M 2.4 Guilbert’s Levels of Educational Objectives.

M 2.4a. Relate domains of learning to professional development.

Professional development is the prima causa, the primary and compelling reason for education.
It becomes all the more pronounced in professional education context. A structured approach
provides not only an outline, but also the reasoning, guidance and prediction for learning. Such
a structure in educational methodology is managed through the educational objectives, and the
complexity of the levels in learning is moderated by Guilbert’s Hierarchy.
Before we get to Guilbert’s, we are already aware of the three categories of learning – the
Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Each of the domain of learning therefore,
intends to support professional development in the area of its significance.
For example, the cognitive domain enhances the knowledge of learners from a range spanning
the basic level to higher level thinking and critical thinking. Critical thinking is where we make
reasoned judgments that are logical and well-thought out. In this way of thinking, we don't
accept the arguments and conclusions prima facie, but match it with the available evidences,
and form the decision or create a solution.
In the psychomotor domain, the learners develop from their level of ‘basic knowledge’ and
‘basic skills’ level to a situation where more sophisticated skills, higher level abilities, and
critical understanding of performance are achieved. Here we can see that there is an addition
of knowledge also with the skill, both at the initial and conclusive levels. That is because, the
skills of performance are based in the foundations of knowledge and the progression of skills
must be inclusive of the knowledge base.
The development of attitude, refinement of values, or reinforcing the effectiveness of
communication. Thus, the learning in affective domain, emerges from a situation of elementary
values and behaviours, inherited value system, and egocentric view to a situation where the
learner has acquired more highly developed attitudes, well thought-out value system, higher
level abilities to identify and articulate others’ values.
For the development of scholarship in affective domain, Mezirow (1991) explained that the
change of perspective happens by a process of ‘disorienting dilemma’. It is an “experience
within which a current understanding is found to be insufficient or incorrect and the learner
struggles with the resulting conflict of views. Such experiences often are those to which
learners point as the beginning of the process of questioning their understanding and views
and entering the transformative learning process” so that there is an attempt to explore the
alternatives to respond to the disorienting issues. Thus, affective domain takes care of the
learner needs to change their base emotions and views and develop as a responsible and evolved
professional.
M 2.4b. Illustrate Guilbert’s hierarchy of educational objectives.
Guilbert’s Hierarchy is a tool that describes the various levels of learning that can be mapped
and managed in the three domains of learning – cognitive, psychomotor, and affective. There
are also other tools of education that demonstrate the progression of learning, such as Bloom’s
Taxonomy, and Miller’s Pyramid. All these tools have their strengths for discerning the
different levels.
The purpose of adapting Guilbert’s over others is because of the simplicity and discernibility
of this reference framework. Without being negatively biased about the expansive scope that
the levels of Bloom / Harrow / Krathwohl provide for cognitive, psychomotor, and affective
domain respectively, they seem to be a tad heavy for the healthcare professionals to comply
for writing objectives in each of their levels. Miller’s on the whole provides a progressively
aligned approach and is very useful as an application tool for developing the assessment
strategies.
The strength of Guilbert lies in its simplicity, along with its relevance for health professions’
education and has the approval of World Health organisation as its publisher. It is an interesting
tool which can predict and explain the identification and validity of teaching – learning
methods / media, and also the assessment method.
In the ‘knowledge’ domain Guilbert’s approach to learning proceeds from recall of facts to
understanding / interpreting the different sets of data, and finally to the ability to make
decisions and solve problems on the basis of the understanding / interpretation. This simple
three-step process builds a sequential order of learning; it clearly brings out that decisions shall
be made NOT on the basis of facts alone, but through a process of understanding and
interpretation.
The ‘skill’ domain builds the learning from the stage of observing and imitation to gaining
control over the skills and culminating in automatism of the skill. In simple terms, any skill
will be learnt initially by observing its performance, and imitating the same in the sequential
order. In the next phase, the learner tries to gain control over the skill: meaning of control has
to be read in the context of planning. Planning is deciding the action before doing it, in the
sense there is no reflex response, but a guided activity. Control in the context of planned
activity is conforming to the set course of action; in this regard, gaining control is developing
the conformity to the plan of activity, by performing the steps as detailed in the plan; this is
like the ‘conscious competence’ phase of learning. The repeated performances to gain control
will result in that skill becoming an automatic activity, something like the ‘unconscious
competence’ phase of learning.
Learning in the affective domain proceeds from the stage where the learner is open and
receptive to the stimulus or trigger situation, responding to it in a desirable manner, and finally
internalising the responses. The initial trigger is a learning event such as being gentle with the
patient during history taking. To be gentle, the student has to be open to the fact that his / her
gentle behaviour is an expected professional behaviour. There has to be an admission that
patient would as a norm, be anxious and therefore need the healthcare professional to be
sensitive to their situation. Being aware of this issue is the state of ‘receiving’. Once the
message is received, there has to be a relevant and appropriate response, which is defined by
the professional roles and responsibilities. As the receiving and responding cycle circulates, it
results in the internalisation of learning, which is manifest by the spontaneous and
professionally authentic response.
Thus Guilbert’s hierarchy ensures that the learning documents either as curriculum or lesson
plans are prepared with an increasing level of difficulty and complexity, and both the learners
and the facilitators of learning are objectively aware of these facilities.
M 2.4c. Relate Guilbert’s hierarchy to educational practices.
Guilbert’s hierarchy has the following uses –
• To write progressive levels of learning objectives. Learning / performance objectives
need to be stated and facilitated in the increasing order of difficulty / complexity.
Guilbert’s hierarchy enables these statements in such an order for all the three domains
of Bloom, on a simple and feasible scale.
• To assess the entry behavior of learners. It is necessary to assess the entry behavior of
learners, prior to implementing the learning plan. Guilbert’s hierarchy, because of its
 pyramidal nature of learning levels creates the base to assess the entry level of learners,
and also to inform the remediation.
• To match appropriate level of teaching –learning methods & media. Guilbert’s
hierarchy can provide a logical and tenable reference for selecting the appropriate T –
L Method and Medium, by mapping the learning objectives on the continuum of
learning and matching them on the span of T- L Methods / Media.
• To identify the relevant level of assessment tool. Guilbert’s hierarchy can also suggest
the appropriate medium and tool for assessment, basing on the nature and complexity
of performance. However, the Miller’s Pyramid would be a better tool, and can be
aligned with the Guilbert’s hierarchy for better results.

M 2.4d. Identify the Guilbert’s level in the given list of SLOs.

Group Task to identify and justify the statements.