Learning isn’t linear…
May 23, 2012
Flipping is the new black. Flipped classrooms. Flipped learning.
And now flipped Bloom’s Taxonomy.
Shelley Wright has written a a brilliant post about flipping Bloom’s Taxonomy, complete with wonderful examples of the process in action in Science, Media Studies and English classes.
To me, it’s not so much about flipping as about rethinking altogether. Learning isn’t linear. It’s not a step by step, one size fits all process. It doesn’t go in a sequence from remembering to understanding to analysing… and finish with creating. And it doesn’t necessarily have to go in the reverse order either. It depends on the learner and on the situation. I think it should look more like this…
21 Comments
leave one →
I never understood the Bloom’s Taxonomy pyramid as linear. I always thought of it more as reflecting the difficulty of the type of question and the amount of information needed to base that level of question on. To me, there is a danger at jumping in at the evaluation stage. I have seen a lot of GT students who blithely evaluate something about which they know nothing and then think that they have done all the work that that question requires. “Which is more important X or Y?” “Y for sure, because it is cool!” Said and done.
Hi Laura,
I sometimes deliberately oversimplify to make a point or to provoke thinking…
Edna
Mission accomplished! You oversimplified!
That is why we have teacher/facilitators to help guide the process.
I could not agree more! When Bloom and Co. originally started talking about levels of thinking, I don’t believe it was their intention for it to become a linear, step-by-step process, but that is how it was interpreted. I tend to think of Bloom’s taxonomy as a big circle with lines running between each of the “levels” of thinking. As we work, we weave through all the levels of thinking.
Thanks Leslie. I like to think of all learning models in that way. At my school we like Kathy Short’s inquiry model. It’s cyclical with arrows moving back and forth… And I still think it needs arrows drawn across the middle too!
You are right, Edna. We have to get away from the assembly line and into a stewpot.
Stewpot! Let me think about that metaphor a bit …
Maybe I’ll ask some students ‘How is learning like a stewpot’?
Yep; I like that one. The one I like better (why I named this blog what I did, and the working title for a new book), is a pond. If you go back to my post entitled “Welcome to the Cognitasphere” I think you will see from where those images arise. But for little kids, yep, stewpot is a good one! Thanks for the comment!
I think learning can have both linear and non-linear aspects. As you said, it depends on the learner.
The constant question: Have all the students learned the objective? If not, what else can I try? If learning were linear, all my students would learn all lessons the first time
.
Reblogged this on Alxbal and commented:
Now. That makes a lot of sense…
Edna,
Once again we are thinking along the same lines…can you believe it that y teacher trainees this semester are in process right now of applying the taxonomy in an activity? I am happy to be able to share your blogpost again!
Thanks, Ellen
YES! YES! YES!
nor is it one-way or two-way. it’s multi-way.
love this.
oh, and my newest blog post is along similar lines.
Not Much – what do you say when a student says that he/she has learned nothing or not much?
Reblogged this on Tommy found a real book. and commented:
Great post and visual Of the nOn-linearity of learning.
Reblogged this on STEM – ROBOTICS EDUCATION.