Stan Pickens, Strasz Project Manager
November 5, 2014
Benjamin Bloom’s Taxonomy is well known within the educational community as a structured classification of learning objectives. But those in the assessment and testing industry—an industry that relies on the inherent value of statistics and facts—may not be aware of Benjamin Bloom (1913–1999) and his team of educators. This blog post explores Bloom’s theory that the most knowledgeable people are those who not only memorize quantifiable facts (i.e., correct test answers) but who also possess a progressive and qualified mastery of their respective subject areas.
Benjamin Bloom’s Taxonomy is well known within the educational community as a structured classification of learning objectives. But those in the assessment and testing industry—an industry that relies on the inherent value of statistics and facts—may not be aware of Benjamin Bloom (1913–1999) and his team of educators. This blog post explores Bloom’s theory that the most knowledgeable people are those who not only memorize quantifiable facts (i.e., correct test answers) but who also possess a progressive and qualified mastery of their respective subject areas.
Those familiar with Charles Dickens’ works may already be familiar with his critique of fact-based learning methods. In Hard Times (1854), Dickens skewered the constricting practicality of his country’s educational system, warning against what he saw as a focus on facts, instead of imagination and true intellectual growth.
— Adapted from Hard Times (1854) by Charles Dickens
Roughly one hundred years later, across the Atlantic Ocean at the University of Chicago, Dr. Benjamin Bloom (1913–1999) had a similar critique of America’s educational methods. Working with his mentor, Dr. Ralph W. Tyler (1902–1994), Bloom developed teaching methodologies that would cultivate students to become masters of subjects, rather than ones who could only memorize and regurgitate facts.
Perhaps Bloom identified with the idea that people are more than subservient animals, and could apply their minds in ways that solve problems. This focus on problem solving as the outcome of education led to his belief that individuals could master any subject with the right set of educational goals and objectives in place.
In the mid 1950s, Bloom built on his and Dr. Tyler’s work by chairing an American education and psychology committee determined to raise standards by developing a system that categorized learning behavior. Since mass education of the American population was now a government priority, Bloom’s committee sought to promote a high-level system of educational instruction, including analysis and evaluation, rather than simple rote memorization of facts. The committee formalized their educational roadmap as a series of “laddered” learning objectives, each with increasing complexity. As a student climbed the ladder, his/her mastery of their subject matter would increase, thus providing a more challenging, rewarding, and valuable learning experience.
Bloom pushed for the word taxonomy to describe this learning ladder, although other group members resisted the term because they did not believe it would resonate within the educational community. Nevertheless, Bloom prevailed, and “Bloom’s Taxonomy” would ultimately become a foundational element of modern educational theory.
In 1956 and 1965, Bloom and his team published two volumes of work based on their research: Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. The most famous and oft-quoted work, Handbook I: Cognitive Domain (1956), classifies and explores educational objectives that deal with recognition of knowledge and the development of intellectual abilities and skills.
The objectives of Bloom’s cognitive Taxonomy are as follows:
- Knowledge: To state, recall, define, and describe.
- Comprehension: To explain, interpret, classify, and re-organize.
- Application: To apply, use, calculate, and punctuate.
- Analysis: To consider the parts separately, analyze a situation, experiment or write a case study and describe what is happening. Compare, give reasons, and deduce.
- Synthesis: To create, design, invent, solve a problem, report, criticize, and give constructive suggestions/improvements.
- Evaluation: To judge, critically appraise, and evaluate strengths and weaknesses.
The second Bloom volume, Handbook II: Affective Domain (1965), looks at objectives that describe changes in interest, attitudes, and values. A third volume, Handbook III: The Psychomotor Domain, never reached publication, although other theorists took up this work (Dave 1970; Harrow 1972; Simpson 1972).
For Bloom, his goal in writing the taxonomy was to foster a love of learning. Through his methods, he and his team believed that students would be stimulated more as they moved up the ladder and met progressively more complex goals. In fact, the label progressive education came into usage after Bloom and his team published the first handbook, and the concept remains today.
Interestingly, Bloom and company proposed ideas similar to “universal consciousness” (i.e., everyone has access to all knowledge, known and unknown, and only needs the means to tap into that knowledge). What Bloom was suggesting, therefore, was a way for students to take active and conscious control over the process of understanding, so that the education of society as a whole would vastly improve. His taxonomy was a systematized way of ordering that consciousness into a cognitive plan that stimulated higher thinking. Additionally, it was a way to assess, measure, and reward that thinking.
Bloom was not the last to propose an educational taxonomy, but his work still resounds today. And although Bloom considered his first handbook “One of the most widely cited yet least read books in American education,” his theories and writings are considered some of the most essential educational tools ever published.
If nothing else, Benjamin Bloom and his taxonomies should serve to remind us that learning should never focus on “just the facts.” Instead, learning should consist of a series of attainable goals that push us and challenge us to attain more knowledge, more understanding, and more mastery of a subject matter.
At Strasz Assessment Systems, we take that view very seriously. We continually educate ourselves in order to build on our 20+ years of experience in the assessment and testing industry, offering our clients the most cutting-edge, robust, and results-oriented products and services available.
Perhaps more importantly, our assessment systems can actually help our clients better understand their test takers, through the use of customized taxonomies within the assessment systems themselves. The Strasz Exam Management Suite can be configured and adapted in myriad ways, including the use of multiple choice items, task-based problems, and even realistic simulations of office equipment and tools. In this way, the Strasz Exam Management Suite allows organizations to build multiple layers of understanding and logic in order to generate exams that best evaluate their test takers—as well satisfying the organization’s own testing goals.
Thanks to Bloom (and Dickens) we know it’s not “just about the facts.” Perhaps it’s time that our assessment systems adequately reflect that belief.
Stan Pickens, Strasz Project Manager
November 5, 2014
Benjamin Bloom’s Taxonomy is well known within the educational community as a structured classification of learning objectives. But those in the assessment and testing industry—an industry that relies on the inherent value of statistics and facts—may not be aware of Benjamin Bloom (1913–1999) and his team of educators. This blog post explores Bloom’s theory that the most knowledgeable people are those who not only memorize quantifiable facts (i.e., correct test answers) but who also possess a progressive and qualified mastery of their respective subject areas.
Benjamin Bloom’s Taxonomy is well known within the educational community as a structured classification of learning objectives. But those in the assessment and testing industry—an industry that relies on the inherent value of statistics and facts—may not be aware of Benjamin Bloom (1913–1999) and his team of educators. This blog post explores Bloom’s theory that the most knowledgeable people are those who not only memorize quantifiable facts (i.e., correct test answers) but who also possess a progressive and qualified mastery of their respective subject areas.
Those familiar with Charles Dickens’ works may already be familiar with his critique of fact-based learning methods. In Hard Times (1854), Dickens skewered the constricting practicality of his country’s educational system, warning against what he saw as a focus on facts, instead of imagination and true intellectual growth.
— Adapted from Hard Times (1854) by Charles Dickens
Roughly one hundred years later, across the Atlantic Ocean at the University of Chicago, Dr. Benjamin Bloom (1913–1999) had a similar critique of America’s educational methods. Working with his mentor, Dr. Ralph W. Tyler (1902–1994), Bloom developed teaching methodologies that would cultivate students to become masters of subjects, rather than ones who could only memorize and regurgitate facts.
Perhaps Bloom identified with the idea that people are more than subservient animals, and could apply their minds in ways that solve problems. This focus on problem solving as the outcome of education led to his belief that individuals could master any subject with the right set of educational goals and objectives in place.
In the mid 1950s, Bloom built on his and Dr. Tyler’s work by chairing an American education and psychology committee determined to raise standards by developing a system that categorized learning behavior. Since mass education of the American population was now a government priority, Bloom’s committee sought to promote a high-level system of educational instruction, including analysis and evaluation, rather than simple rote memorization of facts. The committee formalized their educational roadmap as a series of “laddered” learning objectives, each with increasing complexity. As a student climbed the ladder, his/her mastery of their subject matter would increase, thus providing a more challenging, rewarding, and valuable learning experience.
Bloom pushed for the word taxonomy to describe this learning ladder, although other group members resisted the term because they did not believe it would resonate within the educational community. Nevertheless, Bloom prevailed, and “Bloom’s Taxonomy” would ultimately become a foundational element of modern educational theory.
In 1956 and 1965, Bloom and his team published two volumes of work based on their research: Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. The most famous and oft-quoted work, Handbook I: Cognitive Domain (1956), classifies and explores educational objectives that deal with recognition of knowledge and the development of intellectual abilities and skills.
The objectives of Bloom’s cognitive Taxonomy are as follows:
- Knowledge: To state, recall, define, and describe.
- Comprehension: To explain, interpret, classify, and re-organize.
- Application: To apply, use, calculate, and punctuate.
- Analysis: To consider the parts separately, analyze a situation, experiment or write a case study and describe what is happening. Compare, give reasons, and deduce.
- Synthesis: To create, design, invent, solve a problem, report, criticize, and give constructive suggestions/improvements.
- Evaluation: To judge, critically appraise, and evaluate strengths and weaknesses.
The second Bloom volume, Handbook II: Affective Domain (1965), looks at objectives that describe changes in interest, attitudes, and values. A third volume, Handbook III: The Psychomotor Domain, never reached publication, although other theorists took up this work (Dave 1970; Harrow 1972; Simpson 1972).
For Bloom, his goal in writing the taxonomy was to foster a love of learning. Through his methods, he and his team believed that students would be stimulated more as they moved up the ladder and met progressively more complex goals. In fact, the label progressive education came into usage after Bloom and his team published the first handbook, and the concept remains today.
Interestingly, Bloom and company proposed ideas similar to “universal consciousness” (i.e., everyone has access to all knowledge, known and unknown, and only needs the means to tap into that knowledge). What Bloom was suggesting, therefore, was a way for students to take active and conscious control over the process of understanding, so that the education of society as a whole would vastly improve. His taxonomy was a systematized way of ordering that consciousness into a cognitive plan that stimulated higher thinking. Additionally, it was a way to assess, measure, and reward that thinking.
Bloom was not the last to propose an educational taxonomy, but his work still resounds today. And although Bloom considered his first handbook “One of the most widely cited yet least read books in American education,” his theories and writings are considered some of the most essential educational tools ever published.
If nothing else, Benjamin Bloom and his taxonomies should serve to remind us that learning should never focus on “just the facts.” Instead, learning should consist of a series of attainable goals that push us and challenge us to attain more knowledge, more understanding, and more mastery of a subject matter.
At Strasz Assessment Systems, we take that view very seriously. We continually educate ourselves in order to build on our 20+ years of experience in the assessment and testing industry, offering our clients the most cutting-edge, robust, and results-oriented products and services available.
Perhaps more importantly, our assessment systems can actually help our clients better understand their test takers, through the use of customized taxonomies within the assessment systems themselves. The Strasz Exam Management Suite can be configured and adapted in myriad ways, including the use of multiple choice items, task-based problems, and even realistic simulations of office equipment and tools. In this way, the Strasz Exam Management Suite allows organizations to build multiple layers of understanding and logic in order to generate exams that best evaluate their test takers—as well satisfying the organization’s own testing goals.
Thanks to Bloom (and Dickens) we know it’s not “just about the facts.” Perhaps it’s time that our assessment systems adequately reflect that belief.