This book is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Licensedifferent pathways and using different styles of learning. Because of these assumptions, it is necessary to name
indicators, which are examples of specific behaviors by which students might show success at reaching a general
learning goal. But it is neither desirable nor possible for a list of indicators to be complete—only for it to be
representative (Gronlund, 2004). Consider this example from teaching middle-school biology. For this subject you
might have a general goal like the following, with accompanying indicators:
Goal:
The student will understand the nature and purpose of photosynthesis.
Indicators:- explains the purpose of photosynthesis and steps in the process
- diagrams steps in the chemical process
- describes how plant photosynthesis affects the animal world
- writes a plan for how to test leaves for presence of photosynthesis
- makes an oral presentation and explains how the experiment was conducted
Using a strictly cognitive approach to planning, therefore, a teacher’s job has two parts. First she must identify,
find, or choose a manageable number of general goals—perhaps just a half dozen or so. (Sometimes these can be
taken or adapted from a curriculum framework document such as discussed earlier.) Then the teacher must think
of a handful of specific examples or behavioral indicators for each goal—just a half dozen or so of these as well. The
behavioral indicators clarify the meaning of the general goal, but are not meant to be the only way that students
might show success at learning. Then, at last, thoughtful planning for individual lessons or activities can begin. This
approach works especially well for learning goals that are relatively long-term—goals that take many lessons, days,
or weeks to reach. During such long periods of teaching, it is impossible to specify the exact, detailed behaviors that
every student can or should display to prove that he or she has reached a general goal. It is possible, however, to
specify general directions toward which all students should focus their learning and to explain the nature of the
goals with a sample of well-chosen indicators or examples (Popham, 2002).
The cognitive, general-to-specific approach is reasonable on the face of it, and in fact probably describes how
many teachers think about their instructional planning. But critics have argued that indicators used as examples
may not in fact clarify the general goal enough; students therefore end up unexpectedly—as Casey Stengel said at
the start of this chapter—“someplace else”. Given the general goal of understanding photosynthesis described
above, for example, how are we to know whether the five indicators that are listed really allow a teacher to grasp the
full meaning of the goal? Put differently, how else might a student show understanding of photosynthesis, and how
is a teacher to know that a student’s achievement is s a legitimate display of understanding? To some educators,
grasping the meaning of goals from indicators is not as obvious as it should be, and in any case is prone to
misunderstanding. The solution, they say, is not to start planning with general goals, but with specific behaviors
that identify students’ success.
Educational Psychology 216 A Global Text