The Ergonomics of Learning: A Proposed Update to Bloom's Taxonomy
Saved in:
| Title: | The Ergonomics of Learning: A Proposed Update to Bloom's Taxonomy |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Andrew Curtis (ORCID |
| Source: | Intersection: A Journal at the Intersection of Assessment and Learning. 2025 6(3):95-175. |
| Availability: | Association for the Assessment of Learning in Higher Education. 6844 Bardstown Road #910, Louisville, KY 40291. Tel: 502-406-8012; e-mail: info@aalhe.org; Web site: https://www.aalhe.org/intersection |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 82 |
| Publication Date: | 2025 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Education Level: | Higher Education Postsecondary Education |
| Descriptors: | Taxonomy, Learning Theories, Higher Education, Instructional Design, Learning Objectives, Curriculum Design, Alignment (Education), Evaluation Methods, Cognitive Processes, Cognitive Psychology |
| ISSN: | 2688-7207 |
| Abstract: | Benjamin Bloom's "Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals" (1956) has been established as the most widely known curriculum design and assessment tool in American education. However, despite its notoriety, this tool, like any other tool, is susceptible to obsolescence. The primary topic of this article is the further revision of Bloom's Taxonomy to realign the framework to modern models of education and psychology. The secondary topic, which will be explored through the context of the primary topic, is the development, maintenance, and retirement of theoretical perspectives. While this article attempts to present a source-supported argument for revising Bloom's Taxonomy to fit with the modern pedagogical, psychological, and philosophical perspectives of learning, it also seeks to examine the theorization process itself. Is renovating an old theory to fit new evidence more beneficial to research than wholesale theory replacement? Is wholesale theory replacement optimal, or do the specifics of the situation affect the restoration vs. replacement argument? |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2026 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1494227 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | Benjamin Bloom's "Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals" (1956) has been established as the most widely known curriculum design and assessment tool in American education. However, despite its notoriety, this tool, like any other tool, is susceptible to obsolescence. The primary topic of this article is the further revision of Bloom's Taxonomy to realign the framework to modern models of education and psychology. The secondary topic, which will be explored through the context of the primary topic, is the development, maintenance, and retirement of theoretical perspectives. While this article attempts to present a source-supported argument for revising Bloom's Taxonomy to fit with the modern pedagogical, psychological, and philosophical perspectives of learning, it also seeks to examine the theorization process itself. Is renovating an old theory to fit new evidence more beneficial to research than wholesale theory replacement? Is wholesale theory replacement optimal, or do the specifics of the situation affect the restoration vs. replacement argument? |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2688-7207 |
