mary pat wenderoth department of biology university of washington

Mary Pat WenderothDepartment of Biology

University of Washington

Learning Taxonomies

What are they?

Why use them?

Scholars 2010

Research Research DesignDesign

OLD Learning designOLD Learning designYour students

Your students

Student learningStudent learning

NEW Learning designNEW Learning designYour students

Your students


Post- Biology Scholars 2010Your research question



Your students



Your students


SAME ???

Research Design

Control for

◦ 1. Students---are they “the same” academically? Compare

entering GPA, SAT other academic indicators

Pre-test



Your students



Your students


Design or instructor ?

Research DesignControl 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



Your students



Your students


How to assess?

Research DesignControl 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

2- Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning Domainscognitive (knowledge)affective (attitudes)psychomotor (skills)

Bloom & Krathwohl 1956

1- SOLO, Structure of Observed Learning OutcomesBiggs & Collis 1982

TheThe SOLO model consists of 5 levels of SOLO model consists of 5 levels of understandingunderstanding

• 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

To answer the question students need the knowledge or use of only one piece of given information, fact, or idea, that they can get directly from the problem.

Unistructural questionsUnistructural questions

Quality QuestioningUsing the SOLO Taxonomy

solo-taxonomy-1204838403126960-5.ppt

student Response

Facts

Students need to know or use more than one piece of given information, fact, or idea, to answer the question, but do not integrate the ideas.

This is fundamentally an unsorted, unorganised list.

Multistructural questionsMultistructural questions

Response

Facts

student

Relational questionsRelational questions

These questions require students to integrate more than one piece of given knowledge, information, fact, or idea. At least two separate ideas are required that, working together, will solve the problem.

Response

Facts

student

Extended abstract questionsExtended abstract questions

These questions involve a higher level of abstraction. The items require the 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.

Response

Facts

student

A C

D E Prestructural = D

Unistructural = C

Multistructural = B

Relational = E

Extended abstract = A

B

A

CD

E Prestructural = D

Unistructural = C

Multistructural = B

Relational = E

Extended abstract = F

B

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

Understand Comprehension-- define

Recall Knowledge-- facts


Revised Bloom’s Revised Bloom’s 20012001Recall

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


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 wordsBloom 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.

Bloom wordsBloom words

Crowe, Dirks & Wenderoth 2008. CBE- Life Science Education 7:368.

Bloom’s level GRAPHING

Knowledge Identify the parts of graphs and recognize different types of graphs (e.g., identify the X axis, identify a histogram)

Comprehension Describe the data represented in a simple graph

Application Draw a graph based on a given set of data; predict outcomes based on data presented in graph

Analysis Read and interpret a complex graph having multiple variables or treatments and explain biological implications of data

Synthesis Create a graphical representation of a given biological process or concept

Evaluation Assess the relative effectiveness of different graphical representations of the same data or biological concept


Why Bloom a test?

Bloom’s distribution of exam questions

Align your teaching and testing

3. Assessment• use the same test• use isomorphic questions• use the same Bloom or SOLO level of questions


Your students



Your students


Bloom Index = Bloom total/exam total

= 300 / 100 = 3

300 = Bloom Total Exam Total = 100

1. Bloom Index of exam

2. Level of difficulty of questioneasymoderatehard

How to Bloom a test?

Ask a colleagueBuy them coffeeHave them “Bloom” your

exam

Physiology: Cardiac Output (MP Wenderoth)

Cell Biology: Nuclear transport (Alison Crowe)

Immunology: Virology (Clarissa Dirks)


Physiology: cardiac outputKnowledge-Recall

Which two variables determine cardiac output for an animal?

Comprehension-UnderstandingDefine cardiac output and why it is significant.

ApplicationLance 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.


EvaluationIf an enlarged heart was observed on a CT scan of patient, how would you determine if this enlarged heart was pathological or not?

SynthesisCreate a summary sheet that is a pictorial depiction/ flow diagram of how changes in cardiac output influence mean arterial blood pressure.



KnowledgeKnowledge

ComprehensionComprehension

ApplicationApplication

AnalysisAnalysis SynthesisSynthesis EvaluationEvaluation

Higher Order

Lower Order

SOLO Bloom

• Prestructural Knowledge/Recall

• Unistructural Comprehension

• Multistructural Application

• Relational Analysis

• Extended abstract Synthesis/Evaluation

Lower Order

Higher Order

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 forty-year 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- Bloom’sReferences- Bloom’s

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/

References- SOLOReferences- SOLO

National Research Council 1999

1. Address student’s preconceptions.

Three major findings:

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

mary pat wenderoth department of biology university of washington

Documents

level students

question students

unistructural students

piece of given information

various pieces of information

piece of given knowledge

transfer learning

eextended abstract