READER RESPONSE #5
Domain I, Competency 001
Subcompentency 2
Reading Response #5
Kathy Hainey LT#3
Chapter 5 of Methods for Teaching; Promoting Student Learning, by Jacobsen, et al., discusses the affective, psychomotor and cognitive domains of learning. We are referred back to Chapter 2 in the text, where the cognitive domain was defined in some detail. Chapter 5 defines all three domains, and goes on to relate the levels of each domain. This familiarity with the domains is necessary for understanding learning and writing learning objectives, including appropriate criteria, which will measure all types of learning.
The affective domain primarily deals with a person’s feeling, likes or dislikes, values, and attitudes. As a teacher, my goal is to encourage the growth of open-mindedness in my students. Teaching values does not mean that the students should take up my values, but they should learn to consider others’ opinions, values, and attitudes while continually reevaluating their own. Levels of the affective domain include receiving, responding, valuing, organization, and characterization. These levels are progressive, building upon the previous one. The criteria for affective objectives measure the levels of receiving, responding, and valuing (pg. 121). The goals of the affective domain focus on the components of character development. Examples of this type of development consist of learning positive social and personal behaviors, about health and physical well-being, about aesthetics and the joy of art, and how to be productive citizens (pg. 123).
The psychomotor domain is more focused on developing muscular strength and coordination. Levels of the psychomotor domain comprise reflex movements, perceptual abilities, physical abilities, skilled movements, and nondiscursive communication
(pg. 125). Goals in this domain "…must be specific, observable and measurable" (pg. 126). Being graded in any component in this domain would always bring my GPA down. I have very limited physical abilities beyond walking and chewing gum at the same time! Other than driving, I can think of no movements which I display consistently as "skilled". My penmanship was always graded at a "D", although I could read it! Even if I have sewn a specific type of seam 100 times before, there is no assurance that I will do it well the next time. Somehow I always thought giving a grade in certain psychomotor activities just wasn’t right. Even as a young student, I thought I should be graded on my effort, rather than my actual skill (none). Can any of the P.E. certificate students in this class clarify the grading criteria in schools today regarding klutzes?
The cognitive domain is the domain evaluated mostly in academic classes. Learning in the cognitive domain is "hierarchical and cumulative" (pg. 128). Critical thinking, analytical skills, and problem solving are incorporated to expand our view of learning within this domain. The six levels of the cognitive domain are: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation (pg. 129). On page 139, the authors state, "The ultimate goal of the cognitive component is for children to acquire, apply, adapt, integrate, and evaluate knowledge as they construct new or expanded concepts."
DISCUSSION:
Referring to Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget’s theory of cognitive development, there are stages a child must proceed through before being able to learn at a higher cognitive level. From about 11 years old and up, students should be able to begin thinking in the abstract and comes to be able to consider hypothetical situations (formal operations stage). In writing objectives, this is important to remember. Writing an objective for a second grader should not include the question, "What do you think would happen if people could fly?" This would require abstract thinking, i.e., analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Second graders are not yet capable of this type of cognitive processes.
In my current position teaching a one-room school, all of my students are above the age of 11, but some of them have never entered the formal operations stage of cognitive development. They are still in the concrete stage of cognitive development, and still quite egocentric; not at all global in thinking. In spite of their chronological ages, these students need to develop their critical thinking skills and move into analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. So, when presenting a lesson, the concrete needs to be introduced before the abstract. These students have the ability to be formal operational thinkers, but have not developed that skill yet. Analysis, synthesis, and evaluation are necessary to pass the GED exam, and the students do move into the formal operations stage over time. Writing objectives which address a variety of cognitive levels in one lesson is necessary, and challenging.
Not being familiar with the standardized tests that Texas students must take, I wonder how much of the affective and psychomotor domains are measured on them. Are the tests primarily on the cognitive domain? While I never liked being graded on the psychomotor skills because I did so poorly on them, the same was probably true for students who did poorly on the academics, but were graded on them anyway.
I found this chapter quite interesting, most likely because it focused on topics which fall into psychology, as well as education.