Using learning taxonomies as a model for the creation of
a model for Information Assurance Curriculum
development from Undergraduate to PhD
Dr. Steven Brown
Professor Mary Brown
Capella University
© 2010 Capella University - Confidential - Do not distribute
Introduction
• Information Security Curriculums
• Undergraduate
• Masters
• Doctoral (PhD and DBAs)
•
•
•
•
Associate level
Community colleges
K12
Certificates
© 2009 Capella University - Confidential - Do not distribute
2
Information Security Standards
• ISO/IEC 17799:20002 2005 Information technology - Security
techniques
q
- Code of ppractice for information securityy
management
• Committee on National Security Systems (CNSS)
• IEEE
• National Security Agency’s (NSA) Information Security
Assessment Model (IAM)
• The INFOSEC Assurance - Capability Maturity Model (IACMM)
• ISACA Model Curriculum for Information Security
Management
© 2009 Capella University - Confidential - Do not distribute
3
Problems encountered
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Teaching to a certification
Same certification offered at different levels
Overlap
Same standard at same degree level
Student frustration
Not critically thinking
No scholarly thinking
M
More
application
li i at all
ll levels
l l
•
g,
Additional areas added .e.g.,
• Project Management, Finance, Business Skills
• More hands on
© 2009 Capella University - Confidential - Do not distribute
4
Main Problem
• Learning models?
•
•
•
•
•
How to learn
Understand, evaluate
Analysis
Create
Learn
© 2009 Capella University - Confidential - Do not distribute
5
Learning Models
•
•
•
•
•
Bloom s (1956) taxonomy of educational objectives
Bloom’s
Anderson’s and Krathwohl’s (2001) taxonomy
g
learningg model
Fink’s ((2003)) significant
S.I. Hayakawa 1991 ladder of Abstraction
Conscious Competence Adult Learning Theory
© 2009 Capella University - Confidential - Do not distribute
6
Bloom’s taxonomy of the Cognitive Domain
•
•
•
•
•
•
Evaluation
Synthesis
Analysis
pp
Application
Comprehension
Knowledge
•
Bloom, B., Englehart, M. Furst, E., Hill, W., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational
goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York, Toronto: Longmans, Green.
© 2009 Capella University - Confidential - Do not distribute
7
Anderson’s and Krathwohl’s taxonomy
•
•
•
•
•
•
Create
Evaluate
Analyze
pp y
Apply
Understand
Remember
•
Anderson, L. W. and David R. Krathwohl, D. R., et al (Eds..) (2001) A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of
Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Allyn & Bacon. Boston, MA (Pearson Education Group)
© 2009 Capella University - Confidential - Do not distribute
8
Anderson’s and Krathwohl’s knowledge Dimensions
Anderson, L. W. and David R. Krathwohl, D. R., et al (Eds..) (2001) A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of
Educational Objectives. Allyn & Bacon. Boston, MA (Pearson Education Group)
© 2009 Capella University - Confidential - Do not distribute
9
Fink Significant Learning Model
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Learning How to Learn
Caring
Human Dimension
g
Integration
Application
Knowledge
Foundational
•
Fink, L. D. (2003). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass
© 2009 Capella University - Confidential - Do not distribute
10
Fink’s Interactive Nature of Significant Learning
© 2009 Capella University - Confidential - Do not distribute
11
Information Assurance Curriculum (Phase One)
© 2009 Capella University - Confidential - Do not distribute
12
Information Assurance Curriculum (Phase One)
© 2009 Capella University - Confidential - Do not distribute
13
Information Assurance Curriculum (Phase Two)
© 2009 Capella University - Confidential - Do not distribute
14
Conclusion
• Benefits
•
•
•
•
•
•
Robust Curriculum
Minimum overlap
Learner Satisfaction
Clear upward path
Continued Learning
Reinforced interactive learning
© 2009 Capella University - Confidential - Do not distribute
15
Questions?
• Thank you
• Dr.
Dr Steven Brown
• Professor Mary Brown
© 2009 Capella University - Confidential - Do not distribute
16
References
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s
taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Addison Wesley
An Evaluation of E-Learning on the Basis of Bloom's Taxonomy: An Exploratory Study.Full Text Available By: Halawi,
Leila A.; McCarthy, Richard V.; Pires, Sandra. Journal of Education for Business, Jul/Aug2009, Vol. 84 Issue 6, p374-380,
7p, 8 charts, 1 diagram; (AN 41891185)Database: Academic Search Premier' Database: Academic Search Premier
Beard, D. F. (2009). Successful Applications of the Balanced Scorecard in Higher Education. Journal of Education for
Business, 84(5), 275-282
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York: Longman.
Bloom, B. S., Englehart, T., Furst, E., Hill, W., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). A taxonomy of educational objectives, Handbook 1:
Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay.
Fallahi, C. R. (2008). Redesign of a Life Span Development Course Using Fink's taxonomy. Teaching of Psychology, 35(3),
169-17
Fink, L. D. (2003). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Jossey Bass.
Fink, L. D. (2004). A self-directed guide to designing courses for significant learning. Retrieved on August 30, 2007, from
http://trc.virginia.edu/Workshops/2004/Fink Designing Courses 2004.pdf.
Halasz, Ida M., [1994], Overview of the DA CUM Job Analysis Process, Report 199-I, US Department of Justice National
Institute of Corrections, NIC Academy, September, 1-3.
Kaplan R.
Kaplan,
R S.,
S & Norton,
Norton D.
D P.
P (1996b).
(1996b) Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system.
system Harvard Business
Review, 74(1), 75–85.
Shulman, L. S. (2004).Thewisdom of practice: Essays on teaching, learning and learning to teach. San Francisco: JosseyBass.
© 2009 Capella University - Confidential - Do not distribute
17