BLOOMS TAXONOMY

BLOOMS TAXONOMYA BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO THE ORIGINAL ANDREVISED TAXONOMIESWHAT IS BLOOMS TAXONOMY?A classification system for levels of behavior that are important in learningKnowledge is acquired at certain definable levelsThe taxonomy is cumulative and hierarchicalLevels build on top of each other Each level contains all behaviors from previous levelsSimple recall of facts at the lowest level Mastery of a level required before moving up to the next higher oneStudents continue moving up levels to the highest one (Evaluation in original, Create in Revised)

Blooms Taxonomy outlines six levels of cognitive processes: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.

These levels were ordered from concrete to abstract and have been categorized between lower- and higher-order thinking skills.

Lower-order thinking is often characterized by the recall of information or the application of concepts or knowledge to familiar situations and contexts.

Higher- order thinking calls for more cognitively complex processes that require conceiving, manipulating, and dealing abstractly with ideas.

2HOW DID IT HAPPEN?Benjamin Bloom headed a committee of educational psychologists that devised the classification system in 1956. The committee was formed out of a meeting of the American Psychological Association (APA). The group came up with three major areas of educational activities:- Cognitive: mental skills (Knowledge)- Psychomotor: manual or physical skills (Skills) - Affective: growth in feelings or emotional areas (Attitude)

The committee focused on the cognitive domain and developed six levels within it.

Formally released as the Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, The classification of Educational Goals, Handbook I: Cognitive Domain it has become simply become known as Blooms Taxonomy to educators, educational psychologists and learning theorists.

3WHAT IS IT FOR?Writing educational objectivesDevelopment of most testing formatsIdentifying critical thinking in studentsTaxonomy does not explicitly define critical thinking Six knowledge levels constitute critical thinking Levels clarify what critical thinking and understanding mean

Educators and researchers have been using the taxonomy as a guide not only for writing and evaluating objectives and assessments but also for the use and evaluation of questioning strategies.

Critical thinking is a theoretical construct; instead of measuring it directly, we must measure behaviors that point to it.

4BLOOMS ORIGINAL SIX LEVELSKNOWLEDGECOMPREHENSIONAPPLICATIONANALYSISSYNTHESISEVALUATIONIn the original taxonomy, lower-order thinking skills provided the prerequisites required for achieving higher-order thinking skills.

In the schema of Blooms original taxonomy, the cognitive process levels build in increasing sophistication and complexity, moving from knowledge to comprehension to application to analysis to synthesis and, finally, to evaluation.5BLOOMS ORIGINAL SIX LEVELSKNOWLEDGERETRIEVING, RECOGNIZING, AND RECALLING RELEVANT KNOWLEDGE FROM LONG-TERM MEMORY

FINDARRANGECOUNTDRAWDEFINEDESCRIBEDUPLICATEIDENTIFYLABELLISTLOCATEMATCHMEMORIZENAMEORDEROUTLINEPOINTQUOTEREADRECALLRECITERECOGNIZEREPRODUCERETRIEVESELECTSEQUENCESTATETELLWRITEAt the lowest level, Knowledge, the student exhibits mastery of previously learned material by recalling facts, terminology, basic concepts and answers attached to specific questions. At the knowledge level, expectations of learning are about simple recall, the ability to access facts from long-tem memory and then state them as appropriate responses.

These verbs characterize cognitive processes at the knowledge level.6BLOOMS ORIGINAL SIX LEVELSKNOWLEDGERETRIEVING, RECOGNIZING, AND RECALLING RELEVANT KNOWLEDGE FROM LONG-TERM MEMORY

FINDARRANGECOUNTDRAWDEFINEDESCRIBEDUPLICATEIDENTIFYLABELLISTLOCATEMATCHMEMORIZENAMEORDEROUTLINEPOINTQUOTEREADRECALLRECITERECOGNIZEREPRODUCERETRIEVESELECTSEQUENCESTATETELLWRITEBLOOMS ORIGINAL SIX LEVELSCOMPREHENSIONREQUIRES KNOWLEDGECONSTRUCTING MEANING FROM ORAL, WRITTEN, AND GRAPHIC MESSAGES THROUGH INTERPRETING, EXEMPLIFYING, SUMMARIZING, CLASSIFYING, INFERRING, COMPARING, AND EXPLAININGASSOCIATECLASSIFYCOMPARECOMPUTECONCLUDECONTRASTCONVERTDEFENDDEMONSTRATEDIFFERENTIATEDISCUSSDISTINGUISHESTIMATEEXPLAINEXPRESSEXTENDEXTRAPOLATEGENERALIZEGIVE EXAMPLESIDENTIFYILLUSTRATEINDICATEINFERINTERPRETLOCATEPARAPHRASEPREDICTRECOGNIZEREPORTRESTATEREVIEWSUMMARIZEHaving mastered the basic knowledge of a subject, the student then moves to the comprehension level by demonstrating an elementary understanding of facts and ideas. That mastery is exhibited by organizing, comparing, translating, interpreting, giving descriptions and stating main ideas of a particular subject. Rather than just repeating information about a particular subject, the student can assign meaning to previously learned facts, 8BLOOMS ORIGINAL SIX LEVELSAPPLICATIONREQUIRES KNOWLEDGE & COMPREHENSIONUSING KNOWLEDGE TO EXECUTE A PROCEDUREADDAPPLYCALCULATECHANGECHOOSECLASSIFYCOMPLETECOMPUTEDEMONSTRATEDETERMINEDEVELOPDISCOVERDIVIDEDRAMATIZEEMPLOYEXAMINEFORMULATEGRAPHINTERVIEWMANIPULATEMODIFYMULTIPLYOPERATEORGANIZEPERFORMPRACTICEPREPAREPRODUCERELATEROLE-PLAYSCHEDULESELECTSHOPSHOWSKETCHSOLVESUBTRACTTRANSFERTRANSLATEUSEWith knowledge and comprehension as a foundation, the student can begin solving problems in the application level, applying acquired knowledge, facts, techniques and rules in different ways9BLOOMS ORIGINAL SIX LEVELSANALYSISREQUIRES KNOWLEDGE, COMPREHENSION & APPLICATIONbreaking material into constituent parts, and determining how the parts relate to one another and to an overall structure or purpose through differentiating, organizing, and attributingBREAKING MATERIAL INTO CONSTITUENT PARTS, AND DETERMINING HOW THE PARTS RELATE TO ONE ANOTHER AND TO AN OVERALL STRUCTURE OR PURPOSE THROUGH DIFFERENTIATING, ORGANIZING, AND ATTRIBUTINGANALYZEAPPRAISEAPPRAISEBREAK DOWNCHARACTERIZECRITICIZEDEBATEDEDUCEDIAGRAMDISCRIMINATEEXPERIMENTINSPECTINVENTORYOUTLINEQUESTIONRESEARCHSEPARATESUBDIVIDEUTILIZEexamining the breaking information into parts of identifying motives or causes; making inferences and finding evidence to support generalizations.10BLOOMS ORIGINAL SIX LEVELSSYNTHESISREQUIRES KNOWLEDGE, COMPREHENSION, APPLICATION & ANALYSISMAKING JUDGMENTS BASED ON CRITERIA AND STANDARDSARGUEASSESSATTACKCOMPOSECONSTRUCTCREATECRITIQUEDESIGNDEVELOPEVALUATEINTEGRATEINVENTJUDGEMAKEMEASUREORGANIZEPERFORMPLANPRODUCEPROPOSERANKRATEREVISEREWRITESCORESUPPORTTESTVALUEWEIGHcompiling information together in a different way by combining elements in a new pattern or proposing alternative solutions.11BLOOMS ORIGINAL SIX LEVELSEVALUATIONREQUIRES KNOWLEDGE, COMPREHENSION, APPLICATION. ANALYSIS & SYNTHESISPUTTING ELEMENTS TOGETHER TO FORM A COHERENT OR FUNCTIONAL WHOLE; REORGANIZING ELEMENTS INTO A NEW PATTERN OR STRUCTURE THROUGH GENERATING, PLANNING, OR PRODUCINGARRANGEASSEMBLECATEGORIZECOLLECTCOMBINECOMPILEDERIVEDEVISEINTEGRATEMANAGEMODIFYPRESCRIBEPRIORITIZEPROVERECONSTRUCTTRELATE TREORGANIZE TRESTATE TSET UP TSPECIFY TSYNTHESIZE TTRANSFORM presenting and defending opinions by making judgments about information, validity of ideas or quality of work based on a set of criteria.12

CRITICISMS OF THE TAXONOMYHierarchical structure over-simplifies learning behaviorsHierarchy can misstate an objectives complexity

Objectives from lower levels can be more complex than those in higher levels

Sequential nature does not reflect actual cognitive processes

CRITICISMS OF THE TAXONOMY (cont.)Does not consider all knowledge modalitiesStudents expected to think critically without adequate factual knowledgeCumulative nature of levels doesnt suit all learning tasks - Mastery of skills in a higher level can occur prior to mastery of skills from the levels beneath itBehaviorism basis for the taxonomy- Behaviorism pedagogy now largely rejectedTaxonomy should reflect more learner-centric pedagogiesCognitivismConstructivism

Responding to criticisms, Lorin W. Anderson (a former student of Blooms) met with a consortium of educational experts in 1995 in order to revise the taxonomy.

Over the next six years, the consortium met annually to make recommendations and report findings.

In 2001, the group released Blooms Revised Taxonomy, with significant differences from the original taxonomy.

The revised taxonomy was meant to focus on the active nature of learning.REVISING THE TAXONOMY1995

THE REVISED TAXONOMY2001Some hierarchical aspects removed

Less complex levels not prerequisite to more complex levels

Structural changes:Levels nouns changed to verbsReflects active process of learning- Top two levels transposed - Three levels renamed

THE REVISED TAXONOMY2001 (cont.)Move from one-dimensional taxonomy to two dimensional structure

Knowledge dimension added to Cognitive process dimension - Meant to better represent duality of learning - Taxonomy set up in a 4 x 6 matrix - Knowledge dimension on horizontal axis - Cognitive processes dimension on vertical axis

THE REVISED TAXONOMYKNOWLEDGECOMPREHENSIONAPPLICATIONANALYSISSYNTHESISEVALUATIONTHE REVISED TAXONOMYKNOWLEDGECOMPREHENSIONAPPLICATIONANALYSISSYNTHESISEVALUATIONTHE REVISED TAXONOMYREMEMBERINGUNDERSTANDINGAPPLICATIONANALYSIScreatingEVALUATINGTHE REVISED TAXONOMYREMEMBERINGUNDERSTANDINGAPPLYINGANALYZINGCREATINGEVALUATINGTHE REVISED TAXONOMYREMEMBERINGUNDERSTANDINGAPPLYINGANALYZINGCREATINGEVALUATINGTHE REVISED TAXONOMYREMEMBERINGUNDERSTANDINGAPPLYINGANALYZINGevaluatingcreatingThe Cognitive Process DimensionThe Knowledge Dimension1Remember2Understand3Apply4Analyze5Evaluate6CreateA.Factual KnowledgeB.Conceptual KnowledgeC.Procedural KnowledgeD.Meta-Cognitive KnowledgeTHE TAXONOMY MATRIXThe Cognitive Process DimensionThe Knowledge Dimension1Remember2Understand3Apply4Analyze5Evaluate6CreateA.Factual KnowledgeB.Conceptual KnowledgeC.Procedural KnowledgeD.Meta-Cognitive KnowledgeTHE TAXONOMY MATRIXTAXONOMY TOOL

A useful tool for helping to create lessons was developed by the Virginia Commonwealth University Medical School to help choose outcome verbs and match instructional to assessment questions for each level of the taxonomy. Go here to try it out.REFERENCESAviles, C.B. (1999). Understanding and testing for "critical thinking" with Bloom's Taxonomy of educational objectives. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Council on Social Work Education (45th, San Francisco, CA, March 10-13, 1999. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED446025.pdf

Bloom, B., S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Cognitive domain. NY: Longman.

Chan, C.V., Matthews, L.A. & Kaufman, D.R. (2009). A taxonomy characterizing complexity of consumer ehealth literacy. AMIA Annual Symposiums Proceedings, 2009, 86-90. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2815448/

Tigerskins Unreleased Ambient & Electronika Nuggets Mixtape 1994-96. [Audio recording].

Retrieved from Tigerskins Unreleased Ambient & Electronika Nuggets Mixtape 1994-96

Van Der Volgen, J. (2014, April 9). Blooms taxonomy tool [Blog post]. National Network of Libraries of Medicine. Retrieved from http://nnlm.gov/ntc/2014/04/09/blooms- taxonomy-tool/

Wiggins, G., McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA:Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.