Bloom Taxonomy

Bloom Taxonomy

Remembering (Knowledge / Recall)

🧠 At this level, an expert can **define** Bloom’s taxonomy and **name** its key terms, contributors, components, and usage contexts.

• Core terminology & definitions
  • [taxonomy] – A hierarchical framework for classifying educational learning objectives in the **[domain]**, ranging from simple recall to advanced creation.
  • [domain] – The area of learning focused on mental skills, knowledge acquisition, and reasoning.
  • [domain] – The learning domain concerned with emotions, attitudes, and values.
  • [domain] – The domain involving physical skills, movement, and motor coordination.
  • [objective] – A statement describing what a learner should know or be able to do after instruction.
  • [of Educational Objectives] – The original publication series introducing Bloom’s taxonomy.

• Key contributors
  • [Bloom] – Educational psychologist who chaired the committee that created the taxonomy.
  • [Krathwohl] – Co-author and later reviser of the taxonomy.
  • [Anderson] – Former Bloom student who co-led the 2001 revision.

• Canonical versions
  • [1956 taxonomy] – Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Synthesis, Evaluation.
  • [2001 taxonomy] – Remember, Understand, Apply, Analyze, Evaluate, Create.

• Where Bloom’s taxonomy commonly appears
  • [[1]] – Lesson planning, curriculum design, learning standards.
  • [design] – Aligning objectives, activities, and assessments.
  • [[2]] – Categorizing test questions by cognitive level.
  • [training] – Framework for developing pedagogical skill.
  • [training] – Designing workplace learning and skill-development programs.
  • [management systems] – Tagging objectives and assessments by Bloom level.

• Typical recall-level facts
  • Six cognitive levels exist in the revised taxonomy.
  • It originated in the United States in the 1950s.
  • It is widely used globally across educational and training settings.

Understanding (Comprehension)

📖 Ability to explain what Bloom’s taxonomy is, how its parts relate, and how it differs from alternatives.

• Conceptual relationships & contrasts
  • [vs. revised Bloom’s taxonomy] – Comparison of the first hierarchy with the updated version.
  • [of learning] – How the cognitive domain in Bloom’s taxonomy complements affective and psychomotor domains.
  • [taxonomy] – An alternative model that classifies learning based on the structural complexity of responses.

• Core principles & paradigms
  • [models of learning] – The idea that more complex skills build on simpler ones.
  • [(education)] – The view that learners actively build understanding, which Bloom’s levels can help describe.

• Core operational concepts
  • [verbs] in learning objectives – Using verbs like “define,” “explain,” “analyze,” or “design” to signal cognitive demand.
  • [for learning] – Using questions and tasks at different Bloom levels to support and check understanding.

• Producer vs. consumer perspectives
  • [designer] – Uses Bloom’s taxonomy to plan objectives, activities, and assessments.
  • [[3]] – Experiences tasks at various cognitive levels and demonstrates understanding through performance.

Applying (Application / Use)

🛠️ Ability to use Bloom’s taxonomy in real course, lesson, or assessment design.

• "Hello, World" & canonical examples
  • [plan] – A basic lesson where objectives are explicitly tagged with Bloom levels (e.g., “Students will be able to list… (Remember)”).
  • [question] – Simple example re-written across different Bloom levels (recall vs. interpret vs. evaluate).

• Guides for core task loops
  • [design] – Loop: define outcomes → map to Bloom levels → design learning activities → design aligned assessments.
  • [design] – Start from desired outcomes (with Bloom levels) and work backward to teaching and assessment.

• Reference of common commands/“functions”
  • [[4]] lists for Bloom’s taxonomy – Practical lists of action verbs used to write objectives at each level (remember, understand, apply, etc.). (Bloom verb list – missing)
  • [[5]] – Scoring tools that describe performance in ways aligned with Bloom levels.

• Contextual use cases
  • [training] – Using Bloom to design onboarding and skills-development programs.
  • [education] – Structuring course sequences so students move from recall in early years to creating and evaluating in capstone projects.

Analyzing (Analysis / Break Down)

🔬 Ability to break down Bloom’s taxonomy, compare it to other models, and examine its limitations.

• Comparative analysis (pros & cons)
  • [of Bloom’s taxonomy] – Concerns about oversimplification and lack of empirical validation.
  • [taxonomy] vs. Bloom – Comparison of focusing on structural complexity vs. cognitive process labels.

• Failure modes & root cause analysis
  • [to the test] – When misused, Bloom’s taxonomy may encourage narrow exam-driven teaching.
  • [approach] – Treating Bloom levels as boxes to tick rather than tools for thoughtful design (root cause: superficial adoption).

• Troubleshooting & observability techniques
  • [mapping] – Analyzing where objectives, teaching, and assessment misalign in Bloom levels.
  • [analytics] – Using data on student performance at different difficulty levels to infer gaps in instruction or misclassified tasks.

Creating (Synthesis / Create)

🏗️ Ability to design new learning experiences, curricula, and systems using Bloom’s taxonomy.

• Design patterns & best practices
  • [(education)] – Gradually moving tasks from lower to higher Bloom levels with support.
  • [learning] – Designing activities that push learners into analyzing, evaluating, and creating.

• Common security & ethical patterns
  • [equity] – Ensuring all learners have access to higher-order learning opportunities, not just recall tasks.
  • [curriculum] – Being aware of implicit messages when only low-level objectives are emphasized.

• Lifecycle management strategies
  • [redesign] – Periodically revising objectives and assessments to ensure a healthy spread across Bloom levels.
  • [improvement] – Using feedback and outcomes data to iteratively refine learning designs.

• Scalability & optimization patterns
  • [management system] – Embedding Bloom-aligned objectives and item banks into digital platforms.
  • [banks] – Large repositories of assessment items tagged by Bloom level for reuse and scaling.

Evaluating (Evaluation / Judge)

⚖️ Ability to judge the quality, impact, and suitability of using Bloom’s taxonomy in a given context.

• Evaluation frameworks & testing tools
  • [evaluation] – Assessing whether Bloom-aligned curricula actually improve learning outcomes.
  • [measurement] – Studying reliability and validity of assessments designed with Bloom’s taxonomy.

• Maturity & adoption models
  • [of innovations] – Understanding how Bloom’s taxonomy spread through schools, universities, and training organizations.
  • [design models] – Positioning Bloom’s taxonomy among other widely adopted frameworks.

• Key performance indicators (KPIs) & metrics
  • [outcomes] achievement – Evidence that students can perform tasks at targeted Bloom levels.
  • [engagement] – Degree to which higher-order tasks (analysis, evaluation, creation) increase motivation and participation.

• Strategic decision criteria (rubrics & trade-offs)
  • [frameworks] – Choosing Bloom vs. alternatives like SOLO or Community_of_practice (missing) based on goals.
  • [analysis] – Weighing the effort of tagging and redesigning curricula against gains in clarity and learning.

• Holistic impact analysis
  • [cost of ownership] – Considering time, training, and tooling needed to adopt Bloom’s taxonomy across a program.
  • [[6]] and [[7]] – Evaluating how well Bloom’s framework supports both child and adult learning contexts.