Teaching with the Revised Blooms Taxonomy Janet Giesen

Teaching with the Revised Bloom’s. Taxonomy Janet Giesen Faculty Development and Instructional Design Center

Taxonomy = Classification of thinking Six cognitive levels of complexity

Why use Bloom’s taxonomy? • Write and revise learning objectives • Plan curriculum • Identifies simple to most difficult skills • Effectively align objectives to assessment techniques and standards • Incorporate knowledge to be learned (knowledge dimension) and cognitive process to learn • Facilitate questioning (oral language = important role within framework)

Original Revised Evaluation Creating Synthesis Evaluating Analysis Analyzing Application Applying Comprehension Understanding Knowledge Remembering Noun Verb

Creating Evaluating Analyzing Applying Understanding Remembering

Cognitive Domain Analyzing Applying Creating Affective Domain Characterizing by value or value concept Evaluating Organizing & conceptualizing Remembering Receiving Understanding Responding Valuing Psychomotor Domain Articulating Imitating Manipulating Performing Precisioning

Change in Terms • Categories noun to verb – Taxonomy reflects different forms of thinking (thinking is an active process) verbs describe actions, nouns do not • Reorganized categories – Knowledge = product/outcome of thinking (inappropriate to describe a category of thinking) now remembering – Comprehension now understanding – Synthesis now creating to better reflect nature of thinking described by each category Handout #

Changes in Structure • Products of thinking part of taxonomy • Forms of knowledge = factual, conceptual, procedural, metacognitive (thinking about thinking) • Synthesis (creating) and evaluation (evaluating) interchanged – Creative thinking more complex form of thinking than critical thinking (evaluating) Handout #

Changes in Emphasis • USE: More authentic tool for curriculum planning, instructional delivery and assessment • Aimed at broader audience • Easily applied to all levels of education • Revision emphasizes explanation and description of subcategories Handout #

Remembering The learner is able to recall, restate and remember learned information – Describing – Finding – Identifying – Listing – Retrieving – Naming – Locating – Recognizing Can students recall information?

Understanding Student grasps meaning of information by interpreting and translating what has been learned – Classifying – Comparing – Exemplifying – Explaining – Inferring – Interpreting – Paraphrasing – Summarizing Can students explain ideas or concepts?

Applying Student makes use of information in a context different from the one in which it was learned – Implementing – Carrying out c = – Using – Executing Can students use the information in another familiar situation?

Analyzing Student breaks learned information into its parts to best understand that information – Attributing – Comparing – Deconstructing – Finding – Integrating – Organizing – Outlining – Structuring Can students break information into parts to explore understandings and relationships?

Evaluating Student makes decisions based on in-depth reflection, criticism and assessment – Checking – Critiquing – Detecting – Experimenting – Hypothesising – Judging – Monitoring – Testing Can students justify a decision or a course of action?

Creating Student creates new ideas and information using what previously has been learned – Constructing – Designing – Devising – Inventing – Making – Planning – Producing Can students generate new products, ideas, or ways of viewing things?

Questioning. . . • Lower level questions—remembering, understanding & lower level applying levels • Lower level questions – Evaluate students’ preparation and comprehension – Diagnose students’ strengths and weaknesses – Review and/or summarizing content Handout # University of Illinois (2006)

Questioning. . . • Higher level questions require complex application, analysis, evaluation or creation skills • Higher level questions – Encourage students to think more deeply and critically – Facilitate problem solving – Encourage discussions – Stimulate students to seek information on their own Handout # University of Illinois (2006)

“Remembering” stems What happened after. . . ? How many. . . ? What is. . . ? Who was it that. . . ? Name. . . Find the definition of… Describe what happened after… Who spoke to. . . ? Which is true or false. . . ? (Pohl, 2000)

“Understanding” stems Explain why… Write in your own words… How would you explain…? Write a brief outline. . . What do you think could have happened next. . . ? Who do you think. . . ? What was the main idea. . . ? Clarify… Illustrate… (Pohl, 2000)

“Applying” stems Explain another instance where… Group by characteristics such as… Which factors would you change if…? What questions would you ask of…? From the information given, develop a set of instructions about… (Pohl, 2000)

“Analyzing” stems Which events could not have happened? If. . . happened, what might the ending have been? How is. . . similar to. . . ? What do you see as other possible outcomes? Why did. . . changes occur? Explain what must have happened when. . . What are some or the problems of. . . ? Distinguish between. . . What were some of the motives behind. . ? What was the turning point? What was the problem with. . . ? (Pohl, 2000)

“Evaluating” stems Judge the value of. . . What do you think about. . . ? Defend your position about. . . Do you think. . . is a good or bad thing? How would you have handled. . . ? What changes to… would you recommend? Do you believe. . . ? How would you feel if. . . ? How effective are. . . ? What are the consequences. . . ? What influence will. . have on our lives? What are the pros and cons of. . ? Why is. . of value? What are the alternatives? Who will gain & who will loose? (Pohl, 2000)

“Creating” stems Design a. . . to. . . Devise a possible solution to. . . If you had access to all resources, how would you deal with. . . ? Devise your own way to. . . What would happen if. . . ? How many ways can you. . . ? Create new and unusual uses for. . . Develop a proposal which would. . . (Pohl, 2000)

Summary Bloom’s revised taxonomy • Systematic process of thinking & learning • Assists assessment efforts with easy-to-use format • Visual representation of alignment between goals & objectives with standards, activities, & outcomes • Helps form challenging questions to help students gain knowledge & critical thinking skills • Assists in development of goals, objectives, & lesson plans

Let’s Practice! Worksheets

Thank You! Discussion and Questions

References and Resources Cruz, E. (2003). Bloom's revised taxonomy. In B. Hoffman (Ed. ), Encyclopedia of Educational Technology. http: //coe. sdsu. edu/eet/Articles/bloomrev/start. htm Dalton, J. & Smith, D. (1986) Extending children’s special abilities: Strategies for primary classrooms. http: //www. teachers. ash. org. au/researchskills/dalton. htm Ferguson, C. (2002). Using the revised Bloom’s Taxonomy to plan and deliver team-taught, integrated, thematic units. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 239 -244. Forehand, M. (2008). Bloom’s Taxonomy: From emerging perspectives on learning, teaching and technology. http: //projects. coe. uga. edu/epltt/index. php? title=Bloom%27 s_Taxonomy Mager, R. E. (1997). Making instruction work or skillbloomers: A step-by-step guide to designing and developing instruction that works, (2 nd ed. ). Atlanta, GA: The Center for Effective Performance, Inc. Mager, R. E. (1997). Preparing instructional objectives: A critical tool in the development of effective instruction, (3 rd ed. ). Atlanta, GA: The Center for Effective Performance, Inc. Pohl, Michael. (2000). Learning to think, thinking to learn: Models and strategies to develop a classroom culture of thinking. Cheltenham, Vic. : Hawker Brownlow. Tarlinton (2003). Bloom’s revised taxonomy. http: //www. kurwongbss. qld. edu. au/thinking/Bloom/bloomspres. ppt. University of Illinois, Center for Teaching Excellence (2006). Bloom’s taxonomy. www. oir. uiuc. edu/Did/docs/QUESTION/quest 1. htm