KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Dil Eğitimi ve Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2021 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 2

The Evaluation of the Secondary-School English Curricula According to Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy

Dilek BÜYÜKAHISKA
Melek Nisa DALKILIÇ
Sayfa
389–404
Yayın Tarihi
2022-10-12
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Consequently, the research concludes that the objectives in the curriculum are not sufficient enough in developing higher-order thinking skills of secondary-school students.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:This study aims to evaluate the extent of the objectives in the Secondary-School English curriculum concerning cognitive levels in Bloom’s taxonomy.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The number of the curriculum objectives was 245 from 5th to 8th graders.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Consequently, the research concludes that the objectives in the curriculum are not sufficient enough in developing higher-order thinking skills of secondary-school students.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:21st century skills · Bloom's Revised Taxonomy · Critical Thinking

Abstract

This study aims to evaluate the extent of the objectives in the Secondary-School English curriculum concerning cognitive levels in Bloom’s taxonomy. This aim underlies the first question of the study. The second and third questions inquire about the comparison among the grades and the homogeneity. Along with the adoption of the qualitative method, document and content analysis were implemented to categorize the objectives. The number of the curriculum objectives was 245 from 5th to 8th graders. Three notable outcomes were reached. First, each grade substantially suggests lower-order thinking skills. Besides, understanding is the surpassing level regardless of the grades. Lastly, receptive skills were dominantly consulted in lower-order thinking levels, while higher-order thinking skills were mainly applied in productive skills. Consequently, the research concludes that the objectives in the curriculum are not sufficient enough in developing higher-order thinking skills of secondary-school students.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

BÜYÜKAHISKA, D., DALKILIÇ, M. N. (2022). The Evaluation of the Secondary-School English Curricula According to Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy. Dil Eğitimi ve Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 2, 389–404. https://ajindex.com/articles/488663

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (13)

  1. Amer, A. (2006). Reflections on Bloom’s revised taxonomy. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 4(1), 213-230.
  2. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of educational objectives: Complete edition, New York: Longman. Anderson, L. (2002). Curricular realignment: A re-examination. Theory Into Practice, 41 (4), 255-260.
  3. Assaly, I.R. & Smadi, O.M. (2015). Using Bloom’s taxonomy to evaluate the cognitive levels of master class textbook’s questions. English Language Teaching, 8(5), 100-110.
  4. Bümen, N.T. (2006). Program geliştirmede bir dönüm noktası: Yenilenmiş Bloom taksonomisi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 31(142), 3-14.
  5. Büyükalan Filiz, S. & Baysal, S. B. (2019). Analysis of social studies curriculum objectives according to revised Bloom taxonomy. Inonu University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 20(1), 234-253.
  6. Carroll, R.T. (2000). Becoming a critical thinker: A guide for the new millennium. USA: Pearson Custom Publishing. Demirci, C. & Gökdeniz, M. (2020). TEOG sınavı İngilizce öğretim programına uygunluğu ve yenilenmiş Bloom taxonomisine göre sınıflandırılması. Education Sciences (NWSAES), 15(1), 1-10.
  7. Doğan, Y. & Burak, D. (2018). 4. sınıf fen bilimleri dersi kazanımlarının revise edilmiş Bloom taksonomisine göre incelenmesi. Akdeniz Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 23, 34-56.
  8. Ennis, R. H. (1993). Critical thinking assessment. Theory into Practice, 32(3), 179-186. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00405849309543594
  9. Evcim, H. & Özenici, S. (2019). Analyzing 2016 PPSE English language TPFE according To Bloom’s revised taxonomy. Disiplinlerarası Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(1), 1-18.
  10. Filiz, S.B. (2019). Ortaokul Türkçe dersi öğretim programı kazanımlarının revize edilmiş Bloom taksonomisine göre analizi. İlköğretim Online, 18(4), 1550-1573.
  11. Gandimathi, A., & Zarei, N. (2018). The impact of critical thinking on learning English language. Asian Journal of Social Science Research, 1(2), 25-35.
  12. Gökler, Z.S., Aypay, A., Arı, A. (2012). İlköğretim İngilizce dersi hedefleri kazanımları SBS soruları ve yazılı sınav sorularının yeni Bloom taksonomisine göre değerlendirilmesi. Eğitimde Politika Analizi Dergisi, 1(2), 114-133. Halpern DF 2003. Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking (4th ed). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Publishers.
  13. Kablan, Z., Baran, T. & Hazer, Ö. (2013). İlköğretim matematik 6-8 öğretim programında hedeflenen davranışlar