Bloom?s Taxonomy

Bloom?s TaxonomyCommunicating Ideas (Mechanics)1. Structure and Organization refers to the development of the written response from the introduction through the conclusion. Identifying the main ideas and moving consistently from point to point throughout the responses contribute to good organization. Evaluators should attend to how ideas are linked from the beginning of the response to the end to create a thorough understanding for readers. 2. Writing Style refers to the choice of an appropriate professional tone and vocabulary for the audience of the written responses. 3. APA Format refers to formatting conventions for the citations and references within the written examination responses. All have adopted the APA 6 style as the preferred formatting convention for scholarly work, including the comprehensive examination. Learners may review material on APA Style and Formatting) for more information on the APA style guidelines. 4. Grammar, Usage and Mechanics refer to the conventions of English grammar and usage. Evaluators assess appropriate grammar, usage, and mechanics in the written responses.Bloom?s Taxonomy 3 and the Rubric Scoring GuideFor more information about Bloom?s Taxonomy, please visit the following Web sites: http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/bloom.html http://faculty.washington.edu/krumme/guides/bloom.html The terminology developed in Bloom?s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Cognitive Domain serves as the foundation for the written rubric scoring guide. Pages 5 and 6 of the written rubric display a definition of the Bloom?s Taxonomy categories. The application of Bloom?s Taxonomy to the work of the learner in the written comprehensive examination will result in a numerical score. A scale of 2 (unacceptable) through 10 (strong) for the Thinking categories and a scale of 1 (unacceptable) through 5 (strong) for the Communication categories create an objective, numerical evaluation. The numerical outcome of the scoring process results in a pass/no pass for the written comprehensive examination. (See Scoring Guide below for more information on scoring the written comprehensive examination.) Scoring Guide The Comprehensive Examination Evaluation Rubric is built upon a simple multi-point rating scale. The Thinking (content) part comprises 60 percent of the total score, while the Communication (mechanics) part makes up 40 percent of the total score. The categories in the Focus on Thinking section weigh twice as much as those in the Focus on Communicating Ideas section. That is, each of the three Thinking categories is evaluated on a ten-point scale from Unacceptable (2 points) to Strong (10 points), with two-point increments between adjacent categories. Each of the four Communication categories, on the other hand, is evaluated on a five-point scale from Unacceptable (1 point) to Strong (5 points), with a one-point increment between adjacent categories. The maximum score on the written examination is 50 points (30 for Thinking and 20 for Communication), and the minimum is 10 points (6 for Thinking, and 4 for Communication). The cells of the rubric describe generally the characteristics of the written responses evaluated by the examiners. The score for a written comprehensive examination is obtained by adding the total scores assigned to the seven categories in the Thinking and Communication sections. A total of 30 points is considered a passing score. Learners may achieve the passing score by varying composite scoring profiles. Learners must score 30 points or higher on each of the three written responses from two out of the three readers to pass the examination.APPENDIX D: COMPREHENSIVE EXAMINATION RUBRIC This Comprehensive Examination Rubric for written documents has three sections: ? The first section describes how the five scores can be used for the three criteria to evaluate a learner?s focus on thinking. ? The second section describes how the five scores can be used for the four criteria to evaluate a learner?s focus on the mechanics for communicating ideas. These two sections have a column (in the far right) for readers to use as a worksheet to score each of the three questions and record their comments, or for the Comprehensive Examination Facilitator/Mentor to form a composite decision from the readers. ? The third section gives definitions for: research, evaluation, synthesis, analysis, application, comprehension, knowledge, content and focus; analysis and critical thinking; logic and flow; structure and organization; writing style; APA conventions; grammar/usage/mechanics; and plagiarism. Retain your worksheets for your records of documentation for the examination. Section 1. Evaluation of Learner?s Thinking Directions: For each comprehensive examination response, select 10, 8, 6, 4, or 2 from the five possible scores for each of the three criteria (content and focus, analysis and critical thinking, logic and flow). A score of 0 (zero) may be assigned to an answer if plagiarism is evidenced. Submit criterion scores via the online evaluation form to contribute to the learner?s overall pass/fail result. EVALUATION Focus on Thinking 10 (Strong) 8 (Proficient) 6 (Satisfactory) 4 (Weak) 2 (Unacceptable) Scores and CommentsContent & Focus Successfully answers the question. Thoroughly reviews the literature. Engages Bloom?s cognitive levels of evaluation, synthesis, analysis, application, comprehension, and knowledge plus research. Answers the question completely. Sufficiently reviews literature. Engages Bloom?s cognitive levels of synthesis, analysis, application, comprehension, and knowledge. Answers the question sufficiently. Sufficiently reviews literature. Engages Bloom?s cognitive levels of application, comprehension, and knowledge. Answers the question but digresses significantly, or insufficiently reviews literature. Engages Bloom?s cognitive levels of comprehension and knowledge. Fails to answer question and insufficiently reviews literature. Engages Bloom?s cognitive level of knowledge. Q1 Q2 Q3 Analysis and Critical Thinking Exhibits strong higher-order critical thinking and analysis Research Evaluation (See definitions at end of document.) Generally exhibits higher-order critical thinking and analysis. Synthesis Analysis (See definitions at end of document.) Exhibits limited higher-order critical thinking and analysis. Application (See definitions at end of document.) Exhibits mostly simplistic or reductive thinking and analysis. Comprehension (See definitions at end of document.) Exhibits only simplistic or reductive thinking and analysis. Knowledge (See definitions at end of document.) Q1 Q2 Q3. Logic and Flow Development is logical and clear: all points are addressed individually and linked appropriately. Development is logical and clear: most points are addressed individually and linked appropriately. Development is generally clear: points may be insufficiently linked. Development is flawed (unsound reasoning); points are insufficiently linked. Development is missing or otherwise unacceptable; points are not linked. Q1 Q2 Q3Section 2. Evaluation of Communicating Ideas Directions: For each comprehensive examination response, select 5, 4, 3, 2 or 1 from the five possible scores for each of the three criteria (structure and organization, writing style, APA format, grammar/usage/mechanics). Submit criterion scores via the online evaluation form to contribute to the learner?s overall pass/fail result. EVALUATION 5 (Strong) 4 (Proficient) 3 (Satisfactory) 2 (Weak) 1 (Unacceptable) Scores and Comments Focus on Communicating Ideas Structure and Organization Introduction and conclusion are always effective. Paragraphs are well-developed and have strong topic sentences. Introduction and conclusion are generally effective. Paragraphs are sufficiently developed; topic sentences are generally good. Introduction and/or conclusion are merely competent. Paragraphs are adequately developed; topic sentences are present but ineffective. Introduction or conclusion is underdeveloped. Paragraphs are underdeveloped; topic sentences are missing or unfocused. Introduction and conclusion are missing. Paragraphs are underdeveloped; topic sentences are missing. Q1 Q2 Q3 Writing Style Sentences are consistently clear, concise, and direct. Tone is appropriately formal. Sentences are generally clear, concise, and direct. Tone is appropriately formal. Sentences are occasionally wordy or ambiguous. Tone is too informal for academic writing. Sentences are generally wordy and/or ambiguous. Tone is too informal for academic writing. Sentences are unclear enough to impair meaning. Tone is inappropriate and/or inconsistent. Q1 Q2 Q3 APA Format Excellent APA format, including citations and references. No errors. Appropriate APA format, including citations and references. Infrequent errors. Adequate APA format, including citations and references. Frequency of errors detracts from strength of response. Inadequate APA format, including citations and references. Frequency of errors obstructs clarity. Unacceptable APA format, including citations and references. 6 or more errors per page. Q1 Q2 Q3(continued) Grammar/ Usage/ Mechanics Strong 0 errors per page Competent 1 error per page Adequate 2 errors per page Inadequate; clarity and meaning are impaired 3-5 errors per page Incompetent 6 or more errors per page Q1 Q2 Q3Section 3. Definitions These definitions are helpful when using the rubric for evaluating the comprehensive examination responses. Category Definition Examples Research Conducting observations, formulating hypotheses (if this, then that statements), gathering data to test hypotheses, interpreting results, developing new hypotheses to further explore ideas on a topic. Researchers describe what is, and is not, part of an observation. Level added to Bloom?s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Cognitive Domain, beyond the highest level (7th level and more advanced than Bloom?s 6 levels) Puts new arrangements into old or new context to observe results What if? If (this), then (that)? This is present? This is absent? Evaluation Explaining the value of previous analytical arrangements and subsequent synthesized arrangements Bloom?s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Cognitive Domain, highest level (6th level and most advanced of Bloom?s levels) Judges internal evidence Judges external criteria Weighs alternatives to justify a decision about the best choice Synthesis Combining analytical components in a new way Produces unique communication, an originalCOMPREHENSIVE EXAM MANUAL Bloom?s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Cognitive Domain, one lower level (5th level and more advanced than 4th level) plan, a set of operations, a set of abstract relations, etc. Analysis Breaking facts and concepts into their components Bloom?s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Cognitive Domain, one lower level (4th level and more advanced than 3rd level) Elements, relationships Organizational principles Dissecting ideas to see relationships, resulting in a clarification of ideas. The basis for the arrangement of parts helps to convey the effects of the ideas. Application Applying factual concepts to real life, academic specialization (scholarship), professional practice (present or anticipated), case studies from the disciplinary field of study, and/or examples from the professional literature (juried journals) Bloom?s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Cognitive Domain, one lower level (3rd level and more advanced than 2nd level) Using abstractions in specific situations Comprehension Putting facts from the literature into one?s own words Bloom?s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Cognitive Domain, one lower level (2nd level and more advanced than 1st level) Translation: This means; In other words? Interpretation: One interpretation is..; This suggests that? Extrapolation: From this we can see that? Knowledge Recognizing, recalling, and repeating the facts and related trends and practices of the topic, professional discipline, or field. Absence of original thinking about, or interpretation of, those facts. Bloom?s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Cognitive Domain, lowest level (1st and most basic level) Specifics, Terminology, Facts, Conventions Trends, Sequences, Classifications Categories, Criteria, Methodology Principles, Generalizations, Theories Content and Focus Answers the question(s) asked, focusing on the appropriate global and local content issues Analysis and Critical Thinking Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information ? gathered from or generated by observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication ? as a guide to belief and action. In its exemplary form, it is based on universal intellectual values that transcend subject matter divisions: clarity, accuracy, precision, consistency, relevance, sound evidence, good reasons, depth, breadth, and fairness. It entails the examination of those structures or elements of thought implicit in all reasoning: purpose, problem or question-at-issue, assumptions, concepts, empirical grounding; reasoning leading to conclusions, implications and consequences, objections from alternative viewpoints, and frame of reference. Critical thinking ? in being responsive to variable subject matter, issues and purposes ? is incorporated in a family of interwoven modes of thinking, among them: scientific thinking, mathematical thinking, historical thinking, anthropological thinking, economic thinking, moral thinking, and philosophical thinking. Critical thinking can be seen as having two components: 1. A set of skills to process and generate information and beliefs, and 2. The habit, based on intellectual commitment, of using those skills to guide behavior.It is thus to be contrasted with: 1. The mere acquisition and retention of information alone (because it involves a particular way in which information is sought and treated), 2. The mere possession of a set of skills (because it involves the continual use of them), and 3. The mere use of those skills (as an exercise) without acceptance of their results.Scriven, M., & Paul, R. (2007). Defining critical thinking. National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking. http://www.criticalthinking.org/aboutCT/define_critical_thinking.cfm . Retrieved December 27, 2010. Logic and Flow The argument is well-structured. Groundwork is laid; accurate conclusions are drawn from the evidence used; points are argued and linked appropriately. Logic and flow presents a good example of building a case by presenting evidence and arguing toward a conclusion that represents the evaluation level of Bloom?s taxonomy. Lack of logic and flow would be the example of what is missing from synthesis, analysis, application, comprehension, and knowledge levels. Structure and Organization The response is well-structured. All parts (introduction, sections, paragraphs, conclusions) do their jobs. Writing Style Strong, clear sentences, appropriate academic tone. APA Conventions Only those conventions required by the school. Grammar/Usage/ Mechanics Complete sentences, accurate spelling and punctuation, free from typographical errors, etc. Plagiarism Use of another person?s words without giving credit to the author. Using one?s own words from a previous (published or unpublished) source. Plagiarism can be either intentional or unintentional.:

Unlike most other websites we deliver what we promise;

  • Our Support Staff are online 24/7
  • Our Writers are available 24/7
  • Most Urgent order is delivered with 6 Hrs
  • 100% Original Assignment Plagiarism report can be sent to you upon request.

GET 15 % DISCOUNT TODAY use the discount code PAPER15 at the order form.

Type of paper Academic level Subject area
Number of pages Paper urgency Cost per page:
 Total: