Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

MACUL 2013 Bloom’s Taxonomy is Blooming Technology

2,021 views

Published on

Published in: Education
  • I was wondering why you chose to present revised Bloom's taxonomy within the old framework (i.e., only presenting the Cognitive Process dimension and not include the Knowledge dimension)?
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here

MACUL 2013 Bloom’s Taxonomy is Blooming Technology

  1. 1. Bloom’s Taxonomy is Blooming Technology Bloom’s Taxonomy Going DigitalPrimary Presenter: Maryly SkallosInstitution: Muskegon Community CollegeCo Presenter: Julia VanderMolen, Ph.DInstitution: Davenport University
  2. 2. Disclosure Statement• The planner and presenter do not have any financial arrangements or affiliations with any commercial entities whose products, services, or research may be discussed in this activity.• No commercial funding has been accepted for this presentation.
  3. 3. Session Rules of Etiquette• Please turn off your cell phone/pager• If you must leave the session early, please do so as discreetly as possible• Please avoid side conversation during the session Thank you for your cooperation!
  4. 4. Introduction• Transforming learning for a new educational era – The future is already here – its just not evenly distributed » William Gibson
  5. 5. Session Objectives• Describe Bloom’s Taxonomy (old vs new) and Web 2.0• Select appropriate Web 2.0 tools to address the six levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy• Create one lesson which incorporates a Web 2.0 activity to facilitate student collaboration and learning
  6. 6. What Participants Will Gain• Participants will gain an understanding how Web 2.0 tools can be used to address the six levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy• Participants will learn a minimum of 3 Web 2.0 tools fo reach of the level of Bloom’s Taxonomy• Participants will brainstorm one to two lessons to integrate into his/her classroom
  7. 7. Bloom’s Taxonomy (original – 1956) Evaluation Synthesis Analysis Application Comprehension Knowledge
  8. 8. Bloom’s Taxonomy (updated – 2001) Create Evaluate Analyze Apply Understand Remember
  9. 9. Original Revised HIGHEST Create Evaluation Level of Questions Level of Thinking Evaluate Synthesis Analysis Analyze Application Apply Comprehension Understand Knowledge Remember LOWEST
  10. 10. Original Revised Evaluation Create Synthesis Evaluate Analysis Analyze Application Apply Comprehension Understand Knowledge Remember
  11. 11. Bloom’s as a Learning Process CreatingBefore weEvaluating can understanda concept,Analyzing we have toremember Applying it! Understand Remember
  12. 12. Bloom’s Taxonomy (updated)Before we can apply the Creatingconcept, weEvaluating understand it. must Analyzing Apply Understand Remembering
  13. 13. Bloom’s Taxonomy (updated)Before we can analyze the concept, we Creatingmust apply it. Evaluating Analyze Apply Understanding Remembering
  14. 14. Bloom’s Taxonomy (updated) Creating Evaluate Analyze Applying Before we can evaluate its Understanding impact, we must have analyzed it. Remembering
  15. 15. Bloom’s Taxonomy (updated)Before we can create, Createwe must have Evaluate Analyze Apply Understand Remember
  16. 16. Bloom’s as a Learning Process • Before we can understand a concept, we have to remember it • Before we can apply the concept, we must understand it • Before we analyze it, we must be able to apply it • Before we can evaluate its impact, we must have analyzed it • Before we can create, we must have remembered, understood, applied, analyzed, and evaluatedSource: VanderMolen, J. (2012). Blooming with Technology. Michigan State University Educational TechnologyConference, East Lansing, MI. Retrieved from http://www.technteach.info/msubloomingtech.htm
  17. 17. What is Bloom’s Digital Taxonomy?• It is the application of digital collaboration tools or Web 2.0 tools to engage students at each level of Blooms Taxonomy.
  18. 18. Web 2.0 Characteristics• Web-based applications (“cloud” computing)• Many are free and easy to use• Applications are platform independent• Interactive, social software• Convergent with ubiquitous mobile networking
  19. 19. Remembering• Del.ici.ous – http://delicious.com/• Diigo – http://www.diigo.com• Evernote – http://evernote.com
  20. 20. Understanding• Bubbl.us – http://bubbl.us• Twitter – http://www.twitter.com• LetterPop – http://www.letterpop.com
  21. 21. Applying• Voki or VoiceBoards – http://www.voki.com• Scribble Maps – http://www.scribblemaps.com• Screencast-o-matic – http://www.screencast-o-matic.com
  22. 22. Analyzing• Google Docs – http://docs.google.com• Create-a-Graph or other Infograph tool – http://nces.ed.gov/nceskids/createagraph• RSOE EDIS – http://hisz.rsoe.hu/alertmap/index2.php
  23. 23. Evaluating• Rcampus or iRubric – http://www.rcampus.com/indexrubric.cfm• Tricider – http://tricider.com/en/t• TodaysMeet – http://todaysmeet.com/
  24. 24. Creating• Glogster – http://edu.glogster.com• VoiceThread – http://voicethread.com• MakeBeliefComix – http://www.makebeliefscomix.com/Comix• Prezi – http://www.prezi.com
  25. 25. Questions?
  26. 26. Summary• Bloom’s Taxonomy has been updated• Many different Web 2.0 tools are available• Don’t be shy to ask students to help with the hardware• Most important: Remember to have FUN!
  27. 27. Thank You! Maryly Skallos Maryly.Skallos@ellucian.comMaryly.Skallos@muskegoncc.edu Julia VanderMolen jvandermolen@davenport.edu . © 2013 Ellucian. All rights reserved.
  28. 28. References• Anderson, L.W. (Ed.), Krathwohl, D.R.(Ed.), Airasian, P.W., Cruikshank, K.A., Meyer, R.E., Pintrich, P.R., Raths, J., & Wittock, M.C. (2002). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (Complete edition). New York: Longman.• Bloom, B.S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook 1; Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay CO. Inc: pp. 7-8• Churches, A. (2007). Edorigami, blooms taxonomy and digital approaches. Retrieved from http://edorigami.wikispaces.com/Blom%27s+and+ICT+tools• Kay, R. (2001). Evaluating learning, design, and engagement in web-based learning tools (WBLTs): The WBLT Evaluation Scale. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1849-1856.
  29. 29. References• Fisher, M. (2009). Digital blooms pyramid. Retrieved from http://www.digigogy.com• Meyer, K. (2010). A comparison of Web 2.0 tools in a doctoral course. Internet and Higher Education, 13, 226-232.• Rahmat, M., & Saudi, M.M. (2007). E-learning assessment application based on Bloom taxonomy. The International Journal of Learning, 14(9), 1- 12.• Tansey, R., Schopierayp, S., Boland, E., Lane, F., & Pruett, S. (2009). Examining technology-enhanced coursework in rehabilitation counselor education using Bloom’s taxonomy of learning. Rehabilitation Education, 23(2), 107-118.• Vandermolen, J. (2012). Bloom’s taxonomy goes digital.

×