Bloom's taxonomy was initially created for assessment purposes and it is often represented with a coloured pyramid. The taxonomical categories are arranged according to the intensity of mental processing required to team or master a skill, termed "lower-order" or "higher-order" (Adams, 2015, p. 152). At the lowest order, we have the element of knowledge, and it is the most straightforward to assess because learners just have to regurgitate or choose a correct answer from a list of potential terms. After that, Comprehension comes into play, requiring a higher level of processing. This element requires the learner to demonstrate what they know. The application level will then permit them to use what they have acquired during the first two levels to solve real-world problems.
Once the learners are able to apply concepts, they move onto the stages of analysis and synthesis. During these two levels, learners distinguish between relevant facts and inapplicable information, which will then be used to develop a new or improved output. Finally, once the product is created, it will have to be evaluated, which lies on taxonomy's highest order. This evaluation requires more intense critical thinking skills (Adams, 2015, p. 153).
Since its conception, the taxonomy has been revised, but its initial goals included the creation of: a standard list of learning objectives that can be applied across different disciplines, a resource that helps with measuring a learner's success within a course and multiple ways to compare different courses. Krathwohl (2002) stated that the revision of Bloom's taxonomy moves from being subject-focused to an expansion within each level to include the learner's cognitive and metacognitive processes (Krathwohl, 2002, p. 214). This goes beyond memorizing information to enable a deeper understanding of the content. Applying the students' meta-cognitive processes would help instructors create a more memorable and immersive learning experience. There is a conversion of terms that makes each level more explicit, for example, knowledge becomes remembering, comprehension becomes understanding, synthesis turns to creation, and lastly, the remaining three categories are reduced to apply, analyze and evaluate (p. 218).
It can be said that Bloom's taxonomy is a model of bottom-to-top design whereby the activities are directly connected to the learning objectives unique to an individual. Arneson and Offerdahl’s (2017) paper relates this method to improving visual literacy, therefore leading to developing more accurate forms of instruction or delivery of information (p. 2). This study also incorporates their Visualization Blooming tool (VBT) as part of their strategy and hence might benefit learners who are hearing and for intellectually impaired, as well as typical learners who retain information better from visual ones. Even in the VBT, practice seems to play an important role in the learning process.
In a study conducted by Beetham and Sharpe (2019), they discuss a survey tailored towards collecting real world application of the revised taxonomy resulted in the usefulness of certain digital technologies for learning. The activities listed by students could be applied to existing strategies. They included an additional action before going through the stages of taxonomy, and that was preparation (P. 256). It is essential that this be considered as over preparation or the lack thereof preliminary work could affect the execution of the activities and hence their eventual outcomes.
Ugur, Constantinescu and Stevens (2015) propose that Bloom's taxonomy can be used and evaluated in conjunction with the Self-determination Theory. This theory focuses on an individual's psyche and the concept of autonomy which helps an individual to learn (p.91). Combined with the taxonomy, a learner would have an enhanced experience because it is part of their personal well-being. This promotes self-awareness and gives the students motivation to learn something new and retain that interest long enough for practice to take place (p. 95). Based on the above analyses, certain elements of Bloom’s taxonomy should be considered when creating an accessible learning strategy or at the least, be consulted when planning a lesson to accommodate different learning styles.
References:
Adams N. E. (2015). Bloom's taxonomy of cognitive learning objectives. Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA, 103(3), 152–153. https://doi.org/10.3163
/1536-5050.103.3.010
Arneson, Jessie B., and Erika G. Offerdahl. “Visual Literacy in Bloom: Using Bloom’s Taxonomy to Support Visual Learning Skills.” CBE—Life Sciences Education, vol. 17, no. 1,
2018, doi:10.1187/cbe.17-08-0178.
Beetham, H. and, Sharpe, R. (2020). Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age. New York: Routledge, https://doi-org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/10.4324/9781351252805
Krathwohl, David R. “A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy: An Overview.” Theory Into Practice, vol. 41, no. 4, 2002, pp. 212–218., doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2.
Uğur, H., Constantinescu, P., & Stevens, M. J. (2015). Self-Awareness and Personal Growth: Theory and Application of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Eurasian Journal of Educational
Research, 15(60), 89-110. doi:10.14689/ejer.2015.60.6
Once the learners are able to apply concepts, they move onto the stages of analysis and synthesis. During these two levels, learners distinguish between relevant facts and inapplicable information, which will then be used to develop a new or improved output. Finally, once the product is created, it will have to be evaluated, which lies on taxonomy's highest order. This evaluation requires more intense critical thinking skills (Adams, 2015, p. 153).
Since its conception, the taxonomy has been revised, but its initial goals included the creation of: a standard list of learning objectives that can be applied across different disciplines, a resource that helps with measuring a learner's success within a course and multiple ways to compare different courses. Krathwohl (2002) stated that the revision of Bloom's taxonomy moves from being subject-focused to an expansion within each level to include the learner's cognitive and metacognitive processes (Krathwohl, 2002, p. 214). This goes beyond memorizing information to enable a deeper understanding of the content. Applying the students' meta-cognitive processes would help instructors create a more memorable and immersive learning experience. There is a conversion of terms that makes each level more explicit, for example, knowledge becomes remembering, comprehension becomes understanding, synthesis turns to creation, and lastly, the remaining three categories are reduced to apply, analyze and evaluate (p. 218).
It can be said that Bloom's taxonomy is a model of bottom-to-top design whereby the activities are directly connected to the learning objectives unique to an individual. Arneson and Offerdahl’s (2017) paper relates this method to improving visual literacy, therefore leading to developing more accurate forms of instruction or delivery of information (p. 2). This study also incorporates their Visualization Blooming tool (VBT) as part of their strategy and hence might benefit learners who are hearing and for intellectually impaired, as well as typical learners who retain information better from visual ones. Even in the VBT, practice seems to play an important role in the learning process.
In a study conducted by Beetham and Sharpe (2019), they discuss a survey tailored towards collecting real world application of the revised taxonomy resulted in the usefulness of certain digital technologies for learning. The activities listed by students could be applied to existing strategies. They included an additional action before going through the stages of taxonomy, and that was preparation (P. 256). It is essential that this be considered as over preparation or the lack thereof preliminary work could affect the execution of the activities and hence their eventual outcomes.
Ugur, Constantinescu and Stevens (2015) propose that Bloom's taxonomy can be used and evaluated in conjunction with the Self-determination Theory. This theory focuses on an individual's psyche and the concept of autonomy which helps an individual to learn (p.91). Combined with the taxonomy, a learner would have an enhanced experience because it is part of their personal well-being. This promotes self-awareness and gives the students motivation to learn something new and retain that interest long enough for practice to take place (p. 95). Based on the above analyses, certain elements of Bloom’s taxonomy should be considered when creating an accessible learning strategy or at the least, be consulted when planning a lesson to accommodate different learning styles.
References:
Adams N. E. (2015). Bloom's taxonomy of cognitive learning objectives. Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA, 103(3), 152–153. https://doi.org/10.3163
/1536-5050.103.3.010
Arneson, Jessie B., and Erika G. Offerdahl. “Visual Literacy in Bloom: Using Bloom’s Taxonomy to Support Visual Learning Skills.” CBE—Life Sciences Education, vol. 17, no. 1,
2018, doi:10.1187/cbe.17-08-0178.
Beetham, H. and, Sharpe, R. (2020). Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age. New York: Routledge, https://doi-org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/10.4324/9781351252805
Krathwohl, David R. “A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy: An Overview.” Theory Into Practice, vol. 41, no. 4, 2002, pp. 212–218., doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2.
Uğur, H., Constantinescu, P., & Stevens, M. J. (2015). Self-Awareness and Personal Growth: Theory and Application of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Eurasian Journal of Educational
Research, 15(60), 89-110. doi:10.14689/ejer.2015.60.6
Copyright©2024 Harley-M Teo