Myth #8: Presenting enabling learning objectives (ELOs) is beneficial to learners

Reality

It is critical for instructional designers to define enabling learning objectives (ELOs) to guide the careful design and development of their training interventions. (see Myth #4: Design documents are not necessary)

However, the same bulleted list of ELOs should not be presented verbatim to your learners; at the beginning of a course or lesson. Per Will Thalheimer, R. J. Hamilton (1985) found that presenting learners with a list of the same enabling learning objectives is not beneficial and can even be harmful.

“[An instructional] objective that generally identifies the information to be learned in the text will produce robust effects. Including other information (per Mager’s, 1962, definition) will not significantly help and it may hinder the effects of the objectives” (Hamilton, 1985, p. 78).

Following are alternative and more engaging means to focus the attention of the learner on the purpose and value of your training (versus a technical bullet list).

Alternatives

It’s okay to use the word understand in a focusing objective—because it does not hurt the learner in setting them up to focus attention on critical concepts. But it is NOT okay to use the word understand in an instructional-design objective—because the word “understand” doesn’t have enough specificity to guide instructional design.
— Will Thalheimer

Using the verb “understand”

Resources