MINGGU 2

Untuk membuat penilaian dan pengukuran, perlu dirujuk kepada objektif pengajaran. Taksonomi Bloom memberi sumbangan untuk mengukur objektif pengajaran dan pembelajaran. Taksonomi ialah klasifikasi berhirarki dari sesuatu, atau prinsip yang mendasari klasifikasi. Taksonomi Bloom merujuk pada taksonomi yang dibuat untuk tujuan pendidikan. Taksonomi ini pertama kali disusun oleh Benjamin S. Bloom pada tahun 1956 (wikipedia). Peringkat Teksonomi Bloom ialah:
1. Pengetahuan-nyatakan, namakan, terangkan, labelkan
2. Kefahaman-pilih, terangkan, tulis semula
3. Penggunaan-selesaikan, ramalkan, cari, kesilapan, bina alat
4. Analisis-bezakan, pastikan, pilih
5. Sintesis-bina, hasilkan, susun, kembangkan
6. Penilaian-pilih kritik, berikan alasan, buktikan


Krathwohl's Taxonomy of Affective Domain

Receiving refers to the student's willingness to attend to particular phenomena of stimuli (classroom activities, textbook, music, etc.). Learning outcomes in this area range from the simple awareness that a thing exists to selective attention on the part of the learner. Receiving represents the lowest level of learning outcomes in the affective domain.

Responding refers to active participation on the part of the student. At this level he or she not only attends to a particular phenomenon but also reacts to it in some way. Learning outcomes in this area may emphasize acquiescence in responding (reads assigned material), willingness to respond (voluntarily reads beyond assignment), or satisfaction in responding (reads for pleasure or enjoyment). The higher levels of this category include those instructional objectives that are commonly classified under “interest”; that is, those that stressthe seeking out and enjoyment of particular activities.


Valuing is concerned with the worth or value a student attaches to a particular object, phenomenon, or behavior. This ranges in degree from the simpler acceptance of a value (desires to improve group skills) to the more complex level of commitment (assumes responsibility for the effective functioning of the group). Valuing is based on the internalization of a set of specified values, but clues to these values are expressed in the student's overt behavior. Learning outcomes in this area are concerned with behavior that is consistent and stable enough to make the value clearly identifiable. Instructional objectives that are commonly classified under “attitudes” and “appreciation”
would fall into this category.

Organizationis concerned with bringing together different values, resolving conflicts between them, and beginning the
building of an internally consistent value system. Thus the emphasis is on comparing, relating, and synthesizing values. Learning outcomes may be concerned with the conceptualization of a value (recognizes the responsibility of each individual for improving human relations) or with the organization of a value
system (develops a vocational plan that satisfies his or her need for both economic security and social service). Instructional objectives relating to the development of a philosophy of life would fall into this category.

Characterization by a value or value set. The individual has a value system that has controlled his or her behavior for a
sufficiently long time for him or her to develop a characteristic “life-style.” Thus the behavior is pervasive, consistent, and predictable. Learning outcomes at this level cover a broad range of activities, but the major emphasis is on the fact that the behavior is typical or characteristic of the student. Instructional objectives that are concerned with the student's general patterns of adjustment (personal, social, emotional) would be appropriate here.

SOLO taxonomy

The SOLO taxonomy stands for:
Structure of
Observed
Learning
Outcomes

It was developed by Biggs and Collis (1982), and is well described in Biggs (1999)
It describes level of increasing complexity in a student's understanding of a subject, through five stages, and it is claimed to be applicable to any subject area. Not all students get through all five stages, of course, and indeed not all teaching (and even less "training" is designed to take them all the way).
There are fairly clear links not only with Säljö on conceptions of learning, but also, in the emphasis on making connections and contextualising, with Bateson's levels of learning, and even with Bloom's taxonomy in the cognitive domain. Like my pyramidal representation of Bloom, the assumption is that each level embraces previous levels, but adds something more:

1 Pre-structural: here students are simply acquiring bits of unconnected information, which have no organisation and make no sense.

2 Unistructural: simple and obvious connections are made, but their significance is not grasped.

3 Multistructural: a number of connections may be made, but the meta-connections between them are missed, as is their significance for the whole.

4 Relational level: the student is now able to appreciate the significance of the parts in relation to the whole.

5 At the extended abstract level, the student is making connections not only within the given subject area, but also beyond it, able to generalise and transfer the principles and ideas underlying the specific instance.