The comparative examination of science curriculas

In this study technical and taxonomic examinations of the curricula objectives of 2000, 2005 and 2013 Science Curriculas applied in the last fifteen years have been carried out with regard to revised Bloom's cognitive area taxonomy. In the study document analysis method has been applied in view of qualitative perspective. A total of 2275 objectives limited to the cognitive areas have been examined. The assessment of the reliability of the classifications has been found out as 0.89 according to the formulas put forward by Miles and Huberman. As the curricula objectives have been examined in terms of knowledge dimensions, it has been deduced that the objectives have not been distributed proportionally to knowledge dimensions determined in the revised Bloom's cognitive area taxonomy, that most of the objectives have been focused mainly on conceptual knowledge dimension and that the objectives including the upper level cognitive knowledge have not been adequately provided. As the curricula objectives have been examined in terms of cognitive process dimensions, it has been concluded that the objectives have been distributed disproportionally to cognitive process levels arranged in the revised Bloom's cognitive area taxonomy and that the objectives mostly take part in comprehension level. Furthermore, it has been found out that the objectives concerning the upper level cognitive dimensions being one of the indispensable parts of bringing up qualified individuals have been involved on a limited level. In accordance with the cognitive process, it has been revealed that in 2000 science cirrucula 'Understanding', in 2005 cirrucula 'Creating' and in 2013 cirrucula 'Remembering', 'Applying', 'Analyzing' and 'Evaluating' dimensions are in the forefront in terms of objectives density. With regard to the knowledge dimension, it has been determined that in 2000 science cirrucula 'Factual' and 'Conceptual Knowledge', in 2005 'Procedural Knowledge' and in 2013 'Metacognitive Knowledge' dimensions take the lead. The proposals have been provided to curricula theorists, teachers, text book writers, instructional researchers, policy makers and parents in view of the obtained results.