Bloom’s revised taxonomy changed the original 1956 framework by updating level names to verbs, reordering the top layers, and adding a second dimension to knowledge types. Revisions clarify content for students Do Cognition and how these behaviors interact with factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge.
How Bloom’s Taxonomy Changed
- Noun to verb: Redefined as levels of cognitive behavior: remember, understand, apply, analyze, evaluate, create.
- Top level reordering: Creation sits above assessment to reflect generative thinking.
- Two dimensions: pair cognitive process and knowledge dimension (facts, concepts, procedures, metacognition).
- Clearer alignment: Objectives, guidance, and assessments corresponding to the taxonomy.
- Modern language: Understanding becomes understanding; knowledge becomes memory.
- Planning impact: Encourage task verbs and evidence of learning rather than category labels.
Original level name and modified level name
| Original version (1956) | Revision (2001) |
|---|---|
| Knowledge | remember |
| understand | understand |
| application | Apply |
| analyze | analyze |
| synthesis | create |
| Evaluate | evaluate |
What indescribable changes have taken place
This revision introduces Classification table: A grid spanning six cognitive processes and four knowledge types. This helps teachers specify outcomes and assessments more accurately, e.g. Use conceptual knowledge to analyze x or Use procedural knowledge application y.
- Knowledge dimension: Factual, conceptual, procedural, metacognitive.
- Process-knowledge pairing: Clarifying task design and evidence quality.
- Assess the impact: Verb choice indicates the intended focus of thinking and scoring.
Why to modify
From 1995 to 2000, a team led by Lorin Anderson and David Krathwohl updated Bloom’s taxonomy to reflect contemporary cognitive science and classroom assessment practices. The goal is to respect the original work while making it more suitable for planning, instruction, and evaluation.
References: David R. Krathwohl (2002). Revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. theory into practice41(4), 212-218.
