Aims, Objectives & ILOs

These verbs are not observable or measurable. You cannot watch someone "know" something. How would you assess it? What would evidence of "understanding" actually look like? Replace with verbs from the Bloom table — "explain", "demonstrate", "compare", "apply".

Many trainers start with "I'll talk about X, Y, and Z" and then try to write ILOs afterwards. This is back to front. The ILOs must come first. Content is decided in reference to the ILOs — not the other way around. Writing content first almost always produces sessions that cover too much, too shallowly.

A 30-minute tutorial with 10 ILOs will achieve none of them properly. A common mistake in GP training is setting heroically ambitious ILO lists. Two or three specific, well-designed ILOs will produce far better learning than ten vague ones. Depth beats breadth.

It is easy to write ILOs that test knowledge — but GP training needs all three domains. If all your ILOs are Level 1 or 2 cognitive (remember, understand), you are not pushing trainees to apply, analyse, or create. And if you are ignoring the affective domain entirely, you are missing attitudes, values, and professional behaviours — which are at the heart of what RCGP assesses.

If your ILO is "Demonstrate a consultation skill" but your evaluation is "Write a reflective summary", you are not evaluating the ILO. Your evaluation must directly test whether the ILO was achieved. This is the essence of Biggs' constructive alignment — and it is the most commonly violated principle in GP training sessions.

ILOs are not just for the teacher. Sharing them with the trainee before the session radically improves their ability to engage with the learning and arrive prepared. The trainee knows what they are supposed to achieve. The session becomes a shared endeavour rather than a one-way presentation.

This is perhaps the most common error in GP training documentation. "Continue to build on this skill" or "Continue to develop knowledge of Y" sounds like a reasonable action point. It isn't. It has no specific behaviour, no measurable outcome, and no way of knowing when it has been achieved.

Replace it with a specific ILO-style statement: "By next ESR, demonstrate improved confidence in managing acute presentations of heart failure by completing two CbDs on cardiac cases and attending a cardiology outpatient session." Now there is something to evaluate.

A tutorial where the trainer talks for 90 minutes and the trainee nods is not a tutorial — it is a lecture for an audience of one. Research in medical education consistently shows that passive learning produces poor retention and minimal skill development.

The trainee should be actively constructing their own understanding — discussing, questioning, role-playing, problem-solving. The trainer's job is to create the conditions for that, not to fill the time with information.

Many trainees and trainers draft ILOs retrospectively — after the session — to fit whatever actually happened. This defeats the purpose entirely. ILOs are planning tools, not administrative labels.

The discipline of writing ILOs before the tutorial is what forces clarity of purpose. If you cannot write clear ILOs before the session, you have not yet decided what the session is actually for. That is the problem to solve first.

The RCGP curriculum has 13 Professional Capabilities. If every tutorial is focused on clinical knowledge (Data Gathering, Clinical Management) and none ever address Communication and Consulting, Team Working, or Holistic Practice, the trainee arrives at ARCP with a lopsided portfolio.

Every few tutorials, ask: "Which Professional Capability does this session address?" If the answer is always the same two or three, it is time to broaden the ILOs. The FourteenFish curriculum mapping tool is designed exactly for this purpose.

There is strong evidence in educational psychology that learners disengage and retain very little when they are given too much information at once — this is called cognitive overload. A tutorial with ten ILOs covering a vast topic guarantees that the trainee retains fragments of everything and masters nothing.

Two or three carefully chosen ILOs, delivered well with active learning, will produce more measurable progress than ten ILOs rushed through. Choose the most important things. Leave the rest for another day.

Arriving at a tutorial without knowing what it will cover puts the trainee in a passive, reactive position from the start. They cannot prepare. They cannot reflect on their existing knowledge. They cannot arrive with questions.

Sharing ILOs in advance — even informally — is one of the single most impactful changes a trainer can make. It signals that the trainee's preparation matters, sets a purposeful tone, and consistently produces better learning outcomes.

Two to four ILOs is ideal for a 30–45 minute session. The goal is depth, not coverage. It is better for a trainee to genuinely master two things than to have been exposed to ten. If you find yourself writing more than four, ask which ones you could cut or defer to another session.

In most modern educational contexts, yes. "ILO" (Intended Learning Outcome) is the preferred contemporary term. "Objective" is older and still widely used, but the two terms are generally interchangeable. Some frameworks distinguish between them — but for GP training purposes, treat them as the same thing and use ILO.

This is normal and healthy. ILOs are a plan, not a prison. If something more urgent or relevant emerges during the session, it is entirely reasonable to adapt. The important thing is to be deliberate about the change — agree with the trainee to revise the ILOs rather than simply drifting off-plan without noticing. You can document what actually happened on FourteenFish.

Very directly. Every learning log entry on FourteenFish should ideally describe what was learned in ILO-like language — specific, action-oriented, and linked to a professional capability. A learning log that says "we discussed hypertension" is weaker than one that says "I can now apply the NICE hypertension guideline to adjust medication in 3 specific patient scenarios." The ILO framework makes ePortfolio entries clearer, richer, and more convincing at ARCP.

An Aim is a single, broad statement of the overall purpose: "To explore the management of breathlessness in primary care." It tells you the destination. ILOs are the specific things the learner will be able to do: "Compare the clinical features of cardiac and respiratory causes of breathlessness", "Apply the MRC dyspnoea scale to guide management decisions." You need one Aim and 2–4 ILOs per session.

Strictly, yes — but they don't need to be elaborate. Even a quick case supervision session benefits from a moment of intentionality: "What do I want my trainee to learn from discussing this case?" That question — and its answer — is your ILO. You don't need a formal document; a brief spoken agreement works just as well for informal sessions.