Curriculum evaluation by means of behavioral objectives

Walbesser, Henry H.

doi:10.1002/tea.3660010409

Cited by 13 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The level of these gains is determined by using taxonomies. Taxonomies in education are used for the classification of cognitive levels and they primarily focus on evaluation and achievements (Walbesser, 1963). The original taxonomy developed by Bloom et al has a structure consisting of 6 steps, from simple to complex, from concrete to abstract, including knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation, and acquiring a behavior requires acquiring the previous behavior (Forehand, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Critical Approach to the Inclusion of the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy in Active Skills for Reading: Book 1

Ulum

2021

RumeliDE Dil Ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bloom's Taxonomy was produced in 1956 by the educational psychologist Benjamin Bloom with the aim of fostering higher order thinking skills in education. In time, the original taxonomy was revisited by applying some changes. This up to date taxonomy mirrors a more active style of cognition and is possibly more precise. The revised one developed the practicality of the taxonomy by employing action words. There are six steps of cognitive domain in the revised version, the levels of which are conceptually different. These are remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating in the revised version and they are beneficial in forming learning outcomes since specific verbs are particularly suitable for each level. Accordingly, this paper focuses on exploring how the revised Bloom's taxonomy is contained in the reading questions of an EFL reading course book.Therefore, two research questions were promoted to respond to the cognitive skills in the revised taxonomy. The first research question aims at evaluating the lower level while the second one hints on the higher cognition level. The analyzed EFL reading course book was inquired through descriptive content analysis method. The results of the study displayed that the assessed reading course book lacks the higher level cognitive skills underlined in the revised Bloom's taxonomy. Thus, related assumptions have been produced to suggest how the reading course books which are being produced or will be produced should refer to the revised Bloom's taxonomy while assessing reading comprehension.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Critical Approach to the Inclusion of the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy in Active Skills for Reading: Book 1

Ulum

2021

RumeliDE Dil Ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

On the “behaviorality” of behavioral objectives

Deno

Jenkins

1969

Psychol. Schs.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present analysis was begun as an attempt to develop a formal statement of the criteria used to distinguish between behaviorally and non-behaviorally stated objectives. However, as a result of the analysis the authors have concluded that to categorize descriptive terms as behavioral or non-behavioral is misleading. This paper, then, focuses instead on an alternative model for describing the language of instructional objectives which the authors believe to be more useful than the currently used behavioral model. In addition, data is presented which demonstrates the effectiveness of the alternative model in explaining and predicting the ways in which educators use their language to specify instructional outcomes. We turn first to the widely used behavioral approach to instructional objectives.Curriculum developers with a behavioristic bent have been adamant that instructional objectives should contain a description of the outcomes of instruction in terms of specific observable human behavior (Taber, Glaser, & Schaefer, 1965; Gagne, 1965). Such a demand stems largely from the current emphasis on task analysis in the development of instructional systems which carries with it the requirement that curriculum specialists describe the subject matter competencies to be acquired by the learner (see, for example, Glaser, 1967) in performance terms. The behavioristically oriented task analyst suggests that unless instructional outcomes are described in behavioral terms it is possible neither to specify when that outcome has been achieved (to measure) nor to systematically design the learning conditions most appropriate for achieving that outcome. Clearly, these recommendations and requirements rest on the assumption that human activities are themselves best described as either "behavioral" or %on-behavioral," and, furthermore, that it is possible and appropriate to distinguish between these two types of description.Many psychologists and curriculum developers have taken the position that all of what people can be observed to do is "behavior"; and, thus, that all the terms of the language used to label what people do are "behavioral." It is not clear, however, that the terms or "action words" (Gagne, 1965) most often recommended and used refer directly to observable human behavior. For example, the terms ('write," "say," '(underline," "identify," "differentiate," "classify," and ccsolve" have all been either recommended for, or used in, writing behavioral objectives. Yet, the words "identify" and "solve" certainly do not refer to directly observable behavior in the same sense as terms such as "underline," and "say." Is it that "identify" and "solve" do not actually refer to observable behavior while "underline" and "say" have behavioral referents? Although such a position may be adopted, it will lead to difficulty. The nature of language use is such that most words categorize, and, therefore, will always be something more and something less than the event or events to which they refer. The use of a word to "label" a part...

show abstract

The understanding of selected principles of college chemistry by intermediate grade pupils

Shrader

1968

Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Curriculum evaluation by means of behavioral objectives

Abstract: The author is in charge of the evaluation study of the new curriculum materials for elementary school science being developed by the Commission on Science Education of AAAS. He reports here the design and rationale for that study.

Cited by 13 publications

References 2 publications

A Critical Approach to the Inclusion of the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy in Active Skills for Reading: Book 1

A Critical Approach to the Inclusion of the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy in Active Skills for Reading: Book 1

On the “behaviorality” of behavioral objectives

The understanding of selected principles of college chemistry by intermediate grade pupils

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About