Theoretical curriculum models have formed the backbone in the methodology of today’s educational practice. Theoretical models interpret integrated theories which analyse the understanding of teaching, training and learning behaviours and instructional objectives. Behaviour is defined as performance, actions and activities. Instructional objective is define as the teaching process (Thesaurus: English UK, Encarta Dictionary:UK).
These theories provide principles in which planning and design corroborate teaching, training and learning practice as being measurable. These theories agree a path where the teacher selects appropriate teaching methods and content required in designing satisfactory lesson plans within the scheme of work. Thus predicting the desired learning outcomes to be attained and assessed in achieving a set goal in meeting the curriculum’s set purpose.
In studying theories such as those of the American psychologist, the purposive and neo-behaviourist Burrhus F. Skinner focused his experiments into operant conditioning by means of reinforcement programmes. Psychologist and Behaviourist Fred S. Keller, and others, who in 1964 developed the Personalised System, i.e. the Keller Plan which supports and encourages the learning process in reaching desired learning objectives to be attained at the learner’s own pace, or self pacing. Both of these theories maintain that learning objectives need to be assiduously developed by the teacher enabling effective learning process. Skinner’s approach is seen as - behaviour controlled working method compared to Keller’s approach of self-pacing, whilst promoting the autonomy of personal interaction. Upon reflection Skinner’s self-management seems to attach similar attributes to Keller’s self-pacing each form the opinion of self-control. However there is one theory which dominates the educational system of today Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (1956).
Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Classical Goals was developed by the American psychologist Benjamin S. Bloom and colleagues. “Bloom believed it (Taxonomy) could be serve as a common language about learning goals to facilitate communication across persons, subject matter, and grade levels” (Krathwohl, D. R., 2002, p.1) Bloom’s Taxonomy has been used and practised world wide for many decades as the basis in the planning and designing of lesson plans, preparing teaching, training, and learning resources, assessment strategies and resources and instructional objectives. “Bloom’s ‘Taxonomy of Educational Objectives’ attempts to classify all learning…“ (G. Petty, 2004, p394). Taxonomy refers to a formal classification (taxis=arrangement, nomia=distribution) based on relationships (L. B. Curzon, 1985 p.99). Bloom’s Taxonomy is divided into three domains or categories where ability is measured ensuring that the desired learning process has taken place.
The Cognitive Domain (Figure 1) refers to intellectual ability i.e. knowledge– thinking; the Affective Domain (Figure 2) refers to attitude – feeling; the Psychomotor Domain (Figure 3) refers to physical and manual skills i.e. skills –do. These domains are categorised in levels of subcategories from one to five and six; from the surface (concrete) to deep (abstract) learning. Each ability level must be mastered before progressing towards the next level of increased difficulty.
Figure 1. Bloom’s Taxonomy Cognitive Domain is founded on six successive levels which start from surface learning the Knowledge facts to deep learning the intellectual process of Evaluation (Atherton, J.S (2005)
Figure 2. Bloom’s Taxonomy Affective Domain is founded on the “attitudes of the self” in concept from five successive levels which start from surface learning the Receiving to deep learning the Value Concept (Atherton, J.S (2005).
Figure 3. Bloom’s Taxonomy Psycho-Motor...