The affective domain plays an undeniable role in education. The Maslowian hierarchy of needs put self-actualization (creativity, problem-solving, ethical reasoning etc) right on top of the peak, and rightfully so. If our more basic needs are not met, there is no internal mechanism with which to realize our higher potential. Emotional needs occupy the bridge between the basic physiological, security-based needs, and those of self-esteem, achievement and self-realization.

Studies have shown a direct relationship between the stress response of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis leading to higher cortisol production and the incidence of cognitive dysfunction, especially in the elderly. Higher levels of serum cortisol are associated with lower levels of performance in areas such as language, information processing, hand-eye coordination, visual memory and problem solving. Simply put-- we do not think well when we do not feel well. and that 'feel' can be just as much psychological as it is physiological.

An overly competitive society can impede one's sense of belonging and acceptance and that in turn, can interfere with a student's ability to do well, because the focus then turns to self-preservation and the resultant anxiety of doing it in an environment that is perceived as being hostile or apathetic. The functioning then turns to survival mode, leaving little energy for higher critical or creative pursuits.

This may belie the possibiility and fact that some learners still do very well in the face of adversity. In that case, it would seem that the affective domain is being taken care of by agents outside of school. The home environment plays an enormous role, as do other members of the community. We need to stop short to think about what 'success' really means and how we can balance the affective with the cognitive (and psychomotor, for young learners) to realize the essential goals of education and of life at large.

Affective domain is a great method that utilizes learning skills which are predominantly related to emotional (affective) processes. It utilizes behaviors of awareness, interest, attention, concern, and responsibility, and ability to listen and respond in interactions with others. Obviously in our penchant for evaluating student results as a basis for teacher’s quality we certainly will be missing the point. Affective domain will develop well rounded students with broad abilities but they may not be immediately be visible in the form of test scores. There should be a better mechanism for school evaluation instead of just student scores.

http://pcrest.com/LO/FGB/2-8.pdf

http://epltt.coe.uga.edu/index.php?title=Teaching_and_Learning_in_Affective_Domain

a very interesting question - I think that we do risk focussing on the easily quantified outcomes of learning, and this often means looking to aspect of knowledge acquisition, without considering whether or how this new knowledge has been internalised. A student can sit through a teaching session, parrot back the key concepts, but not necessarily have a true understanding or acceptance of the meaning. The difficulty is often associated with the social value given to these measurable outcomes - there is less interest in placing resources and making time available to allow for development of learning in the affective domain, and when this does occur, it is difficult to quantify in a way that allows it to be seen as a valuable contribution and one that needs to be supported.

The emotional dimension and the cognitive dimension of mental life are so intimately intertwined that the neglect of either results in passions ruling over reason or reason becoming more brutish than any brute. Children should be cultured in myth and literature in order to have them nurture a native inclination towards what is true and good. Plato, who was very wary about the arts, still believed that children ought to be directed towards right feelings towards what they are teaching. Songs, poetry, literature were all to be carefully examined in order to cultivate the Good in each student.

Hi Robert,

most contemporary theories of learning recognise that learning is a complex and multi-faceted process that involves social, emotional and cognitive domains. The work of Illeris (2007).

This is an excerpt from my thesis to further explain (Mowbray, 2010)

Illeris (2007) has proposed that all learning consists of two interrelated processes. He identified these as interaction and acquisition. Interaction relates to the processes occurring between the individual and the environment or the social elements of learning. Acquisition relates to the processes of acquiring knowledge, which always includes content and incentive (Illeris, 2007). The content element of acquisition concerns what is learned. This may be any nature of knowledge including “skills, opinions, understanding, insights, meanings, attitudes, qualifications and/or competence” (p. 24). The incentive element of acquisition encompasses the motivations, emotions and will that sustain the fundamental mental energy involved in learning (2007). In any learning, the content and incentive dimensions of acquisition are synergistically triggered by the interactive process between the individual and the environment to promote or impede understanding (Illeris, 2007).

References

Illeris, K. (2007). How we learn: Learning and non-learning in school and beyond. London: Routledge.

Illeris, K. (Ed.). (2009). Contemporary theories of learning. Abingdon: Routledge.

Mowbray, S. (2010). Students’ perspectives on impacts of the PhD process: The PhD as the acquisition of intellectual virtues. PhD thesis, University of Western Sydney, Australia. (link below)

Hope this is useful

best

Susan

http://handle.uws.edu.au:8081/1959.7/499869

I am working on the same topic and I need some on to guide me to sources where I can find:

1.  comparison of the three domains showing % improvement or gains made by students

2. Comparison of the three domains showing most preferred domain by instructors for assessment in any content area. 

certainly we can not specify that a certain domain is the most to be used for evaluation in teaching and learning but what is the best is to have both, we should have a certain system that we can be able to evaluate all the domains, because on their combination we can conclude that the training is effective, and that is one need to have a diverse of knowledge(cognitive domain), must internalizes this knowledge and affects his feelings and attitudes, emotions as well as the way a person is acting on the society(affective domain) and also one must be able to put all he/she gained in the classroom to a practical orientation, that is in day to day activities.(psychomotor domain).

I sincerely need more clarification on that, and some theories to support

AFFECTIVE DOMAIN plays an undeniable roles in the process of total development of a child. To me, I see this domain (affective) as the major domain that direct learning, because, the emotional state, interest and wiliness of the learner are very important in any process of teaching and learning. There is need to shift focus to this domain and explore it in total.

This domain has suffered great neglect because of the difficulty encountered during evaluation which makes people makes researchers focus only on the cognitive domain. There is need for researchers to come together and agree on a standard way to evaluate this domain that will be so easy just like the cognitive domain, so that we can improve our education system.