Reframing engineering curriculum based on bloom's taxonomy

Palabras clave: Bloom taxonomy, engineering, curriculum reform, Bloom Taxonomy, expectations, school reality, quality of curriculum, curriculum planning, educational innovation, forgetting curve, symbiosis


This article challenges traditional curriculum at engineering schools in Peru by moving engineering curriculum plans to be reframed based on the amount of concentrated time a learner can spend on a subject without becoming distracted with overloaded schedule by deliberate practice and less lecture rooms, learners gain a compelling expertise before graduation. After digging a little deeper into the student experience, we found the disconnect between what universities teach and the skills needed in the modern society. We have developed an empirical evidence for this estimate hinged on Bloom’s taxonomy in a case study at an engineering department. Our result has shown that, on average, 5.5 hours is needed to reach the top level of Bloom's taxonomy immediately after one-hour lecture. From the results of this study and supported by Bloom's taxonomy and the forgetting curve theory, it is concluded that engineering careers need to readjust study plans to concentrate more time on doing, designing, building and developing a particular domain of knowledge and establish tutorial practice for each unit of classroom time with a reasonable workload. Engineering of all strands are always involved with design and building things, hence it requires more tutorials and practical tasks in a specific domain and thus would contribute to a symbiotic relationship between science and technolog.


La descarga de datos todavía no está disponible.


ACM(2015) Software Engineering, Curriculum Guidelines for Undergraduate Degree Programs in oftware
Engineering, A Volume of the Computing Curricula Series.

Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of educational objectives: Complete edition, New York: Longman.

Ballen C. J., Wieman C, Salehi S., Searle J. B., and Zamudio K. R. (2017) Enhancing Diversity in Undergraduate Science: Self-Efficacy Drives Performance Gains with Active Learning, CBE—Life Sciences Education

Chapman, W. (1992). Engineering Modeling and Design. New York: Routledge.

Colvin G. (2008). Talent is overrated: what really separates world class performers from everyone else? ISPN 978-1591842248 Colvin publisher, The Penguin Group.

Dalkir, K., (2017). Knowledge management in theory and practice. MIT press.

Doll Jr, W. E. (2015). A post-modern perspective on curriculum. Teachers College Press.

Gladwell M. (2008) Outliers: the story of success Int’led, ISBN 978-0-316- 03669-6. Gladwell Publisher, Little, Brown and Company.International Association of Engineers (2016, December 17th) About IAENG. Retrieved from

Krathwohl D.R. (2010) A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy: An Overview

Kiraly, D., & Piotrowska, M. (2014). Towards an Emergent Curriculum Development Model for the European Graduate Placement Scheme. In Conference proceedings. The future of education (p. 368). libreriauniversitaria. it Edizioni.

Mousavifard, F. and Ayoubi, A., (2018). Innovation and training in engineering management: an essentiality, a necessity or a choice? International Journal of Information, Business and Management, 10(1), pp. 230-244.

Murre J.M.J., Dros J. (2015) Replication and Analysis of Ebbinghaus’ Forgetting Curve. PLoS ONE 10(7)
Pressman, R. S. (2008). Software engineering: A practitioner's approach (9th ed.). Boston, Mass.: McGraw Hill.

Soto, M.A., (2018). Imaginary Realities: Curriculum Change that Ignores Classroom Contexts. International Perspectives on Teachers Living with Curriculum Change. Springer, pp. 205-227.

Tuyet T. (2012) Is the learning approach of students from the Confucian heritage culture problematic? Educational Research for Policy and Practice

Roy W., Regina K, Mackness J (2011) Emergent learning and learning ecologies in Web 2.0

Marton, F., Tsui, A. B., Chik, P. P., Ko, P. Y., & Lo, M. L. (2004). Classroom discourse and the space of learning. Routledge.

Englund, T., (2016). On moral education through deliberative communication. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 48(1), pp. 58-76. Wieman C. (2010) Why Not Try a Scientific Approach to Science Education? The Magazine of Higher Learning, Journal, Volume 39, 2007 - Issue 5

Wieman C. E. (2014) Large-scale comparison of science teaching methods sends clear message, Department of Physics and Graduate School of Education, Stanford University, Stanford
Artículo original