Cargando…

Probing Internal Assumptions of the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy

Bloom’s taxonomy is a classification of learning objectives originally developed for general educational purposes. The taxonomy was revised to expand beyond cognitive processes and to include knowledge types as an orthogonal dimension. As Bloom’s taxonomy is a tool widely used in biology education b...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Larsen, Tori M., Endo, Bianca H., Yee, Alexander T., Do, Tony, Lo, Stanley M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Society for Cell Biology 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9727608/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36112622
http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.20-08-0170
_version_ 1784845060369547264
author Larsen, Tori M.
Endo, Bianca H.
Yee, Alexander T.
Do, Tony
Lo, Stanley M.
author_facet Larsen, Tori M.
Endo, Bianca H.
Yee, Alexander T.
Do, Tony
Lo, Stanley M.
author_sort Larsen, Tori M.
collection PubMed
description Bloom’s taxonomy is a classification of learning objectives originally developed for general educational purposes. The taxonomy was revised to expand beyond cognitive processes and to include knowledge types as an orthogonal dimension. As Bloom’s taxonomy is a tool widely used in biology education by researchers and instructors, it is important to examine the underlying assumptions embedded within how people may implicitly understand and use the taxonomy. In this paper, we empirically examine two major assumptions: the independence of the knowledge-type and cognitive-process dimensions and the use of action verbs as proxies for different cognitive processes. Contingency analysis on 940 assessment items revealed that the knowledge-type and cognitive-process dimensions are related and not independent. Subsequent correspondence analysis identified two principle axes in how the two dimensions are related, with three clusters of knowledge types and cognitive processes. Using the Shannon evenness index, we did not find a clear relationship between question prompt words (including action verbs) and cognitive processes in the assessment items. Based on these results, we suggest that both dimensions of the revised Bloom’s taxonomy should be used and that question prompt words or action verbs alone are not sufficient in classifying the embedded learning objectives within assessment items.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9727608
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher American Society for Cell Biology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97276082022-12-07 Probing Internal Assumptions of the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy Larsen, Tori M. Endo, Bianca H. Yee, Alexander T. Do, Tony Lo, Stanley M. CBE Life Sci Educ General Essays and Articles Bloom’s taxonomy is a classification of learning objectives originally developed for general educational purposes. The taxonomy was revised to expand beyond cognitive processes and to include knowledge types as an orthogonal dimension. As Bloom’s taxonomy is a tool widely used in biology education by researchers and instructors, it is important to examine the underlying assumptions embedded within how people may implicitly understand and use the taxonomy. In this paper, we empirically examine two major assumptions: the independence of the knowledge-type and cognitive-process dimensions and the use of action verbs as proxies for different cognitive processes. Contingency analysis on 940 assessment items revealed that the knowledge-type and cognitive-process dimensions are related and not independent. Subsequent correspondence analysis identified two principle axes in how the two dimensions are related, with three clusters of knowledge types and cognitive processes. Using the Shannon evenness index, we did not find a clear relationship between question prompt words (including action verbs) and cognitive processes in the assessment items. Based on these results, we suggest that both dimensions of the revised Bloom’s taxonomy should be used and that question prompt words or action verbs alone are not sufficient in classifying the embedded learning objectives within assessment items. American Society for Cell Biology 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9727608/ /pubmed/36112622 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.20-08-0170 Text en © 2022 T. M. Larsen, B. H. Endo, et al. CBE—Life Sciences Education © 2022 The American Society for Cell Biology. “ASCB®” and “The American Society for Cell Biology®” are registered trademarks of The American Society for Cell Biology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/This article is distributed by The American Society for Cell Biology under license from the author(s). It is available to the public under an Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike 3.0 Unported Creative Commons License.
spellingShingle General Essays and Articles
Larsen, Tori M.
Endo, Bianca H.
Yee, Alexander T.
Do, Tony
Lo, Stanley M.
Probing Internal Assumptions of the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy
title Probing Internal Assumptions of the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy
title_full Probing Internal Assumptions of the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy
title_fullStr Probing Internal Assumptions of the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy
title_full_unstemmed Probing Internal Assumptions of the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy
title_short Probing Internal Assumptions of the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy
title_sort probing internal assumptions of the revised bloom’s taxonomy
topic General Essays and Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9727608/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36112622
http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.20-08-0170
work_keys_str_mv AT larsentorim probinginternalassumptionsoftherevisedbloomstaxonomy
AT endobiancah probinginternalassumptionsoftherevisedbloomstaxonomy
AT yeealexandert probinginternalassumptionsoftherevisedbloomstaxonomy
AT dotony probinginternalassumptionsoftherevisedbloomstaxonomy
AT lostanleym probinginternalassumptionsoftherevisedbloomstaxonomy