Classifying educational goals using Bloom’s taxonomy
How can you classify different levels of skills you want your students to gain from your classes?
Learning objectives are traditionally categorized after Bloom’s (1956) taxonomy. Bloom separates learning objectives in three classes: cognitive, affective and psychomotor. Cognitive learning objectives are about what people know, understand and about their thinking processes dealing with and synthesizing that knowledge. Affective learning objectives are about feelings and emotions. Lastly psychomotor learning objectives are about what people do with their hands. Even though Bloom was trying to combine all three classes, in the context of today’s university education, the focus is clearly on cognitive learning objectives.
Cognitive learning objectives can be divided into sub-categories. From low-level to high-level processes those categories are as follows:
Knowledge Learning gains on this level can for example be tested by asking students to repeat, define or list facts, definitions, or vocabulary.
Comprehension In order to test comprehension, students can for example be asked to describe, determine, demonstrate, explain, translate or discuss.
Application Ability to apply concepts is shown for example by carrying out a procedure, calculating, solving, illustrating, transferring.
Analysis Competency on this level can be tested by asking students to contrast and compare, to analyze, to test, to categorize, to distinguish.
Synthesis Ability to synthesize can be shown by assembling, developing, constructing, designing, organizing or conceiving a product or method.
Evaluation The highest level, evaluation, can be tested by asking students to justify, assess, value, evaluate, appraise or select.
In the next post I’ll talk about how you can use this classification to help with developing good multiple-choice questions, so stay tuned!
jwalkupcash says:
The “highest level” in the old Bloom’s Taxonomy is synthesis, not application.
jwalkupcash says:
Sorry, meant “evaluate.”
mglessmer says:
Yes! Thanks for catching that and for letting me know! Should be fixed now.
How to plan a course from scratch | Adventures in Oceanography and Teaching says:
[…] and self-reliance). You might also notice that I am dealing with fairly high skill levels here: In Bloom’s classification, the knowledge learning outcomes are around level 2 and 3, the skills are even as high as […]
Designing exercises with the right amount of guidance as well as the right level of difficulty | Adventures in Oceanography and Teaching says:
[…] there is not one clear answer. It depends on the learning outcomes (classified, for example, by Bloom or in the SOLO framework) you have decided on for your […]
Teaching: intentional and reasoned act | says:
[…] talked about Bloom’s taxonomy of learning objectives before but I have to admit that I’ve only gone back and read the original Bloom (1956) book […]
Currently reading: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives | says:
[…] (2001) revised taxonomy of learning outcomes. They modified some of the higher levels of the original Bloom (1956) taxonomy and now use a continuum of cognitive processes from “remember” to […]
The structural complexity of learning outcomes | says:
[…] talked about the classification of learning outcomes according to Blooms’s taxonomy recently, and got a lot of feedback from readers that the examples of multiple-choice questions at […]