Original and Revised Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Essays

Original and Revised Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: An Overview Vernita Lewis Critical Thinking 501 March 15, 2011 David Krathwohl?s article ?A Revision of Bloom?s Taxonomy: An Overview? takes a look into Benjamin Bloom?s work entitled ?Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goal? and compares it to a more modern version of Bloom?s work. A more modern version of Bloom?s work was developed by Anderson, et al. in 2001. Krathwohl finds and explores the commonalities and disparities of the two works. Bloom's Taxonomy is a multi- level model of categorized thinking according to six cognitive levels of difficulty. In Bloom?s original Taxonomy knowledge, comprehension, and application make up the lowest levels and analysis, synthesis, and evaluation make up the highest levels. The levels are set up in a hierarchy, so students have mastered all levels lower than the one that the student is currently on. He recognizes that Bloom?s original Taxonomy of Educational Objectives served its purpose during its appointed era, but the revised version serves a more modern era. The rev ised edition of Bloom?s Taxonomy has been adjusted and revised to become more fitting of the 21st century. The major differences between the original Taxonomy and the revised Taxonomy are that the original Taxonomy consisted of a single dimension; the revised Taxonomy mirrors a double outlook on learning and cognition. The two dimensions of the revised Taxonomy guide the processes of stating objectives and planning and guiding instruction; leads to more visibly defined evaluations and a stronger relationship of assessment to both objectives and instruction. I understand the reasoning for developing a revised Taxonomy was to make it more relevant for the current era. I agree that Anderson et al. have achieved this through structural changes. Bloom's original Taxonomy was one-dimensional in form while the revised Taxonomy is two-dimensional in form. By separating the verbs from the nouns Anderson et al. was able to separate the dimensions. I find the two dimensional form make more sense. One dimension of the revised Taxonomy classifies The Knowledge Dimension while the second dimension identifies The Cognitive Process Dimension. The Knowledge Dimension composed of four levels and The Cognitive Process Dimension consists of six levels. The revised Taxonomy added Metacognitive Knowledge is knowledge includes strategic knowledge, task knowledge, and self-knowledge and most importantly consist of being aware of your own cognitive abilities. I find that this is a very important aspect of measuring learning. Krathwohl implies that metacognitive knowledge or being aware of your own cognitive reaches will aid in increased learning. Metacognative knowledge allows me to activate relevant knowledge about my own strengths and weaknesses pertaining to the task at hand and my motivation for completing the task. If I realize that I already know a fair amount about a specific topic and that I am interested in this topic; this realization will possibly lead me to change my approach to the task. I?ll probably adjust how I approach the task completely. I can also activate the relevant knowledge I already have for solving the problem. This type of metacognitive knowledge influences how I subsequently prepare for task or test. This need for a second dimension is also consistent with the multidimensional frameworks that David Krathwohl reviewed; Krathwohl implies two important points. Krathwohl examines Bloom?s Taxonomy and suggest that recalling or remembering knowledge, is the lowest level of Bloom's Taxonomy. With knowledge as a noun it?s something I gain or have, but the verb tense is actually what I can do or will be able to do; like recalling and recognizing facts. Anderson et al. applied verbs where Bloom had applied nouns and this created better clarity for teachers and educators and I also agree that replacing the nouns with verbs brings a better understanding of what the Taxonomy is attempting to convey. Krathwohl points out that the consecutively higher levels are all verbs; comprehending knowledge, applying knowledge, and so on. This is consistent with the disputation that the original Taxonomy categories were intended to function as verbs. With knowledge being used in verb form as described by Krathwohl it now functions as a second level category. Out of the two-dimensional form Anderson et al. provided us with the Taxonomy Table which provides teachers and other educators with an