The original Bloom's Taxonomy was drafted in 1956 after Benjamin S. Bloom and several of his associates set about developing a framework that specified statements that could be used to standardize the way that educators classified learning outcomes (Krathwohl, 2002). The taxonomy was organized around the six categories of the cognitive domain: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. It began to gain popularity as educators realized how beneficial it was to have a common language that organized cognitive skills hierarchically (Cochran & Conklin, 2007; Hanna, 2007; Krathwohl, 2002).
In 1994, one of the original authors, David R. Krathwohl, published an article that offered several suggestions for how the Taxonomy could be revised and updated (Krathwohl & Anderson, 2010). Krathwohl collaborated with Lorin Anderson, one of Bloom's former students, to organize a small group that began meeting biannually to discuss the revisions (Churches, 2008). These meetings continued for five years with the final draft being published in 2001 (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001).
The most significant revisions made entailed changing the list of cognitive processes from noun forms into verb forms (Krathwohl, 2002; Krathwohl & Anderson, 2010). Application, Analysis, and Evaluation were thus renamed Apply, Analyze, and Evaluate. In addition, several of the categories were given new names. Knowledge became Remembering and Comprehension became Understanding. This latter change addressed a long-standing criticism of the original Taxonomy, as the term "understand" was often used somewhat ambiguously to refer to areas of learning between Comprehension and Synthesis (Krathwohl, 2002). The revised Taxonomy also switched Synthesis and Evaluation, with Synthesis being renamed Create (Krathwohl, 2002; Krathwohl& Anderson, 2010). This final change addresses the action of constructing new meaning, which Krathwohl & Anderson (2010) explain, "goes beyond merely making new knowledge fit with existing knowledge as Synthesize suggests" (p.64).
References
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.) (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.
Churches, A. (2008, April 1). Bloom's Taxonomy blooms digitally. Tech & Learning. Retrieved from http://www.techlearning.com/article/8670.
Cochran, D., & Conklin, J. (2007). A new Bloom: Transforming learning. Learning & Leading with Technology, 34(5), 22-25. Retrieved from www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ779824.pdf
Hanna, W. (2007). The new Bloom's Taxonomy: Implications for music education. Arts Education Policy Review, 108(4),7-16.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's Taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212-218.
Krathwohl, D. R., & Anderson, L. W. (2010). Merlin C. Wittrock and the revision of Bloom's Taxonomy. Educational Psychologist, 45(1), 64-65.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Annotated Bibliography of Articles
Abstracts included come directly from the articles or from the database specified, and are included per the instructions for this assignment given by the professor.
Cochran, D., & Conklin, J. (2007). A new Bloom: Transforming learning. Learning & Leading with Technology, 34(5), 22-25. Retrieved from www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ779824.pdf
Abstract (ERIC database):
This article discusses a new design for the classic Bloom's Taxonomy developed by Anderson, L. W. & Krathwohl, D. (2001), which can be used to evaluate learners' technology-enhanced experience in more powerful and critical ways. The New Bloom's Taxonomy incorporates contemporary research on learning and human cognition into its model. The original taxonomy created consensus about how to use important vocabulary as it helped educators make use of the hierarchical nature of knowledge in teaching, learning, and curriculum development. It helped teachers use objectives as tools to promote and evaluate student learning. Benjamin Bloom and his colleagues created a workable and valuable way for educators to think about objectives, talk to each other, and create curriculum. The new paradigm updates this classic taxonomy and has some very important changes that help technology-using educators even more. This updated version of the classic Bloom's Taxonomy emphasizes learners' cognitive processes and points toward technology-enhanced activities.
Annotation:
The authors explain that the updates to Bloom's Taxonomy are especially helpful measuring the behaviors of learners rather than the content of a lesson. The evaluation of students' progress through the identification of what a student will be able to do thus takes on more importance than the material that is being studied. Teachers that use technology in the classroom will find these changes especially useful since they will be able to focus on what the students can do, rather than what can be done with the technology.
_________________________________________________________
Hanna, W. (2007). The new Bloom's Taxonomy: Implications for music education. Arts Education Policy Review, 108(4), 7-16.
Abstract:
Academic programs use objective and standardized assessment criteria. Music education programs have avoided such objective assessments via the assertion of subjectivity and aesthetics in music learning. In this article, the author introduces the revised Bloom's taxonomy as a tool to translate music education outcomes into objective educational criteria. The author analyzes cognitive processes and knowledge domains that address more complex forms of musicianship using achievement standards from the nine national standards in music education as examples. The author also introduces four new knowledge domains to describe procedural and metacognitive knowledge that are integral to music learning. In addition, the new taxonomy elevates creativity as the most complex of the cognitive processes, which has positive implications for the field of music education.
Annotation:
The author explains how the new revisions made to the Bloom's Taxonomy are especially helpful to music educators. While music is often seen from a subjective viewpoint, the new language allows for a more accurate assessment of artistic subjects.
_________________________________________________________
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's Taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212-218.
Abstract (Education Research Complete database):
Focuses on the revision of the final draft of the original 'Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain,' initiated by University of Chicago Board of Examination associate director Benjamin S. Bloom. Advantages of the original Taxonomy; Content of the original Taxonomy; Framework of the objectives describing intended learning outcomes; Overview of the revised Taxonomy.
Annotation:
This article discusses the original purposes for why Benjamin S. Bloom and his associates developed the Taxonomy, it's original construction, and the revisions that were made to the Taxonomy. After several years of careful deliberation, a small group of experts published the revisions in 2001. One of the goals in revising Bloom's Taxonomy was to create a framework that would encourage greater teacher usage, and as a result, it was revised to represent both the knowledge dimension and the cognitive process dimension.
_________________________________________________________
Krathwohl, D. R., & Anderson, L. W. (2010). Merlin C. Wittrock and the revision of Bloom's Taxonomy. Educational Psychologist, 45(1), 64-65. doi: 10.1080/00461520903433562
Abstract:
Merl Wittrock, a cognitive psychologist who had proposed a generative model of learning, was an essential member of the group that over a period of 5 years revised the Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, originally published in 1956. This article describes the development of that 2001 revision (Anderson and Krathwohl, Editors) and Merl's contributions to that effort.
Annotation:
When Krathwohl and Anderson were looking for experts to assist them in the revisions of the Bloom's Taxonomy, they requested the assistance of cognitive psychologist, Merl Wittrock. Wittrock was influential in the decision to change the cognitive processes from noun forms to verb forms, and worked diligently to choose the right words. In addition, it was Wittrock's suggestion to rename Synthesis to Create. Wittrock was also a strong proponent of including metacognitive knowledge in the revisions.
_________________________________________________________
Lord, T., & Baviskar, S. (2007). Moving students from information recitation to information understanding: Exploiting Bloom's Taxonomy in creating science questions. Journal of College Science Teaching, 36(5), 40-44.
Abstract (Education Research Complete database):
This article focuses on the formulation of science questions based on the mid and upper levels of Benjamin Bloom's taxonomy. Several studies conducted had revealed that college students in the U.S. have retained only a marginal understanding of the science courses that they have taken. In 1956, a team of theorists, led by Bloom, was able to develop a series of six learning levels for categorizing degrees of abstraction of questions. The six levels are knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation.
Annotation:
The authors mention past studies done which show students unable to use the information they have learned in college after they have graduated. The posit that this is a result of teaching for knowledge and not teaching for understanding. They then explain how the revised Bloom's Taxonomy can benefit teachers in this goal of teaching for knowledge.
_________________________________________________________
Cochran, D., & Conklin, J. (2007). A new Bloom: Transforming learning. Learning & Leading with Technology, 34(5), 22-25. Retrieved from www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ779824.pdf
Abstract (ERIC database):
This article discusses a new design for the classic Bloom's Taxonomy developed by Anderson, L. W. & Krathwohl, D. (2001), which can be used to evaluate learners' technology-enhanced experience in more powerful and critical ways. The New Bloom's Taxonomy incorporates contemporary research on learning and human cognition into its model. The original taxonomy created consensus about how to use important vocabulary as it helped educators make use of the hierarchical nature of knowledge in teaching, learning, and curriculum development. It helped teachers use objectives as tools to promote and evaluate student learning. Benjamin Bloom and his colleagues created a workable and valuable way for educators to think about objectives, talk to each other, and create curriculum. The new paradigm updates this classic taxonomy and has some very important changes that help technology-using educators even more. This updated version of the classic Bloom's Taxonomy emphasizes learners' cognitive processes and points toward technology-enhanced activities.
Annotation:
The authors explain that the updates to Bloom's Taxonomy are especially helpful measuring the behaviors of learners rather than the content of a lesson. The evaluation of students' progress through the identification of what a student will be able to do thus takes on more importance than the material that is being studied. Teachers that use technology in the classroom will find these changes especially useful since they will be able to focus on what the students can do, rather than what can be done with the technology.
_________________________________________________________
Hanna, W. (2007). The new Bloom's Taxonomy: Implications for music education. Arts Education Policy Review, 108(4), 7-16.
Abstract:
Academic programs use objective and standardized assessment criteria. Music education programs have avoided such objective assessments via the assertion of subjectivity and aesthetics in music learning. In this article, the author introduces the revised Bloom's taxonomy as a tool to translate music education outcomes into objective educational criteria. The author analyzes cognitive processes and knowledge domains that address more complex forms of musicianship using achievement standards from the nine national standards in music education as examples. The author also introduces four new knowledge domains to describe procedural and metacognitive knowledge that are integral to music learning. In addition, the new taxonomy elevates creativity as the most complex of the cognitive processes, which has positive implications for the field of music education.
Annotation:
The author explains how the new revisions made to the Bloom's Taxonomy are especially helpful to music educators. While music is often seen from a subjective viewpoint, the new language allows for a more accurate assessment of artistic subjects.
_________________________________________________________
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's Taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212-218.
Abstract (Education Research Complete database):
Focuses on the revision of the final draft of the original 'Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain,' initiated by University of Chicago Board of Examination associate director Benjamin S. Bloom. Advantages of the original Taxonomy; Content of the original Taxonomy; Framework of the objectives describing intended learning outcomes; Overview of the revised Taxonomy.
Annotation:
This article discusses the original purposes for why Benjamin S. Bloom and his associates developed the Taxonomy, it's original construction, and the revisions that were made to the Taxonomy. After several years of careful deliberation, a small group of experts published the revisions in 2001. One of the goals in revising Bloom's Taxonomy was to create a framework that would encourage greater teacher usage, and as a result, it was revised to represent both the knowledge dimension and the cognitive process dimension.
_________________________________________________________
Krathwohl, D. R., & Anderson, L. W. (2010). Merlin C. Wittrock and the revision of Bloom's Taxonomy. Educational Psychologist, 45(1), 64-65. doi: 10.1080/00461520903433562
Abstract:
Merl Wittrock, a cognitive psychologist who had proposed a generative model of learning, was an essential member of the group that over a period of 5 years revised the Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, originally published in 1956. This article describes the development of that 2001 revision (Anderson and Krathwohl, Editors) and Merl's contributions to that effort.
Annotation:
When Krathwohl and Anderson were looking for experts to assist them in the revisions of the Bloom's Taxonomy, they requested the assistance of cognitive psychologist, Merl Wittrock. Wittrock was influential in the decision to change the cognitive processes from noun forms to verb forms, and worked diligently to choose the right words. In addition, it was Wittrock's suggestion to rename Synthesis to Create. Wittrock was also a strong proponent of including metacognitive knowledge in the revisions.
_________________________________________________________
Lord, T., & Baviskar, S. (2007). Moving students from information recitation to information understanding: Exploiting Bloom's Taxonomy in creating science questions. Journal of College Science Teaching, 36(5), 40-44.
Abstract (Education Research Complete database):
This article focuses on the formulation of science questions based on the mid and upper levels of Benjamin Bloom's taxonomy. Several studies conducted had revealed that college students in the U.S. have retained only a marginal understanding of the science courses that they have taken. In 1956, a team of theorists, led by Bloom, was able to develop a series of six learning levels for categorizing degrees of abstraction of questions. The six levels are knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation.
Annotation:
The authors mention past studies done which show students unable to use the information they have learned in college after they have graduated. The posit that this is a result of teaching for knowledge and not teaching for understanding. They then explain how the revised Bloom's Taxonomy can benefit teachers in this goal of teaching for knowledge.
_________________________________________________________
Internet Resources
The questions below are taken from the Psychology of Adult Learning course assignment for New Links at Oklahoma State University, Spring 2011.
Bloom's Revised Taxonomy
1. Who put up the link?
It is uncertain who created this website. It may be a collaboration of several different individuals, or a compilation organized by one person.
2. Mission Statement.
None
3. What subjects or topics does the site address?
The resources on this site all pertain to the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy.
4. What type of material is posted on the page?
-- Powerpoint presentations
-- Poster presentations
-- A planning framework
5. Who would be interested in the site?
This site would be most useful to elementary teachers. The presentations are very informational and well organized, however, making them of interest to high school or university teachers might be a challenge.
6. What is the best feature of the site?
The site is well-organized and easy to navigate.
7. What is the worst feature of the site?
It focuses specifically on using the revised Taxonomy with elementary students and does not address higher grades.
8. Who is the intended or target audience?
Elementary teachers, possibly teachers from a specific school for an in-service orientation day.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Bloom's Taxonomy Blooms Digitally
Churches, A. (2008, April 1). Bloom's Taxonomy blooms digitally. Tech & Learning. Retrieved from http://www.techlearning.com/article/8670
1. Who put up the link?
The Technology & Learning website is designed to provide information about teaching with technology. It offers information in several different formats, including a blog,ebooks and e-journals, forums, webinars, and best practices resources.
This specific article, written by Andrew Churches, gives a detailed list of learning outcomes and verb phrases that teachers can use when using technology in a classroom.
2. Mission Statement.
None
3. What subjects or topics does the site address?
Churches (2008) gives a brief summary of the creation of the original Bloom's Taxonomy, as well as the creation of the revised Taxonomy. Verb phrases from the revised Taxonomy are given that could be used when teaching with specific types of technology, or to enhance the use of technology in the classroom.
4. What type of material is posted on the page?
A list of verbs and action phrases has been created for each of the levels of the revised Taxonomy. Each list offers helpful suggestions on how to incorporate the use of technology in a classroom.
5. Who would be interested in the site?
This website would be a useful resource for any teacher who uses technology in his or her classroom. It also offers more general verb phrases that could be used in other disciplines.
6. What is the best feature of the site?
Specific technology tasks are in bold, and general keywords are in easily identifiable boxes. While this resource was probably designed with K12 teachers in mind, it could also be a very useful tool for faculty in higher education.
7. What is the worst feature of the site?
None
8. Who is the intended or target audience?
Teachers who teach with technology.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Bloom's Taxonomy "Revised": Key Words, Model Questions, & Instructional Strategies (PDF)
1. Who put up the link?
This document was created by Indiana University Purdue University's Center for Teaching and Learning.
2. Mission Statement.
The mission statement for IUPUI's Center for Teaching and Learning is available at this link.
3. What subjects or topics does the site address?
The document specifically gives information about the revisions made to Bloom's Taxonomy.
4. What type of material is posted on the page?
-- Correlations between the names of the levels in the original Taxonomy and those
on the revised Taxonomy.
-- Verbs used for objectives for each level.
-- Model questions for each level.
-- Instructional strategies for each level.
5. Who would be interested in the site?
Educators at any level would find this site useful, as well as students studying to be teachers.
6. What is the best feature of the site?
The creator has not only listed the verb objectives, but also many helpful statements and instructional strategies that can assist a teacher in writing lesson plan objectives and learning outcomes.
7. What is the worst feature of the site?
The page formatting is hard to read in some places as the words are covered over by dividing lines.
8. Who is the intended or target audience?
Teachers and students studying to be teachers.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Leslie Owen Wilson's Curriculum Pages: Beyond Bloom -- A New Version of the Cognitive Taxonomy
1. Who put up the link?
This site was created by Dr. Leslie Owen Wilson, a professor emerita at the University of Wisconsin Stevens Point. Dr. Wilson taught courses in the School of Education and has published several books and articles. (See Dr. Wilson's Biography)
2. Mission Statement.
There is no formal mission statement posted, but Dr. Wilson designed the site to present information for her students.
3. What subjects or topics does the site address?
The entire site covers a large field of educational topics. The specific page linked above discusses Bloom's Revised Taxonomy. It gives a brief history of the revisions, and shows a chart that compares the original Taxonomy to the revised Taxonomy. There is also information given about the different types of knowledge that the new Taxonomy addresses and why these changes were made.
4. What type of material is posted on the page?
-- Charts and graphs
-- Written summarized material
-- Citations of additional resources available on the topic.
5. Who would be interested in the site?
-- Students of Dr. Wilson's
-- Researchers studying about the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy
-- K12 teachers
6. What is the best feature of the site?
The comparison chart of the old and new Taxonomies is excellent and helps to explain what changes were made.
7. What is the worst feature of the site?
None
8. Who is the intended or target audience?
Educators and students interested in the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
A Model of Learning Objectives
1. Who put up the link?
This page was created by Iowa State University's Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching.
2. Mission Statement.
CELT's mission statement is available at this link.
3. What subjects or topics does the site address?
The Model of Learning Objective page focuses on the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy.
4. What type of material is posted on the page?
There are one very interesting graph that connects each Taxonomy level, remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating, with the four cognitive levels and knowledge dimensions, factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. Two tables then present each aspect of the first graph separately. The first table is structured around the revised Bloom's Taxonomy and the second the major types and subtypes of knowledge dimensions.
There are also several links to additional information about Bloom's Taxonomy.
5. Who would be interested in the site?
Students and educators would both find this site very useful.
6. What is the best feature of the site?
The graph is easy to understand and use. It helps to identify verbs that represent both the levels of thinking skills as well as the level of knowledge learned.
7. What is the worst feature of the site?
None
8. Who is the intended or target audience?
Educators and students interested in using Bloom's Taxonomy.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Bloom's Revised Taxonomy
1. Who put up the link?
It is uncertain who created this website. It may be a collaboration of several different individuals, or a compilation organized by one person.
2. Mission Statement.
None
3. What subjects or topics does the site address?
The resources on this site all pertain to the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy.
4. What type of material is posted on the page?
-- Powerpoint presentations
-- Poster presentations
-- A planning framework
5. Who would be interested in the site?
This site would be most useful to elementary teachers. The presentations are very informational and well organized, however, making them of interest to high school or university teachers might be a challenge.
6. What is the best feature of the site?
The site is well-organized and easy to navigate.
7. What is the worst feature of the site?
It focuses specifically on using the revised Taxonomy with elementary students and does not address higher grades.
8. Who is the intended or target audience?
Elementary teachers, possibly teachers from a specific school for an in-service orientation day.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Bloom's Taxonomy Blooms Digitally
Churches, A. (2008, April 1). Bloom's Taxonomy blooms digitally. Tech & Learning. Retrieved from http://www.techlearning.com/article/8670
1. Who put up the link?
The Technology & Learning website is designed to provide information about teaching with technology. It offers information in several different formats, including a blog,ebooks and e-journals, forums, webinars, and best practices resources.
This specific article, written by Andrew Churches, gives a detailed list of learning outcomes and verb phrases that teachers can use when using technology in a classroom.
2. Mission Statement.
None
3. What subjects or topics does the site address?
Churches (2008) gives a brief summary of the creation of the original Bloom's Taxonomy, as well as the creation of the revised Taxonomy. Verb phrases from the revised Taxonomy are given that could be used when teaching with specific types of technology, or to enhance the use of technology in the classroom.
4. What type of material is posted on the page?
A list of verbs and action phrases has been created for each of the levels of the revised Taxonomy. Each list offers helpful suggestions on how to incorporate the use of technology in a classroom.
5. Who would be interested in the site?
This website would be a useful resource for any teacher who uses technology in his or her classroom. It also offers more general verb phrases that could be used in other disciplines.
6. What is the best feature of the site?
Specific technology tasks are in bold, and general keywords are in easily identifiable boxes. While this resource was probably designed with K12 teachers in mind, it could also be a very useful tool for faculty in higher education.
7. What is the worst feature of the site?
None
8. Who is the intended or target audience?
Teachers who teach with technology.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Bloom's Taxonomy "Revised": Key Words, Model Questions, & Instructional Strategies (PDF)
1. Who put up the link?
This document was created by Indiana University Purdue University's Center for Teaching and Learning.
2. Mission Statement.
The mission statement for IUPUI's Center for Teaching and Learning is available at this link.
3. What subjects or topics does the site address?
The document specifically gives information about the revisions made to Bloom's Taxonomy.
4. What type of material is posted on the page?
-- Correlations between the names of the levels in the original Taxonomy and those
on the revised Taxonomy.
-- Verbs used for objectives for each level.
-- Model questions for each level.
-- Instructional strategies for each level.
5. Who would be interested in the site?
Educators at any level would find this site useful, as well as students studying to be teachers.
6. What is the best feature of the site?
The creator has not only listed the verb objectives, but also many helpful statements and instructional strategies that can assist a teacher in writing lesson plan objectives and learning outcomes.
7. What is the worst feature of the site?
The page formatting is hard to read in some places as the words are covered over by dividing lines.
8. Who is the intended or target audience?
Teachers and students studying to be teachers.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Leslie Owen Wilson's Curriculum Pages: Beyond Bloom -- A New Version of the Cognitive Taxonomy
1. Who put up the link?
This site was created by Dr. Leslie Owen Wilson, a professor emerita at the University of Wisconsin Stevens Point. Dr. Wilson taught courses in the School of Education and has published several books and articles. (See Dr. Wilson's Biography)
2. Mission Statement.
There is no formal mission statement posted, but Dr. Wilson designed the site to present information for her students.
3. What subjects or topics does the site address?
The entire site covers a large field of educational topics. The specific page linked above discusses Bloom's Revised Taxonomy. It gives a brief history of the revisions, and shows a chart that compares the original Taxonomy to the revised Taxonomy. There is also information given about the different types of knowledge that the new Taxonomy addresses and why these changes were made.
4. What type of material is posted on the page?
-- Charts and graphs
-- Written summarized material
-- Citations of additional resources available on the topic.
5. Who would be interested in the site?
-- Students of Dr. Wilson's
-- Researchers studying about the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy
-- K12 teachers
6. What is the best feature of the site?
The comparison chart of the old and new Taxonomies is excellent and helps to explain what changes were made.
7. What is the worst feature of the site?
None
8. Who is the intended or target audience?
Educators and students interested in the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
A Model of Learning Objectives
1. Who put up the link?
This page was created by Iowa State University's Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching.
2. Mission Statement.
CELT's mission statement is available at this link.
3. What subjects or topics does the site address?
The Model of Learning Objective page focuses on the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy.
4. What type of material is posted on the page?
There are one very interesting graph that connects each Taxonomy level, remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating, with the four cognitive levels and knowledge dimensions, factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. Two tables then present each aspect of the first graph separately. The first table is structured around the revised Bloom's Taxonomy and the second the major types and subtypes of knowledge dimensions.
There are also several links to additional information about Bloom's Taxonomy.
5. Who would be interested in the site?
Students and educators would both find this site very useful.
6. What is the best feature of the site?
The graph is easy to understand and use. It helps to identify verbs that represent both the levels of thinking skills as well as the level of knowledge learned.
7. What is the worst feature of the site?
None
8. Who is the intended or target audience?
Educators and students interested in using Bloom's Taxonomy.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Monday, March 21, 2011
Practical Application
Below is a list of learning outcomes that adult learners might master after attending an information literacy seminar at their university library. (Adapted from Churches (2008).)
Remembering:
Students will identify the steps used to search a digital library database.
Understanding:
Students will summarize a newspaper, magazine, or journal article found on a digital library database, commenting on the information that might be useful for a research project.
Applying:
Students will execute a search for information on one of the digital library databases, demonstrating mastery of the process and tasks used to find a piece of information for a research project.
Analysing:
Students will integrate useful pieces of information from more than one resource by deconstructing each resource, and then organizing them into one new research paper or project.
Evaluating:
Students will hypothesize on the validity of a certain topic, critiquing the information gleened from the digital library databases, and reflecting on their conclusions.
Creating:
Students will construct a new piece of information, producing a unique and creative form that might be published, filmed, programmed, etc.
Remembering:
Students will identify the steps used to search a digital library database.
Understanding:
Students will summarize a newspaper, magazine, or journal article found on a digital library database, commenting on the information that might be useful for a research project.
Applying:
Students will execute a search for information on one of the digital library databases, demonstrating mastery of the process and tasks used to find a piece of information for a research project.
Analysing:
Students will integrate useful pieces of information from more than one resource by deconstructing each resource, and then organizing them into one new research paper or project.
Evaluating:
Students will hypothesize on the validity of a certain topic, critiquing the information gleened from the digital library databases, and reflecting on their conclusions.
Creating:
Students will construct a new piece of information, producing a unique and creative form that might be published, filmed, programmed, etc.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)