Developing Measurable Learning Objectives CLO 1 We Will

Developing Measurable Learning Objectiveswlo 3 Clo 1we Will Begi

Developing Measurable Learning Objectives [WLO: 3] [CLO: 1] We will begin the process of developing assessments for an instructional plan using the backward design model. In this model, we begin with the end in mind; therefore, when developing an instructional plan, we start with the standards that are used to create measurable learning objectives to ensure alignment. Once those standards are finalized, educators then create assessments before writing the instructional plans, ensuring alignment between learner measurement and instruction. Assignments in Weeks 1 through 5 will contribute to your Final Paper, so reviewing instructor feedback to make necessary revisions in Week 6 is essential.

Prior to beginning this assignment, review the Weekly Lesson for Week 1, which provides detailed guidance on creating measurable learning objectives. Read Chapter 4: Learning Objectives, Assessment and Instruction, and complete the activity at the end of 4.1 to help identify measurable learning objectives. Explore the article on the backward design model titled "Understanding by Design." Watch the video featuring Grant Wiggins on "Understanding by Design" for further insight. Review the web page on "Read the Standards," and explore the Bloom’s Video and Bloom’s Wheel to aid in writing measurable objectives. Reflect on your teaching area and the types of learners you will serve—whether in a classroom, corporate setting, healthcare, military, or other context—and consider your content focus.

Content Instructions (Due Monday, Day 7): Prepare the following:

• Complete the Week 1 Developing Learning Objectives Assignment Template, available in the Weekly Lesson for Week 1, and submit it to Waypoint.
• Highlight your chosen teaching environment (e.g., PreK, K-12, military, corporate, healthcare, etc.).
• Copy and paste a selected standard from the provided options (state standards for Pre-K, CCSS for math and reading, state K-12 standards, or relevant standards outside traditional public school disciplines).
• Develop three measurable learning objectives aligned with your selected standard.
• Use Bloom’s Wheel to craft one objective at each of three different cognitive levels, ensuring each is labeled with the appropriate Bloom’s Taxonomy level. Select verbs from the wheel’s middle section to formulate clear, measurable objectives.

Ensure your assignment follows formatting expectations, including a separate title page with the title of the paper, your name, course name and number, instructor’s name, and submission date. Writing clear, measurable objectives not only supports effective assessment development but also aligns instruction with learner outcomes.

Paper For Above instruction

Developing precise and measurable learning objectives is a crucial step in instructional design, particularly when employing the backward design model. This approach emphasizes starting with the end goals in mind—identifying what learners should know and be able to do after instruction—then designing assessments and instructional activities accordingly. Establishing clear standards and objectives at the outset ensures alignment across all components of the educational process, which enhances learning effectiveness and assessment validity.

In my envisioned teaching context as a corporate trainer specializing in leadership development, I aim to facilitate adult learners' acquisition of essential managerial skills. The standards I focus on derive from industry competency frameworks and professional certification requirements, such as those from the Project Management Institute or similar organizations. These standards emphasize skills like effective communication, strategic thinking, and team management.

For my first measurable learning objective, aligned with a standard on effective communication, I aim for learners to demonstrate the ability to craft clear, audience-appropriate messages. Using Bloom’s Taxonomy, this objective targets the "Apply" level, requiring learners to practically use communication techniques in simulated scenarios. A sample objective might read: "By the end of the training, learners will be able to compose clear and concise workplace emails tailored to specific audiences, demonstrating application of professional communication principles."

The second objective focuses on critical thinking, aligned with standards requiring strategic decision-making. This objective, categorized under the "Analyze" level, could state: "Learners will analyze case studies to identify leadership challenges and propose appropriate solutions, demonstrating analytical skills relevant to managerial decision-making." This objective ensures learners are engaging with content at a higher cognitive level, fostering deep understanding and problem-solving abilities.

The third objective addresses the learner’s ability to evaluate team performance, aligning with standards related to performance assessment. It targets the "Evaluate" level and might be phrased as: "Participants will evaluate team project outcomes against set benchmarks, providing constructive feedback and improvement strategies." This objective not only assesses evaluative skills but also encourages reflective practice and continuous improvement.

Using Bloom’s Wheel, I selected verbs that clearly indicate observable behaviors, such as "compose," "analyze," and "evaluate." These verbs promote measurability and ensure the objectives are specific and assessable. By clearly defining cognitive levels, I align instructional activities and assessments with each objective, promoting coherent learning experiences that systematically build learner competence.

Overall, creating these measurable objectives involves understanding the content standards, Clear identification of desired learner outcomes, and the application of Bloom’s Taxonomy to diversify cognitive levels. This structured approach guides the development of effective assessments and instructional strategies, ultimately leading to meaningful learning experiences tailored to adult learners in a corporate setting.

References

• Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. Longmans.
• Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (Expanded 2nd ed.). ASCD.
• Marzano, R. J. (2007). The art and science of teaching: A comprehensive framework for effective instruction. Solution Tree Press.
• Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
• Tomlinson, C. A., & McTighe, J. (2006). Integrating differentiated instruction and understanding by design. In C. A. Tomlinson & J. McTighe (Eds.), Integrating Differentiated Instruction & Understanding by Design (pp. 1-24). ASCD.
• Reeves, T. C. (2010). A comprehensive framework for designing, delivering, and evaluating online courses. TechTrends, 54(4), 9-15.
• Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university (4th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
• Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories: An educational perspective (6th ed.). Pearson.
• Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1998). Cooperative learning returns to college. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 30(4), 26-35.
• Gagné, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning and theory of instruction. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.