TRAINING MODULE SERIES:
STUDENT-CENTERED LEARNING (SCL)
APPROACHES FOR INNOVATIVE TEACHING
Module 3:
Learning Taxonomies
Rozinah Jamaludin, Rogayah Jaafar & Sarjit Kaur
© Centre for Development of Academic Excellence(CDAE), Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM),
2012
Training Module Series: Student-Centered Learning (SCL) Approaches for Innovative Teaching
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or
by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written permission
of Centre for Development of Academic Excellence(CDAE), Universiti Sains Malaysia
Centre for Development of Academic Excellence (CDAE)
Universiti Sains Malaysia
2nd Floor, Eureka Complex
11800, USM Pulau Pinang
MODULE 3:
LEARNING TAXONOMIES
Rozinah Jamaludin, Rogayah Jaafar & Sarjit Kaur
CONTENTS
Preface.......................................................................................................... 1
Module Description...................................................................................... 3
Module Outcomes........................................................................................ 3
1. Introduction to Learning Taxonomies..................................................... 4
2. Bloom’s Taxonomy.................................................................................... 5
3. Buckwalter’s Educational Taxonomy...................................................... 11
4. Conclusion................................................................................................. 13
References & Further Reading.................................................................... 14
Preface
Students are expected to achieve 21st century skills, which inculcate life & career skills,
learning & innovation and information & communication technology (ICT) skills. Consequently,
it has become the unwavering responsibility of educators to ensure that these skills are
sowed in students especially at higher education institutions (HEIs). As such new methods of
teaching and learning (T&L) have been continuously identified to devise techniques which
are relevant and suitable for the students of the net generation. Parallel to that perspective,
Student-Centered Learning (SCL) has been promoted as a new approach in T&L to support
the rapidly changing educational environment. The Centre for Development of Academic
Excellence (CDAE) has published the Training Module Series: Student-Centered Learning (SCL)
Approaches for Innovative Teaching which consists of Modules 1 to 6 that will provide the basis
for a training programme for academic staffs to enhance their pedagogical knowledge and
skills. The modules were authored by an array of experts in the area of T&L, who have provided
an overview of SCL in terms of definition, methodology and application.
Module 1: Introduction serves as a foreword to the concept of SCL by: (1) introducing
the vision and mission of the National Higher Education Strategic Plan 2 (NHESP 2) regarding
T&L through the soft power approach at the regional and global levels; (2) describing the 21st
century skills that are needed for today’s society and (3) specifying the outcomes of T&L in the
classroom. Module 2: Philosophy of Student-Centered Learning (SCL) provides an overview of
SCL and introduces the underlying philosophies that support the student-centered approach
to teaching. The content of this module also describes the key benefits of SCL for students and
lecturers and student-centered pedagogy (i.e. characteristics of the learners and the nature
of the learning environment in the student-centered setting).
Module 3: Learning Taxonomies revolves around the learning taxonomies used in T&L
that are based on Anderson and Krathwohl’s (2001) revised version of Bloom’s Taxonomy and
Buckwalter’s Taxonomy for the Health and Medical Sciences (1981). This module illustrates
the basic principles of the learning taxonomies used in education and the classification of
educational objectives (i.e. three domains: cognitive, affective, and psychomotor). Module 4:
The Constructivist Lecturer provides detailed methods that will assist the reader to become a
constructivist lecturer via the application of constructivist approaches in T&L.
Module 5: Approaches to Student-Centered Learning (SCL) aims to offer teachers
in higher education a variety of student-centered educational approaches. These learning
approaches are presented in a straightforward manner, with opportunities for self-assessment
and reflection to allow for the selection of the most appropriate SCL approach.
1
Module 6: Assessment in Student Centered Learning is a compilation of six individual
units that includes the detailed description of assessment for the SCL approach which consists
of definition, methodology and principles. This module also describes issues, benefits, and
challenges of implementing assessment and best practices for assessing students in the in the
SCL.
On the whole, the modules are projected to be beneficial to the reader in terms of
T&L, upon the understanding and consequently the application of the SCL concept. Each
module in this series will definitely aid in the improvement of the T&L environment in USM and
thus is recommended for all the academic staff of Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM).
Professor Abd Karim Alias
Director
Centre for Development of Academic Excellence (CDAE), USM
2
Module Description
This module describes the learning taxonomies used in teaching and learning that
are based on Anderson and Krathwohl’s (2001) revised version of Bloom’s Taxonomy and
Buckwalter’s Taxonomy for the Health and Medical Sciences (1981). Bloom’s Taxonomy of
Learning Domains is a classification of learning objectives within the field of education that was
proposed in 1956 in the publication titled Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification
of Educational Goals. Bloom’s Taxonomy is a foundational and essential element within the
education community. It refers to a classification of the different objectives that educators
set for students (i.e. learning objectives). Bloom’s Taxonomy divides educational objectives
into three domains: cognitive, affective, and psychomotor (sometimes loosely described as
knowing/head, feeling/heart, and doing/hands, respectively). Within the domains, learning at
the higher levels depends on having attained prerequisite knowledge and skills at the lower
levels. A goal of Bloom’s Taxonomy is to motivate educators to focus on all three domains,
thereby creating a more holistic form of education.
Module Outcomes
At the end of this module, users should be able to:
1.
Understand the basic principles of the learning taxonomies used in education;
2.
Classify educational objectives into three domains: cognitive, affective, and
psychomotor;
3.
Apply the knowledge dimension to the six cognitive levels of the revised Bloom’s
Taxonomy and its various modifications; and
4.
Compare Bloom’s Taxonomy with Buckwalters’ Taxonomy for the Health and
Medical Sciences.
3
Attitudes
Motor Skills
Psychomotor
Cognitive
Strategies
Problem
Solving
Procedures
& Rules
Concepts
Verbal
Information
Gagne
(1985)
Affective
Cognitive
Tripartite
Hilgard
(1980)
Revised Bloom,
Anderson & Krathwohl
(2001)
Anderson
(1981)
Merrill
(1983)
Apply
Generic Skills
Apply
Skills
Understand
Relationships
Memorize
Information
Reigeluth &
Moore
(1999)
Source: Anderson, L.W. & Krathwohl, D.R. (Eds.). (2001).
Declarative Remember
Meta-Cognitive Remember
Knowledge Verbatim
Knowledge
Procedural Remember
Comprehension
Understand
Procedural
Knowledge Paraphrase
Knowledge
Use
Application
Apply
Generality
Conceptual
Knowledge
Analysis
Analyze
Find
Synthesis
Evaluate
Factual
Generality
Knowledge
Evaluation
Create
Knowledge
Bloom
(1956)
Table 1. Comparison of learning taxonomies
Receiving
Responding
Valuing
Organization
Characterization
Krathwohl,
Bloom &
Masia (1964)
Perception
Set
Guided Response
Mechanism
Complex Response
Adaptation
Origination
Simpson
(1972)
1
Introduction to Learning Taxonomies
Understanding learning taxonomies is important for ensuring meaningful learning outcomes
for learners and for choosing among available learning resources and assessment methods in
the learning environment. A number of learning taxonomies exist, as shown in Table 1.
4
2
Bloom’s Taxonomy
In the 1950s, Benjamin Bloom developed the taxonomy of cognitive objectives that
categorised thinking behaviours as ordered thinking skills and objectives. His taxonomy follows
the thinking process by stating that ‘You cannot understand a concept if you do not first
remember it; similarly you cannot apply knowledge and concepts if you do not understand
them’.
The hierarchy of learning behaviours was categorised into three interrelated and
overlapping learning domains:
1.
Cognitive (knowledge)
2.
Affective (attitude)
3.
Psychomotor (skills)
2.1
The Cognitive Domain
The cognitive domain is exhibited by a person’s intellectual abilities. Cognitive
learning behaviours are characterised by observable and unobservable skills, such
as comprehending information, organising ideas, and evaluating information and
actions. The cognitive domain is knowledge or mind based, and it has three practical
instructional levels: fact, understanding, and application. The fact level is a single
concept and uses verbs such as define, identify, and list. The understanding level
combines two or more concepts, and the application level puts two or more concepts
together to form something new. Delivery in this domain is typically a lecture, and
evaluation includes subjective and objective test items.
These skills are arranged into six hierarchical levels, beginning from the
simple and building to the most difficult. These six categories are arranged on scale
of difficulty, meaning that a learner who is able to perform at the higher levels of the
taxonomy demonstrates a more complex level of cognitive thinking.
5
2.2
The Affective Domain
The affective domain addresses a learner’s emotions towards learning
experiences. A learner’s attitudes, interests, attention, awareness, and values are
demonstrated by affective behaviours. The affective domain is based on behavioural
aspects and may be labelled as beliefs. The three levels in this domain are awareness,
distinction, and integration. The first two levels are cognitive, whereas integration is
behavioural and requires the learner to evaluate and synthesise.
2.3
The Psychomotor Domain
The psychomotor domain refers to the use of basic motor skills, coordination, and
physical movement. Bloom’s research group did not develop in-depth categories
of this domain, claiming lack of experience in teaching these skills. However, Dave
(1967), Simpson (1972), and Harrow (1972) developed psychomotor categories to
support Bloom’s domain. The psychomotor domains defined by Harrow and Simpson
are better suited for certain adult training and for teaching young adults and children.
The psychomotor domain is skill based, and in this domain the student produces a
product. The three practical instructional levels include imitation, practice, and
habit. The psychomotor domain is steeped in delivery of demonstrations. Thus, the
first level—imitation—is simply a repeat of the demonstration under the watchful eye
of the instructor. The practice level is a proficiency-building experience that may be
conducted by the student without direct oversight of the instructor. The habit level
is reached when the student can perform the skill in twice the time that it takes the
instructor or an expert to perform.
6
2.4
Classification under Bloom’s Taxonomy
Bloom’s Taxonomy is a multi-tiered model of classifying thinking according to six
cognitive levels of complexity. It is a continuum from lower order thinking skills (LOTS)
to higher order thinking skills (HOTS), as shown in the diagram below.
The First Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956)
Higher Order Thinking Skills
Evaluation
Synthesis
Analysis
Application
Comprehension
Knowledge
Lower Order Thinking Skills
The definitions of each of these six levels are as follows:
Knowledge: Remembering or retrieving previously learned material. Examples of verbs that
relate to this function are: know, identify, relate, list, define, recall, memorize, repeat, record,
name recognise, and acquire.
Comprehension: The ability to grasp or construct meaning from material. Examples of verbs
that relate to this function are: restate, locate, report, recognise, explain, express, identify,
discuss, describe, review, infer, conclude, illustrate, interpret, draw, represent, differentiate,
and conclude.
Application: The ability to use learned material or to implement material in new and concrete
situations. Examples of verbs that relate to this function are: apply, relate, develop, translate,
use, operate, organise, employ, restructure, interpret, demonstrate, illustrate, practice,
calculate, show, exhibit, and dramatize.
Analysis: The ability to break down or distinguish the parts of material into its components so
that its organisational structure may be better understood. Examples of verbs that relate to this
function are analyse, compare, probe, inquire, examine, contrast, categorise, differentiate,
investigate, detect, survey, classify, deduce, experiment, scrutinise, discover, inspect, dissect,
discriminate, and separate.
7
Synthesis: The ability to put parts together to form a coherent or unique new whole. Examples
of verbs that relate to this function are: compose, produce, design, assemble, create, prepare,
predict, modify, tell, plan, invent, formulate, collect, set up, generalise, document, combine,
relate, propose, develop, arrange, construct, organise, originate, derive, and write.
Evaluation: The ability to judge, check, and even critique the value of material for a given
purpose. Examples of verbs that relate to this function are: judge, assess, compare, evaluate,
conclude, measure, deduce, argue, decide, choose, rate, select, estimate, validate, consider,
appraise, value, criticise, and infer.
Bloom’s Taxonomy as Revised by Anderson and Krathwohl (2001)
Higher Order Thinking Skills
Creating
Evaluating
Analysing
Applying
Understanding
Remembering
Lower Order Thinking Skills
The revised version of Bloom’s Taxonomy created by Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) defines
the six levels as follows:
Remembering: Retrieving, recalling, or recognising knowledge from memory. Examples of verbs
that relate to this function are: recognising, listing, describing, identifying, retrieving, naming,
locating, and finding.
Understanding: Constructing meaning from different types of functions be they written
or graphic messages. This involves activities such as: interpreting, summarising, inferring,
paraphrasing, classifying, comparing, explaining, and exemplifying.
Applying: Carrying out or using a procedure through executing, or implementing. Applying
related theory and concepts and refers to situations where learned material is used through
products like models, presentations, interviews or simulations. Examples of verbs that relate to
this function are: implementing, carrying out, using, and executing.
Analysing: Breaking material or concepts into parts and determining how the parts relate or
interrelate to one another or to an overall structure or purpose. Mental actions included in
this function are differentiating, organising and attributing, as well as being able to distinguish
8
between the components or parts. When one is analysing, he/she can illustrate this mental
function by creating spreadsheets, surveys, charts, diagrams, or graphic representations.
Examples of verbs that relate to this function are: comparing, organising, deconstructing,
attributing, outlining, finding, structuring, and integrating.
Evaluating: Making judgments based on criteria and standards through checking and
critiquing. Critiques, recommendations, and reports are some of the products that can be
created to demonstrate the processes of evaluation. In the newer taxonomy, evaluation
comes before creating, as it is often a necessary part of the precursory behaviour prior to
creating something. Examples of verbs that relate to this function are: checking, hypothesising,
critiquing, experimenting, judging, testing, detecting, and monitoring.
Creating: Putting elements together to form a coherent or functional whole; reorganising
elements into a new pattern or structure by generating, planning, or producing. Creating
requires users to put parts together in a new way or to synthesise parts into something new and
different to create a new form or product. This process is the most difficult mental function in
the new taxonomy. Examples of verbs that relate to this function are: designing, constructing,
planning, producing, inventing, devising, and making. This skill was #5 in Bloom’s Taxonomy,
which was labelled ‘synthesis’.
The changes to Bloom’s Taxonomy can be seen in the diagram below:
1956
2001
Evaluation
Create
Synthesis
Evaluate
Analysis
Analyse
Application
Apply
Comprehension
Understand
Knowledge
Remember
Noun
Verb
One of the aspects that differentiates the new model from that of the 1956 original
is that it lays out components clearly so they can be considered and used. While the levels of
knowledge were indicated in the original work – factual, conceptual, and procedural -- these
were never fully understood or used by teachers because most of what educators were given
in training consisted of a simple chart with the listing of levels and related accompanying
9
verbs. The updated version has added ‘metacognitive’ to the array of knowledge types.
Using a simple cross impact grid or table like the one below, one can easily match activities
and objectives to the types of knowledge and to the cognitive processes (Table 2).
Table 2. Knowledge dimensions
Knowledge
Dimensions
1. Remember
2. Understand
3. Apply
4. Analyse
5. Evaluate
6. Create
Factual
Conceptual
Procedural
Metacognitive
Figure 1 shows the continuum of knowledge dimensions from procedural knowledge to factual
knowledge and from conceptual knowledge to metacognitive knowledge.
Knowledge that helps students
to do something specific to a
discipline-methods of inquiry,
very specific or finite skills,
algorithms, techniques and
methodologies
Procedural
Knowledge
Information/awareness
of one’s own cognition
Metacognitive
and particular cognitive
processes-reflective
Knowledge
knowledge about how to
go about solving problems,
cognitive tasks, to include
contexual and conditional
knowledge and knowledge of self.
Knowledge that is basic to specific
disciplines –facts, terminology,
details or elements students
must know in order to
Factual
understand a discipline
or solve a problem in it.
Knowledge
Conceptual
Knowledge
Knowledge of classifications,
principles, generalizations,
theories, models or structures
pertinent to a particular
disciplinary area.
Figure 1: The knowledge dimensions
Table 3. Verbs used in stating cognitive outcomes (Bloom’s Taxonomy, 1956)
KNOWLEDGE
COMPREHENSION
APPLICATION
ANALYSIS
SYNTHESIS
EVALUATION
Define
Label
Convert
Describe
Apply
Compute
Analyse
Appraise
Arrange
Appraise
Assemble
Argue
List
Discuss
Demonstrate
Calculate
Collect
Assess
Name
Distinguish
Employ
Categorise
Compose
Justify
10
Stop
and Think
Can you think of any more verbs to state cognitive objectives and outcomes?
Lower Order Questions (e.g. fill-in-the-blank, MCQ)
3
Higher Order Questions (e.g. MEQ, PMP)
Buckwalter’s Educational Taxonomy
In the medical and health sciences, a further modification of Bloom’s Taxonomy was
introduced by Buckwalter in 1981 to evaluate the cognitive performance of medical students.
The taxonomy was subsequently refined by other authors, notably Irwin and Bamber (1982) to
explore the cognitive structure of modified essay questions (MEQ). More recently, the refined
Buckwalter’s Taxonomy was utilised by Edward and Peter (2007) to examine the assessment
of higher order cognitive skills in undergraduate medical education; they used it to determine
the levels of cognitive ability tested by MEQ versus multiple choice questions (MCQ).
Palmer and Devitt reduced the six levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy to three levels: recall or
recognition, interpretation, and problem solving.
Level 1: Covering knowledge (recall of information);
Level 2: Covering comprehension and application (understanding and being able to interpret data); and
Level 3: Covering problem solving (using knowledge and understanding in 3.1
new circumstances).
Application of Buckwalter’s Cognitive Taxonomy
Buckwalter’s Cognitive Taxonomy is now increasingly being used in the medical
11
and health sciences, in particular in the assessment of higher order cognitive skills in
undergraduate medical education. The modified taxonomy was developed mainly
to assess medical students’ cognitive competencies at the higher levels of Bloom’s
Taxonomy. The major use of Buckwalter’s Taxonomy is to review MEQ, a popular
assessment tool in problem-based learning.
BUCKWALTER’S COGNITIVE TAXONOMY LEVELS
1.
Recognition and recall of isolated information;
2.
Comprehension and interpretation of data; and
3.
Application of knowledge to the solution of a specific problem.
3.2 Application of Buckwalter’s Taxonomy
Level 1: Tests recognition and recall of isolated information
Requires students to demonstrate: learning and recall of isolated information
Level 2: Tests comprehension and interpretation of data
Requires students to demonstrate: understanding of the data by making use of it.
Level 3: Tests the application of knowledge to the solution of a specific problem.
Requires students to demonstrate: analysis of the problem, recall of relevant
information and principles, and application of these to the solution of a specific
problem.
Stop
and Think
Examples of Various Cognitive Levels Detected in Written Tests
1. A patient with acute abdominal pain is found to have an elevated serum
amylase level. List three causes of an elevated serum amylase level (Level 1)
2. A patient presents edema of the arm following radical mastectomy. Discuss
the pathogenesis of edema of the arm (Level 2)
3. A patient presents a mobile lump in the right breast, which on fine needle
biopsy is found to contain malignant cells. Discuss the further steps you would
take in the management of this patient (Level 3)
12
Quiz
For each of the statements below, select the most appropriate
cognitive level based on Buckwalter’s Taxonomy.
1. A cigarette smoker was admitted with coarse crepitations
heard over the midzone of his left lung. Detail the underlining
pathophysiology of the crepitations.
2. A
55-year-old
heavy
smoker
who
was
diagnosed
with lobar pneumonia secondary to chronic obstructive airway
disease (COAD) was treated with an initial dose of antibiotics
and ventolin inhalation. Elaborate on the advice you would
provide to this patient on discharge and his follow up care.
Answer:_________________________________________________
Answer:__________________________________________________
3. A heavy cigarette smoker was found to have hyperventilated
lungs on chest radiography. List two main causes of
hyperventilated lungs on a chest X-ray.
4
Answer:___________________________________________________
Conclusion
Although there are many learning taxonomies, Anderson and Krathwohl’s (2001) revision
of Bloom’s Taxonomy and Buckwalters’ Taxonomy for the Health and Medical Sciences (1981)
were introduced in this chapter, as they are best suited to the SCL taxonomies.
13
References & Further Reading
Anderson, L.W. & Krathwohl, D.R. (Eds.). (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and
Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Longman.
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956) Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational
goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: Longman.
Buckwalter J. A., Schumacher R., Albright J.P., & Cooper, R.R. (1981) Use of an educational
taxonomy for evaluation of cognitive performance. Journal of Medical Education. 56(2):11521.
Dave, R. H. (1975). Developing and writing behavioral objectives. (R. J. Armstrong, ed.). Tucson,
Arizona: Educational Innovators Press.
Edward, J. P., & Peter G. D. (2007). Assessment of higher order cognitive skills in undergraduate
education: modified essay or multiple choice questions? Research paper, BMC Medical
Education. Vol 7: 49.
Gagne, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning (4th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and
Winston.
Harrow, A. (1972) A Taxonomy of the psychomotor domain: A guide for developing behavioral
objectives. New York: David McKay.
Hilgard, E. R. (1980). The trilogy of mind: Cognition, affection and conation. Journal of the
History of the Behavioral Sciences, 16, 107–117.
Irwin W. G., & Bamber J. H. (1982). The cognitive structure of the modified essay question.
Medical Education, 16(6): 326-31.
Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Masia, B.B. (1964). Taxonomy of educational objectives:
The classification of educational goals. Handbook II: Affective domain. New York, Longman.
Merrill, M. D. (1983). Component display theory. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design
theories and models: An overview of their current status (pp. 279–333). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
14
Reigeluth, C. M. & Moore, J. (1999). Cognitive education and the cognitive domain. In C.
M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional
theory (pp. 51–68). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Simpson, E. (1972). The classification of educational objectives in the psychomotor domain:
The psychomotor domain. Vol. 3. Washington, DC: Gryphon House.
Thambi, D., Kalsukar, S., Ahmad, Z., & Jaafar, R. (July 1990). An appraisal of modified essay
questions, Diagnosa, 74–78.
Comparison
of
Learning
Taxonomies
at
http://heybradfords.com/moonlight/files/CV/
ProfSampleFiles/CDWS/Grounded%20Learning%20Taxonomies%20Compared.pdf. Retrieved
on the 1 December 2011.
15