Using Bloom’s Taxonomy to Frame Assessment
Bloom’s Taxonomy offers great scope for planning and developing assessment of all types.
As a reminder, here’s how the taxonomy runs:
- Level 1: Knowledge
- Level 2: Comprehension
- Level 3: Application
- Level 4: Analysis
- Level 5: Synthesis
- Level 6: Evaluation
It is inherently progressive.
As we move up the taxonomy, so the level of challenge increases.
Each successive level presents a set of criteria we can use to make judgements about learner mastery.
This is what makes it such a powerful framework for assessment.
(At least, that is, when dealing with the cognitive domain of learning. We would not necessarily, for example, seek to use the taxonomy to assess a learner’s ability at throwing the javelin or producing a piece of artwork.)
In-Lesson Assessment: Strategy 1 – Mid-Lesson Taxonomy Review
Plan mid-lesson review activities in which you take learners through two or three levels of the taxonomy.
This will allow you to ascertain the extent to which they have understood the lesson content, allowing you to adapt the remainder of the lesson so that it best fits with where learners are at.
For example, in a lesson looking at persuasive writing, we might introduce a mid-lesson review where we ask learners to recall the key points of the lesson so far, explain these to a partner and then provide two examples of how they can be applied.
This sees us assessing learners’ knowledge, comprehension and application.
The first three levels of the taxonomy.
The information we get back from this assessment will be vital in helping us to shape what we do next.
We might find, say, that the class as a whole are expert in applying one of the techniques we have looked at, but that when it comes to the other techniques the general level of mastery is rather more uneven.
We could then revisit these techniques in the second half of the lesson to resolve the problem, while letting those learners who have already demonstrated mastery move onto something more complex.
In-Lesson Assessment: Strategy 2 – Mastery-Based Plenaries
Plan plenary activities that give learners the chance to revisit and reinforce their learning, but which also give you the opportunity to elicit useful information concerning mastery.
For example, you might design a two-part plenary involving comprehension and synthesis.
This lets you elicit information about learners’ concrete and abstract understanding of the lesson content.
Information you can then use to inform your future planning, making it more effective.
(The concrete element comes from the comprehension, the abstract from the synthesis.)
With this strategy, the key is to pin together two different levels of the taxonomy, selecting ones that relate to your lesson and that will elicit the kind of information you want.
In-Lesson Assessment: Strategy 3 – Mini-Assessment Gateways
Devise mini-assessments that act as gateways between activities.
This gives you the opportunity to assess mastery before you attempt to move the whole class from one task to the next.
In a lesson, for example, you might ask a series of comprehension questions after the first activity, pose an analytical hinge question based on a common misconception after the second activity, and then ask for an evaluative summary in between the third activity and the plenary.
The benefit of this approach is twofold.
First, you elicit information you can use to adapt and modify the lesson.
Second, depending on the information you elicit, you can make the decision to move on to the next activity, to slow things down and revisit what you have just done, or, you can split the class in half, moving one group onto the next activity while you spend time working with the other group to get them up to speed.
Question-Led Assessment: Strategy 1 – Consider the Information You Want to Elicit
When designing assessments around questions, it is important to consider what information they are likely to elicit.
Closed questions generally provide less information than open ones.
However, this may be more specific and directed.
Plus, closed questions are the easiest way to check recall and, often, basic understanding.
Higher-order questions, based on the top levels of Bloom’s taxonomy, may require decoding.
If you do not show learners how to do this, they may struggle to answer them. Or may answer them in a way that is different to what you want.
It’s helpful to teach learners how to decode the command words connected to analysis, synthesis and evaluation.
This gives them the tools they can use to unlock more challenging questions.
One option is to display a command word with two boxes beneath it.
One box demonstrates an incorrect interpretation of the word.
The other box demonstrates a correct interpretation.
The purpose here is to fix meaning in learner’s minds by illustrating a contrast.
Between what is wrong (a non-example) and what is right (an example).
I’m always a fan of this approach – contrasting examples and non-examples – as it plays into our inherent ability for pattern recognition, aiding long-term recall.
Question-Led Assessment: Strategy 2 – Bloom’s-Based Bullet Points
Written questions can be supported by a series of bullet points indicating the areas at which learners should look in their responses.
Such an approach can be seen in a wide variety of exam papers.
The aim is to provide a breakdown of a complex question, scaffolding learner responses by intimating the structure that should be followed when answering.
When it comes to the taxonomy, we might set a complex question in which we are testing learners’ mastery at different levels and then break this down into three bullet points, the first of which looks at comprehension, the second at analysis and the third at evaluation.
Some argue that this approach makes life too easy for learners, removing the need to unpack questions.
Others suggest that providing a scaffold means learners have a better chance to demonstrate what they know and understand, and that doing this removes potentially unhelpful ambiguity over what is expected.
It is for you to decide if you want to use this approach or not.
Question-Led Assessment: Strategy 3 – Learners Choose What to Answer
Each level of the taxonomy can be subdivided into different cognitive processes which, while retaining a core similarity, are subtly different.
(For illustration, see the full Bloom’s Taxonomy word list at the end of this blog.)
Evaluation, for example, covers assess, judge, rank and critique, four processes that all rest on a similar mental operation, but which are sufficiently different to require different words to signify them.
An interesting consequence of this is that, when planning question-led assessments, you might want to provide learners with a selection of questions connected to a level of the taxonomy, from which they then select the one (or two, or three) that they would like to answer.
This is like the situation we find in some exam-board assessments, where learners must select from a set of similar questions.
The advantage of this approach is that it presents learners with different opportunities through which to demonstrate their mastery.
It also generates variety in the work you get back from learners.
So, for example, instead of setting an ‘evaluate’ question that everyone in the class must answer, you could try setting a selection of four questions – an evaluate one, a defend one, a critique one, and a rank one – that learners choose between.
You will still be assessing everyone’s skills of evaluation, just in a slightly different way.
Task-Based Assessment and Bloom’s Taxonomy
In task-based assessment we take as our starting point the task we want learners to complete.
This could be the completion of a project, the answering of a set of questions, or the demonstration of understanding through a speech.
Tasks overlap with questions and products – in many cases, the assessments we develop will encompass all three.
However, thinking about each separately affords a little clarity that might otherwise be hard to gain.
To that end, here are three strategies to consider when developing task-based assessments.
Task-Based Assessment: Strategy 1 – Contrast Potential Responses
Consider the extent to which your task allows learners the opportunity to show the various degrees of mastery they have gained over the content.
This takes us back to the question of whether an assessment has enough scope to sufficiently discriminate between different ability levels.
To ensure the tasks you set are broad enough in range, sit down and think about the competing responses a more-able and less-able learner would be able to create given the demands of the task.
With these two thoughts in mind, you can enact a comparison and come to a judgement about whether there is sufficient scope.
If there is, the different responses will be far enough removed from one another to demonstrate very different degrees of mastery.
If there isn’t, the responses will be too close for the assessment to be as useful as you would like, and you’ll need to make some changes.
Task-Based Assessment: Strategy 2 – Bloom’s-Based Task Success Criteria
A common means through which to structure task-based assessment is to state the overall task and to then provide a series of success criteria that help learners understand the different things they need to do to be successful.
You can tie these success criteria to different levels of the taxonomy.
This means that, as learners achieve each one, so too will they be moving up the taxonomy, demonstrating their relative mastery at each stage.
This will help you to elicit a wide range of information about learner knowledge and understanding.
It will also ensure your assessment is differentiated.
This is because different learners will be challenged by different success criteria.
So, for example, one learner might race through the first four before finding themselves having to work hard to achieve number five, while another learner might spend the whole task labouring to achieve numbers one, two and three (and, therefore, experiencing challenge across those levels).
Task-Based Assessment: Strategy 3 – Use Your Bloom’s Word List
The simplest way to use the taxonomy to construct task-based assessments is to refer to the word list below.
Scan the list, select a word that fits with the kind of assessment you want to create, and then form a task accordingly.
For example, we might turn to the analysis list to construct an assessment at the end of a unit of work on the Romans:
- Analyse, Appraise, Categorize, Compare, Contrast, Differentiate, Discriminate, Distinguish, Examine, Experiment, Explore, Investigate, Question, Research, Test.
Scanning the list, we decide that compare and contrast represent the key areas of analysis about which we want to know.
From here we start to think about a task and perhaps settle on:
- Create a guide comparing and contrasting Roman life to the lives we lead today.
We see the inevitable intertwining of product and task here, as mentioned earlier.
Nonetheless, in constructing this assessment, the task has been the focal point.
(The next step would be to define success criteria and provide learners with guidance covering the different areas of Roman life about which we want them to write.)
Full Bloom’s Taxonomy Word List
Knowledge Keywords:
- Arrange, Define, Describe, List, Match, Memorise, Name, Order, Quote, Recognise, Recall, Repeat, Reproduce, Restate, Retain.
Comprehension Keywords:
- Characterise, Classify, Complete, Describe, Discuss, Establish, Explain, Express, Identify, Illustrate, Recognise, Report, Relate, Sort, Translate.
Application Keywords:
- Apply, Calculate, Choose, Demonstrate, Dramatize, Employ, Implement, Interpret, Operate, Perform, Practise, Role-Play, Sketch, Solve, Suggest.
Analysis Keywords:
- Analyse, Appraise, Categorize, Compare, Contrast, Differentiate, Discriminate, Distinguish, Examine, Experiment, Explore, Investigate, Question, Research, Test.
Synthesis Keywords:
- Combine, Compose, Construct, Create, Devise, Design, Formulate, Hypothesise, Integrate, Merge, Organise, Plan, Propose, Synthesise, Unite.
Evaluation Keywords:
- Appraise, Argue, Assess, Critique, Defend, Evaluate, Examine, Grade, Inspect, Judge, Justify, Rank, Rate, Review, Value.
