Training objectives 41

SECTION FOUR

Training
objectives
42 Manual for Media Trainers: A Learner-Centred Approach
Training objectives 43

SECTION FOUR

Training objectives

I
n the following pages a comprehensive system of designing training programs
will be described. Generally, the methods outlined here follow the principles
of a concept known as Training by Objectives (TBO). This system is closely
related to the procedures of Learning by Objectives (LBO) and its related offshoots.
In a distant way, it is also related to the more well-known Management by Objectives
(MBO) concept. What all these have in common is the point of view that any
activity must be guided by the end result one is working toward. This seems such
an obvious idea that it hardly bears mentioning, but losing sight of a project’s goal
is such a common occurrence that these systems were developed to keep projects
“on track.” Additional terms for this model of training are Criterion Referenced
Learning (CRL) or Criterion Referenced Training (CRT). We prefer the former
term (CRL) because it directs attention to learning rather than training; it is the
learning of trainees that matters most after all, not the instructional activity of trainers.
The terminology stems from the idea training must be measured (or referenced)
against a specified result (or criterion).

The training by objectives model was built upon systems analysis thinking,
and was originally offered as a “scientific” way of organizing programs to make
the somewhat unpredictable nature of developing human resources more
methodical. Systems analysis attempts to apply principles of logic to complex,
overlapping, and interactive processes such as training. This is done as one way of
making them more sensible and reliable. Indeed, all types of objectives-based
processes emphasize predictability and consistency, and these are considered their
chief benefits. Systems analysis attempts to reduce the difficulties in understanding
complex systems by reducing major portions of processes to simple “black boxes.”
The purpose of simplifying them is to make them easier to understand and to
reduce confusion that might result if one tried to comprehend at once the
complicated inner working of the processes. By shifting our attention from the
complex interior aspects to features visible from the outside, we can more fully
grasp outlines of the whole process.

Systems analysis shrinks entire processes into an examination of “inputs” and

“outputs.” Inputs to a process consist of all the resources necessary for the process
to operate. These include tangible assets such as raw materials, but can also be
intangible resources such as information or ideas. Outputs are the finished products
produced by processes. Once again, outputs can be tangible or intangible results.
The process is made up of all those activities that work with the inputs to produce
the outputs. In systems analysis, there is usually an additional part of the entire
44 Manual for Media Trainers: A Learner-Centred Approach

“system.” It is a comparative phase that describes the difference between the input
and the output. This permits adjustments in the process so that the outputs of the
system can be evaluated and adjustments made either in the inputs or in the
processes. Through evaluation the “improvements” produced by the process can
be optimized. Suppose we wished to describe an automobile factory in systems
analysis terms. The inputs would be made up of all the parts that go into the
finished autos, plastic, metal, rubber, fabric, and so on. Other inputs would include
human workers, financial resources, and physical plant (the buildings and
equipment). The outputs would be the finished automobiles. The purpose of a
systems analysis is to produce the best possible finished products (automobiles)
using the least resources (inputs). The comparison of inputs and outputs will allow
managers to adjust the processes so as to achieve the optimum operation.

Getting bogged down in details is a common problem in training. One important

advantage of a systems analysis perspective is that one is forced to take the longer,
wider view of the organization, focusing less on the specific technicalities. The
issue is not “how” or “why” things get done, rather “just getting the job done
properly.” When applied to training, a systems analysis begins with an examination
of the input to the training process. While there are many inputs—trainers, facilities,
training materials, and the like—the key element is the training need analysis. The
training needs define the work to be achieved in the “process” of training. These
are then laid out in training objectives, in keeping with procedures described in
section two. The process, of course, is the prescribed training program, designed
to answer the issues raised by the training needs analysis. The outputs of the process
are the trained personnel. Evaluation of the abilities of trainees following their
training programs will reveal whether the objectives spelled out earlier have been
met. In order for this approach to work the results of the evaluation must be used
Training objectives 45

to adjust the training process and to revise the formulation of objectives. Feeding
back information about the successes and failures of training to the needs analysis
phase improves the effectiveness of training. Continual adjustment in the processes
of training keeps the training from becoming static, allowing it to be refined to
achieve optimum results.

Some experts refer to this model as a “cybernetic system” of training. It is

made up of four key phases: 1) training needs analysis, 2) the training program, 3)
training program evaluation, and 4) feedback. The main advantage of this model
is that it produces reliable results. If there are changes in the inputs, for example
in the performance levels of trainees, the evaluation and feedback stages permit
rapid adjustment of training programs so that objectives can continue to be met.
Predictability gives managers clear expectations so they can make plans with
confidence that intended results will be obtained.

It may not be evident why objectives are necessary. After collecting information
in the training needs analysis, it might seem perfectly clear what skills and knowledge
are lacking. But, even when the needs seem clear, the particulars must be studied.
When the TNA exercise is finished, care has to be exercised to ensure that training
will actually correct deficiencies identified. Writing training objectives in an orderly
and rigorous manner provides a discipline and enforces on the trainers the
requirement to deeply analyze the conditions found in the workplace. Much training
is wasted due to a poor match between needs and the kind of training actually
delivered. This can be largely avoided through a meticulous and reflective approach
to the construction of writing objectives. Training objectives are not only for the
use of the trainer, but for the trainees too. They need to fully understand the aims
of training in order for them to be committed to the work and to its goals.

Good objectives produce a surprising range of positive results. Of course

objectives focus training, giving a sharply defined purpose to the activity. The
clarity of detailed objectives avoids misunderstandings and it also helps reduce
the likelihood of oversights or gaps in the training program. Beyond this, objectives
provide additional, often more subtle, benefits. Just a few can be mentioned here.
First, objectives provide consistent outcomes. This can be an important
consideration in large training organizations where a number of different trainers
might be responsible for different groups of learners in the same training activity.
By working with the same objectives, each trainer can be confident that all groups
will achieve the same, or at least similar, results. To be sure, different people will
have different approaches to training on any given topic, but this hardly matters
as long as the final results are comparable. Because the aims of training are spelled
out in objectives, it becomes easier to select the best training strategies—what
sequencing of topics will work best or what media can support the training, for
example. Even training exercises and practical projects become easier to specify
46 Manual for Media Trainers: A Learner-Centred Approach

when the objectives are properly laid out. If the objectives are properly constructed,
the timing of different parts of the curriculum will be easier to estimate. In most
training activities, scheduling assumes a significant portion of the planner’s
responsibilities. Courses have to begin and end at predetermined dates, and seldom
is there an opportunity for adjusting length or timing once training is underway.

Objectives also provide a rational basis for the evaluation of training. In effect,
objectives set up the measures through which effectiveness of training can be judged.
If trainees meet the standards proposed in the objectives, then it is reasonable for
the activity to be viewed as a success. (Of course, this assumes that the objectives
are suitable for the training needs identified in the TNA; it is quite possible to
have a training failure that stems from a faulty needs analysis.) Learning objectives
make training evaluation more “objective” (no pun intended), because the
assessment of the program is tied to what it set out to do in the beginning, not
some arbitrarily chosen set of criteria.

Five questions to answer

Construction of a set of training objectives must be based upon results of the training
needs analysis. A vital outcome of the TNA is a report that characterizes
performance discrepancies, as described in an earlier section. These performance
discrepancies represent the difference between expected work outcomes and the
work results that were actually obtained. George Odiorne described two kinds of
training objectives that flow from training needs analyses. First are objectives that
restore the status quo. In these cases, something has caused deviation from accepted
norms, a deviation sufficiently serious to provoke action. Training thus is required
to restore conditions to the norm. The second type of objective includes ones that
are meant to be innovative or to produce a breakthrough to a new, higher level of
excellence. Both motives can be considered solutions for problems. Even though
a problem might not seem the proper way to view these needs, that is actually
what they are—the organization has a person or groups of persons whose abilities
do not measure up to its requirements. This is definitely a problem!

In developing training objectives to correct such “problems,” start by sketching

out the answers to five questions:

(1) What are the present levels of performance or specific conditions?

The answer to this question should clearly state what is actually going on in
the workplace. The more specific and the more simply stated the problem,
the easier it will be to transcribe the ideas into objectives. The statement can
be in plain language, perhaps no longer than one or two sentences. Example:
“A new digital editing system will be in place within two months and staff
need to be proficient in use of the new software and hardware.”
Training objectives 47

(2) What are the desired levels of performance or specific conditions?

Again, in a minimum of words, state the results that need to be achieved by

training. The results desired must be realistic, given the resources and time
likely to be allocated for training. At this stage, reflect on whether the desired
levels are ones that training is likely to attain. Example: “Skills on the digital
editing system must be at least equivalent to current ones and must be achieved
well in advance of implementation so that the transition will be smooth and
seamless, with no interruption to productions.”

(3) Nature and size of the group to be trained.

Who is to be trained will determine the sort of training objectives that are
necessary. The size of the training group might also be a factor in how objectives
are formulated. The nature of the group can include any aspect that might
influence the state of knowledge, maturity, inherent abilities, or motivation.
Example: “ Editors number about eleven, mostly mid-career staff, including a
mix of men and women with secondary school education, but a few with
university degrees.”

(4) What are the benefits that will be realized if training is successful?

State clearly what positive things will occur to the organization, if training
achieves its desired result. Keep in mind that training is primarily intended to
enhance the organization, not individuals, the public, the state or some other
equally deserving but irrelevant party. Being clear about the consequences
that are intended will help give objectives more impact. Example: “Viewers
will be unaware of the new editor when it is put in place, except that the video
quality will be noticeably better.”

(5) How will the changes in staff capability be measured?

It is important that changes expected to occur through training are properly

documented. A training department needs to be accountable for its programs,
and this means that training must be evaluated. Write a few notes about possible
ways of assessing the outcome of training. Example: “Production department
discrepancy report totals will remain unchanged or decline following training.
Evaluation of edited features will show an increase in technical quality and no
decrease in production values.”

Selecting performance levels

Answers to the questions just asked will sharpen the objectives presented in
training programs. Even with the focused objectives, another issue remains to be
48 Manual for Media Trainers: A Learner-Centred Approach

considered—at what level should the training be targeted? Matching the objectives
to the job needs necessitates a judgment about how much improvement in
performance is required. Usually this takes the form of some type of cost vs. benefit
analysis. Two kinds of errors can occur at this stage—formulating objectives that
call for performance that exceed job requirements, or ones that call for performance
that do not meet job requirements. To solve these problems training planners
need to continually refer back to the TNA during the development of training
objectives.

Will trainees who meet the objectives fully qualify for the jobs they are expected
to do? Supervisors usually expect trainees to step into positions ready to go to
work, possibly with a brief orientation on-the-job training session. If trainees do
not meet the requirements, who do you think will be blamed? The fault
undoubtedly will be assigned to the trainer or the training program. To avoid an
instance of this sort, it is important to first be certain that the objectives really do
address the needs identified in the needs analysis. Then it is prudent to involve
supervisors and other managers in verifying that the objectives do indeed satisfy
their requirements. Doing this avoids unpleasant misunderstandings later on. This
is not only a defense strategy, supervisors can offer a valuable external check on
the decisions being made in the planning process. Having the opinion of another
person not involved in training frequently adds another valuable dimension to
planning.

Will trainees actually be learning more than is required on their jobs? At first
glance this might seem to be a small problem; extra learning might contribute in
some vague way to the quality of the training, one might think. But is important to
recall that learning which cannot be used soon after training is seldom retained.

Writing objectives

The answers you developed in the exercise just described should be kept close at
hand as you work your way through the objective drafting exercise. They can
provide a roadmap as you weigh different alternatives open to you as the planner
of this training exercise. In the explanation to follow keep in mind that our main
concern is with what the learner will be able to do, not what the trainer is going to
instruct or teach. This is the basic philosophy of learner centered training, which
you‘ve probably already discovered is an organizing principle of this manual.
Planning and training should revolve around the trainees’ needs, not the trainer’s.

Examine your answer to the second question in the preceding section “What
are the desired levels of performance or specific conditions?” These serve as
reference points you can use in preparing objectives. It explains what you expect
of your trainees once the training is completed. Only after you have developed a
Training objectives 49

set of objectives can the plan take up the procedures, content, and methods related
to those objectives. These methods are ones that cause the trainee to deal with the
appropriate subject matter in accordance with the principles of adult learning,
and the methods eventually lead to an evaluation of the trainee’s performance
against those specified objectives. Think of these objectives as a destination. It is
impossible to choose the best route to the end of your journey until you know
what the exact destination is. If you don’t know what your destination is, then
anyplace will do! So if you hope to efficiently achieve training objectives, you
must first be sure that the objectives are stated clearly and unambiguously.

First, a definition: An objective is an intent communicated by a statement

describing a proposed change in a learner. The statement should describe what
the trained person will be like when the training is completed. It should describe a
pattern of behavior (that is, performance level) the trainee will demonstrate. Without
a suitable objective it is impossible to evaluate a course or training program properly.
There is no proper basis for selecting participants, determining contents, choosing
instructional methods, materials, or facilities. In short, it is impossible to make any
useful plan until the objectives have been finalized. This, for example, is like the
technician, who will first find out what has to be done before selecting tools to do
the job. If you don’t do this, you will waste a lot of time, effort, money, and you
may not achieve anything worthwhile.

Another very important point about sharply defined objectives is that they
provide you with a standard against which one can measure the learner’s
performance. Objectives allow trainers to determine whether trainees are able to
perform in a desired manner. If evaluation is to be really useful, it must measure
performance against the objectives. This also allows trainees to measure their own
progress toward the desired level of performance. If trainees know and understand
objectives, they can assist the trainer in working toward the objectives. Of course,
50 Manual for Media Trainers: A Learner-Centred Approach

as noted earlier, the objectives must be realistic. It must be possible for the
participants nominated to training to reach the desired performance standard within
the time allocated for training. Unrealistic objectives can be counterproductive;
trainees won’t put forth satisfactory effort if they feel objectives cannot be met
reasonably.

The learner centered approach requires that the training plan be built upon
the everyday working requirements of each person’s job. This means that the
training must reflect—or even better—simulate the actual job situation. This aim
can be accomplished by ensuring that the objectives fit within working conditions
the planner found in the training needs analysis. Good training objectives should
enable participants to imagine how they will perform on the job once training is
completed. They understand what is expected, and they can see how the behavioral
changes will be evident in the workplace. Behavior is the proper term here; every
training program is meant to alter in some important way how people behave in
their jobs.

Now, another definition: Learning is a change in observable behavior that

occurs as a result of experience. This definition has two key elements, observation
and experience. All learning of interest to trainers must result in tangible behavior
changes; people should be able to see those changes. At first, one might think it
possible that training could result in internal changes among learners and thus
might not be visible to others. But the reasoning here is that unless those internal
changes affect in some fashion the way people act on the job, then they cannot be
important. Internal changes may matter to the person receiving training, but if we
cannot observe the result, it cannot have any significant impact on job performance.
Granted, some changes produced by training have to be observed indirectly. If,
for instance, training objectives call for changed attitudes, they will be observable
through the new behavior that occurs because of the changed attitudes.

A further definition: Behavior is (for purposes of training, at least) the observable

and measurable activity of a learner. As trainers we need to be able to see (observe)
the behavior that is to be altered by training. Otherwise how could we tell if learning
is taking place? And we must not only be able to see the behavior, we must be
able to gauge how well that behavior conforms to our objectives. Moreover, as
training proceeds we will want to be able to judge whether progress is being made
toward the objective and to determine how quickly progress is being made. If we
can see that progress is being made, we would want to continue training. When
progress stops, some adjustment in training must be made to restart learning and
to continue moving toward the training objectives. If objectives are correctly
formulated they should contain information about how behavior can be measured.
If our objective is to be able to operate a digital audio tape recorder in a particular
way, we should be able to decide whether our training has met its objective. We
Training objectives 51

would make that judgment on the basis of our trainees’ performance, and we
would be able to judge the readiness of trainees according to the standards set up
for the training.

Can learning occur that is not observable? Yes, of course. But here is the issue
for training: We are interested in changing the way people do their jobs; if training
is to be of any value, it must alter job performance for this better, and this certainly
will be observable. It is quite possible for one to learn something that never results
in new or different behavior. Make no mistake, this can be real learning; but in
training terms, such learning is considered wasted because it does not influence
job effectiveness. Suppose a trainee memorized a list of random words. Being
able to recall the list would represent genuine learning, but of what use would it
be?

Another way of describing a training objective is as a statement that precisely

and completely defines behaviors the trainee will exhibit at the end of training.
The precision is required to make certain everyone included in the training
exercise—the trainer, the trainees, the sponsoring organization, supervisors,
managers, in short all parties who might have a stake in the outcome of training—
understands exactly what the training is expected to produce. As already stated,
the trainees need to have a clear picture of what is expected in order for them to
participate in meeting the objectives. If the trainees do not know what trainers
want, they can’t contribute as successfully to meeting those goals. Objectives also
must state the complete aims of the training exercise. This point is a reminder to
identify even those facets that might be assumed or taken for granted. Every single
intended behavior change must be spelled out in objectives.

Training objectives must follow a definite, highly precise format to conform to

professional practices and to match the philosophy of the “training by objectives”
model mentioned earlier. According to this approach, each objective must contain
three distinct elements. Those three are: 1) terminal behavior, 2) conditions, and
3) standards. As a rule, all three are contained within the single sentence that
makes up a training objective. A training program should have a list of objectives
laid out in this format, perhaps as many as five to ten, as the training activity
begins.

Terminal behaviors set out in objectives are descriptive terms that define the
capabilities intended to be achieved at the end of training. It is what the trainee
will be able to do when training is finished. The words used to describe terminal
behavior must be observable and measurable in order to be appropriate for training
purposes. This requirement is necessary so that the behavior can be assessed
appropriately—if one cannot see clearly and judge the behavior, then one cannot
be certain when or if the objective has been met. By measure we do not mean that
52 Manual for Media Trainers: A Learner-Centred Approach

the behavior must literally be judged by a numeric scale, but that it should be
described in actions that can be gauged or classified easily.

The conditions included within objectives are the circumstances under which
the terminal behavior must be evident. Generally, the conditions are needed to
spell out the exact situation surrounding the behavior, including every single factor
that might modify the behavior’s performance. For instance, an objective for training
a track sprinter might include as conditions “without wind assistance,” or “wearing
spiked track shoes,” or “on a grass track.” The conditions within an objective
provide a set of rules under which the terminal behavior must be performed by
the trainees. Finally, to restate and emphasize the point remember that any aspect
of the setting that might affect not only the quality but the manner in which trainees
demonstrate their learning should be identified and described in the training
objective. Suppose trainees are expected to perform under time limitations, or
suppose learners must act out their terminal behavior under adverse physical
conditions (inclement weather, poor facilities, or distractions), these too should be
specified as conditions within objectives.

The standard refers to the performance level or quality expected to be achieved

at the end of training. This also is often called the “criterion,” or the rule or test by
which qualities of the performance can be judged. As described earlier, this is
what is meant by criterion referenced learning or training. The standard provides
a precision and clarity sufficient to make it possible for the trainer to determine
positively when the objective has been met satisfactorily. Because the terminal
behavior must be observable and measurable, the standard defines the exact
measured stage, caliber, stage, number, height, length, or other quality of whatever
behavior is the subject of training. Once the standard has been met under terms
laid out in the conditions, the training objective is determined to be fulfilled and
the training work can move on.

A few examples might help illustrate how suitable objectives are devised.
Consider as an objective “to be able to ride a bicycle without assistance and without
placing a foot on the ground a distance of 300 meters on a macadam or concrete
roadway.” An experienced trainer should be able to pick out the terminal behavior,
conditions and standard with ease. The terminal behavior in this objective is to
“ride a bicycle.” The standard is “without placing a foot on the ground” and “a
distance of 300 meters.” And the conditions are “macadam or concrete roadway”
and “without assistance.” The term “without assistance” might alternatively be
interpreted as a standard, though it is probably best described as a condition. To
have a degree of doubt about whether a term represents a standard or a condition
is not uncommon, and should not be a concern. In this example, the main point is
that the bicycle must be ridden without any assistance, by which we suppose is
meant without the aid of another person holding the rider steady. You probably
Training objectives 53

learned to ride a bicycle by having a person hold you upright while you pedaled.
Eventually, you developed your motor skills sufficiently to be able to ride without
the prop provided by another person and you could ride away unaided. At this
point you truly were riding a bicycle on your own.

Consider the objective “to understand the principles of writing objectives so

that objectives will be written clearly and precisely.” This objective is similar to
ones sometimes found in training programs, but it has defects that will pose real
difficulties for trainers. First, what is the terminal behavior? As written, the terminal
behavior called for in this example is “to understand the principles of writing
objectives.” The problem here is that understanding is a behavior that is definitely
not observable and it is probably not measurable. Understanding is an internal
state that cannot be seen directly, though it could be argued that it might be
observed indirectly through other behaviors. Even if this were true, it would be
much better to describe the behavior in terms that can be observed. In this example,
observable behaviors would be those that would be affected by understanding of
the principles of writing objectives. Therefore, it would be preferable to devise an
objective along the lines of “to be able to write objectives containing terminal
behaviors, conditions, and standards . . .” We can safely assume that if the trainees
have the ability to write properly constructed objectives, they must possess
understanding of the “principles of writing objectives.” Or if they do not understand,
but they can write objectives properly, then what possible difference can it make?
There is a second problem with the objective in this example. It has no conditions.
This implies the behavior should be performed at any time anywhere and under
any conditions. This is probably not reasonable, so the conditions really ought to
be added. The terms “clearly and precisely” are, of course, standards. Though in
this example the trainer has considerable latitude in interpreting the meaning of
clearly and precisely, in many situations terms like these may be the best that can
be formulated.

The failure to use behaviors that can be directly observed is probably the
most common error in the construction of training objectives. Vague terms
compound the problem greatly, too. Take as an example the expression “to improve
the ability to edit news copy “incorporated as part of a training objective. This
expression can—and undoubtedly will be—interpreted differently by various persons
involved in training. How much improvement is enough? What is improvement?
How can improvement be measured? All these questions are encouraged by the
lack of specificity in the statement. It is possible to correct this shortcoming by
adding clauses that pin down exactly what the training is expected to do. For
example, the objective could be rewritten as “to improve the ability to edit radio
news copy so that stories’ meanings are clear to the average listener.” This does
seem to be a better objective, be we are still left with question. What is meant by
clear? What is clear enough? And who is an average listener? The addition of the
54 Manual for Media Trainers: A Learner-Centred Approach

radio specification is helpful—knowing the medium for which the news copy will
be written aids the trainer in knowing what kind of editing will be required because
editing practices are different in radio as compared with, say, newspapers.

Here is another objective for illustration and study: “to know how to compute
current flow correctly in a circuit based upon Ohm’s law.” This objective is like
the objective presented in the previous example. The terminal behavior is clear,
but again it lacks qualities that permit it to be observed and measured. How can
one observe what another person knows? It is impossible to detect what another
person knows by direct observation; knowing is an internal state that may not
have any external indicators. Most people do not give visible clues about their
inner thoughts, unless something causes them to exhibit behaviors that betray their
thinking. Here is a simple way of determining whether the terminal behavior is
suitable. Note that in all cases the word that describes the terminal behavior is a
verb—knowing, understanding, and riding, as in the examples here. Verbs can be
active or not, but since we want to observe the behavior, we require that the verb
be active. In drafting training objectives, always make certain that the word used
to describe the terminal behavior is a verb and that it is active; choose words such
as writing, riding, or selecting rather than understanding, thinking, or knowing.
Continuing with the analysis of this training objective, can you pick out the standard?
It is “correctly” of course. Words like correctly, properly, appropriately, are
frequently employed as standards. Their use may or may not be a good choice. In
this case, there can be little doubt about what it the correct answer; electronic
students would all agree on the correct solution to Ohm’s law problems. But if the
subject is less clearly defined, for example set lighting or graphic design, there can
be a wide difference of opinion on what is “correct” or “suitable.” Generally, it is
best to avoid words of this kind, but at times the training planner may have no
other choice. Finally, what are the conditions? There is only one, calculations
must be based on Ohm’s law.

Finally, consider the objective, “to provide the trainee with a general
appreciation of the needs for safety in the workplace.” No doubt, this is a laudable
goal. Safety is always a concern where potential for injury and accidents are high,
as is sometimes the case in broadcasting. Television studios can be dangerous
places with high voltage exposure, heavy lighting instruments suspended over
personnel on the floor, and the need to work in heavy shadows. Still, the goal
spelled out seems quite unfocused. What does it mean to have a “general
appreciation” for safety. Furthermore, how this would be observed is not
immediately apparent. In this case, the “fuzziness” of the aim makes this objective
unsatisfactory. But there is an additional problem here. Note that the objective
begins “to provide. . . .” Providing the trainee is an activity of the trainer. We must
have goals that are stated in terms of what the trainees will be able to do, not what
the trainer does in the training exercise. Otherwise, we might satisfy the objective
Training objectives 55

by merely “providing” the trainees with the information required to “appreciate”

safety, and it might have absolutely no effect whatsoever on the trainees. Therefore,
it is never wise to write objectives that refer to behavior on the trainer’s part. The
thinking here is that in a learner-center model, it is the trainee that matters, not the
trainer.

Because good training objectives require some type of visible behavior, and
because it is preferable to employ active rather than passive verbs, training objectives
frequently take the following form: “to be able to . . . .” with the verb followed by
the standard and conditions. To some this may seem unnecessarily repetitive, but
it does provide a familiar and easily understood framework for the learning
objective. Doing something—as in “to be able to . . . “ says clearly than the learner
must demonstrate their new capabilities by acting out a behavior. If a training
objective begins with this simple phrase, constructing the terminal behavior will
hardly ever go wrong. This convention, is so widely accepted that the introductory
phrase “to be able to . . . “ is simply abbreviated as TBAT. When you see an
objective beginning “TBAT, it means to be able to . . .”

Conditions are a source of problems in training objectives mainly when they

are incomplete. Usually this happens when the person writing the objectives takes
56 Manual for Media Trainers: A Learner-Centred Approach

for granted that the unstated conditions are nevertheless understood. Take for
example this objective: “to be able to list the ten different operating modes of the
video mixer/switcher.” Sounds fine, doesn’t it? But there are questions one could
ask. Is the list to be offered from memory, or from notes, operating manual, or
other document? A person reading this objective would have to guess that the ten
modes would be recalled from memory, and not from some other documentation.
The implication of this objective might not be clear to everyone. Similarly, any
kind of tool, appliance, reference, document, or other support should not be
assumed, unless specified within the training objective. Sometimes even clothing
and safety devices are included. The setting of the performance might also need
to be described (indoors, outdoors, in a studio with full lighting, etc). Sometimes
the list can become very long. Don’t be overly concerned if this happens; length is
not as important a consideration as completeness and clarity.

There are several ways that standards can present problems in training
objectives. One way to avoid problems is to ask whether the standards are
achievable. Even though you might like to reach a high level of performance, it is
not a good strategy to spell out a standard that very few will be able to reach. If
many trainees find it impossible to meet the standard, motivation will decline;
they may lose their commitment to the entire training project. If a large portion of
the trainees do not succeed, it also makes the trainers appear ineffectual.

It goes without saying that the usual rules of good writing apply when drafting
training objectives. Don’t be wordy. Do cut out any unnecessary language. As
stressed throughout this section, you should strive for clarity of meaning. Despite
what was just said about the possible need for long lists of conditions, try to keep it
brief. Long sentences are hard to understand. If you find it absolutely necessary to
include a lot of detail, break the objective into two or more sentences. Although
there is no rule requiring it, most training objectives are only one or two sentences
in length. This is a convention you are certainly allowed to break when it suits
your purpose.

Learning domains and learning objectives

Objectives concern learning that falls within the three major domains—cognitive,
psychomotor skills, and attitude. Each domain requires a different type of objective
because of the dissimilar learning each requires. Consider the cognitive domain.
Cognition requires mental activity that onlookers can seldom see. For this reason,
cognitive learning objectives typically require the learning to act out behavior that
will demonstration learning. Objectives like this might require learners to “name”
or to “identify correctly” a list of facts, or carry out some other act that will make
the cognition visible to trainers.
Training objectives 57

Actually, experts often prefer to divide the cognitive learning domain into two
subcategories. The first is known as information gain. Simply acquiring knowledge—
that is, knowing facts—is one example of learning within the cognitive domain.
The other type of cognitive learning goes beyond merely memorizing information,
it involves mental skills. This subcategory requires a learner to utilize facts in a
systematic process to produce a prescribed result. Dividing one number into another
is an example of a mental skill. This kind of skill requires different learning abilities
than simply memorizing, for instance, the multiplication table. Another example
is learning a new language. Learning the meaning of words is primarily a task of
memorizing translated meaning. But putting words together to make meaningful
sentences and paragraphs demands a different set of capabilities.

For training objectives of the mental skill sort, learners are usually required to
demonstrate their mastery of the skill itself. They might be asked to “divide two
three-digit numbers together following the prescribed procedure, producing a
correct answer.” Likewise, learners might be requested to “construct sentences
using proper grammar and syntax and with correct vocabulary use.” As can be
seen, objectives like these call for learners to make observable their internal mental
changes that result from training.

The second category, psychomotor skills, seems on its surface to be the most
straightforward. After all, by definition they require a physical act of some kind.
Merely observing the physical act provides trainers an opportunity to verify that
the learning has been transferred as intended. For psychomotor objectives, the
only issue that may need special care is defining actions so that they can be studied
and measured appropriately and accurately. For these kinds of learning objectives,
a simple demonstration is usually all that is required. An objective such as “TBAT
swim 100 meters unaided and without stopping in an outdoor swimming pool” or
“TBAT to make clean edits on a personal computer using Pro-Tools® audio editing
software” might be all that is necessary.

The affect or attitude domain of learning presents the most difficulty in writing
training objectives. Several reasons for the difficulty can be mentioned. First, by
definition attitudes are internal states that cannot be observed directly. Furthermore,
attitudes and beliefs are often elusive. To make attitudes visible to an observer it
frequently involves some type of attitude questionnaire. There are really no other
convenient ways of requiring learners to expose their inner states. However, because
the questionnaire asks for learners to voluntarily describe their attitudes, it is possible
that they may not be able or willing to disclose their true feelings. After training, it
is usually obvious what attitudes the trainer wants the learner to adopt, so
questionnaires tend to result in responses that trainers “want” whether or not they
truly reflect the learner’s inner state. It often happens that a course intended to
58 Manual for Media Trainers: A Learner-Centred Approach

modify attitudes, such as ones on workplace safety, results in significant changes

as measured by questionnaires prior to and after the training. But whether those
measured changes result in altered behavior in the workplace is an entirely different
issue, and these behavioral changes may not be accurately predicted by
questionnaires.

The issue of attitude measurement will be taken up in a later section on training

evaluation, but a few points are worth considering here. First, because the attitude
training is invisible to onlookers, it—like other kinds of objectives already
mentioned—should be stated in behavioral terms only. Even if you wish to change
attitudes towared workplace safety, what matters is how staff members exhibit
safety consciousness through their behavior. It helps greatly if the attitudes to be
influenced can be phrased so that the intent of training is clear. In other words,
the objectives should point to the positive results of behaving safely in the
workplace—results that benefit both the staff member and the organization. A
particular problem is in stating standards for attitude training. Assigning levels or
measuring attitudes is not easy to do, hence defining a standard and making it
clear to learners presents its own problems.

In summary, the keys to writing good training objectives are simple: Clear,
precisely worded statements of goals stated in terms of changes in learner’s behavior
specifying the conditions and standards of performance. Learning by objectives is
a model of training that should provide both the trainer and the learner with a
good road map toward a productive outcome. The use of this approach should
produce predictable and verifiable learning gains.

References

Odiorne, George S. (1970). Training by objectives; an economic approach to

management training: New York: Macmillan.