EVALUATING THE NATIONAL CURRICULUM OF COMPUTER SCIENCE GRADE 6 TO 8 BY USING BLOOM’S TAXONOMY
Abstract
Critical thinking, problem solving and logical reasoning are considered as the 21st century learning skills. These higher order thinking skills (HOTS) can only be developed through curriculum and teaching and learning strategies, because it include critical, logical, reflective, metacognitive, and creative thinking.
The purpose of this study is to analyze National Curriculum 2006 (Pakistan) of Computer Education in order to observe that how much it is helpful for the development of higher order thinking skills among the students and whether it has focused on merging 21st century interdisciplinary themes with core contents of the subject.
The National Curriculum2006 (Pakistan) of Computer Education from grade VI to VIII was analyzed using the revised blooms taxonomy. Out of six levels, upper three levels Analyzing, Evaluating and Creating were considered as HOTS. Frequency and Proportions were calculated for Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) meeting HOTS criteria. P21 framework was used for checking the contents and SLOs which merging the 21st century interdisciplinary themes in curriculum.
Overall only 9% of the SLOs in curriculum met the requirement of HOTS. There was a slightly increasing trend was observed from grade 6 to 8. Grade 6 had 6%, grade 7 had 9% and grade 8 had 11% of HOTS.
However overall proportion of SLOs meeting HOTS was low but an increasing trend was observed from grade VI to grade VIII. In order to develop HOTS among the students, there is a need to redesign the curriculum, teachers should be trained accordingly and assessment standards should also be meeting with curriculum needs.
It will help in the re-designing of National Curriculum for Computer Education Grade VI-VIII. This study can be expended to analyze the National Curriculum for other subjects.
Keywords
References
- Anderson, L., Krathwohl, D., Airasian, P. et al (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, New York: Pearson, Allyn & Bacon. Assaly, I. R., & Smadi, O. M. (2015, April 23). Using Bloom's Taxonomy to Evaluate the Cognitive Levels of Master Class Textbook's Questions. Retrieved April 30, 2017, from http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/view/ Barahal, S. (2008), Thinking about Thinking: Pre- Service Teachers Strengthen their Thinking Artfully, Phi Delta Kappan 90 (4). Britishcouncilorg. (2017). Britishcouncilorg. Retrieved3 June, 2017, from http://courses.britishcouncil.org/teachertraining/mod/glossary/print.php?id=4561 Elliott Seif. (2013). Edge, A professional networking community for educators. Retrieved 26 April, 2017, from http://edge.ascd.org/blogpost/strengthening-curriculum-and-instruction-in-a-21st-century-world. Imtliuse. (2017). Imtliuse. Retrieved 21 May, 2017, from https://www.imt.liu.se/edu/Bologna/LO/slo.pdf Ibrahim, F. (1998). Curricula foundations, organizations, and Evaluation. Cairo: Egypt Library. Krathwohl, D.R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview [Electronic Version]. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 212-218. Liberty concepts. (2013). The Glossary of Education Reform. Retrieved 4 May, 2017, from http://edglossary.org/blooms-taxonomy/ Nazri Hassan et al... (2017). Development of Higher Order Thinking Skills Module in Science Primary School: Needs Analysis. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 7(2), 624-628. Nitko, A. & Brookhart, S. (2007), Educational Assessment of Students, Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall. Norris, S. & Ennis, R. (1989), Evaluating Critical Thinking, Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publications. Partnership for 21st century learning, p21. (2002). P21org. Retrieved 24 April, 2017, from http://www.p21.org/component/content/article/140-history. Partnership for 21st century learning, p21. (2002). P21org. Retrieved 24 April, 2017, from http://www.p21.org/about-us/our-history. Partnership for 21st century learning, p21. (2002). P21org. Retrieved 23 April, 2017, from http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/docs/P21_Framework_Definitions_New_Logo_2015.pdf . Partnership for 21st century learning, (2002). P21org. Retrieved 24, April 2017, from http://www.p21.org/about-us/p21-framework. Riazi, A., & Mosalanejad, N. (2010). Evaluation of learning objectives in Iranian High-School and pre-university English Textbooks using Bloom’s Taxonomy. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, vol. 13(4), 1-16. Sproutfundorg. (2016). the Sprout Fund. Retrieved 21 April, 2017, from http://www.sproutfund.org/2016/04/29/demystifying-learning-frameworks-the-p21 framework/. Textbookequityorg, M. (2017). Textbookequityorg. Retrieved 7 May, 2017, from https://textbookequity.org/Textbooks/Orey_Emergin_Perspectives_Learning.pdf Vanderbiltedu, P. (2017). Vanderbilt University. Retrieved 4 May, 2017, from https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/blooms-taxonomy/
Details
Primary Language
English
Subjects
Other Fields of Education
Journal Section
Research Article
Authors
Nasreen Sahito
Pakistan
Publication Date
January 7, 2020
Submission Date
October 29, 2019
Acceptance Date
January 1, 2020
Published in Issue
Year 2019 Volume: 5 Number: 15
Cited By
Analysis of Higher Order Thinking Skills of Intended Mathematics Learning Outcomes in India
MIER Journal of Educational Studies Trends and Practices
https://doi.org/10.52634/mier/2025/v15/i1/2856