When we were University students, we were taught not only to set objectives at the planning stage, but pronounce those objectives to the students at the beginning of the lesson. Though it is considered to be important as the teacher turns back to the objectives at the end of the lesson to see if they have been met, I've always felt there was something wrong about it.

Last year a professor of psycology lectured at our school. She said research showed that when you inform a person of something good and there is no much emotional impact, they forget about it immediately. When you deliver them some negative information, they remember it for long. So, our students won't remember our aims for long.

Yesterday I listened to a podcast at EdTechTalk and the topic was Objectives. Several negative aspects of telling the students the objectives of the lesson outright at the beginning were discussed.

1) It you tell your students exactly what they are going to do, the discovery element vanishes.

2) You take responsibility off the students and act as the only person who dictates what is going to happen in the classrooom.

3) One doesn't always stick to a lesson plan and tends to detour.

So, if we pronounce a lesson objective at the beginning of a class:

1) It should be carefully worded not to take away the discovery element (a knd of intrigue) and allow a change in direction.

2) It has to have emotional impact.

3) It has to be written so that the students see it.

 What do you think of the problem?