Weekly Bookmarks (8/7/2011)
-
Intel Education: Designing Effective Projects: Thinking Frameworks
Review of Bloom’s Taxonomy, including problems and the revised version, with information about the differences between factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge.
-
Those teachers who keep a list of question prompts relating to the various levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy undoubtedly do a better job of encouraging higher-order thinking in their students than those who have no such tool. On the other hand, as anyone who has worked with a group of educators to classify a group of questions and learning activities according to the Taxonomy can attest, there is little consensus about what seemingly self-evident terms like “analysis,” or “evaluation” mean. In addition, so many worthwhile activities, such as authentic problems and projects, cannot be mapped to the Taxonomy, and trying to do that would diminish their potential as learning opportunities.
-
It seems that the author has not considered A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Complete Edition by Lorin W. Anderson, David R. Krathwohl, Peter W. Airasian and Kathleen A. Cruikshank.
Fred Saba
Professor Emeritus
Educational Technology
http://distance-educator.com
My apologies that your comment wasn’t posted immediately. The spam filter apparently didn’t like your URL.
I seems that you didn’t look past the first page of the source. On the second page, it reviews the revised version and quotes Anderson et al.
http://www97.intel.com/en/ProjectDesign/ThinkingSkills/ThinkingFrameworks/Bloom_Taxonomy2.htm
Personally, I don’t think the revised version really does anything to solve the problems mentioned here. Changing the names of the categories doesn’t actually make it easier to categorize activities, especially authentic ones.