Bloom's taxonomy for assessing language skills Content introduction main body

MAIN BODY
1.1. Creating the Bloom's Taxonomy Assessment
The first step in creating the assessment is to be clear on what the students should have learned from the lesson being taught. Then pick a singular topic and ask questions based on each of the levels. Here is an example using the prohibition era as the topic for an American History class.

1. 
   Knowledge Question: Define prohibition.
   
2. 
   Comprehension Question: Explain the relationship of each of the following to prohibition:
   
3. 
   18th Amendment
   
4. 
   21st Amendment
   
5. 
   Herbert Hoover
   
6. 
   Al Capone
   
7. 
   Woman's Christian Temperance Union
   
8. 
   Application Question: Could the methods that proponents of the temperance movement be used in a bid to create a Smoking Prohibition Amendment? Explain your answer.
   
9. 
   Analysis Question: Compare and contrast the motives of temperance leaders with those of doctors in the fight over prohibition.
   
10. 
    Synthesis Question: Create a poem or song that could have been used by temperance leaders to argue for the passage of the 18th Amendment.
    
11. 
    Evaluation Question: Evaluate prohibition in terms of its effects on the American economy.
    

Students have to answer six different questions, one from each level of Bloom's Taxonomy. This spiraling of knowledge shows a greater depth of understanding on the student's part.
When giving students an assessment like this, the more abstract questions should be awarded additional points. To fairly grade these questions, it is important that you create an effective rubric. Your rubric should allow students to earn partial points depending on how complete and accurate their questions are.
One great way to make it more interesting for students is to give them some choice, especially in the upper-level questions. Give them two or three choices for each level so that they can choose the question that they feel most confident in answering correctly.
Benjamin Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives plays a crucial role in developing assessments that measure higher and lower level cognitive skills. Since it is important to assess how well students master the information within the levels of the taxonomy, the present study first presents the higher and lower levels of Bloom's taxonomy and then seeks to investigate whether the exam questions of General English courses are based on both higher and lower order thinking levels. This study was carried out through qualitative methods of data collection. The findings of the study suggested that the analyzed exam papers lacked the higher level cognitive skills contained in Bloom's Taxonomy. Based on the findings, some assumptions have been made with the aim of suggesting how the exam papers which are being written or will be written should refer to Bloom's taxonomy.
The study aims to review the literature that analyses the relevance of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives in the teaching of creative and critical thinking among students in Malaysia, and identify missing aspects in Bloom's Taxonomy vis a vis the indigenous context, important to promote creative and critical thinking among students in Malaysia. Method: Multiple sources of information which documents the objectives of English Literature curriculum in Malaysia, outlines the nature of Bloom's Taxonomy, reports past research which addresses issues in the application of Bloom's Taxonomy, and reports research findings on the issues in teaching English Literature as a subject. Findings: The literature subject is an essential avenue for students' learning, especially in developing creative and critical thinking. The English syllabus with augmented taxonomy should be based on holistic learning outcomes which contain three set of abilities- Rationale Thinking, Purposeful Thinking, and Effective Relation with Contexts. Significance: The study would shed light on the effectiveness of teaching creative and critical thinking through English Literature. The findings may help curriculum developers and teachers to explore the missing aspects in the Bloom's Taxonomy vis a vis the indigenous context, hence lead to the development of informed way forward in designing effective pedagogical approach/es that nurture creative and critical thinking among students.²
This study aims at analyzing assessment questions included in an Arabic language textbook (Communication Skills) for eight grade in the Jordanian schools according to the levels of knowledge in Bloom's Taxonomy to reveal the percentages of distributing of these questions against this taxonomy. In order to achieve the purposes of this study, the researcher designed the instrument of analysis which he applied to the 520 questions included in the textbook for both first and second semesters. Data was identified, recorded and the results were compared to the standard percentages identified by using the means introduced by the specialists. The results of this study revealed that the textbook questions mostly focused on the lower levels of thinking. Results also showed a graphic disagreement between the percentages of the distribution of the textbook assessment questions and the standard percentages at five levels (Remembering, Understanding and Comprehension, Application, Analysis and Evaluation). In the light of these results, the research recommends that there should be a stronger focus on questions of higher levels of thinking in an Arabic Language textbook for grade eight particularly at the levels of application, analysis and evaluation. It also recommends a gradual increase of balanced questions in any future textbook production, and more content analysis studies should include Arabic language textbooks at all stages.
Assessment is an essential part of the teaching-learning process. Students’ learning can be measured by different procedures. Despite a significant increase in test procedures, numerous issues surrounding testing of comprehension remain unresolved. This paper investigates the relationship between the level of thinking processes in comprehension questions and the students` performance. The findings indicate that the level of questions designed according to Bloom’s Taxonomy influence the students’ performance in answering comprehension questions. The findings conclude that there’s a relationship between the level of thinking processes needed and the students’ ability to answer these questions correctly. This paper provides a common base for further discussionsont the undergraduates’ competence in English Language as well as the recommendations on the techniques that could be used to handle higher order level questions. Keywords: Level of thinking process; Reading Comprehension Questions; Performance; Bloom’s Taxonomy; Multiple choice questions (MCQs) L'évaluation est une partie essentielle du processus de l'enseignement-apprentissage. L'apprentissage des élèves peut être mesuré par des procédures différentes. Malgré un accroissement significatif dans les procédures de test, de nombreuses questions concernant les tests de compréhension restent non résolues. Cet article étudie la relation entre le niveau des processus de pensée dans les questions de compréhension et de la performance des étudiants. Les résultats indiquent que le niveau de questions conçues selon la taxonomie de Bloom influence sur la performance des élèves dans leurs réponses aux questions de compréhension. Les résultats concluent qu'il y a une relation entre le niveau de processus de pensée nécessaire et la capacité des élèves à répondre à ces questions correctement. Ce document fournit une base commune pour des discussions plus approfondies sur la compétence de l'anglais des élèves de premier cycle, ainsi que les recommandations sur les techniques qui pourraient être utilisées pour traiter des questions d'un plus haut niveau.Mots-clés: niveau de processus de pensées; questions sur la compréhension écrite; performance; taxonomie de Bloom; questions de choix multiple (MCQs).
Substance use disorders (SUDs) are a public health problem affecting millions of Americans. Despite their prevalence, there are few health care resources allocated for SUDs treatment. Relatively few health care professionals are exposed to SUDs education in their respective programs, which may be one reason for this resource insufficiency. In hopes of rectifying this gap, the authors developed a SUDs course for health professions students combining classroom learning with practical application to patient care. Methods: The authors used Bloom's taxonomy of cognitive, affective, and psychomotor learning domains as an educational framework to create numerous opportunities for students to deepen their knowledge, assess their attitudes, and develop their motivational interviewing skills. The primary outcome of the study was a comparison of students' scores on the Substance Abuse Attitude Scale (SAAS) pre- and post-course completion. Secondary outcome was to compare students' self-assessment scores of their patient counseling with residents' assessments of them on the Liverpool Communication Skills Assessment Scale (LCSAS). Results: One hundred twelve students participated in the authors' SUDs course over a 9-month period. Ninety-five students completed both the pre- and post-course SAAS surveys. The total SAAS survey score and individual domain scores for nonmoralizing, treatment optimism, and treatment intervention demonstrated significant improvement post-course. Eighty-nine students completed a motivational interview with a patient. Eighty students had a LCSAS self-assessment paired with a residents' assessment³. Mean scores for individual items on the LCSAS for both groups' assessment were approximately 3.5, indicating that students' communication was assessed as “acceptable” to “good.” Conclusions: This study demonstrates that Bloom's taxonomy was a useful educational framework to ensure a systematic development of the authors' SUDs course. Through participation in our course, students touched each of the 3 domains in Bloom's taxonomy. The authors believe their course design may serve as a framework for future SUDs courses.Andrew J. Muzyk was project co-investigator and was involved in course design and instruction and in the planning, writing, and editing of the manuscript. Chris Tew, Allie Thomas-Fannin, Sanjai Dayal, Reina Maeda, and Nicole Schramm-Sapyta were involved in course design and instruction and in the planning, writing, and editing of the manuscript. Kathryn Andolsek was involved in course design and in the planning, writing, and editing of the manuscript. Shelley Holmer was project co-investigator and was involved in course design and instruction and in the planning, writing, and editing of the manuscript.