Writing
objectives for precision teaching
From: Malcolm
Neely, Ph.D.
Subject:
IEP Objective Statements
Date: October
2000
Some time ago this (SC
List) thread appeared and John E. has an excellent web-page devoted to
the subject. I wrote the following to contribute, but was unable to send
it until I received permission from Marshall Van Ostrom regarding the use
of his objective statement style. It took a while to find him. He is retired
and has given his permission for any of us to use, if desired. His style
and forms are very tight and blend to the Chart so well.
I contacted Harold Kunzelmann
and Carl Koenig to substantiate Eric Haughton's aim-statement contribution
(read on). Ogden and Elizabeth may have additional information as to Eric's
formulating the notion.
The Robert Mager (1962) "Given
a ..." form of writing instructional (behavioral change) objectives is
widely accepted by our public schools. Example:
"Given a list
of 35 chemical elements, the learner must be able to recall and write the
valences of at least 30." (pp. 28-30).
Mager also cites time-frame
examples, "...within a period of 14 seconds. (pp. 44f). Ali and Michael's
shared statements exemplify the Mager style making the statements transfer
easily to the Standard Behavior Chart:
Given a sheet
of all randomly ordered single phonemes, vowel digraphs and consonant blends,
Morgan will say the sounds at a rate of 60 sounds per minute with no errors
by June 2001.
Given all first
and second grade level sight words from the Dolch sight word list, Morgan
will say the sight words at a rate of 60 per minute with no errors by September
2001.
John Eshleman's web
page (http://members.aol.com/johneshleman/objective.html)
offers detailed instructions for writing excellent Mager style behavioral
objectives.
The Mager style is the
style of choice for our public schools. Unfortunately, our public schools
chose and still choose "per cent" as their criterion for accomplishment,
they ignore "frequency," and "Celeration" is unknown by any term though "review" dates
are stipulated by law implying anticipated change.
Return to Top
Van
Ostrom behavioral objective writing
During the academic
year of 1971 to 1972, The Superintendent of Public Instruction in the State
of Washington sponsored a number of business consultants to teach various
school districts management techniques, including instructional objective
writing. Marshall Van Ostrom, consultant to both Boeing, Weyerhaeuser Paper,
and other national firms, was chosen by the State Special Education Department
to work with Washington's local special education programs.
Harold Kunzelmann, Carl
Koenig, and Eric Haughton were a part of the training team combining Precision
Teaching to the Van Ostrom management system. I recall Harold's saying
how blown away Van Ostrom was to see how Precision Teaching's planning
(Is/Did) and tracking (chart) dovetailed with the Van Ostrom management
system so perfectly.
Van Ostrom advances
a nine-step system for writing objectives (maybe ten steps, because each
objective begins with a date or has a "start date" entry).
1. The first is to state
the goal (the good intentions statement beginning with, To)
which includes the direction of change (increase, maintain, decrease)
and verb-object behavior (movement cycle/learning
channel(s), plus object to be counted):
Example: To
increase correct see/say word...
2. The second
step is to state the location (in/at),
which can be interpreted as a geographical/building site (at home, in the
classroom, in the judge's chambers) as well as from where the stimulus
comes such as text (book, story, poem):
Example: ...at
Learning Courses (my learning center in my basement) in Teach Your Child
To Read in 100 Easy Lessons Part I of "Hunting for Tigers"...
3. The third step
is to state the current performance frequency (snapshot
or more):
Example: ...from
50 correct words per minute...
4. The fourth
step is to state the aim* (which should
be stated in a range):
Example: ...to
200 to 250 correct words per minute...**
5. The fifth step
is to state by when (aha--celeration!):
Example: ...by
Wednesday 2 Feb 2001...
6. The sixth step
is to state the type of cost (instructor
cost, tutor cost, book cost):
Example: ...at
an instructional cost...
7. The seventh
step is to state the amount of cost (again
a range):
Example: ...of
$6.00...
8. The eighth
step is to state the type of time (teacher
instructional, class practice, home practice):
Example: ...and
a class practice time...
9. The ninth step
is to state the amount of time:
Example: ...of
one minute each day...
If there is to be instructional
time in addition to practice time repeat steps eight and nine. If there
is to be a home practice time repeat steps eight and nine. Etc.
So, to restate the above
objective begun 19 Jan 2001:
"Ryan" is To
increase his see/say words in "my basement" from 50 correct
words per minute to 200 to 250 correct words per minute by Wednesday,
2 Feb 00 at an instructional
cost of $12.00 to $6.00 and a class practice time of two minutes to one
minute each day and a home practice time of five minutes to one minute
each day.
An error objective might
also be written, separately, as it could well be a separate objective and
chart.
If you wish to start
with a combined statement until evidence suggests otherwise, combine them
("Ryan" is to increase his see/say cwpm and decrease his see/say ewpm words
in "my basement" from 50 cwpm and 10 ewpm to 200 to 250 cwpm with 2 to
0 ewpm...). If you prefer "learning opportunities" to "errors" or "wrongs",
write learning opportunities (lo).
In addition to the Van
Ostrom management objective, Van Ostrom includes begin, review, projected
finish, and actual finish dates. He also accounts for estimated dollar
costs and actual dollar costs; and for estimated time and actual time costs.
A "Senior" objective heads the Van Ostrom form with most of the form devoted
to "Sub" or "enabling" objectives. Space is allotted on the same "objectives
form" for writing who the team members are for seeing that each objective
is accomplished. Our interpretation of that on our forms included manager,
advisor, trainer, and supervisor--those with the responsibility, resources,
and accountability--along with the behaver.
Many may not be interested
in the dollar cost or the time cost (for the corporate world, it is critical),
but when we have mastered those, as well our curricular design, instructional
design, practice design, learning channel(s), fluency, bounce, celeration,
etc. standards, we might be a science--with outstanding teachers and learners--with
profits. :-)
It is easy to see that
the Van Ostrom objective writing method blends into the Standard Celeration
Chart so easily. In fact, by the time one fills out the blanks on the chart
at the top and on the bottom, lines in time bars, records a few beginning
practices, draws an up and down arrow with range aim bars, jots a few curricular,
instructional, and other "Is" or "Did" notations onto the chart, one has
charted the stated learning objective and more.
EVERYBODY, INITIAL THE
CHART AND GET TO WORK!
Van Ostrom was also
a proponent of Douglas McGregor's Theories X and Y. Use X with apprentices
until they show professional skill (about six months), and Y when they
become professional (pupils can become professional pupils). Theory Y would
support the learner's managing their own learning as soon as possible--and
the chart provides spaces for the learners to write their names on the
spaces from the behaver's side of the chart as they advance toward the
manager's side as charter, counter, and timer. They might even become co-manager
before becoming their own learning manager. Where is it that WE all have
heard, "GET THE LEARNER INVOLVED!"
------------------------------------------
* Van Ostrom stressed
that aims should be meetable and beatable. This suggests that our long-term
goals and aims might require mini-aims for some learners as they strive
for high fluencies.
** Van Ostrom stated
the aim ranges in order of the stated increase or decrease direction of
the behavior. Ex: (increasing to) 200 to 250 cwpm, or (decreasing to) 2
to 0 ewpm. This experience with Van Ostrom (and maybe with discussion with
Og?) led Eric Haughton to the decision to state aims in reverse of the
usual low to high, and to not agree with Van Ostrom's directional rule.
Instead Eric taught us to state the highest increasing behavior-aim-point
in first position and the acceptable behavior-aim-point in second position
(250 to 200); and to state the lowest decreasing behavior-aim-point in
first position and the acceptable behavior-aim-point in second position
(0 to 2). Eric felt it important to stretch learners and teachers perceptions
to highly fluent performances, and stating the best mark first would so
emphasize this point (Kunzelmann, Koenig).
References:
Kunzelmann, Harold P.
Telephone conference 27 Sep 2000.
Koenig, Carl H. Telephone
conference 27 Sep 2000.
Mager, Robert F. Preparing
instructional objectives. Fearon Publishers, Palo Alto, California.
1962. 61 pages.
McGregor, Douglas. The
human side of enterprise. New York: McGraw Hill, 1960.
Van Ostrom, Marshall,
and Associates. State of Washington Special Education Department Leadership
Institute on Management By Objectives, 1971 to 1972.
Return
to Top |
