JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Educational Objectives in Computing Education: A Comparative Analysis
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Educational Objectives in Computing Education: A Comparative Analysis
An, Sangjin; Lee, Youngjun;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
This study examined three elementary school computing curriculum - the CSTA K-12 computer science standards, the computing programme of the national curriculum in England, and the 2015 national curriculum in Korea - focusing on the educational objectives with the perspective of the revision of Bloom`s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. The CSTA K-12 computer science standards mainly addressed applying procedural knowledge and using digital technology is the main theme. The computing programme in England concentrated on understanding factual and conceptual knowledge of computer science, such as algorithms. The 2015 national curriculum also addressed applying procedural knowledge, but the main focus is making softwares and robots. The findings of this comparative analysis suggest that it is needed to set up concrete educational objectives for lower grade and make them related to the secondary education to make more coherent elementary-level learning objectives. And elementary-level computing learning objectives are needed to be organized with the perspective of knowledge and cognitive process level.
 Keywords
Computing Education;Informatics Curriculum;Bloom`s Taxonomy;Educational Objectives;
 Language
Korean
 Cited by
 References
1.
Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, "2015 National Curriculum," Notice No. 2015-74, Sep. 2015.

2.
Bloom, Benjamin Samuel. "Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of education goals by a committee of college and university examiners," David McKay, 1956.

3.
H. Kang, C. Chong, Y. Choi, "An Alternative Exploration of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: On the Basis of the Teachers' Interview", Secondary Education Research, Vol. 53, No. 1, pp. 51-84, 2005.

4.
Anderson, Lorin W., David R. Krathwohl (Eds.). "A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives", Addison Wesley Longman, 2001.

5.
D. R. Krathwohl, "A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview", Theory into practice, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 212-218. 2002. crossref(new window)

6.
Y. Jin, N. Huh, B. Jung, and Y. Kim., "Analysis and Standard Development of Instructional Objectives for Informatics Subject in Elementary School", The Journal of Korean association of computer education, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 47-59. 2009.

7.
H. Choi, "Study of Analysis about Learning Objectives of Informatics Textbooks in Middle School using Anderson's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives", The Journal of Korean association of computer education, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 51-63. 2014.

8.
H. Lee, Y. Seo, G. Park, Y. Kim, "Classification of Educational Objectives in the Middle School Biology: Based on Bloom's New Taxonomy of Educational Objectives", Biology Education, Vol. 34, No. 3, pp. 365-376. 2006.

9.
G. Lee, T. Yoo, "Analysis of Cognitive Learning Objectives in the 2007 Home Economics High School Textbooks and Achievement Standards by the Anderson's 'Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives", The Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 53-68. 2011.