Chile has a 400-page government document that defines what millions of kids learn every year. I extracted all 718 learning objectives individually, classified them by subject, grade level, and thematic axis, and built a knowledge graph with 778 interconnected nodes in Obsidian.
Then I added an analysis layer: I used NLP to extract the main verb from each learning objective and classified it according to Bloom's Revised Taxonomy (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001) into 6 cognitive levels: Remember, Comprehend, Apply, Analyze, Evaluate and Create.
Key findings:
- 42% of the curriculum is Apply — read, write, calculate, practice
- 39% is Remember + Understand — identify, describe, recognize
- Only 18% requires higher-order thinking (Analyze, Evaluate, Create)
But the interesting part is in the details:
- Visual Arts has 50% higher-order thinking. A 6-year-old is asked to create artwork and critically evaluate others' work. It's the most cognitively demanding subject in the entire curriculum.
- Physical Education has 1.5%. Almost everything is "execute movements." No designing games, no evaluating team strategies--
- In grades 1-2, Analyze and Evaluate are literally 0%. They don't appear until grade 3 — yet Visual Arts already asks 6-year-olds to create and evaluate.
- Progression is real but slow: from 11% higher-order in grade 1 to 24% in grade 5.
The question isn't whether 18% is "good" or "bad": kids need solid foundations before tackling more complex tasks, but the question is: if Visual Arts proves that a 6-year-old CAN think critically and create, why don't other subjects even try?
Methodology: Automated extraction of 718 learning objectives → verb-based classification using Bloom's Revised Taxonomy. Coverage: 91% (651/718). Tools: Python, Obsidian, NLP.
Full article with more context (in Spanish): https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/convert%C3%AD-el-curr%C3%ADculum-chileno-de-educaci%C3%B3n-b%C3%A1sica-en-marshall-tlkqf/
If anyone wants the Obsidian vault or raw data, DM me.