Evaluating Student Learning in an IT Curriculum Using Bloom's -- Webb's Curriculum Taxonomy
Pages 111 - 114
Abstract
The Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) requires any accredited undergraduate Information Technology (IT) program to develop a continuous improvement practice to evaluate and update the undergraduate IT curriculum as necessary. During the process to incorporate cybersecurity topics into the IT curriculum, the faculty at a southeastern public university developed an IT Security-related and Cybersecurity Curriculum Taxonomy to identify strategies to move security-related topics taught in the higher level courses to lower and intermediate courses. To do this, the faculty combined Bloom's Taxonomy's six levels of thinking with Webb's Depth of Knowledge Model to create Bloom's -- Webb's Curriculum Taxonomy. The purpose of this paper is to describe the methodology used to create the taxonomy with the expectation that the same method could be used to evaluate any IT curriculum for a variety of reasons.
References
[1]
Lunt, B., Ekstrom, J. J., Gorka, S., Hislop, G., Kamali, R., Lawson, and Reichgelt, H. 2008. Information technology 2008: Curriculum guidelines for undergraduate degree programs in information technology. Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), IEEE Computer Society.
[2]
Harris, M.A., and Patten, K. P. 2016. Using Bloom's and Webb's taxonomies to integrate emerging cybersecurity topics into a computing curriculum. Journal of Information Systems Education, 26, 3 (Summer 2016), 219--234.
[3]
Overbaugh, R. C., and Schultz, L. 2015. Bloom's taxonomy. Old Dominion University. Retrieved from http://ww2.odu.edu/educ/roverbau/Bloom/blooms_taxonomy.htm
[4]
Webb, N. L. 1997. Research monograph no. 6: Criteria for alignment of expectations and assessments in mathematics and science education. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
[5]
Bloom, B. S., and Krathwohl, D. R. 1956. Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York: Longmans, Green.
[6]
Anderson, L. W., and Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.) 2001. A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Boston MA: Allyn & Bacon, Pearson Education Group.
[7]
Krathwohl, D. R. 2002. A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41, 4, 212--218.
[8]
Webb, N. L. 1997. Research monograph no. 6: Criteria for alignment of expectations and assessments in mathematics and science education. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
[9]
Keane, L. B., Patten, K. P., Brookshire, R. G., Cardon, P. W., Gerdes, J. H., and Norris, D. T. 2009. Toward developing an experiential learning curriculum model in information technology. Proceedings of the Fifteenth Americas Conference on Information Systems, San Francisco CA, August 6-9.
[10]
Perkins, D. 2008. Levels of thinking in Bloom's taxonomy and Webb's depth of knowledge. Retrieved from http://www.paffa.state.pa.us/PAAE/Curriculum%20Files/7.%20DOK%20Compared%20with%20Blooms%20Taxonomy.pdf
[11]
Starr, C. W., Manaris, B., and Stalvey, R. H. 2008. Bloom's taxonomy revisited: Specifying assessable learning objectives in computer science. Proceedings of SIGCSE 08, ACM, Portland OR, March 12-15.
[12]
Surendra, N. C., and Denton, J. W. 2009. Designing the IS curricula for practical relevance: Applying baseball's "Moneyball" theory. Journal of Information Systems Education, 20, 1, 77--86.
Index Terms
- Evaluating Student Learning in an IT Curriculum Using Bloom's -- Webb's Curriculum Taxonomy
Recommendations
Bloom's taxonomy revisited: specifying assessable learning objectives in computer science
SIGCSE 08Traditionally, Bloom's Taxonomy has been used for creating exams and other student assessment instruments. In this paper, we advocate its use for specifying learning outcomes in computer science prior to assessment. We have found, over a period of three ...
Bloom's taxonomy revisited: specifying assessable learning objectives in computer science
SIGCSE '08: Proceedings of the 39th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science educationTraditionally, Bloom's Taxonomy has been used for creating exams and other student assessment instruments. In this paper, we advocate its use for specifying learning outcomes in computer science prior to assessment. We have found, over a period of three ...
Engineering a New Curriculum: Experiences at Ohio University in Incorporating the IEEE-TCPP Curriculum Initiative During a Transition to Semesters
IPDPSW '12: Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE 26th International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium Workshops & PhD ForumThis paper describes the efforts at Ohio University to incorporate selected topics from the IEEE-TCPP Curriculum Initiative into the Computer Science/Computer Engineering curriculum prior to a transition to semesters at Ohio University that will occur ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
September 2016
188 pages
ISBN:9781450344524
DOI:10.1145/2978192
- Conference Chair:
- Deborah Boisvert,
- Program Chair:
- Stephen Zilora
Copyright © 2016 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].
Sponsors
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 28 September 2016
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Conference
SIGITE/RIIT 2016
Sponsor:
SIGITE/RIIT 2016: The 17th Annual Conference on Information Technology Education and the 5th Annual Conference on Research in Information Technology
September 28 - October 1, 2016
Massachusetts, Boston, USA
Acceptance Rates
SIGITE '16 Paper Acceptance Rate 26 of 67 submissions, 39%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 176 of 429 submissions, 41%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 188Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)10
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
Reflects downloads up to 10 Nov 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Get Access
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in