Transcript Biology in Bloom

Learning Taxonomies
What are they?
Why use them?
Mary Pat Wenderoth
Department of Biology
University of Washington
Scholars 2010
Research Design
Your
students
OLD Learning design
Student
learning
Post- Biology Scholars 2010
Your research question
Your
students
NEW Learning design
Student
learning
Research Design
Your
students
OLD Learning design
Student
learning
NEW Learning design
Student
learning
SAME ???
Your
students
Research Design
Control for
◦ 1. Students---are they “the same” academically?
 Compare
entering GPA,
SAT
other academic indicators
 Pre-test
Research Design
Your
students
OLD Learning design
Student
learning
Design or instructor ?
Your
students
NEW Learning design
Student
learning
Research Design
Control for
◦ 1. Students--are they “the same” academically?
 Compare GPA, SAT, other academic indicators
 Pre-test
2. Instructor
• you teach both sections of course
• control for years of experience
• teaching philosophy
• monitor teaching style
Research Design
Your
students
OLD Learning design
Student
learning
How to assess?
Your
students
NEW Learning design
Student
learning
Research Design
Control for
◦ 1. Students--are they “the same” academically?
 Compare GPA, SAT, other academic indicators
 Pre-test
2. Instructor
• you teach both sections of course
• control for years of experience
• teaching philosophy
• monitor teaching style
3. Assessment
• use the same test
• use isomorphic questions
• use the same Bloom or SOLO level of questions
Major Learning Taxonomies
1- SOLO, Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes
Biggs & Collis 1982
2- Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning Domains
cognitive (knowledge)
affective (attitudes)
psychomotor (skills)
Bloom & Krathwohl 1956
The SOLO model consists of 5 levels of understanding
•
•
•
•
•
Prestructural – the student acquires bits of unconnected
information that have no organisation and make no sense.
Unistructural – students make simple and obvious
connections between pieces of information
Multistructural – a number of connections are made, but not
the meta-connections between them
Relational – the students sees the significance of how the
various pieces of information relate to one another
Extended abstract – at this level students can make
connections beyond the scope of the problem or question, to
generalise or transfer learning into a new situation
Unistructural questions
To answer the question
students need the knowledge
or use of only one piece of
student
given information, fact, or
idea, that they can get directly
from the problem.
Facts
Response
Quality Questioning
Using the SOLO Taxonomy
solo-taxonomy-1204838403126960-5.ppt
Multistructural questions
Students need to know or
use more than one piece of
given information, fact, or
student
idea, to answer the
question, but do not
integrate the ideas.
This is fundamentally an
unsorted, unorganised list.
Facts
Response
Relational questions
These questions require
students to integrate
more than one piece of
given knowledge,
student
information, fact, or
idea.
At least two separate
ideas are required that,
working together, will
solve the problem.
Facts
Response
Extended abstract questions
These questions involve a
higher level of abstraction.
The items require the
student
student to go beyond the
given information,
knowledge, information, or
ideas and to deduce a more
general rule or proof that
applies to all cases.
Facts
Response
A
B
D
E
C
Prestructural = D
Unistructural = C
Multistructural = B
Relational = E
Extended abstract = A
C
D
E
A
B
Prestructural = D
Unistructural = C
Multistructural = B
Relational = E
Extended abstract = F
Evaluation- critique
Synthesis - create
Analysis- compare and contrast
Application-- solve
Comprehension-- define
Knowledge-- facts
Bloom, B.S., Krathwohl, D.R., and Masia, B.B. (1956)
NEW
ORIGINAL
Create
Evaluation- critique
Evaluate
Synthesis - create
Analyze
Analysis- compare and contrast
Apply
Application-- solve
UnderstandComprehension-- define
Recall
Knowledge-- facts
Bloom, B.S., Krathwohl, D.R., and Masia, B.B. (1956)
Revised Bloom’s 2001
Recall Understand
Apply
Analyze
Evaluate Create
Factual
knowledge
Conceptual
knowledge
Procedural
knowledge
Metacognitive
knowledge
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001)
Evaluation- critique
Synthesis - create
Analysis- compare and contrast
Application-- solve
Comprehension-Understand-- define
Knowledge-Recall-- facts
Bloom, B.S., Krathwohl, D.R., and Masia, B.B. (1956)
Bloom words



Knowledge--Recall
Memorize, name, recognize, label, list, locate,
order, repeat, reproduce, state, select.
Comprehend--Understand
Define, describe, translate, give example,
restate.
Apply
Predict, calculate, solve, use, demonstrate,
dramatize, sketch.
Bloom words



Analyze
Compare and contrast, infer, differentiate,
discriminate, distinguish, question, test.
Synthesis/create
Create, assemble, construct, design, develop,
organize, propose, write.
Evaluate
Critique, appraise, assess, defend, judge,
rate, value.
Crowe, Dirks & Wenderoth 2008. CBE- Life Science Education 7:368.
Bloom’s level
Knowledge
Comprehension
Application
Analysis
Synthesis
Evaluation
GRAPHING
Identify the parts of graphs and recognize different types
of graphs (e.g., identify the X axis, identify a histogram)
Describe the data represented in a simple graph
Draw a graph based on a given set of data; predict
outcomes based on data presented in graph
Read and interpret a complex graph having multiple
variables or treatments and explain biological
implications of data
Create a graphical representation of a given biological
process or concept
Assess the relative effectiveness of different graphical
representations of the same data or biological concept
Crowe, Dirks & Wenderoth 2008. CBE- Life Science Education 7:368.
Crowe, Dirks & Wenderoth 2008. CBE- Life Science Education 7:368.
Why Bloom a test?
Bloom’s distribution of exam questions
knowledge
10%
16%
16%
52%
8%
comprehension
application
analysis
synthesis
Align your teaching and testing
Your
students
Your
students
OLD Learning design
Student
learning
NEW Learning design
Student
learning
3. Assessment
• use the same test
• use isomorphic questions
• use the same Bloom or SOLO level of questions
Bloom Index for exam
Recall
=1
Understand
=2
Apply
Analysis
Synthesis
Evaluate
=
=
=
=
(knowledge)
(comprehension)
3
4
5
6
Bloom Index for exam
exam pts
20 pts *
20 pts *
20 pts *
20 pts *
20 pts *
Exam Total = 100
1=
2=
3=
4=
5=
Bloom pts
20
40
60
80
100
300 = Bloom Total
Bloom Index = Bloom total/exam total
= 300 / 100
= 3
1. Bloom Index of exam
2. Level of difficulty of question
easy
moderate
hard
How to Bloom a test?
Ask a colleague
Buy them coffee
Have them “Bloom” your exam
Physiology: Cardiac Output (MP Wenderoth)
Cell Biology: Nuclear transport (Alison Crowe)
Immunology: Virology (Clarissa Dirks)
Crowe, Dirks & Wenderoth 2008. CBE- Life Science Education 7:368.
Physiology: cardiac output
Knowledge-Recall
Which two variables determine cardiac output for an animal?
Comprehension-Understanding
Define cardiac output and why it is significant.
Application
Lance Armstrong has a normal resting cardiac output 6L/min
yet his resting heart rate is only 40 beats/min. What is his
stroke volume?
Analysis
Compared to a normal resting male of the same height and
weight, Lance Armstrong’s stroke volume is greatly increased.
Provide a physiological explanation for a large stroke volume.
Crowe, Dirks & Wenderoth 2008. CBE- Life Science Education 7:368.
Synthesis
Create a summary sheet that is a pictorial depiction/
flow diagram of how changes in cardiac output
influence mean arterial blood pressure.
Evaluation
If an enlarged heart was observed on a CT scan of
patient, how would you determine if this enlarged
heart was pathological or not?
Crowe, Dirks & Wenderoth 2008. CBE- Life Science Education 7:368.
Higher Order
Analysis
Synthesis
Evaluation
Application
Comprehension
Knowledge
Lower Order
Bloom, B.S., Krathwohl, D.R., and Masia, B.B. (1956)
SOLO
Bloom
Lower Order
• Prestructural
Knowledge/Recall
• Unistructural
Comprehension
• Multistructural
Application
• Relational
Analysis
• Extended abstract
Synthesis/Evaluation
Higher Order
References- Bloom’s







Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning,
teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of educational
objectives: Complete edition, New York : Longman.
Anderson , L.W., & Sosniak, L.A. (Eds.). (1994). Bloom's taxonomy: a fortyyear retrospective. Ninety-third yearbook of the National Society for the
Study of Education, Pt.2 . , Chicago , IL . , University of Chicago Press.
Bloom, Benjamin S. & David R. Krathwohl. (1956). Taxonomy of educational
objectives: The classification of educational goals, by a committee of college
and university examiners. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York ,
Longmans.
Crowe, A., Dirks,C, & Wenderoth, M.P. (2008) Bloomin’ Biology CBE- Life
Science Education 7:368
http://www.coun.uvic.ca/learning/exams/blooms-taxonomy.html
http://www.polyu.edu.hk/assessment/arc/links/reference_g_blooms.htm
http://www.kurwongbss.eq.edu.au/thinking/Bloom/blooms.htm
References- SOLO





http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/solo.htm
http://www.slideshare.net/jocelynam/solo-taxonomy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_of_Observed_Learning_Outcome
Biggs FILM
http://www.daimi.au.dk/~brabrand/short-film/
National Research Council 1999
Three major findings:
1. Address student’s preconceptions.
2. Build BOTH a deep foundation of factual knowledge
& strong conceptual framework.
3. Enhance student’s ability to monitor their learning.
(metacognition)
“To achieve these ambitious goals,
we will need much more emphasis on
both science education and the
“science of education”.
Science Jan 2, 2009