Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
What is Bloom’s Taxonomy?
Bloom’s Taxonomy is a framework developed by Benjamin Bloom in 1956 that classifies learning objectives into six levels of complexity: remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating. This hierarchy helps educators design comprehensive learning goals and assessments to guide students through progressive stages of learning.
How does Bloom’s Taxonomy work for students?
Bloom’s Taxonomy is a tool to help students approach learning in a structured manner, progressing through six levels of cognitive skills:
- Remembering: Start by recalling facts and basic concepts.
- Understanding: Interpret information by explaining ideas and concepts.
- Applying: Use your knowledge to solve problems in new situations.
- Analyzing: Break down information to understand relationships and patterns.
- Evaluating: Assess the value or validity of ideas, arguments, or solutions.
- Creating: Combine different pieces of knowledge to produce something new or innovative.
How is Bloom’s Taxonomy structured?
Bloom’s Taxonomy is structured as a hierarchy with six levels of cognitive skills, starting from the simplest (remembering) to the most complex (creating). This structure represents the progression of learning from basic recall of information to advanced critical thinking and creativity.
Why is Bloom’s Taxonomy important for educators? Bloom’s Taxonomy helps educators design curricula and assessments that encompass a range of cognitive skills. By aligning lessons and assignments with different levels of the taxonomy, teachers can challenge students appropriately and support their intellectual development.
How can Bloom’s Taxonomy be used in the classroom?
Educators can use Bloom’s Taxonomy to design lesson plans, create assessments, and frame learning objectives. By targeting various levels of the taxonomy, teachers can ensure students are not just memorizing information but also engaging in higher order thinking such as analysis, evaluation, and creation.
What are the criticisms of Bloom’s Taxonomy?
Some criticisms of Bloom’s Taxonomy include its hierarchical structure, which may imply that the stages are discrete and sequential. Critics argue that learning is often non-linear, and students may use different cognitive skills simultaneously. Additionally, some argue that the taxonomy can devalue knowledge and comprehension compared to higher order thinking skills.
How has Bloom’s Taxonomy been revised?
In 2001, Bloom’s Taxonomy was revised by a group of educational psychologists led by Lorin Anderson and David Krathwohl. The revision updated the original taxonomy by emphasizing active verbs, reordering some levels, and changing some terminology (e.g., changing “synthesis” to “creating”).
How can students benefit from Bloom’s Taxonomy?
Students can use Bloom’s Taxonomy as a guide for approaching learning more effectively. By understanding the different levels of cognitive skills, students can aim to progress from basic memorization to higher-order thinking, such as applying, analyzing, and creating knowledge.
How can Bloom’s Taxonomy help with assessment design?
Educators can use Bloom’s Taxonomy to create assessments that target different cognitive skills. By designing questions and tasks at various levels of the taxonomy, teachers can evaluate students’ understanding, critical thinking, and creativity comprehensively.
Can Bloom’s Taxonomy be applied to different subjects?
Yes, Bloom’s Taxonomy can be applied across various subjects and disciplines. Its hierarchical model is versatile and can guide the design of learning objectives and assessments in subjects such as mathematics, science, language arts, social studies, and more.
Is Bloom’s Taxonomy only useful for formal education settings?
No, Bloom’s Taxonomy can also be useful in informal educational settings, such as professional training programs, workshops, and seminars. It provides a framework for structuring learning objectives and evaluating participants’ progress.
References
Bloom, B.S. (Ed.). Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., Krathwohl, D.R. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Co Inc.
Armstrong, P. (2010). Bloom’s Taxonomy. Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching.
Bloom, B. S. (1971). Mastery learning. In J. H. Block (Ed.), Mastery learning: Theory and practice (pp. 47–63). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Vol. 1: Cognitive domain. New York: McKay, 20, 24.
Guskey, T. R. (2005). Formative Classroom Assessment and Benjamin S. Bloom: Theory, Research, and Implications. Online Submission.
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Longman.
Harrow, A.J. (1972). A taxonomy of the psychomotor domain. David McKay Co.
Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Masia, B. B. (1964). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Handbook II: Affective Domain. Longman.
Harrow, A. (1972) A Taxonomy of Psychomotor Domain: A Guide for Developing Behavioral Objectives. New York: David McKay.
A Taxonomy of Psychomotor Domain
Simpson E.J. (1972). The Classification of Educational Objectives in the Psychomotor Domain. Washington, DC: Gryphon House.