Bloom (1968). Learning for mastery

Bloom, B. S. (1968, May). Learning for mastery. Evaluation Comment, 1(2). Retrieved February 16, 2009, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED053419.

“The thesis of this paper is that, to promote mastery learning, 5 variables must be dealt with effectively: (1) aptitude for kinds of learning, viewed as the amount of time required by the learner to attain mastery of the task; (2) quality of instruction, viewed in terms of its approaching the optimum for a given learner; (3) ability to understand instruction, i.e., to understand the nature of the task and the procedures to follow; (4) perseverance, the amount of time one is willing to spend in learning; and (5) time allowed for learning, the key to mastery.” (Abstract)

“Basically, the problem of developing a strategy for mastery learning is one of determining how individual differences in learners can be related to the learning and teaching process.” (p 1)

“A learning strategy for mastery may be derived from the work of Carroll (1963), supported by the ideas of Morrison (1926), Bruner (1966), Skinner (1954), Suppes (1966), Goodlad and Anderson (1959), and Glaser (1968).” (p 2)

“Put in its most brief form the model proposed by Carroll (1963) makes it clear that if the students are normally distributed with respect to aptitude for some subject (mathematics, science, literature, history, etc.) and all the students are provided with exactly the same instruction (same in terms of amount of instruction, quality of instruction, and time available for learning), the end result will be a normal distribution on an appropriate measure of achievement.” (p 2-3)

“Conversely, if the students are normally distributed with respect to aptitude, but the kind and quality of instruction and the amount of time available for learning are made appropriate to the characteristics and needs of each student, the majority of students may be expected to achieve mastery of the subject. And, the relationship between aptitude and achievement should approach zero.” (p 3)

“Quite in contrast to this is Carroll’s (1963) view that aptitude is the amount of time required by the learner to attain mastery of a learning task.” (p 3)

“Carroll (1963) defines the quality of instruction in terms of the degree to which the presentation, explanation, and ordering of elements of the task to be learned approach the optimum for a given learner.” (p 4)

[Stopped reading at p 4]

[Notable references]

Carroll, John. (1963) A model of school learning. Teachers College Record. 64, 723-733.