University of Burundi

Institute for Applied Pedagogy

English Department
Class : BAC II
Sem. : II
Time Allocation: 30 Hrs (2credits)

Subject: INSTRUCTIONAL(EDUCATIONAL) OBJECTIVES DEVELOPMENT

CONTENTS

I. Content Based Teaching/Approach

II. Objective Based Teaching/Approach
1. Defining Instructional/Educational/Teaching Objectives
2. Type of Instructional/Educational/Teaching Objectives
3. Formulation of Instructional/Teaching Objective
4. Observable Behaviors and The New Taxonomy (Marzano, 2009)
III. Competence/Competency Based Teaching/Approach
1. General Information On Competences
2. Notions Related to Competences
3. The Pedagogy of Integration
4. Conclusion

Objectives of the course

Student will be able to:

1. Differentiate between the objective based teaching, content based teaching and
competence based teaching.
2. Choose and formulate a relevant teaching-learning objective at different levels.
3. Show the link between competence based teaching and the pedagogy of integration

I. CONTENT BASED TEACHING/APPROACH

INTRODUCTION

Generally, educational/learning pedagogies are centered on school learning success and the
ways for learners to achieve this success. By using cognitivist theories, by decentering from
teaching process and emphasizing the process of learning, these theories have reversed the
relationships teacher-learner and produced a real take into account of the learner by returning
to the educational triangle a preponderant place for the relationship learner-knowledge and to
the teacher, the role of mediator.

Thus, in the recent history of the development of teaching programs, we distinguish three main
logics which determined their construction:
Ø Content Based Approach;
Ø Objectives Based Approach;
Ø Competence/Competency Based Approach.
 I. Content-Based Approach

The content-based approach intervened in the 1960s. This is the most traditional approach.
It consists of the codified and formalized presentation of knowledge. With this approach,
teaching unfolds according to a linear progression linked to a content-specific logic.

This content approach is characterized by the absence of an explicit output profile and
skills/competences. The material to be taught is structured according to knowledge, or concepts
to be acquired.
We could symbolize it by the phrase: to teach mathematics, English, French, ….. to X student
you need to know Mathematics, English, French, and that is indisputable because it is essential
to master the content that we must teach if we want to succeed its teaching.

The teacher in this approach is only interested in his/her own speech. He/she does not take into
account the fact that some learners by appearing to listen to him/her do not follow him/her; and
other students don't watch him/her but maybe listen to him/her and others are surely sleeping
but eyes open and eventually left him/her some time ago.

Criticisms have been leveled towards the content centered approach and relate to three
elements:
v the sacralization of teaching,
v the selection and
v memorization

The Sacralization of Teaching

The teacher has undisputed authority and all learners owe him a “religious” respect, with the
content approach the class (school) is considered the only temple of knowledge and the teacher
has undisputed skills and learners are without initiatives.

Selection and Memorization.

The learner's activity is memorization, the fruit of which is the development of the sense of
imitation and reproduction. The teachers forget that the learner needs in addition to the
memorization, of being creative, of having an intellectual curiosity. This is the use of elitist
methods. This approach is designed in the spirit of competition which consists of sorting the
best. It considers the learner as ignorant but who has unlimited memory capable of retaining
pages and lists programs.

Advantages of the Content-Based Approach

The content-based approach easily adapts to difficult teaching situations such as large classes
with lack of teaching equipment and precarious teaching conditions.
This approach is reassuring for everyone (the learners and the teacher), the authorities know
in details what happens at each moment in the classroom.
Teachers value efficiency and convenience of a program that offers established knowledge,
irrefutable judgments and logical reasoning. Learners find in the classroom protection of part
of the teacher and valorization of their work.
Teaching unites the teacher and the learning around knowledge, hence the educational
triangle.

Educational triangle

From this relationship, emerge two modalities approach to knowledge. The didactic one, reports
of the teacher's approach to enlightening the learner. The other cognitive aspect is a process
apprehension, accommodation, integration and assimilation of knowledge by the learner.The
teacher teaches and the learner learns, acquires knowledge. Initially, the teacher's action was
preponderant (frontal pedagogy):

The teacher, for his own convenience, willingly organizes and distributes knowledge to the
learner/the student. The content-based approach leaves very little room for a real activity of the
learners which made react many authors by showing that this content-centered approach and
the teacher is not beneficial for the learner. This educational model having had its day, found a
revival in the active method supported by teaching by objectives.

II. OBJECTIVE BASED TEACHING/APPROACH

Objective Based Teaching/Approach was applied in training professionals and technicians

before being extended to the general education during the 1980s.

It came to complete the contents by specifying the activities carried out on this content. The
implicit output profile is mastery by the learner with a set of objectives (knowledge, know-how,
interpersonal skills) at the end of a period of the learning process.

The objective approach was fueled in particular by Bloom’s work: the organization of content
schools operates from the delimitation of different categories of objectives (general, specific
and operational) which have certainly enabled to have precise aims of teaching by defining
varied know-how, but which has caused a juxtaposition and thereby a fragmentation of school
activities related to these fragmented objectives. The notion of instructional objective has
developed to meet the need to introduce more rigor in the systems of training and aimed to
make explicit the purposes of training by formalizing the pedagogical agreement between
teachers and learners by clearly stating what these latter must learn and why.
 1. Defining instructional/Educational/Teaching Objectives

Before exploring the issues related to teaching objectives in details, it is useful to consider the
matter of terminology. There are two main terms as far instructional teaching objectives are
concerned: goals and objectives. The terms goals and objectives have been used by different
people in different ways. For some, the term goal applies only to the overarching purpose of
curriculum, and the term objective is reserved for day-to-day instructional targets. In the
research and theoretical worlds, these terms tend to be used interchangeably for general and
specific purposes. Since the focus in this course is on day-to-day classroom instruction the term
objective is the one to be used.

The importance of goals and objectives in education was established as far back as the first half
of the last century by the educational philosopher and evaluation expert Ralph Tyler (1949a,
1949b). For Tyler, a well-constructed objective should contain a clear reference to a specific
type of knowledge as well as reference to the behaviours that demonstrate proficiency relative
to that knowledge.

Where Tyler’s insights into the nature of content and the nature of learning made it clear that
educators must design specific objectives and identify the behaviours that demonstrate
achievement of those objectives, David Krathwohl and David Payne (1971) made distinctions
between three levels or types of objectives: global objectives, educational objectives, and
instructional objectives. As described by Robert Marzano and John Kendall (2007), global
objectives are the most general. They are broad, complex areas. Instructional objectives are the
most specific of the three types of objectives.

In preparing Instructional Objectives, Robert Mager (1962) explained that a well-written

instructional objective should include three elements:

1. Performance. An objective always says what a learner is expected to be able to do; the
objective sometimes describes the product or result of the doing.
2. Conditions. An objective always describes the important conditions (if any) under which
the performance is to occur.
3. Criterion. Whenever possible, an objective describes the criterion of acceptable performance
by describing how well the learner must perform in order to be considered acceptable.

In the middle of the triad are educational objectives. They articulate specific areas of
knowledge, but don’t identify the performance conditions and criteria for success as do
instructional objectives. In Designing and Teaching Learning Goals and Objectives, we
primarily address educational objectives, which we more commonly refer to as learning
objectives.

The importance of learning objectives to the day-to-day execution of classroom activities is

fairly obvious. Objectives are the reason classroom activities are designed. Without clear
objectives, classroom activities are without direction. Good teaching begins with clear learning
objectives from which teachers select appropriate instructional activities and assessments that
help determine students’ progress on the learning objectives.
Dimensions of Learning objectives

Two important characteristics of learning objectives are objective specificity and objective
difficulty. Objective specificity refers to the degree to which goals are defined in terms of clear
and distinct outcomes. Objective difficulty refers to the degree to which objectives provide a
challenge to students.

Objectives Specificity

Learning objectives provide a set of shared expectations among students, teachers,

administrators, and the general public. As discussed previously, they can range from the very
specific (for example, “Students will be able to list the Great Lakes”) to the very general
(“Students will be able to write a well-formed essay”). The more specific the objectives are, the
better they are. That is, objectives that are specific in nature are more strongly related to student
achievement than objectives that are not.

Objectives Difficulty

Students will perceive learning objectives as more or less difficult depending on their current
state of knowledge, their beliefs about what causes achievement, and their perceptions of their
own abilities. Studies indicate that students are most motivated by objectives they perceive as
difficult but not too difficult.

Objectives difficulty may also moderate or change the effect of feedback on student
achievement. For example, Avraham Kluger and Angelo DeNisi (1996) found that feedback as
an instructional strategy is more effective when learning objectives are at the right level of
difficulty-challenging, but not too difficult.

Types of Learning objectives

In addition to their specificity and difficulty, learning objectives vary in terms of their purposes
and functions. Learning objectives that emphasize mastery of content, or mastery objectives,
might enhance learning more than goals that specify attainment of a specific score, or
performance objectives. Non-cognitive objectives that involve students in cooperative tasks
might have a unique effect of their own.

Mastery vs. Performance Objectives

One well-investigated distinction regarding learning objectives involves their overarching

purpose; namely, mastery or performance. The first mastery objectives, focuses on developing
competence. The second type, performance objectives, focuses on demonstrating
competence by obtaining a specific score or grade. Performance objectives will typically
include a desired score or grade. Mastery objectives, by definition, articulate the content that
is to be learned. For example, the following are mastery objectives:

ü Students will be able to use word segmentation and syllables to decode an unrecognized
word.

Although each type of objectives may be associated with increased student achievement,
research indicates that mastery objectives are typically associated with higher order learning
and better retention than are performance objectives, especially for more challenging content.
Research by Judith Meece (1991) revealed that teachers who used mastery objectives in their
classrooms promoted more meaningful learning, provided more developmentally appropriate
instruction, and supported student autonomy more than did teachers with performance-oriented
classrooms.

Communicating Objectives and Providing Feedback

If objectives provide clear targets for learning, then feedback may be thought of as information
that facilitates the process of reaching those targets. Researchers John Hattie and Helen
Timperley (2007) claim that in educational settings “the main purpose of feedback is to reduce
discrepancies between current understandings and performance and a goal” (p. 86). Their
comprehensive review synthesized research on the power of feedback to improve student
achievement. Noting that many of the individual findings included in feedback meta-analyses
are negative (showing that feedback sometimes inhibits performance), Hattie and Timperley
distinguished between the effects of feedback about the task, the process, self-regulation, and
the self. Feedback regarding the task, process, and self-regulation is often effective, whereas
feedback regarding the self (often delivered as praise) typically does not enhance learning and
achievement.

Importance of Formulation of Educational Objectives

The question of knowing the objective we are aiming for is an essential question in teaching.
Because it is depending on the objective set, the content, methods and evaluation of teaching.
We start by deciding on our destination, after which we see the means of getting there and it is
only afterwards that we check whether we arrived safely or not.

Viviane and Gérard Delansheere say it correctly as: “driving and going nowhere are mutually
exclusive.” We can't drive and go anywhere. Mager puts that “If you are not sure where you
want to go... you risk finding yourself elsewhere ".

“There is no favorable wind for him who does not know where he is going” (Sénèque)

It is the objective set which gives its meaning to the content of the course, lesson.

It is the objective set which gives its meaning of the Method of teaching

It is also the objective set that depends on the content of the assessment.

2. Developing Specific Learning Objectives and Tasks

Objective specificity is an important aspect of designing effective objective. In general, specific

objective have a more powerful effect on student achievement than do general objective.
Objective specificity begins with making a distinction between learning objective and the
classroom activities and assignments that will support those objectives. Stated differently, there
is often confusion between objectives, activities, and assignments. For example, consider the
following list. It typifies what you might find in the learning objectives section of some
teachers’ planning books.
1. Students will successfully complete the exercises in the chapter three.
2. Students will create a metaphor representing the food pyramid.
3. Students will be able to determine subject/verb agreement in a variety of simple, compound,
and complete sentences.
4. Students will be able to identify the characteristics of fables, fairy tales, and tall tales.
5. Students will investigate the relationship between speed of air flow and lift provided by an
airplane wing.

Statements 1, 2, and 5 are activities or assignments. As the names imply, activities and
assignments are things students will be asked to do. They are a critical part of effective teaching,
but they are not ends in themselves. They constitute the means by which the ends, or learning
objectives, are to be accomplished.

By contrast, statements 3 and 4 are learning objectives. A learning objective is a statement of

what students will know or be able to do. Note that statements 3 and 4 begin with “Students
will be able to”. Activities and assignments are stated in less-structured ways.

Typically, students complete activities with guidance and help from the teacher and complete
assignments independently. There is certainly overlap in these categories of behaviours.

Differentiating between Learning Objectives and Activities/Assignments

Subject Learning Objectives Activities/Assignments

Language arts Students will be able to:
• Sound out words that are not in their
sight vocabulary but are known to
them.
Mathematics Students will be able to:
• Solve equations with one variable.
Students will observe the teacher
modelling sounding and blending
strategies.
Students will practice solving 10
equations in cooperative groups.

Exercise 1
Following are statements from different subject areas. Some are more clearly learning
objectives; others are more clearly activities or assignments. After each statement, identify
whether it is better classified as a learning objective or an activity or assignment.

1. Students will be able to recognize the protagonist, theme, and voice of a piece of
literature.
2. Students will produce a book report on a book of their choice, including a table of
contents, with proper pagination and format throughout.
3. Given a set of coordinates, students will be able to graph the slope of a line.

4. Students will compare and describe the slopes of two lines.

3. Students will be able to explain how the problems created by the French and Indian War
contributed to causes of the American Revolution.
4. Students will produce a play dramatizing the problems created by the French and Indian
War and how they contributed to causes of the American Revolution.

5. Students will write a paper describing the relationships among atoms and subatomic
particles.

Exercise 2

Translating general statements into learning objectives

Following are phrases representing general aspects of information and skill in specific
subjects areas. Translate these into clearer statements of learning objectives.

The idea behind this exercise is to write learning objectives that provide more specific
guidance for both the student and the teacher.

1. Speaking effectively
2. Reducing fractions
3. Knowing local history
4. Using excel
5. Spanish conversation
6. Reading comprehension

Designing assessment tasks for learning objectives

Following are learning objectives in various areas. For each one, write a sample assessment
task:
1. Students will be able to use knowledge of prefixes, suffixes and roots to spell words
2. Students will explain the rules and strategies of a team game
3. Students will explain how an organism’s behaviour is related to the physical
characteristics of its environment
4. Students will illustrate how food works as source of energy
5. Students will be able to create and separate a simple mixture such as salt and sand
6. Students will be able to analyse a speaker’s presentation with an eye for logical fallacy
7. Students will be able to determine cause and effect of historical events in the exploration
of the Ameriacas
8. Students will determine the main idea and supporting details of an expository essay.
 3. Developing Learning Objectives at Different Levels of Difficulty (According to
The New Taxonomy: Marzano, 2009)

According to Bloom’s Taxonomy, there are six (6) levels at the cognitive domain. These levels
are summarised (with verbs that can be used to formulate objectives) in the table below.

In this course, we are going to be guided by The New Taxonomy developed by Marzano (2009).
According to Marzano (2009), goals should be at the right difficulty level to enhance student
achievement. They can’t be too easy, or they will bore students. They can’t be too difficult, or
they will frustrate students. Instead, they must challenge students but be perceived as attainable.

In a classroom with twenty-five or more students, developing learning objectives at the right
level of difficulty can pose significant obstacles for teachers. Given that students will be at
different levels of understanding or skill in terms of the content being studied, how can a teacher
write an objective for all students that satisfies the criterion “challenging but attainable”? The
answer is fairly “straightforward. For a given topic in a unit of instruction, construct objectives
at multiple levels of difficulty.

In this section, we present a framework or taxonomy for writing objectives at differing levels
of difficulty. That taxonomy is articulated in depth in two related books: The New Taxonomy
of Educational Objectives (Marzano & Kendall, 2007) and Designing and Assessing
Educational Objectives: Applying the New Taxonomy (Marzano & Kendall, 2008).

There should be at least four objectives representing four levels of difficulty. The first level
requires students to simply recognize or recall important details. This is the least demanding of
the learning objective. The second level requires students to explain critical features. Here the
emphasis is not just on details but on the distinction between the critical versus noncritical
information. The third level requires students to go beyond factual knowledge and generate
information that is not immediately obvious. The objective at the fourth level goes beyond
knowledge of the phenomenon under study. It requires students to trace the development of
information about the phenomenon. The objective at the fourth level goes beyond knowledge
of the phenomenon per se.

Abbreviated Scale Involving Learning objective at Different Levels of Difficulty

Score 4.0 More complex learning objective

Score 3.0 Target learning objective
Score 2.0 Simpler learning objective
Score 1.0 With help, partial success at score 2.0 content and score 3.0 content
Score 0.0 Even with help, no success

The target learning goal is the objective initially designed by the teacher for the whole class. It
is placed in score 3.0 position on the scale. A more complex objective is placed in the score 4.0
position, and a simpler goal is placed in the score 2.0 position. Score 1.0 and score 0.0 don’t
require new objective; they involve students’ successful performance (or lack of performance)
with help.

To effectively use the scale, it is necessary to write objective at different levels of complexity.
This is where the New Taxonomy can be of value. As table 3.1 shows, it involves four levels
of complexity:

Level 4—Knowledge Utilization

Level 3—Analysis
Level 2—Comprehension
Level 1—Retrieval

Retrieval objectives require the recognition and recall of basic information and the execution
of procedures. The level 1 learning goal requires students to retrieve knowledge; they must
recognize or recall basic details about a phenomenon under study.

Comprehension objectives involve identifying the critical features of knowledge. At this level,
students must be able to articulate and represent the major ideas and supporting details
regarding knowledge. The level 2 learning objectives requires students to explain the critical
features of a phenomenon under study.

Analysis objectives involve reasoned extensions of knowledge. They are sometimes referred to
as “higher order” (thinking skills) because they require students to make inferences that go
beyond what was directly taught. The level 3 objective requires students to identify similarities
and differences.

Knowledge utilization objectives require students to use new knowledge in the context of a
robust task. Robust tasks are the venue in which individuals use knowledge to address real-
world issues. The level 4 goal requires students to engage in a real-world task: investigating the
development of knowledge regarding the phenomenon being studied.

Each of the four levels of the New Taxonomy involves specific mental processes in the table
below.
 Level of Difficulty Mental Processes

Level 4: Knowledge Utilization Decision Making

Problem Solving
Experimenting
Investigating
Level 3: Analysis Matching
Classifying
Analysing Errors
Generalizing
Specifying
Level 2: Comprehension Integrating
Symbolizing
Recognizing
Level 1: Retrieval Recalling
Executing

Level 1: Retrieval

The process of retrieval can vary somewhat depending on the type of knowledge involved and
the degree of processing required. To understand these differences, it is important to keep in
mind the distinction

“between declarative knowledge (information) and procedural knowledge (skills, strategies,

and processes). Retrieval of information is either a matter of recognizing or recalling.
Recognizing can be described as determining whether information is accurate or inaccurate.
Recalling, by contrast, requires students to produce information from permanent memory. For
example, a goal that requires students to select a synonym from among a set of words relies
upon recognition. A synonym is provided for the student, and the student must recognize it. A
goal that requires students to produce a synonym employs recall. In addition to recognizing the
term synonym, the student must produce an appropriate example. This distinction constitutes a
hierarchy of difficulty in itself: recalling is a more complex mental process than recognizing.
Although information (declarative knowledge) is only recognized or recalled, skills, strategies,
and processes (procedural knowledge) can be executed as well. Execution means that a series
of steps is carried out, something occurs, and a product results. For example, consider the
procedure for multicolumn subtraction: a quantity is computed when the steps are carried out.
Thus, we say that procedural knowledge is executed, whereas information is recognized and
recalled. However, it is also true that procedural knowledge can be recognized and recalled
because all procedures contain embedded information. For example, to perform multicolumn
subtraction (procedural knowledge), students must know information about place value
(declarative knowledge). Consequently, they could be asked to recall or recognize this
information in addition to executing the steps of multicolumn subtraction.
Recognizing Objectives and Tasks
“Verbs that teachers frequently use when designing recognizing goals and tasks include the
following:
• Recognize (from a list)
• Select from (a list)
• Identify (from a list)
• Determine (if the following statements are true)

Recalling involves producing accurate information as opposed to simply recognizing it.

Recalling Objectives and Tasks

Verbs that teachers frequently use when designing recalling goals and tasks include the
following:
• Exemplify • Describe
• Name • Identify who
• List • Describe what
• Label • Identify where
• State • Identify when

Tasks for recalling objectives are usually in the form of short constructed-response items.
Students must name something or provide a list of things.

Executing Objectives and Tasks

Executing involves actually carrying out a mental or psychomotor procedure as opposed to

simply recognizing or recalling information about procedures. Again, consider multicolumn
subtraction. A teacher could write a recognizing goal for this procedure that requires students
to identify accurate statements about multicolumn subtraction. She could write a recalling goal
that requires students to describe how to perform multicolumn subtraction. Neither of those
goals actually requires students to perform multicolumn subtraction, however. This is the
domain of execution—asking students to demonstrate a skill, strategy, or process.
There is a great deal of misunderstanding regarding executing goals, particularly as they relate
to complex mental and psychomotor procedures. Although it is true that executing is at the
lowest level of the New Taxonomy (because it is a form of retrieval), it can be the highest level
of expectation for students when a complex mental or psychomotor procedure is involved.
Consider the mental process of writing a persuasive essay. The actual execution of this process
is a complex feat indeed, requiring the management of many interacting components. The same
can be said for the process of playing basketball, a psychomotor procedure. How then, could a
teacher ever expect to construct goals beyond the retrieval level for complex procedures? The
answer is that executing, in fact, might be the highest level of expectation for students for
complex procedures. Stated differently, a teacher might not have goals above the executing
level for complex procedures such as writing a persuasive essay and playing basketball. This
does not mean, however, that goals at different levels of complexity cannot be designed for
complex procedures.

One way to differentiate levels of complexity for complex procedures is to break them into
smaller component parts. For some students, a teacher might focus on one or two elements
only for a complex procedure. For example, for students less skilled at writing persuasive
essays the emphasis might be on stating a clear claim with some sentences supporting the claim.
With this narrower focus for less skilled students, goals for more skilled students would
incorporate more components of the overall complex procedure. For example, a learning goal
for the complex procedure of writing a persuasive essay might include a clear claim and
specific evidence for the claim presented in a coherent manner. For students, more familiar
with writing persuasive essays, the goal might also specify that each piece of evidence should
be backed up with information supporting its validity.

“Verbs that teachers frequently use when designing executing objectives and tasks include
the following:
• Use • Make
• Demonstrate • Complete
• Show • Draft

In summary, there are three types of retrieval objectives and tasks that can be designed:
recognizing goals, recalling goals, and executing objectives.

Class Assignment: Formulate 5 objectives at the Retrieval Level

Level 2: Comprehension

Comprehension goals require students to demonstrate an understanding of the overall structure

of knowledge-the critical versus noncritical aspects of the knowledge. There are two related
types of comprehension goals a teacher might design: integrating goals and symbolizing
objectives.

Integrating Goals and Tasks

Integrating involves distilling knowledge down to its key characteristics and organizing it into
a parsimonious, generalized form. Integrating goals and tasks require students to describe the
critical (as opposed to noncritical) information regarding content.

Verbs that teachers frequently use when designing integrating goals and tasks include the
following:

• Describe how or why • Explain ways in which

• Describe the key parts of • Paraphrase
• Describe the effects • Summarize
• Describe the relationship between

Symbolizing Goals and Tasks

Symbolizing goals require students to translate their understanding into some pictorial, graphic,
or pictographic representation. Another way of saying this is that symbolizing goals require
students to translate what they have produced from an integrating goal into some non-linguistic
form. Consequently, symbolizing goals can be and are frequently used in tandem with
integrating goals.

Verbs that teachers frequently use when constructing symbolizing goals and tasks include the
following:
• Symbolize • Represent
• Depict • Illustrate

Integrating Objectives and Tasks

Integrating involves distilling knowledge down to its key characteristics and organizing it into
a parsimonious, generalized form.

• Draw • Diagram
• Show • Chart
• Use models

Tasks for symbolizing objectives require students to produce and explain a pictorial, graphic,
or pictographic representation of content.
In summary, there are two types of comprehension objective: integrating and symbolizing
objectives.

Level 3: Analysis

Analysis goals require students to go beyond what was actually taught in class and make
inferences that create new awareness. There are five types of analysis goals a teacher might
design: matching goals, classifying goals, analysing errors objective, generalizing objective,
and specifying objective.

Matching Objective and Tasks

Matching involves identifying similarities and differences.

Verbs that teachers frequently use when designing matching objective and tasks include the
following:
• Categorize • Distinguish
• Compare and contrast • Sort
• Differentiate • Create an analogy
• Discriminate • Create a metaphor

It is important to note that matching can involve more than two examples of a specific type of
knowledge. For example, as described by Marzano and Kendall (2008), a student demonstrates
the ability to match by organizing historically important wars into two or more groups based
on their similarities. Consequently, the following would be an example of a task that could be
used to assess a matching objective:

Classifying Objectives and Tasks

The mental process of classifying goes beyond organizing items into groups or categories. As
described previously, such activity is better thought of as matching. Instead, classifying
involves identifying the superordinate category in which knowledge belongs as well as the
subordinate categories (if any) for knowledge.

Verbs that teachers frequently use when designing classifying goals and tasks include the
following:
 • Identify a broader category
• Classify • Identify categories
• Organize • Identify different types
• Sort

Analysing Errors Objectives and Tasks

Goals that involve analysing errors require students to identify factual or logical errors in
knowledge or processing errors in the execution of procedural knowledge.

Verbs that teachers frequently use when designing learning goals and tasks that involve
analysing errors include the following:
• Identify errors • Identify • Diagnose
• Identify problems misunderstandings • Evaluate
• Identify issues • Assess • Edit
• Critique • Revise

Generalizing Objectives and Tasks

Generalizing goals require students to infer new generalizations and principles from
information that is known or stated. Generalizing goals involve inductive thinking on the part
of students in that they must create general statements based on specific pieces of information.

Verbs that teachers frequently use when designing generalizing goals and tasks include the
following:
• Generalize • Create a principle
• What conclusions can be drawn • Create a rule
• What inferences can be made • Trace the development of
• Create a generalization • Form conclusions”

Specifying Objective and Tasks

Specifying objective require students to make and defend predictions about what might
happen or what will necessarily happen in a given situation. Specifying goals are deductive in
nature in that they require students to reason from a rule or a principle to make and defend
predictions.

Verbs that teachers frequently use when designing specifying goals and tasks include the
following:
• Make and defend • What would have to happen
• Predict • Develop an argument for
• Judge • Under what conditions
• Deduce

In summary, there are five types of analysis objective: matching objective, classifying
objective, analysing errors goals, generalizing goals, and specifying objective.
Level 4: Knowledge Utilization

Knowledge utilization goals require students to apply or use knowledge in specific situations.
There are four types of knowledge utilization goals: decision-making goals, problem-solving
goals, experimenting goals, and investigating goals. We consider each in this section.

Knowledge utilization goals require students to apply or use knowledge in specific situations.
There are four types of knowledge utilization goals: decision-making goals, problem-solving
goals, experimenting goals, and investigating goals.

Decision-Making Objectives and Tasks

Decision-making goals require students to select among alternatives that initially appear
equal.

Verbs that teachers frequently use when designing decision-making goals and tasks include
the following:
• Decide • Which among the following would be
• Select the best among the following the best
alternatives • What is the best way
• Which of these is most suitable

Problem-Solving Objectives and Tasks

Problem-solving goals require students to accomplish a goal for which obstacles or limiting
conditions exist. Problem solving is closely related to decision making in that the latter is
frequently a subcomponent of the former. However, whereas decision making does not involve
obstacles to a goal, problem solving does.

Verbs that teachers frequently use when designing problem-solving goals and tasks include
the following:
• Solve • Figure out a way to
• How would you overcome • How will you reach your goal under
• Adapt these conditions
• Develop a strategy to

Experimenting Objectives and Tasks

Experimenting goals require students to generate and test hypotheses about a specific physical
or psychological phenomenon. A critical feature of experimenting goals is that the data are
newly collected by the student. That is, students must use data that they have generated.

Verbs that teachers frequently use when designing experimenting goals and tasks include the
following:
• Experiment • How would you determine if
• Generate and test • How can this be explained
• Test the idea that • Based on the experiment, what can be
• What would happen if predicted
• How would you test that
Investigating Objectives and Tasks

Investigating goals require students to examine a past, present, or future situation. Investigating
goals are similar to experimenting goals in that they involve the gathering and testing of data.
However, the data used in investigating goals are not gathered by direct observation on the part
of the student as they are in experimenting goals. Instead, the data used in investigating goals
are assertions and opinions that have been made by others. Investigating may be likened more
to investigative reporting, whereas experimenting may be likened more to pure scientific
inquiry.

Investigating Objectives and Tasks

Investigating goals require students to examine a past, present, or future situation. Investigating
goals are similar to experimenting goals in that they involve the gathering and testing of data.
However, the data used in investigating goals are not gathered by direct observation on the part
of the student as they are in experimenting goals. Instead, the data used in investigating goals
are assertions and opinions that have been made by others. Investigating may be likened more
to investigative reporting, whereas experimenting may be likened more to pure scientific
inquiry.

Verbs that teachers frequently use when designing investigating objectives and tasks include
the following:
• Investigate • What are the differing features of
• Research • How did this happen
• Find out about • Why did this happen
• Take a position on • What would have happened if

In summary, there are four types of knowledge utilization goals: decision-making goals,
problem-solving goals, experimenting goals, and investigating goals.

Summary

One of the key considerations in designing learning goals is level of difficulty. By designing
goals at different difficulty levels, the teacher can ensure that each student is challenged without
being overwhelmed. This is the core of effective differentiation. The four levels of cognition
outlined in the New Taxonomy (retrieval, comprehension, analysis, and knowledge utilization)
allow teachers to easily construct appropriate goals for every student as well as corresponding
assessment items and tasks.

Students will be able:

• To identify the main ideas in the text
• Identify specific details

• Understand and apply content/academic vocabulary critical to the meaning of the text,
including vocabularies relevant to different contexts, cultures, and communities.
• Analyze informational/expository text and literary/narrative text for similarities and
differences and cause and effect relationships
• Analyze and evaluate the presentation and development of ideas and concepts within,
among, and beyond multiple texts
• Analyze recurring themes in literature
 • Evaluate reading progress and apply goal setting strategies and monitor progress
toward meeting reading goals

III. COMPETENCE BASED APPOACH TO OBJECTIVES DEVELOPMENT

The objective based teaching having had its days, there came a renewal in active methods
supported by objective-based teaching. This new approach gives pride of place to the learner
who invests in the exploration and the acquisition of knowledge.

The competence-based approach opens a new field in pedagogy. It introduces the notion of
competence (the ability to act appropriately in a given situation). Competence based teaching
(the skills being acquired through situations), is based on the delimitation of skills using or
mobilizing a set of resources (knowledge, know-how and interpersonal skills) in a given
discipline, in order to perform a task such as dealing with a situation or production of
communicative acts

It essentially claims to be theory constructivist situating knowledge in the lived experience of

the learner who allows us to explain the process appropriation of this knowledge in a context
that is stimulating and motivating.

III.1. What is the Competence Based Teaching Approach?

Xavier Roegiers, one of the theorists of the Competence based teaching approach, defines it as
follows: “The Competence -based approach in class, is: first specify two or three skills that
each student must have developed at the end of year in each discipline; based on these skills,
define what the student must acquire (knowledge, know-how, know-how). For the teacher, this
constitutes the objectives of its course and its activities; then show the student what these are
for knowledge. For example, we do not do grammar for the simple pleasure of grammar, but
because grammar used to read and write. This helps motivate the pupil; finally confront the
student with situations complex which involve what has been learned. These situations are
close to everyday life situations.

Competence-based teaching does not deny the objectives but defines them according to the
situation to be treated and not content disciplinary measures aimed at developing behavior.
Competence do not replace knowledge. On the contrary, the knowledge constitutes the basis
of learning and the school will continue to give capital importance.

However, the Competence -based approach aims further: the learner must better learn to use
and apply knowledge in new situations. We say that a learner has acquired a competence when
he knows what to do, how to do and why to do in a given situation. Possessing knowledge or
abilities does not mean being competent. We may know techniques or rules of accounting
management and not knowing to apply them at the appropriate time. We can know commercial
law and write poorly contracts. Every day, experience shows that people who are in possession
of knowledge or abilities do not know to mobilize them in a relevant way and opportune time,
in a situation of work.
What is a competence?

According to the science of education researchers, Xavier Roegiers the competence “is the
integrated set of abilities that make it possible to understand a situation and respond more or
less pertinently” and according to the same author. Competence “is the possibility for an
individual, to mobilize in an internalized way and critique, an integrated set of resources to
solve a complex task belonging to a situation-problem family.

According to J. Marie De Ketele (1989, p.100): “the skill is an ordered set of abilities that are
exercised on content in a given category of situations for resolve the problems posed by it.

In conclusion, competence is the possibility for an individual to mobilize a set of knowledge,

know-how and know-how in order to resolve effective and spontaneous problems in real life
situations in general and of his professional life in particular. Competence is defined in terms
both complex and concrete (evaluable); it must be able to evaluate itself through resolution of
complex situations.

III.2. Some Notions Related to The Competence-Based Teaching Approach

Resources

It is the set of provisions that learning to practice this or that other competence. In other words,
it is the knowledge, know-how and interpersonal skills which, put together, will help the learner
to resolve any current life situation (therefore to exercise a skill).

Integration of acquired knowledge

Operation by which we make interdependent different elements which were initially

dissociated by making them function in an articulated manner in function of a given objective.
This is the integration of acquired; that is to say joint mobilization, through the learner, of the
different educational achievements with a view to resolve a daily life situation.

Integration Module

An integration module is a period devoted to the integration of acquired knowledge in order to

exercise a competence. This period extends, during the teaching/learning process, on a week
in general, a week that Rogiers calls “integration week”

Terminal objective of integration

This is a goal that will be achieved in the end of a school year (or a cycle). It is necessary that
the different skills exercised during the year (or a cycle) are integrated into what Regiers calls
a “macro-skill”. “An integration objective is a macro-skill which covers the whole of skills,
and therefore all knowledge, know-how and interpersonal skills of a cycle (in general two
years) » Roegers (2004). The Terminal Objective is therefore this opportunity given to the
learner to mobilize several skills/competences jointly.
Situation

“To put in a situation” means to put “into conditions as close as possible to the reality”. The
integration of acquired knowledge will not be possible in one situation. Roegiers speaks of
“integration situation”, “complex situation”, target situation” or “reinvestment situation.

Integration of a situation

This is a drawn situation of everyday life, a situation which will be, for the learner, the
opportunity to mobilize, transfer the knowledge acquired with a view to face it. “….the
situations encountered in class by the child must be extremely similar to those he will encounter
in life extracurricular if we want to expect that there has transfer » SEAGOE in pedagogy and
motivation.

The effectiveness of the integration of acquired knowledge will depend on good choice of the
situation.

Family of Situation

To enable the learner to master the skill, or to reassure of the given mastery, the teacher must
confront the learner to several similar situations. It is this set of “target” situations equivalent;
interchangeable in terms of level of difficulty and complexity that we called “family of
situations”.

Example :
If we want to ensure mastery of the competence “write, in French, administrative
correspondence to apply for a job using the current vocabulary, the family of situations will be
the set of different correspondences that the student could write and send different employers
different companies, provided that the conditions remain the same: use of current vocabulary.

Confront the student with a family of situation remains an effective way to ensure the
acquisition of a competence by the student.

The integration of a situation

The integration of situation is defined as a contextualized set of information to be articulated

in order to solve a specific task. “It can also be considered as an opportunity to practice skills
by the learner or as an opportunity to assess whether he is competent » (MFEEPF, 2016, p.31).

According to J.Marie De Ketele (1989, p.100) the integration of situation, “is a complex
situation including essential information and parasitic information and bringing into play
previous learning.

A situation is said to be complex if it combines several elements that the student knows, that
he has mastered, that he has already used several times but separately in a another order or in
another context.

Example:
calculate the average of the marks obtained by learners from the same establishment at the end
of the year by using the notions of univariate statistics.
The student must carry out personal work which mobilizes all of its acquired knowledge. In
doing so, it integrates all these resources through the resolution of an integration problem
situation.

Generally speaking, the situation of integration is a situation that allows the learner to exercise
a competence, check if the learners have integrated the newly acquired resources, that
previously set objectives have been achieved.

The constituent elements of a situation of integration

The integration situation is composed of “ four constituents” namely:

-the context which describes the environment where the situation mentioned is located;
-the support which is the set of material elements (virtual or real) which are presented to the
learner (like mathematical formulas, illustration, photo….) but without providing elements of
response;

The support includes information on the basis from which the learner will act; According to
the case, the information may be complete or incomplete, relevant or parasitic;

-the function which specifies for what purpose the production is carried out. Most of the time,
this function is a social function;
-the instruction which is the set of instructions for work that is given to the learner.

The Characteristics of a Situation of Integration

According to Xavier Roegiers, a situation of integration must be:

relevant: it does indeed correspond to the competence to be assessed; to be developed.
complex: it requires articulating several resources, that is to say it calls on the combination of
several resources;

-specialized, or specific: it mobilizes discipline-specific, field-specific resources disciplinary,

and the level of studies considered; confusing: it is new, in its context, in the presentation of
its information or in his instructions. The learner has never met her and it requires analysis on
his part.

Finalized on a concrete task, that is to say that there is an expected, clearly identifiable
production: a text, the solution to a problem, an object of art, a functional object, an action
plan, etc. Motivating for the learner: it is designed in such a way to maximize the chances of
being significant for him. The application of the pedagogy of integration implies an alternation
of two types of learning: one-off learning and integration learning.

For 6 to 9 weeks on average, the teacher installs the necessary resources among students
through the different lessons planned by level called one-off learning that takes place as the
teacher is used to with the teaching by objectives. During this period, formative assessments
are maintained. During the 10th week (or last week of the landing), the teacher stops completely
to teach new concepts and offers students to resolve complex situations in which the student
must mobilize resources learned during the previous 6 or 9 weeks.

Students are invited to work alone or in small groups. Groups to resolve these situations, but
the emphasis is mainly focused on the individual work of the student. Several situations of the
same level are suggested: one to practice (A situation learning), another to evaluate their
acquired knowledge (a situation of integration) and possibly a other to remedy their observed
difficulties. All activities offered to students during the integration week constitutes “a module
integration”. The integration modules are followed by formative assessment modules.

III.3. Construction of Situations of Integration

The notion of “situation of integration” occupies a central place in the pedagogy of the
integration. It constitutes the cornerstone in this approach because it is based on the situation
integration that the student exercises competence and we check whether he is competent.

The qualities of the situation to be developed

According to Xavier Roegiers, these qualities are ten (10) in number:

1. A mobilizing situation, that is to say, arouses the integration of knowledge, skills and know-
how and not their juxtaposition;
2. A new situation: we must guarantee the novelty of the situation, that is to say that the learner
has never met her otherwise we will find yourself in front of a reproduction;

3. A situation leading to a production, that is to say we wait for the resolution of this situation
a production clearly identifiable written or oral. For this production, it is preferable to use
an instruction or a question or a question set.

4 A situation in which the student is an actor, that is to say make the situation manageable by
each student taking into account their local context and address him personally;

5 A situation in line with the educational objectives, i.e. proposing instructions in line with
targeted skill and be located in a situation

6 A situation of an appropriate level, i.e. give the situation the level of difficulty desired
(knowledge, know-how to be mobilized) and adjust the data and how to provide it to the
pupil

7 A situation that conveys positive values;

8 A significant situation for the student, that is to say a situation that makes the learner want
to mobilize its resources and put itself into action movement (this is done through a context
that speaks to him and data which are at least close to reality).

She poses a challenge to him or rather she is presented to him in such a way that the student
perceives a challenge within his reach;

9. A situation whose presentation is accessible, i.e. making the presentation of the situation
more readable and propose clear instructions;
10. A rewarding situation for the student in the as the instructions are independent
The stages of developing a situation of integration.

The procedure to follow to construct a situation integration purposes can be summarized by

the steps following:

1. Choice of skill
For each level in a discipline given, we have 2 or 3 competences which are developed
throughout the year.

Before starting to develop a situation, it is must specify the educational level, type of skill (N 1,
o

N 2 and N 3), bearing numbers and finally the competence to be assessed.

o o

2. Carefully drafting the constituent elements of the situation

The materials and instructions must be written carefully so that the task at hand appears clearly.
We must also ensure that the student does not have yet encountered this situation that he is
asked to resolve.

3. Accuracy of correction indicators

We must first define the indicator “an observable sign which makes it possible to operationalize
a criterion” (MFEEPF, 2017). It is this information that we collect to decide on the mastery of
a criterion by the students.

The indicators are of the order of the observable in situation. For example, the criterion
“presentation correct copy” can be operationalized through some indicators: presence of
identifiable titles; absence of erasures; absence of stains.

4. Respecting the 2/3 Rule

This rule, proposed by De Ketele, consists of constructing the situation of integration of such
so that the student has three independent opportunities to show mastery of each criterion.

We consider that there is mastery of a criterion by the student when it shows mastery of the
criterion during two out of three opportunities at least successful; this threshold of mastery is
called minimum mastery of criteria. Maximum control corresponds to the success of three out
of three opportunities, all occasions show mastery of the criteria.

How to support the student in the development of one's skills

So that the learner is able to integrate situation, it is necessary to consider an apprenticeship of

integration. To do this, there are steps to follow:

Understanding the situation

To help the student understand the situation, we go through four dimensions:

 1. Lexical dimension

This dimension helps the learner to understand the words, expressions and terms that may
constitute an obstacle.

With the help of the teacher, and latter alone, the learner silently reads the situation of
integration, identifies words, terms and expressions which may constitute obstacles to the
understanding of the situation, provides appropriate explanations from the context of the
situation and/or definitions proposed in the dictionary and then the teacher validates the
explanations from the learner or groups of learners.

2. Hermeneutical dimension

This dimension helps the learner to reformulate the problem posed in its own terms. With the
help of the teacher, the learner identifies the problem posed in the situation and reformulates
the problem with its own words. Learners validate the results of small groups of 4 learners and
then the teacher validates the group results.

3. Logical dimension
This dimension helps the learner to identify the tasks and the types of tasks requested. With the
help of the teacher, the learner identifies the tasks requested in each of the instructions situation,
learners validate the results of small groups of 4 learners and finally the teacher validates the
group results.

4. Projective dimension
This dimension helps the learner to identify the expected qualities of the production. With help
of the teacher, the learner defines one or two qualities (criteria) of the expected production,
identifies for each quality, one or two indicators that can refine the defined quality.

The construction and validation of a competence

To help the student demonstrate their competence, that is to say to show that he is competent
and to validate his production, we move on to two dimensions:

1. Rhetorical dimension

2. Reflexive dimension or retroactive dimension

1. Rhetorical dimension

This dimension serves to help the learner to mobilize the resources acquired in order to find
solutions to given problem situations. Individually, the learner mobilizes a set of integrated
required resources, adjusts the resources to build the expected production, uses the appropriate
 connectors in view to articulate the reconstructed sentences and the teacher validates learners’
production.

2. Reflexive Dimension or Retroactive Dimension

Individually then in pairs, the learner(s) verifies that the response to the instructions meets to
the qualities and indicators identified previously. The teacher validates the personal production
of the learner or learners with reference to the expected qualities. After the production of the
learner, the teacher identifies the learner’s difficulties and in what matter, remediation must be
carried out. It follows these dimensions in situations learning only, the teacher and the learner
will work on these situations. But for the integration situation: it’s the learner who works alone,
and he shows his competence from of this situation.

Differences between teaching by objectives and Teaching by competence

Settings learning Objective based Competence based

Entrance by disciplinary the contents measures
broken down and hierarchized into
micro-units.
Process An observable behavior from the learner
based on transmission of disciplinary
content by the teacher; the learner is
passive and reproduces the contents
decontextualized, transmitted by the
teacher.
Nature of contents A mono disciplinary content taught for
himself and decontextualized.
Results Disciplinary contents transmitted by the
teacher, reproduced and returned by the
learner
Output profile mono disciplinary contents and
decontextualized to be reproduced at
term of the training.
epistemological exclusively refers to a behavior.
Reference
by the classes of situations and
situations relevant to training.
A treatment competent of
Situations based on actions and
Experiences of the learner;
the learner is active and builds its
knowledge and its competence
a plurality of resources
contextualized, interdisciplinary and
meaningful for the learner
Knowledge and skills built by
the learner through their own
activities and experiences and
situations
classes of situations to be dealt with
competently at the end of the
training.
May refer to different
Epistemological Paradigms
as the constructivism

Conclusion

Teaching by objectives consists of cutting out complex learning in distinct objectives achieved
by learners. The Objective-based teaching had the merit of putting for the first time the learner
at the center of the concerns of school programs. However, Competence based has its
limitations. The objectives are numerous and fragmented. The learner learns fragmented
knowledge, without necessarily understand its meaning. Competence based or integration
pedagogy makes it possible to create links between different objectives. She allows you to
give meaning to learning. It is for this reason that the teacher must teach students to “integrate”
their knowledge, know-how and interpersonal skills.

ANNEXE: Some Hints to Objectives formulating according to some specific skills and
subskills:

Reading Skill

Student will be able to:

• Demonstrate the steps of the reading process.
• Use format features of textbooks to understand major concepts.
• Locate information in textbook appendices, such as index, glossary, and gazetteers.
• Use the electronic catalog to find and check out a book from the library.
• Demonstrate knowledge of online databases.
• Analyze information from diagrams, charts, graphs, and illustrations.
• Generate questions, take notes, and summarize information from readings.
• Identify the main idea and supporting details.
• Understand the relationship between cause and effect.
• Analyze the use of comparison and contrast.
• Distinguish fact from opinion.
• Determine meaning of vocabulary in context.

Speaking Skill

•Speak with clarity and purpose to inform the class about the cultural research mini topic

•Speak with appropriate expression, smoothness, pace, volume, eye contact, and physicality

•Use standard language and grammar

Writing Skills

Students will be able to:

•Use the six traits of writing (content, organization, conventions, voice, sentence
•fluency, word choice)
•Create a thesis statement to guide and frame writing
•Use conventions of standard written English
•Develop ideas and content with specific details and examples
•Explore ideas and personal reactions to the selections through formal (expository) writing

Vocabulary

Students will be able to:

Identify lexical items in context and construct sentences and questions using the vocabulary
words in a personal context.
To recognize spelling, meaning, and usage differences of homophones