Objectives which specify what learners should do as a result of instruction are sometimes called 'performance objectives'. A good deal has been written for and against the use of such objectives.
In 1 972, a book on the use of performance objectives in language teaching was published by Valette and Disick. In the book, arguments similar to those already outlined are advanced for the use of an objectives approach to syllabus design. In particular, it empha�izes the importance of stating objectives in terms of student rather than teacher behaviour, and of specifying input rather than output.
�
TASK 6 1
Complete the following tasks which have been adapted from Valette and Disick ( 1 972: 12).
The following are examples of either student or teacher behaviours. Identify the four student behaviours by marking
5
next to them.__ 1 to present rules of subject-verb agreement
__ 2 to explain the differences between direct and indirect object
64 Defining syllabus design
3 to write answers to questions on a reading selection 4 to model the pronunciation of dialogue sentences 5 to repeat after the speakers on a tape
6 to mark whether a statement heard is true or false 7 to introduce cultural material into the lesson 8 to review the numbers from one to a hundred
__ . 9 to describe in German a picture cut from a magazine
The following are examples of student input and output behaviours. Write an 0 next to the four output behaviours.
I
I
I
I
I
i
I I1 to pay attention in class
2 to recite a dialogue from memory
I
3 to study Lesson Twelve
4 to learn the rules for the agreement of the past participle
5 to look at foreign magazines
I
6 to attend a make-up .lab period
7 to write a brief composition about a picture 8 to read a paragraph aloud with no mistakes 9 to watch a film on Spain
__ 1 0 to answer questions about a taped conversation
Most syllabus planners who advocate the use of performance objectives suggest that they should contain three components. The first of these, the performance component, describes what the learner is to be able to do, the second, the conditions component, specifies the conditions under which the learner will perform, and the final component, the standards component, indicates how well the learner is to perform. As an example, consider the following three-part performance objective:
In a classroom simulation, learners will exchange personal details. All utterances will be comprehensible to someone unused to dealing with non-native speakers.
The different components of the objective are as follows: Perfonna7tce: exchange personal details
Conditions: in a classroom simulation
Standard: all utterances to be comprehensible to someone unused to dealing with non-native speakers.
�
TAS K 62
Indicate the performance, conditions, and standards in the follow ing performance objectives:
1 Working in pairs, learners will provide enough information for their partner to draw their family tree. Enough information will be provided for a three-generation family tree to be drawn. 2 Students will extract and record estimated minimum and
Objectives 65
maximum temperatures from a taped radio weather forecast. Four of the six regions co,.,°ered by the forecast must be accurately recorded.
3 While watching a videotaped conversation benveen two native speakers, identify the various topics discussed and the points at which the topics are changed. All topics and change points are to be identified.
The specification of conditions and standards leads to greater precision in objective setting, and also facilitates the grading of objectives (objectives can be made easier or more difficult by modifying conditions and standards). However, formal four-part objectives can become unwieldy, with a course spawning many more objectives than a teacher could hope to teach (Macdonald-Ross 1975). One way of overcoming this problem is to specify conditions and standards for sets of objectives rather than for each individual objective.
�
TASK 63
What do you see as the advantages for language syllabus design of specifying objectives in performance terms?
We have ·already considered some of the advantages of specifying objectives in performance terms. Mager ( 1975), an influential proponent of performance objectives, sees them as curriculum 'signposts' which indicate our destination. He rather acidly asks how we are to know when we have reached our destination if we do not know where we are going. (A counter-question might be: 'How do we know where we are, when we end up somewhere other than our pre-specified destination?')
Gronlund ( 1 9 8 1 ) argues that the effort to specify objectives in performance terms forces us to be realistic about what it is feasible to achieve, and that they greatly facilitate student assessment. In relation to this second argument, he points out the difficulty of writing a test if we do not know what it is that we wish our learners to be able to do as a result of instruction. Other arguments in favour of objectives include their value in enabling teachers to convey to students the pedagogic intentions of a course. (Mager and Clark ( 1963) carried out an experiment in which students who knew where they were heading learned much faster than students who had not been provided with course objectives.) Their value in assisting with other aspects of course planning such as the selection of materials and learning objectives has also been pointed out.
In recent years, learner-centred approaches to language syllabus design have become popular. In such approaches, the learner is involved, as far as possible and feasible, in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of the curriculum. This involvement is felt to increase the interest and
66 Defining syllabus design
motivation of the learners. It is also felt to be a particularly effective way of developing the learners' learning skills by fostering a reflective attitude toward the learning process (see, for example, Candlin's ( 1 987) list of desirable characteristics of learning tasks in
4.3).
Advocates of a learner-centred approach to education believe that, at the very least, learners should be fully informed about any course of study they are undenaking. Information (in the learner's home language where necessary) can be provided in a number of forms. It can, for instance, be provided in the form of a specification of course content. One advantage of the provision of information in the form of performance objectives is that these are generally couched in terms to which the learner can relate. If asked why he is attending a language course, a learner is more likely to reply that he wants to be able 'to understand the news on television', or 'to obtain goods and services as a tourist in the target country' than 'to master the distinction between the present perfect and simple past' or 'to use the article system appropriately'.
Proponents of learner-centred approaches to curriculum development also argue for the pedagogic benefits of training learners to set their own objectives (see, for example, Candlin and Edelhoff 1982; Nunan and Brindley 1 986). In this context, Brindley ( 1984) suggests that:
Setting learning objectives serves a number of useful purposes: it enables the teacher to evaluate what has been learned since terminal ' behaviour is always defined in terms which are measurable; it means that learners (provided they have participated in the process of setting objectives) know what they are supposed to be learning and what is expected of them; it provides a constant means of feedback and on-going evaluation for both teacher and learner; and it provides 'a way of beginning the individualisation of instruction' (Steiner 1 975) since learners can set their own standards of performance and evaluate how well these standards have been attained.
(Brindley 1 984: .35)
�
TASK 64
Make a list !Jf the various arguments in favour of an objectives approach as described here.
Which of these arguments do you find mostlleast convincing? From your experience, how feasible do you think it is to teach learners to set their own objectives?
What type of learner is most likely to benefit from such an exercise? What type of learner is least likely to benefit?
Ob;ectives 67