However, I'm not so sure that some of these suggestions are really all that "alternative:, and many are just common-sense best practices. For instance, For instance, when you say, "Write out the learning objectives for a single lesson", I think that's a great idea, but it's a great idea even if you don't engage in "alternative" grading (whatever that is). In fact, I'm a little puzzled -- shouldn't this be the standard procedure? Why are people designing lesson plans without learning objectives?
One thing that you didn't mention is: TELL YOUR STUDENTS WHAT THE LEARNING OBJECTIVES ARE!! I've seen a number of people go into considerable detail about how to write learning objectives but who then are dismissive of actually communicating these to students. Of course developing explicit learning objectives is helpful for instructors who are designing a course, but they are even more helpful for students who are trying to navigate the material. I ALWAYS announce the learning objectives right at the beginning of the lesson, and also review them at the end of the lesson.
>shouldn't this be the standard procedure? Why are people designing lesson plans without learning objectives?
Yes, it should be the standard procedure. But, it's far from the case that most faculty engage in this activity when building a class or a lesson. In fact the use of learning objectives in courses has gotten significant pushback from various faculty corners. Read this blog post from my personal website for a summary: https://rtalbert.org/why-learning-objectives/
Some of the pushback is based on research, which makes some decent points: https://www.christytuckerlearning.com/should-we-list-the-learning-objectives/ Some of the pushback comes from faculty in places where learning objectives are mandated by the institution or even the government, drafted by people with no direct contact with students, then pushed on faculty in a top-down manner -- so the pushback is understandable although misplaced. Some of it, frankly, is sheer laziness on the part of some faculty.
And even if there is no pushback, it's still quite common for me to work with faculty and find that many have never really thought about explicitly framing their learning objectives -- or they thought about it, but didn't do it. You're right, it is puzzling but it's real, so that's why it's on the list -- it's definitely not a foregone conclusion that this is taking place.
To be honest, those questions were rhetorical. I do understand that many people do not design lesson plans around explicit learning objectives. And I think that while they work well in courses that emphasize knowledge or concrete skills, they aren't appropriate for classes that are more process-oriented (e.g. writing courses) or an advanced seminar that is more focused on discussion. So learning objectives are not necessarily suitable for every class, but to the extent that they are, then it's hard to understand why an instructor is not using them for lesson design.
I agree that many faculty don't do this -- in my experience, essentially no STEM faculty take the approach of designing individual lesson plans based on learning objectives. In part, that's because of laziness, but more often it's because of plain simple obliviousness -- they've never been in classes structured this way, so it never occurs to them to do it.
And thanks for the links to the articles! I read them with great interest. In the end, I remain unconvinced, but I'm always eager to hear alternative viewpoints.
Fantastic list, thanks for sharing Robert. I have tried some of these and plan to experiment with a few others. I love the focus here on small prototypes to help us get going toward solving daunting problems.
This is a very helpful guide! Thank you. I'm trying to start small, so this is exactly what I needed.
These are all very thoughtful. Thank you!
However, I'm not so sure that some of these suggestions are really all that "alternative:, and many are just common-sense best practices. For instance, For instance, when you say, "Write out the learning objectives for a single lesson", I think that's a great idea, but it's a great idea even if you don't engage in "alternative" grading (whatever that is). In fact, I'm a little puzzled -- shouldn't this be the standard procedure? Why are people designing lesson plans without learning objectives?
One thing that you didn't mention is: TELL YOUR STUDENTS WHAT THE LEARNING OBJECTIVES ARE!! I've seen a number of people go into considerable detail about how to write learning objectives but who then are dismissive of actually communicating these to students. Of course developing explicit learning objectives is helpful for instructors who are designing a course, but they are even more helpful for students who are trying to navigate the material. I ALWAYS announce the learning objectives right at the beginning of the lesson, and also review them at the end of the lesson.
>shouldn't this be the standard procedure? Why are people designing lesson plans without learning objectives?
Yes, it should be the standard procedure. But, it's far from the case that most faculty engage in this activity when building a class or a lesson. In fact the use of learning objectives in courses has gotten significant pushback from various faculty corners. Read this blog post from my personal website for a summary: https://rtalbert.org/why-learning-objectives/
Some of the pushback is based on research, which makes some decent points: https://www.christytuckerlearning.com/should-we-list-the-learning-objectives/ Some of the pushback comes from faculty in places where learning objectives are mandated by the institution or even the government, drafted by people with no direct contact with students, then pushed on faculty in a top-down manner -- so the pushback is understandable although misplaced. Some of it, frankly, is sheer laziness on the part of some faculty.
And even if there is no pushback, it's still quite common for me to work with faculty and find that many have never really thought about explicitly framing their learning objectives -- or they thought about it, but didn't do it. You're right, it is puzzling but it's real, so that's why it's on the list -- it's definitely not a foregone conclusion that this is taking place.
Thanks your very prompt reply!
To be honest, those questions were rhetorical. I do understand that many people do not design lesson plans around explicit learning objectives. And I think that while they work well in courses that emphasize knowledge or concrete skills, they aren't appropriate for classes that are more process-oriented (e.g. writing courses) or an advanced seminar that is more focused on discussion. So learning objectives are not necessarily suitable for every class, but to the extent that they are, then it's hard to understand why an instructor is not using them for lesson design.
I agree that many faculty don't do this -- in my experience, essentially no STEM faculty take the approach of designing individual lesson plans based on learning objectives. In part, that's because of laziness, but more often it's because of plain simple obliviousness -- they've never been in classes structured this way, so it never occurs to them to do it.
And thanks for the links to the articles! I read them with great interest. In the end, I remain unconvinced, but I'm always eager to hear alternative viewpoints.
Fantastic list, thanks for sharing Robert. I have tried some of these and plan to experiment with a few others. I love the focus here on small prototypes to help us get going toward solving daunting problems.
No surprise, I know you're all about prototyping! Maybe I got this post idea from you?