Bloom's Taxonomy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The Bloom's Wheel, according to the Bloom's verbs and matching assessment types. The verbs are intended to be feasible and measurable.
Bloom's Taxonomy is a classification of learning objectives within education proposed in 1956 by a committee of educators chaired by Benjamin Bloom who also edited the first volume of the standard text, Taxonomy of educational objectives: the classification of educational goals[1] (referred to as simply "the Handbook" below). Although named for Bloom, the publication followed a series of conferences from 1949 to 1953, which were designed to improve communication between educators on the design of curricula and examinations.[2][3]
It refers to a classification of the different objectives that educators set for students (learning objectives). Bloom's Taxonomy divides educational objectives into three "domains": Cognitive, Affective, and Psychomotor (sometimes loosely described as knowing/head, feeling/heart and doing/hands respectively). Within the domains, learning at the higher levels is dependent on having attained prerequisite knowledge and skills at lower levels.[4] A goal of Bloom's Taxonomy is to motivate educators to focus on all three domains, creating a more holistic form of education.[1]
A revised version of the taxonomy was created in 2000.[5][6][7]
Bloom's Taxonomy is considered to be a foundational and essential element within the education community as evidenced in the 1981 survey Significant writings that have influenced the curriculum: 1906-1981, by H.G. Shane and the 1994 yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education.
A mythology has grown around the taxonomy, possibly due to many people learning about the taxonomy through second hand information. Bloom himself considered the Handbook,[1] "One of the most widely cited yet least read books in American education."[3] Contents [hide] * 1 Domains * 2 Cognitive * 3 Affective * 4 Psychomotor * 5 Definition of Knowledge * 6 Criticism of the Taxonomy * 7 Further reading * 8 See also * 9 References |
[edit] Domains
Key to understanding the taxonomy and its revisions, variations, and addenda over the years is an understanding that the original Handbook[1] in 1956 was intended only to focus on one of the three domains (as indicated in the domain specification in title: The Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Handbook I: Cognitive Domain), but there was expectation that additional material would be generated for the other domains (as indicated in the numbering of the handbook in the title).
The second volume, Handbook II: Affective Domain edited by David Krathwohl was published in 1964.[8]
There was no Handbook III for the Psychomotor domain published by the committee as the consensus was that (as college level academics) they lacked the necessary experience to do the job properly.[3] Substitute domain taxonomies have been published by various authors[9][10][11] to fill the gap.
Bloom also considered the initial effort to be a starting point, as evidenced in a memorandum from 1971 in which he said, "Ideally each major field should have its own taxonomy in its own language - more detailed, closer to the special language and thinking of its experts, reflecting its own appropriate sub-divisions and levels of education, with possible new categories, combinations of categories and omitting categories as appropriate."[5]
[edit] Cognitive

Categories in the cognitive domain of Bloom's Taxonomy (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001)
Skills in the cognitive domain revolve around knowledge, comprehension, and critical thinking of a particular topic. Traditional education tends to emphasize the skills in this domain, particularly the lower-order objectives.
There are six levels in the taxonomy, moving through the lowest order processes to the highest:
Knowledge
Exhibit memory of previously-learned materials by recalling facts, terms, basic concepts and answers * Knowledge of specifics - terminology, specific facts * Knowledge of ways and means of dealing with specifics - conventions, trends and sequences, classifications and categories, criteria, methodology * Knowledge of the universals and abstractions in a field - principles and generalizations, theories and structures
Questions like: What are the health benefits of eating apples?
Comprehension
Demonstrative understanding of facts and ideas by organizing, comparing, translating, interpreting, giving descriptions, and stating main ideas * Translation * Interpretation * Extrapolation
Questions like: Compare the health benefits of eating apples vs. oranges.
Application
Using new knowledge. Solve problems to new situations by applying acquired knowledge, facts, techniques and rules in a different way
Questions like: Which kinds of apples are best for baking a pie, and why?
Analysis
Examine and break information into parts by identifying motives or causes. Make inferences and find evidence to support generalizations * Analysis of elements * Analysis of relationships * Analysis of organizational principles
Questions like: List four ways of serving foods made with apples and explain which ones have the highest health benefits. Provide references to support your statements.
Synthesis
Compile information together in a different way by combining elements in a new pattern or proposing alternative solutions * Production of a unique communication * Production of a plan, or proposed set of operations * Derivation of a set of abstract relations
Questions like: Convert an "unhealthy" recipe for apple pie to a "healthy" recipe by replacing your choice of ingredients. Explain the health benefits of using the ingredients you chose vs. the original ones.
Evaluation
Present and defend opinions by making judgments about information, validity of ideas or quality of work based on a set of criteria * Judgments in terms of internal evidence * Judgments in terms of external criteria
Questions like: Do you feel that serving apple pie for an after school snack for children is healthy? Why or why not?
[edit] Affective
Skills in the affective domain describe the way people react emotionally and their ability to feel another living thing's pain or joy. Affective objectives typically target the awareness and growth in attitudes, emotion, and feelings.
There are five levels in the affective domain moving through the lowest order processes to the highest:
Receiving
The lowest level; the student passively pays attention. Without this level no learning can occur.
Responding
The student actively participates in the learning process, not only attends to a stimulus; the student also reacts in some way.
Valuing
The student attaches a value to an object, phenomenon, or piece of information.
Organizing
The student can put together different values, information, and ideas and accommodate them within his/her own schema; comparing, relating and elaborating on what has been learned.
Characterizing
The student holds a particular value or belief that now exerts influence on his/her behaviour so that it becomes a characteristic.
[edit] Psychomotor
Skills in the psychomotor domain describe the ability to physically manipulate a tool or instrument like a hand or a hammer. Psychomotor objectives usually focus on change and/or development in behavior and/or skills.
Bloom and his colleagues never created subcategories for skills in the psychomotor domain, but since then other educators have created their own psychomotor taxonomies.[12] Simpson (1972) among other contributors, such as Harrow (1972) and Dave (1967), created a Psychomotor Taxonomy that helps to explain the behavior of typical learners or high performance athletes. The proposed levels are:
1. Perception: The ability to use sensory cues to guide motor activity. This ranges from sensory stimulation, through cue selection, to translation. Examples: Detects non-verbal communication cues. Estimate where a ball will land after it is thrown and then moving to the correct location to catch the ball. Adjusts heat of stove to correct temperature by smell and taste of food. Adjusts the height of the forks on a forklift by comparing where the forks are in relation to the pallet. Key Words: chooses, describes, detects, differentiates, distinguishes, identifies, isolates, relates, selects.
2. Set: Readiness to act. It includes mental, physical, and emotional sets. These three sets are dispositions that predetermine a person's response to different situations (sometimes called mindsets). Examples: Knows and acts upon a sequence of steps in a manufacturing process. Recognize one's abilities and limitations. Shows desire to learn a new process (motivation). NOTE: This subdivision of Psychomotor is closely related with the “Responding to phenomena” subdivision of the Affective domain. Key Words: begins, displays, explains, moves, proceeds, reacts, shows, states, volunteers.
3. Guided Response: The early stages in learning a complex skill that includes imitation and trial and error. Adequacy of performance is achieved by practicing. Examples: Performs a mathematical equation as demonstrated. Follows instructions to build a model. Responds hand-signals of instructor while learning to operate a forklift. Key Words: copies, traces, follows, react, reproduce, responds
4. Mechanism: This is the intermediate stage in learning a complex skill. Learned responses have become habitual and the movements can be performed with some confidence and proficiency. Examples: Use a personal computer. Repair a leaking faucet. Drive a car. Key Words: assembles, calibrates, constructs, dismantles, displays, fastens, fixes, grinds, heats, manipulates, measures, mends, mixes, organizes, sketches.
5. Complex Overt Response: The skillful performance of motor acts that involve complex movement patterns. Proficiency is indicated by a quick, accurate, and highly coordinated performance, requiring a minimum of energy. This category includes performing without hesitation, and automatic performance. For example, players will often utter sounds of satisfaction or expletives as soon as they hit a tennis ball or throw a football, because they can tell by the feel of the act what the result will produce. Examples: Maneuvers a car into a tight parallel parking spot. Operates a computer quickly and accurately. Displays competence while playing the piano. Key Words: assembles, builds, calibrates, constructs, dismantles, displays, fastens, fixes, grinds, heats, manipulates, measures, mends, mixes, organizes, sketches. NOTE: The Key Words are the same as Mechanism, but will have adverbs or adjectives that indicate that the performance is quicker, better, more accurate, etc.
6. Adaptation: Skills are well developed and the individual can modify movement patterns to fit special requirements. Examples: Responds effectively to unexpected experiences. Modifies instruction to meet the needs of the learners. Perform a task with a machine that it was not originally intended to do (machine is not damaged and there is no danger in performing the new task). Key Words: adapts, alters, changes, rearranges, reorganizes, revises, varies.
7. Origination: Creating new movement patterns to fit a particular situation or specific problem. Learning outcomes emphasize creativity based upon highly developed skills. Examples: Constructs a new theory. Develops a new and comprehensive training programming. Creates a new gymnastic routine. Key Words: arranges, builds, combines, composes, constructs, creates, designs, initiate, makes, originates.
[edit] Definition of Knowledge
In the appendix to Handbook I, there is a definition of knowledge which serves as the apex for an alternative, summary classification of the educational goals. This is significant as the Taxonomy has been called upon significantly in other fields such as knowledge management, potentially out of context “ | Knowledge, as defined here, involves the recall of specifics and universals, the recall of methods and processes, or the recall of a pattern, structure, or setting. (Bloom et al. 1956 p 201) |

Bloom’s Taxonomy
"Taxonomy” simply means “classification”, so the well-known taxonomy of learning objectives is an attempt (within the behavioural paradigm) to classify forms and levels of learning. It identifies three “domains” of learning (see below), each of which is organised as a series of levels or pre-requisites. It is suggested that one cannot effectively — or ought not try to — address higher levels until those below them have been covered (it is thus effectively serial in structure). As well as providing a basic sequential model for dealing with topics in the curriculum, it also suggests a way of categorising levels of learning, in terms of the expected ceiling for a given programme. Thus in the Cognitive domain, training for technicians may cover knowledge, comprehension and application, but not concern itself with analysis and above, whereas full professional training may be expected to include this and synthesis and evaluation as well. * Cognitive: the most-used of the domains, refers to knowledge structures (although sheer “knowing the facts” is its bottom level). It can be viewed as a sequence of progressive contextualisation of the material. (Based on Bloom, 1956)

The model above is included because it is still common currency, but Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) have made some apparently minor but actually significant modifications, to come up with:

Revised taxonomy of the cognitive domain following Anderson and Krathwohl (2001)
Note the new top category, which is about being able to create new knowledge within the domain, and the move from nouns to verbs.
In higher education, "understand" is still—in my view—problematic in its positioning. There is a higher, contextualised level of "understanding" which comes only with attempting to evaluate ideas and to try them out in new ways, or to "create" with them. It is what I expect at Master's level. The taxonomy is an epistemological rather than psychological hierarchy, but it also has a basic chronological element: you achieve certain levels before others. This higher, Gestalt, level of understanding comes last, in my experience: my principal evidence is in the use of research methods. The "real", intuitive, contextualised, critical, strategic understanding only happens when you have tried to be creative within the field... Argue with me (use the "comments welcome" link below). And thanks to all the people who have done so; I hope you found it a useful activity. I did!
More on the revised version, including the magical verbs to use in objectives at different levels
Yet more
Apologies to the reader who prefers "Analyzing"! * Affective: the Affective domain has received less attention, and is less intuitive than the Cognitive. It is concerned with values, or more precisely perhaps with perception of value issues, and ranges from mere awareness (Receiving), through to being able to distinguish implicit values through analysis. (Kratwohl, Bloom and Masia (1964))

* Psycho-Motor: Bloom never completed work on this domain, and there have been several attempts to complete it. One of the simplest versions has been suggested by Dave (1975): it fits with the model of developing skill put forward by Reynolds (1965), and it also draws attention to the fundamental role of imitation in skill acquisition.

Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives The development and use of instructional objectives is discussed in detail in chapter 15. At the present time it is sufficient to state that instructional objectives are concrete statements of the goals toward which instruction is directed. They play an important role in the process of learning and instruction.
When developing instructional objectives, providing instruction, and evaluating student performance, it is important to keep in mind that there are different levels or outcomes of learning. Distinguishing among different levels and outcomes of learning is important. If teachers are unaware of different levels of learning, they are likely to focus on one level to the detriment of others. For example, a teacher may teach a vast amount of factual information but never get around to teaching students to apply and synthesize this information. Or a teacher may teach higher level thinking skills without realizing that these skills require the prior learning of basic skills that must be integrated into these higher order skills.
In addition, it is not unusual to see a teacher who wants her students to learn higher order thinking skills give examinations that require only lower level skills. Under such circumstances, the students are likely to put their efforts into the lower order skills. Skills at different levels must be taught (and tested) in different ways; and therefore it is important for teachers and other instructional designers to take into account the different levels and outcomes of instruction. Bloom's (1956) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives is the most renowned description of the levels of cognitive performance. The levels of the Taxonomy and examples of activities at each level are given in Table 3.3. The levels of this taxonomy are considered to be hierarchical. That is, learners must master lower level objectives first before they can build on them to reach higher level objectives. Table 3.3
Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives
Cognitive Domain 1. Knowledge (Remembering previously learned material) Educational Psychology: Give the definition of punishment.
Mathematics: State the formula for the area of a circle.
English / Language Arts: Recite a poem. 2. Comprehension (Grasping the meaning of material) Educational Psychology: Paraphrase in your own words the definition of punishment; answer questions about the meaning of punishment.
Mathematics: Given the mathematical formula for the area of a circle, paraphrase it using your own words.
English / Language Arts: Explain what a poem means. 3. Application (Using information in concrete situations) Educational Psychology: Given an anecdote describing a teaching situation, identify examples of punishment.
Mathematics: Compute the area of actual circles.
English / Language Arts: Identify examples of metaphors in a poem. 4. Analysis (Breaking down material into parts) Educational Psychology: Given an anecdote describing a teaching situation, identify the psychological strategies intentionally or accidentally employed.
Mathematics: Given a math word problem, determine the strategies that would be necessary to solve it.
English / Language Arts: Given a poem, identify the specific poetic strategies employed in it. 5. Synthesis (Putting parts together into a whole) Educational Psychology: Apply the strategies learned in educational psychology in an organized manner to solve an educational problem.
Mathematics: Apply and integrate several different strategies to solve a mathematical problem.
English / Language Arts: Write an essay or a poem. 6. Evaluation (Judging the value of a product for a given purpose, using definite criteria) Educational Psychology: Observe another teacher (or yourself) and determine the quality of the teaching performance in terms of the teacher's appropriate application of principles of educational psychology.
Mathematics: When you have finished solving a problem (or when a peer has done so) determine the degree to which that problem was solved as efficiently as possible.
English / Language Arts: Analyze your own or a peer's essay in terms of the principles of composition discussed during the semester. Knowledge (recalling information) represents the lowest level in Bloom's taxonomy. It is "low" only in the sense that it comes first - it provides the basis for all "higher" cognitive activity. Only after a learner is able to recall information is it possible to move on to comprehension (giving meaning to information). The third level is application, which refers to using knowledge or principles in new or real-life situations. The learner at this level solves practical problems by applying information comprehended at the previous level. The fourth level is analysis - breaking down complex information into simpler parts. The simpler parts, of course, were learned at earlier levels of the taxonomy. The fifth level, synthesis, consists of creating something that did not exist before by integrating information that had been learned at lower levels of the hierarchy. Evaluation is the highest level of Bloom's hierarchy. It consists of making judgments based on previous levels of learning to compare a product of some kind against a designated standard.
Teachers often use the term application inaccurately. They assume anytime students use the information in any way whatsoever that this represents the application level of Bloom's taxonomy. This is not correct.
A child who "uses" his memorization of the multiplication tables to write down "15" next to "5 times 3 equals" is working at the knowledge level, not the application level. A child who studies Spanish and then converses with a native Mexican is almost certainly at the synthesis level, not at the application level. If the child made a deliberate attempt to get his past tense right, this would be an example of application. However, in conversing he would almost certainly be creating something new that did not exist before by integrating information that had been learned at lower levels of the hierarchy. Bloom's use of the term application differs from our normal conversational use of the term. When working at any of the four highest levels of the taxonomy, we "apply" what we have learned. At the application level, we "just apply." At the higher levels, we "apply and do something else." The main value of the Taxonomy is twofold: (1) it can stimulate teachers to help students acquire skills at all of these various levels, laying the proper foundation for higher levels by first assuring mastery of lower-level objectives; and (2) it provides a basis for developing measurement strategies to assess student performance at all these levels of learning.
There is not room in this book to discuss in detail each of the levels of Bloom's Taxonomy. A careful reading of Table 3.3 will help readers review or understand the important distinctions among these levels of educational outcomes. Review Quiz 4 will help you determine whether you understand these distinctions. Additional information can be found in the Workbook and in (Give citations here.). Gage and Berliner (1984) have expanded upon the Taxonomy with their concept of a behavior content matrix (Figure 3.4). Across the top are listed the topics covered in a unit of instruction. Down the side are listed the levels of the Taxonomy. By writing objectives at the appropriate intersection points, the teacher is able to develop both objectives and assessment strategies that cover the full range of expectations within each topic. Since not all topics lend themselves to objectives at every level of the Taxonomy, some of the cells in this matrix are blank; when higher level objectives occur with nothing at the lower level, the lower-level objectives would have to be learned in a different context