3 ms·
I'm glad to see they're going with Bloom v2. For context, in Bloom v1, when he was looking for a word to represent the second layer from the bottom, most peopl
by red_admiral 4y ago
I'm glad to see they're going with Bloom v2.
For context, in Bloom v1, when he was looking for a word to represent the second layer from the bottom, most people in the working group said "understand", but one person (afaik) said "no, when I say understand, I want them to truly understand, not just that". So we had years and years of education courses based on Bloom v1 teaching you that "Bloom is the thing where you're not allowed to use 'understand'" and whether you put that banned word in your course learning outcomes was the shibboleth for whether you were in the cultured education people's ingroup, or one of those philistines who might be able to get great teaching evaluations and their students report learning stuff, but they don't really understand capital-E Education (Theory).
(I've heard anecdotally that at one uni, everyone just did s/understand/comprehend/ for a while, as if a more fancy word had any influence on what's actually taught in the course.)
Then Bloom himself put "understand" back in there in v2. Some people got a lot of egg on their face.
- grendelt 4y agoI'm not sure that "Bloom himself" had much to do with v2. It was published two years after he passed away. Doesn't mean he wasn't somehow involved, but he wasn't listed as an author of the v2. I could be wrong though. Also schools weren't harping on the layer of the taxonomy named Understand - that's just not a good measurable verb to use in an objective. When choosing a verb, you ask yourself "How will you know they Understand? What will it look like?"
- red_admiral 4y agoYou're right, it seems to be Krathwohl who did most of v2. Some of the schools I used to work with, very much were harping on "understand" at the time when v2 came out.