bloom’s taxonomy (1956) and bloom’s taxonomy revised (2001) thomas f. hawk management department...

12
Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956) and Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised (2001) Thomas F. Hawk Management Department Frostburg State University

Upload: myron-underwood

Post on 03-Jan-2016

215 views

Category:

Documents


3 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956) and Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised (2001) Thomas F. Hawk Management Department Frostburg State University

Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956)and

Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised (2001)

Thomas F. Hawk

Management Department

Frostburg State University

Page 2: Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956) and Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised (2001) Thomas F. Hawk Management Department Frostburg State University

References

Bloom, B.S., Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H. & Krathwohl, D.R. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, The Cognitive Domain. New York: Longmans.

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: Longmans.

Page 3: Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956) and Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised (2001) Thomas F. Hawk Management Department Frostburg State University

Summary of Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956)

1.0 Knowledge

2.0 Comprehension

3.0 Application

4.0 Analysis

5.0 Synthesis

6.0 Evaluation

Page 4: Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956) and Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised (2001) Thomas F. Hawk Management Department Frostburg State University

Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956)

1.00 Knowledge1.10 Knowledge of Specifics

1.11 Knowledge of Terminology1.12 Knowledge of Specific Facts

1.20 Knowledge of Ways & Means of Dealing with Specifics1.21 Knowledge of Conventions1.22 Knowledge of Trends & Sequences1.23 Knowledge of Classifications & Categories1.24 Knowledge of Methodology

1.30 Knowledge of the Universals & Abstracts in the Field1.31 Knowledge of Principals & Generalizations1.32 Knowledge of Theories and Structures

Page 5: Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956) and Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised (2001) Thomas F. Hawk Management Department Frostburg State University

Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956)

2.00 Comprehension2.10 Translation2.20 Interpretation2.30 Extrapolation

3.00 Application4.00 Analysis

4.10 Analysis of Elements4.20 Analysis of Relationships4.30 Analysis of Organizational Principles

5.00 Synthesis5.10 Production of a Unique Communication5.20 Production of a Plan or a Proposed Set of Operations5.30 Derivation of a Set of Abstract Relations

Page 6: Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956) and Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised (2001) Thomas F. Hawk Management Department Frostburg State University

Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956)

6.00 Evaluation6.10 Judgements in Terms of Internal Evidence

6.20 Judgements in Terms of External Evidence

Page 7: Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956) and Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised (2001) Thomas F. Hawk Management Department Frostburg State University

Summary of Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised (2001)

Knowledge Dimension

A. Factual

B. Conceptual

C. Procedural

D. Metacognitive

Process Dimension

1. Remember

2. Understand

3. Apply

4. Analyze

5. Evaluate

6. Create

Page 8: Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956) and Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised (2001) Thomas F. Hawk Management Department Frostburg State University

Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised (2001)Types of Knowledge

A. Factual KnowledgeAa. Knowledge of TerminologyAb. Knowledge of Specific Details & Elements

B. Conceptual KnowledgeBa. Knowledge of Classifications & CategoriesBb. Knowledge of Principles & GeneralizationsBc. Knowledge of Theories, Models, & Structures

C. Procedural KnowledgeCa. Knowledge of Subject-Specific Skills & AlgorithmsCb. Knowledge of Subject-Specific Techniques & MethodsCc. Knowledge of Criteria for When to Use Procedures

D. Meta-cognitive KnowledgeDa. Strategic KnowledgeDb. Knowledge about Cognitive Tasks (Context & Conditions)Dc. Self-Knowledge

Page 9: Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956) and Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised (2001) Thomas F. Hawk Management Department Frostburg State University

Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised (2001)

1.0 Remember1.1 Recognizing – Identifying1.2 Recalling -Retrieving

2.0 Understand2.1 Interpreting – Clarifying, paraphrasing, representing, translating2.2 Exemplifying – Illustrating, instantiating2.3 Classifying – Categorizing, subsuming2.4 Summarizing – Abstracting, generalizing2.5 Inferring – Concluding, extrapolating, interpolating, prediciting2.6 Comparing – Contrasting, mapping, matching2.7 Explaining – Constructing models

3.0 Apply3.1 Executing – Carrying out3.2 Implementing - Using

Page 10: Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956) and Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised (2001) Thomas F. Hawk Management Department Frostburg State University

Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised (2001)

4.0 Analyze4.1 Differentiating – Discriminating, distinguishing,

focusing, selecting4.2 Organizing – Finding coherence, integrating,

structuring4.3 Attributing - Deconstructing

5.0 Evaluate5.1 Checking – Coordinating, detecting, monitoring, testing5.2 Critiquing - Judging

6.0 Create6.1 Generating - Hypothesizing6.2 Planning - Designing6.3 Producing - Constructing

Page 11: Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956) and Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised (2001) Thomas F. Hawk Management Department Frostburg State University

Comparison of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (1956 & 2001)• Original

– 1.0 Knowledge

– 2.0 Comprehension– 3.0 Application– 4.0 Analysis– 5.0 Synthesis– 6.0 Evaluation

• Revised

Knowledge

Processes– 1.0 Remember– 2.0 Understand– 3.0 Apply– 4.0 Analyze– 5.0 Evaluate– 6.0 Create

Page 12: Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956) and Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised (2001) Thomas F. Hawk Management Department Frostburg State University

Using Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised

• Understand your assumptions and values (teaching/learning philosophy)

• Identify the course learning outcomes (rubrics)• Identify the knowledge type outcomes in course• Identify the process type outcomes in course• Create the learning activities (learning models)

to embrace the learning style diversity• Create the assessment activities (assessment)• Create the syllabus (syllabus)