Yıl 2019, Cilt 7 , Sayı 14, Sayfalar 464 - 479 2019-10-29

Comparison of the Learning Outcomes in 12th Grade Biology Curriculum According to The Revised Bloom Taxonomy: 2013, 2017 and 2018 Curriculums
Comparison of the Learning Outcomes in 12th Grade Biology Curriculum According to The Revised Bloom Taxonomy: 2013, 2017 and 2018 Curriculums

Hülya ASLAN EFE [1] , Rıfat EFE [2]


The outcomes were coded into dimensions based on descriptive analysis in the Revised Bloom Taxonomy. The study revealed that the outcomes framed for the 12th grade of 2013 biology curriculum were more diverse in comparison to the same grade of the 2017 and 2018 biology curriculums in terms of knowledge dimension.  There were number of outcomes were higher in the analysis and evaluation of cognitive dimensions in the 2013 biology curriculum compared to the 2017 and 2018 biology curriculum. While the 2018 biology curriculum for the 12th grade have four outcomes for the creating level of the cognitive dimension, 2013 biology curriculum for the same grade did not include any outcome for the creating level of the cognitive dimension.In this study, the learning outcomes of 2013, 2017 and 2018 secondary biology programs were examined according to the revised Bloom Taxonomy and the distribution of the outcomes to the corresponding level was expressed in figures and graphics. A qualitative approach was employed through document analysis.

The outcomes were coded into dimensions based on descriptive analysis in the Revised Bloom Taxonomy. The study revealed that the outcomes framed for the 12th grade of 2013 biology curriculum were more diverse in comparison to the same grade of the 2017 and 2018 biology curriculums in terms of knowledge dimension.  There were number of outcomes were higher in the analysis and evaluation of cognitive dimensions in the 2013 biology curriculum compared to the 2017 and 2018 biology curriculum. While the 2018 biology curriculum for the 12th grade have four outcomes for the creating level of the cognitive dimension, 2013 biology curriculum for the same grade did not include any outcome for the creating level of the cognitive dimension.In this study, the learning outcomes of 2013, 2017 and 2018 secondary biology programs were examined according to the revised Bloom Taxonomy and the distribution of the outcomes to the corresponding level was expressed in figures and graphics. A qualitative approach was employed through document analysis. 

  • Amer, A. (2006). Reflections on Bloom’s revised taxonomy. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 4 (1), 213-230.
  • Anderson,L., Krathwohl, R., Airisian, P., Cruikshank, K. Mayer, R., Pintrich, P.,Raths, J.& Wittrock,M. (Ed.) (2001). Taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy, NY:Longman, Newyork, USA.
  • Ayas, A. (2006). Fen bilgisi öğretiminde laboratuvar kullanımı [The use of laboratory in science teaching] Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları retrieved from http://kisi.deu.edu.tr/bulent.cavas/ders/rapor2.pdf on 03.04.2018.
  • Ayvacı, H. Ş., & Şahin, Ç. (2009). Fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin ders sürecinde ve yazılı sınavlarda sordukları soruların bilişsel seviyelerinin karşılaştırılması. [Comparison of Cognitive Levels of Science Teachers' Questions During the Course and Written Examinations]. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(2), 441-455.
  • Bloom, B. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. New York: David McKay Co.
  • Corlis, S.B. (2005). The effects of reflective prompts and collaborative learning in hypermedia problem-based learning environments on problem solving and metacognitive skills (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, The University of Texas, Austin).
  • Eke, C. (2015). Dalgalar ünitesindeki kazanımların yenilenmiş bloom taksonomisine göre incelenmesi [Determination of objectives of waves topics according to the revised bloom’s taxonomy], Eğitim ve Öğretim Çalışmaları Dergisi, 4(2), 346-353.
  • Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34 (10), 906-911
  • Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences: The theory in practice. New York: Basic Books.
  • Hirst, P. (1973). Liberal education and the nature of knowledge. In R.S. Pete (Ed..), The philosophy of education (pp. 87-111). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of bloom’s taxonomy: An overview, Theory into Practice, 41(4), 212-264.
  • Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2000). Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı Ortaöğretim Biyoloji Dersi Programı [Ministry of National Education Board of Education and Training Secondary biology curriculum] Ankara.
  • Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2013). Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı Ortaöğretim Biyoloji Dersi Programı [Ministry of National Education Board of Education and Training Secondary biology curriculum], Ankara
  • Ministry of National Education [MoNE] (2017). Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı Ortaöğretim Biyoloji Dersi Programı [Ministry of National Education Board of Education and Training Secondary biology curriculum], Ankara
  • Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2018). Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı Ortaöğretim Biyoloji Dersi Programı [Ministry of National Education Board of Education and Training Secondary biology curriculum], Ankara
  • Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. (2nd Edition). Calif: SAGE Publications.
  • Pintrich, P. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing, Theory into Practice, 41, 4, 119-225.
  • Sadiç, A & Çam, A. (2015). 8.sınıf öğrencilerinin epistemolojik inançlari ile pisa başarıları ve fen ve teknoloji okuryazarlığı [Eight grade students’ epistemological beliefs with pisa success and their scientific literacy]. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 3 (5), 18-49.
  • Tanık, N. & Saraçoğlu, S. (2011). Fen ve teknoloji dersi yazılı sorularının yenilenmiş bloom taksonomisi’ne göre incelenmesi [An investigation of the social sciences courses exam questions according to revised bloom’s taxonomy]. TÜBAV Bilim Dergisi, 4(4), 235-246.
  • Thamraksa, C. (2005). Metacognition: a key to success for EFL learners. Bangkok University Academic Review, 4 (1), 95-99.
  • Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2005). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in social sciences]. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
Birincil Dil en
Konular Sosyal
Yayımlanma Tarihi December
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Orcid: 0000-0002-0042-4546
Yazar: Hülya ASLAN EFE (Sorumlu Yazar)
Kurum: Dicle University
Ülke: Turkey


Orcid: 0000-0002-8196-309X
Yazar: Rıfat EFE
Kurum: Dicle University
Ülke: Turkey


Tarihler

Başvuru Tarihi : 13 Temmuz 2019
Kabul Tarihi : 24 Ekim 2019
Yayımlanma Tarihi : 29 Ekim 2019

APA ASLAN EFE, H , EFE, R . (2019). Comparison of the Learning Outcomes in 12th Grade Biology Curriculum According to The Revised Bloom Taxonomy: 2013, 2017 and 2018 Curriculums. Journal of Computer and Education Research , 7 (14) , 464-479 . DOI: 10.18009/jcer.591450