Thread: Objectives for dental visit design
Post: Proficiency level missing in Mager Objective
Author: Christopher Keith

Posted Date: January 24, 2012 5:20 PM
Status: Published
Overall rating: 

Rhonda, your objectives look on track, but I viewed the slideshow (IT510 Mager Objectives) and was wondering if you should include the third part of the Mager Objective (the proficiency level).

For example, on your first objective (After viewing a slide show on how to identify carious lesions on a radiograph, the learner will be able to correctly identify large carious lesions on radiographs) should you include something like, "with 90% accuracy" or some other standard of measurement?

Also, the last two objectives:

Upon completion of viewing a video on tooth brushing and flossing, the learner will be understand how to correctly brush and floss their teeth, the importance of brushing and flossing, and how often each should be done.

After viewing a slide show on the preventive exam, the learner will understand what the dentist is looking for: number of teeth, lesions, healthy/unhealthy gingiva, and healthy/unhealthy teeth (carious lesions).

Is "understand" a good action verb? The slide show says, "A good action verb is one where learner behavior can either be directly observed or indirectly observed." Not sure "understand" can be observed. How could they show their understanding?

I think I am on track here. Anyone else agree or disagree?

Thread: Objectives for dental visit design
Post: disagree on proficiency statement, agree about "understand"
Author: Rhonda Schalk

Posted Date: January 24, 2012 5:42 PM
Status: Published
Overall rating: 

I understand where you are coming from. That's the way I read it at first, but I also looked at Mager objectives -- examples ( https://bb8.siue.edu/bbcswebdav/users/dknowlt/WebDesignOnline/ContentWBDSGN/GuidingStatements/Objectives/ObjMagerExs.htm ) and none of those had the proficiency level stated in that manner. If you follow that link, you can see the examples and then it will lead you to click on another so you can see the parts of the objective. If I'm understanding it correctly, I have that part down.

I'll agree that "understand" is not a very strong verb. I guess I'm falling back on the way I learned to write objectives 20+ years ago. Do you have a better verb? I'll think on it and see if I can come up with something.

Thank you for the thoughtful feedback.
Rhonda

Thread: Objectives for dental visit design
Post: GREAT feedback - Mager objectives refinement
Author: David Knowlton

Posted Date: January 24, 2012 5:58 PM
Status: Published
Overall rating: 

I have arguments with other Instructional designers all the time about whether or not "correctly" can serve as a proficiency level.  I mean, if we ask a learner to "correctly balance a checkbook," then that implies 100% accuracy.  :-)  If this were another course in the program (specifically, IT510), I'd push Rhonda to be more specific on that proficiency.  But, in this class, I'll totally buy "correctly" as long as she understands that that does have some implications for assessment.  If she says "correctly" (implying 100%), then only perfectly correct will do for her learners to "pass." 

As for the verb, Christopher also makes a great point.  Mager would not like the verb "understand" at all.  It's not observable or measurable.  So, here's the question I would ask Rhonda.  What behavior do you want the learners to engage in such that you'd be comfortable saying, "a-ha, I have evidence that they understand."? 

So, I like "identify" as your verb in the first two.  If they "identify," then you'll be comfortable saying that they understand, right?  See if you can think of something similar for the other two objectives.

:-)

Dave

Thread: Objectives for dental visit design
Post: RE: GREAT feedback - Mager objectives refinement
Author: Rhonda Schalk

Posted Date: January 25, 2012 7:06 PM
Status: Published
Overall rating: 

Dave said that to be more expansive on the proficiency portion of my statement, I really should have identified more precisely how correctly I would like the learner to do "whatever". So, what I was thinking with the radiographs (x-ray pictures), that the child would have several chances to get the identification on one radiograph correct before the answer was shown. Should I say something to that effect or more like "with 70% accuracy"?
Rhonda

Thread: Objectives for dental visit design
Post: How about within X# of attempts?
Author: Laura Benson

Posted Date: January 28, 2012 8:48 AM
Status: Published
Overall rating: 

Hi Rhonda, I'm catching up on the boards, so I apologize if someone answered this elsewhere, but I don't see a response to this thread.  How about something along the lines of "the child will successfully identify a radiograph within 4 tries/attempts," with whatever number you think is best?

Thread: Objectives for dental visit design
Post: x# does sound better than %
Author: Rhonda Schalk

Posted Date: January 28, 2012 9:45 PM
Status: Published
Overall rating: 

Laura,
Thanks for the suggestion. I do think that putting it in a number term would be better...of course, now I need to go back and see what I wrote later on just to be sure I'm not contradicting myself. :-)

I'm trying to catch up on posts tonight. I'm still trying to get this balancing act down. Not succeeding very well.
Rhonda