Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Bloom's taxonomy
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
=== Criticism of the taxonomy === Richard W. Morshead criticized the original taxonomy, noting that it was not a properly constructed taxonomy as it lacked a systematic rationale of construction.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Morshead |first=Richard W. |year=1965 |title=On Taxonomy of educational objectives Handbook II: Affective domain |journal=Studies in Philosophy and Education |volume=4 |issue=1 |pages=164–170 |doi=10.1007/bf00373956|url=https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/43808/1/11217_2004_Article_BF00373956.pdf |hdl=2027.42/43808 |s2cid=143935506 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> This was later acknowledged in the 2001 revision, where the taxonomy was restructured on more systematic lines.<ref name="anderaetal2001" />{{Page needed|date=May 2024}} Some critiques of the taxonomy's cognitive domain accept the six categories but question the existence of a sequential, hierarchical link.<ref name="paul1993">{{cite book |last=Paul |first=R. |year=1993 |title=Critical thinking: what every person needs to survive in a rapidly changing world |edition=3rd |place=Rohnert Park, CA |publisher=Sonoma State University Press }}</ref> Often, educators may see the taxonomy as a hierarchy and mistakenly dismiss the lower levels as less important for teaching.<ref name="Flannery">{{cite journal |last=Flannery |first=Maura C. |date=November 2007 |title=Observations on biology |journal=[[The American Biology Teacher]] |volume=69 |issue=9 |pages=561–564 |doi=10.1662/0002-7685(2007)69[561:OOB]2.0.CO;2 |s2cid=85828325 |url=https://www.nabt.org/websites/institution/File/pdfs/american_biology_teacher/2007/069-09-0561.pdf |quote=Biology is often referred to as an observational science almost as a slur, with the implication that biologists simply look at the living world without the strong theoretical and mathematic underpinnings of a science like physics. There is the suggestion that observation is easy. Thus biology is viewed as a lightweight science—anyone can do it: just go out and start looking, at birds, at grass, at cells under the microscope. Benjamin Bloom's taxonomy of learning tasks puts observation at the lowest level, with recall of information. This denigration of observation has long bothered me because I see it as often difficult and complex, a skill that needs to be learned and a talent that is much more developed in some. |access-date=2017-03-05 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170306033013/https://www.nabt.org/websites/institution/File/pdfs/american_biology_teacher/2007/069-09-0561.pdf |archive-date=2017-03-06 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref name="Lawler">{{cite web |last=Lawler |first=Susan |date=26 February 2016 |title=Identification of animals and plants is an essential skill set |publisher=[[The Conversation (website)|The Conversation]] |url=https://theconversation.com/identification-of-animals-and-plants-is-an-essential-skill-set-55450 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161117044125/http://theconversation.com/identification-of-animals-and-plants-is-an-essential-skill-set-55450 |archive-date=17 November 2016 |access-date=5 March 2017 |quote=Ironically, the dogma that has been so detrimental to field taxonomy is known as Bloom's taxonomy. University lecturers are told to apply an educational theory developed by Benjamin Bloom, which categorises assessment tasks and learning activities into cognitive domains. In Bloom's taxonomy, identifying and naming are at the lowest level of cognitive skills and have been systematically excluded from University degrees because they are considered simplistic.}}</ref> In response, others have argued that the learning of lower levels supports the development of skills at higher levels, and in certain fields, the most critical skills may reside in the lower levels, such as species identification in natural history.<ref name="Flannery"/><ref name="Lawler"/> [[Instructional scaffolding]] from lower-level to higher-level skills is an application of [[Vygotskian constructivism]].<ref name="vygotsky1978">{{cite book |last=Vygotsky |first=L. S. |author-link=Lev Vygotsky |year=1978 |title=Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes |chapter=Chapter 6: Interaction between learning and development |pages=79–91 |place=Cambridge, Massachusetts |publisher=Harvard University Press }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Keene |first1=Judith |last2=Colvin |first2=John |last3=Sissons |first3=Justine |date=June 2010 |orig-year=2010 |title=Mapping student information literacy activity against Bloom's taxonomy of cognitive skills |journal=Journal of Information Literacy |volume=4 |issue=1 |pages=6–21 |doi=10.11645/4.1.189 |quote=When supporting students outside the classroom situation, a subject aware advisor should be capable of spotting mistakes in a student's solution and of analysing these mistakes to identify the difficulty that the student is encountering. Such support can be seen as offering scaffolding in a student's 'zone of proximal development' (Vygotsky, 1978) and exemplified by teaching students to analyse a problem through the identification of the key elements and the relationships between these elements. |doi-access=free |url=https://eprints.worc.ac.uk/1051/1/1451.pdf }}</ref> While some consider the three lower levels hierarchically ordered and the three higher levels parallel,<ref name="anderaetal2001" /> others argue that it can be beneficial to move to application before introducing concepts, particularly in problem-based learning environments where real-world contexts precede theoretical understanding.{{Citation needed|date=March 2009}} The distinction between categories can be seen as artificial, since cognitive tasks often involve multiple processes.<ref>{{cite journal | last=Fadul |first=J. A.|title=Collective Learning: Applying distributed cognition for collective intelligence|journal=The International Journal of Learning|volume=16 | issue =4 |pages=211–220 |issn=1447-9494|year=2009|doi=10.18848/1447-9494/CGP/v16i04/46223}}</ref> Categorizing mental processes into distinct classifications may undermine the interconnected nature of cognition, a critique commonly directed at taxonomies of mental processes. Despite this, the taxonomy is widely used in educational settings to structure learning outcomes, though a 2020 study revealed inconsistencies between institutions in the mapping of action verbs to the taxonomy's levels.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Newton |first1=Philip M. |last2=Da Silva |first2=Ana |last3=Peters |first3=Lee George |date=10 July 2020 |title=A pragmatic master list of action verbs for Bloom's taxonomy |journal=[[Frontiers in Education]] |volume=5 |doi=10.3389/feduc.2020.00107|doi-access=free }}</ref>
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)