student learning objectives examples technology education

Blended Learning

22 Learning Objectives

Observe & consider, perspectives on learning objectives.

As we discussed in the previous section, well articulated learning objectives are a foundation for any blended learning design process because they establish what you want your students to know or do upon completion of your course. As we look to further explore the learning objectives, it is worth considering an objectives significance from various perspectives. Well crafted learning objectives allow all stakeholders in the course to share a common understanding of what the course is about.

Instructors & Course Designers

For instructors and course designers, the value of a learning objective is perhaps most obvious. In short, learning objectives enable the blended learning design process to happen. Learning objectives provide road map for a course and help align content, assessments and activities to round out the learning experience.

Well developed learning objectives can also help students to understand better their own learning process. When the goals are explicit, students can more purposefully approach readings, activities, and assignments and more easily make connections that deepen the learning experience. Furthermore, students may be able to articulate skills more clearly and link their learning experiences to a real-world context.

Institutions, Departments and Programs

Though our primary focus remains at the course level, learning objectives can have significance beyond the course level. In thinking about how your course objectives take shape, it may be worth considering how programs, departments, and institutions might use learning objectives to help organize more holistic learning pathways for students. For example, our institution has the  UW Essential Learning Outcomes help communicate to prospective students how a UW education will prepare them for life after graduation. At the same time, this communicates to prospective employers what skills and abilities a UW graduate will bring to an organization.

Departments and programs can also outline learning objectives that align with those institutional objectives but speak more specifically to how a program of study will prepare a student for a specific discipline.

Learning Objectives and Course Structure

Learning objectives might seem straightforward, but there are actually quite a number of considerations to make to ensure that an objective is complete and works to align with the various elements of a blended course. The diagram below outlines how objectives work at various levels of a course to build a the course structure and to help define the various assignments, activities, and assessments.

Anatomy of an Objective

A learning objective is a brief statement with several important characteristics:

• contains a verb that aligns with the designed learner action
• contains object that summarizes the desired knowledge or skill
• is actionable – can be put into practice or though activity
• is measurable or observable – can be assessed to determine whether the objective was met

While each characteristic above is an important component of a complete learning objective, it is worth spending a moment looking at the way in which the verb can link an objective to one of the six cognitive domains within Bloom’s Taxonomy .

Now that we’ve established the component parts of a well-written objective, let’s look review a few examples. Consider the table below and note the difference between the strong and weak objectives. As you review the chart, notice how the strong objectives include each of the essential components of an objective (listed above). At the same time, note how the weak objectives contain a non-descript verb and imprecise object.

Supplemental Resources

• Writing Good Learning Objectives from I-Tech
• A Model of Learning Objectives  – Interactive tool based on A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives by Rex Heer, Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching, Iowa State University.

Practice & Apply

Reflect on learning objectives and your course.

• Does your program or department have well defined learning objectives or outcomes for students?
• If so, how do those objectives impact your course design, activities, and assessments?
• If you have learning objectives developed for your course, are they written in a way that is measurable and actionable?

Media Attributions

Teaching with Technology Copyright © 2015 by Steel Wagstaff is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Creating Learning Outcomes

Main navigation.

A learning outcome is a concise description of what students will learn and how that learning will be assessed. Having clearly articulated learning outcomes can make designing a course, assessing student learning progress, and facilitating learning activities easier and more effective. Learning outcomes can also help students regulate their learning and develop effective study strategies.

Defining the terms

Educational research uses a number of terms for this concept, including learning goals, student learning objectives, session outcomes, and more. 

In alignment with other Stanford resources, we will use learning outcomes as a general term for what students will learn and how that learning will be assessed. This includes both goals and objectives. We will use learning goals to describe general outcomes for an entire course or program. We will use learning objectives when discussing more focused outcomes for specific lessons or activities.

For example, a learning goal might be “By the end of the course, students will be able to develop coherent literary arguments.” 

Whereas a learning objective might be, “By the end of Week 5, students will be able to write a coherent thesis statement supported by at least two pieces of evidence.”

Learning outcomes benefit instructors

Learning outcomes can help instructors in a number of ways by:

• Providing a framework and rationale for making course design decisions about the sequence of topics and instruction, content selection, and so on.
• Communicating to students what they must do to make progress in learning in your course.
• Clarifying your intentions to the teaching team, course guests, and other colleagues.
• Providing a framework for transparent and equitable assessment of student learning. 
• Making outcomes concerning values and beliefs, such as dedication to discipline-specific values, more concrete and assessable.
• Making inclusion and belonging explicit and integral to the course design.

Learning outcomes benefit students 

Clearly, articulated learning outcomes can also help guide and support students in their own learning by:

• Clearly communicating the range of learning students will be expected to acquire and demonstrate.
• Helping learners concentrate on the areas that they need to develop to progress in the course.
• Helping learners monitor their own progress, reflect on the efficacy of their study strategies, and seek out support or better strategies. (See Promoting Student Metacognition for more on this topic.)

Choosing learning outcomes

When writing learning outcomes to represent the aims and practices of a course or even a discipline, consider:

• What is the big idea that you hope students will still retain from the course even years later?
• What are the most important concepts, ideas, methods, theories, approaches, and perspectives of your field that students should learn?
• What are the most important skills that students should develop and be able to apply in and after your course?
• What would students need to have mastered earlier in the course or program in order to make progress later or in subsequent courses?
• What skills and knowledge would students need if they were to pursue a career in this field or contribute to communities impacted by this field?
• What values, attitudes, and habits of mind and affect would students need if they are to pursue a career in this field or contribute to communities impacted by this field?
• How can the learning outcomes span a wide range of skills that serve students with differing levels of preparation?
• How can learning outcomes offer a range of assessment types to serve a diverse student population?

Use learning taxonomies to inform learning outcomes

Learning taxonomies describe how a learner’s understanding develops from simple to complex when learning different subjects or tasks. They are useful here for identifying any foundational skills or knowledge needed for more complex learning, and for matching observable behaviors to different types of learning.

Bloom’s Taxonomy

Bloom’s Taxonomy is a hierarchical model and includes three domains of learning: cognitive, psychomotor, and affective. In this model, learning occurs hierarchically, as each skill builds on previous skills towards increasingly sophisticated learning. For example, in the cognitive domain, learning begins with remembering, then understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and lastly creating. 

Taxonomy of Significant Learning

The Taxonomy of Significant Learning is a non-hierarchical and integral model of learning. It describes learning as a meaningful, holistic, and integral network. This model has six intersecting domains: knowledge, application, integration, human dimension, caring, and learning how to learn. 

See our resource on Learning Taxonomies and Verbs for a summary of these two learning taxonomies.

How to write learning outcomes

Writing learning outcomes can be made easier by using the ABCD approach. This strategy identifies four key elements of an effective learning outcome:

Consider the following example: Students (audience) , will be able to label and describe (behavior) , given a diagram of the eye at the end of this lesson (condition) , all seven extraocular muscles, and at least two of their actions (degree) .

Audience 

Define who will achieve the outcome. Outcomes commonly include phrases such as “After completing this course, students will be able to...” or “After completing this activity, workshop participants will be able to...”

Keeping your audience in mind as you develop your learning outcomes helps ensure that they are relevant and centered on what learners must achieve. Make sure the learning outcome is focused on the student’s behavior, not the instructor’s. If the outcome describes an instructional activity or topic, then it is too focused on the instructor’s intentions and not the students.

Try to understand your audience so that you can better align your learning goals or objectives to meet their needs. While every group of students is different, certain generalizations about their prior knowledge, goals, motivation, and so on might be made based on course prerequisites, their year-level, or majors. 

Use action verbs to describe observable behavior that demonstrates mastery of the goal or objective. Depending on the skill, knowledge, or domain of the behavior, you might select a different action verb. Particularly for learning objectives which are more specific, avoid verbs that are vague or difficult to assess, such as “understand”, “appreciate”, or “know”.

The behavior usually completes the audience phrase “students will be able to…” with a specific action verb that learners can interpret without ambiguity. We recommend beginning learning goals with a phrase that makes it clear that students are expected to actively contribute to progressing towards a learning goal. For example, “through active engagement and completion of course activities, students will be able to…”

Example action verbs

Consider the following examples of verbs from different learning domains of Bloom’s Taxonomy . Generally speaking, items listed at the top under each domain are more suitable for advanced students, and items listed at the bottom are more suitable for novice or beginning students. Using verbs and associated skills from all three domains, regardless of your discipline area, can benefit students by diversifying the learning experience. 

For the cognitive domain:

• Create, investigate, design
• Evaluate, argue, support
• Analyze, compare, examine
• Solve, operate, demonstrate
• Describe, locate, translate
• Remember, define, duplicate, list

For the psychomotor domain:

• Invent, create, manage
• Articulate, construct, solve
• Complete, calibrate, control
• Build, perform, execute
• Copy, repeat, follow

For the affective domain:

• Internalize, propose, conclude
• Organize, systematize, integrate
• Justify, share, persuade
• Respond, contribute, cooperate
• Capture, pursue, consume

Often we develop broad goals first, then break them down into specific objectives. For example, if a goal is for learners to be able to compose an essay, break it down into several objectives, such as forming a clear thesis statement, coherently ordering points, following a salient argument, gathering and quoting evidence effectively, and so on.

State the conditions, if any, under which the behavior is to be performed. Consider the following conditions:

• Equipment or tools, such as using a laboratory device or a specified software application.
• Situation or environment, such as in a clinical setting, or during a performance.
• Materials or format, such as written text, a slide presentation, or using specified materials.

The level of specificity for conditions within an objective may vary and should be appropriate to the broader goals. If the conditions are implicit or understood as part of the classroom or assessment situation, it may not be necessary to state them. 

When articulating the conditions in learning outcomes, ensure that they are sensorily and financially accessible to all students.

Degree 

Degree states the standard or criterion for acceptable performance. The degree should be related to real-world expectations: what standard should the learner meet to be judged proficient? For example:

• With 90% accuracy
• Within 10 minutes
• Suitable for submission to an edited journal
• Obtain a valid solution
• In a 100-word paragraph

The specificity of the degree will vary. You might take into consideration professional standards, what a student would need to succeed in subsequent courses in a series, or what is required by you as the instructor to accurately assess learning when determining the degree. Where the degree is easy to measure (such as pass or fail) or accuracy is not required, it may be omitted.

Characteristics of effective learning outcomes

The acronym SMART is useful for remembering the characteristics of an effective learning outcome.

• Specific : clear and distinct from others.
• Measurable : identifies observable student action.
• Attainable : suitably challenging for students in the course.
• Related : connected to other objectives and student interests.
• Time-bound : likely to be achieved and keep students on task within the given time frame.

Examples of effective learning outcomes

These examples generally follow the ABCD and SMART guidelines. 

Arts and Humanities

Learning goals.

Upon completion of this course, students will be able to apply critical terms and methodology in completing a written literary analysis of a selected literary work.

At the end of the course, students will be able to demonstrate oral competence with the French language in pronunciation, vocabulary, and language fluency in a 10 minute in-person interview with a member of the teaching team.

Learning objectives

After completing lessons 1 through 5, given images of specific works of art, students will be able to identify the artist, artistic period, and describe their historical, social, and philosophical contexts in a two-page written essay.

By the end of this course, students will be able to describe the steps in planning a research study, including identifying and formulating relevant theories, generating alternative solutions and strategies, and application to a hypothetical case in a written research proposal.

At the end of this lesson, given a diagram of the eye, students will be able to label all of the extraocular muscles and describe at least two of their actions.

Using chemical datasets gathered at the end of the first lab unit, students will be able to create plots and trend lines of that data in Excel and make quantitative predictions about future experiments.

• How to Write Learning Goals , Evaluation and Research, Student Affairs (2021).
• SMART Guidelines , Center for Teaching and Learning (2020).
• Learning Taxonomies and Verbs , Center for Teaching and Learning (2021).

13 SMART Goals Examples for Technology Integration

Technology integration is a crucial part of any successful education system. It can help increase productivity, foster collaboration, and enhance student learning experiences.

Developing SMART goals will ensure that technology is used to its fullest potential. This article will provide some examples of SMART goals in the context of technology integration in the classroom.

Table of Contents

What is a SMART Goal?

The SMART ( Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Time-based ) method will enable you to establish effective goals for technology integration.

Want more clarity? Let’s dive deeper into each SMART element:

Integrating technology without a specific goal can lead to disappointment and frustration. Realize that the more detailed your goals are, the better your chances of reaching them.

Start by assessing what you hope to achieve through technology integration. Are you looking to streamline processes, boost productivity , or improve communication? Once you’ve identified your objectives, it’s easier to determine which technologies will be most effective in reaching success.

Understanding the measurable outcomes of your technological integrations is essential for success with any project. Without tracking progress, your goals would be challenging to accomplish.

This SMART criterion will help you take control of any tests and tribulations that come your way and use them as a learning opportunity to move forward.

The temptation to take on too much too soon is understandable, but it’s important not to overlook the value of being realistic. Pursuing achievable goals will make sure that you don’t bite off more than you can chew and ultimately fail.

Setting meaningful goals that align with your values will propel you to reach your grand aspirations. Even if the journey ahead is daunting, your personal values will provide a reliable guide to staying true to yourself.

A timeline is like a roadmap, guiding you from where you are to where you want to be. Without one, it’s easy to get sidetracked or lose motivation. And remember that deadlines are fluid and can be adjusted as needed but having one allows for better planning and organization.

Below you’ll discover 13 SMART goals examples for technology integration:

1. Improve Digital Literacy

“I will increase the percentage of students with digital literacy skills from 50% to 70% by the end of this quarter. I’ll provide access to training, tutorials, and other resources encouraging students to develop their digital skills.”

Specific: The goal states that digital literacy skills should be increased from 50% to 70%.

Measurable: You can track the percentage of students with digital literacy skills over time.

Attainable: This statement is feasible if students access the required resources and training materials.

Relevant: Digital literacy is a crucial skill for students and professionals alike.

Time-based: This SMART goal must be completed by the end of the quarter.

2. Use Interactive Learning Tools

“Over the two months ahead, I’ll invest in and use interactive learning tools for all subjects that can be easily implemented. I plan to make learning more engaging and interactive while staying on top of the latest technology trends.”

Specific: This goal mentions which tools will be used and which subjects.

Measurable: How much progress has been made to implement interactive learning tools can be measured.

Attainable: Given the right resources and commitment, the time frame provided is possible.

Relevant: Using interactive learning tools is essential to stay updated with technology trends.

Time-based: The goal is expected to be completed in two months.

3. Increase Computer Usage

“I aim to increase students’ computer usage in all grade levels by 10% for one academic year. That will include providing additional hardware and technology-based learning activities that are engaging and promote higher-level thinking.”

Specific: The goal is well-defined, specifying the overall objective and how it will be met.

Measurable: Computer usage can be tracked through increased hardware, technology-based learning activities, and student engagement.

Attainable: This goal is achievable with additional resources and activities.

Relevant: Increased computer usage is vital for student success and promotes higher-level thinking skills.

Time-based: The statement must be completed within one academic year.

4. Develop Your Tech Skills

“I aspire to take a course that will increase my understanding and use of technology within three months. My aim is to become an expert in the technology used in my job and support others in using it.”

Specific: This goal outlines what you must do (enroll in a course, increase understanding and use of technology) and how long it should take (three months).

Measurable: You could check your study progress and how many hours you’ve spent on coursework.

Attainable: Gaining expertise in a particular technology is feasible within the allotted time frame.

Relevant: The goal focuses on becoming proficient in the tech used at work and supporting others.

Time-based: A three-month deadline is set for this particular goal.

5. Incorporate Cloud Computing

“By the end of 9 months, I’ll research and implement cloud computing technology to improve our data security. I’ll also take advantage of the scalability of cloud computing by allowing our IT department to store and access data from any connected device.”

Specific: You have precise actions available—research and implement cloud computing.

Measurable: Make sure you measure the data security improvements.

Attainable: Assuming that you have the resources, this is a reasonable goal.

Relevant: This goal relates to your primary objective of improving data security.

Time-based: You should expect goal attainment within 9 months.

6. Enhance Collaboration

“I’ll use web-based tools to promote collaboration by the end of four months. By providing better communication and access to shared resources, I want to improve teamwork and efficiency of our everyday tasks.”

Specific: The SMART goal identifies precisely what will be done and how it will be accomplished.

Measurable: By using web-based tools, the team can track how often they collaborate and what tasks are being completed.

Attainable: This can be done by researching and implementing web-based tools that can be used for collaboration.

Relevant: This is relevant to promoting collaboration, improving communication , and providing access to resources.

Time-based: There is a four-month window for accomplishing success.

7. Boost Student Engagement

“I will increase student engagement in the classroom by introducing digital tools and other technology to assist with differentiation. I hope to have this implemented in all classrooms within two months.”

Specific: The statement details what will be done and the time frame.

Measurable: Measure student engagement by surveying students, parents, and teachers.

Attainable: You can introduce more digital tools and other technology in a short period.

Relevant: Technology can help facilitate differentiation in the classroom and make learning engaging for students.

Time-based: Two months are required to reach this goal.

8. Optimize Data Collection and Analysis

“I plan to develop a system that collects and analyzes data accurately, efficiently, and quickly within the following 7 months. The system should improve our decision-making abilities and eliminate the need for manual data gathering.”

Specific: The individual plans to develop a system that collects and analyzes data quickly.

Measurable: You will create a system that reduces the need for manual data gathering.

Attainable: This is feasible as it can be done given the time frame and resources.

Relevant: The goal is appropriate because it focuses on data collection, affecting decision-making abilities .

Time-based: The statement is time-bound because it has an end date of 7 months.

9. Create Tech Training Programs

“I’ll create and implement an ongoing technical training program for all staff members within the next 6 months. This program should help staff understand the latest technologies, the systems they use, and effectively implement them to meet objectives.”

Specific: This goal is explicit because you want to design and implement a technical training program.

Measurable: Ensure the training program delivery is possible within 6 months.

Attainable: This SMART goal can be achieved if you take the time to create a comprehensive program.

Relevant: Creating tech training programs is essential in helping staff get up to speed with the latest technology.

Time-based: Achievement of the goal is expected within 6 months.

10. Integrate Technology for Assessment

“To assess student progress, I’ll implement a technology-driven formative assessment system to evaluate student learning within 5 months. I want the system to meet all stakeholders’ needs and provide timely feedback to support learning.”

Specific: The goal establishes the objective of integrating technology for student assessment.

Measurable: Track the implementation of a technology-based formative assessment system.

Attainable: Providing timely feedback supports student learning and is achievable within the 5-month timeline.

Relevant: This is relevant as it will assess student learning and provide feedback to support their development.

Time-based: Success is anticipated after 5 whole months.

11. Automate Administrative Tasks

“I’ll strive to use technology to automate administrative tasks for three months. I want to reduce paperwork and manual activities so that staff can focus more on other tasks and responsibilities.”

Specific: This goal is about automating administrative tasks to increase efficiency.

Measurable: Count the number of automated administrative tasks achieved over the three months.

Attainable: Automation is definitely feasible, as many software solutions help with this.

Relevant: Automating administrative tasks will improve efficiency and productivity, making them suitable.

Time-based: There are three months to accomplish the statement.

12. Establish Security Protocols

“We’ll establish and enforce security protocols for using technology by the end of 6 months. These protocols will include password requirements, firewalls, antivirus software updates, and restrictions on certain sites.”

Specific: The SMART goal is clear. The staff will establish security protocols for using technology.

Measurable: This can be gauged by creating security protocols and a timeline for enforcement.

Attainable: This is absolutely doable with the right resources and time.

Relevant: The goal is appropriate for establishing security protocols to ensure data privacy.

Time-based: Goal attainment will be met within 6 months.

13. Leverage Video Conferencing

“In three months, I’ll purchase a video conferencing system for all school board meetings, allowing board members to attend from different locations more easily. I will also explore the feasibility of incorporating video conferencing into daily school activities.”

Specific: The goal is explicit because it outlines purchasing a video conferencing system.

Measurable: The school board will be able to measure the success after three months.

Attainable: Video conferencing systems are readily available and can be implemented quickly.

Relevant: Leveraging video conferencing is highly relevant in the context of school board meetings.

Time-based: You should anticipate results within the following three months.

Final Thoughts

Technology integration through SMART goals is an effective tool for increasing classroom productivity and student engagement. It provides a framework for teachers to set goals tailored to their students’ needs.

As the educational landscape changes, the SMART method will help teachers adjust their instruction and make meaningful connections with their students.

Taking advantage of this powerful opportunity can allow educators to revolutionize traditional teaching methods and create unique experiences for students.

Our websites may use cookies to personalize and enhance your experience. By continuing without changing your cookie settings, you agree to this collection. For more information, please see our University Websites Privacy Notice .

Department of Educational Psychology

Educational Technology

The Two Summers Program’s learning objectives are based on a combination state and national standards, specifically drawing on the ISTE Standards for Technology Coaches . Students weave academic/learning experiences through their own instruction (e.g., K-12 classroom teaching) to develop and expand crucial technological and pedagogical skills.

Graduates of the Two Summers Program will be able to:

• Identify, describe, and apply emerging technologies in teaching and learning environments
• Demonstrate knowledge, attitudes, and skills of digital age work and learning
• Plan, design, and assess effective learning environments and experiences
• Implement curriculum methods and strategies that use technology to maximize student learning
• Develop technology-enabled assessment and evaluation strategies
• Compare and contrast social, ethical, and legal issues surrounding technology
• Facilitate instruction in the new literacies that emerge within digital / interactive learning environments

We believe technology should be used to support content knowledge and creative pedagogy grounded in contemporary theories of thinking and learning. Technology is not an end in and of itself but a mechanism we can leverage to optimally engage and educate learners in Math, Science, Language, Social Studies, Music, Art, and other domains.

For that reason, Two Summers emphasizes a design-experiment approach to technology integration, cutting across all courses and key program artifacts:

(C) [blue text] denotes Content -based skills; (P) [green text] denotes Pedagogy -based skills; (D) [purple text] denotes Disposition -based skills

Content Knowledge consists of understanding contemporary technologies (i.e., hardware, software), the internet, and a combination of on- and offline computer-based tools capable of supporting classroom instruction.

Pedagogy consists of understanding instructional design methods, contemporary theories of thinking and learning, and design research methods that enable the wise and successful integration of technology as part of instruction.

Disposition   consists of understanding intellectual risk-taking, on-the-fly problem solving, technology visioning, and learning through data-driven decision-making (i.e., technology implementation, data collection, analysis).

The Two Summers Program threads these keys artifacts, demonstrations of skill, and crucial components of technology integration together using the ISTE Standards for Technology Coaches :

Using Bloom’s Taxonomy to Write Effective Learning Objectives: The ABCD Approach

Bloom’s Taxonomy offers a framework for categorizing educational goals that students are expected to attain as learning progresses.

Learning objectives can be identified as the goals that should be achieved by a student at the end of a lesson. The objectives of a lesson describe the base knowledge and skills we want our students to learn from our lesson. Simply put it’s what the student can do after they unit has been introduced. Your choice of materials, topics and logical structured presentation of a lesson has a direct influence on the objectives or goals you want your students to achieve.

See also: What is flipped classroom

Having a clear learning objective assists the facilitator or teacher in the basic course design. It helps with the creation of assessment, which in return showcases the student’s ability to achieve the objectives through collecting data. Monitoring a student’s progress throughout the learning process is vital to understand whether they are able to reach the learning objective or not. Furthermore, assessing students help the teacher to realize whether teaching methods should be adjusted or not.

See also: Instructional design

Having specific goals help the logical flow of a lesson. It’s vital that a lesson is tailored to achieve detailed lesson objectives. In order for the lesson to have a positive and constructive outcome. Basically, to make sure that students achieve the aim of the lesson.

See also: ADDIE model

This process can be simplified by following a basic formula: The ABCD approach. By using this formula, you will be able to create clear and effective objectives. It consists of four key elements: ( A )  Audience , ( B )  Behavior , ( C )  Condition , and ( D )  Degree .

A-Audience: Determine who will achieve the objective.

B-Behavior: Use action verbs (Bloom’s taxonomy) to write observable and measurable behavior that shows mastery of the objective.

C-Condition: If any, state the condition under which behavior is to be performed. (Optional)

D-Degree: If possible, state the criterion for acceptable performance, speed, accuracy, quality, etc. (Optional)

Please note that not every learning objective must contain a condition or state a degree.

Please also note that objectives may not be written in this order (ABCD).

Below are some example objectives which include Audience , Behavior , Condition , Degree

• “ Students will be able to apply the standard deviation rule to the special case of distributions having a normal shape .”
• “ Given a specific case study , learners will be able to conduct at least 2 needs analysis . “
• “ Given a diagram of the eye , students will be able label the 9 extra-ocular muscles and describe at least 2 of their actions .”
• “ Students will explain the social justice to ensure that adequate social services are provided to those who need them in three paragraphs .”

See also: Instructional design models

First you need to establish what prior knowledge your students have. Assess whether your students know any of the materials you want to present. What experiences do they have prior to coming into the classroom? By taking into account their valuable prior-knowledge you will be able to create an innovative lesson, with unique content. Content that your students don’t know about yet.

Prior knowledge can be assessed by giving all students a pre-test or a pre-course quiz. It’s vital to accurately understand a student’s prior knowledge to avoid misconceptions and misunderstandings. In this way you can avoid repeating information they already know as well as adjust your learning objectives accordingly.

This also gives you the opportunity to get to know your students that will help you adapt your teaching styles and methods. It’s important to know what motivates your new audience, what are their values and personality types. You can also discover what kind of learners they are. By assessing your students’ prior knowledge, you can add activities and worksheets that they will find interesting and can relate to.

Now, you can also make sure that the content you want to present are relevant to their reference frameworks. You can add extra materials and topics to challenge them and to tailor the learning objectives to the skills that they need to obtain and not the skills they already have.

After identifying your Audience by keeping the above-mentioned alternatives in mind you can start writing down your learning objectives. Usually it starts with a phrase like, “ After reviewing this section, students will be able to… ” or “ After completing this activity, learners will be able to… ”

See also: What are MOOCs

It’s quite simple to understand the different behaviors shown by students. By using the Blooms taxonomy theory, you could classify individuals into three different groups by assessing their intellectual behavior. Behavior can be assessed by observing and measuring a student’s ability to apply new skills they have learned and how they display knowledge of the new skills.

Here is a list of the classifications by the Bloom’s Taxonomy to measure proficiency and competence from a learner:

Domains of Bloom’s Taxonomy

Bloom states that learning occurs in three different learning domains: Cognitive, Affective, and Psychomotor.

Cognitive domain learning refers to the student’s ability to think and use their brain power. Psychomotor domain learning refers to a student’s physical ability to use an instrument or tool.  Affective domain learning refers to the student’s ability to resolve conflict and their emotional stability and growth.

Cognitive domain

The cognitive domain is further divided into two sub-categories: Cognitive process dimension and the Knowledge dimension.

1.Cognitive process dimension

This domain involves the process we use to apply and showcase our intellectual skills. Ranked from lower to higher order complexities: remember, understand, apply, analyze, evaluate, and then finally create.

2.Knowledge dimension

Students have different ways of showcasing and applying their knowledge just as much as they learn in different ways:

• Metacognitive: Learners focuses on contextualizing, self-knowledge, strategy, and cognitive tasks.
• Conceptual: Learners focuses on theories, assemblies, categories and groupings, ideologies and generalizations.
• Factual: Learners focuses on facts, specific details and terminology
• Procedural: Learners focuses on using different algorithms, techniques and methods, following step-by-step guidelines for specific scenarios.

Basically, the cognitive domain refers to the kind of intellectual learners we are whereas the knowledge domain identifies the ways in which we use knowledge.

The cognitive process levels are categorized from lower-order to higher-order thinking skills: remember, understand, apply, analyze, evaluate, and create.

Affective domain

This domain refers to the emotional capability of an individual and in which ways they act and react towards is. It puts emphasis on five subjective influences such as values, emotions, motivations, appreciations, and personal attitudes.

The five levels under the Affective domain refers to Characterizing – To be able to manage and resolve. Organizing – to be able to formulate, balance and discuss. Valuing – To be able to support and debate. Responding – To be able to volunteer, work together and to follow, and Receiving – To be able to differentiate, accept and listen.

The learner can be affected and influenced in many different ways. Learning objectives need to meet the different needs of a learner.

Psychomotor domain

Psychomotor domain is the learning and combination of old and new skills that involves physical movements.

This domain categorizes skills in five different levels:

Once you understand the behavior of your learners you will be able to adapt your learning objectives according.

The third step in the ABC procedure is looking at the different conditions. Ask yourself when writing your lesson aims and objectives – What conditions am I surrounded in?

This can also refer to specific tools and materials a student may need to apply in the lesson as well as the classroom situation. If you have a very small classroom you can’t have a lesson objective where students should roam around and ask each other questions. You won’t get the outcome you desire. Do your students have the necessary equipment to be able to perform and achieve the lesson objective?

Think practically – What kind of equipment is available to you, are they necessary in order for you to achieve the aim? What kind of equipment should not be allowed in the classroom? Will the conditions of having too many things in the classroom be disruptive and hinder the learning outcome?

Remember that conditions influence the learner’s performance and in effect the overall behavior. The following examples does not describe conditions:

• Given a three-part lecture.…
• After completing this unit….
• Given that the student has passed an introductory course….

The last step in the ABCD Approach is ‘Degree’. This basically refers to the level in which a learner should perform for it to be seen as credible. The learning objective should either be at its highest level, which means that the student can produce the aim with precision and without any mistakes. Leading to the lowest level where the student can’t produce the aim at all and are making many mistakes.

To which degree should the students be assessed against to be classified as ‘achieving the aim’?

The degree can be described as: A student can “successfully construct” or A student can “accurately describe.” Be sure to elaborate on ‘successful’ and ‘accurate’ to make sure the students are fairly assessed.

You can be more specific in your assessment criteria in stating: A student can “list all 12 moving parts” or A student can “name all parts of a machine.”

When writing down the degree to which students are assessed in your learning objective make sure that it’s stated accurately. Unacceptable criteria are vague for example: “must be able to make 80 percent on a multiple-choice exam” or “must pass a final exam” or “to the satisfaction of the instructor” are not precise enough and can’t count as a degree.

Rather change “To the satisfaction of the instructor” to “according to an instructor-supplied checklist of criteria.”

The assessment criteria should be easily measured by looking at the student’s performance.

Many instructors, teachers and facilitators don’t value the importance of writing learning objectives. It’s vital to any class and should be given some thought. Learning goals, aims and objectives should be very clear before doing any kind of lesson plan. A teacher should know what they are working towards in order for students to reach their full potential and achieve the aim of the class. Writing a decent and thorough learning objective shows competency and skill of the instructor.

Using the ABCD method (Audience, Behavior, Condition and Degree) will help you clarify your learning objectives and ultimately help you and your students achieve a better outcome.

Action Words and Phrases to Avoid

Your objectives should be free of vague or ambiguous words and phrases. Below are some of the action verbs that are not observable or measurable:

I am a professor of Educational Technology. I have worked at several elite universities. I hold a PhD degree from the University of Illinois and a master's degree from Purdue University.

Similar Posts

Adaptive learning: what is it, what are its benefits and how does it work.

People learn in many different ways. Adaptive learning has sought to address differences in ability by targeting teaching practices. The use of adaptive models, ranging from technological programs to intelligent systems, can be…

Definitions of Instructional Design

What is instructional design? Instructional design can be defined as the creation of instructional materials, modules or lessons. The instructional design process consists of  determining the needs of the learners, defining the end…

Screen Capture / Lecture Capture tools

Lecture/screen capture refers to any technology that allows instructors to record a lecture and make it available digitally by placing on the Web for students to watch online before or after class. Screen capture…

How to Create Effective Multiple Choice Questions

There are many advantages to using multiple choice (MC) questions as an evaluation / assessment strategy. They are easy to set up, easy to mark, and allow teachers to cover a wide range…

Bloom’s Taxonomy

Together with Edward Gurst, David Krathwohl, Max Englehart and Walter Hill, psychologist Benjamin Bloom released Taxonomy of Educational Objectives in 1956. This framework would prove to be valuable to teachers and instructors everywhere…

SAMR Model: Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and Redefinition

When integrating technology into education, the SAMR model serves as a foundational guide. Crafted by Ruben R. Puentedura, SAMR offers educators a structured way to think about incorporating technology effectively. It stands for…

• Our Mission

Harnessing Technology for Engaging Learning Experiences

Having students try podcasting or storytelling with virtual reality is an effective way to increase engagement and reinforce critical content.

In education, we often talk about student engagement. Years ago, I completely misunderstood what student engagement was, why it mattered, and its impact on student learning. Student engagement is more than just being attentive: It means that students become curious about learning and more interested in the content, and, as a result, process the information at higher levels. Engaged learners are more likely to develop their critical thinking skills and have a deeper understanding of the material, which will lead to academic success.

When we create learning experiences that shift students from consumers of content to creators, it helps to increase their engagement in and, hopefully, excitement for learning. So, how can we keep students engaged? We have to spark curiosity and perhaps take some risks in our classroom with new ideas. Providing a variety of options for students to develop their content area knowledge and skills in ways that meet their interests and needs also promotes autonomy and will lead to an increase in engagement. In my own classroom, teaching Spanish and an eighth-grade STEAM course, I decided to explore a few new ideas centered on telling stories—with the help of some emerging technology.

Immersive Storytelling

Storytelling is a fantastic way for students to be creative and engage in a variety of learning experiences that meet their specific interests and needs. Whether students create something using paper and markers or choose from the many digital options available, it is all about promoting choice in learning.

Rather than use the traditional tools that I had in the past, I took a risk and used CoSpaces Edu to explore immersive storytelling in my Spanish II class after some students asked why they couldn’t explore the augmented and virtual reality tools the way the STEAM class did. Whether using CoSpaces Edu like I did or using options available through resources like Experiments with Google , there are many ways to bring these opportunities to our students.

Although I was nervous about bringing alternate reality and virtual reality tools into the classroom, it seemed to be something they would enjoy. I thought that trying something new would boost their engagement. I randomly assigned students into groups and provided instructions for narrating a story that happened in the past.

Students could select any template and then had to work together to find the right objects and add animated characters with speech bubbles, audio, and more. The templates available helped students to get started and then focus on the content and how they could bring their stories to life. In all prior years of teaching the same content, I had not seen students enjoy an activity as much nor retain the content, especially learning how to tell stories using the different past tenses as they did. It was a risk worth taking and one that was a different way to engage students, especially with the use of an emerging technology. 

Sharing Stories through podcasts

As someone who has hosted a podcast for several years, I have always considered doing this in my classroom. This past school year, I tried something really different in my STEAM course, and I could not have predicted the benefits that I observed. We started by listening to a few podcasts that I had selected. I asked students about what they thought the focus was and if they could determine anything about the hosts or the “brand.”

When I revealed each podcast logo and host, the students were surprised at all of the different styles. I then dove into helping students design their own podcast and logo and create a brand for themselves. For some, it was uncomfortable at first, but with some guidance and collaboration with classmates, it didn’t take long for it to become something quite fun for them and me. 

I decided to focus on podcasting for about four weeks so that students could really learn about the value of podcasts and how to use them for their own learning as well as for building speaking skills and confidence. For our class, students would have time to explore podcasts before diving into creating their own. The learning activity required them to create a name, logo, intro, and topic first. Then, they had to record an intro and have some of their classmates provide feedback. The next step was to practice their interviewing skills by having a few classmates as guests. The final component was drafting an email to a teacher to invite them as a guest. I provided some templates for students to follow, and they had to take the lead to schedule and then produce the podcast. 

My students used either Spotify for Podcasters or Soundtrap for Education to record their podcasts and Canva to design the logo. As I listened to their episodes, it was great to hear their excitement, to see their confidence build during the experience, which allowed them to create, collaborate, problem-solve, and move through the classroom more. Students learned about each other and their teachers and developed their speaking skills and confidence. This was a fantastic way to learn more about my students and their interests. Students developed skills in collaboration, communication, creativity, and problem-solving that will benefit them in the future. Some students even decided to continue their podcasts after our work in class ended.

To keep students engaged, try a variety of methods and tools, and continue to model the excitement for learning.

REALIZING THE PROMISE:

Leading up to the 75th anniversary of the UN General Assembly, this “Realizing the promise: How can education technology improve learning for all?” publication kicks off the Center for Universal Education’s first playbook in a series to help improve education around the world.

It is intended as an evidence-based tool for ministries of education, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, to adopt and more successfully invest in education technology.

While there is no single education initiative that will achieve the same results everywhere—as school systems differ in learners and educators, as well as in the availability and quality of materials and technologies—an important first step is understanding how technology is used given specific local contexts and needs.

The surveys in this playbook are designed to be adapted to collect this information from educators, learners, and school leaders and guide decisionmakers in expanding the use of technology.  

Introduction

While technology has disrupted most sectors of the economy and changed how we communicate, access information, work, and even play, its impact on schools, teaching, and learning has been much more limited. We believe that this limited impact is primarily due to technology being been used to replace analog tools, without much consideration given to playing to technology’s comparative advantages. These comparative advantages, relative to traditional “chalk-and-talk” classroom instruction, include helping to scale up standardized instruction, facilitate differentiated instruction, expand opportunities for practice, and increase student engagement. When schools use technology to enhance the work of educators and to improve the quality and quantity of educational content, learners will thrive.

Further, COVID-19 has laid bare that, in today’s environment where pandemics and the effects of climate change are likely to occur, schools cannot always provide in-person education—making the case for investing in education technology.

Here we argue for a simple yet surprisingly rare approach to education technology that seeks to:

• Understand the needs, infrastructure, and capacity of a school system—the diagnosis;
• Survey the best available evidence on interventions that match those conditions—the evidence; and
• Closely monitor the results of innovations before they are scaled up—the prognosis.

RELATED CONTENT

Podcast: How education technology can improve learning for all students

To make ed tech work, set clear goals, review the evidence, and pilot before you scale

The framework.

Our approach builds on a simple yet intuitive theoretical framework created two decades ago by two of the most prominent education researchers in the United States, David K. Cohen and Deborah Loewenberg Ball. They argue that what matters most to improve learning is the interactions among educators and learners around educational materials. We believe that the failed school-improvement efforts in the U.S. that motivated Cohen and Ball’s framework resemble the ed-tech reforms in much of the developing world to date in the lack of clarity improving the interactions between educators, learners, and the educational material. We build on their framework by adding parents as key agents that mediate the relationships between learners and educators and the material (Figure 1).

Figure 1: The instructional core

Adapted from Cohen and Ball (1999)

As the figure above suggests, ed-tech interventions can affect the instructional core in a myriad of ways. Yet, just because technology can do something, it does not mean it should. School systems in developing countries differ along many dimensions and each system is likely to have different needs for ed-tech interventions, as well as different infrastructure and capacity to enact such interventions.

The diagnosis:

How can school systems assess their needs and preparedness.

A useful first step for any school system to determine whether it should invest in education technology is to diagnose its:

• Specific needs to improve student learning (e.g., raising the average level of achievement, remediating gaps among low performers, and challenging high performers to develop higher-order skills);
• Infrastructure to adopt technology-enabled solutions (e.g., electricity connection, availability of space and outlets, stock of computers, and Internet connectivity at school and at learners’ homes); and
• Capacity to integrate technology in the instructional process (e.g., learners’ and educators’ level of familiarity and comfort with hardware and software, their beliefs about the level of usefulness of technology for learning purposes, and their current uses of such technology).

Before engaging in any new data collection exercise, school systems should take full advantage of existing administrative data that could shed light on these three main questions. This could be in the form of internal evaluations but also international learner assessments, such as the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), and/or the Progress in International Literacy Study (PIRLS), and the Teaching and Learning International Study (TALIS). But if school systems lack information on their preparedness for ed-tech reforms or if they seek to complement existing data with a richer set of indicators, we developed a set of surveys for learners, educators, and school leaders. Download the full report to see how we map out the main aspects covered by these surveys, in hopes of highlighting how they could be used to inform decisions around the adoption of ed-tech interventions.

The evidence:

How can school systems identify promising ed-tech interventions.

There is no single “ed-tech” initiative that will achieve the same results everywhere, simply because school systems differ in learners and educators, as well as in the availability and quality of materials and technologies. Instead, to realize the potential of education technology to accelerate student learning, decisionmakers should focus on four potential uses of technology that play to its comparative advantages and complement the work of educators to accelerate student learning (Figure 2). These comparative advantages include:

• Scaling up quality instruction, such as through prerecorded quality lessons.
• Facilitating differentiated instruction, through, for example, computer-adaptive learning and live one-on-one tutoring.
• Expanding opportunities to practice.
• Increasing learner engagement through videos and games.

Figure 2: Comparative advantages of technology

Here we review the evidence on ed-tech interventions from 37 studies in 20 countries*, organizing them by comparative advantage. It’s important to note that ours is not the only way to classify these interventions (e.g., video tutorials could be considered as a strategy to scale up instruction or increase learner engagement), but we believe it may be useful to highlight the needs that they could address and why technology is well positioned to do so.

When discussing specific studies, we report the magnitude of the effects of interventions using standard deviations (SDs). SDs are a widely used metric in research to express the effect of a program or policy with respect to a business-as-usual condition (e.g., test scores). There are several ways to make sense of them. One is to categorize the magnitude of the effects based on the results of impact evaluations. In developing countries, effects below 0.1 SDs are considered to be small, effects between 0.1 and 0.2 SDs are medium, and those above 0.2 SDs are large (for reviews that estimate the average effect of groups of interventions, called “meta analyses,” see e.g., Conn, 2017; Kremer, Brannen, & Glennerster, 2013; McEwan, 2014; Snilstveit et al., 2015; Evans & Yuan, 2020.)

*In surveying the evidence, we began by compiling studies from prior general and ed-tech specific evidence reviews that some of us have written and from ed-tech reviews conducted by others. Then, we tracked the studies cited by the ones we had previously read and reviewed those, as well. In identifying studies for inclusion, we focused on experimental and quasi-experimental evaluations of education technology interventions from pre-school to secondary school in low- and middle-income countries that were released between 2000 and 2020. We only included interventions that sought to improve student learning directly (i.e., students’ interaction with the material), as opposed to interventions that have impacted achievement indirectly, by reducing teacher absence or increasing parental engagement. This process yielded 37 studies in 20 countries (see the full list of studies in Appendix B).

Scaling up standardized instruction

One of the ways in which technology may improve the quality of education is through its capacity to deliver standardized quality content at scale. This feature of technology may be particularly useful in three types of settings: (a) those in “hard-to-staff” schools (i.e., schools that struggle to recruit educators with the requisite training and experience—typically, in rural and/or remote areas) (see, e.g., Urquiola & Vegas, 2005); (b) those in which many educators are frequently absent from school (e.g., Chaudhury, Hammer, Kremer, Muralidharan, & Rogers, 2006; Muralidharan, Das, Holla, & Mohpal, 2017); and/or (c) those in which educators have low levels of pedagogical and subject matter expertise (e.g., Bietenbeck, Piopiunik, & Wiederhold, 2018; Bold et al., 2017; Metzler & Woessmann, 2012; Santibañez, 2006) and do not have opportunities to observe and receive feedback (e.g., Bruns, Costa, & Cunha, 2018; Cilliers, Fleisch, Prinsloo, & Taylor, 2018). Technology could address this problem by: (a) disseminating lessons delivered by qualified educators to a large number of learners (e.g., through prerecorded or live lessons); (b) enabling distance education (e.g., for learners in remote areas and/or during periods of school closures); and (c) distributing hardware preloaded with educational materials.

Prerecorded lessons

Technology seems to be well placed to amplify the impact of effective educators by disseminating their lessons. Evidence on the impact of prerecorded lessons is encouraging, but not conclusive. Some initiatives that have used short instructional videos to complement regular instruction, in conjunction with other learning materials, have raised student learning on independent assessments. For example, Beg et al. (2020) evaluated an initiative in Punjab, Pakistan in which grade 8 classrooms received an intervention that included short videos to substitute live instruction, quizzes for learners to practice the material from every lesson, tablets for educators to learn the material and follow the lesson, and LED screens to project the videos onto a classroom screen. After six months, the intervention improved the performance of learners on independent tests of math and science by 0.19 and 0.24 SDs, respectively but had no discernible effect on the math and science section of Punjab’s high-stakes exams.

One study suggests that approaches that are far less technologically sophisticated can also improve learning outcomes—especially, if the business-as-usual instruction is of low quality. For example, Naslund-Hadley, Parker, and Hernandez-Agramonte (2014) evaluated a preschool math program in Cordillera, Paraguay that used audio segments and written materials four days per week for an hour per day during the school day. After five months, the intervention improved math scores by 0.16 SDs, narrowing gaps between low- and high-achieving learners, and between those with and without educators with formal training in early childhood education.

Yet, the integration of prerecorded material into regular instruction has not always been successful. For example, de Barros (2020) evaluated an intervention that combined instructional videos for math and science with infrastructure upgrades (e.g., two “smart” classrooms, two TVs, and two tablets), printed workbooks for students, and in-service training for educators of learners in grades 9 and 10 in Haryana, India (all materials were mapped onto the official curriculum). After 11 months, the intervention negatively impacted math achievement (by 0.08 SDs) and had no effect on science (with respect to business as usual classes). It reduced the share of lesson time that educators devoted to instruction and negatively impacted an index of instructional quality. Likewise, Seo (2017) evaluated several combinations of infrastructure (solar lights and TVs) and prerecorded videos (in English and/or bilingual) for grade 11 students in northern Tanzania and found that none of the variants improved student learning, even when the videos were used. The study reports effects from the infrastructure component across variants, but as others have noted (Muralidharan, Romero, & Wüthrich, 2019), this approach to estimating impact is problematic.

A very similar intervention delivered after school hours, however, had sizeable effects on learners’ basic skills. Chiplunkar, Dhar, and Nagesh (2020) evaluated an initiative in Chennai (the capital city of the state of Tamil Nadu, India) delivered by the same organization as above that combined short videos that explained key concepts in math and science with worksheets, facilitator-led instruction, small groups for peer-to-peer learning, and occasional career counseling and guidance for grade 9 students. These lessons took place after school for one hour, five times a week. After 10 months, it had large effects on learners’ achievement as measured by tests of basic skills in math and reading, but no effect on a standardized high-stakes test in grade 10 or socio-emotional skills (e.g., teamwork, decisionmaking, and communication).

Drawing general lessons from this body of research is challenging for at least two reasons. First, all of the studies above have evaluated the impact of prerecorded lessons combined with several other components (e.g., hardware, print materials, or other activities). Therefore, it is possible that the effects found are due to these additional components, rather than to the recordings themselves, or to the interaction between the two (see Muralidharan, 2017 for a discussion of the challenges of interpreting “bundled” interventions). Second, while these studies evaluate some type of prerecorded lessons, none examines the content of such lessons. Thus, it seems entirely plausible that the direction and magnitude of the effects depends largely on the quality of the recordings (e.g., the expertise of the educator recording it, the amount of preparation that went into planning the recording, and its alignment with best teaching practices).

These studies also raise three important questions worth exploring in future research. One of them is why none of the interventions discussed above had effects on high-stakes exams, even if their materials are typically mapped onto the official curriculum. It is possible that the official curricula are simply too challenging for learners in these settings, who are several grade levels behind expectations and who often need to reinforce basic skills (see Pritchett & Beatty, 2015). Another question is whether these interventions have long-term effects on teaching practices. It seems plausible that, if these interventions are deployed in contexts with low teaching quality, educators may learn something from watching the videos or listening to the recordings with learners. Yet another question is whether these interventions make it easier for schools to deliver instruction to learners whose native language is other than the official medium of instruction.

Distance education

Technology can also allow learners living in remote areas to access education. The evidence on these initiatives is encouraging. For example, Johnston and Ksoll (2017) evaluated a program that broadcasted live instruction via satellite to rural primary school students in the Volta and Greater Accra regions of Ghana. For this purpose, the program also equipped classrooms with the technology needed to connect to a studio in Accra, including solar panels, a satellite modem, a projector, a webcam, microphones, and a computer with interactive software. After two years, the intervention improved the numeracy scores of students in grades 2 through 4, and some foundational literacy tasks, but it had no effect on attendance or classroom time devoted to instruction, as captured by school visits. The authors interpreted these results as suggesting that the gains in achievement may be due to improving the quality of instruction that children received (as opposed to increased instructional time). Naik, Chitre, Bhalla, and Rajan (2019) evaluated a similar program in the Indian state of Karnataka and also found positive effects on learning outcomes, but it is not clear whether those effects are due to the program or due to differences in the groups of students they compared to estimate the impact of the initiative.

In one context (Mexico), this type of distance education had positive long-term effects. Navarro-Sola (2019) took advantage of the staggered rollout of the telesecundarias (i.e., middle schools with lessons broadcasted through satellite TV) in 1968 to estimate its impact. The policy had short-term effects on students’ enrollment in school: For every telesecundaria per 50 children, 10 students enrolled in middle school and two pursued further education. It also had a long-term influence on the educational and employment trajectory of its graduates. Each additional year of education induced by the policy increased average income by nearly 18 percent. This effect was attributable to more graduates entering the labor force and shifting from agriculture and the informal sector. Similarly, Fabregas (2019) leveraged a later expansion of this policy in 1993 and found that each additional telesecundaria per 1,000 adolescents led to an average increase of 0.2 years of education, and a decline in fertility for women, but no conclusive evidence of long-term effects on labor market outcomes.

It is crucial to interpret these results keeping in mind the settings where the interventions were implemented. As we mention above, part of the reason why they have proven effective is that the “counterfactual” conditions for learning (i.e., what would have happened to learners in the absence of such programs) was either to not have access to schooling or to be exposed to low-quality instruction. School systems interested in taking up similar interventions should assess the extent to which their learners (or parts of their learner population) find themselves in similar conditions to the subjects of the studies above. This illustrates the importance of assessing the needs of a system before reviewing the evidence.

Preloaded hardware

Technology also seems well positioned to disseminate educational materials. Specifically, hardware (e.g., desktop computers, laptops, or tablets) could also help deliver educational software (e.g., word processing, reference texts, and/or games). In theory, these materials could not only undergo a quality assurance review (e.g., by curriculum specialists and educators), but also draw on the interactions with learners for adjustments (e.g., identifying areas needing reinforcement) and enable interactions between learners and educators.

In practice, however, most initiatives that have provided learners with free computers, laptops, and netbooks do not leverage any of the opportunities mentioned above. Instead, they install a standard set of educational materials and hope that learners find them helpful enough to take them up on their own. Students rarely do so, and instead use the laptops for recreational purposes—often, to the detriment of their learning (see, e.g., Malamud & Pop-Eleches, 2011). In fact, free netbook initiatives have not only consistently failed to improve academic achievement in math or language (e.g., Cristia et al., 2017), but they have had no impact on learners’ general computer skills (e.g., Beuermann et al., 2015). Some of these initiatives have had small impacts on cognitive skills, but the mechanisms through which those effects occurred remains unclear.

To our knowledge, the only successful deployment of a free laptop initiative was one in which a team of researchers equipped the computers with remedial software. Mo et al. (2013) evaluated a version of the One Laptop per Child (OLPC) program for grade 3 students in migrant schools in Beijing, China in which the laptops were loaded with a remedial software mapped onto the national curriculum for math (similar to the software products that we discuss under “practice exercises” below). After nine months, the program improved math achievement by 0.17 SDs and computer skills by 0.33 SDs. If a school system decides to invest in free laptops, this study suggests that the quality of the software on the laptops is crucial.

To date, however, the evidence suggests that children do not learn more from interacting with laptops than they do from textbooks. For example, Bando, Gallego, Gertler, and Romero (2016) compared the effect of free laptop and textbook provision in 271 elementary schools in disadvantaged areas of Honduras. After seven months, students in grades 3 and 6 who had received the laptops performed on par with those who had received the textbooks in math and language. Further, even if textbooks essentially become obsolete at the end of each school year, whereas laptops can be reloaded with new materials for each year, the costs of laptop provision (not just the hardware, but also the technical assistance, Internet, and training associated with it) are not yet low enough to make them a more cost-effective way of delivering content to learners.

Evidence on the provision of tablets equipped with software is encouraging but limited. For example, de Hoop et al. (2020) evaluated a composite intervention for first grade students in Zambia’s Eastern Province that combined infrastructure (electricity via solar power), hardware (projectors and tablets), and educational materials (lesson plans for educators and interactive lessons for learners, both loaded onto the tablets and mapped onto the official Zambian curriculum). After 14 months, the intervention had improved student early-grade reading by 0.4 SDs, oral vocabulary scores by 0.25 SDs, and early-grade math by 0.22 SDs. It also improved students’ achievement by 0.16 on a locally developed assessment. The multifaceted nature of the program, however, makes it challenging to identify the components that are driving the positive effects. Pitchford (2015) evaluated an intervention that provided tablets equipped with educational “apps,” to be used for 30 minutes per day for two months to develop early math skills among students in grades 1 through 3 in Lilongwe, Malawi. The evaluation found positive impacts in math achievement, but the main study limitation is that it was conducted in a single school.

Facilitating differentiated instruction

Another way in which technology may improve educational outcomes is by facilitating the delivery of differentiated or individualized instruction. Most developing countries massively expanded access to schooling in recent decades by building new schools and making education more affordable, both by defraying direct costs, as well as compensating for opportunity costs (Duflo, 2001; World Bank, 2018). These initiatives have not only rapidly increased the number of learners enrolled in school, but have also increased the variability in learner’ preparation for schooling. Consequently, a large number of learners perform well below grade-based curricular expectations (see, e.g., Duflo, Dupas, & Kremer, 2011; Pritchett & Beatty, 2015). These learners are unlikely to get much from “one-size-fits-all” instruction, in which a single educator delivers instruction deemed appropriate for the middle (or top) of the achievement distribution (Banerjee & Duflo, 2011). Technology could potentially help these learners by providing them with: (a) instruction and opportunities for practice that adjust to the level and pace of preparation of each individual (known as “computer-adaptive learning” (CAL)); or (b) live, one-on-one tutoring.

Computer-adaptive learning

One of the main comparative advantages of technology is its ability to diagnose students’ initial learning levels and assign students to instruction and exercises of appropriate difficulty. No individual educator—no matter how talented—can be expected to provide individualized instruction to all learners in his/her class simultaneously . In this respect, technology is uniquely positioned to complement traditional teaching. This use of technology could help learners master basic skills and help them get more out of schooling.

Although many software products evaluated in recent years have been categorized as CAL, many rely on a relatively coarse level of differentiation at an initial stage (e.g., a diagnostic test) without further differentiation. We discuss these initiatives under the category of “increasing opportunities for practice” below. CAL initiatives complement an initial diagnostic with dynamic adaptation (i.e., at each response or set of responses from learners) to adjust both the initial level of difficulty and rate at which it increases or decreases, depending on whether learners’ responses are correct or incorrect.

Existing evidence on this specific type of programs is highly promising. Most famously, Banerjee et al. (2007) evaluated CAL software in Vadodara, in the Indian state of Gujarat, in which grade 4 students were offered two hours of shared computer time per week before and after school, during which they played games that involved solving math problems. The level of difficulty of such problems adjusted based on students’ answers. This program improved math achievement by 0.35 and 0.47 SDs after one and two years of implementation, respectively. Consistent with the promise of personalized learning, the software improved achievement for all students. In fact, one year after the end of the program, students assigned to the program still performed 0.1 SDs better than those assigned to a business as usual condition. More recently, Muralidharan, et al. (2019) evaluated a “blended learning” initiative in which students in grades 4 through 9 in Delhi, India received 45 minutes of interaction with CAL software for math and language, and 45 minutes of small group instruction before or after going to school. After only 4.5 months, the program improved achievement by 0.37 SDs in math and 0.23 SDs in Hindi. While all learners benefited from the program in absolute terms, the lowest performing learners benefited the most in relative terms, since they were learning very little in school.

We see two important limitations from this body of research. First, to our knowledge, none of these initiatives has been evaluated when implemented during the school day. Therefore, it is not possible to distinguish the effect of the adaptive software from that of additional instructional time. Second, given that most of these programs were facilitated by local instructors, attempts to distinguish the effect of the software from that of the instructors has been mostly based on noncausal evidence. A frontier challenge in this body of research is to understand whether CAL software can increase the effectiveness of school-based instruction by substituting part of the regularly scheduled time for math and language instruction.

Live one-on-one tutoring

Recent improvements in the speed and quality of videoconferencing, as well as in the connectivity of remote areas, have enabled yet another way in which technology can help personalization: live (i.e., real-time) one-on-one tutoring. While the evidence on in-person tutoring is scarce in developing countries, existing studies suggest that this approach works best when it is used to personalize instruction (see, e.g., Banerjee et al., 2007; Banerji, Berry, & Shotland, 2015; Cabezas, Cuesta, & Gallego, 2011).

There are almost no studies on the impact of online tutoring—possibly, due to the lack of hardware and Internet connectivity in low- and middle-income countries. One exception is Chemin and Oledan (2020)’s recent evaluation of an online tutoring program for grade 6 students in Kianyaga, Kenya to learn English from volunteers from a Canadian university via Skype ( videoconferencing software) for one hour per week after school. After 10 months, program beneficiaries performed 0.22 SDs better in a test of oral comprehension, improved their comfort using technology for learning, and became more willing to engage in cross-cultural communication. Importantly, while the tutoring sessions used the official English textbooks and sought in part to help learners with their homework, tutors were trained on several strategies to teach to each learner’s individual level of preparation, focusing on basic skills if necessary. To our knowledge, similar initiatives within a country have not yet been rigorously evaluated.

Expanding opportunities for practice

A third way in which technology may improve the quality of education is by providing learners with additional opportunities for practice. In many developing countries, lesson time is primarily devoted to lectures, in which the educator explains the topic and the learners passively copy explanations from the blackboard. This setup leaves little time for in-class practice. Consequently, learners who did not understand the explanation of the material during lecture struggle when they have to solve homework assignments on their own. Technology could potentially address this problem by allowing learners to review topics at their own pace.

Practice exercises

Technology can help learners get more out of traditional instruction by providing them with opportunities to implement what they learn in class. This approach could, in theory, allow some learners to anchor their understanding of the material through trial and error (i.e., by realizing what they may not have understood correctly during lecture and by getting better acquainted with special cases not covered in-depth in class).

Existing evidence on practice exercises reflects both the promise and the limitations of this use of technology in developing countries. For example, Lai et al. (2013) evaluated a program in Shaanxi, China where students in grades 3 and 5 were required to attend two 40-minute remedial sessions per week in which they first watched videos that reviewed the material that had been introduced in their math lessons that week and then played games to practice the skills introduced in the video. After four months, the intervention improved math achievement by 0.12 SDs. Many other evaluations of comparable interventions have found similar small-to-moderate results (see, e.g., Lai, Luo, Zhang, Huang, & Rozelle, 2015; Lai et al., 2012; Mo et al., 2015; Pitchford, 2015). These effects, however, have been consistently smaller than those of initiatives that adjust the difficulty of the material based on students’ performance (e.g., Banerjee et al., 2007; Muralidharan, et al., 2019). We hypothesize that these programs do little for learners who perform several grade levels behind curricular expectations, and who would benefit more from a review of foundational concepts from earlier grades.

We see two important limitations from this research. First, most initiatives that have been evaluated thus far combine instructional videos with practice exercises, so it is hard to know whether their effects are driven by the former or the latter. In fact, the program in China described above allowed learners to ask their peers whenever they did not understand a difficult concept, so it potentially also captured the effect of peer-to-peer collaboration. To our knowledge, no studies have addressed this gap in the evidence.

Second, most of these programs are implemented before or after school, so we cannot distinguish the effect of additional instructional time from that of the actual opportunity for practice. The importance of this question was first highlighted by Linden (2008), who compared two delivery mechanisms for game-based remedial math software for students in grades 2 and 3 in a network of schools run by a nonprofit organization in Gujarat, India: one in which students interacted with the software during the school day and another one in which students interacted with the software before or after school (in both cases, for three hours per day). After a year, the first version of the program had negatively impacted students’ math achievement by 0.57 SDs and the second one had a null effect. This study suggested that computer-assisted learning is a poor substitute for regular instruction when it is of high quality, as was the case in this well-functioning private network of schools.

In recent years, several studies have sought to remedy this shortcoming. Mo et al. (2014) were among the first to evaluate practice exercises delivered during the school day. They evaluated an initiative in Shaanxi, China in which students in grades 3 and 5 were required to interact with the software similar to the one in Lai et al. (2013) for two 40-minute sessions per week. The main limitation of this study, however, is that the program was delivered during regularly scheduled computer lessons, so it could not determine the impact of substituting regular math instruction. Similarly, Mo et al. (2020) evaluated a self-paced and a teacher-directed version of a similar program for English for grade 5 students in Qinghai, China. Yet, the key shortcoming of this study is that the teacher-directed version added several components that may also influence achievement, such as increased opportunities for teachers to provide students with personalized assistance when they struggled with the material. Ma, Fairlie, Loyalka, and Rozelle (2020) compared the effectiveness of additional time-delivered remedial instruction for students in grades 4 to 6 in Shaanxi, China through either computer-assisted software or using workbooks. This study indicates whether additional instructional time is more effective when using technology, but it does not address the question of whether school systems may improve the productivity of instructional time during the school day by substituting educator-led with computer-assisted instruction.

Increasing learner engagement

Another way in which technology may improve education is by increasing learners’ engagement with the material. In many school systems, regular “chalk and talk” instruction prioritizes time for educators’ exposition over opportunities for learners to ask clarifying questions and/or contribute to class discussions. This, combined with the fact that many developing-country classrooms include a very large number of learners (see, e.g., Angrist & Lavy, 1999; Duflo, Dupas, & Kremer, 2015), may partially explain why the majority of those students are several grade levels behind curricular expectations (e.g., Muralidharan, et al., 2019; Muralidharan & Zieleniak, 2014; Pritchett & Beatty, 2015). Technology could potentially address these challenges by: (a) using video tutorials for self-paced learning and (b) presenting exercises as games and/or gamifying practice.

Video tutorials

Technology can potentially increase learner effort and understanding of the material by finding new and more engaging ways to deliver it. Video tutorials designed for self-paced learning—as opposed to videos for whole class instruction, which we discuss under the category of “prerecorded lessons” above—can increase learner effort in multiple ways, including: allowing learners to focus on topics with which they need more help, letting them correct errors and misconceptions on their own, and making the material appealing through visual aids. They can increase understanding by breaking the material into smaller units and tackling common misconceptions.

In spite of the popularity of instructional videos, there is relatively little evidence on their effectiveness. Yet, two recent evaluations of different versions of the Khan Academy portal, which mainly relies on instructional videos, offer some insight into their impact. First, Ferman, Finamor, and Lima (2019) evaluated an initiative in 157 public primary and middle schools in five cities in Brazil in which the teachers of students in grades 5 and 9 were taken to the computer lab to learn math from the platform for 50 minutes per week. The authors found that, while the intervention slightly improved learners’ attitudes toward math, these changes did not translate into better performance in this subject. The authors hypothesized that this could be due to the reduction of teacher-led math instruction.

More recently, Büchel, Jakob, Kühnhanss, Steffen, and Brunetti (2020) evaluated an after-school, offline delivery of the Khan Academy portal in grades 3 through 6 in 302 primary schools in Morazán, El Salvador. Students in this study received 90 minutes per week of additional math instruction (effectively nearly doubling total math instruction per week) through teacher-led regular lessons, teacher-assisted Khan Academy lessons, or similar lessons assisted by technical supervisors with no content expertise. (Importantly, the first group provided differentiated instruction, which is not the norm in Salvadorian schools). All three groups outperformed both schools without any additional lessons and classrooms without additional lessons in the same schools as the program. The teacher-assisted Khan Academy lessons performed 0.24 SDs better, the supervisor-led lessons 0.22 SDs better, and the teacher-led regular lessons 0.15 SDs better, but the authors could not determine whether the effects across versions were different.

Together, these studies suggest that instructional videos work best when provided as a complement to, rather than as a substitute for, regular instruction. Yet, the main limitation of these studies is the multifaceted nature of the Khan Academy portal, which also includes other components found to positively improve learner achievement, such as differentiated instruction by students’ learning levels. While the software does not provide the type of personalization discussed above, learners are asked to take a placement test and, based on their score, educators assign them different work. Therefore, it is not clear from these studies whether the effects from Khan Academy are driven by its instructional videos or to the software’s ability to provide differentiated activities when combined with placement tests.

Games and gamification

Technology can also increase learner engagement by presenting exercises as games and/or by encouraging learner to play and compete with others (e.g., using leaderboards and rewards)—an approach known as “gamification.” Both approaches can increase learner motivation and effort by presenting learners with entertaining opportunities for practice and by leveraging peers as commitment devices.

There are very few studies on the effects of games and gamification in low- and middle-income countries. Recently, Araya, Arias Ortiz, Bottan, and Cristia (2019) evaluated an initiative in which grade 4 students in Santiago, Chile were required to participate in two 90-minute sessions per week during the school day with instructional math software featuring individual and group competitions (e.g., tracking each learner’s standing in his/her class and tournaments between sections). After nine months, the program led to improvements of 0.27 SDs in the national student assessment in math (it had no spillover effects on reading). However, it had mixed effects on non-academic outcomes. Specifically, the program increased learners’ willingness to use computers to learn math, but, at the same time, increased their anxiety toward math and negatively impacted learners’ willingness to collaborate with peers. Finally, given that one of the weekly sessions replaced regular math instruction and the other one represented additional math instructional time, it is not clear whether the academic effects of the program are driven by the software or the additional time devoted to learning math.

The prognosis:

How can school systems adopt interventions that match their needs.

Here are five specific and sequential guidelines for decisionmakers to realize the potential of education technology to accelerate student learning.

1. Take stock of how your current schools, educators, and learners are engaging with technology .

Carry out a short in-school survey to understand the current practices and potential barriers to adoption of technology (we have included suggested survey instruments in the Appendices); use this information in your decisionmaking process. For example, we learned from conversations with current and former ministers of education from various developing regions that a common limitation to technology use is regulations that hold school leaders accountable for damages to or losses of devices. Another common barrier is lack of access to electricity and Internet, or even the availability of sufficient outlets for charging devices in classrooms. Understanding basic infrastructure and regulatory limitations to the use of education technology is a first necessary step. But addressing these limitations will not guarantee that introducing or expanding technology use will accelerate learning. The next steps are thus necessary.

“In Africa, the biggest limit is connectivity. Fiber is expensive, and we don’t have it everywhere. The continent is creating a digital divide between cities, where there is fiber, and the rural areas.  The [Ghanaian] administration put in schools offline/online technologies with books, assessment tools, and open source materials. In deploying this, we are finding that again, teachers are unfamiliar with it. And existing policies prohibit students to bring their own tablets or cell phones. The easiest way to do it would have been to let everyone bring their own device. But policies are against it.” H.E. Matthew Prempeh, Minister of Education of Ghana, on the need to understand the local context.

2. Consider how the introduction of technology may affect the interactions among learners, educators, and content .

Our review of the evidence indicates that technology may accelerate student learning when it is used to scale up access to quality content, facilitate differentiated instruction, increase opportunities for practice, or when it increases learner engagement. For example, will adding electronic whiteboards to classrooms facilitate access to more quality content or differentiated instruction? Or will these expensive boards be used in the same way as the old chalkboards? Will providing one device (laptop or tablet) to each learner facilitate access to more and better content, or offer students more opportunities to practice and learn? Solely introducing technology in classrooms without additional changes is unlikely to lead to improved learning and may be quite costly. If you cannot clearly identify how the interactions among the three key components of the instructional core (educators, learners, and content) may change after the introduction of technology, then it is probably not a good idea to make the investment. See Appendix A for guidance on the types of questions to ask.

3. Once decisionmakers have a clear idea of how education technology can help accelerate student learning in a specific context, it is important to define clear objectives and goals and establish ways to regularly assess progress and make course corrections in a timely manner .

For instance, is the education technology expected to ensure that learners in early grades excel in foundational skills—basic literacy and numeracy—by age 10? If so, will the technology provide quality reading and math materials, ample opportunities to practice, and engaging materials such as videos or games? Will educators be empowered to use these materials in new ways? And how will progress be measured and adjusted?

4. How this kind of reform is approached can matter immensely for its success.

It is easy to nod to issues of “implementation,” but that needs to be more than rhetorical. Keep in mind that good use of education technology requires thinking about how it will affect learners, educators, and parents. After all, giving learners digital devices will make no difference if they get broken, are stolen, or go unused. Classroom technologies only matter if educators feel comfortable putting them to work. Since good technology is generally about complementing or amplifying what educators and learners already do, it is almost always a mistake to mandate programs from on high. It is vital that technology be adopted with the input of educators and families and with attention to how it will be used. If technology goes unused or if educators use it ineffectually, the results will disappoint—no matter the virtuosity of the technology. Indeed, unused education technology can be an unnecessary expenditure for cash-strapped education systems. This is why surveying context, listening to voices in the field, examining how technology is used, and planning for course correction is essential.

5. It is essential to communicate with a range of stakeholders, including educators, school leaders, parents, and learners .

Technology can feel alien in schools, confuse parents and (especially) older educators, or become an alluring distraction. Good communication can help address all of these risks. Taking care to listen to educators and families can help ensure that programs are informed by their needs and concerns. At the same time, deliberately and consistently explaining what technology is and is not supposed to do, how it can be most effectively used, and the ways in which it can make it more likely that programs work as intended. For instance, if teachers fear that technology is intended to reduce the need for educators, they will tend to be hostile; if they believe that it is intended to assist them in their work, they will be more receptive. Absent effective communication, it is easy for programs to “fail” not because of the technology but because of how it was used. In short, past experience in rolling out education programs indicates that it is as important to have a strong intervention design as it is to have a solid plan to socialize it among stakeholders.

Beyond reopening: A leapfrog moment to transform education?

On September 14, the Center for Universal Education (CUE) will host a webinar to discuss strategies, including around the effective use of education technology, for ensuring resilient schools in the long term and to launch a new education technology playbook “Realizing the promise: How can education technology improve learning for all?”

file-pdf Full Playbook – Realizing the promise: How can education technology improve learning for all? file-pdf References file-pdf Appendix A – Instruments to assess availability and use of technology file-pdf Appendix B – List of reviewed studies file-pdf Appendix C – How may technology affect interactions among students, teachers, and content?

About the Authors

Alejandro j. ganimian, emiliana vegas, frederick m. hess.

• Media Relations
• Terms and Conditions
• Privacy Policy

Take On Writing Student Learning Objectives With These Three Easy Methods

SLO is one of many acronyms that have been bouncing around the education world for the last few years. SLO stands for Student Learning Objective. With each project, lesson, and unit you design, you are already setting expectations and objectives for your students. It’s easy to get caught up in the fun of creating and lose track of why we were making something in the first place. This is where SLOs come in! A well-thought-out SLO is key to keeping you on track and reflective as an art educator. You know that your students continue to improve in their creative and technical abilities. Furthermore, SLOs measure that growth and give you evidence that you can bring to your administration to advocate for your art program.

Keep reading to learn three easy approaches to apply SLOs in your art room.

As you read through these three approaches with examples, feel free to use this complimentary download to help you stay focused and organized as you plan your own. For more resources like this one, be sure to check out the PRO Pack, Understanding SLOs in the Art Room . Find this Pack and so many more in PRO Learning.

1. Pre-written SLOs

Every great art piece starts out with the artist finding a reference. SLOs are the same way—every great SLO starts out with the art teacher finding an anchor standard. The National Visual Arts Standards are already written in a way that is easy to adapt into an SLO. Keep your students and what you want them to do in mind as you read through the different anchor standards. Read through the example essential and enduring questions. When you come across one that sounds like a good fit for your students, look at the grade level expectation. If needed, distill that standard down into language your students will understand.

Here are three examples of distilling grade-level anchor standards.

Say you want your students to be able to accurately render an object from observation. This sounds like Anchor Standard #3: Refine and complete artistic work . This anchor standard is broken down further when you look at the grade-level expectations.

For third-grade artists, the standard says, “Elaborate visual information by adding details in an artwork to enhance emerging meaning.”

To share this goal with students in the form of an “I can” statement, you may use, “I can make my art more meaningful by adding details.” This is a great SLO to build in near the end of a multi-day project.

Here are some suggested steps to implement this SLO:

• Before students start working on the final day of their project, they write down the big idea behind their artwork.
• Brainstorm three different details they can add to make their big idea more obvious.
• Ask an elbow partner for suggestions if needed.
• Students add at least one of the new details to their artwork by the end of the period.
• For an exit ticket, students reflect on how the new detail helped make the meaning clearer.

For eighth-grade artists, the same standard says, “Apply relevant criteria to examine, reflect on, and plan revisions for a work of art or design in progress.”

To share this goal with students, you may say, “I can accept a critique from my peers and use their feedback to improve my art.” This SLO lends well to an in-progress critique.

• A few days before a project due date, students write down two to three questions they have about their own artwork.
• Students circulate the room for five to ten minutes, writing their own answers to their classmates’ questions.
• Students return to their seats and read their peers’ answers.
• As students finalize their projects, they consider and use the feedback they received.
• After submitting their project, students compose a short reflection on how they revised their pieces using their classmates’ advice.

For advanced high school artists, the same standard says, “Reflect on, reengage, revise, and refine works of art or design considering relevant traditional and contemporary criteria as well as personal artistic vision.”

An example of student-friendly language at this level may be, “I can refine my own work by considering where my personal artistic vision falls in relation to the rest of art history.” You can insert this SLO right after ideating and starting an artwork.

• As students get started with an artwork, research how similar topics have been represented throughout art history and contemporary art.
• Challenge students to incorporate at least one thing they learned from their research.
• After completing the artwork, students will write an artist statement that shares how their research informed their approach and intent.

Looking for more? Here are 20 Practical SLO Ideas for Busy Art Teachers .

2. The ABCD Method

If you prefer to write your own SLO, try out the ABCD method. ABCD stands for Artist, Be able to, Condition, and Degree. First, decide which age artists and skills you will be teaching. Next, determine what students will be able to produce. Then, decide the conditions for artmaking. Finally, share what criteria you will use to measure the success of your students. Then, take all your pieces and put them together into a student-centered narrative.

Here is an example using the acronym:

• A for Artist I will be teaching graphite and observational drawing skills with my Art 1 students who have never done this activity before.
• B for Be able to Students will be able to produce a self-composed still-life drawing with at least five objects from their backpacks.
• C for Condition Students will complete a full-page drawing with graphite in their sketchbooks. Students can use an eraser. They will demonstrate value, line, graphite techniques, and observational drawing skills. To establish a baseline, students will draw for an entire half-hour. Students will have access to all instructions and a timer displayed on the projector for this exercise.
• D for Degree Success will look like a well-rendered drawing. The drawing will use a full range of values, have strong value contrast, and include accurate, observed details. The drawing will take up the whole page.

Here is the final ABCD goal:

This goal is based on Anchor Standard #3: Refine and complete artistic work .

Art 1 artists will demonstrate their graphite skills and observational drawing knowledge. They will accurately render their own still life from observation using at least five items from their own backpack. Students will use their sketchbook, pencil, and eraser to render this still life. Students apply prior knowledge to this new practice. They will have thirty minutes to work and must stop drawing at the end of that time. Students will be assessed based on how accurately they were able to render their still life within the set parameters.

3. The SMART Method

The SMART method is another option if you want to write your own SLO. SMART stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Timely. First, decide exactly what you want to do and why. Then, determine how you will know when you have met your goal. Ask yourself if this is a realistic goal that you will be able to reach. Then, articulate how meeting this goal will help you. Last, set a deadline for when you will accomplish your goal. Once you have addressed all those parts, synthesize your goal into one or two sentences.

Here is another example using this acronym:

• S for Specific I want my Art 1 students to accurately render from observation using graphite. Accurate rendering is an important foundational skill. This class has not drawn from observation before, aside from icebreaker activities.
• M for Measurable I will measure whether my students have met the goal by assessing their still-life skills. To set a baseline, students will design and then render a still-life using five objects from their backpacks. Students will have a time limit of thirty minutes. After the first still life, students will learn rendering techniques like blocking, gridding, and angle references. Learning these techniques will take three block periods. After that, students will do the same still life a second time. I will compare the two drawings based on pre-determined criteria already established with the students.
• A for Achievable This is a reachable goal. Most students show improvement just with dedicated class time to draw. Adding in instruction on rendering techniques will prompt greater growth.
• R for Relevant This goal will benefit students in a few ways. It will very clearly document student growth. Students will be able to look back and see that their practice paid off and they improved. It will allow you to identify students who are already comfortable with rendering and may need more of a challenge. It will also show you which students may need more time, practice, or more scaffolded objectives. The goal will help students feel successful as they move further into the Art 1 curriculum. These are foundational skills that will be built upon as the year progresses.
• T for Timely This challenge will take four class periods or seven class hours. Students will see results in a short period of time.

Here is the final SMART goal:

This goal is also based on Anchor Standard #3: Refine and complete artistic work .

After two weeks of rendering practice and exercises, Art 1 students will accurately draw a self-composed still life in graphite from observation in thirty minutes.

Figure out what works for you and your students.

Pre-written, ABCD, and SMART student learning objectives all meet different needs. Are you pressed for time or is cross-district alignment necessary? You may want to lean towards a pre-written SLO. Trying to work out one specific activity? ABCD might be the way to go. A bigger picture unit might be best hashed out with the SMART method. SLOs are used to communicate expectations between teachers, students, and administration, so it is important to consider what works best for you and your students.

Distill your SLO into student-friendly language and share it. A common example is the “I can” statement . Find a place to display your SLOs so you can constantly reference them. Be consistent in where you display them so students can begin to use that space as a resource to answer their own questions. Make sure you include the SLO in everything you share with the students. Technique handout? SLO at the top! Learning how to do visual notetaking ? Make sure they write the SLO in a prominent spot! With clear and consistent communication, you can empower students to set their own goals and be more equipped to meet the ones you have for them.

If you are looking for even more resources on SLOs, check out the PRO Pack, Understanding SLOs in the Art Room , found in PRO Learning, or the Designing Your Art Curriculum graduate course.

How do you already communicate learning objectives to your students?

Which approach to establishing SLOs are you most interested to try this year?

Magazine articles and podcasts are opinions of professional education contributors and do not necessarily represent the position of the Art of Education University (AOEU) or its academic offerings. Contributors use terms in the way they are most often talked about in the scope of their educational experiences.

Jennie Drummond

Jennie Drummond, a high school art educator, is a former AOEU Writer. She loves facilitating an environment where students collaborate, help one another succeed, and celebrate diversity, individuality, and community.

Art and Appetite: 7 Ways to Explore the Significance of Food in the Art Room

7 Engaging Ways to Teach the Elements and Principles of Art and 3 Fun Ways to Review Them

10 Easy Strategies to Apply Brain-Based Learning in the Art Room

7 Common Misconceptions When Approaching Your Art Curriculum This Year

Website Navigation for Screen Readers

• Return home
• Go to header navigation
• Go to search form
• Go to content region
• Go to footer region

• Back to Assessment Measures

Writing Effective Learning Objectives / Educational Objectives

A learning objective is student centric; it states what the student will learn and be able to accomplish by the end of instruction. It describes a specific behavior which will lead to the desired goal. It is specific and measurable. It has three major components:

• What the student will be able to
• Conditions needed for the student to accomplish the
• Criteria for evaluating the student

How to write learning objectives

Learning objectives emphasize:

• students’ performance
• end product
• what students learned

Learning objectives do not emphasize:

• teacher performance
• subject matter
• how knowledge was acquired

Learning objectives should have the following S.M.A.R.T. attributes

Specific – Statement of learning are concise and well defined in describing what students will be able to do.

Measurable – Use action / measurable verbs that can be observed through any assessment such as test, homework, or project etc. to describe what the student will be able to do.  (see list attached to this document).

Attainable – Ensure that students will have the pre-requisite knowledge by the end of the course in able to achieve the stated learning objectives.

Relevant – The stated skills or knowledge are appropriate for the program and the course as described in the curriculum.

Time-bound – State when students should be able to demonstrate the knowledge or skill (mid or end of course or end of program, etc.).

BLOOM’s Taxonomy

Follow Bloom’s Taxonomy cognitive process to state your learning objectives. Ensure that the stated objectives describe a progressive cognitive process that represents a continuum of increasing cognitive complexity.

On a continuum of learning, students start by:

Remembering – recalling previous knowledge.

Understanding – understanding new information and presenting it in their own words.

Applying – applying what they learned into authentic settings.

Analyzing – distinguishing between facts and inferences and recognizing logical fallacies in reasoning.

Evaluating – making judgment about ideas, materials or values.

Creating – putting the parts learned together to create a whole, with a focus on creating meaning or structure.

Putting it Together

Program and course level objectives.

• Create Program Learning objectives that will be addressed multiple times in your core course offering.
• Identify which objectives are addressed in what course.
• Identify assessments, direct, indirect, formative, summative to assess whether the students have attained the desired learning.
• Assess all objectives multiple times to map a continuum of improvement.
• Create a Program Matrix to ensure that all stated objectives were addressed multiple times in core curriculum offerings of the program.

Assignments/Measures

• At the assignment level, the Course Learning Objectives stated for the course are too broad and they need to be reworded into basic measurable outcomes as defined or stated in the assignment.
• They must map directly to a specific Course Learning Objective.
• If applicable, rubrics should guide the evaluation of each assessment and results should be gathered to measure learning.

Action Verbs

(Bloom’s/Anderson & Krathwohl’s Taxonomy – Cognitive Domain)

Anderson, L.W., & Krathwohl (Eds.). (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives . New York: Longman.

Bloom, B.S. and Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals, by a committee of college and university examiners. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain . NY, NY: Longmans, Green.

• Office of the Provost

265 Garland Hall 3400 North Charles Street Baltimore, Maryland 21218 Phone: (410) 516-8070 Fax: (410) 516-8035 [email protected]

• External link to Facebook
• External link to Instagram
• External link to Twitter
• External link to Linkedin
• External link to Youtube
• External link to Wikipedia
• About the Provost’s Office
• University Policies
• © 2024 Johns Hopkins University
• University Contacts
• Emergency Contact Information
• Student Right to Know

Website Footer Navigation

• Jump to content region

• eLearning Platform
• eLearning Content
• Access 800 Courses on our Platform
• Bespoke eLearning
• Our Pricing
• Request a Demo
• Content Partnerships
• Whitepapers
• Most Popular Blogs
• Personal Learning Journeys
• Training Feedback Form
• Training Needs Analysis Template
• Personal Development Plan Template
• Learning and Development Strategy
• Talent Management Strategy
• Kirkpatrick Evaluation Model
• Microlearning
• Informal Learning
• 70 20 10 Learning

Home » Blog » Learning Objectives: How to Write, Types and Examples

Learning Objectives: How to Write, Types and Examples

For students, learning objectives provide an overview of the key points and main building blocks covered in a topic.

Skillshub’s experience in the academic and corporate world shows that having established learning objectives can help to improve engagement, motivation, and results.

As a thought leader in the field of educational objectives, we believe there are several types and structures of learning objectives you should consider when planning a course or lesson.

In this article, we’ll look at how to write learning objectives effectively, different types of learning objectives, and provide some example objectives to help you get started.

What are Learning Objectives?

Before we cover the details of writing learning objectives, it’s important to understand what they are and why having them is essential.

Learning objectives provide an overview of the topics covered in a course or lesson and allow everyone involved—teachers, students, and even administrators—to have a shared understanding of the goals for any given session.

In simple terms, learning objectives:

• Outline what students should be able to do after completing the lesson
• Provide a shared understanding of the topics covered in a course or lesson
• Help teachers plan and assess learning activities
• Allow administrators to monitor student progress
• Make it easier for students to review key material

Essentially, learning objectives provide a framework that benefits everyone involved in the learning process.

Learn How To Create Personal Learning Journeys For FREE!

What’s the difference between a learning objective and a learning outcome.

Learning outcomes and learning objectives are superficially similar, as in both cases, the two terms are used to describe what students should be able to do after completing a course or lesson.

However, there is an essential distinction between the two.

A learning objective refers specifically to the topics that will be covered during a lesson/course. Learning outcomes, on the other hand, look beyond mere knowledge and provide evaluations on how well students can apply what they’ve learned.

For instance, a learning objective may be to “understand the components of the water cycle”. A learning outcome related to this might be to “identify ways in which humans are impacting the global water cycle.”

The learning objective here defines how the lesson or course should be structured, while the learning outcome provides an evaluation of how well students understand and can apply what they have learned.

Benefits of Well-Written Learning Objectives

Now that you’ve got a clearer understanding of what learning objectives are and how they differ from learning outcomes, let’s take a look at the benefits of having well-crafted learning objectives in place.

There is a wide range of material benefits associated with creating and leveraging learning objectives, including:

Improved lesson and course planning

A clearly stated learning objective provides the basis for lesson and course planning. Well-written objectives help teachers identify not only the topics that need to be covered, but also the resources (e.g., books or videos) needed to cover them effectively.

Improved assessment

Having established learning objectives in place helps teachers create assessments which accurately evaluate student understanding of any given topic.

Teachers can use learning objectives to create quizzes, tests, and other assessments to accurately evaluate student knowledge.

Improved student understanding

Clear learning objectives are helpful for students in a number of ways.

For instance, having an overview of the topics covered in a lesson or course can help students track their progress more effectively and identify areas which may need review.

Furthermore, having objectives in place can help reduce the cognitive load associated with learning new topics, allowing students to focus more on their understanding of a subject rather than worrying about what needs to be done next.

Increased student engagement

Having established learning objectives in place can help keep students and employees engaged during lessons and lectures.

When students have a clear understanding of the topics covered, it becomes easier for them to follow along with the lesson plan and stay focused on the topic at hand.

Furthermore, providing objectives can motivate students by setting out specific goals they should be working towards.

More effective communication between teachers, students, and administrators

A shared understanding of learning objectives helps to ensure effective communication between all stakeholders in the educational process.

Teachers can use objectives to effectively communicate expectations with students, while administrators can use them to monitor student progress.

Having established learning objectives also makes it easier for teachers and administrators to identify potential issues or areas in which students may need additional support.

A better focus on the topics covered in a given course or lesson

Finally, having learning objectives in place helps to ensure that all stakeholders are focusing on the topics covered in a lesson or course.

Objectives set out specific goals which everyone should be working towards and help to keep discussions focused.

By providing an overview of the topics covered, learning objectives can also help teachers identify areas which need further exploration or review.

Overall, having clear learning objectives can help to improve results by providing everyone involved with a shared understanding of the goals of any given lesson or course.

How to Write Effective Learning Objectives

While the basic idea of learning objectives is simple, the act of creating effective learning objectives requires a bit more thought and consideration.

Let’s take a look at some tips to help you craft practical learning objectives:

Understanding the ABCD Model

The ABCD model provides a foundation for creating effective learning objectives.

The ABCD stands for:

The Audience portion of the ABCD model refers to whom the objective is intended for. The intended audience for any learning objective should modify the content and language used in the objective.

For instance, objectives for younger students may need to be simplified or contain more visual aids, whereas objectives for adult learners can assume a higher level of knowledge and use more sophisticated language.

The Behaviour associated with the ABCD model refers to what type of action should be taken by the audience in question.

This could include analytical thinking, problem-solving, writing, or any other behaviour which is relevant to the topic being covered.

The type of behaviour should be specific and clearly defined in order for it to be effectively measured.

The Condition portion of the model refers to what context or circumstances will have an impact on how the objective is achieved.

For instance, a learning objective may require students to solve a problem in a particular way (e.g., without using a calculator).

The condition portion of the ABCD model ensures that any necessary qualifications are taken into account when crafting an objective.

The Degree portion of the ABCD model refers to how successful students should be in order to achieve the learning objective.

This can include anything from basic understanding to complete mastery of the topic in question.

The degree should be clearly specified so that it can be effectively measured when assessing student performance.

Putting it all together

In other words, learning objectives should provide a description of who is being taught, what they should be able to do afterwards, the conditions under which this can be achieved, and how well it must be done.

Using the ABCD model provides an accessible framework that specific learning objectives can be crafted around.

Breaking Down the Process

To help you master the process of creating effective learning objectives, we’ve broken down the process into four steps:

Identify your audience

When crafting learning objectives, it’s important to consider who the objective is intended for. Identifying the intended audience will inform the language and content used in crafting the objective.

Specify desired learner behaviour

Having a specific behaviour in mind will help you create a practical learning objective. Consider which behaviours are necessary for learners to master the topic, and strive to ensure that the objectives reflect these behaviours.

Determine the conditions and constraints

The conditions and constraints surrounding the learning objective should be made explicit. This includes any qualifications or stipulations which must be met in order for learners to achieve the objective.

It should also consider any possible constraints or limitations that may impact how the objective is achieved. These constraints could include time or resource limitations, for example.

Define the degree of success desired

Finally, you should determine how successful learners must be in order to achieve the objective. This could include understanding basic concepts or mastering all aspects of a topic.

By defining the degree of success desired, it will be easier to measure whether learners have achieved the objective.

The degree should be specific and measurable in order for learners to effectively work towards it. This could include anything from basic understanding to complete mastery of the topic in question.

Taking a step-by-step process

By taking a step-by-step approach to creating practical learning objectives, it will be easier to ensure that the desired outcome is achieved.

Ideally, any learning objective should contain all of the necessary information to help learners understand what they need to do in order to succeed.

To achieve this, you should start by outlining what the learner needs to do in a clear and concise manner.

Then, break down each step into more detailed tasks to ensure that all necessary aspects of the objective are included. This could include defining any qualifications or constraints which may impact the completion of the task.

Finally, consider how successful learners must be in order to achieve the task set out in the learning objectives. This should be measurable so that learners can effectively work towards it and track their progress.

By taking a step-by-step approach to writing learning objectives, you will be able to ensure that the desired outcomes are achieved for each lesson or course.

Types of Learning Objectives

There are three primary types of learning objectives that can be used as the basis for crafting your own practical learning objectives.

Using these archetypes along with the ABCD model will help to ensure that your objectives are specific, measurable, and achievable.

Knowledge-based Objectives

Knowledge-based objectives are used to measure the learner’s understanding of a particular concept.

This type of objective should focus on testing the learner’s knowledge and comprehension in order to assess their level of understanding.

A good example of a knowledge-based objective would be:

“The learner will be able to explain the process of photosynthesis in at least three sentences.”

Skill-based Objectives

Skill-based objectives are used to assess the learner’s ability to apply their understanding of a concept.

This type of objective should focus on testing the learner’s ability to use the knowledge they have acquired in order to complete a task.

A good example of a skill-based objective would be:

“The learner will be able to apply the principles of photosynthesis to solve a problem.”

Attitude-based Objectives

Attitude-based objectives are used to assess the learner’s attitude towards the concept.

This type of objective should focus on testing the learner’s ability to think critically about a concept and their willingness to apply this knowledge in real-world situations.

A good example of an attitude-based objective would be:

“The learner will be able to demonstrate an understanding of photosynthesis and its implications for sustainability.”

Learning Objectives Examples

To help make the process of crafting practical learning objectives easier, here are some examples you can use as a reference point.

Knowledge-Based Objectives Examples

“The learner will be able to list the three main components of photosynthesis and explain their role in the process.”

“The learner will be able to identify the five primary sources of energy used in photosynthesis and explain how they are utilised.”

Skill-Based Objectives Examples

“The learner will be able to apply their knowledge of photosynthesis to construct a model demonstrating the process.”

“The learner will be able to use the principles of photosynthesis to design an experiment that tests one of its aspects. “

Attitude-Based Objectives Examples

“The learner will be able to discuss the implications of photosynthesis on climate change and how it can help reduce negative impacts.”

“The learner will demonstrate an understanding of the importance of photosynthesis for our environment and its impact on sustainability.”

Best Practices for Writing Learning Objectives

While writing learning objectives can be challenging, the good news is that there is established best practice for crafting effective and practical learning objectives.

By following these guidelines, you will be able to ensure that your learning objectives are clear, achievable, and useful.

Make your Objectives Specific and Measurable

Good learning objectives are specific and should clearly indicate what the learner needs to accomplish to achieve the desired outcome. They should also be measurable so that it is evident when the learner has achieved them.

Use Action Verbs

Action verbs should be used in the learning objectives to indicate what the learner will do. This will make it clear to both the trainer and the learners what is expected of them.

Action verbs include:

• Understand • Identify • Demonstrate • Apply

Consider the Level of Difficulty

Before writing the learning objective, you should consider the difficulty level appropriate for the learners. The degree of difficulty should be challenging but also achievable so that learners can successfully work towards it.

Align objectives with the overall learning goals

Learning objectives should be aligned with the overall learning goals of the course or lesson. This will ensure that all objectives contribute towards achieving the desired outcome for the learners.

Turning Learning Objectives into Training Objectives

While learning objectives are most commonly used in educational settings to help guide the learning process, they can also be used as a basis for creating training objectives.

Training objectives should focus on the desired outcomes from the training activity and use similar language and structure as learning objectives.

The critical difference is that the focus will be more on how to best achieve these outcomes rather than what needs to be learned.

Some strategies for turning objectives into training objectives include:

• Focus on how to effectively apply the knowledge or skills acquired from the learning activity.
• Consider how best to facilitate the transfer of this knowledge or skill so that learners can use it in their professional lives. Make sure the objective is measurable and achievable.

An example of a training objective derived from a learning objective is:

Learning Objective: “The learner will be able to identify the five primary sources of energy used in photosynthesis and explain how they are utilised.”

Training Objective: “The learners will understand how to combine different sources of energy to create new products or applications.”

Developing content and assessments that align with objectives

The primary difference between learning and training objectives is that learning objectives focus on knowledge acquisition, whereas training objectives focus on skill development.

Where learning objectives prioritise content that teaches the learner about a specific concept, training objectives focus on developing problem-solving skills that can be applied to real-world scenarios.

When it comes to assessments, learning objectives should align with content and assessments that allow learners to demonstrate their understanding of the material. This could include multiple choice questions, short answer tests, and even practical activities.

By comparison, assessments for training objectives should encourage learners to apply their skills in a practical setting. This could include case studies, simulations, and group activities that allow learners to use the knowledge they have acquired in a problem-solving context.

Assessing and Evaluating Learning Objectives

Once written, learning objectives should not be static and should be reviewed regularly to ensure they are still relevant and achievable. To assess the learning objectives, it is essential to use both formative and summative assessments.

Formative assessments should be used during the learning process to measure progress and help identify any areas where learners may need additional support or guidance. This could include quizzes, tests, or group activities.

On the other hand, summative assessments should be used at the end of the learning process to measure the transfer of learning. These could include essays or presentations that require learners to demonstrate their understanding of the material.

By regularly assessing and evaluating your learning objectives, you can ensure they remain relevant and achievable for all learners. This is particularly true of training objectives where the application of the skills acquired is tested in a practical setting.

Measuring Learning Objectives

The ability to measure learning objectives is essential for assessing the success of a course or lesson. Learning objectives should be measurable to ensure it is evident when learners have met them.

As mentioned, formative assessments should be used during the learning process to help measure progress, while summative assessments should be used to measure how much learners have learned.

Other methods for measuring learning objectives include:

• Pre- and Post-Tests: This involves administering a test or quiz before and after the lesson to measure how much the learners have learned.
• Self-Assessments: Ask learners to reflect on what they have learned at the end of each lesson or session.
• Observation: An observer can be used to watch a learning activity and provide feedback on how well learners are performing.
• Projects: Ask learners to create a project or product at the end of the lesson that demonstrates their understanding of the material.

By using these different methods of measurement, you can ensure that your learning objectives are being met and that learners are gaining the knowledge and skills they need to succeed.

Final Thoughts

Learning objectives are essential for any educational or training setting.

By measuring learning objectives regularly, you can more accurately track the success of your course or lesson and ensure that all learners achieve their desired outcomes.

Skillshub’s innovative eLearning platform makes it easy for trainers to create, measure, and assess learning objectives. With tools like quizzes and assessments, and reporting tools to track progress, Skillshub can help you ensure that all learners are achieving their desired outcomes.

Our professionally designed off-the-shelf courses are also a great way to get started and provide you with all the tools and resources you need to develop engaging and interactive courses.

With our comprehensive suite of e-learning solutions, Skillshub can ensure that your learners have the knowledge and skills they need to succeed.

If you’re looking for an easy and efficient way to create, measure, and assess learning objectives, Skillshub is the perfect platform for you.

As an eLearning company , Skillshub is committed to creating efficient and impactful learning experiences.

Contact us today to find out how we can help you achieve your educational goals.

Sean McPheat

Sean is the CEO of Skillshub. He’s a published author and has been featured on CNN, BBC and ITV as a leading authority in the learning and development industry. Sean is responsible for the vision and strategy at Skillshub, helping to ensure innovation within the company.

Updated on: 11 October, 2023

Would your connections like this too? Please share.

You might also be interested in…

Refining Healthcare Through Health eLearning

13 Strategies for Enhancing Training & Development in Your Organisation

Pedagogy vs Andragogy: What’s the Difference for Learning Strategies?

The Ultimate Guide To Neurodiversity in the Workplace

What is Ebbinghaus’s Forgetting Curve and How to Overcome it

What Is a Learner-Centred Approach and Why Is It Important

• elearning Content
• Virtual Training
• Get In Touch

5 Ways to Use Technology to Improve Teaching and Learning

• Share article

Technology has played a critical role in sustaining schools during the pandemic: Record numbers of students now have their own school-issued digital devices, educators have become more-critical evaluators of technology tools, and a hard push is underway at the federal, state, and local levels to get all homes connected to high-speed internet.

But making all these developments translate into better use of technology in schools will not be easy.

Using in-depth reporting combined with exclusive EdWeek Research Center survey data from teachers, principals, and district leaders, Education Week’s annual Technology Counts report examines these challenges.

Below is an outline of the tech priorities schools must address now and next school year, with links to helpful resources for how to tackle those challenges.

1. Getting virtual instruction right

Teachers, principals, and district leaders should be thinking hard about how to make remote learning better, especially if they are continuing to offer it even as most students have returned to school buildings. Read the story, here.

2. Connecting SEL and technology

Social media, virtual learning, online gaming, and ubiquitous devices present new social challenges for kids. So, what social-emotional skills do they need to flourish in an increasingly tech-centric world, and are schools teaching them? Learn more, here .

3. Cutting down on excessive screen time

Without even counting digital instruction, the amount of time teenagers and tweens spend staring at computer screens rivals how much time they would spend working at a full- or a part-time job. Educators and children’s health experts alike argue students need more support to prevent the overuse of technology from leading to unhealthy behaviors in the classroom. Read more, here .

4. Protecting student data

Student data privacy encompasses a broad range of considerations, from students’ own smartphones, to classroom applications discovered and embraced by teachers, to district-level data systems, to state testing programs. Here’s why schools are struggling to protect that data .

5. Using artificial intelligence in smart ways

Schools are embracing education technologies that use artificial intelligence for everything from teaching math to optimizing bus routes. But how can educators know if the data and design processes those products rely on have been skewed by racial bias? And what happens if they’re afraid to ask? Learn more here .

Sign Up for EdWeek Tech Leader

Edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In

How to Write Learning Objectives: 35 Examples

How do you write learning objectives? This article defines learning objectives for clarity and gives 35 examples of learning objectives.

Table of Contents

Introduction.

Having clear learning objectives is crucial in conducting effective classes. These objectives serve as a roadmap for both educators and learners, outlining the specific knowledge, skills, and competencies that will be covered during the learning experience.

It is important to differentiate learning objectives from learning outcomes . While learning objectives focus on what students will be able to do or understand by the end of a lesson or course, learning outcomes are the actual results or achievements of the learning process. Learning objectives are the stepping stones that guide students towards the desired outcomes.

In the following sections, we will explore various examples of learning objectives to provide a comprehensive understanding of their importance and how they can be effectively utilized in different educational settings.

But first, let’s look at three different definitions of learning objectives.

Learning Objectives Defined

Among these definitions, the most plausible definition for learning objectives, with my little modification to allow measurement, is the first one. This definition emphasizes the importance of specificity, which is crucial for effective teaching and learning.

I added “positive changes” because I believe that after a learning experience, the student must learn something useful or beneficial to advance his or her knowledge, skills, or attitude.

Specific statements that describe what learners should be able to do or positive changes that can be observed and measured after completing a learning experience. P. Regoniel

By clearly defining what learners should be able to do or understand, educators can provide a roadmap for both themselves and their students, ensuring that the learning process remains focused and meaningful. Specific learning objectives also help students understand what is expected of them, enhancing their motivation and engagement.

Therefore, the first definition aligns well with the purpose and function of learning objectives in educational settings.

Learning objectives play a crucial role in guiding the educational process and ensuring that students achieve the desired outcomes. By setting specific and measurable goals , educators can effectively design and deliver lessons that align with the desired learning outcomes .

In this section, I will provide examples of learning objectives in various subject areas, all of which are aligned with the definition of learning objectives chosen in the previous section. These examples comprise the course and their corresponding learning objectives.

1. Principles and Theories of Language Acquisition and Learning

2. human anatomy and physiology, 3. introduction to construction engineering.

Example Learning Objectives

4. Counseling Psychology

5. nutrition and diet therapy, 6. applied statistics, 7. introduction to earth science.

These examples demonstrate the diverse range of learning objectives across different subject areas. Each objective is specific, measurable, and aligned with the chosen definition of learning objectives. By setting clear expectations for what students should be able to do or understand, educators can guide the learning process effectively and ensure that students achieve the desired outcomes.

Learning objectives serve as a roadmap for both educators and students, outlining the expected outcomes of the learning process. By setting specific and measurable goals, educators can design and deliver lessons that align with these objectives. This helps to ensure that students gain the knowledge and skills for success.

The examples provided on how to write learning objectives in the previous sections illustrate how learning objectives can be applied in different subject areas. From principles and theories of language acquisition to human anatomy and physiology, construction engineering, counseling psychology, nutrition and diet therapy, applied statistics, and earth science, each objective is specific, measurable, and aligned with the chosen definition of learning objectives.

Start your class with the end in mind.

Related Posts

Innovations and education in the 21st century, thesis writing: what to write in chapter 5, the meaning and importance of curriculum development, about the author, patrick regoniel, simplyeducate.me privacy policy.

55 Learning Objectives Examples

Chris Drew (PhD)

Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]

Learn about our Editorial Process

Learning objectives are explicit statements that clearly express what learners should be able to comprehend, perform or experience by the end of a course or instructional period (Adams, 2015).

They are fundamental to the process of educational planning and instructional design, acting as vehicles that drive both teaching and learning strategies.

Importantly, they ensure coherence and a clear focus, differentiating themselves from vague educational goals by generating precise, measurable outcomes of academic progress (Sewagegn, 2020).

I have front-loaded the examples in this article for your convenience, but do scroll past all the examples for some useful frameworks for learning how to write effective learning objectives.

Learning Objectives Examples

Learning Objectives for Internships

For more, see: List of SMART Internship Goals

Learning Objectives for Presentations

For More: See This Detailed List of Communication Objectives Examples

Learning Objectives for Kindergarten

Taxonomies to Assist in Creating Objectives

Various taxonomies are available to educators as guides in formulating potent learning objectives, with three prominent ones provided below.

1. The SMART Framework for Learning Objectives

The SMART framework helps you to construct clear and well-defined learning objectives. It stands for: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound (Doran, 1981).

• Specific objectives are ones that are straightforward, detailing the what, why, and how of the learning process. For example, an objective that states “Improve mental multiplication skills” is less specific than “Multiply two-digit numbers mentally within two minutes with 90% accuracy.” When I was learning to write learning objectives at university, I was taught to always explicitly describe the measurable outcome .
• Measurable objectives facilitate tracking progress and evaluating learning outcomes. An objective such as “Write a 500-word essay on the causes of World War II, substantiated with at least three academic sources” is measurable, as both word count and the number of sources can be quantified.
• Achievable objectives reflect realistic expectations based on the learner’s potential and learning environment, fostering motivation and commitment.
• Relevant objectives correspond with overarching educational goals and learner’s needs, such as an objective to “identify and manage common software vulnerabilities” in a cybersecurity course.
• Time-bound objectives specify the duration within which the learning should take place, enhancing management of time and resources in the learning process.

2. Bloom’s Taxonomy

Bloom’s taxonomy outlines six cognitive levels of understanding – knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation (Adams, 2015). Each are presented below:

Each level is demonstrated below:

Here, we can reflect upon the level of learning and cognition expected of the learner, and utilize the Bloom’s taxonomy verbs to cater the learning objectives to that level.

3. Fink’s Taxonomy

Another helpful resource for creating objectives is Fink’s Taxonomy of Significant Learning , which emphasizes different dimensions of learning, including foundational knowledge, application, integration, human dimension, caring, and learning how to learn (Marzano, 2010):

• Foundational knowledge refers to the basic information learners must understand to progress with the topic at hand—for instance, understanding color theory before painting a canvas.
• Application gives learners real-world instances for applying the knowledge and skills they’ve cultivated, such as using Adobe Photoshop in a design project after a graphic design lecture.
• Integration enables learners to make interdisciplinary connections between the new knowledge and various fields of study or areas of life—for example, a business student applying economic theory to understand market dynamics in biotechnology.
• Human dimension involves personal and social implications of learning, i.e., how the learners see themselves and interact with others in light of the new knowledge.
• Caring challenges learners to develop new feelings, interests, or values aligned with the course outcomes, like fostering a conservation mindset in an environmental science course.
• Learning how to learn encourages learners to become self-directed and resourceful, enabling them to cultivate learning strategies, skills, and habits that make them lifelong learners, such as using reflective journals or peer reviews (Marzano, 2010).

An example of an objective that uses Fink’s framework could be:

“Learners will conduct a small research project about a famous physicist (foundational knowledge), incorporating class teachings (application) and their own interpretations (integration), then present to the class (human dimension), reflecting on how the physicist’s work affects them personally (caring) and how the project grew their understanding of research methods (learning how to learn).”

Why are Learning Objectives Important?

Effective learning objectives serve to streamline the learning process, creating a clear path for both teachers and learners.

The role of objectives in education mirrors the use of a roadmap on a journey; just as marking out stops and landmarks can facilitate navigation, learning objectives can clarify the trajectory of a course or lesson (Hall, Quinn, & Gollnick, 2018).

On a practical level, imagine teaching a course about climate change. Without explicit learning objectives (like understanding how carbon footprints contribute to global warming), learners could easily veer off track, misinterpreting the main focus.

Learning objectives also act as an anchor during assessments, providing a yardstick against which progress and performance can be gauged (Orr et al., 2022). When students are graduating high school, for example, it’s likely they’ll be assessed on some form of standardized testing to measure if the objectives have been met.

By serving as a guide for content selection and instructional design, learning objectives allow teachers to ensure coursework is suitably designed to meet learners’ needs and the broader course’s objectives (Li et al., 2022). In situations where time is crucial, such as military training or emergency medicine, keeping the focus narrow and relevant is crucial.

Tips and Tricks

1. tips on integrating learning objectives into course design.

Learning objectives serve as a foundation in the designing of a course.

They provide a structured framework that guides the incorporation of different course components, including instructional materials, activities, and assessments (Li et al., 2022).

When designing a photography course, for example, learning objectives guide the selection of appropriate theoretical content (like understanding aperture and shutter speed), practical activities (like a field trip for landscape photography), and the assessment methods (like a portfolio submission).

Just like how research objectives shape the methodology a research study will take, so too will learning objectives shape the teaching methods and assessment methods that will flow-on from the path set out in the overarching learning objectives.

2. Tips on Assessing and Revising your Learning Objectives Regularly

Learning objectives are not set in stone; they demand constant review and refinement.

In the light of feedback from learners, instructors or external bodies (like accreditation agencies), learning outcomes, and advancements in pedagogy, learning objectives may need to be revised (Orr et al., 2022).

Think about a programming course where new frameworks or libraries are regularly introduced; in such cases, the learning objectives would need to be updated to reflect these emerging trends. This provides opportunities for continual enhancement of the course design, thus fostering an environment of progressive learning and teaching (Sewagegn, 2020).

Teachers should revise their learning objectives every time they re-introduce the unit of work to a new cohort of students, taking into account the learnings and feedback you acquired last time you taught the unit.

Learning objectives, when effectively formulated and implemented, serve as key drivers of successful instruction.

They underscore the importance of clarity, directness, and depth in the learning process, fostering a learning environment designed for optimal learner engagement, progress tracking, and educational outcome (Hall, Quinn, & Gollnick, 2018).

With their expansive role in the educational journey, educators are encouraged to invest time and resourceful thought in crafting and continually refining their classroom objectives (Doran, 1981). Moreover, the use of established taxonomies and attention to characteristics like SMARTness in this process can greatly facilitate this endeavor.

As the backbone of well-structured courses, learning objectives deserve the thoughtful consideration and continuous improvement efforts of every dedicated educator. It is our hope that this article has provided insights that will help you bring more clarity, coherence, and effectiveness to your educational planning.

Adams, N. E. (2015). Bloom’s taxonomy of cognitive learning objectives.  Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA ,  103 (3), 152. doi: https://doi.org/10.3163%2F1536-5050.103.3.010

Doran, G. T. (1981). There’sa SMART way to write management’s goals and objectives.  Management review ,  70 (11), 35-36.

Hall, G. E., Quinn, L. F., & Gollnick, D. M. (2018).  Introduction to teaching: Making a difference in student learning . Sage Publications.

Li, Y., Rakovic, M., Poh, B. X., Gaševic, D., & Chen, G. (2022). Automatic Classification of Learning Objectives Based on Bloom’s Taxonomy.  International Educational Data Mining Society .

Marzano, R. J. (2010).  Designing & teaching learning goals & objectives . Solution Tree Press.

Orr, R. B., Csikari, M. M., Freeman, S., & Rodriguez, M. C. (2022). Writing and using learning objectives.  CBE—Life Sciences Education ,  21 (3). Doi: https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.22-04-0073

Sewagegn, A. A. (2020). Learning objective and assessment linkage: its contribution to meaningful student learning.  Universal Journal of Educational Research ,  8 (11), 5044-5052.

• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 119 Bloom’s Taxonomy Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ All 6 Levels of Understanding (on Bloom’s Taxonomy)
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 15 Self-Actualization Examples (Maslow's Hierarchy)
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ Forest Schools Philosophy & Curriculum, Explained!

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site belongs to UNESCO's International Institute for Educational Planning

IIEP Learning Portal

Search form

• issue briefs
• Improve learning

Information and communication technology (ICT) in education

Information and communications technology (ict) can impact student learning when teachers are digitally literate and understand how to integrate it into curriculum..

Schools use a diverse set of ICT tools to communicate, create, disseminate, store, and manage information.(6) In some contexts, ICT has also become integral to the teaching-learning interaction, through such approaches as replacing chalkboards with interactive digital whiteboards, using students’ own smartphones or other devices for learning during class time, and the “flipped classroom” model where students watch lectures at home on the computer and use classroom time for more interactive exercises.

When teachers are digitally literate and trained to use ICT, these approaches can lead to higher order thinking skills, provide creative and individualized options for students to express their understandings, and leave students better prepared to deal with ongoing technological change in society and the workplace.(18)

ICT issues planners must consider include: considering the total cost-benefit equation, supplying and maintaining the requisite infrastructure, and ensuring investments are matched with teacher support and other policies aimed at effective ICT use.(16)

Issues and Discussion

Digital culture and digital literacy: Computer technologies and other aspects of digital culture have changed the ways people live, work, play, and learn, impacting the construction and distribution of knowledge and power around the world.(14) Graduates who are less familiar with digital culture are increasingly at a disadvantage in the national and global economy. Digital literacy—the skills of searching for, discerning, and producing information, as well as the critical use of new media for full participation in society—has thus become an important consideration for curriculum frameworks.(8)

In many countries, digital literacy is being built through the incorporation of information and communication technology (ICT) into schools. Some common educational applications of ICT include:

• One laptop per child: Less expensive laptops have been designed for use in school on a 1:1 basis with features like lower power consumption, a low cost operating system, and special re-programming and mesh network functions.(42) Despite efforts to reduce costs, however, providing one laptop per child may be too costly for some developing countries.(41)
• Tablets: Tablets are small personal computers with a touch screen, allowing input without a keyboard or mouse. Inexpensive learning software (“apps”) can be downloaded onto tablets, making them a versatile tool for learning.(7)(25) The most effective apps develop higher order thinking skills and provide creative and individualized options for students to express their understandings.(18)
• Interactive White Boards or Smart Boards : Interactive white boards allow projected computer images to be displayed, manipulated, dragged, clicked, or copied.(3) Simultaneously, handwritten notes can be taken on the board and saved for later use. Interactive white boards are associated with whole-class instruction rather than student-centred activities.(38) Student engagement is generally higher when ICT is available for student use throughout the classroom.(4)
• E-readers : E-readers are electronic devices that can hold hundreds of books in digital form, and they are increasingly utilized in the delivery of reading material.(19) Students—both skilled readers and reluctant readers—have had positive responses to the use of e-readers for independent reading.(22) Features of e-readers that can contribute to positive use include their portability and long battery life, response to text, and the ability to define unknown words.(22) Additionally, many classic book titles are available for free in e-book form.
• Flipped Classrooms: The flipped classroom model, involving lecture and practice at home via computer-guided instruction and interactive learning activities in class, can allow for an expanded curriculum. There is little investigation on the student learning outcomes of flipped classrooms.(5) Student perceptions about flipped classrooms are mixed, but generally positive, as they prefer the cooperative learning activities in class over lecture.(5)(35)

ICT and Teacher Professional Development: Teachers need specific professional development opportunities in order to increase their ability to use ICT for formative learning assessments, individualized instruction, accessing online resources, and for fostering student interaction and collaboration.(15) Such training in ICT should positively impact teachers’ general attitudes towards ICT in the classroom, but it should also provide specific guidance on ICT teaching and learning within each discipline. Without this support, teachers tend to use ICT for skill-based applications, limiting student academic thinking.(32) To sup­port teachers as they change their teaching, it is also essential for education managers, supervisors, teacher educators, and decision makers to be trained in ICT use.(11)

Ensuring benefits of ICT investments: To ensure the investments made in ICT benefit students, additional conditions must be met. School policies need to provide schools with the minimum acceptable infrastructure for ICT, including stable and affordable internet connectivity and security measures such as filters and site blockers. Teacher policies need to target basic ICT literacy skills, ICT use in pedagogical settings, and discipline-specific uses. (21) Successful imple­mentation of ICT requires integration of ICT in the curriculum. Finally, digital content needs to be developed in local languages and reflect local culture. (40) Ongoing technical, human, and organizational supports on all of these issues are needed to ensure access and effective use of ICT. (21)

Resource Constrained Contexts: The total cost of ICT ownership is considerable: training of teachers and administrators, connectivity, technical support, and software, amongst others. (42) When bringing ICT into classrooms, policies should use an incremental pathway, establishing infrastructure and bringing in sustainable and easily upgradable ICT. (16) Schools in some countries have begun allowing students to bring their own mobile technology (such as laptop, tablet, or smartphone) into class rather than providing such tools to all students—an approach called Bring Your Own Device. (1)(27)(34) However, not all families can afford devices or service plans for their children. (30) Schools must ensure all students have equitable access to ICT devices for learning.

Inclusiveness Considerations

Digital Divide: The digital divide refers to disparities of digital media and internet access both within and across countries, as well as the gap between people with and without the digital literacy and skills to utilize media and internet.(23)(26)(31) The digital divide both creates and reinforces socio-economic inequalities of the world’s poorest people. Policies need to intentionally bridge this divide to bring media, internet, and digital literacy to all students, not just those who are easiest to reach.

Minority language groups: Students whose mother tongue is different from the official language of instruction are less likely to have computers and internet connections at home than students from the majority. There is also less material available to them online in their own language, putting them at a disadvantage in comparison to their majority peers who gather information, prepare talks and papers, and communicate more using ICT. (39) Yet ICT tools can also help improve the skills of minority language students—especially in learning the official language of instruction—through features such as automatic speech recognition, the availability of authentic audio-visual materials, and chat functions. (2)(17)

Students with different styles of learning: ICT can provide diverse options for taking in and processing information, making sense of ideas, and expressing learning. Over 87% of students learn best through visual and tactile modalities, and ICT can help these students ‘experience’ the information instead of just reading and hearing it. (20)(37) Mobile devices can also offer programmes (“apps”) that provide extra support to students with special needs, with features such as simplified screens and instructions, consistent placement of menus and control features, graphics combined with text, audio feedback, ability to set pace and level of difficulty, appropriate and unambiguous feedback, and easy error correction. (24)(29)

Plans and policies

• India [ PDF ]
• Detroit, USA [ PDF ]
• Finland [ PDF ]
• Alberta Education. 2012. Bring your own device: A guide for schools . Retrieved from http://education.alberta.ca/admin/technology/research.aspx
• Alsied, S.M. and Pathan, M.M. 2015. ‘The use of computer technology in EFL classroom: Advantages and implications.’ International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies . 1 (1).
• BBC. N.D. ‘What is an interactive whiteboard?’ Retrieved from http://www.bbcactive.com/BBCActiveIdeasandResources/Whatisaninteractivewhiteboard.aspx
• Beilefeldt, T. 2012. ‘Guidance for technology decisions from classroom observation.’ Journal of Research on Technology in Education . 44 (3).
• Bishop, J.L. and Verleger, M.A. 2013. ‘The flipped classroom: A survey of the research.’ Presented at the 120th ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition. Atlanta, Georgia.
• Blurton, C. 2000. New Directions of ICT-Use in Education . United National Education Science and Culture Organization (UNESCO).
• Bryant, B.R., Ok, M., Kang, E.Y., Kim, M.K., Lang, R., Bryant, D.P. and Pfannestiel, K. 2015. ‘Performance of fourth-grade students with learning disabilities on multiplication facts comparing teacher-mediated and technology-mediated interventions: A preliminary investigation. Journal of Behavioral Education. 24.
• Buckingham, D. 2005. Educación en medios. Alfabetización, aprendizaje y cultura contemporánea, Barcelona, Paidós.
• Buckingham, D., Sefton-Green, J., and Scanlon, M. 2001. 'Selling the Digital Dream: Marketing Education Technologies to Teachers and Parents.'  ICT, Pedagogy, and the Curriculum: Subject to Change . London: Routledge.
• "Burk, R. 2001. 'E-book devices and the marketplace: In search of customers.' Library Hi Tech 19 (4)."
• Chapman, D., and Mählck, L. (Eds). 2004. Adapting technology for school improvement: a global perspective. Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning.
• Cheung, A.C.K and Slavin, R.E. 2012. ‘How features of educational technology applications affect student reading outcomes: A meta-analysis.’ Educational Research Review . 7.
• Cheung, A.C.K and Slavin, R.E. 2013. ‘The effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis.’ Educational Research Review . 9.
• Deuze, M. 2006. 'Participation Remediation Bricolage - Considering Principal Components of a Digital Culture.' The Information Society . 22 .
• Dunleavy, M., Dextert, S. and Heinecke, W.F. 2007. ‘What added value does a 1:1 student to laptop ratio bring to technology-supported teaching and learning?’ Journal of Computer Assisted Learning . 23.
• Enyedy, N. 2014. Personalized Instruction: New Interest, Old Rhetoric, Limited Results, and the Need for a New Direction for Computer-Mediated Learning . Boulder, CO: National Education Policy Center.
• Golonka, E.M., Bowles, A.R., Frank, V.M., Richardson, D.L. and Freynik, S. 2014. ‘Technologies for foreign language learning: A review of technology types and their effectiveness.’ Computer Assisted Language Learning . 27 (1).
• Goodwin, K. 2012. Use of Tablet Technology in the Classroom . Strathfield, New South Wales: NSW Curriculum and Learning Innovation Centre.
• Jung, J., Chan-Olmsted, S., Park, B., and Kim, Y. 2011. 'Factors affecting e-book reader awareness, interest, and intention to use.' New Media & Society . 14 (2)
• Kenney, L. 2011. ‘Elementary education, there’s an app for that. Communication technology in the elementary school classroom.’ The Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research in Communications . 2 (1).
• Kopcha, T.J. 2012. ‘Teachers’ perceptions of the barriers to technology integration and practices with technology under situated professional development.’ Computers and Education . 59.
• Miranda, T., Williams-Rossi, D., Johnson, K., and McKenzie, N. 2011. "Reluctant readers in middle school: Successful engagement with text using the e-reader.' International journal of applied science and technology . 1 (6).
• Moyo, L. 2009. 'The digital divide: scarcity, inequality and conflict.' Digital Cultures . New York: Open University Press.
• Newton, D.A. and Dell, A.G. 2011. ‘Mobile devices and students with disabilities: What do best practices tell us?’ Journal of Special Education Technology . 26 (3).
• Nirvi, S. (2011). ‘Special education pupils find learning tool in iPad applications.’ Education Week . 30 .
• Norris, P. 2001. Digital Divide: Civic Engagement, Information Poverty, and the Internet Worldwide . Cambridge, USA: Cambridge University Press.
• Project Tomorrow. 2012. Learning in the 21st century: Mobile devices + social media = personalized learning . Washington, D.C.: Blackboard K-12.
• Riasati, M.J., Allahyar, N. and Tan, K.E. 2012. ‘Technology in language education: Benefits and barriers.’ Journal of Education and Practice . 3 (5).
• Rodriquez, C.D., Strnadova, I. and Cumming, T. 2013. ‘Using iPads with students with disabilities: Lessons learned from students, teachers, and parents.’ Intervention in School and Clinic . 49 (4).
• Sangani, K. 2013. 'BYOD to the classroom.' Engineering & Technology . 3 (8).
• Servon, L. 2002. Redefining the Digital Divide: Technology, Community and Public Policy . Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
• Smeets, E. 2005. ‘Does ICT contribute to powerful learning environments in primary education?’ Computers and Education. 44 .
• Smith, G.E. and Thorne, S. 2007. Differentiating Instruction with Technology in K-5 Classrooms . Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
• Song, Y. 2014. '"Bring your own device (BYOD)" for seamless science inquiry in a primary school.' Computers & Education. 74 .
• Strayer, J.F. 2012. ‘How learning in an inverted classroom influences cooperation, innovation and task orientation.’ Learning Environment Research. 15.
• Tamim, R.M., Bernard, R.M., Borokhovski, E., Abrami, P.C. and Schmid, R.F. 2011. ‘What forty years of research says about the impact of technology on learning: A second-order meta-analysis and validation study. Review of Educational Research. 81 (1).
• Tileston, D.W. 2003. What Every Teacher Should Know about Media and Technology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
• Turel, Y.K. and Johnson, T.E. 2012. ‘Teachers’ belief and use of interactive whiteboards for teaching and learning.’ Educational Technology and Society . 15(1).
• Volman, M., van Eck, E., Heemskerk, I. and Kuiper, E. 2005. ‘New technologies, new differences. Gender and ethnic differences in pupils’ use of ICT in primary and secondary education.’ Computers and Education. 45 .
• Voogt, J., Knezek, G., Cox, M., Knezek, D. and ten Brummelhuis, A. 2013. ‘Under which conditions does ICT have a positive effect on teaching and learning? A call to action.’ Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 29 (1).
• Warschauer, M. and Ames, M. 2010. ‘Can one laptop per child save the world’s poor?’ Journal of International Affairs. 64 (1).
• Zuker, A.A. and Light, D. 2009. ‘Laptop programs for students.’ Science. 323 (5910).

Related information

• Information and communication technologies (ICT)

On The Site

Teaching About Technology in Schools Through Technoskeptical Inquiry

June 3, 2024 | victorialynn | Harvard Educational Review Contributors , Voices in Education

By Jacob Pleasants, Daniel G. Krutka, and T. Philip Nichols

New technologies are rapidly transforming our societies, our relationships, and our schools. Look no further than the intense — and often panicked — discourse around generative AI , the metaverse , and the creep of digital media into all facets of civic and social life . How are schools preparing students to think about and respond to these changes?

In various ways, students are taught how to use technologies in school. Most schools teach basic computing skills and many offer elective vocational-technical classes. But outside of occasional conversations around digital citizenship, students rarely wrestle with deeper questions about the effects of technologies on individuals and society.

Decades ago, Neil Postman (1995) argued for a different form of technology education focused on teaching students to critically examine technologies and their psychological and social effects. While Postman’s ideas have arguably never been more relevant, his suggestion to add technology education as a separate subject to a crowded curriculum gained little traction. Alternatively, we argue that technology education could be an interdisciplinary endeavor that occurs across core subject areas. Technology is already a part of English Language Arts (ELA), Science, and Social Studies instruction. What is missing is a coherent vision and common set of practices and principles that educators can use to align their efforts.

To provide a coherent vision, in our recent HER article , we propose “technoskepticism” as an organizing goal for teaching about technology. We define technoskepticism as a critical disposition and practice of investigating the complex relationships between technologies and societies. A technoskeptical person is not necessarily anti-technology, but rather one who deeply examines technological issues from multiple dimensions and perspectives akin to an art critic.

We created the Technoskepticism Iceberg as a framework to support teachers and students in conducting technological inquiries. The metaphor of an iceberg conveys how many important influences of technology lie beneath our conscious awareness. People often perceive technologies as tools (the “visible” layer of the iceberg), but technoskepticism requires that they be seen as parts of systems (with interactions that produce many unintended effects) and embedded with values about what is good and desirable (and for whom). The framework also identifies three dimensions of technology that students can examine. The technical dimension concerns the design and functions of a technology, including how it may work differently for different people. The psychosocial dimension addresses how technologies change our individual cognition and our larger societies. The political dimension considers who makes decisions concerning the terms, rules, or laws that govern technologies.

To illustrate these ideas, how might we use the Technoskeptical Iceberg to interrogate generative AI such as ChatGPT in the core subject areas?

A science/STEM classroom might focus on the technical dimension by investigating how generative AI works and demystifying its ostensibly “intelligent” capabilities. Students could then examine the infrastructures involved in AI systems , such as immense computing power and specialized hardware that in turn have profound environmental consequences. A teacher could ask students to use their values to weigh the costs and potential benefits of ChatGPT.

A social studies class could investigate the psychosocial dimension through the longer histories of informational technologies (e.g., the printing press, telegraph, internet, and now AI) to consider how they shifted people’s lives. They could also explore political questions about what rules or regulations governments should impose on informational systems that include people’s data and intellectual property.

In an ELA classroom, students might begin by investigating the psychosocial dimensions of reading and writing, and the values associated with different literacy practices. Students could consider how the concept of “authorship” shifts when one writes by hand, with word processing software, or using ChatGPT. Or how we are to engage with AI-generated essays, stories, and poetry differently than their human-produced counterparts. Such conversations would highlight how literary values are mediated by technological systems . 

Students who use technoskepticism to explore generative AI technologies should be better equipped to act as citizens seeking to advance just futures in and out of schools. Our questions are, what might it take to establish technoskepticism as an educational goal in schools? What support will educators need? And what might students teach us through technoskeptical inquiries?

Postman, N. (1995). The End of Education: Redefining the Value of School. Vintage Books.

About the Authors

Jacob Pleasants is an assistant professor of science education at the University of Oklahoma. Through his teaching and research, he works to humanize STEM education by helping students engage with issues at the intersection of STEM and society.

Daniel G. Krutka is a dachshund enthusiast, former high school social studies teacher, and associate professor of social studies education at the University of North Texas. His research concerns technology, democracy, and education, and he is the cofounder of the Civics of Technology project ( www.civicsoftechnology.org ).

T. Philip Nichols is an associate professor in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction at Baylor University. He studies the digitalization of public education and the ways science and technology condition the ways we practice, teach, and talk about literacy.

They are the authors of “ What Relationships Do We Want with Technology? Toward Technoskepticism in Schools ” in the Winter 2023 issue of Harvard Educational Review .

• Gift Guides
• Voices in Education

Not Seeing the Program You Are Looking For?

Use the + icon on the right to see more links

• Undergraduate Majors & Minors
• Graduate & Professional Programs
• General Education
• Academic Resources
• Study Abroad
• Student Research
• Dutchmen First Program
• Academic Calendar
• 7-week Term Calendar
• Bishop Library
• Honors Program
• Summer Term
• Admission & Aid
• Undergraduate Admission
• Graduate Admission
• Admitted Students
• International Students
• Military Students
• Financial Aid & Costs
• New Student Advising Days
• Transfer Admission
• Types of Aid
• Tuition & Scholarship Calculators
• Scholarships & Grants
• Financial Aid FAQs
• Student Life
• Health & Wellness
• Fitness & Recreation
• Activities & Clubs
• Commuter Resources
• Spiritual Life
• Student Mentoring
• Pride of the Valley Marching Band
• Traditions & History
• Mission & Strategy
• College Leadership
• Inclusive Excellence
• Sustainability Initiatives
• Working at LVC
• Administrative Offices & Directories
• Breen Center for Career and Professional Development
• Community Service & Volunteerism
• Summer Camps & Community Programming
• Community Impact
• Our Location

Mission, Goals, & Objectives

• Education Mission, Goals, & Objectives

The Lebanon Valley College Education Department develops, knowledgeable and effective teachers that can problem solve and think critically about contemporary educational issues.  All teaching certification candidates will implement the most current evidence-based practices, including current teaching methodologies, and educational technology.  They value diversity and promote inclusiveness, and have genuine respect for those with whom they work.  Our prospective teachers possess effective communication skills, a love for learning and a sense of responsibility and service to their school community.

Education Department Goals & Objectives

Program Goal 1. Students in the early childhood education, special education, and secondary education programs will be able to demonstrate content knowledge competencies of the curriculum, based in theory and commensurate with the Pennsylvania Department of Education subject specific competencies as measured by the PA state teacher certification assessments and pre-service teacher planning, preparations evaluations.  

• When planning lessons, students will demonstrate specific knowledge of content linked to research-based pedagogy   
• Students will clearly communicate instructional goals, procedures, and content   
• Students will use formal and/or informal assessments to measure a lesson’s effectiveness and the extent to which learning goals were achieved  

Program Goal 2: Students in the early childhood education, special education, and secondary education programs will use professional communication to effectively speak, write, and listen in a classroom-based setting.  

• Students will use appropriate and effective verbal and nonverbal communication in a professional classroom setting.  
• Students will demonstrate proficiency in written communication in the areas of focus, content, organization, style, and conventions through professional writing samples  

Program Goal 3: Students in the early childhood education, special education, and secondary education programs will maintain professional conduct and ethical behavior in a professional classroom setting.  

• Students will demonstrate professional dress, attendance, and punctuality in a field based setting   
• Students will demonstrate professional relationships with school colleagues, families and the broader community   

Program Goal 4: Students in the early childhood education, special education, and secondary education programs will manage a learning environment that is safe and conducive to learning.  

• Students will create a positive learning environment involving meaningful, caring and respectful relationships between the field-based classroom community  
• Students will prepare a safe and appropriate classroom environment to optimize learning in a field-based setting.  
• Students will plan and teach classroom procedures and routines.  

Program Goal 5: Students in the early childhood education, special education, and secondary education will link content to related research-based pedagogy based on sound educational theory in short-and long-range instructional plans. 

• Students will demonstrate the ability to differentiate instruction using appropriate resources, materials, technology, and activities to engage students in meaningful learning based on their instructional goals.  
• Students will demonstrate appropriate and varied instructional strategies to engage learners.  
• Students will assess their own professional growth through focused self-reflection.  

For more information on learning goals and outcomes, contact  [email protected] .