Bloom’s taxonomy provides a useful set of guidelines for defining educaonalobjecves in a curriculum centred around outcome based educaon paradigm.Curriculum designers make use of a hierarchy of educaonal objecves fromsimple(remembering) to Complex(creang) as defined in Bloom's Taxonomy.Accreditaon authories like NAAC in India, recognise universies that align theircurriculum around Bloom’s taxonomy. In a standard curriculum design process of aneducaonal instute, the educaonal objecves of any course (or subject) are broadlycategorised into Knowledge, Values and Skill. Bloom and his colleagues (David R.Krathwohl, 1965), in their original publicaon provided taxonomy for knowledgethrough cognive domain, taxonomy for values through affecve domain andtaxonomy for skills through psychomotor domain (not wrien by bloom). However, it iswidely observed that curriculum designers only make use of Bloom's taxonomy ofcognive domain only. Even for educaonal objecves dealing with values and skill,only keywords defined in Bloom’s cognive domain are used. This is especiallyproblemac for programs in design discipline like Product design and visualcommunicaon. In India, new Design instutes, opening under NAAC accrediteduniversies have to rely upon Bloom’s taxonomy of cognive domain for creang astandardised curriculum. Remedy for the problem proposed is to use separatetaxonomy for affecve domain and taxonomy for psychomotor domain, along withtaxonomy of cognive domain for defining objecves in design discipline like productdesign and visual communicaon. The research concludes by suggesng that such anapproach for using taxonomy of affecve and psychomotor domain may be useful indefining educaonal objecves for other similar programs whose program outcomesrequire inclusion of values and skills along with knowledge.
© 2001-2026 Fundación Dialnet · Todos los derechos reservados