Final answer:
General objectives, as suggested by Gronlund, lead to specific, measurable outcomes without resulting in a narrow curriculum, lack of engagement, or abstract learning goals. The correct option is d) Abstract and theoretical learning goals.
Step-by-step explanation:
General objectives, as suggested by Gronlund, typically lead to a focus on specific, measurable outcomes. This means that the objectives are clear and concise, allowing students and instructors to have a clear understanding of what needs to be achieved. For example, in a history class, an objective could be for students to analyze primary sources and multiple accounts of an event or period.
On the other hand, general objectives do not necessarily lead to a narrow and rigid curriculum. While the objectives provide a framework for learning, instructors still have flexibility in selecting content and teaching methods. This allows for a more engaging and dynamic learning experience for students.
Moreover, general objectives do not necessarily result in a lack of student engagement. In fact, when students have clear objectives and understand what they need to achieve, it can increase their motivation and engagement with the material. When students are actively engaged in their learning, they are more likely to retain information and apply it in different contexts.
Lastly, general objectives are not synonymous with abstract and theoretical learning goals. While some objectives may be more abstract, such as developing critical thinking skills, they can still be achieved through concrete activities and assessments. For example, in a physics class, an objective could be for students to design and conduct experiments to test scientific concepts. The correct option is d) Abstract and theoretical learning goals.