Mary Pat WenderothDepartment of Biology
University of Washington
Learning Taxonomies
What are they?
Why use them?
Scholars 2010
Research Research DesignDesign
OLD Learning designOLD Learning designYour students
Your students
Student learningStudent learning
NEW Learning designNEW Learning designYour students
Your students
Student learningStudent learning
Post- Biology Scholars 2010Your research question
Research Research DesignDesign
OLD Learning designOLD Learning designYour students
Your students
Student learningStudent learning
NEW Learning designNEW Learning designYour students
Your students
Student learningStudent learning
SAME ???
Research Design
Control for
◦ 1. Students---are they “the same” academically? Compare
entering GPA, SAT other academic indicators
Pre-test
Research Research DesignDesign
OLD Learning designOLD Learning designYour students
Your students
Student learningStudent learning
NEW Learning designNEW Learning designYour students
Your students
Student learningStudent learning
Design or instructor ?
Research DesignControl for
◦ 1. Students--are they “the same” academically? Compare GPA, SAT, other academic indicators Pre-test
2. Instructor• you teach both sections of course• control for years of experience• teaching philosophy• monitor teaching style
Research Research DesignDesign
OLD Learning designOLD Learning designYour students
Your students
Student learningStudent learning
NEW Learning designNEW Learning designYour students
Your students
Student learningStudent learning
How to assess?
Research DesignControl for
◦ 1. Students--are they “the same” academically? Compare GPA, SAT, other academic indicators Pre-test
2. Instructor• you teach both sections of course• control for years of experience• teaching philosophy• monitor teaching style
3. Assessment• use the same test• use isomorphic questions• use the same Bloom or SOLO level of questions
Major Learning Taxonomies
2- Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning Domainscognitive (knowledge)affective (attitudes)psychomotor (skills)
Bloom & Krathwohl 1956
1- SOLO, Structure of Observed Learning OutcomesBiggs & Collis 1982
TheThe SOLO model consists of 5 levels of SOLO model consists of 5 levels of understandingunderstanding
• Prestructural – the student acquires bits of unconnected information that have no organisation and make no sense.
• Unistructural – students make simple and obvious connections between pieces of information
• Multistructural – a number of connections are made, but not the meta-connections between them
• Relational – the students sees the significance of how the various pieces of information relate to one another
• Extended abstract – at this level students can make connections beyond the scope of the problem or question, to generalise or transfer learning into a new situation
To answer the question students need the knowledge or use of only one piece of given information, fact, or idea, that they can get directly from the problem.
Unistructural questionsUnistructural questions
Quality QuestioningUsing the SOLO Taxonomy
solo-taxonomy-1204838403126960-5.ppt
student Response
Facts
Students need to know or use more than one piece of given information, fact, or idea, to answer the question, but do not integrate the ideas.
This is fundamentally an unsorted, unorganised list.
Multistructural questionsMultistructural questions
Response
Facts
student
Relational questionsRelational questions
These questions require students to integrate more than one piece of given knowledge, information, fact, or idea. At least two separate ideas are required that, working together, will solve the problem.
Response
Facts
student
Extended abstract questionsExtended abstract questions
These questions involve a higher level of abstraction. The items require the student to go beyond the given information, knowledge, information, or ideas and to deduce a more general rule or proof that applies to all cases.
Response
Facts
student
A C
D E Prestructural = D
Unistructural = C
Multistructural = B
Relational = E
Extended abstract = A
B
A
CD
E Prestructural = D
Unistructural = C
Multistructural = B
Relational = E
Extended abstract = F
B
Evaluation- critique
Synthesis - create
Analysis- compare and contrast
Application-- solve
Comprehension-- define
Knowledge-- facts
Bloom, B.S., Krathwohl, D.R., and Masia, B.B. (1956)
NEW ORIGINAL
Create Evaluation- critique
Evaluate Synthesis - create
Analyze Analysis- compare and contrast
Apply Application-- solve
Understand Comprehension-- define
Recall Knowledge-- facts
Bloom, B.S., Krathwohl, D.R., and Masia, B.B. (1956)
Revised Bloom’s Revised Bloom’s 20012001Recall
Understand
Apply Analyze Evaluate
Create
Factual knowledge
Conceptual knowledge
Procedural knowledge
Metacognitive knowledge
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001)
Evaluation- critique
Synthesis - create
Analysis- compare and contrast
Application-- solve
Comprehension-Understand-- define
Knowledge-Recall-- facts
Bloom, B.S., Krathwohl, D.R., and Masia, B.B. (1956)
Knowledge--Recall Memorize, name, recognize, label, list,
locate, order, repeat, reproduce, state, select.
Comprehend--Understand Define, describe, translate, give example,
restate.
Apply Predict, calculate, solve, use, demonstrate,
dramatize, sketch.
Bloom wordsBloom words
Analyze Compare and contrast, infer, differentiate,
discriminate, distinguish, question, test.
Synthesis/create Create, assemble, construct, design, develop,
organize, propose, write.
Evaluate Critique, appraise, assess, defend, judge,
rate, value.
Bloom wordsBloom words
Crowe, Dirks & Wenderoth 2008. CBE- Life Science Education 7:368.
Bloom’s level GRAPHING
Knowledge Identify the parts of graphs and recognize different types of graphs (e.g., identify the X axis, identify a histogram)
Comprehension Describe the data represented in a simple graph
Application Draw a graph based on a given set of data; predict outcomes based on data presented in graph
Analysis Read and interpret a complex graph having multiple variables or treatments and explain biological implications of data
Synthesis Create a graphical representation of a given biological process or concept
Evaluation Assess the relative effectiveness of different graphical representations of the same data or biological concept
Crowe, Dirks & Wenderoth 2008. CBE- Life Science Education 7:368.
Crowe, Dirks & Wenderoth 2008. CBE- Life Science Education 7:368.
Why Bloom a test?
Bloom’s distribution of exam questions
Align your teaching and testing
3. Assessment• use the same test• use isomorphic questions• use the same Bloom or SOLO level of questions
NEW Learning designNEW Learning designYour students
Your students
Student learningStudent learning
OLD Learning designOLD Learning designYour students
Your students
Student learningStudent learning
Bloom Index = Bloom total/exam total
= 300 / 100 = 3
300 = Bloom Total Exam Total = 100
1. Bloom Index of exam
2. Level of difficulty of questioneasymoderatehard
How to Bloom a test?
Ask a colleagueBuy them coffeeHave them “Bloom” your
exam
Physiology: Cardiac Output (MP Wenderoth)
Cell Biology: Nuclear transport (Alison Crowe)
Immunology: Virology (Clarissa Dirks)
Crowe, Dirks & Wenderoth 2008. CBE- Life Science Education 7:368.
Physiology: cardiac outputKnowledge-Recall
Which two variables determine cardiac output for an animal?
Comprehension-UnderstandingDefine cardiac output and why it is significant.
ApplicationLance Armstrong has a normal resting cardiac output 6L/min yet his resting heart rate is only 40 beats/min. What is his stroke volume?
Analysis
Compared to a normal resting male of the same height and weight, Lance Armstrong’s stroke volume is greatly increased. Provide a physiological explanation for a large stroke volume.
Crowe, Dirks & Wenderoth 2008. CBE- Life Science Education 7:368.
EvaluationIf an enlarged heart was observed on a CT scan of patient, how would you determine if this enlarged heart was pathological or not?
SynthesisCreate a summary sheet that is a pictorial depiction/ flow diagram of how changes in cardiac output influence mean arterial blood pressure.
Crowe, Dirks & Wenderoth 2008. CBE- Life Science Education 7:368.
Bloom, B.S., Krathwohl, D.R., and Masia, B.B. (1956)
KnowledgeKnowledge
ComprehensionComprehension
ApplicationApplication
AnalysisAnalysis SynthesisSynthesis EvaluationEvaluation
Higher Order
Lower Order
SOLO Bloom
• Prestructural Knowledge/Recall
• Unistructural Comprehension
• Multistructural Application
• Relational Analysis
• Extended abstract Synthesis/Evaluation
Lower Order
Higher Order
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of educational objectives: Complete edition, New York : Longman.
Anderson , L.W., & Sosniak, L.A. (Eds.). (1994). Bloom's taxonomy: a forty-year retrospective. Ninety-third yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Pt.2 . , Chicago , IL . , University of Chicago Press.
Bloom, Benjamin S. & David R. Krathwohl. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals, by a committee of college and university examiners. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York , Longmans.
Crowe, A., Dirks,C, & Wenderoth, M.P. (2008) Bloomin’ Biology CBE- Life Science Education 7:368
http://www.coun.uvic.ca/learning/exams/blooms-taxonomy.html http://www.polyu.edu.hk/assessment/arc/links/reference_g_blooms.htm http://www.kurwongbss.eq.edu.au/thinking/Bloom/blooms.htm
References- Bloom’sReferences- Bloom’s
http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/solo.htm http://www.slideshare.net/jocelynam/solo-taxonomy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_of_Observed_Learning_Outcome
Biggs FILM http://www.daimi.au.dk/~brabrand/short-film/
References- SOLOReferences- SOLO
National Research Council 1999
1. Address student’s preconceptions.
Three major findings:
2. Build BOTH a deep foundation of factual knowledge & strong conceptual framework.3. Enhance student’s ability to monitor their learning.
(metacognition)
“To achieve these ambitious goals, we will need much more emphasis on both science education and the “science of education”.
Science Jan 2, 2009