Lesson Objective - how many is ideal?

As a teacher a mistake that I have been carrying forward all these years is: last minute rush to complete the class objective in a 40 min session. I usually, have the habit of listing the lesson objectives on the right side of the board - black/white/green (whatever be the color of the board).

The idea is to

(a) remind me that this is my objective to be achieved today.

(b) make the students aware of the concepts dealt in class.

(c) Topics they need to revisit at home.

(d) to inform the observers who walk into my class anytime for class observation.

What I have not listed above, or what I have been ignoring all these years is the: undue pressure I carry as soon as I list the objective. A pressure I give to myself stating:

• the listed objectives have to be achieved - come what may.
• To achieve this: rush through. (irrespective of student engagement/understanding of the topic).
• In case, I am not able to cover the objectives listed, carry it over.
• How long and how much do I carry it over?

And it is not a surprise when I say that in a few classes - esp. the Senior Secondary classes, I struggle to finish the objectives listed. The objectives get carried over to my next class. Now, this has certain implications:

1. I already have a lesson plan for each day - so I crowd this objective along with the others, which means there is sure to be a spillover / carry forward task throughout the week.
2. Do I re-write/modify the next day's plan - which takes away my preparation time.
3. And no time for reflection during the end of the lesson.
4. No time to discuss with students how they would prefer to read/learn this particular lesson/ topic.

I have been reflecting on this teaching style of mine (during this Dusshera Break) and the realization dawned on me that the objectives listed are more than the time allotted for a lesson. That led me to research: what is the ideal ratio of the objectives to be listed for a class to the time allotted for the session?

Research always throws up a lot of interesting facts and theories, the one that stayed with me was research undertaken in Canada in 1989 titled 'Academic Learning Time in Physical Education Classes for Mentally Handicapped Students'. This was an observational study, and the outcome of the research stated that ideally 63% of the PE time was used for teacher - student interaction. This comes to roughly 25 min of the class is required for teacher student interaction. And research further states that 3-5 objectives are ideal for an hour's class, if that is the case then for 25 min sessions the objectives, I have to deal with is roughly 3.

My analysis has flaws in it. My entire premise is based on a research paper which deals with mentally handicapped students and with reference to a discipline that requires physical movements - but that is the one I could resonate with.

I do agree that classroom interactions cannot always be quantified. So, it is not the number of objectives alone that matter; what matters is how effective do we get students to engage with the objectives listed. And that led me to read further and figure out that the Bloom's taxonomy plays a crucial role in laying out the lesson objectives. Bloom's taxonomy helps in identifying the essential skills required that match the content taught. It helps us to structure the objectives that align with lower order tasks to higher order tasks.

Not to forget, the exit strategy - an important aspect of teaching. Clearly defined, limited objectives provide ample time for us (teachers) to discuss with the students - how we learnt this unit when we were young, how others (probably, your peers did it), how they would like to learn it and what resources they require for the same. After all, teaching does not limit to delivering a content; it is all about motivating students to take the ownership of learning on their shoulders.