Bloom’s New Taxonomy

I made some changes on Thursday night and when I got to class to do the presentation the changes were not there.  I must have forgotten to save.  I don’t know when I saw the new Bloom’s taxonomy, but it could have been for a diigo newsletter.  For me it was a surprise to see that the known descriptors had change to verbs to indicate that the new learning model represented learning as an active activity.  Evaluating is not on top anymore, instead creating is considered to be the highest order thinking skill.  I noticed it, but didn’t know what it meant.  I only knew that the creative process from my own experience and life of having two people in the arts.   To me creating is not a concrete sequential activity.  It is often a “messy” process, ideas and other processes coming in from all direction.  The second model of Bloom’s taxonomy speaks to me much better.  It reflects learning as active and how different thinking skills affect each other.  For example at the beginning of learning the cog representing “remembering” or “knowledge” would be moving much harder than the other cogs and in term that particular cog will set other cogs in motion.

So the definition of what “creating” means put me on a quest.  It seems that they have broken down “creating” into two types.- #1 is the “creating” artists do to express ideas in emotions in various artistic forms.  The other, #2 is cognitive creativity which can be defined in various ways. Creative thinking can be arriving at alternative possibilities to a problem, coming up with useful ideas such as a product or solution and even a theory.  The next cognitive creativity thinking skill could be evaluating and modifying exisiting ideas or exploring connections.

If “creating” or other HOTS (higher order thinking skills) are considered  to be the most desirable skills students should be trying to attain, then how do we get there are educators or TLs?  I think that it requires a change in attitude and behavior.  We need to stop having students follow instructions when giving a topic to research.  Taxonomy verbs such as “follow”, “describe”, “include” are restricting.  We need to re-frame assignments that allow and foster exploration and curiosity. The inquiry model for research enables students to explore and to follow their curiosity.

A Foods teacher once told me and asked me, “I don’t know if I should be doing this project.  The students don’t seem to be engaged?”  Before becoming aware of the inquiry model and Bloom’s New Taxonomy, my comment, was to have her students use a different form of presentation.  That is parallel to using technology to do the same thing.  There is no change to the approach to learning.

I was also interested in the language that teachers use when giving assignments.  As a TL who asks for a copy of a research assignment, I always try to come up with the ICT skills that could be incorporated into student research.  Underneath the various skills I have listed the verbs and possible ICT skills.  The bolded words are possible new terms which I think will need to incorporated to indicate a change in approach and behaviour.

Language is an important aspect of a library database.  We have cataloging done for us and there are very few things we as librarians have to do, but we must make sure that it does reflect social justice. Cataloging is a subjective activity, someone make a decision about what subject headings to use and what not to use.  It is up to the librarian to agree or disagree with the language/terms being used.  When I first took over the library at my school, I looked over the collection and noticed that the subject headings for First Nations had Indians as a searchable subject term.  The term “First Nations” was nowhere to be found.  I was appalled, and changed every book and video’s subject heading to reflect the acceptable term for Aboriginal peoples.  Librarians have to acknowledge that are responsible for social justice in their field.

Remembering (Can the student recall or remember information?)

recognize, list, describe, identify, retrieve, name, locate, find

Bulleting, marking key words, recalling, highlighting

ICT Skills

• Library database (creating a list of resources)
• social bookmarking (diigo)
• googling (adjusting reading levels, boolean terms)
• subscribed databases

Understanding (Can the student explain ideas or concepts?)

interpret, summarize, compare, explain, infer, discuss

blogging, journaling, twittering (beyond how are you?)

ICT Skills

• Mind mapping (mind meister, gantt)
• Google docs
• Blogger, Word Press
• Wikispaces
• Webquests
• Twitter
• Power point, Prezi, Glogster

Applying (Can the student use information in a new way?)

classify, show, examine, illustrate, use

uploading, collaborating, editing

ICT Skills

• skype
• smartboard
• webpage

Evaluating  (Can the student distinguish between the parts?)

compare, contrast, explain, examine, categorize, investigate

validating information, analyzing, making judgements, breaking down information, understanding new relationships

• spreadsheet presentations (gliffy)
• web page (weebly)
• blog
• online newspapers (leaving a comment on an article)

Create (Can the student create a new product, show a point of view or a new way of viewing things?)

create, invent, compose, design, construct, imagine, plan

designing, inventing, constructing, planning, producing

ICT Skills

• Comic life
• iMovie
• Book Creator (iPad)
• Hyper Studio
• GoLive
• Story Kit
• Glogster

Further Information

Bloom’s Taxonomy and ICT

Includes starter sheets for different ICT applications and rubrics

Create your own mind maps at MindMeister

Many times teachers come to the library to a specific topic with a set of criteria students have to fulfill.  Other times it is vague and almost to the point that it is incomprehensible to me let alone the students.  So here is an example of a teacher who came into the library who wanted students to do research on love.  He wanted books on love, Internet sources where they could find quotations.  After some questioning  what he was really wanted students to do is to write an essay on love.  To help students I taught them how to use wordle for a concept map so that they could organize their thoughts on the topic.  Sometimes I think librarians have to help the process or intervene in a way that helps students with their learning and this is where I think Blooms new Taxonomy will help librarians introduce ICT to help students accomplish their tasks.  The idea is to develop ICT skills in the various domains of the New Bloom’s Taxonomy.

Remembering-recalling information

Understanding-explaining ideas or concepts

Applying-Using information in another familiar situation

Analysing-breaking down information into parts to explore understanding and relationships

Evaluating-justifying a decision or course of action

Creating-generating new tools, products or ways of viewing things

What was your key defining ICT quality when you filled out the questionnaire?

I’m not quite sure what that means, but I think to become ICT literate you need patience and perseverance and calm when learning something new.  It is not an ICT quality per se, but it is what you need to be able to learn the technology.  From my observations of people who won’t or get frustrated with technology always think that life is supposed to be made easier and why is it so hard to learn.  They want an immediate solution and when something doesn’t work out the first time, they become frustrated.  There are always going to be some sites that will help you understand the applications, but you need patience and time.

How were your ideas about ICT in school settings influenced by Will Richardson’s book, “Why School”?

I think that his observations about school is very accurate. However, change is something schools are slow to implement.  Sure kids are good at what they are interested in, but sometimes they are just not savvy with other things.  They need to be educated about ICT.  For example most students have never heard about tagging and how it is important to their research when using online databases or when bookmarking websites.  Some students do not even know how to print or change A4 paper size to letter size.  I think Richardson is really suggesting that the ability and capabilities of children to be  remarkable learners and collaborators are there when given the chance to “unlearn”.  At the same time students have to be self regulators because without that as part of the equation it can become a nagging process.  Not all students are motivated even when given the opportunity to pursue personal interests.

When you think about the cognitive, cultural and technological dimensions of our connected selves, what stands out for you as a key concept?

The connected self really needs the ability to “figure things out”.  It influences the way you think about things because information is so readily available.  You sit and watch tv and find out another point of view or confirm a fact without having to leave the couch. I hadn’t really thought about how the cultural dimensions of technology, but when you think about it our students have created their own culture, by the short cuts in language they use to message someone.  Even when my children text me they expect me to know what omg means.  No explanation.

Technology influences behavior, I remember it was the oddest thing for someone sitting outside my house to phone my kid to tell her she was waiting for her.  I think most kids text, and rarely email.  Another example is the need for an instant reply.  If someone doesn’t immediately reply it is often taken as a slight or “trouble”.

Running a moodle course was a bit of a headache because students rarely checked their email.  I had to make sure a new assignment was posted on a certain day and train them to check for the assignment.  However, when I deleted all their essays by accident and emailed them, students came rushing into the library to see if it was true.  Students seem to pick and choose.  As adults I don’t think we ever ignore someone’s email, unless it is an ad or we get something that just a notice.

I think when Jenny taught us those different applications and had us working in groups she was trying to create a culture of learners and educators who could collaborate via technology in a thoughtful and professional way.

How do you define technology and information literacy today?

I used to think that they were the same thing, but now have come to realize that they are are not.  An information literate student would be able to find and access information they need, effectively use the information and be able to evaluate their sources.  Being information literate would enable students to be more self directed and have greater control over their learning.  A technologically literate student would be able to use digital technology and its different forms to create new information or knowledge and to be able to communicate those forms.  They are different, and a student would need both kinds of education.

What are the most important conceptual developments that you will take with you as we move forward in this course?

There are many applications for a variety of tasks, being exposed to them helps to decide what I feel comfortable doing.  It will take a while to be comfortable showing and working with students.  Having never heard of pearltrees or mind meister, is proving to be interesting.  I think the more you have in the “tool box” the better it is.

What issues or opportunity have you identified as a key topic for your inquiry work next week?

I would like to look into Blooms new taxonomy that highlights different applications for different levels of developmental skills ie knowledge to synthesis.  I would research the different application and write handouts for the applications I decide would work for my teaching practice in the library.  Practical inquiry would benefit me the most.

Why School?

When I first started my library and teaching career we were using card catalogs and the computer wasn’t even a part of my daily life.  Teacher librarian training was typing out those god awful cards used in the catalog.  The prof used to measure how far our indentations were off.  That’s what we got marked on. I don’t think I can call those days the good old days.  I never want to return to those times.

This is the exact opposite of what is available to our students.  They have computers, cell phones and unlimited access to the internet which has so much information available to them at their fingertips.  I would have to argue that not everything out on the net is valuable, but that is another discussion. They have devices and access to help them learn and make an impact on their lives and how they go about learning.  However in reality at our school we haven’t changed much,  the culture that has been created by teachers and how they view learning is rather the same, but I feel that it is changing.  In our school, we have a high ratio of students who are all keen to go to university, and not just any university-UBC.

They will drop out of a course a week before the end if they know that they didn’t get a high enough mark.  They only take courses they know that will boost their GPA.  They will try various methods such as retaking courses at summer school or online to boost their GPA.  They know how to play the system for everything it has to offer.  Some don’t care about learning and won’t take risks because that could lower their marks and thus their chances for entry into UBC.  They need to be told of every detail in the assignments, if not they will drive you crazy.  These are students who know how to jump through the hoops, but I really wonder how they will survive in the real world.  Seems to me these are the students Stephen Downes sees education/learning as something that is delivered.  Having provincial exams doesn’t help because often teachers will spend a month preparing their students.  Our principal isn’t happy when we score below the district average.  What doesn’t help is when the students I described earlier apply to UBC and most get in.  For example, one year we had 210 applicants to UBC and about 189 got accepted to various faculties.  Will students want to taught in “old school” ways?  Of course-it got them into UBC.  This is what most people believe is “academic”.  Change is gonna come painfully for our school.

Our Changes

We were one of the first schools in Richmond to assess students using “Essential Learning Outcomes”.  It first started with the science department who identified the essential learning outcomes for their junior science.  In the first term students got no grades and it confused a lot of people including parents. Students had three tries to pass an “ELO”.  Eventually the ELOs were turned into percentages or grades.

The ESL department for the past year and a half has been working on a rubric that covers the ELOs for all 4 levels of language learners.  We found that students were  always trying to cheat to get into the next level.  The rubrics are based on “I can” statements that cover speaking, reading, writing, and listening and is written in simple language that students and parents can understand.  We will be fully implementing this assessment model in September.  Other departments such as English and Social studies are also trying to make changes to their assessment models.

The Connected Self and Students

I think students connect themselves to technology quite well.  It is what they know and how they see the world.  However, I find that they can use their devices for their social presence, but know little about connecting themselves  in a way that would help themselves become 21st century learners.  They need to learn technology not only for their social lives, but how it can enhance their learning.

As far as research is concerned with students, Wikipedia rules. I’ve tried to be persistent with teaching students how to use online databases. The students who finally “give in” are so much better off in terms of the product they are able to produce.  Quality of information is important.  I sometimes tell students about my nephew who works at a law firm and the senior partner who didn’t think he could win a particular case. My nephew offered to do the research and it was enough to win the case.  Senior partner gave him a $10,000 bonus.

When I was explaining how to use the database, students were shocked when I asked them to bring out their smart phones to access the catalog and to create a working book list for their research.  Their own personal that they normally use to text their friends was now being used to learn something.  A different perspective on the “connected self” for my students.  Here is another short anecdote about a Business Ed teacher who wanted to projects on countries and their economies.  One of the other criteria for the project was to find out what it was like to be living in their country of choice as a teenager.  My suggestion was to go to a website that had teenagers from different countries looking for pen pals.  Correspond with them via email, skype to get some real first hand knowledge.  I think the possibilities could have been creative and endless.  I think it fell on deaf ears even though every student had access to a computer in the Business Ed room.

The connected self, be it teacher or student needs to know what technology can do for them and how it can bring challenges, push boundaries to move students and schools from content mastery to learning mastery.

Welcome to UBC Blogs. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!