Abstract
This article examines the role of Bloom’s Taxonomy in modern teaching and learning. It highlights its historical development, structure, and applications in lesson planning, instruction, and assessment. The paper explores how Bloom’s framework encourages teachers to design objectives that foster critical thinking, creativity, and problem-solving. It also discusses the relevance of the taxonomy in the 21st-century classroom and its contribution to student-centered pedagogy.
References
.Adams, N. E. (2015). Bloom’s taxonomy of cognitive learning objectives. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 103(3), 152–153. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.103.3.010
2.Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
3.Armstrong, P. (2010). Bloom’s taxonomy. Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching. Retrieved from https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/blooms-taxonomy
4.Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. Longmans, Green and Co.
5.Brookhart, S. M. (2010). How to assess higher-order thinking skills in your classroom. ASCD.
6.Church, A. (2017). Bloom’s digital taxonomy: Understanding the levels of learning in the digital age. Retrieved from https://teachthought.com
7.Forehand, M. (2010). Bloom’s taxonomy. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology (pp. 41–47). University of Georgia.
8.Huitt, W. (2011). A systems approach to the study of human behavior. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta State University.
9.Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
10. Pohl, M. (2000). Learning to think, thinking to learn: Models and strategies to develop a classroom culture of thinking. Hawker Brownlow Education.
