Mager's Instructional Objectives

Summary

In his book Preparing Instructional Objectives: A critical tool in the development of effective instruction (1997), Robert Mager provides a widely used and accepted methodology for writing and formatting instructional objectives.   Simply stated, Mager states that to be effective, all instructional objectives need to contain three elements: a performance, a condition, and the criterion.  (Note:  some instructional designers refer to the 3 parts as the behavior, condition, and standard.  A behavior, condition, and standard are the same thing as performance, condition, and criterion.)

The objective’s goal should be to cause a change in behavior on the part of the student.  If it does not, either the objective is poorly written or unnecessary.  The very first thing done, as part of the analysis phase, is to develop a list of tasks to be performed.  This is referred to as the Task Analysis and is where content for training is selected and sequenced.   From the derived task list, the 3 part objective is written.  The objective should describe the outcome of the training; not the process for delivering the training.  When writing the objective, the designer needs to make the objective as specific as possible.  Objectives that are too generic can be interpreted differently by different people – instructors and students.  When completed, the objectives will be used for selecting instructional strategies, methods and media.  They will also be used for developing tests and assessments. 

The Three Parts of the Objective

Performance – Use an overt (visible) verb where the performance is easily seen and measured (e.g., write, run, repair, etc.)  For covert (invisible) verbs the designer must include “indicator behaviors” that tell how the covert verb will be seen (or indicated) which should also aid in measurability.  There are also what Mager refers to as “abstract” performance verbs, such as understand, value, and appreciate.  These too will require an indicator behavior.

Condition – Use a condition statement as part of the objective to describe the condition under which the student will have to demonstrate competency.

Criterion – The criterion tells “how well” the student must perform to prove competency.  The criterion must be realistic and measurable.  Some sample criteria elements include: speed, quantity (how many), accuracy, and quality.  The criterion must come from requirements (or standards).

Mager also includes a chapter called Pitfalls and Barnacles.  In this chapter he discusses some of the problems he sees when reviewing objectives – such as objectives written without a performance as the main intent.  Normally, an indicator behavior will be used as the main event which can be confusing and misleading.  Another example is what he refers to as “False Givens” which is where unnecessary or misleading information is included in the objective; this often includes information that describes the process or procedure.

Comment and Critique

Mager’s 3 part objective has been around for a long time and is widely accepted as the standard by industry.  (This book was first copyrighted in 1962 as “Preparing Objectives for Programmed Instruction.”

I do have several critiques of things he does not discuss or reference.

• He does mention or discuss the gap analysis or content prioritization normally done in conjunction with the Task Analysis.  All tasks are not trained, and the gap analysis and content prioritization are used to determine which tasks are training worthy and which are not.  Factors such as task criticality, difficulty, and frequency are used to determine tasks to be included in the instruction.   Only after tasks have been selected for inclusion in the instruction can instructional strategies, methods and media be selected – and the objectives written.
• I don’t recall him discussing that all test and assessment items must be linked to an objective. When discussing the performance part of the objective, he does not discuss learning domains (cognitive, psychomotor, and affective) or the taxonomies that accompany each domain.  He also never mentions there has been extensive research (and verb lists) done on the appropriate performance verbs for each of the domain.  Research that is easily accessible by all instructional designers.
• He does not talk about the need for evaluating and determining the need (or not) for task fidelity when writing the condition. The need for task fidelity will help determine instructional strategies, methods and media.