Analysis of University Teachers' Assessment Practices of Bloom's Three Domains of Learning

Abstract

Initially developed between 1956 and 1972, Benjamin Bloom’s three domains of educational activities and behaviors (cognitive, affective, and psychomotor) have gained significant importance in the field of educational assessment. The concept that learning is not purely a cognitive function, but emotional processes and motor skills coordination are also involved has led to the notion of a holistic assessment. Versatile assessment techniques help meet diverse learning needs, foster progressive disposition, and encourage practical skills acquisition. Besides, it also aids in lifelong learning since more neural networks and pathways are generated among students. Despite the importance of holistic assessment, it is not practiced by faculty members of public sector universities. The study's objectives were 1) to find out the views of public sector university teachers about assessment using blooms domains of learning, and 2) to analyze public university teachers’ assessment practices in Bloom’s three learning domains. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with six university teachers (three males and three females) to achieve this purpose. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed, and thematic analysis was done using NVIVO software. The main findings were that university teachers consider teaching and learning more than delivering knowledge. Some of them opinion that Bloom’s Taxonomy a necessary aspect of assessment. Regarding practices, it was found that they use diverse assessment strategies such as Q&A, presentations, quizzes, assignments, and projects. Though few teachers were unable to distinguish between assessment and evaluation; yet, they were aware of the importance of checking students’ knowledge. Likewise, four teachers were familiar with bloom’s taxonomy, while two teachers were totally unfamiliar. Concerning the affective domain’s assessment, most teachers acknowledged that emotions play an essential role in learning; however, the majorly used technique to motivate students was to share with them about getting a job and the scope of the discipline. As far as the assessment of the psychomotor domain was concerned, two teachers clearly refused, whereas others said that they occasionally involve students physically in their learning. These findings suggest that teachers are aware of the three domains of learning subconsciously, but the intentional assessment of all three key learning domains is not being done. Therefore, it is recommended that HEC and university administration should pay attention to organizing workshops and training to make teachers practice formulating objectives within all three learning domains for full-fledged learning of students.