Bloom's Revised Taxonomy & Webb's Depth of Knowledge for AIG

Bloom's Revised Taxonomy
Richard C. Overbaugh and Lynn Schultz
Old Dominion University

In 1956, Benjamin Bloom headed a group of educational psychologists who developed a classification of levels of intellectual behavior important in learning. During the 1990's a new group of cognitive psychologists, lead by Lorin Anderson (a former student of Bloom), updated the taxonomy to reflect relevance to 21st century work. The two graphics show the revised and original Taxonomy. Note the change from nouns to verbs associated with each level.

The Old Model
The New Model (Bloom's Revised Taxonomy)
Remembering: can the student recall or remember the information? define, duplicate, list, memorize, recall, repeat, reproduce state
Understanding: can the student explain ideas or concepts? classify, describe, discuss, explain, identify, locate, recognize, report, select, translate, paraphrase
Applying: can the student use the information in a new way? choose, demonstrate, dramatize, employ, illustrate, interpret, operate, schedule, sketch, solve, use, write.
Analyzing: can the student distinguish between the different parts? appraise, compare, contrast, criticize, differentiate, discriminate, distinguish, examine, experiment, question, test.
Evaluating: can the student justify a stand or decision? appraise, argue, defend, judge, select, support, value, evaluate
Creating: can the student create new product or point of view? assemble, construct, create, design, develop, formulate, write.

Some very useful sites:

Kathy Shrock's "Google Tools to Support Bloom's Revised Taxomy"

Bloom's Digital Taxonomy by Andrew Churches. This is a great site about how to use many different tools to enable or enhance the process of teaching students at the various levels of Bloom.

A Model of Learning Objectives. This site created by Rex Heer at ISU presents a "rolloverable" 3d representation of the new 4 X 6 Taxonomy. "Rollovers" pop up simple examples of Learning Objectives. The taxonomy is also explained and links provided for even more useful resources.


Webb's Depth of Knowledge Model
(from Webb's Depth of Knowledge Guide, 2009)
Webb (1997) developed a process and criteria for systematically analyzing the alignment between standards and standardized assessments. Since then the process and criteria have demonstrated application to reviewing curricular alignment as well. This body of work offers the Depth of Knowledge (DOK) model employed to analyze the cognitive expectation demanded by standards, curricular activities and assessment tasks (Webb, 1997). The model is based upon the assumption that curricular elements may all be categorized based upon the cognitive demands required to produce an acceptable response. Each grouping of tasks reflects a different level of cognitive expectation, or depth of knowledge, required to complete the task. It should be noted that the term knowledge, as it is used here, is intended to broadly encompass all forms of knowledge (i.e. procedural, declarative, etc.). The following table reflects an adapted version of the model.
Please visit my AIG Documents page for copies of Bloom's Revised Taxonomy and Webb's Depth of Knowledge Guide.
Using Bloom's Revised Taxonomy and Webb's Depth of Knowledge Model and Jacob's Ladder with Gifted Learners
We often use Jacob’s Ladder resources in AIG Resource Classes and the Nurturing Program.  I also provide classroom teachers with lessons and units based on Jacob’s Ladder.  This program was developed for gifted learners.  The first page has a table which explains the concepts and skills addressed.  Students working at the top of the ladder, as if climbing higher, are using their critical thinking and creating skills.


The expectation is that AIG students need to be using DOK Level 3 and 4 skills during classroom activities.  The Jacob’s Ladder program provides ways to ensure they are, assuming they complete the A3, B3, and C3 activities. 


The Jacob’s Ladder A2, B2, and C2, activities align with DOK Level 3 “Strategic Thinking” skills.  If you want to ensure you are providing AIG students with critical thinking assignments which not only meet our new Common Core Standards but also address Webb’s DOK Levels 3 and 4 and the RBT Create, model your assignments after this program. 


Please let me know if I can help you develop rigorous lessons and units to meet your gifted students' needs.                                                                    


~Kama Cannon