<< Chapter < Page | Chapter >> Page > |
A few years ago two of Benjamin Bloom’s original colleagues, Linda Anderson and David Krathwohl, revised his taxonomy so as to clarify its terms and to make it more complete (Anderson&Krathwohl, 2001; Marzano, 2006). The resulting categories are summarized and compared to the original categories in Table 6. As the chart shows, several categories of objectives have been renamed and a second dimension added that describes the kind of thinking or cognitive processing that may occur. The result is a much richer taxonomy than before, since every level of the objectives can now take four different forms. Remembering, for example, can refer to four different kinds of memory: memory for facts, for concepts, for procedures, or for metacognitive knowledge. Table 6 gives examples of each of these kinds of memory.
Original term from Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956) | Revised term emphasizing cognitive processing (2001) | A new dimension added: types of knowledge learned (2001) | Example of cognitive process remembering combined with possible types of knowledge |
Knowledge | Remembering | Memory for facts: recalling the names of each part of a living cell | |
Comprehension | Understanding | ||
Application | Applying | ||
Analysis | Analyzing | ||
Evaluation | Evaluating | ||
Synthesis | Creating |
|
|
Memory for concepts: recalling the functions of each part of a living cell | |||
Memory for procedures: recalling how to view a cell under a microscope | |||
Memory for metacognition: recalling not the names of the parts, but a technique for remembering the names of the parts of a living cell | |||
Although taxonomies related to affect, or the feelings and emotions of students, are used less commonly than cognitive taxonomies for planning instruction, various educators have constructed them. One of the most widely known was also published by colleagues of Benjamin Bloom and classifies affect according to how committed a student feels toward what he is learning (Krathwohl, Bloom,&Masia, 1964/1999). [link] summarizes the categories and gives brief examples. The lowest level, called receiving, simply involves willingness to experience new knowledge or activities. Higher levels involve embracing or adopting experiences in ways that are increasingly organized and that represent increasingly stable forms of commitment.
Affective domain | Psychomotor domain | ||
Receiving | Willingness to attend to particular experience | Imitation | Repeating a simple action that has been demonstrated |
Responding | Willingness to participate actively in an experience | Manipulation | Practice of an action that has been imitated but only learned partially |
Valuing | Perception of experience as worthwhile | Precision | Quick, smooth execution of an action that has been practiced |
Organization | Coordination of valued experiences into partially coherent wholes | Articulation | Execution of an action not only with precision, but also with modifications appropriate to new circumstances |
Characterization by a value complex | Coordination of valued experiences and of organized sets of experiences into a single comprehensive value hierarchy | Naturalization | Incorporation of an action into the motor repertoire, along with experimentation with new motor actions |
Taxonomies related to abilities and skills that are physical, or psychomotor, have also been used less widely than affective taxonomies, with the notable exception of one area of teaching where they are obviously relevant: physical education. As you might expect, taxonomic categories of motor skills extend from simple, brief actions to complex, extended action sequences that combine simpler, previously learned skills smoothly and automatically (Harrow, 1972; Simpson, 1972). One such classification scheme is shown in [link] . An example of a very basic psychomotor skill might be imitating the action of throwing a ball when modeled by someone else; an example of the latter might be performing a 10 minute gymnastics routine which the student has devised for himself or herself. Note, though, that many examples of psychomotor skills also exist outside the realm of physical education. In a science course, for example, a student might need to learn to operate laboratory equipment that requires using delicate, fine movements. In art classes, students might learn to draw, and in music they might learn to play an instrument (both are partly motor skills). Most first graders are challenged by the motor skills of learning to write. For students with certain physical disabilities, furthermore, motor skill development is an important priority for the student’s entire education.
Notification Switch
Would you like to follow the 'Educational psychology' conversation and receive update notifications?