1966
DOI: 10.21236/ad0633474
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Derivation, Analysis, and Classification of Instructional Objectives

Abstract: Office under Task INGO, Methods for Deriving Instructional Objectives. This report is designed to present an examination and clarification of the methods, terms, and criteria associated with the determination of student performance objectives. Distinctions are made between kinds of objectives and their purposes for use by training managers. Decisions influencing the utility and communicability of performance objectives may thus be more specifically responsive to training organization needs. Appreciation is ext… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

1969
1969
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Fallentine et al, (1974) contains a description of how the instructional development process was accomplished in a logistics course. Other documentation and discussion of the development of objectives of academic interest can be found in Ammerman (1966); Ammerman and Melching (1966); Banathy (1968); Davies (1971); Edling (1968, pp. 177-192); Esbensen (1968); Haggard et aL (1970); Kibler et al (1970); McKnight and Hundt (1972); Mager (1962); Mager and Beach (1967); Melching et al (1966); Miles and Robinson (1971, pp.…”
Section: Courseware Preparationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Fallentine et al, (1974) contains a description of how the instructional development process was accomplished in a logistics course. Other documentation and discussion of the development of objectives of academic interest can be found in Ammerman (1966); Ammerman and Melching (1966); Banathy (1968); Davies (1971); Edling (1968, pp. 177-192); Esbensen (1968); Haggard et aL (1970); Kibler et al (1970); McKnight and Hundt (1972); Mager (1962); Mager and Beach (1967); Melching et al (1966); Miles and Robinson (1971, pp.…”
Section: Courseware Preparationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The relevance of practice under programed instruction,' with its careful analysis of instructional objectives (13,14,15), explains a large share of its commonly found superiority over conventional teaching methods. Yet even compared with a carefully developed linear program, Shettel and Lindley (16) found that students could learn the phonetic alphabet (a-alpha, b=bravo, etc.)…”
Section: Relevance Of Practice Activitiesmentioning
confidence: 99%