Continue Using Your Project Scenario From The Attached Assig

Continue Using Your Project Scenario From The Attached Assignment An

Continue using your project scenario from the (ATTACHED ASSIGNMENT) and identify and write your performance objectives. As you consider the scenario and the goals and analysis completed in Unit II, you will: 1) briefly recap your scenario, 2) write at least three terminal objectives, 3) write at least two enabling objectives for each terminal objective, 4) and reflect on the process you chose to write these objectives and why you chose this process with a minimum of 200 words. Which of the processes or models from this unit did you utilize? How does the process or model you have chosen best work for you in this situation? This portion of your project should include a minimum of one outside resource (this can be your textbook).

When writing your terminal and enabling objectives, you may use bullet points of different levels for each type of objective, a table, or even a graphic image (you might use the SmartArt feature in Microsoft Word, for instance) to illustrate the relationships between your objectives. You are free to choose whichever format works best for your scenario and objectives. Adhere to APA Style when creating your in-text citations and references for all outside sources that are used. Your formatting, however, does not need to be in APA Style for this unit’s assignment.

Paper For Above instruction

In any instructional design project, the clarification of performance objectives is a fundamental step to ensure that learning outcomes align with overall goals. In the context of the project scenario derived from the previous assignment, the first phase involves succinctly recapping the scenario's core elements. For example, suppose the scenario involves training new retail staff on customer service protocols. In that case, the scenario entails developing a comprehensive training module to improve customer satisfaction scores within a retail chain.

Following the scenario recap, three terminal objectives are established. These high-level objectives articulate the desired end results for learners after completing the instruction. For instance, a terminal objective could be: "By the end of the training, participants will demonstrate effective customer interaction skills." To complement this, two enabling objectives support each terminal objective by outlining the necessary intermediate skills or knowledge. Examples include: "Participants will identify key elements of excellent customer service" and "Participants will demonstrate active listening techniques during role-playing exercises." These enabling objectives provide measurable steps toward achieving the terminal goal.

The second terminal objective might focus on problem resolution: "Participants will effectively resolve customer complaints." Supporting enabling objectives could be: "Participants will identify common types of complaints" and "Participants will apply conflict resolution strategies in simulated scenarios." Similarly, a third terminal objective may be "Participants will utilize company policies to handle transactional issues," supported by enabling objectives like "Participants will locate relevant policies in the company manual" and "Participants will role-play procedures for handling returns and exchanges."

While formulating these objectives, I employed the SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound) process, which I find highly effective for instructional planning. The SMART model's emphasis on clarity and measurability ensures that objectives are well-defined and attainable within the given timeframe, providing a clear pathway for both instructors and learners. I selected this process because it aligns with my need for precise, practical objectives that can be assessed quantitatively or qualitatively, facilitating effective evaluation of learner progress.

This approach, rooted in the principles articulated by Dick, Carey, and Carey (2015), allows for systematic development of objectives that directly inform instructional activities and assessment strategies. The process’s iterative nature encourages continual refinement, which I find particularly beneficial when addressing complex or multi-faceted scenarios. Additionally, the SMART criteria provides a structured framework that integrates well with other models such as Bloom’s taxonomy, enhancing instructional coherence and focus.

In conclusion, the process of choosing SMART objectives aligns with my pedagogical approach and offers a reliable method for ensuring that instructional goals are clear and attainable. The model's focus on specific, measurable outcomes makes it particularly suitable for scenarios requiring precise skill development and assessment. Such structured objective-setting ultimately supports the overarching aim of achieving meaningful, impactful learning experiences.

References

• Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. O. (2015). The systematic design of instruction (8th ed.). Pearson.
• Gagné, R. M., Wager, W. W., Golas, K., & Keller, J. M. (2005). Principles of instructional design (4th ed.). Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
• Mager, R. F. (1992). Preparing instructional objectives._pairs.
• Marzano, R. J. (2007). The art and science of teaching: A comprehensive framework for effective instruction. ASCD.
• Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
• Selby, G. V. (2005). Evaluating and improving instruction. Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
• Reigeluth, C. M. (1999). Instructional-design theories and models: An overview of their current status. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (pp. 3-26). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Orey, M. (2010). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology (pp. 1-15). ISTE Publications.
• Richey, R. C., Klein, J. D., & Tracey, M. W. (2011). The instructional design knowledge base (3rd ed.). Routledge.
• Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V. (2018). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (4th ed.). Pearson.