Lesson Objectives In Backward Planning

Creating lesson objectives in backward planning

It seems funny, but the best way to begin thinking about planning a lesson is by thinking about the end. This is due to the fact that each teacher should predict in advance what his/her goal is going to be.

This process of planning is known as backward design. Ralph Tyler (1949) described it as the most efficient way to emphasize the educational instruction. Stephen Convey (1989) says that successful people usually keep their goals, results that they want to achieve, in mind. Backward design is commonly used in unit, curriculum, and course planning. It requires teachers to hold in mind what students need to achieve at the end of the unit or course (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005).

There are

The first stage of planning is identifying the results. The teacher begins to create objectives, what he/she wants the students to be able to do at the end of the lesson. The teacher should think of some essential questions, which could help him/her to plan the lesson. Here are some guided questions that help to clarify objectives of the lesson:

Is the lesson skill, language or content based? That is one of the most important questions to answer while planning the lesson. The teacher should know exactly if the lesson is skill based, language based, or content based, identifying what the teacher’s true aim of the lesson is.

Are you having students use receptive or productive skills? The receptive skills are listening and reading, because learners do not need to produce language to do these, they receive and understand it. These skills are sometimes known as passive skills. They can be contrasted with the productive or active skills of speaking and writing. Example, often in the process of learning new language, learners begin with receptive understanding of the new items, then later move on to productive use. As for productive skills, they are speaking and writing, because learners doing these need to produce language. They are also known as active skills. They can be compared with the receptive skills of listening and reading. E.g., learners have already spent time practicing receptive skills with a shape poem, by

However, there are some critiques on this taxonomy. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) argue that during the thinking process several learning level activates simultaneously. Therefore it is not possible to indicate in lesson objectives and evaluate only one these levels. Also the hierarchy given by Bloom is not proved according to Marzano (2000). He says there are no evidences that prove the learning levels are acquired in this sequence. A mythology has grown around the taxonomy, possibly due to many people learning about the taxonomy through second hand information. Bloom himself considered the Handbook "one of the most widely cited yet least read books in American education". Despite all these criticisms, Bloom’s taxonomy helps to verbalize lesson objectives and these essential statements can be also used to formulate lesson objectives. Indication of three levels of learning objectives help to differentiate objectives by students’