• Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education
• /
• v.26 no.5
• /
• pp.570-579
• /
• 2007

Instructional objectives clearly show what teachers should teach in the class and how they lead the class, focusing on a certain activity for their students in the class. Clear instructional objectives are a prerequisite for teachers to accomplish effectively their curriculum. The revised Bloom's taxonomy table of educational objectives has been introduced in 50 years since the publication of his original taxonomy table in 1956. Bloom's revised taxonomy table of educational objectives has two-dimensions, the "cognitive process" dimension and the "knowledge" dimension, and it classifies class objectives more elaborately and clearly. This study was designed to classify instructional objectives stated in elementary science guidebooks for teachers into Bloom's revised taxonomy table, and see how the objectives of elementary science classes were categorized by grade level and areas. In addition, this study examined how the objectives of elementary science classes by study area were classified into the new taxonomy table. This study classified 618 elementary science instructional objectives of third- to sixth-grade science guidebooks for teachers into Bloom's revised taxonomy table. The results showed that the objectives of elementary science classes emphasized disproportionately some of the knowledge and cognitive process dimensions. In the area of subjects while the percentages of factual knowledge were very high, those of meta-cognitive knowledge were low.

• Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society
• /
• v.41 no.2
• /
• pp.107-126
• /
• 2010

Education is an intentional and planned change process for achieving the objective. Thus, an educational objects sets is very important in elementary and secondary instructional practice. Bloom created the original taxonomy of the cognitive, affective, psychomotor domain for categorizing level of abstraction of questions that commonly occur in educational settings in 1956. During the 1990, Anderson & Krathwohl, Marzano led a new educational taxonomy which met for the purpose of updating the Bloom's taxonomy, hoping to add relevance for 21st century teaching and learning. The educational taxonomy with information literacy process is relationship. The purpose of this study is restructure of information literacy process based on educational object taxonomy.

• The Journal of the Convergence on Culture Technology
• /
• v.8 no.5
• /
• pp.9-16
• /
• 2022

This study attempted to analyze the achievement criteria of the 2015 special curriculum middle school physical education curriculum based on Bloom's new education goal taxonomy. To this end, 184 sentences based on the common curriculum and basic curriculum achievement standards of the relevant curriculum were analyzed into a total of 24 combinations of 4 dimensions of Bloom's new education goal taxonomy and 6 dimensions of cognitive courses. The results of the study are as follows. First, in the case of the special curriculum physical education and middle school achievement standards, unlike the analysis of the basic curriculum of elementary schools shown in previous studies, the 'procedural knowledge-applying' combination was the most common, and it was confirmed that there was a hierarchy by school level. In addition, the dimensions of knowledge and cognitive processes were relatively diverse, confirming the key points of physical education and middle school classes for disabled students. Second, in the case of the common curriculum among the lower curriculum, knowledge and cognitive process dimensions were relatively diverse except for cognitive process dimensions such as 'remember', and higher knowledge and cognitive process dimensions such as 'metacognitive knowledge' and 'creative'. Third, in the case of the basic curriculum among the lower curriculum, the 'procedural knowledge-applying' combination was excessively concentrated at 60.7%, which was analyzed to require improvementsary.

• Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education
• /
• v.43 no.3
• /
• pp.353-364
• /
• 2024

The purpose of this study is to analyze the achievement standards for grades 3-4 of the 2022 revised science curriculum and identify the goals of science education for grades 3-4 of the 2022 revised curriculum, as well as provide implications for the development of the science textbooks for grades 3-4 and the direction of teaching for teachers in the field. For this purpose, 57 achievement standards of the Science Department 2022 revised curriculum for grades 3-4 were analyzed as to their knowledge dimensions and cognitive processes according to Bloom's Taxonomy of the New Educational Objectives. In cases where an achievement standard is a double sentence or combines two or more knowledge dimensions or cognitive process dimensions, we separated the sentences after having consulted with a group of experts and divided the achievement standards into 57 sentences. We then analyzed the frequency of the categorization of concepts and descriptors by comparing them with the previously studied elementary science standards from the 2015 revised curriculum. The main findings of the study are as follows. First, in the knowledge dimension, the "factual knowledge" accounted for 50 items (86%), compared to "conceptual knowledge" (10%), and "procedural knowledge" (4%), and "metacognitive knowledge" was not analyzed at all. Second, in terms of the cognitive processes, "Understanding" was the highest at 60% with 34 items. It was followed by "applying" with 11%, "creating" with 19%, "evaluating" with 15%, and "analyzing" and "remembering" with 6%. Third, when analyzing the descriptors, "I can explain" was the highest with 9%, followed by "comparison" with 6%, and "practice" and "classification" with 5%. Fourth, compared to the 2015 revised curriculum, "conceptual knowledge" was reduced and "factual knowledge" was overwhelmingly increased. Fifth, in the cognitive process dimension, "understanding,' has increased significantly, while the other cognitive process dimensions have decreased. Conclusions and implications based on these findings are as follows: the focus of the Science Department for grades 3-4 in the 2022 revised curriculum is heavily weighted toward the "factual knowledge," with "understanding" dominating the cognitive process dimensions. As a result, many concepts and applications have been reduced. Based on the results of the comparison of the descriptors with the results of the 2015 revised curriculum, the implications for the development of the science textbooks for grades 3-4 of the 2022 revised curriculum were discussed, and so were the implications of the curriculum for the field.

• Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education
• /
• v.43 no.2
• /
• pp.284-300
• /
• 2024

This study elucidates the achievement standards statements of the 2022 revised elementary school science curriculum to identify specific achievement standards for the upcoming curriculum. Therefore, the researcher analyzed the statements of the overall elementary school achievement standards based on Bloom's taxonomy of new educational objectives. The results are as follows. First, the achievement standards statements are biased toward certain knowledge and cognitive process dimensions; this aspect is not consistent with the goals of the 2022 revised curriculum and the teaching and learning directions of the science department. Thus, achievement standards that enable various types of activities and inquiry learning should be developed. Second, a need emerges for the hierarchization of knowledge and cognitive levels by grade level. The proportions of low levels of knowledge and cognitive process dimensions increased in the upper grades, such that a systematic hierarchy should be considered. Third, the need to diversify the use of the descriptors of achievement standards is also identified. Although the tendency to rely on specific descriptors decreased during the previous curriculum, approx imately half of the descriptors were only used once or twice. Therefore, balancing the use of various descriptors is necessary. To ensure that the results are reflected in the achievement standards for elementary school science textbooks under the revised science curriculum for elementary schools in 2022, a discussion is required on the design of achievement standards statements. As a follow-up study, the researcher proposes a comparative analysis of the achievement standards of science curricula for middle and high schools to explore the wording of achievement standards appropriate for elementary school science education considering its nature, goals, and contents and to analyze the hierarchy and continuity of the entire science curriculum.