What mistakes are you making when writing learning objectives?

Overlooking Strategic Alignment by not considering the company's overall strategy or thier business impact. A clear ROI failS to resonate with executives focused on business results.

Unless this is a train the trainer course or similar, “describe“ the four steps of customer is also an example of a poor objective. Only the application needs to be in the objectives. But better still, start with a problem that this new skill will address, so something like: “You will be able to handle difficult situations and improve your single call resolution levels (by amount X) by applying the four steps of customer service”

When writing learning objectives, one of the most common mistakes is to not align the objectives with the overall goals or standards of the organisation. Also failing to make them measurable or observable; they should be clearly defined and articulated using specific action verbs that describe the desired outcomes. It is important to craft clear, specific, and achievable learning objectives that provide a roadmap for both instruction and assessment. Each objective should clearly state what the learner will be able to do as a result of the instruction, how well they should be able to do it, and under what conditions they will demonstrate their understanding or skill.

The issue arises because vague and unclear learning objectives hinder effective communication and understanding, leading to potential misunderstandings or gaps in knowledge. To address this, ensure that learning objectives are following SMART strategy: specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound. Clearly articulate the expected outcomes, providing a roadmap for both trainers and learners, and consider seeking feedback to refine objectives for optimal clarity and comprehension.

MEASURABLE. This is a key word. If you use verbs like “discuss” or “explain,” you are implying that the participant will ACTUALLY be assessed performing that verb. Verbs like these are wholly inappropriate in eLearning. In Instructor Led Training, they are hidden in “group discussions,” which is a cop out - we all know that not everyone participates in group discussions, so those people did not meet the objective. Observable and measurable implies that each participant will be individually observed and measured. This also means that there has to be an objective device used to determine competency. If there is no individual performance, no rubric or key to determine competency, it is not observed or measured.

Yes, we absolutely need to create measurable and observable objectives. However, we cannot measure whether someone is ‘identifying and respecting’ diversity and inclusion. How about: - Demonstrate inclusive written and spoken communication skills in the workplace, by: (insert measurable thing that will be assessed)

You've highlighted a crusial point. To make learning more meaningful and measurable, guide learners on what actions to take. For instance, with the objective "appreciate the importance of diversity and inclusion," incorporate practical exercises or discussions. For "demonstrate inclusive communication skills," consider role-playing scenarios. This hands-on approach helps learners actively apply their knowledge, making it more tangible and applicable in real situations. Regular feedback and assessments can then reinforce these skills and support continuous improvement

Learning objectives should be exactly the number needed to complete an analyzed task. On this point, mistake 3 misses the point that often objectives are written from opinion and not analysis. Analysis of the tasks should determine the number of objectives. The number of total objectives in a course is dependent on the number of tasks to be trained. Also, there are two types: which are often overlooked: enabling and terminal objectives. Terminal objectives are what are measured to determine competency of performing a task. Enabling objectives are necessary for a terminal objective to be completed proficiently. When writing objectives, start with the terminal and then determine if you need enabling objectives. If not, then leave it alone.

In my opinion, the number of words isn't a big deal—it's about choosing the right words for the content. If you can express the topic clearly in a few words, that's great. And if using more words fits the content, that's good too. It's all about the balance between words and what you're talking about.

When it comes to crafting learning objectives, striking the right balance is crucial. Writing too many objectives can overwhelm both the learners and the instructors, leading to a fragmented learning experience. With an excessive number of objectives, learners may struggle to prioritize their focus and may not achieve mastery in any particular area. On the other hand, having too few learning objectives can result in a lack of clarity and direction, leaving important skills or knowledge gaps unaddressed. In such cases, learners may not fully grasp the scope of what they are expected to learn, and the training may fail to meet its intended outcomes. Therefore, it's essential to carefully consider the scope and depth of the content.

On point. My practice is: ONE Key Learning Outcomes for each day. For example, "Able to generate multimedia using multi AI tools" Then at least 2 more learning objective for each module that contribute to the Learning Outcomes. Module 1. prompt engineering 1. Able to communicate with ai using different prompting technique to generate desired result 2. Able to identify which technique to used on different outcomes. Do the same to other modules of the day, remember to connect it to Learning Outcomes.

My view is that learners almost never look at the objectives (and why would they?). The objectives are there to align the performance goal with the design and delivery of the training. A good way to make them relevant and impactful to is to rewrite them in order to motivate learners. For instance, a conventional objective could be “understand the regulatory requirements of providing resuscitation”. Something like “use CPR to save a life while respecting the law” would be much more meaningful.

True. Depends on who is your reader. If this is a public program, connect the learning outcomes with your ideal learner (client). If you're writing for L&D or corporate for review. First connect it to their business goals through overview / executive summary. Then write the Learning Outcomes and Learning Objective for the level of participant you're receiving. For example, Coaching Program: To Senior Manager - Able to help peers and downline to improve performances and build trust. To Coaches - Able to Apply X Model to increase effectiveness of every session.

A mistake within this mistake is not considering the level and needs of the subject itself. The learning objectives should be aligned with the learner, agreed. But it is very important to distinguish between the “need to know” and the “nice to know” when it comes to writing the objectives. Both distinctions are meaningful and relevant and should be described in detail, so the learner grasps the whole context and can be able to discern between what has to be learned as a founding principle, and the actual tasks he/she needs to develop and how those two concepts interact.

Any course that will be regularly delivered, such as new hire or onboarding training, should go through a regular maintenance cycle. This maintenance cycle should be a review of the course efficacy, changes to behaviors, processes, or systems, and changing policies and procedures. However, this requires a Learning and Development organization that allows for analysis and REAL evaluation that is more than a smile sheet. If the training wasn't based on analysis, and if the org doesn't allow for proper evaluation of impact on training, then there is no objective way to recalibrate the learning objectives to the current task performance.

Here’s a good simple rule: the learning objective must entail action. Yes, “today you will learn X,” but how will the learner apply that knowledge? What do you want your learners to do with what they just learned? How will the learner acquire that information or the resources needed for the task ahead? Example audience: plumbers. Example LO: identify the correct type of pipes used to install gas water heaters by referencing your materials handbook. While this example falls in the LOTS (lower order thinking skills) category, it outlines the task (identifying the correct type of pipes for gas water heater installation) and the resource to be used (materials handbook).

I would consider the following in order to avoid mistakes when writing Learning Outcomes: 1. What is the duration of the Training intervention? 2. Does the client want me to take many concepts braodly or take one concept and go deep into it? 3. What prior exposure and experience do the learners who are going to attend the training program have with respect to what is going to be covered in the program? 4. If the client wants just a broad covereage and the durnation is also less, then I restrict myself to the first 3 levels of Blooms Hierarchy of learning; 5. If the duration is more than 1 day, then I will take the learners upto the 6th Level of the Blooms Hierarchy. I will use Active Verbs from Blooms Taxonomy to avoid vagueness.

Common mistakes in learning objectives involve ambiguity or lack of measurability. For instance, a poorly constructed objective might state, "Understand the importance of teamwork." Understanding is subjective and challenging to quantify. Another example is "Appreciate cultural diversity." Appreciation is a feeling, not a measurable outcome. Effective objectives should focus on observable actions, like "Demonstrate effective teamwork in a group project" or "Identify and respect cultural differences in a workplace scenario." Clear, measurable verbs are crucial for assessing and achieving learning outcomes. I use blooms taxonomy to write learning objectives and make them measurable. I have found it to be very effective indeed.