bacaan tambahan bloom s taxonomy 2

7/30/2019 Bacaan Tambahan Bloom s Taxonomy 2

1/9

/

Bloom's TaxonomyFrom Emerging Perspectives on Learning, Teaching and Technology

Mary ForehandThe University of Georgia

IntroductionOne of the basic questions facing educators has always been "Where do we begin inseeking to improve human thinklng?" (Houghton, 2004).-Fortunately we do not have to;r;; flom scrat"h in searching foianswers to this complicated question' The -Communities Resoiving Our Pioblems [C.R.O.P') recommends, "One place to begin is indefining the nature of tf,inking. Before *. t* make it better, we need to know more ofwhat it is" (Houghton, 2004).Benjamin S. Bloom extensively contemplated the,nature of thinking, eventually authoringor cl-authoring 18 books. According to a biography of Bloorn, written by former studentElliot W. Eisner, "it was clear that he was in love with the process of finding out' andfinding out is what i think he did best. one of Bloom's great talents was having a nose forwhat is significant" (2002).Although it received little attention when first published, Bloom's Taxonomy has sincebeen translated into 22langaages and is one of the most widely applied and most oftencited references in educatiJn. (etraerson & Sosniak, 1994, preface), (Houghton, 2004), (Krathwohl, Z0OZ), ( oz-TeacherNet, 2001). As of this writing, three other chapters in thisebook make reference to Bloom's Taxonomy, yet another testament to its relevance'

HistoryIn 1780, Abigail Adams stated, "Leaming is not attained by chance; it must be souglrt forwith ardor and attended to with diligence" ( quotationspage.com,2005). Learning,teaching, identifying educational goals, and thinking are all complicated conceptsinterwoien in an iniricate web. Bloom was arduous, diligent, and patient while seeking todemystify these concepts and untangle this web. He made "the improvement of studentlearning'; (Bloom 197i, Preface) the central focus of his life's work.Discussions during the 1948 Convention of the American Psychological Association ledBloom to spearheid a group of educators who eventually undertook the ambitious task ofclassifying educationai-goais and objectives. Their intent was to develop a method of


2/9

classification for thinking behaviors that were believed to be important in the processesof learning. eu"rrtoul"{, iftJit"*.*ork became a taxonomy of three domains:.Thecognitive.knowledgebaseddomain,consistingofsixlevels. The affectivJ- u[i*aioulUased domain, consisting of five levels, and. The psy"no*otoi- smrs based domain, consisting of six levels.1x 1956, eiglrt years after the group first began, *ot.11the cognitive domain wascompleted and a rranJbook co-mmonty reieiedto as "Bloom's iaxonomy" was published'ftris ctrapter focuses its attention on the cognitive domain'While Bloom pushed for the use of the term "taxonolny"' others in the group resistedbecauseoftheunfamiliarityofthetermwithineducationalcircles.EventuallyBloomprevailed, forever lirrki";ilrname and the term. The small volume intended foruniversity .xu*i.r"r, ihu', b""r, transformed into a basic reference for all educatorsworldwide. Unexpectedly, it has been used by curriculum.planners' administrators'researchers, and classroom teachert u, ufi t""tls of education" (Anderson & Sosniak'1994,p.1). While i tft""fa be noted ,h"t ;th"; educational taronomies and hierarchical

systems have been d"""Ga, it is gloom's iu*ooo*ywhich ternains' even after nearlyfifty years, the de facto standard'What is Bloomrs Taxonomy?Understanding that "taxonomy" and "classification" T? :y"o"y'oous helps dispeluneasiness with the term. Blo6m's Taxonomy is a mufi-ti3:::::::::::::red model of classifyingthinking according to six cognitive f*.it Jf"mplexity' Throughout the years' the levelshave often been d!fii"J u."u stairway, leading many-tlachers to encourage their studentsto ,'climb to a trigfri, titt.f ofl thoughi." The liwestthree levels are: knowledge'comprehenrion, unJ application. fn-e.trigirest three-levels.are: analysis' synthesis' andevaluation. ,'The taxonomy is hirr*.hi."ul; [in that] each level is subsumed by the higherlevels. In other words, a student nrnctioning at theiapplication'level has also masteredthe material at the'knowledge' and'comprJhension'ievels'" ("UW TpachingAcademv'2003). one can easily see how trris ullangement led to naturdl divisions of lower andhiglrer level thinking.clearly, Bloom's Taxonomy has stood the test of time' Due to its long history andpopularity, it has been condensed, expanded, and reinterpreted in a variety of ways'Research Sndings have led to tfte Aitiou"ry lf a veritabi" t*otgutbord of interpretationsand applicatio* iuliog on a continuumraoging frolntiqft overviews to expandedexplanations. NonethJess, one ,.r"ttt t.uiti"ottia"signta Uy one of the co-editors of theoriginal taxonomy along with a former Bloom itoa""g merits particular attention'

Revised Bloom's Taxonomy (RBT)


3/9

organizing, and attributing'. Evaluating: Making judgments based on criteria and standards through checkingand critiquing. creating, el-ittiog elements together to form a coherent or functional whole;reorganizing elerients into a new pattem or structure through generating'planning, or Producing'

(Anderson & Krathwohl,2001' pp' 67-68)

Structural changes *Structural changes seem dram atic atfirst, yet are quite logical when closely examined'Bloom's original cognitive taxonomy *"t'" "t"-aimensiJnal form' With the addition ofproducts, the RevisJd Bloom,s tu*orro*! t*., ,h. for*,of a two-dimensional table' oneof the dimensions i;;;trft", The Knowl"lg. nitnt*ion (or the kind of knowledge to beleamed) while ,t " r".orra identifies The C"ognitive Process Dimension (or the processused to learn). As represented on the

gridbe"low, the intersection of the'knowledge andcognitive process "at"gori"s form twenty-four separate cells as represented on the"TaxonomY Table" below'The Knowledge Dimension on the left side is comprised of .four levels that are defined asFactual, Conceptual, Procedural, *9 vi"i"-Cognitiu"' The Cognitive Process Dimensionacross the top "f th";l-**ists of six l*JtTft"t are def,rned as Remember' Understand'Apply, Analyze,Eviuate, and create. r,actr levet of both dimensions of the table issubdividedEach of the four Knowledge Dimension levels is subdivided into either three or fourcategories t..g. nu.touiis f,lvid"d into Factual, Knowledge of Terminology' andI(nowledge of sp""iir" Details *a Bf"*."it,' rnt Cognltive Process Dimension levelsare also subdividei *l}irn" number of sectois in each level ranging from a low of threeto a high of eight categories. For ex.ample, Remember is. subdivided into the threecategories of nrm"mf,"r, Recognizingi*Jn.tulling while the Understanding level isdivided into eiglrt separate categories. i[" *t"ftt"g-grid containing 19 subcategories ismost helpful ,o t.u.ti"r, in both-writi"g "i1"tti*t"dd ?ligtting standards with curricular'The ,,Why,, *a "fto*i sections of this-chapter further.discuss use of the TaxonomyTable as well as provide specifrc examples of applications'

U nderstan di n g : Constructing me aning T:T "t'1: -Y"Til 3u' S33*cmes s asesunqersLaururr5' vv!ru-.I_-r-r?r-_

"f r""" ;, inferring,,il;gh interpr"eting, exemplifying' classifying' summanzrngcomparing, and exPlaining'ffffi"[:'Jffffi;o?'"'r"gup'"'i1:::T:i1^:1:*l'*i;Tj#ill1"#l"t:illi#it'"#.;tffi t";;;ffi ;'9."'1it,'1'10111,*11*;:"1"^YJ3;"#"7:ffi '#:Tr'"T;;':"";;;;;rdr'**"orpurposethroughdifferentiating,

Tablel. Bloom's TaxonomY


4/9

During the 1990's, a former student of Bloom's, Lorin Anderson, led a new assemblywhich met for the purpose of updating the taxonomy, hoping to add relevance for 21stcentury students and teacherr. tt it time "representatives of three groups [were present]:.ognitiu. psychologists, curriculum theorists and instructional researchers, and testingand assessment specialists" (Anderson, & Krathwohl, 2001,p. xxviii)' Likethe original;"* they wer"^also arduous and diligent in their pursuit of learning, spending six yearsto finalize their work. Published in 2001, the revision includes several seemingly minoryet actualiy quite signi}cant changes. Several excellent sources are available which detailthe revisions and r"fsons for the clanges. A more concise sunmary appears here' The,t urrg", occur in three broad categories: terminology, structure' and emphasis'TerminologY Changeschanges in terminology between the two versions are perhaps the most obviousdifferences and can uirt .u,r." the most confusion. Basically, Bloom's six major"ut"gori", were changed from 1g1 t9 vg[$s. Additionally, the lowest level of theoriginal, knowledge iur r.nurneTand bElffiiriffimembering' Finally, comprehension and,yitfr"ri, *"r. r"t-itl.d to understanding and creating' In an effort to minimize thectnfusion, comparison images appear below'

Caption: Terminology changes "The graphic is a representation of the NEW verbageassociated with the liigfamtltar Bloom's Taxonomy. Note the changefrom Nouns toverbs [e.g., Appticatioi-to Apptying] to describe the dffirent levels of the taxonomy'Note that the top two levels iie-essenttally exchangedfrom the Old to the New version'"(Schultz, 2005) (Evaluation moved from ih" top to Evaluating in the second from the top,'synthesis moiedfrom second on top to the top as Creating.) Source:

The new terms are defined as:. Remembering:Retrieving,

long-term memory.

Sld\Grsian F{firr Ursltrt

recognizing, and recalling relevant knowledge from


5/9

representation" (Krathwohl, 2002) of the alignment between standards and educationalgoals, objectives, products, and activities.Today's teachers must make tough decisions about how to spend their classroom time.Clear aiignment of educational objectives with local, state, and national standards is anecessity. Like pieces of a huge p:uzzle, everything must fit properly. The RevisedBloom's Taxonomy Table clarifies the fit of each lesson plan's purpose, "essentialquestion," goal or objective. The twenty-four-cell grid from Oregon State University thatis shown above aiong with the Printable Taxonomy Table Examoles can easily be used inconjunction with a chart. When used in this manner the "Essential Question" or lessonobjective becomes clearly defined.

How can Bloom's Taxonomy Be Used?A search of the World Wide Web will yield clear evidence that Bloom's Taxonomy hasbeen applied to a variety of situations. Current results include a broad spectrum ofapplications represented by articles and websites describing everything from corrosiontraining to medical preparation. In almost all circumstances when an instructor desires tomove a group of students through a learning process utilizing an organized framework,Bloom's Taxonomy can prove helpfrtl. Yet the educational setting (K-graduate) remainsthe most often used application. A brief explanation of one example is described below.The educational journal Theory into Practice published an entire issue on the RevisedBloom's Taxonomy. Included is an article entitled, "Using the Revised Taxonomy to Planand Deliver Team-Taught, Integrated, Thematic Units" (Ferguson, 2002).The writer describes the use of the revised Bloom's Taxonomy to plan and deliver anintegrated English and history course entitled "Western Culture." The taxonorny providedthe team-teachers with a common language with which to translate and discuss statestandards from two different subject areas. Moreover, it helped them to understand howtheir subjects overlapped and how they could develop conceptual and proceduralknowledge concurrently. Furthermore, the taxonomy table in the revised taxonomyprovided the history and English teachers with a new outlook on assessment and enabledthem to create assignments and projects that required students to operate at more complexlevels of thinking (Abstract, Fergusorl 2002).Additionally, The Encyclopedia of Educational Technology website contains an excellentand extensive description of the use of the Revised Taxonomy Table in writing,examining and revising objectives to insure the alignment of the objectives with both thestandards and the assessments. Three charts can be found on the site one of whichcompares "LJnclear obj ectives" with "Revised Obj ectives".Bloom's group initially met hoping to reduce the duplication of effort by faculty atvarious universities. In the beginning, the scope of their purpose was limited tofacilitating the exchange of test items measuring the same educational objectives.Intending the Taxonomy "as a method of classifying educational objectives, educational


6/9

experiences, learning processes, and evaluation questions and problems" (Paul, 1985 p.39), numerous examples of test items (mostly multiple choice) were included. This led toa natural linkage of specific verbs and products with each level of the taxonomy. Thus,when designing effective lesson plans, teachers often look to Bloom's Taxonomy forguidance.Likewise the Revised Taxonomy includes specific verb and product linkage with each ofthe levels of the Cognitive Process Dimension. However, due to its 19 subcategories andtwo-dimensional organization, there is more clarity and less confusion about Al nt of aspecific verb or product to a given level. Thus the Revised Taxonomy offers teachers aneven more powerful tool to help design their lesson plans.As touched upon earlier, through the years, Bloom's Taxonomy has given rise toeducational concepts including terms such as high and low level thinking. It has also beenclosely linked with multiple intelligences (Noble, 2004) problem solving skills, creativeand critical thinking, and more recently, technology integration. For example, currently,the State of Georeia K- l2 Technoloey Planhas included in its website an excellentgraphic depicting technology alignment using Bloom's Taxonomy with leaming thoughthe two axes of insffuctional approach and authenticity.Using the Revised Taxonomy in an adaptation from the Omaha Public Schools Teacher'sCorner, a lesson objective based upon the story of Goldilocks and the Three Bears ispresented for each of the six levels of the Cognitive Process as shown on. the RevisedTaxonomy Table.Remember: Describe where Goldilocks lived.Understand: Summarize what the Goldilocks story was about.Apply: Construct a theory as to why Goldilocks went into the house.Analyze: Differentiate between how Goldilocks reacted and how you would react in eachstory eventEvaluate: Assess whether or not you think this really happened to Goldilocks.create: Compose a song, skit, poem, or rap to convey the Goldilocks story in a newform.Although this is a very simple example of the application of Bloom's taxonomy theauthor is hopeful that it will demonstrate both the ease and the usefirlness of the RevisedTaxonomy Table.


7/9

The Knowledge The Cognitive Process DimensionDimension Remember Understand Applv Analyze Evaluate CreateFactualKnowledqe

ConcepturalKnowledgeProceduralKnowledgeMeta-CosnitiveI(nowledge

Summarize Classifv Order Rank CombineistDescribe InterpretTabulate PredictAooronriate -xecuteUSC

Experiment Explain Assess PlanCalcr"rlate Differentiate Conclude ComposeConstruct Achieve Action Actualize

Copyright (c) 2005 Extended Campus -- Oregon State Universityhttp ://ecampu s. ore gon state. ed u Desi gner/Developer - Dianna FisherCaption: As one can see from the Oregon State chart above, the intersection of the sixCognitive Process defined dimensions (Remember, Understand, Apply, Analyze,Evaluate, and Create) with the four Knowledge Dimensions (defined as Factual,Conceptual, Procedural, and Meta-Cognitive) forms a grld with twenty-four separate cellsas represented. Each of the cells contains a hyperlinked verb that launches a pop-upwindow containing definitions and examples.Changes in EmphasisEmphasis is the third and final category of changes. As noted earlier, Bloom himselfrecognized that the taxonomy was being "unexpectedly" used by countless groups neverconsidered an audience for the original publication. The revised version of the taxonomyis intended for a much broader audience. Emphasis is placed upon its use as a "moreauthentic tool for curriculum planning, instructional delivery and assessment" (gz-TeacherNet, 2001).Why use Bloom?s Taxonomy?As history has shown, this well known, widely applied scheme filled a void and provided.educators with one of the first systematic classifications of the processes of thinking andleaming. The cumulative hierarchical framework consisting of six categories eachrequiring achievement of the prior skill or ability before the next, more complex, one,remains easy to understand. Out of necessity, teachers must measure their students'ability. Accurately doing so requires a classification of levels of intellectual behaviorimportant in learning. Bloom's Taxonomy provided the measurement tool for thinking.Wift the dramatic changes in society over the last five decades, the Revised Bloom'sTaxonomy provides an even more powerful tool to fit today's teachers' needs. Thesffucture of the Revised Taxonomy Table mafrix "provides a clear, concise visual


8/9

SummaryCountless people know, love and are comfortable with the original Bloom's Taxonomyand are understandably hesitant to change. After all, change is diffrcult for most people.The original Bloom's Taxonomy was and is a superb tool for educators. Yet, even "theoriginal group always considered the [Taxonomy] framework a work in progress, neitherfinished nor frnal" (Anderson & Krathwohl200l p. xxvii). The new century has broughtus the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy which really is new and improved. Try it out; thisauthor thinks you will like it better than cake.ReferencesAnderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teachingand assessing: A revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of educational objectives: Completeedition, New York : Longman.Anderson, L.W., & Sosniak, L.A. (Eds.). (1994). Bloom's taxonomy: a forfy-yearretrospective. Ninety-third yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education,Pt.z . , Chicago , IL . , University of Chicago Press.Bloom, Benjamin S. & David R. Krathwohl. (1956). Taxonomy of educationalobjectives: The classification of educational goals, by a committee of college anduniversity examiners. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York , Longmans.Cruz, E. Q004). Encyclopedia of Educationai Technology: Bloom's Revised Taxonomy.Retrieved March 1 9, 2 005 from http ://coe. sdsu. edu/eeVArti c I es/b loomrev/Eisner, E.W. (2002) Benjamin Bloom 1913-99, Retrieved March 31, 2005 fromInternational Bureau of Education: UNESCO,http://www.ibe.unesco.ore/lnternational/Publications/Thinkers/ThinkersPdf/bloome.pdfFerguson , C. Q002). Using the Revised Taxonomy to Plan and Deliver Team- Taught,Integrated, Thematic Units. Theory into Practice,4T (4),239-244.Georgia Department of Education (2005). Georgia Department of Education: Office ofinformation technology, Atlanta Georgia : Educational technology & media: Technologyintegration plan: Introduction, Retrieved March 24, 2005 fromhttp://techservices.doe.k I 2. ga.us/edtech/TechP lan.htmHoughton, R.S.. (2004. March 17). Communities Resolving Our Problems (C.R.O.P.):the basic idea: Bloom's Taxonomy - Overview. Retrieved March 12, 2005 fromhttp ://www.ceap.wcu. ed u/Hou ghton/Learner/think/bloomsTaxonomv.htmlKrathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory intoPractice, 41 (4), 212-218.


9/9

Noble, T. (2004). Irrtegrating the rwised bloom's taxonomy with multiple intelligences:A planning tool for "rril"ofi* differentiation, Teachers College Record (Vol' 106' pp'tOil: nUctwell Publishing Limited'Omaha Public Schools, (2005) Teacher's comer:Retrieved March 27, 2005 from http://www'ops'oregon state university . (2004).osy extended campus: coruse development:Instructional design -iht iu*o,,o*y Table. Retrieved April 3, 2005 from

oz-TeacherNet. (2001). oz-TeacherNet: Teachers helping teachers: Revised Bloom'sTaxonomy. Retrievei Vf *"n 1g, 2005 from http ://rite' e-d'q ut'edu'au/oz-.,--^-" P' fi rr"c:d i cnlav&- ceid:29index.php?paul, R. w. (1985a). Bloom's taxonomy and critical thinking instruction' EducationalLeadership (Vol. aZ,;: *lt Association for Supervision & Cuniculum Development'Quotations Page (2005). The Quotatigns Page: QuotationDetails: Quotation #3073 fromLaura Moncur,s ivtotirrational Quotations, Ritrieved March 20, 2005 fromtrttp:i/www.quotati onspage'com/quote/l0ZZ'htmlSchulrz, L. (2005, January 25). Lynn Schultz: old Dominion university : Bloom'staxonomy. Retrieved March 5, 2005, from

South Carolina State Department of Education (2005)' Myscschools'com: South CarolinaState Department of Education: Taxonomy for Lachrng,.te=ning, and assessing: (Arevision of Bloom's Taxonomy of educational objectives)' Retrieved March 12'20051io* htt',l***.,,,,nsJr"ho J s.co*/offi cet/cto/enhance/Tuxono*o-T*ble' htmUWTeachingAcademyShort-Corrrse'(2003).Examquestiontypes&st$enJcompetencies: How to *"ur*" leaming accuately: Blbom's'Taxonomy' Retrieved

Comprehension: Bloom's taxonomY'.'ol"enrlin s/'hl ooms taxonomy.hlml

October 1,2007 from

bacaan tambahan bloom s taxonomy 2

Documents