Bloom’s Taxonomy 2.0

Over the few months that I’ve been blogging, my post on Bloom’s Digital Taxonomy has been the biggest hit.  And, what interests my readers interests me.  Here’s more on the subject:

Probably every classroom teacher in this country has at least come across Bloom’s Taxonomy at some point.  Most of us can recite the ‘level’s by heart, in order from lowest- to highest-order thinking:

Knowledge –> Comprehension –> Application –> Analysis –> Synthesis –> Evaluation

We’ve come to associate certain action words, activities, and types of questions with each level, and we know that the higher the level, the more challenging the approach.  It ‘s helpful to think about where your content falls on this scale.  I must admit that I referred to my laminated ‘Bloom’s Chart’ almost daily during my first year – because it was useful, but also because I couldn’t quite remember it.  Something about it didn’t seem to stick – it seemed contrived, a little archaic, and not very user-friendly.

Enter: Bloom’s revised Taxonomy, ca. 2001, by Lorin Anderson.  From Mary Forehand’s article on Bloom’s Taxonomy:

During the 1990’s, a former student of Bloom’s, Lorin Anderson, led a new assembly which met for the purpose of updating the taxonomy, hoping to add relevance for 21st century students and teachers. This time “representatives of three groups [were present]: cognitive psychologists, curriculum theorists and instructional researchers, and testing and assessment specialists”… Like the original group, they were also arduous and diligent in their pursuit of learning, spending six years to finalize their work.

Let’s look at the original and the revised versions side-by-side:

“The graphic is a representation of the NEW verbage associated with the long familiar Bloom’s Taxonomy. Note the change from Nouns to Verbs [e.g., Application to Applying] to describe the different levels of the taxonomy. Note that the top two levels are essentially exchanged from the Old to the New version.” (Schultz, 2005)

6 years to change nouns into verbs and to flip two levels??  I guess Bloom had it almost just right.  Despite the parsimonious revision, the new taxonomy makes alot more sense to me.  It also seems to make alot of sense to Andrew Churches.  If I was still in the classroom, I would definitely toss out my old ‘Bloom’s chart’ and replace it with this:

Notice that the yellow box contains 21st-century-type/web 2.0 skills!  Churches takes the taxonomy and almost completely updates it again – providing digital verbage that you can easily apply in your classroom.  If you’re a forward-thinking instructor and you’re interested in integrating more technology into your instruction, check out ANDREW CHURCHES’ entire paper – BLOOM’S DIGITAL TAXONOMY – here.  He gives great, concrete examples of how to apply these ideas, he lists many free resources that can be used, and he has tons of rubrics for different activities that address the different levels.  Fun read!  Makes me think again about my retirement from teaching…

Do you use the old Bloom’s or the Revised Bloom’s?

Bloom’s Taxonomy for the Digital Age – Integrating Technology

Integrating technology into curriculum has been a popular topic in the blogosphere for some time now.  I’m starting to find more and more concrete, applicable ideas that have the potential to be easily integrated – thank goodness for collaboration.  I feel like we’re getting somewhere.

Check this out –    Andrew Churches’  “Bloom’s Digital Taxonomy v.2.12“.

View this document on Scribd

• He brilliantly updates the 7 scaffolded levels with web-based skills such as searching, bookmarking, blogging, and collaboration and includes rubrics and exemplars of performance.
• He’s actually been talking about this for almost two years.  Here, he offers digital alternatives for normal classroom activities, along with tools that can easily be used.

Another cool find – Stacy Baker’s blog on how she’s using technology in her Biology class.

• My favorite find here, so far, is this amazing rubric that she has her students post on their blog or wiki page, where they have to justify their mastery of different 21st century skills – searching, publishing, reaching out to experts and more (this is the ideal performance).  Here’s the blank version that they have to fill out.

Procedural Knowledge

Tony Karrer posted an interesting article yesterday: “Know Where You Can Find Anything” which brought up the point that, these days, there is a much greater need for students to have ‘search skills’ and ‘network skills’ than to master a ton of content.

This reminded me of a post by Michael Staton in February called “Content Knowledge is Dead”. I don’t completely agree with this statement, but I do agree that there must be a change in what we’re teaching our high school and college students. They need to know how to problem-solve, to locate and effectively use resources, and to collaborate with others. Whether or not state standards are updated to reflect this need, I have faith that educators will not let their students fall behind. But, with everything on their plates, how can they possibly find the time or energy to adapt their curricula? I think that I know the answer: you and me. We are going to make sure that this happens.

Through the Grapevine – AP change is a-comin’

I found a very exciting and uplifting blog post on Karl Fisch’s blog.

Apparently, the College Board is reviewing the AP History and Science curricula to reduce the breadth of content and increase emphasis on inquiry and scientific reasoning.

I taught AP Biology for two years and thought that the amount of material and the scarcity of classtime to teach it was absurd. 

Check out his post!

The future, according to Steve Hargadon

In the few short weeks that I have been exploring the world of ‘Web 2.0-Education 3.0’, I have come to understand that there is one man who definitely knows what’s going on: Steve Hargadon.  Though I have yet to communicate with him, I have been using his blog as a starting point for my daily adventures.  It always seems to lead me somewhere interesting.  Mr. Hargadon not only created Classroom 2.0, but is a virtual Educational Technology guru who seems interested in helping teachers, above all else.

His most recent blog post concerns an upcoming (Wednesday night!) live chat with the creators of PBS’s “Vote 2008” on-line curriculum.  I looked into this website and loved it!  This is a great resource not only for social studies teachers, but also for the tech people on K-12 campuses.