Bloom’s Taxonomy

Introduction to Bloom’s Taxonomy

Bloom’s taxonomy is a guide about the goals to be achieved in the classroom by the teachers. It accomplishes this by creating a multi-tiered model of classifying thinking and knowledge acquisition.  It was created by Dr. Benjamin Bloom, the taxonomy’s namesake, in conjunction with other psychologists.

Bloom’s classifies learning from lower order to higher order and each category of learning builds upon the other to further clarify this concept.  It is a useful standard when crafting learning outcomes. Bloom’s taxonomy hierarchically maps verbs according to the complexity of skill required by the action described. Use Bloom’s taxonomy to clearly align the required performance to the appropriate cognitive level.  Paying attention to learning objectives can help focus your attention on the most critical aspects of a learning experience.

If you prefer an overview on this topic in video format, please watch the video below:

Origins of the Learning Theory

Bloom’s taxonomy was created in 1956 (Bloom, 1956) under the leadership of educational psychologist Dr Benjamin Bloom in order to promote higher forms of thinking in education such as analyzing and evaluating rather than just remembering facts or rote learning.  Throughout the years, Bloom’s taxonomy has remained relatively unchanged, though in 2001, the names of the levels were revised by David Kathwohl and Lorin Anderson (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001).  While the hierarchy is similar to the original form, now each level is identified by a verb, indicating what the learner can do at that particular stage in their learning.

When this was originally created in 1956, the world was in the midst of the post World War II educational reform and a Cold War with the USSR.  At this time, cognitivism was being developed and the two topics are heavily intertwined.  Indeed, the most widely used theories of cognitivism in education are based on Bloom’s taxonomies of learning objectives, which are related to the development of different kinds of learning skills, or ways of learning.  These tools and theories were developed with the intent of improving US education both in the post World War II effort and to maintain an edge over the USSR in the Cold War.  While this originated in the mid-1950s and was updated in 2001, this taxonomy remains useful even today.

Fundamental Tenets of the Theory

With this historical background, we can now examine the core structure and principles of Bloom’s Taxonomy and how it applies to modern education. Bloom’s taxonomy is a useful standard when crafting learning outcomes. Bloom’s taxonomy hierarchically maps verbs according to the complexity of skill required by the action described.  This hierarchy of learning means that learners need to progress through each of the levels, from remembering through to evaluating/creating.  For example, some verbs such as define or identify rank as lower-order competencies, whereas verbs like analyze or interpret are considered higher-order competencies.

The concept is that a learner will not be able to perform the verb of one level until they are capable of performing the verb of the level below it.  At the bottom is remembering which is the most fundamental learning objective is to remember a fact. Moving up the hierarchy, understanding, represents an increase in understanding of something, yet it is also dependent on the fact that a learner must remember something before understanding it.  With this hierarchy in mind, it works up from understanding to applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating.

See figure 1 below to visualize Bloom’s taxonomy and to gain greater insights on each level of the hierarchy.

Image description:

The image depicts Bloom’s Taxonomy in a pyramid shape divided into six colored sections representing different levels of cognitive processes. From bottom to top, the sections are labeled with a level: Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Synthesis, and Evaluation. These represent increasing levels of complexity in learning processes.

Bloom’s taxonomy is based on the theory of cognitivism though it has some traits of behaviorism and constructivism.  It emphasizes mental processes, such as memory, comprehension, and problem solving, showing its deep cognitivist roots.  Yet the higher echelons of the taxonomy, such as analysis, evaluation, and creation show clear ties with constructivism.  Finally, as behaviorism is rooted in observable behavior, the bottom-most level of knowledge is most often measured with retention tests, a clearly behaviorist measurement of learning.

Strengths and Limitations of Bloom’s Taxonomy

Bloom’s taxonomy’s greatest strength is that it clearly and succinctly identifies learning objectives.  This representation both defines and instructs in a single step, a useful tool for both theorists and instructional designers.  As instructional designers create curriculum, they are able to more effectively gauge their students current level and decide on appropriate learning objectives for that current level in addition to the time and resources the learners will have in the instruction to move up in the hierarchy.  Additionally, by using a common framework, designers and instructors have a shared language that will allow for easier communication and more quantifiable measurements.

Like any model, Bloom’s taxonomy has its weaknesses and limitations.  Primarily, it is only a representation of what truly occurs inside the mind of learners.  It simplifies and assumes and, while a powerful tool, cannot fully represent what actually occurs in the brain.  A few particular limitations are as follows:

• Due to its simplicity, it is easy for instructional designers to ignore exceptions and the nuances necessary to understand the learning process.
• Bloom’s taxonomy is not as relevant for learning situations that only require rote memorization as, in those cases, it does not move past the bottom tier of the taxonomy.
• It is also less useful for young children that have less structured learning opportunities or for learning creative arts or neurodivergent learners of all ages.
• Bloom’s taxonomy fails to properly describe the learning process for hands-on or athletic skills where there is a high-degree of muscle memory that needs to be developed.

Bloom’s taxonomy is useful in almost all settings, whether it is in-person or online, with the most obvious exceptions outlined above.  Outside these exceptions, Bloom’s taxonomy is useful in most K-12 settings, undergraduate, graduate, and professional settings to ascertain the level of each student or to create targeted learning objectives with commensurate examinations.

Instructional Design Implications

Despite its limitations, Bloom’s Taxonomy remains a powerful tool in instructional design.  Bloom’s taxonomy is very practical and is most effectively utilized when establishing and reviewing the learning objectives of the curriculum.  It should also be used when developing exams or other evaluative measures.  Finally, it can be used in categorizing the current understanding level of the learner for placement purposes.  It is useful to see a practical example of the application of Bloom’s taxonomy.  Below, we provide two distinct examples of how Bloom’s taxonomy can be used to create instruction and to identify learner progress.

If the instructional designer sequences the objectives in line with Bloom’s Taxonomy, they ensure that learners not only gain foundational knowledge but also develop the capacity to creatively solve new problems in the cybersecurity domain. This strategic approach maximizes skill transfer and supports deeper learning outcomes.

By incorporating Bloom’s Taxonomy in various fields, from cybersecurity to literature, we see its adaptability. Now we can summarize the key takeaways of this framework.

Conclusion

Bloom’s taxonomy is a straightforward way to view the learning process while also providing actionable steps to improve and tailor-make content for a specific student or group of students.  This easy-to-understand and implement theory can be used by instructional designers when considering learning objectives.  It also can be  a beneficial part of the review process when developing assessments.

Bloom’s taxonomy can become an intuitive and integral part of any instructional designer’s thought processes but new technology, as simple as matching algorithms or as complicated as the latest AI, can be used to review work.  As part of this review, AI can be tasked to review the learning objectives and the assessment criteria to make certain they are in alignment.

Check your knowledge of Bloom’s taxonomy below:

References

Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Allyn & Bacon.

Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. David McKay.

Sethi, M. (n.d.). Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. OER Commons. Retrieved February 20, 2025, from https://oercommons.org/courseware/lesson/72230/overview

Additional Resources

Queen, E. (2014). How to write learning objectives using Bloom’s taxonomy [Video]. YouTube. Retrieved February 20, 2025, from https://youtu.be/4DgkLV9h69Q