Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
The Transform your Teaching podcast is a service of the Center for Teaching and Learning at Cedarville University in Cedarville, Ohio. Join Dr. Rob McDole and Dr. Jared Pyles as they seek to inspire higher education faculty to adopt innovative teaching and learning practices.
This is the Transform Your Teaching Podcast. The Transform Your Teaching Podcast is a service of the Center for Teaching and Learning at Cedarville University in Cedarville, Ohio.
Ryan:Hello, and welcome to this episode of Transform Your Teaching. In today's episode, Dr. Rob McDole and Dr. Jared Pyles continue our series on AI Resilience Course Design by talking about objectives. Thanks for joining us.
Rob:Well, Jared, it's that time. We get to explore, on the podcast before we have guests. Backwards design, and we're starting where we always start with backwards design, and that's the end in mind. Yep. Course objectives.
Rob:Mhmm.
Jared:First, some context, we are in our AI resilient course design, and we have talked about objectives at length previously. Yes. But this time, it's under the lens of backward design a bit, but I mean, objectives are objectives regardless of what frame you kind of put it into. So while this may be specifically for AI resilient design, it does share a lot of the commonalities with just normal objective discussion. I will say one thing as disclaimer.
Jared:We are going to give some examples of not great or weak objectives. I wanna give a disclaimer. Any similarities to your objectives, living or dead, purely coincidental?
Rob:Yes. These are actually not built off of any one objective
Jared:Or any yeah.
Rob:Anything person that we have ever come
Jared:in contact with. Anyone that we know.
Rob:Yeah. So I think that's fair.
Jared:That I would hope so.
Rob:Take solace in the fact that we are not referencing old material.
Jared:We are not. Or material that exists now.
Rob:Yes.
Jared:Do you wanna define what backward design is for those that don't know it?
Rob:So backward design is fairly simple and straightforward. You start with the end in mind. Like, what is your ultimate goal? What is your ultimate outcome for this particular course or program or even module? What do you want to have happen?
Rob:And specifically, you're looking at creating a target that is for students. So it needs to be something that they can think about, some way you want them to think, feel, or do, and that those things are measurable. You start with that in mind and you work backwards from there. That's when you then look at, okay, well, what are my this is my overarching goal, but this is what I want to have happen in a particular course. What are the outcomes that need to happen in order for those things to be true?
Rob:Where I feel comfortable that, okay, you know, a student, like, instance, can read, scripture. What do they need to be able to do, think, or feel in order to just read scripture, but maybe that's not the best idea for end goal. Maybe I want their lives to be transformed when they read scripture. Mhmm. See, that changes.
Rob:That changes the outcomes. So where you start matters, and the end goal that you envision matters because that then becomes the target which you're trying to reach. So, hopefully, that is enough of a short overview in terms of backwards design to give people an idea that's accessible.
Jared:Yeah. And it's it's important to consider where they're going to end up the student at the end of the course. So, along with that, while you consider that to be the target, then you start working backward, to the start of the course, hence the backward design. So you go with, you know, what do they need to be able to do in small steps to get to that end of course objective?
Rob:You break it down.
Jared:You break it down into a path. Right? We use module objectives, but you can use any terminology you want, but they're small objectives along the way. And if you consider Bloom's taxonomy as something that you would do, let's say you've got a course objective that ends with analyze, then you would step down. I'm envisioning in my head, I forgot the then analyze, and you got, like, define, identify
Rob:Mhmm.
Jared:Compare and contrast. Those are your building blocks along the way Right. To get to that final, objective. So just making it as clear as possible, making it as measurable as possible as you go.
Rob:So I think with that in mind, I, you know, I think we've given all the disclaimers and hopefully enough of a, beginning point for folks. And I think it's fair to say, if you're if you're still stuck on the whole, backwards design kind of idea, you know, there are plenty of resources, and we'll point to some in our in our podcast for you as well where you Williams and oh,
Jared:Wiggins and
Rob:number and McTeague.
Jared:McTeague. Wiggins and McTeague's 2,005 understanding by design.
Rob:Yeah. And they're the they're the ones that are most cited for, you know, at least in the education world for this kind of of process. But you'll see this process really in the business world. In any place where you have, like, problem solving that's going on, they're gonna start with defining what is the end goal. Engineers do this all the time.
Rob:They might call them I know in software engineering, you have spec sheets. I think in engineering as well, you have spec sheets so it defines the problem to be solved. It it defines the outcome that is needed. So you're gonna see this in some form or fashion in different areas. With that said, let's move forward.
Rob:Sure.
Jared:You wanna look at some objectives?
Rob:Look at some of objectives. Let's give listeners some examples of things that they either might have run into or at least some we're gonna have some intentionally like we said earlier, we're gonna have some intentionally weak objectives. So let's start with business.
Jared:Sure. Let's go down the business route. Here is your intentionally weak objective. Students will understand how to make good business decisions. Now, Rob, understand is my least favorite
Rob:How do you measure that, Jared? How do
Jared:you measure understand? Students will understand how to make good business decision. First off, let's back up again. Again, objectives all day with objectives. A a objective statement should not be students will verb.
Jared:It should be students will be able to verb. Because if you're thinking about something measurable, something that's gonna happen down the line, it should be students will be able to do this.
Rob:And I
Jared:think a lot of times when, and I was guilty of this, and believe me, this comes from I was a very poor objective writer. When I went through, and got my license to teach high school, I went into, high school English and taught. And the RISA, the resident educator state assessment, I figured what that all that was all that meant. I had to go through and prove again that I was a teacher after I had already finished. I don't want I'm still a little salty about it, but I'm just gonna
Rob:So are most teachers still.
Jared:Yeah. And if you're from the state of Ohio and you're listening, fix it. But I struggled with objective writing because I I was it wasn't like I Ohio State was great, but it never really clicked for me. So I didn't do well on the reset as a result of that. Luckily, got grandfathered into it because it started before, I mean, started after I started teaching and got my initial license.
Jared:But I would get confused with the idea of, okay, is it the objective or is it a summary of what the students are going to do in the class? And I think a lot of teachers get wrapped up into thinking that it's going to be, they are going to do this while in my class, like a summary statement. That's why you see things like students will understand, students will discuss, students will respond, that type of thing where, and it's difficult, like you said, Rob, to assess someone's ability to understand. If you think of it that way, we're not in the business of testing someone's ability to understand. Instead, we are wanting them to see understanding's part of it, but that's not as measurable as something like evaluate or critique or analyze.
Jared:And so if we were to take this, students will understand how to make good business decisions. You know, understand cannot be observed. And also the idea of good business decisions. Good, how do you define good? This is something else we talk about.
Jared:The adjectives that I'm going through because I'm an English teacher. The adjectives are important as well. If you can't define good, you gotta fix it. So here is the measurable example.
Rob:So you would say good is too general.
Jared:Well, it's not that it's too general.
Rob:It's too undefined. Good is subjective. Right. So based on what then?
Jared:It's based on what? Good based on what?
Rob:Yeah. Right? Yeah.
Jared:And that if that's something specific, if that's a I mean, good could very well be a term in business that's like more specific than what you and I would use, but maybe not. But if it's a specific term, then that would make sense to use it there. A better one would be evaluate a business decision using stated ethical criteria. So you've got evaluate. That's measurable.
Jared:Can a student evaluate or not? You know that from you could tell if someone knows how to evaluate or not. A business decision using stated ethical criteria. So there's where you remove the good part of it and you say specifically and that to me sounds like a rubric. A stated ethical criteria, that's a rubric right there that you can then you then can evaluate the student on their ability to evaluate.
Rob:Yeah. It's gonna be stated. And we left it general here. I mean, if we were going to do one seriously, it would need to be focused on a particular course. Yep.
Rob:So what kind of business decision are we talking about here? What area is this in? What are the stated, either national or state, criterias or standards that need to be in place? I mean, accountants out there, they know this, you know, really well. FTC Yep.
Rob:You know, you go on and on. Gap. So we just wanted to make sure that we gave our listeners something that they could they could see the difference. Right. And I think that contrast is pretty stark.
Rob:One is a lot more ambiguous. Mhmm. And it leaves you I mean, if you're a student and you read that, it's like, But then you reevaluate a business decision using stated ethical criteria. And and for purposes, we would we would suggest that if you're using something like this, that you'd be more specific about what that ethical criteria is, obviously. Right.
Rob:It's most certainly better.
Jared:If it's an objective that comes at the end, you've got plenty of time there to build up to that. You can build in the stated ethical criteria along the way. It's not something that's necessarily a surprise at the end. So
Rob:Yeah. And then when we when we think about AI resilience in this area, so this is where we bring in the AI resilience side. Like, when you're being specific, the more specificity you can bring to an objective, I would argue, It gives you a lot more wiggle room, if you will, in creating assessments later on, which we'll talk in a future episode when we revisit these objectives. Mhmm. Like, we'll we'll have much more wiggle room to be able to deal with what AI can do.
Rob:Sure. And actually use it to our advantage, I would argue.
Jared:Yeah. Can we do example two as well? Our second example, going to the health sciences Let's go on. Alright. Here's your weak one.
Jared:Rob, you tell me what's wrong with this one. Students will identify and respond appropriately to patient safety concerns.
Rob:Oh, it's this is the one that gets people probably the most, at least in my career that I've seen, is what I call the stacking Yeah. Of multiple objectives into one because there's this desire. You've got all these great things. Right? Yep.
Rob:And sometimes they go together, and I get it. But you provide multiple targets, and you don't know how they relate to one another. It's like, does this target relate? In other words, how do the verbs Mhmm. Relate to each other?
Rob:Which one comes first? Is it the chicken or the egg? Do I identify or do I respond appropriately? Which one which one do I do first? What do I need to understand first?
Rob:Yep. You know, do I need to understand the patient patient respond appropriately to patient safety concerns, or do I need to identify them first? I mean, I know this seems kind of made up, but honestly, we I have seen things like this where you could be left scratching your head as as to which one should you do first, which one's more important.
Jared:Mhmm.
Rob:And I've also seen them where it's more than just two verbs. You've got, like
Jared:Yeah.
Rob:I've seen I think probably the most I've ever seen is five verbs.
Jared:I like the objective statements that are more than one statement and one objective. And, like
Rob:Like a massive run on sentence like I used to write when I was in grade school?
Jared:Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Those are great. Those are great.
Rob:So so alright, Jared. You know, how would you solve this problem? This one seems a little bit easier to me, but, yeah, you go
Jared:ahead. Identify and respond. You've got two verbs in there, which I don't like, and I think a good clean objective has one measurable verb in it. So I would immediately get rid of identify and respond. Appropriately is also like, again, just like good before, you know?
Jared:Although with that one though, with health sciences, there is definitely appropriate inappropriate responses to patient safety concerns.
Rob:Right. So But it is going to be based on evidence and it's going to be based on
Jared:Sure. Yeah. You have a cause Real criteria. Amputate your leg, you know, that kind of a thing. Well, okay.
Jared:Anyway, the measurable version of that would be prioritize, which isn't even on Bloom's taxonomy. No. But it still works. Yeah. It's definitely a verb that you can measure.
Jared:Prioritize patient care actions in a simulated scenario using stated safety criteria. So again, stated safety criteria, there's your appropriately, but it's definitely, spelled out more. What I like about this one as well is it adds in the assessment that you would use. I don't want to spoil too much of it because we'll get to the next episode. But some objectives, especially I know some of our ed students here at the university, and I did this as well when I was going through some of my, education, is that they will, as part of objective writing, they will add in the assessment so they can see the connection between objective and assessment.
Jared:So it would be prioritize patient care actions by, in this case, it's in a simulated scenario. So again, the bad one, the weak one, students will identify and respond appropriately to patient safety concerns. The measurable one, prioritize patient care actions in a simulated scenario using stated safety criteria. Pretty darn good.
Rob:Yeah. I'd say that's much better. And you can also see how you've kind of taken identify and respond, and you've given them more clarity and precision in the verb prioritize.
Jared:Mhmm.
Rob:It doesn't mean that you might not use those two verbs, say, in module objectives. Yep. To get there. To get there, let's say this is a course objective, and you're gonna still get down to something like identify and respond. So identify and respond, although respond, I would be I mean, that is you can measure that.
Rob:You definitely wanna articulate respond how.
Jared:Right.
Rob:Right. So you'd wanna make sure that you're you're being definitive in terms of what your expectations are.
Jared:Respond could go a different way. So you could talk about the level of response. You could talk about, like, the actual how to respond
Rob:Mhmm.
Jared:Or the the you know? Yeah. I I'm I'm with you on that one. Response kinda weak there.
Rob:But prioritize gives you, gives you the ability to coax those things out later on in module objectives. And I think it is, especially when you tie it to what we talked about. So we won't get into the assessment even though we kinda We
Jared:kinda want to. Yeah. They fit so
Rob:well together. You see it. You kinda see the semblances of it there. Yeah. So let's move on to example number three, the humanities.
Jared:The humanities. The intentionally weak objective for the humanities.
Rob:Oh oh, let me do this one. So here's the intentionally weak objective. Students will engage meaningfully with great works of the past. But, Jared, that sounds so good. I mean, it warms my heart.
Rob:Does it? It does.
Jared:Does it? But what's wrong with it? Do you wanna discuss why it's wrong, or should I spoil it for you?
Rob:You spoil it.
Jared:Alright. Well, it's very vague. How do you measure someone's ability to engage meaningfully?
Rob:Well, I don't know, but I know it when I see it.
Jared:I know it when I see it. Unfortunately, that doesn't work with objectives. It doesn't identify any kind of observable learning or really any kind of basis for assessment. Like how would you assess someone's ability to engage meaningfully? And see, to me, this sounds like a summary statement that they would do over in the course.
Jared:Yes. And especially in the humanities course, students will engage meaningfully with great works of the past. That is a summary statement. That is not a measurable objective. So the measurable version of this is taking something like students will engage meaningfully with great works of the past, which sounds like a summary statement, and turn it into something very measurable.
Jared:Compare how two authors frame a shared moral question. Oh. Now there is, something to this that maybe is more or could be outside of the scope of the course. You may not be necessarily looking at morality in the course that you're doing. Maybe it's more of like comparing how Shakespeare uses the idea of irony in his tragedies or something like that.
Jared:It doesn't necessarily have to frame around a moral question, but the important thing is is that you're taking something that wasn't measurable, which is engaging, and turning it into something that is measurable, comparing through looking at great works of the past still.
Rob:But you don't even I mean, the the generality of who determines the great works of the past.
Jared:Yeah. That too. Yeah.
Rob:You've got that. I the other one kinda gets around that. It sounds really great when you say great works of the past. You immediately go, oh.
Jared:I like great works of the past.
Rob:But what do you mean by that?
Jared:I don't know.
Rob:Yeah. But it sounds good.
Jared:What does great works of the past mean to you, Rob?
Rob:I like the American romanticists. Sure. Yeah. Right? We've discussed that multiple times.
Rob:Do not like Charles Dickens. Do I like Homer? Yes.
Jared:Simpson?
Rob:No. Oh. The Iliad and the Odyssey.
Jared:It out there. I had to I had to yeah. The Iliad and the Odyssey.
Rob:Although, I guess, Matt Groening did have some interesting things that he wrote for that show.
Jared:Yeah. For sure.
Rob:But still, I'm not sure it's a great work of the past.
Jared:Yeah. But you make a great point. It's very subjective. Right? I mean, if I saw that objective in my literature course as a course objective, I'd be like, well, that means I can pull whatever I think is a great work of the past.
Jared:Right. And it could necessarily not be the same for another person or the person who wrote the objective in the first place. So
Rob:If you define what that means, then that's that's wonderful, and you can you can at least almost like when you're you're doing your any kind of work, you basically create your definitions and your limitations, and everybody knows that upfront. And you would probably try to state something like that in an objective. But this one, I think the measurable objective compare, that verb right off the get go is is pretty simple.
Jared:Yeah. What's also interesting is that comparison, and we'll talk about this a bit more, again, not trying to give too much away in the assessment episode, but comparing and contrasting is a universal skill regardless of if you're using it in literature or something else. And that's something I try to get across to my students in my literature course, who some say, I don't like reading. I don't like literature. I'm like, I get it.
Jared:But the tools that we're using, the skills that we are developing are universal. So doing things like comparing and contrasting or identifying or noticing similarities and stuff like that, it's important throughout. Our last example.
Rob:Social sciences.
Jared:This one is a doozy. Students will read, discuss, and learn about foundational theories of human behavior. Wow. Read, discuss. And again, any similarities, living or dead, to your objectives are purely coincidental.
Jared:Read, discuss, and learn about foundational theories of human behavior.
Rob:So, again, we have another summary of course activities, not not, an outcome. Yes. It's telling students what they will encounter, but not what they should be able to do by the end of the course.
Jared:Mhmm.
Rob:So hopefully, our our listeners can can hear that.
Jared:It's like saying students will use a pencil to write down things in this course.
Rob:Ta da. Look. I wrote it down, and then you read what they wrote, and you're like
Jared:Well, you used a pencil,
Rob:so I have to give
Jared:an a.
Rob:Jimmy was here.
Jared:That's an the pen, I'd have to give you an f. Yeah. So
Rob:So that that that, I think, hopefully, now we're starting to kinda show Yeah. Some of these things. And and the way we would make this measurable is apply one foundational theory of human behavior to interpret a specified social scenario. Yep. So what this objective gives us is a better target to create assessments off of, which we'll talk about when we In a future episode.
Rob:Yeah. In a future episode when we when we talk about assessments specifically, we'll come back to these examples. We'll look at how we might create assessments off of them. Yeah. Right?
Rob:And I think people will find that when you do this kind of work on the objective side and you think more specifically about it Right. Then it makes it work so much better. It gives you much more to work with in terms of assessment and creativity.
Jared:Mhmm. Yeah. So some of the takeaways from this, make sure your verbs are measurable. Make sure there's only one measurable, observable verb in your objective. Don't write summary statements.
Jared:Don't overload your objective with too many verbs. Make sure they're measurable. Go with something like, Bloom's taxonomy. We do have an objective GPT that we have created that will be turned into a skill because ChatGPT decided, we don't like GPTs anymore. So they're just gonna make skills now.
Rob:Skills are better.
Jared:So that's an episode on objectives. And because assessments are so, you know, so closely tied to your objectives, We're doing an episode on assessments right after we talk with our special guest, Doctor. Trent Rogers. Yeah. On objectives.
Jared:Value of objectives. He's going to bring in something, some work that he's going to get this episode, and he's going to work on some objectives, and we're going to do a quote unquote lab with him where he goes through his objectives and we give him feedback, We've everything given him our course alignment grid that allows him to create the objectives and align it with the assessments and the content. We're gonna walk through all that with him, and I'm very, very excited about seeing Doctor. Rogers and having him walk through this with us.
Rob:Yeah. It's gonna be it's gonna be exciting. I'm looking forward to it.
Ryan:Thanks for listening to this episode of Transform Your Teaching. If you have any questions or comments about our conversation about objectives, feel free to send us an email at CTLPodcastcedarville dot edu. You can also connect with us on LinkedIn. And finally, don't forget to check out our blog at cedarville.edu/focusblog. Thanks for listening.