88 Applying The Congruence Principle Of Bloom’s Taxonomy .

The Journal of Technology Studies90merge into real-world experiences contextuallyconsistent with authentic problems andapplications in STEM careers. Such integrationmay refer to making meaningful connectionsbetween core disciplinary practices of eachSTEM domain being integrated, with the goal ofusing this integrated knowledge to solve realworld problems (Mobley, 2015). The integrationof STEM concepts can then be visualized asfollows, consider (see Figure 1) the content ofunits in Sciences, Mathematics and Engineering/technology education. Due to the overlap ofconcepts identified in these units, they may beconsidered for integration through a problembased learning activity that culminates intoa project enabling students to operationalizeSTEM concepts. In addition, the content andassessment type identified in the area that thesedisciplines intersect need to be clearly specifiedto assess learning outcomes. A second approach(see Figure 2) can be viewed as follows; unitsfrom the Sciences and Engineering/technologyEducation have been integrated. A unit fromMathematics is integrated with a unit fromEngineering/ technology Education. Dugger(2010) noted that there are a number of ways thatSTEM can be taught in schools today. One way isto integrate one of the STEM disciplines into theother three (e.g., integrating engineering aspectsinto science, technology and mathematics).And a more comprehensive way is to infuse allfour disciplines into each other and teach themas an integrated subject matter. In this regard,Erekson and Shumway (2006) noted that a fullinterdisciplinary model, in which the contentfrom two or more disciplines are merged, hasthe potential to be very effective in technologyeducation. Although this model appears to showpromise, it also appears the most elusive. Thus,achieving congruence in designing learningexperiences that simulate an integrated STEMcourse has revealed the challenges of makingScienceconnections across the STEM subjects. Honeyet al. (2014) suggested that instructors shouldbuild in their teaching opportunities that makeSTEM connections explicit to students andeducators (e.g., through appropriate scaffoldingand sufficient opportunities to engage in activitiesthat address connected ideas).BASIS FORCONGRUENCE PRINCIPLEBloom’s Taxonomyand the New Revised Bloom’s TaxonomyBloom’s Taxonomy is a hierarchical wayof classifying thinking according to sixcognitive levels of complexity. The lowestthree levels include the following: knowledge,comprehension, and application. The highestthree levels include: analysis, synthesis,and evaluation (Bloom & Krathwohl, 1956).Throughout the years teachers have encouragedtheir students to think through these cognitivelevels and to operate at the higher levels whensolving problems. For example, it has beenperceived that a student functioning at the“application” level also has mastered the materialat the “knowledge” and “comprehension”levels. To this end, the taxonomy is used asa framework for categorizing and classifyinglearning objectives according to the skill levelrequired to meet desired learning outcomes.Outcomes describe what students are expectedto know and be able to do by the end of agiven instructional period. These outcomesrelate to skills, knowledge, and behaviors thatstudents attain as they progress through a givenlearning experience. Anderson and Krathwohl(2001) modified Bloom’s taxonomy by addinganother dimension of knowledge types: factual,conceptual, procedural,and meta-cognitive. Factual knowledge can bestbe defined as the basic elements that all studentsmust acquire within a discipline, whereasMathematicsMathematicsEng/Tech EDEng/Tech EDFigure 1. Integration of content unitsin Sciences, Mathematics, and engineering/technology education.ScienceFigure 2. Integration of content unitsin Sciences, Mathematics, throughengineering/technology education.

1.Remember: recognizing, recalling(repeating verbatim): state[for example, the steps in the procedurefor changing a flat tire].2.Understand: interpreting, exemplifying,classifying, summarizing, inferring,comparing, and explaining(demonstrating understanding of termsand concepts): explain [in your own wordsthe concept of design].3.Apply: executing, implementing(applying learned information to solvea problem): calculate [how much materialsone may require to complete a givenconstruction project].4.Analyze: differentiating, organizing,attributing, checking, critiquing usingexisting criteria (breaking things downinto their elements, formulating theoreticalexplanations or mathematical or logicalmodels for observed phenomena):explain [why mass might affect the velocityof a given object].5.Evaluate: (a) “Critiquing” based onself-designed/chosen criteria,(b) “Deciding” in the light of larger context,human values and ethics,(making and justifying value judgmentsor selections from among alternatives):select [from among available optionsfor expanding production capacity,and justify your choice].6.Create: generate, plan, and produce(creating something, combining elementsin novel ways): make up [a homeworkproblem involving material coveredin class this week].Bloom & Krathwohl, (1956) indicated thatideally researchers in each major field woulduse this taxonomy to develop their own uniqueobjectives and language. They suggested thata discipline-specific taxonomy could offerassessment with greater details, with influencesfrom experts in their respective fields,and break down the categories into subcategoriesand levels of education with new groupingsand combinations.The Accreditation Board for Engineeringand Technology (ABET) evaluates everyengineering-related program (departmentsand interdisciplinary course programs) in theUnited States and determines whether they meetcertain standards (ABET, 2013). According toFelder and Brent (2004), this body determineswhether the said programs and courses meetABET- defined criteria and benchmarks that leadto realization of identified standards. Prior to areview of a program, instructors seek to evaluatethe appropriateness of the educational objectives,the extent to which the specified outcomes resultin the objectives, and whether they incorporatespecific attributes specified by ABET. Forengineering and technology education programsthese would be ABET (Outcomes 3a–3k).As STEM initiatives become the driving forceof educational change through K-16, Clark andErnest (2010) argued that all instructors would saythat they want their students to master higher levelthinking skills as reflected by the revised Bloom’staxonomy. To this end, the design of integratedSTEM activities should focus on the extent towhich the course’s learning objectives map ontothe outcomes, the feasibility of the specifiedoutcome assessment and continuous improvementprocesses, and the seriousness with which theprogram is implementing those processes.Chyung and Stepich (2003) suggested thatBloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives wasinstrumental in making sure there was congruenceamong the planning, instruction, and assessmentprocess of design learning experiences.91Applying the Congruence Principle of Bloom’s Taxonomy to Developan Integrated STEM Experience through Engineering Designconceptual knowledge can best be defined asthe understanding of inter-relationships amongthe basics of a discipline to the larger overallstructure and explain how they function together.Procedural knowledge requires that studentsknow how to conduct inquiry, understand andapply techniques and methods using appropriateprocedures, and metacognitive dimensionsrequire that students are aware of their ownknowledge level, including the knowledge anduse of heuristics. Anderson and Krathwohlrenamed the earlier hierarchy of levels fromnouns to verbs. A brief summary of the adaptionand extension of Anderson and Krathwohl’s(2001) revised Bloom’s taxonomy follows:

The Journal of Technology Studies92ROLE OF ENGINEERING DESIGNIN ENGINEERINGAND TECHNOLOGY EDUCATIONResearchers, (Ereckson & Custer, 2008;Pinelli & Haynie, 2010; Wicklein, 2004)advocated for engineering as the focus fortechnology education because engineeringprovides a solid framework to design andorganize curriculum, while providing an idealplatform for integrating mathematics, science,and technology. According to Atman et al. (1999)design is a central element of engineering, and allengineers perform some type of design function.Likewise, Warner and Morford, (2004) stated thatdesign is fundamental to the study of technology,and design cannot be fully appreciated withoutan understanding of technology. This statementimplies that, if technology is to be fullyunderstood, then the concepts of design must becomprehended. The Standards for TechnologicalLiteracy (ITEA, 2000/2002/2007) Standards8, 9, 10, and 11 highlight design concepts tobe introduced throughout the K-12 curriculum.Hailey et al. (2005) posited that the designprocess described in Standard 8 for students inGrades 9-12 is very similar to the introductoryengineering design process described in freshmanengineering design textbooks, specifically thebook by Eide, Jenison, Mashaw, and Northrup(2002). Hailey et al. (2005) noted two exceptionsas highlighted in Figure 3, and Mosborg, Adams,Kim, Atman, Turns, and Cardella (2005) affirmedthat the number of stages in these diagramsranged from a few to several dozen, depending onthe detail and complexity with which the designprocess is rendered.Classical Engineeringy Design processClassical Engineeringy Design process(from introductory engineering text by Eide, et al.)(from introductory engineering text by Eide, et al.)Today, the field is witnessing exponentialgrowth of engineering practices, STEM- relatedcurriculums (e.g., Project Lead the Way, STEMAcademy, CISCO investment in STEM, andMicrosoft Math Partnership) are being introduced– IDENTIFY THE NEED– DEFINING A PROBLEM– DEFINE THE PROBLEM– BRAINSTORMING– SEARCH FOR INFORMATION– RESEARCHING AND GENERATING IDEAS– IDENTIFY CONSTRAINTS– SPECIFY EVALUATION CRITERIA– GENERATE ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONSEngineering AnalysisOptimization DecisionDesign specifications(So it can be made)Communications– IDENTIFYING CRITERIAAND SPECIFYING CONSTRAINTS– EXPLORING POSSIBILITIESSelecting an approachand developing a design makinga model of prototype. Testing andevaluating the design specificationsRefining the designCommunicating process and resultsCreating or making itFigure 3. Engineering design process compared to technology education design processat the K-12 curriculum level. Additionally, thefederal government in financial years 2009, 2010,and 2011 offered approximately 867 million tosupport activities related to STEM education andincreased outreach activities that support STEMinitiatives through organizations like the NationalAeronautics and Space Administration (NASA),The National Science Foundation programs(President’s Council of Advisors on Scienceand Technology, 2010).These new initiatives and curricula imply thateducators should design collaboration strategiesand new instructional practices. As suggested byChyung and Stepich (2003) Bloom’s taxonomy

USING BLOOM’S TAXONOMYTO DEVELOP A CONGRUENTINTEGRATED STEM LESSONTHROUGH ENGINEERING DESIGNHaag, Froyd, Coleman, and Caso (2005) statedthat data can only be collected on observablebehaviors and ABET student outcomes do notdefine observable behaviors; therefore, learningobjectives should be formulated for each outcomedescribing the desired observable studentperformance. This may imply that an engineeringtechnology education teacher seeking to integrateSTEM concepts into their curriculum mayredesign traditional technology education problembased activities into a STEM-integrated projectthat depicts a stated standard performance anddesired outcome. Such projects may include (e.g.,Cookie Package Design Challenge; SustainableHouse Project, and more) that can be repurposed todeliberately help students realize how the STEMconcepts being taught overlap in a given learningactivity and how these lead to both the solving ofa given design problem and the realization of acomplete project product.For the purposes of this article the authors utilizedan air blaster car. The main focus of the design ofthis car revolves around four main areas: principlesof aerodynamics involved with air blaster carconstruction, design of vehicle, construction ofvehicle, and racing of vehicle. Such a lesson canbe best illustrated as described by Figure 2 wherescientific concepts that explain the principles ofaerodynamics, and the mathematic principlesbehind racing the car (i.e., calculating speed basedon the time the car will cover a given length,integrated with engineering technology principlesbehind design and construction of the vehicle).Given this activity, Wiggins and McTighe (2005)advocated for the backward design process,which prompts instructors to ask, how best dowe go about designing the car, and what kind oflessons and practices are needed to master keyperformances? This approach also requires thateducators operationalize the identified standardsin terms of assessment evidence as they begin toplan a unit. Instructors are tasked with askingthemselves, what they would accept as evidencethat the students have attained the desiredunderstandings and proficiencies.The next steps will be to develop objectives,learning activities and materials, and evaluationof criteria for each of the four areas. At this pointthe congruence principle becomes particularlyimportant. Maintaining the congruence amongthe objectives, learning activities, and evaluationcriteria is critical to the effectiveness of theinstruction. Congruent instruction means thatlearning activities are designed to support theobjectives and that the evaluation methods aredesigned to assess important learning outcomesrepresented by the objectives. A curriculummapping exercise would provide a snapshotof where educators stand in light of theanticipated learning outcomes that studentswill be able to demonstrate. Bloom’s taxonomyof educational objectives is instrumental inmaking sure that there is congruence amongthe components of each module.Bloom’s original taxonomy was used to determinethe levels of the objectives for each moduleand to design learning activities through whichstudents would accomplish those objectives.Prior to developing learning activities, the authorsdetermined the levels in the taxonomy for eachobjective. Because the learning sequence andprocesses are interdependent, it was listed as thehighest level from the taxonomy, in conjunctionwith lower, supporting levels. These aresummarized in Table 1.93Applying the Congruence Principle of Bloom’s Taxonomy to Developan Integrated STEM Experience through Engineering Designstill has merit as a guide for instructionalplanning for two specific reasons. First, itreminds educators that the key to effectiveinstruction is the congruence or “degree ofcorrespondence among the objectives, instruction,and assessment” (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001,p. 10). Second, because it is analytical, it helpsremind instructors that learning is made up of acomplex array of cognitive skills. At the sametime, it doesn’t prevent them from designinginstruction in a more dynamic way, in whicha low-level cognitive skill can be learned inconjunction with a high-level cognitive skill. Tothis end, the integration of engineering designinto technology education continues to providethe field with authentic learning experiences thatare ideal education required to help nations toprosper in the technologically interdependentworld in which we live. Responsibility for thisfalls on the engineering and technology educationteacher working in collaboration with colleaguesin science and math.

The Journal of Technology Studies94Table 1: Standards, Levels of Objectives, and Knowledge ObjectivesResearch pertinent informationon underlying principles of aerodynamicswith air blaster car constructionLevelsin RBTKnowledgedimensionin RBTRememberand UnderstandFactualSTL9, 16-MS,MS-PS3-3., MS-PS3-4.Recognize principles of Newton’s Third Lawof Motion and how it relates to air blastercar competitionUnderstandand ApplyConceptualSTL9, 16-MSMS-PS3-2.Explain how mass, friction, and designof air blast car relate to its movementUnderstandand ApplyProceduralApply, Analyze,Createand EvaluateMeta-cognitiveSTL9-11-MSMS-PS3-4., MS-PS3-5.Utilize the process of engineering designto design and develop a drawing designwhich shows understanding of air blasterconcepts and construct a prototype car,present the model to peersDEVELOPING LEARNINGACTIVITIES FOR THE REMEMBERAND UNDERSTAND LEVEL(FACTUAL) DIMENSIONResearch: Students were asked to conduct researchinto underlying principles of winning car designs.This could entail students’ finding informationabout the basics of aerodynamics as it relates tocars and, specifically, the underlying principlesinto construction of these cars. Students may beasked to informally demonstrate their knowledgeand comprehension of factual knowledge into thedesign of at least three different designs based onthe aerodynamic design of the cars.Students were expected to recall the underlyingprinciples of aerodynamics in car design usingterms that they elicited from the research activityand elaborate on them using more commonterms to illustrate aerodynamic designs (e.g.,shape, sleek outline, sometimes relating to withexamples to show comprehension of the concepts).The teacher should give students opportunitieswhere they can connect the factual to conceptualknowledge as they progress through the activity.This connection should help students constructand deconstruct knowledge as they understand andapply principles of Newton’s Third Law of Motionand how it relates to air blaster cars throughsmall group discussions. Through this processstudents may demonstrate the intended level oflearning (comprehension) and then go beyond thatto demonstrate an unanticipated higher level oflearning (e.g., application, analysis, synthesis, orevaluation) by connecting factual to conceptualknowledge.LEARNING ACTIVITIES FOR THEAPPLICATION AND ANALYSISLEVELS (PROCEDURAL) DIMENSIONBased on discussions that ensue, the teachershould design classroom experiences that givestudents an opportunity to explore and explainhow force, mass, friction, and design parametersrelate to an air blaster car. By explaining anddemonstrating the application of force on anobject causes an acceleration of that object, thatis, the more force you have, the faster an objectgoes, and helping students comprehend thatforce is not the only factor in the movement, oracceleration of an object. Other factors such asthe friction, air or fluid resistance, and pressuremay affect the acceleration as well. The studentsmay be asked the following questions: Why isit important to be aware of how force and massaffect acceleration? What other factors may playa role? Why? How? Students eventually will beexpected to apply these principles to the designof a car, Figure 4. Students can provide feedbackto sketches of prototype cars for each other, andthe can also provide examples of where they haveseen these principles used. This method helpedstudents consider different views of the samesituation, promoting application and analysis.

Rules:1. Design MUST touch all sides of the rectangle layout2. Design MUST clear all predesign holes and cut outs3. Design MUST have a color scheme (using color pencils)Figure 4. Students’ sketches depicting factual and conceptual levels of Bloom’s taxonomyFigure 5. Students’ prototypes depicting conceptual and procedural levels of Bloom’s taxonomyFigure 6. Students’ prototypes depicting procedural and meta-cognitive levels of Bloom’s taxonomy95Applying the Congruence Principle of Bloom’s Taxonomy to Developan Integrated STEM Experience through Engineering DesignRules:1. Design MUST touch all sides of the rectangle layout2. Design MUST clear all predesign holes and cut outs3. Design MUST have a color scheme (using color pencils)

The Journal of Technology Studies96Table 2: Suggested Evaluation Procedure for Air Blaster Car Project to Integrate STEM TDimensionActivity corresponding to Originalbloom cognitive processesSuggested EvaluationFactualStudents to submit portfolio of sketchesthat document initial researchof challenge, criteria and constraintsthey experienced used to design airblaster car, Car Design Sketches.Complete submitted portfolioswith at least 2 sketches,detailing the challenge, criteria,and constraints in the context ofperformance improvement.ConceptualSpeed and weight of car: studentsto record weight of their cars in grams,race car three times on a race trackand calculate the speeds of their carsby utilizing the formula Speed Distance / Time.Compare the data from their findingsto those of their peers, and be able toexplain how the weight (mass) of theircar impacted the rate of the speed ittravelled.ProceduralManufacture (cut, shape, sand, paint,and detail) car as per chosen designutilizing provided materials and tools.Weigh car and race car on track 3 ti

Bloom’s Taxonomy and the New Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy Bloom’s Taxonomy is a hierarchical way of classifying thinking according to six cognitive levels of complexity. The lowest three levels include th