Different

Taxonomies of
Objectives
GROUP 4: BSED MATH 2A
Overview

Bloom's and Anderson Taxonomy

McTighe and Wiggins Taxonomy

Finks Taxonomy
Biggs Taxonomy
 Bloom's and Anderson Taxonomy
of Objectives
An Introduction to Bloom's Taxonomy
Benjamin Bloom's Taxonomy comprises three learning domains: the cognitive,
affective, and psychomotor, and assigns to each of these domains a hierarchy that
corresponds to different levels of learning.
It's important to note that the different levels of thinking defined within each
domain of the Taxonomy are hierarchical. In other, each level subsumes the levels
that come before it. So, if we look at the cognitive domain for example (which is
represented in Figure 1), we can infer that before a student can conduct an
analysis, they first might need to know the methods of analysis, understand the
different elements to review, and consider which method to apply. It is only then
that they will be ready to conduct the analysis itself
Bloom's and Anderson Taxonomy
of Objectives

Figure 1.
The
Hierarchy of
the Cognitive
Domain of
Bloom's
Taxonomy
(1956)
Bloom's and Anderson Taxonomy
of Objectives

Figure 2.
Anderson
and
Krathwol's
(2001)
revision to
Blooms
Cognitive
Hierarchy
 Bloom's and Anderson Taxonomy
of Objectives
Bloom's Taxonomy, created by educational psychologist Benjamin Bloom in 1956, is a framework used to
categorize educational objectives and classify different levels of cognitive skills that students are expected
to demonstrate. The cognitive domain of Bloom's Taxonomy consists of six hierarchical levels, each
representing a progressively more complex cognitive process. Here is an explanation of each level:
1. Knowledge: At the base of the hierarchy is knowledge, which involves the simple recall of factual
information. This can include memorization of facts, dates, definitions, and basic concepts. Examples of
activities at this level include listing, defining, naming, and identifying. Example: Define noun.
2. Comprehension: Comprehension involves demonstrating an understanding of the material by
interpreting, summarizing, or explaining concepts in one's own words. It goes beyond mere recall and
requires students to grasp the meaning of information. Activities at this level include summarizing,
paraphrasing, explaining, and interpreting.
3. Application: Application requires students to apply their knowledge and understanding to solve
problems or complete tasks in new situations. This involves using acquired knowledge and concepts in
practical or real-world scenarios. Examples of activities at this level include problem-solving, applying
principles, using information in new contexts, and demonstrating procedures.
 Bloom's and Anderson Taxonomy
of Objectives
4. Analysis: Analysis involves breaking down complex ideas into simpler parts and understanding the
relationships between them. It requires students to examine the components of information and discern
patterns or structures. Activities at this level include categorizing, comparing, contrasting, analyzing
relationships, and identifying patterns.
5. Synthesis: Synthesis involves the creation of new ideas or products by combining different elements in
creative or original ways. It requires students to integrate knowledge from various sources and apply critical
thinking skills to generate new insights or solutions. Examples of activities at this level include designing,
planning, inventing, composing, and hypothesizing.
6. Evaluation: Evaluation is the highest level of Bloom's Taxonomy and involves making judgments or
assessments based on criteria and standards. It requires students to critically evaluate information,
arguments, or solutions and make reasoned judgments about their validity or effectiveness. Activities at this
level include critiquing, assessing, judging, and justifying decisions.
These six levels form a hierarchical structure, with each level building upon the skills and abilities
developed in the preceding levels. Educators can use Bloom's Taxonomy to design instructional activities
and assessments that target specific cognitive skills and encourage higher-order thinking.
Bloom's and Anderson Taxonomy
of Objectives
Bloom's Taxonomy revised

In 2001, David Krathwohl (one of Bloom's original collaborators) and co-

editor Lorin Anderson published a revision to the 1956 hierarchy with
contributions from cognitive psychologists, curriculum theorists, instructional
researchers, and testing and assessment specialists. This new revised version
introduced a key change to the cognitive domain of Bloom's Taxonomy: it
shifted the language used from nouns to verbs (see Figure 2) and thereby
focused the attention away from acquisition and toward active performance
of the types of learning involved in each stage of the hierarchy. "Synthesis"
was also dropped and "create" was moved to the highest level of the domain.
Bloom's and Anderson Taxonomy
of Objectives

Figure 2.
Anderson
and
Krathwol's
(2001)
revision to
Blooms
Cognitive
Hierarchy
Bloom's and Anderson Taxonomy
of Objectives
Bloom's and Anderson Taxonomy
of Objectives
Remembering: This level involves recalling facts or information. It forms the foundation for higher-
order thinking and lays the groundwork for more advanced cognitive skills.
Understanding: Once information is remembered, this level requires comprehension and the
ability to explain concepts in one's own words. It involves grasping the meaning and significance of
information.
Applying: Here, students use acquired knowledge in new situations. Application involves using
information to solve problems or carry out tasks.
Analyzing: Analytical thinking involves breaking down complex information into its components,
identifying patterns, and understanding the relationships between different elements.
Evaluating: At this level, students critically assess information or situations, making judgments
based on criteria and evidence. It encourages a deeper level of thinking and discernment.
Creating: The pinnacle of the taxonomy involves synthesizing information and ideas to generate
new concepts, solutions, or products. It fosters creativity and originality.
 McTighe and Wiggin Taxonomy
of Objectives
What is Understanding by Design?

It was used to design the basic education curriculum in school year 2010-2012 before K-12
Education Curriculum was implemented.
It is also called as the Backward Design
It puts the emphasis on designing curriculum to engage students in exploring and deepening
their understanding of important ideas and the design of assessments (Wiggins and McTighe,
2002).

McTighe and Wiggins outline six facets of understanding within the Understanding by Design (UbD)
framework, providing a comprehensive view of what it means for students to truly understand a
concept. These facets guide the design of instruction and assessment.
 McTighe and Wiggin Taxonomy
of Objectives
The Three Stages of Backward Design
 McTighe and Wiggin Taxonomy
of Objectives
The Three Stages of Backward Design
Stage One – Identify Desired Results:
In the first stage, the instructor must consider the learning goals of the lesson, unit, or course. Wiggins and McTighe
provide a useful process for establishing curricular priorities. They suggest that the instructor ask themselves the
following three questions as they progressively focus in on the most valuable content:
What should participants hear, read, view, explore or otherwise encounter?
This knowledge is considered knowledge worth being familiar with. Information that fits within this question is the
lowest priority content information that will be mentioned in the lesson, unit, or course.
What knowledge and skills should participants master?
The knowledge and skills at this substage are considered important to know and do. The information that fits within this
question could be the facts, concepts, principles, processes, strategies, and methods students should know when they
leave the course.
What are big ideas and important understandings participants should retain?
The big ideas and important understandings are referred to as enduring understandings because these are the ideas that
instructors want students to remember sometime after they’ve completed the course.
 McTighe and Wiggin Taxonomy
of Objectives
Stage Two – Determine Acceptable Evidence:
The second stage of backward design has instructors consider the assessments and performance tasks students will complete in order
to demonstrate evidence of understanding and learning. In the previous stage, the instructor pinpointed the learning goals of the
course. Therefore, they will have a clearer vision of what evidence students can provide to show they have achieved or have started to
attain the goals of the course. Consider the following two questions at this stage:
1. How will I know if students have achieved the desired results?
2. What will I accept as evidence of student understanding and proficiency?
At this stage it is important to consider a wide range of assessment methods in order to ensure that students are being assess over the
goals the instructor wants students to attain. Sometimes, the assessments do not match the learning goals, and it becomes a frustrating
experience for students and instructors. Use the list below to help brainstorm assessment methods for the learning goals of the course.
Term papers.
Short-answer quizzes.
Free-response questions.
Homework assignments.
Lab projects.
Practice problems.
Group projects.
Among many others…
 McTighe and Wiggin Taxonomy
of Objectives
Stage Three – Plan Learning Experiences and Instruction:
The final stage of backward design is when instructors begin to consider how they will teach. This is when instructional strategies and
learning activities should be created. With the learning goals and assessment methods established, the instructor will have a clearer
vision of which strategies would work best to provide students with the resources and information necessary to attain the goals of the
course. Consider the questions below:
1. What enabling knowledge (facts, concepts, principles) and skills (processes, procedures, strategies) will students need in order to
perform effectively and achieve desired results?
2. What activities will equip students with the needed knowledge and skills?
3. What will need to be taught and coached, and how should it best be taught, in light of performance goals?
4. What materials and resources are best suited to accomplish these goals?
Leverage the various instructional strategies listed below:
Large and/or group discussion
Interactive lecturing and think-pair-shares
Flipped classroom
Cooperative learning (including team-based and project-based learning)
Guided note-taking
Guided inquiry for problem-solving
 McTighe and Wiggin Taxonomy
of Objectives
McTighe and Wiggins (McTighe, 2018) in their Understanding by Design (UbD) described four key types of
educational goals - knowledge, basic skills, long-term understanding and long-term transfer goals.
Knowledge Goals: These goals focus on the acquisition of factual information, concepts, and
principles. Knowledge goals aim to ensure that students have a solid foundation of essential content
knowledge.
Basic Skills Goals: Basic skills goals involve the development of fundamental skills that are essential
for learning across various subjects. These skills may include reading, writing, mathematics, and
communication skills.
Long-Term Understanding Goals: Long-term understanding goals go beyond surface-level knowledge
and focus on fostering deep comprehension, critical thinking, and conceptual understanding over
time.
Long-Term Transfer Goals: Long-term transfer goals aim to equip students with the ability to apply
their learning in new and unfamiliar situations, both within and beyond the classroom. These goals
promote the transfer of knowledge and skills to real-world contexts.
McTighe and Wiggin Taxonomy
of Objectives
Summary:

Long-term transfer goals refer to students' capacity to apply what they

have learned to new situation or different context. Long-term transfer
goals are often transdisciplinary in nature. They encompass complex skills
like critical thinking, collaboration, developmental habits of mind such as
persistence and self-regulation. (McTighe, 2018)
 McTighe and Wiggin Taxonomy
of Objectives
“The 6 Facets of Understanding”
1. Explain: Requires students to provide thorough and coherent explanations of concepts and
processes.
Example: Explaining the scientific principles behind a specific natural phenomenon.
2. Interpret: Involves making sense of information, connecting ideas, and providing context.
Example: Interpreting a historical document to understand its impact on a particular era.
3. Apply: Requires students to use knowledge and skills in various contexts.
Example: Using mathematical principles to analyze and solve a practical engineering problem.
4. Have Perspective: Encourages students to consider different viewpoints and see the bigger picture.
Example: Analyzing historical events from different cultural viewpoints.
5. Empathize: Involves understanding and appreciating others' experiences and perspectives.
Example: Engaging in the literature that explores characters from diverse backgrounds to foster
empathy.
6. Have Self-Knowledge: Focuses on self-awareness and understanding one's own thought processes.
Example: Keeping a learning journal to reflect on one's understanding and areas of growth in a subject.
McTighe and Wiggin Taxonomy
of Objectives
Fink's Taxonomy
Fink's Taxonomy is known as the "Taxonomy of Significant Learning."
In his book "Creating Significant Learning Experiences," Dee Fink defined learning in terms of
change. He believes in order for learning to occur, there has to be some kind of change in the
learner. If there is no change, there is no learning. Additionally, he believes significant
learning requires that there be some kind of lasting change that is important in terms of the
learner's life.
Unlike other learning taxonomies, Fink's is not hierarchical, but Interactive. This means that
each kind of learning can stimulate other kinds of learning. Additionally, Fink's Taxonomy
goes beyond cognitive processes and includes other goals of teaching. His taxonomy
includes more affective aspects such as the "human dimension" and "caring" - identifying
and/or changing one's feelings.
Fink's Taxonomy
 Fink's Taxonomy
Fink's Taxonomy includes six kinds of significant learning.
1. Foundational Knowledge: Focuses on acquiring fundamental information and understanding essential concepts.
Example: Memorizing historical dates in a history class.
2. Application: Requires the practical use of knowledge in real-world situations.
Example: Solving mathematical problems that simulate real-life situations.
3.Integration: Involves connecting new knowledge with existing understanding to create a more comprehensive
view.
Example: Relating scientific principles to everyday experiences to enhance comprehension.
4. Human Dimension: Focuses on personal and interpersonal aspects, exploring values, beliefs, and perspectives.
Example: Discussing ethical dilemmas in a philosophy class and understanding diverse viewpoints.
5. Caring: Encourages empathy and concern for others, fostering a sense of responsibility and ethical awareness.
Example: Engaging in community service projects to apply learning in a meaningful context.
6. Learning How to Learn: Aims to develop metacognitive skills, enabling students to become more effective and
self-directed learners.
Example: Reflecting on study strategies and adapting them based on personal learning preferences
Biggs’ SOLO Taxonomy
The SOLO taxonomy stands for ‘structure of observed learning outcome’. It provides a
framework for analyzing a student’s depth of knowledge.
It was developed by John Biggs as an alternative to Bloom’s taxonomy of knowledge.
The SOLO taxonomy contains 5 levels of knowledge, from simple to complex:
1. Prestructural
2. Unstructural
3. Multistructural
4. Relational
5. Extended Abstract
 Biggs’ SOLO Taxonomy
5 Levels Of The Taxonomy
1. Prestructural: At the prestructural stage, students don’t have any understanding of the
topic. This may be because they’ve never encountered it before!

Biggs argues that “prestructural responses simply miss the point” and “show little evidence
of relevant learning” (Biggs & Tang, 2007, p. 87).

We can observe that a student is in the prestructural stage when they respond to questions
with simple answers like:
“I don’t know”
“I’m parroting what I am supposed to say”, or
With an irrelevant comment.
Biggs’ SOLO Taxonomy
5 Levels Of The Taxonomy
1. Prestructural Example
When I grade papers, I notice this all the time. A paragraph may be totally off topic,
filled with factual inaccuracies, or totally copied from a source text. This shows me that
the student completely misunderstands.
Be Aware
Biggs reminds us that sometimes a person will give a long and seemingly impressive
response to a question, but it may still be at the prestructural stage.
He uses the example of a politician speaking a lot, but not actually answering the question
they were asked.
 Biggs’ SOLO Taxonomy
5 Levels Of The Taxonomy
2. Unistructural
A student with unistructural understanding tends to understand only one or two
elements of the task, but not the whole.
At this level, a student may be able to identify and name a few things and follow simple
procedures that they have been taught.
While some elements of a topic may be covered by the student, they will also miss many
more important parts of the topic that are required to truly understand it.
A student who provides a unistructural response to a question would likely:
Be able to give a vague or general answer.
Know some terms relevant to the topic.
Not be able to explain the terms in depth when pushed.
 Biggs’ SOLO Taxonomy
5 Levels Of The Taxonomy
3. Multistructural
At the multistructural level, the student has begun to acquire a lot knowledge, but can’t
put it together yet.
The student’s knowledge remains at the level of remembering, memorizing and
parroting what they have learned. The student therefore has surface level
understanding. They could not use a concept in new and innovative ways because they
simply don’t understand it well enough.

Example
The multistructural student is like the builder without his tools: all the pieces are there, but
he doesn’t know how they connect. You may have felt this way when you unpacked some
Ikea furniture and it’s been laid out upon your floor in bits!
 Biggs’ SOLO Taxonomy
5 Levels Of The Taxonomy
4. Relational
The relational stage is the first that shows deep qualitative understanding of a topic and more complex
thinking skills.
At the relational level, students start to see how the parts of a topic are put together. They can:
Identify patterns.
Explain how parts of a topic link together.
Compare and contrast different elements of a topic.
View a topic from several perspectives.
Central to relational knowledge is the ability to create structures and systems for sorting knowledge.
Students begin to explain connections between things by using systemic and some theoretical modelling.
A Quote
‘As Biggs argues: “a qualitative change in learning and understanding has occurred. It is no longer a matter
of listing facts and details” (Biggs & Tang, 2007, p. 87).
 Biggs’ SOLO Taxonomy
5 Levels Of The Taxonomy
5. Extended Abstract
At the extended abstract stage, students have a sophisticated understanding of the topic and can
apply it in various contexts.
Biggs argues that the essence of the extended abstract response “is that it goes beyond what has
been given” (Biggs & Tang, 2007, p. 87). In other words, students can create new knowledge and
apply the knowledge they have in multiple contexts due to their deep understanding of the topic.
An Example:
For example, a student may learn something in the classroom and be able to apply it in their lives
outside the classroom in an entirely different context.
Students may also be able to generate theoretical ideas and then use them to make assumptions about
future events.
Summary
In summary, all the taxonomies of objectives or outcomes

discussed in the foregoing paragraphs begin with the cognitive

process at the lowest level becoming more complex and

higher in level as one goes higher in the taxonomy of

objectives. Good learning outcomes are concemed not only

with the cognitive process in the lower level like remembering

but also with more complex outcomes in the higher cognitive

level such as applying evaluating and creating.

6. Good learning outcomes are SMART Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Result

oriented and Time-bound. "To discuss everything that you learned from this

course" is not a good learning outcome. It is not specific. But "to illustrate with a

concrete example at least 5 principles of learning" is a good learning outcome.

Good learning outcomes are stated using behavioral terms.

7. Good learning outcomes are useful and relevant to the learners. The learning

outcomes are for the learners to attain at the end of the lesson. It is easier for

the learners to realize the learning outcomes if they are of use and of relevance

to them. If the learning outcomes are relevant, the learners see the importance

or significance of realizing the learning outcomes in their life. It is quite difficult

for learners to learn something which has no relevance to their life.

Thank
You
GROUP 4: BSED MATH 2-A
Perolino, Ma. Diana Rose
Rasonable, Michelle Ann
Rivera, Ria Mae
Sapul, Queen Joy
Sellarico, Joylyn
Sison, Stephanie
Tauson, Ina
Tingson, Rommel
Trabasas, Errol
Tuble, Bless