Changing Levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy in Learning Objectives and Exam Questions in First-Semester Introductory Chemistry before and during Adoption of Guided Inquiry

IF 2.5 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Eileen M. Kowalski, Carolann Koleci, Kenneth J. McDonald
{"title":"Changing Levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy in Learning Objectives and Exam Questions in First-Semester Introductory Chemistry before and during Adoption of Guided Inquiry","authors":"Eileen M. Kowalski, Carolann Koleci, Kenneth J. McDonald","doi":"10.3390/educsci14090943","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"When General Chemistry at West Point switched from interactive lectures to guided inquiry, it provided an opportunity to examine what was expected of students in classrooms and on assessments. Learning objectives and questions on mid-term exams for four semesters of General Chemistry I (two traditional semesters and two guided inquiry semesters) were analyzed by the Cognitive Process and Knowledge dimensions of Bloom’s revised taxonomy. The results of this comparison showed the learning objectives for the guided inquiry semesters had a higher proportion of Conceptual and Understand with a corresponding decrease of Factual, Procedural, Remember and Apply learning objectives. On mid-term exams, the proportion of Remember, Understand, Analyze/Evaluate, Factual, and Conceptual questions increased. We found that guided inquiry learning objectives and mid-term exam questions are more conceptual than traditional courses and may help explain how active learning improves equity in introductory chemistry.","PeriodicalId":11472,"journal":{"name":"Education Sciences","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Education Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14090943","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

When General Chemistry at West Point switched from interactive lectures to guided inquiry, it provided an opportunity to examine what was expected of students in classrooms and on assessments. Learning objectives and questions on mid-term exams for four semesters of General Chemistry I (two traditional semesters and two guided inquiry semesters) were analyzed by the Cognitive Process and Knowledge dimensions of Bloom’s revised taxonomy. The results of this comparison showed the learning objectives for the guided inquiry semesters had a higher proportion of Conceptual and Understand with a corresponding decrease of Factual, Procedural, Remember and Apply learning objectives. On mid-term exams, the proportion of Remember, Understand, Analyze/Evaluate, Factual, and Conceptual questions increased. We found that guided inquiry learning objectives and mid-term exam questions are more conceptual than traditional courses and may help explain how active learning improves equity in introductory chemistry.
在采用引导式探究之前和期间,布卢姆分类法在化学入门第一学期学习目标和试题中的等级变化
当西点军校的普通化学课从互动式讲授转变为引导式探究时,为研究学生在课堂和评估中的期望提供了一个机会。我们按照布卢姆修订版分类法的认知过程和知识维度,对普通化学 I 四个学期(两个传统学期和两个引导式探究学期)的学习目标和期中考试试题进行了分析。比较结果显示,引导探究学期的学习目标中,概念性和理解性学习目标所占比例较高,而事实性、程序性、记忆性和应用性学习目标则相应减少。在期中考试中,记忆题、理解题、分析/评价题、事实题和概念题的比例有所增加。我们发现,与传统课程相比,引导式探究学习目标和期中考试题更具概念性,这可能有助于解释主动学习如何提高化学入门课程的公平性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Education Sciences
Education Sciences Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
16.70%
发文量
770
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信