| Course | NUR 635 Teaching and Learning for Nurse Educator |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 4 |
| Paper type | Paper on writing measurable learning objectives |
| Length | About 1,020 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Southern New Hampshire University |
| Program | MSN |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for NUR 635 Module 4
From Understand to Evaluate: Writing Anticoagulant Safety Objectives With the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy
[Student Name]
Southern New Hampshire University
NUR 635: Teaching and Learning for Nurse Educator
Module Four Objectives Paper
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The organization, setting and figures below are a composite written as a model document. No real employer, client, colleague or patient is described.
From Understand to Evaluate: Writing Anticoagulant Safety Objectives With the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy
Objectives are the hinge of a teaching plan. They tell the educator what to teach and how to assess it, and they tell students what they will be expected to do. Poorly written objectives, those that name content rather than performance or that sit only at the level of recall, quietly shape a lesson toward memorization. This paper rewrites the objectives of Harborside's anticoagulant lesson for its sophomore pharmacology students using the revised Bloom's taxonomy. It argues that objectives should describe observable performance, should be placed deliberately on both dimensions of the taxonomy and should be matched with assessments at the same level.
The Original Objectives
The lesson's original objectives read: students will understand the different anticoagulants; students will know the side effects of anticoagulants; and students will appreciate the importance of anticoagulant safety. None can be observed or measured directly. Understand, know and appreciate describe internal states, and an instructor cannot tell from them what a student who has met the objective would be able to do. The objectives also name broad content without limits, so they give no guidance about depth. And all three point toward recall, although the learner assessment showed that the students' real difficulties lay in applying knowledge to patients, such as recognizing when timing rules apply.
The Revised Taxonomy
The revised Bloom's taxonomy, published by Anderson and Krathwohl and colleagues, reorganized the original framework into two dimensions. The knowledge dimension distinguishes factual knowledge, the basic elements such as terms and details; conceptual knowledge, the relationships among elements such as principles and classifications; procedural knowledge, how to do something; and metacognitive knowledge, awareness of one's own thinking. The cognitive process dimension lists six categories expressed as verbs: remember, understand, apply, analyze, evaluate and create (Krathwohl, 2002). An objective can be placed in the cell where a knowledge type meets a cognitive process, which helps educators see whether a lesson covers the range intended. Guidance for educators notes that verbs should be chosen to match the intended level and that higher levels require the lower ones (Adams, 2015).
The Rewritten Objectives
Six objectives replace the original three. Each begins with a measurable verb and specifies the performance. First, identify the laboratory test used to monitor warfarin, unfractionated heparin and low-molecular-weight heparin when monitoring is indicated (remember, factual knowledge). Second, explain why direct oral anticoagulants generally do not require routine laboratory monitoring (understand, conceptual knowledge). Third, select the appropriate reversal agent or strategy for a patient with bleeding on each anticoagulant class (apply, conceptual knowledge). Fourth, distinguish between patient situations that require holding an anticoagulant dose and those that do not, including neuraxial procedures (analyze, conceptual knowledge). Fifth, carry out a pre-administration safety check for a scheduled enoxaparin dose, including platelets, renal function and procedure timing (apply, procedural knowledge). Sixth, judge whether a patient's discharge anticoagulant plan is safe and complete and recommend changes (evaluate, conceptual and procedural knowledge).
Matching Objectives to Assessment
An objective is only as useful as the assessment that measures it, and the assessment must work at the same cognitive level. Constructive alignment holds that outcomes, teaching activities and assessments should be designed to match (Biggs, 1996). For the first objective, a multiple-choice item asking which test monitors unfractionated heparin fits the remember level. For the third, an item presenting a bleeding patient on apixaban and asking for the appropriate reversal strategy tests application. For the fourth, a case with several patients, one of whom has just had an epidural catheter removed, asks students to decide which doses to hold and why, which requires analysis. For the fifth, a skills lab station asks students to perform the pre-administration check on a simulated chart. For the sixth, students review a written discharge plan containing two deliberate errors and write a recommendation, which requires evaluation. A test built only from items like the first would measure recall and miss the objectives that matter most for safety.
Beyond the Cognitive Domain
Safe anticoagulant practice is not only cognitive. The pre-administration check in the fifth objective is procedural knowledge, but performing it smoothly at the bedside is a psychomotor skill that improves with practice, and the lesson will include a skills station where each student completes the check on a simulated chart within a time limit. Safety also depends on an attitude: the willingness to hold a dose and question an order when something does not fit, even when a busy staff nurse says to give it. An affective objective captures this: students will defend a decision to hold a scheduled anticoagulant dose when a safety criterion is not met. It is assessed in a role-play in which a faculty member, playing a hurried nurse, pressures the student to give the dose. Including these objectives acknowledges that knowing the rule is only part of following it.
The Pull Toward Recall
Objectives tend to drift downward. Recall items are quick to write, easy to grade and produce clear right answers, while items at the analyze and evaluate levels take time to write and judge. Faculty under time pressure may keep high-level objectives on paper while testing only low-level knowledge, and students quickly learn that memorization is what counts. The result is a mismatch between what programs say they value and what they reward. Guarding against this drift means building the test blueprint from the objectives, allocating items to each cognitive level in proportion to its importance and reviewing tests for level before they are given. For this lesson, the blueprint will assign no more than a third of items to the remember and understand levels, with the remainder at apply and above, reflecting the learner assessment's finding that application is where students struggle.
Conclusion
Replacing understand, know and appreciate with identify, explain, select, distinguish, carry out and judge changes more than wording. It commits the lesson to teaching and assessing what students must actually do to give anticoagulants safely, from recalling monitoring tests to evaluating a discharge plan. The revised Bloom's taxonomy provides the structure, and alignment with assessment keeps the objectives honest.
References
Adams, N. E. (2015). Bloom's taxonomy of cognitive learning objectives. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 103(3), 152-153. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.103.3.010
Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32(3), 347-364. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138871
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212-218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
What the NUR 635 Module 4 instructions ask for
The NUR 635 objectives assignment typically asks you to write or revise learning objectives for a lesson or course and to justify them with a taxonomy, most often the revised Bloom's taxonomy, sometimes alongside the affective or psychomotor domains. Some prompts ask for a table classifying each objective. Expect two to four pages in APA 7. Critique vague objectives specifically, explain both dimensions of the taxonomy, write objectives with measurable verbs that state performance, classify each one and pair it with an assessment at the same level, since graders look for objectives that could actually drive teaching and testing decisions. Include at least one affective or psychomotor objective if safety depends on it.
How this NUR 635 Module 4 objectives paper example is built
This sample critiques three objectives from a composite anticoagulant lesson, including understand the different anticoagulants, for describing internal states and pointing only toward recall. It explains the knowledge and cognitive process dimensions of the revised taxonomy using Krathwohl, with guidance on verbs from Adams. Six rewritten objectives range from identifying monitoring tests to judging a discharge plan, each classified on both dimensions. Using Biggs's constructive alignment, each objective is paired with an assessment at the same level, from a recall item to a discharge plan containing deliberate errors. A final section warns that objectives drift toward recall because recall is easiest to test, and psychomotor and affective objectives are added for the safety check and the courage to hold a dose.
Where the NUR 635 Module 4 rubric puts the points
Objectives rubrics in this course usually weigh the use of measurable verbs, appropriate cognitive levels, correct classification with a taxonomy, alignment with assessment, relevance to learner needs and APA 7 writing. High-scoring papers critique existing objectives with specific reasons, explain both dimensions of the revised taxonomy and include objectives above the apply level where the content demands it. Graders reward assessments matched to each objective's level and awareness of practical pressures that push teaching toward recall. Connecting objectives to earlier learner assessment findings shows that they were written for real students rather than generic ones, and objectives in more than one domain show breadth.
NUR 635 Module 4 help: the mistakes that cost points
Objectives papers lose points when they use verbs such as understand or know, when every objective sits at the remember level, when objectives are classified without explaining the taxonomy or when assessments do not match the objectives' levels. Another frequent gap is writing objectives unrelated to the learners' identified needs. Critique the original objectives, explain the two dimensions, write specific performance statements with measurable verbs, classify each, include higher-level objectives where appropriate and pair each with a matched assessment. If your lesson covers psychomotor or affective outcomes, send the prompt and topic for objectives written in those domains with assessments to match.
Get NUR 635 Module 4 written to your instructions
Send your current objectives or your topic, the learner level and the rubric. You will receive objectives rewritten with measurable verbs, classified on both dimensions of the revised taxonomy and paired with assessments at the same level, within 24 to 48 hours and free the first time. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Southern New Hampshire University document.
More NUR 635 papers and related MSN samples
- NUR 635 Module 1 Discussion: The Learning Styles Myth
- NUR 635 Module 2 Theory Comparison: Four Learning Theories, One Skill
- NUR 635 Module 3 Milestone One: Learner Assessment for Anticoagulant Safety
- NUR 502 Module 2 Learner Needs Assessment
- NUR 631 Module 7 Negotiation Memo: Negotiating First-Year Funding With the CFO
- NUR 607 Module 6 Pediatric Well Visit: A 13-Year-Old's Blood Pressure and BMI
- NUR 550 Module 3 Milestone One: A Documented, Repeatable Literature Search on Delirium Prevention
NUR 635 Module 4 questions, answered
Where can I find a free NUR 635 Module 4 Objectives Paper sample?
A complete paper is shown here: anticoagulant safety objectives rewritten with the revised Bloom's taxonomy, classified on both dimensions and matched to assessments.
Why is understand a poor verb for learning objectives?
It describes an internal state that cannot be observed. Measurable verbs such as identify, explain, select or judge state what a student who met the objective could do.
What are the two dimensions of the revised Bloom's taxonomy?
The knowledge dimension, which includes factual, conceptual, procedural and metacognitive knowledge, and the cognitive process dimension, which runs from remember and understand to apply, analyze, evaluate and create.
How do you match objectives to assessments?
Write assessment items or tasks that require the same cognitive process as the objective. An evaluate objective needs a task that asks students to judge, not a recall question.
Why do nursing objectives drift toward recall?
Recall items are faster to write and grade, so faculty may test memorization even when objectives aim higher. Building the test blueprint from the objectives helps prevent this.