A Card-Based Learning Objective Design Method for Collaborative Curriculum Design
Pages 19 - 25
Abstract
This paper takes the Bloom's Taxonomy, more specifically the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy, as a baseline for learning objective and curriculum design adopted by generations of teachers and instructors in their practice. On the backdrop of recent findings and persistent principles of learning design, the authors employ narrative theory and its notion of linguistic statements to propose a collaborative approach to curriculum design using an interactive and card-based method. The conceptual notions of the Learning Objective Design Deck are illustrated and important arguments for the use of a card deck in context of learning objective design workshops are presented. The methodical tool aimed at educators and instructional designers is comprised of a canvas and a card deck that can be used in both physical, in form of an actual card deck, and digital formats, e.g. on collaborative synchronous digital whiteboard solutions. The authors will discuss the current state of their methodological design, perspectives on formalisation for implementation in software and present initial results form a workshop conducted with domain experts to reflect on areas for improvement and further research. The paper concludes with a contextualisation of the method in relation to other learning design tools in development by the authors that integrate the narratively driven learning experience design approach to conceptualise a framework and modelling language for learning experience design that can be extended to a software-based approach for learning activity or even learning unit design.
References
[1]
Bloom, B.S. 1956. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook: The Cognitive Domain. David McKay: New York, NY, USA.
[2]
Anderson, L. & Krathwohl, D. 2001. A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Longman: New York, NY, USA.
[3]
Forehand, M., 2010. Bloom's Taxonomy. In M. Orey, ed. Emerging Perspectives on Learning, Teaching, and Technology. Global Text Project: Zurich, Switzerland. 41--47. Retrieved April 2, 2012 from http://epltt.coe.uga.edu/.
[4]
Kennedy, D. 2006. Writing and using learning outcomes: a practical guide. University College Cork. Cork, Ireland.
[5]
Armstrong, P. 2010. Bloom's Taxonomy. Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching. Retrieved April 10, 2021 from https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/blooms-taxonomy/.
[6]
Grunert O'Brien, J., Millis, B.J., & Cohen, M.W. 2008. The course syllabus: A learning-centered approach (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA, USA.
[7]
Perkins, D. 2016. Using Project-Based Learning To Flip Bloom's Taxonomy For Deeper Learning. Retrieved April 10, 2021 from https://www.teachthought.com/technology/using-project-based-learning-flip-blooms-taxonomy-deeper-learning/.
[8]
Perkins, D. 2019. 8 Steps For Teaching Through Project-Based Learning. Retrieved April 10, 2021 from https://www.teachthought.com/technology/8-basic-steps-project-based-learning-get-started/.
[9]
Recke, M.P. & Perna, S. 2021. An Emergent Narrative System to Design Conducive Educational Experiences. In Jones, P., Apostolopoulos, N., Kakouris, A., Moon, C., Ratten, V. and Walmsley, A. (eds.). Universities and Entrepreneurship: Meeting the Educational and Social Challenges (Contemporary Issues in Entrepreneurship Research, Vol. 11). Emerald Publishing Limited: Bingley, UK, 185--198. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2040-724620210000011012.
[10]
Recke, M.P. & Perna, S. 2021. Emergent Narratives in Remote Learning Experiences for Project Based Education. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 19(2), 59--70. https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.19.2.2142.
[11]
Recke, M.P., Perna, S. & Pereira, T.G. 2021. Designing Narratively Driven Learning Activities for Blended Learning Experiences. In Proceedings of 9th International Conference on Information and Education Technology ICIET2021. IEEE, Okayama, Japan, 171--177.
[12]
Laurillard, D. 2012. Teaching as a Design Science: Building Pedagogical Patterns for Learning and Technology. Routledge: New York, NY, USA.
[13]
Maina, M., Craft, B., & Mor, Y. (eds.). 2015. The art & science of learning design. Sense Publishers: Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
[14]
Hokanson, B., Clinton, G., & Tracey, M. 2015. i Design of Learning Experience; Creating the Future of Educational Technology. Springer: New York, NY, USA.
[15]
Schön, D.A. 1987. Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA, USA.
[16]
Simon, H.A. 1996. The sciences of the artificial (3rd ed.). The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA.
[17]
Cross, N. 2001. Designerly ways of knowing: Design discipline versus design science. Design issues, 17(3), 49--55. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1511801.
[18]
Beetham, H. 2008. Review of the Design for Learning programme phase 2. JISC Design for Learning programme report. Retrieved April 2, 2021 from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearningpedagogy/designlearn.aspx.
[19]
Mor, Y. 2013. SNaP! Re-using, sharing and communicating designs and design knowledge using scenarios, narratives and patterns. In R. Luckin, P. Goodyear, B. Grabowski, S. Puntambekar, N. Winters, & J. Underwood (eds.). Handbook of design in educational technology. Routledge: London, UK, 189--200.
[20]
Conole, G. 2013. Designing for learning in an open world. Springer: New York, NY, USA.
[21]
Pozzi, F., Persico, D., & Earp, J. 2015. A multi-dimensional space for learning design representations and tools. In M. Maina, C. Craft & Y. Mor (eds.). The Art & Science of Learning Design. SensePublishers: Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 49--62.
[22]
Danaher, G., Schirato, T. & Webb, J. 2000. Understanding Foucault. Allen & Unwin: St Leonards, NSW, Australia.
[23]
Salmon, G., & Wright, P. 2014. Transforming future teaching through 'Carpe Diem' learning design. Education Sciences, 4(1), 52--63. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci4010052.
[24]
Usher, J., MacNeill, S., & Creanor, L. 2018. Evolutions of Carpe Diem for learning design. Compass: Journal of Learning and Teaching, 11(1), 1--8. https://doi.org/10.21100/compass.v11i1.718.
[25]
Armellini, A., & Jones, S. 2008. Carpe Diem: seizing each day to foster change in e-learning design. Reflecting Education, 4(1), 17--29.
[26]
University of Ulster. 2020. Curriculum design workshop resources. Retrieved April 4, 2021 from https://ulster.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/VIEW/overview.
[27]
Nicol, D. 2012. Transformational change in teaching and learning: Recasting the educational discourse. Evaluation of the Viewpoints Project at the University of Ulster. Retrieved April 10, 2021 from https://www.reap.ac.uk/TheoryPractice/Principles.aspx.
[28]
Young, C., & Perović, N. 2016. Rapid and creative course design: as easy as ABC. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 228, 390--395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.07.058.
[29]
Hasenknopf, B., Michou, V., Milani, M., Perović, N., Young, C. 2019. Sharing the ABC approach to learning design across three European universities. European Learning & Teaching Forum 2019 (ISSN: 2593--7448).
[30]
Conole, G., & Wills, S. 2013. Representing learning designs-making design explicit and shareable. Educational Media International, 50(1), 24--38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2013.777184.
[31]
Koper, R. 2006. Current research in learning design. Educational Technology & Society, 9(1), 13--22.
[32]
Bratteteig, T., & Wagner, I. 2016. Unpacking the notion of participation in participatory design. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 25(6), 425--475. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-016-9259-4.
[33]
DiSalvo, B., Yip, J., Bonsignore, E., & DiSalvo, C. (eds.). 2017. Participatory design for learning: Perspectives from practice and research. T Routledge: New York, NY, USA.
[34]
Deng, Y., Antle, A.N., Neustaedter, C. 2014. Tango cards: A card-based design tool for informing the design of tangible learning games. In Proceedings of the DIS '14: Designing Interactive Systems Conference 2014, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 695--704. https://doi.org/10.1145/2598510.2598601.
[35]
Mora, S., Gianni, F., Divitini, M. 2017. Tiles: A card-based ideation toolkit for the internet of things. In Proceedings of the DIS '17: Designing Interactive Systems Conference 2017, Edinburgh, UK, 587--598. https://doi.org/10.1145/3064663.3064699.
[36]
Roy, R., & Warren, J. P. 2019. Card-based design tools: A review and analysis of 155 card decks for designers and designing. Design Studies, 63, 125--154. https://doi.org/10.1145/3375462.3375476.
[37]
Lucero, A., Dalsgaard, P., Halskov, K., Buur, J. 2016. Designing with cards. In Markopoulos P., Martens JB., Malins J., Coninx K., Liapis A. (eds.). Collaboration in Creative Design; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 75--95. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29155-0_5.
[38]
Mueller, F., Gibbs, M.R., Vetere, F., Edge, D. 2014. Supporting the creative game design process with exertion cards. In Proceedings of the CHI '14: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Toronto, ON, Canada, 2211--2220. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557272.
[39]
Wetzel, R., Rodden, T., Benford, S. 2017. Developing ideation cards for mixed reality game design. Trans. Digit. Games Res. Assoc., 3(2), 175--211. http://dx.doi.org/10.26503/todigra.v3i2.73.
[40]
Tahir, R. & Wang, A.I. 2020. Transforming a Theoretical Framework to Design Cards: LEAGUE Ideation Toolkit for Game-Based Learning Design. Sustainability, 12(20), 8487. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12208487.
[41]
Gruber, M.R. 2019. Introduction to the Learning Design Cards. University of Zurich UZH. Retrieved at April 2, 2021 from https://dlf.uzh.ch/2019/06/27/introduction-to-the-learning-design-cards/.
[42]
Jones, C.R. 2013. Designing for practice: A View from Social Science. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe (eds.). Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age: Designing for 21st Century Learning, Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 204--217.
[43]
Polkinghorne, D.E. 1988. Narrative Knowing and the Human Sciences, State University of New York Press: Albany, NY USA.
[44]
Fludernik, M. 2009. An Introduction to Narratology. Routledge: London, UK.
[45]
Bal, M. 2009. Narratology - Introduction to the Theory of the Narrative (3rd ed.). University of Toronto Press: Toronto, Canada.
[46]
Kagan, S. 2005. Rethinking Thinking - Does Bloom's Taxonomy Align with Brain Science?. Kagan Online Magazine, Fall 2005. Retrieved April 2, 2021 from https://www.kaganonline.com/free_articles/dr_spencer_kagan/289/Rethinking-Thinking-Does-Bloom-s-Taxonomy-Align-with-Brain-Science.
[47]
Booker, M. 2007. A Roof without Walls: Benjamin Bloom's Taxonomy and the Misdirection of American Education. Acad. Quest., 2007(20), 347--355. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12129-007-9031-9.
[48]
Wineburg, S. & Schneider, J. 2010. Was Bloom's Taxonomy Pointed in the Wrong Direction? Kappan, 91(4), 56--61. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171009100412.
[49]
Wright, S., 2012. Flipping Bloom's Taxonomy. Retrieved April 5, 2021 from https://plpnetwork.com/2012/05/15/flipping-blooms-taxonomy/.
Index Terms
- A Card-Based Learning Objective Design Method for Collaborative Curriculum Design
Recommendations
Design Card Sets: Systematic Literature Survey and Card Sorting Study
DIS '20: Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Designing Interactive Systems ConferenceDesign cards are a popular way for designers to encode and communicate design knowledge. Aiming to inform the designers of such design tools we set out to characterize the design space of design cards in a two-pronged approach involving a) a systematic ...
Blended Learning Design for Software Engineering Course Design
CSSE '08: Proceedings of the 2008 International Conference on Computer Science and Software Engineering - Volume 05As an important learning method in e-learning time, blended learning, combining with the advantages of traditional learning and digitalized learning, advocates that the ways of learning should vary from time to time, situation to situation and person to ...
Challenging the Alignment of Learning Design Tools with HE Lecturers’ Learning Design Practice
Transforming Learning with Meaningful TechnologiesAbstractExtensive research has been carried out for the development of learning design tools; nevertheless, their adoption by HE lecturers remains low. Sharing, guidance, and various forms of representation are the main pillars of learning design tools. ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
June 2021
123 pages
ISBN:9781450376846
DOI:10.1145/3477282
Copyright © 2021 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 ACM 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]
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 17 December 2021
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Conference
ICSLT 2021
ICSLT 2021: 2021 7th International Conference on e-Society, e-Learning and e-Technologies
June 10 - 12, 2021
Portsmouth, United Kingdom
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 90Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)28
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2
Reflects downloads up to 05 Mar 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in