Home
Vivian Paganuzzi's Library tagged → View Popular
Bloom's Taxonomy: An Overview - TeacherVision.com
-
- Knowledge: remembering or
recalling appropriate, previously learned information to draw out factual
(usually right or wrong) answers. Use words and phrases such as: how many,
when, where,
list, define, tell, describe, identify, etc., to draw out
factual answers, testing students' recall and recognition.
- Comprehension: grasping
or understanding the meaning of informational materials. Use words such as:
describe, explain, estimate, predict, identify, differentiate, etc., to encourage students to translate, interpret, and extrapolate. - Application: applying previously learned information (or knowledge) to new
and unfamiliar situations. Use words such as: demonstrate, apply, illustrate, show,
solve, examine, classify, experiment, etc.,
to encourage students to apply knowledge to situations that are new
and unfamiliar.
- Analysis: breaking down
information into parts, or examining (and trying to understand the
organizational structure of) information. Use words and phrases such as: what are
the differences, analyze, explain, compare, separate, classify, arrange, etc.,
to encourage students to break information down into parts.
- Synthesis: applying
prior knowledge and skills to combine elements into a pattern not clearly
there before. Use words and phrases such as: combine, rearrange, substitute,
create, design, invent, what if, etc., to encourage students to combine elements
into a pattern that's new.
- Evaluation: judging or
deciding according to some set of criteria, without real right or wrong
answers. Use words such as: assess, decide, measure, select, explain,
conclude, compare, summarize, etc., to encourage students to make
judgements according to a set of criteria.
According to Bloom’s Taxonomy, human thinking skills can be broken down into the following six categories.
- Knowledge: remembering or
CriticalThinking.org - Critical Thinking in Every Domain of Knowledge and Belief
Here you see before you the diagram which we used as the central organizer for the previous year's conference. In the center of the diagram we see the Elements of Thought, the Standards of Thought, and the Traits of Mind. So far I've only mentioned the Elements of Thought as structures we need to become conversant in. But, think for a moment of intellectual standards. Try this experiment. When you're with a group of students, ask them the following question:
When someone presents you with a belief -- "I believe this is true," or an argument to persuade you to accept a viewpoint or a premise or a belief — when somebody presents you with such a case, how do you know whether to accept it or not? What standards do you use to assess your thinking and the thinking of others?
Now I've tried that many many times with students, and sometimes with faculty. I've found that very few people can answer that question in an intelligible fashion. Most students will say, I don't know what you're talking about. What do you mean standards of assessment in thinking? I've never ever had anyone respond — whether student or faculty — with an answer like this: "I use the standards of clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, logic and fairness. I seek to be clearer. I seek to be accurate. I seek to be precise. I seek to stay focused on the issue. I assess my thinking for relevance. I try to deepen my thinking and notice when I'm being superficial. I try to broaden my thinking to make my thinking more comprehensive. I try to notice when other people's thinking is narrow and superficial rather than deep and broad. I check my thinking for how logical it is. Does it really make sense or am I contradicting myself/? Am I following through the implications of my thought in a consistent logical fashion? Am I focusing on the significant questions putting the insignificant questions, the peripheral questions, in the background? And, am I able to assess other people's thinking fair-mindedly even though they disagree with me ? C
-
What standards do you use to assess your thinking and the thinking of others?
-
accurate. I seek to be precis
- 2 more annotations...
Logical Fallacies .info
-
The ability to identify logical fallacies in the arguments of others, and to avoid them in one’s own arguments, is both valuable and increasingly rare. Fallacious reasoning keeps us from knowing the truth, and the inability to think critically makes us vulnerable to manipulation by those skilled in the art of rhetoric.
AskPhilosophers.org
-
Whatever "intuitions" are, however, they can only be the foundation of knowledge of any kind if one can show that they justify the beliefs they give rise to, and to do that, one has to say something about why intuitions are trustworthy
Guardian Unlimited | Comment is free | Quackery and superstition - available soon on the NHS
-
Everyone has their own private sphere of unreason, inhabiting the life of the imagination most of the day. No one is suggesting anyone else's private nonsense be banned - not religion, not reiki or Hopi ear candles
RichardDawkins.net - The Official Richard Dawkins Website
-
Faith is corrosive to the human mind. If someone genuinely believes that it is right to believe things without reason or evidence then they are open to every kind of dogma, whim, coercion, or dangerous infectious idea that's around. If someone is convinced that it is acceptable to base their beliefs on what is written in an ancient book, or what some teacher tells them they must believe, then they will have no true freedom of thought; they will be trapped by their faith into inconsistency and untruths because they are unable to throw out false ideas when evidence against them comes along.
Selected Tags
Related Tags
Sponsored Links
Top Contributors
Groups interested in critical...
-
Critical Thinking prompts
A list of websites that hav...
Items: 12 | Visits: 1
Created by: zack hayden
Highlighter, Sticky notes, Tagging, Groups and Network: integrated suite dramatically boosting research productivity. Learn more »
Join Diigo