Running head: INFLUENCES ON BLOOM S TAXONOMY 1. Influences on Bloom s Taxonomy: How Benjamin Bloom s Personal Life Influenced His Taxonomy

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Running head: INFLUENCES ON BLOOM S TAXONOMY 1. Influences on Bloom s Taxonomy: How Benjamin Bloom s Personal Life Influenced His Taxonomy"

Joshua Freeman
6 years ago
Views:

1 Running head: INFLUENCES ON BLOOM S TAXONOMY 1 Influences on Bloom s Taxonomy: How Benjamin Bloom s Personal Life Influenced His Taxonomy and How the Taxonomy Influenced His Future Work Lauren Elizabeth LePage Harrelson Eastern Connecticut State University

2 INFLUENCES ON BLOOM S TAXONOMY 2 One of the most recognized learning theories in education today is Bloom s Taxonomy, a categorical hierarchy that divides students thought processes into six levels that build on each other: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation (Bloom, 1956). It has become so popular that it is published in more than 22 languages and adopted everywhere from the classroom and the school leader s office to seats of government (Gershon, 2013). This essay will first examine how Benjamin Bloom s personal life directly influenced his development of the taxonomy, but, more importantly, this will examine how his taxonomy research led him to more influential and meaningful theories about education and the roles of the student and the teacher. Bloom s idea for a taxonomy stemmed directly from the demands of his job position in the early 1940s and was likely influenced by his mentor, famous educator Ralph Tyler. Let us first examine Bloom s academic background: He obtained his bachelor s and master s degree in psychology from the University of Pennsylvania in 1935 (Anderson, 2002, p. 63). Already he showed an interest in the workings of the mind and in doing research. Indeed, upon graduating he was hired as a researcher for four years (Anderson, 2002, p. 63). One of his future students would remark, He was in love with the process of finding out, and finding out is what I think he did best (Eisner, 2002, p. 2). Bloom decided to pursue his doctoral degree in education only after he met Tyler, so we can assume that Tyler was a substantial influence (Anderson, 2002, p. 63). Bloom was intent on studying under Tyler s guidance, so when Tyler switched universities, Bloom also followed (Anderson, 2002, p. 63). Eisner (2000) notes that in later years Bloom s office was bare and disorderly except for one wonderful black and white

3 INFLUENCES ON BLOOM S TAXONOMY 3 photograph of his mentor, Ralph W. Tyler, hanging on the wall (p. 2). Tyler had obtained his doctoral degree in educational psychology from the University of Chicago in 1927 (Miller, 1995). In 1934 he published a path-breaking book, Constructing Achievement Tests, which brought together his earlier work on curriculum development and established him as a leader in educational research early in his career (Miller, 1995). While Bloom pursued his doctoral degree, he worked as a staff member in the office of the University of Chicago s Board of Examinations under Tyler s supervision (Anderson, 2002, p. 63). After he graduated in 1942, he became an examiner on the board and stayed for 16 years (Eisner, 2000, p. 1). The idea of a university examiner would be unfamiliar to many in higher education today. This department was an arm of the University created in 1931 and designed to remove the burden of evaluation from professors (Booker, 2007, p. 349). As such, they were tasked with developing assessments and tests. This demand, as well as Tyler s influence and previous research, probably led Bloom to consider developing a taxonomy. The taxonomy began from informal discussions at an American Psychological Association conference in 1948 in Boston (Booker, 2007, p. 349). Bloom and others felt that college students cognitive capabilities could be broken into a categorical system and that this system would help them develop specifications through which educational objectives could be organized (Eisner, 2002, p. 2). It is important to note that this taxonomy was specifically designed for the university level, which is in direct odds to how it is used today. Today, K-12 educators usually learn about Bloom s taxonomy and attempt to integrate it into their curriculum, whereas college professors and adjunct instructors remain largely unaware of the taxonomy because most are not required to

4 INFLUENCES ON BLOOM S TAXONOMY 4 study education formally (Booker, 2007). Booker (2007) argues that this has led to a misappropriation of the taxonomy and has actually harmed students learning in K-12 because teachers emphasize the higher tiers at the expense of the bottommost tier: knowledge. Bloom himself stated, Unexpectedly, it has been used by curriculum planners, administrators, researchers, and classroom teachers at all levels of education (as cited in Booker, 2007, p. 351). Remember, his goal was to develop a taxonomy that would be a more reliable procedure for assessing students and the outcomes of educational practice (Eisner, 2002, p. 2) at a university. He pulled together a team to research and develop the taxonomy, which was published in 1956 (Anderson, 2002, p. 63). (The complete taxonomy includes two other domains that are less popular and not referenced here, as they were published in subsequent years.) A second benefit of the taxonomy emerged that may not have been anticipated: It provided a framework for instruction, a guide for professors to build their curriculum around. It suggested the types of higher order thinking that professors should expect from students at the college level. The handbook even provides examples of assessment geared around the different cognitive thought levels (Bloom, 1956). It became a blueprint for designing more appropriate tests and planning more useful curriculums (Anderson, 2002, p. 63). We could easily end our discussion here: We have examined the roots, the personal influences, that caused Bloom to develop his taxonomy to begin with. However, something more interesting remains: Bloom spent a significant amount of time developing an assessment tool that hinged on a categorical hierarchy of student s cognition. In the decades that would follow, however, Bloom shifted his attention away from students resulting test scores and correlating thought levels, and rather focused on

5 INFLUENCES ON BLOOM S TAXONOMY 5 how teachers could do their job better. Bloom himself stated, Tests and other forms of evaluation are still used primarily to classify and sort students (the summative function), rather than to help educators better understand students so that they, in turn, can provide appropriate instruction of high quality (the formative function; as cited in Anderson, 1996, p. 83). It is fascinating that he spent time developing a categorical system for summative assessment, then focused on the problems inherent in sorting students into categories to begin with. It is also interesting that he switched from focusing on students results, which would suggest a student problem, to focusing on how professors or teachers can influence, and thus change, those results, which would suggest a teaching problem. It seems as if he discovered a larger problem in education while he was developing the taxonomy and working within the examination department. Unfortunately, education today, especially in K-12, puts a heavy emphasis on his taxonomy but perhaps underemphasizes the more important works that came after it, including the concept of mastery teaching (Anderson, 2002, p. 63). Bloom left his post as a university examiner within a few years of publishing his taxonomy (Anderson, 2002, p. 63) and started focusing his research on the ways in which we as educators could create an equal playing field for students through our teaching strategies. As Anderson (2002) notes, for most of the 20th century, the conventional wisdom was that teachers were limited in what they could do to help large numbers of children succeed in school (p. 63). Bloom took an interest in studying why some students excelled academically and thus scored better than other students, and he realized that there are some factors, alterable variables (Anderson, 1996, p. 80), that could change their learning outcomes. He said, We ve assumed that one half to a third of our students would learn poorly in school and that is what nature and God intended.

6 INFLUENCES ON BLOOM S TAXONOMY 6 We rank students frequently, we make judgments about them daily, and we very quickly persuade the lower students that they are of a different order from those at the top (Brandt, 1979, p. 157). Bloom believed that under favorable learning conditions, most people reach a high level of excellence (Brandt, 1985, p. 34). Bloom subtly hints that problems with student learning outcomes are not just student-centered problems but rather teacher-centered problems. He also said, We get overly fascinated with achievement in itself. I hope we will begin to understand that performance on an achievement test is simply evidence that the child can cope with his/her learning environment (Brandt, 1979, p. 161). This is a very revealing statement coming from someone who spent years working in an office that developed and administered tests. In short, his research around assessment and cognitive categorizing at the college level seems to have made him realize that he could better help the world of education not just by measuring students outcomes within a particular scale, but more so by showing teaching strategies that would improve those outcomes. Thus, to me, the taxonomy is less impactful than that which it gave birth to in his resulting decades of research.

7 INFLUENCES ON BLOOM S TAXONOMY 7 References Anderson, L. W. (1996). If you don't know who wrote it, you won't understand it: Lessons learned from Benjamin S. Bloom. Peabody Journal of Education, 71(1), Retrieved from Anderson, L. (2002). Benjamin Samuel Bloom ( ). American Psychologist, 57(1), 63. Retrieved from Bloom, B. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. New York: David McKay Company. Booker, M. (2007). A roof without walls: Benjamin Bloom s taxonomy and the misdirection of American education. Academic Questions, 20(4), doi: /s Brandt, R. J. (1985). On talent development: A conversation with Benjamin Bloom. Educational Leadership, 43(1), 33. Retrieved from Brandt, R.J. (1979) A conversation with Benjamin Bloom. Educational Leadership, 37(2), Retrieved from Eisner, E. W. (2000). Benjamin Bloom Prospects: The Quarterly Review of Comparative Education, XXX(3). Retrieved from Gershon, M. (2013). Still blooming after almost 60 years. TES: Times Educational Supplement, (5067), Retrieved from Miller, J. (1995). Ralph Winfred Tyler. Behavioral Science, 40(1), 7. Retrieved from

Analysis: Evaluation: Knowledge: Comprehension: Synthesis: Application:

Analysis: Evaluation: Knowledge: Comprehension: Synthesis: Application: In 1956, Benjamin Bloom headed a group of educational psychologists who developed a classification of levels of intellectual behavior important in learning. Bloom found that over 95 % of the test questions