A levels-of-processing analysis of Bloom's taxonomy.

Abstract

The cumulative hierarchical assumption of Bloom's Taxonomy was tested by orienting American and Australian subjects at four Taxonomic levels (Knowledge, Application, Synthesis, Evaluation) to the same study material and subsequently administering an unexpected memory test. With the exception of the Evaluation category, recall generally increased, as predicted, as Taxonomic level increased. Bloom's Taxonomy appears to possess some cross-national validity, at least for the two nationalities sampled, since the overall recall performance of the Americans and Australians was quite similar. In general, moderate support is obtained for the cumulative hierarchical assumption, but it is concluded that the Evaluation category is misplaced as the apex level of the Taxonomy.Part of the data reported in the present study formed the basis of a thesis submitted by Ronald Cohen to the University of New Orleans in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the master's degree.Requests for reprints should be sent to

Approaches to Cell Biology Teaching: Questions about Questions

“…Such a framework can be found in Bloom's (1956) Taxonomy of the Cognitive Domain, a classification system for cognitive abilities and educational objectives developed by educational psychologist Benjamin Bloom and his four colleagues (M. Englehart, E. Furst, W. Hill, and D. Krathwohl). Since its inception, Bloom's Taxonomy has influenced curriculum development, the construction of test questions, and our understanding of learning outcomes (Kunen et al, 1981;Kottke and Schuster, 1990). It has helped educators to match the questions they ask with the type of thinking skills they are trying to develop, and to otherwise formulate or clarify their instructional objectives.…”

Supporting active cognitive processing in collaborative groups: The potential of Bloom's taxonomy as a labeling tool

“…Bloom's (1956Bloom's ( , 1984 taxonomy of educational objectives was developed as a tool for a variety of purposes. His taxonomy is organized from simple to complex and concrete to abstract cognitive categories (Krathwohl, 2002), representing a cumulative framework that has been widely applied in educational research (Kunen, Cohen, & Solman, 1981). The authors of the present study have adopted Bloom's taxonomy as a "language" about learning goals to facilitate communication across persons, subject matter, and grade levels.…”

“…For instance, Kunen et al (1981) questioned whether evaluation should remain as the highest level of the original taxonomy. Former students of Bloom have revised the original taxonomy .…”

Measurement of Learning Process by Semantic Annotation Technique on Bloom’s Taxonomy Vocabulary

“…Bloom's taxonomy of educational aims was established as a tool for a variety of purposes. Bloom's taxonomy is systematized from simple to complex and specific to abstract cognitive classifications (Krathwohl, 2002), representing an aggregate framework that has been broadly applied in educational research (Kunen, Cohen, & Solman, 1981). More particularly, Bloom's categories reveal levels in knowledge construction (Bloom, Engelhart, Furst, Hill, & Krathwohl, 1956).…”