A Comparison of the Cognitive Taxonomy of

Look into Everything, Explore & Examine Enjoy Teaching Journal

ISSN: 2345 - 4962

www.lieee.org www.etj.lieee.org

Vol. 3, No. 3; September 2015, pp. 1- 8

A Comparison of the Cognitive Taxonomy of Educational Objectives to the Evolution of the Atomic Theory

Hiwa Weisi Assistant Professor of TEFL, Faculty of Humanities, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran Email: [email protected]

Gerannaz Zamani Ph.D Student of TEFL, Faculty of Humanities, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran Email: [email protected]

Abstract The Cognitive taxonomy of educational objectives incorporates six levels from the simple recognition or recall of information, as the lowest level, to the highest level which is classified as evaluation and creation. The aim of this paper is to make an analogy between the development of the cognitive processes from remembering to creating based on Anderson and Krathwohl's cognitive taxonomy of educational objectives and the history of the atomic theory, first proposed by John Dalton in 1803 followed by Thompson, Rutherford, Niels Bohr and finally the quantum theory which builds upon the previous atomic theories. This comparison gives a profound picture of the thinking processes including both lower and higher-order thinking processes learners deal with in education. The goal behind the cognitive taxonomy is to equip learners to be able to transfer the knowledge and skills they have learned to new contexts.

Key words: Cognitive taxonomy of educational objectives, Particle, Atomic theory, Quantum theory, Higher-order thinking

1. Introduction 1.1 Cognitive Taxonomy In 1956 Bloom developed three domains of learning which were classified into cognitive, affective and psychomotor domains. These three domains are often referred to as the KSA (Knowledge, Skills, and Attitude). This taxonomy of learning behaviors can be regarded as “the aims of the learning process.” i.e.,

after the learning process, the student should have acquired new skills, knowledge, and attitudes. The cognitive taxonomy developed by Bloom classifies thinking skills from the concrete to the abstract— Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Synthesis, and Evaluation. The taxonomy represents a cumulative hierarchy, that is, one level must be mastered before the next level can take place. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) revised Bloom's

A Comparison of the Cognitive Taxonomy of Educational Objectives to the Evolution of the Atomic Theory by Hiwa Weisi and Gerannaz Zamani 1


ISSN: 2345 - 4962

taxonomy to fit the more outcome-focused modern education objectives, introducing a two dimensional framework composed of a knowledge dimension (factual knowledge, conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge and metacognitive knowledge) and a cognitive process dimension (understand, comprehend, apply, analyze, evaluate and create). Anderson and Krathwohl changed the names from



nouns to active verbs, and reversed the order of the highest two levels. The cognitive taxonomy of educational objectives is a framework for classifying statements of what we expect or intend students to learn as a result of instruction (Krathwohl, 2002). The structure of the Cognitive Process Dimension in Anderson and Krathwohl's Taxonomy is illustrated in Figure 1:

1. Remember: Retrieving relevant knowledge from long-term memory. 1.1 Recognizing 1.2 Recalling 2. Understand: Determining the meaning of instructional messages. Including oral and graphic communication. 2.1 Interpreting 2.2 Exemplifying 2.3 Classifying 2.4 Summarizing 2.5 Inferring 2.6 Comparing 2.7 Explaining 3. Apply: Carrying out or using a procedure in a given situation. 3.1 Executing 3.2 Implementing 4. Analyze: Breaking material into constituent parts and detecting how the parts relate to one another and to an overall structure or purpose. 4.1 Differentiating 4.2 Organizing 4.3 Attributing 5. Evaluate: Making judgment based on criteria and standards. 5.1 Checking 5.2 Critiquing 6. Create: Putting elements together to form a novel, coherent whole or make an original product. 6.1 Generating 6.2 Planning

Figure 1. Structure of the Cognitive Process Dimension in Anderson and Krathwohl's Taxonomy Note. Retrieved from Anderson and Krathwohl (2001), p. 66-69. 1.2 Atomic theory Generally the history of the atomic theory is said to begin with John Dalton. Atomic theory deals with the idea that matter is made up of minute units called

atoms or particles. Dalton described how the atoms are combined to form new compounds. In 1897, Thomson discovered the Electrons, i.e. the negative charges that exist in an atom. In the 1911, a revolutionary view of the atom was introduced by Rutherford. He proposed



ISSN: 2345 - 4962

that an atom encompasses little, dense core of positive charges named protons in the nucleus of the atom, surrounded by a ring of negative charges. During the 1913s, the Danish physicist Niels Bohr, refined the atomic model by suggesting that electrons moved only in restricted, successive orbitals and that the external, higher-energy orbits specified the chemical features of different elements. The originator of quantum theory was Planck, whereas Heisenberg formulated one of the most well-known laws of quantum theory called the Uncertainty Principle which is also referred to as the principle of indeterminacy. This theory stated that electrons do not have fixed position in planetary-like orbits, but are in motion around the nucleus in the form of electron clouds. Since we can never observe an atom, we will never observe cognitive learning either. Does the development of the thinking skills of the cognitive taxonomy follow an identical pattern as the atomic theory? This paper attempts to build an assimilation between the structure of an atom and the thinking skills students go through from the lowest levels of thinking in Anderson and Krathwohl’s cognitive taxonomy (i.e. Understand, Comprehend and Apply) to the highest levels of thinking (i.e. Analyze, Evaluate and Create) in order to depict a clear picture of how students move from the state of retention of knowledge to the state of transfer of knowledge which results in meaningful learning. 2. Assimilation of the Cognitive Taxonomy to the History of the Atom from Dalton to Bohr and the Quantum Model Just like atoms which are the essential building blocks of ordinary matter, the cognitive thinking skills are the building blocks to achieve learning. Atoms are the smallest unit of a matter that cannot be seen even with a microscope. Similarly, human cognition and the thinking skills used in the process of learning are not visible either. 2.1 Dalton’s Atomic Theory (1808) and Retention



A matter is made of minute, indestructible particles named atoms. All atoms of a given matter have the same features and mass that distinguish them from the atoms of other matters (Dalton, 1803). The first cognitive process in Anderson and Krathwohl's taxonomy is Remembering which involves retrieving relevant Knowledge from long term memory and is associated with the cognitive processes of recognizing and recalling. According to Anderson and Krathwohl (2001), in this level meaningful learning does not take place rather rote learning happens and focuses on remembering fragments of knowledge often in isolation. Retention requires students remember what they have learned and mainly focuses on the past, i.e. it is the capacity to remember instructional material at some later time in much the same way as it was presented during instruction (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Dalton's theory was chiefly about the chemistry of atoms, how the atoms are combined to form new elements, rather than the internal, physical structure of atoms; He assumed that atoms are indivisible particles. As Dalton believed in an empty particle without any internal elements, remembering is simply memorizing basic elements of a discipline without having a deep understanding of those elements, therefore; there is no internalized knowledge. Such knowledge requires attentional control and is constrained by the limitations of the working memory.

Figure 2. Empty Particle However, remembering knowledge is indispensable for problem solving and meaningful learning as such knowledge is used in more intricate tasks. For instance, knowledge of the appropriate spelling of English words is vital if learners are to master writing an essay. Learners acquire complex tasks slowly by gradually building up more complex repertoires of skills and task out of simpler ones (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001).



ISSN: 2345 - 4962

2.2 Thomson’s Atomic Theory and Integration of Incoming/Prior knowledge Thomson's atomic theory which was developed in 1897 is known as the chocolate chip cookie model or the plum pudding model or the Christmas pudding model (Thompson, 1897). He entirely changed the concept of an atom by discovering the negative charge called electron. Till the end of the nineteenth century the notion of an atom was akin to a small solid ball. Thomson believed that an atom is composed of smaller items of protons and electrons. In the plum pudding model, the atom is mainly composed of the positive mass (Proton (P), the plum pudding). The smaller electrons (actually, raisins in the plum pudding (E)) are dispersed throughout the massive positive portion to sustain charge neutrality (Thompson, 1897). According to Anderson and Krathwohl (2001), the cognitive level of Understanding involves constructing meaning from instructional messages including oral, written, and graphic communication. Learners are able to comprehend when they create links between their incoming and existing knowledge. We can consider the new knowledge as the electron or the raisons and Protons as prior knowledge. The new knowledge (electrons or the raisons) is integrated with existing frameworks and schemas in the memory (the plum pudding in Figure 3). Since concepts are the building blocks for these frameworks and schemas, conceptual knowledge provides the bases for understanding. At first the incoming knowledge like the raisons in the plum pudding are diffused among the schemas. Without rehearsal of the new information or activation of data this incoming knowledge will gradually fade away and prior knowledge occupies the volume of the memory. On the other hand without prior knowledge no connection can be made for the retention of the incoming knowledge, thus like the Protons which form the larger mass and are the components if all matters, prior knowledge likewise, are the bases for integrating all types of new knowledge in the memory. According to Ausubels assimilation learning theory, meaningful learning is a process in which learners comprehend the new knowledge structure and make them fit with the existing conceptual structures in the brain. In this



process when new knowledge is linked with previously acquired concepts meaningful learning takes place.

Figure 3. The plum pudding 2.3 Rutherford’s Atomic Theory and Vanishing of novel data Ernest Rutherford (1871–1937) conducted an experiment in which he noticed that the alpha particles deflected when they were shot through a thin layer of gold (Rutherford, 1919). In this experiment he recognized that all the mass of an atom is concentrated in the nucleus, and a huge mass of the atom involves an empty space which is occupied by negative charges of electrons (Rutherford, 1919). He realized that although the nucleus encompasses nearly the entire mass of an atom, it takes an unthinkably tiny amount of the volume around which the small particles of electrons orbit at some distance.

Figure 4. Deflection of alpha particles As noted earlier, protons are concentrated in the nucleus and are constant, similarly, prior knowledge in the memory are located in specific regions in the brain



ISSN: 2345 - 4962

and are fixed. If new data have no relationship with pre-existing data in the memory and providing that no practice or rehearsal occurs, like the deflected alpha particles in Figure 4, novel information will disappear from memory and would not be able to integrate with novel data and move to higher cognitive levels. In assimilation learning theory, Ausubel compares effective learning to rote learning, which is the simple memorization of information without relating it to previously acquired concepts or knowledge. In such cases, new knowledge is forgotten easily and not applied to new situations because it was not linked to concepts already acquired. The retention and moving of information to higher levels, relies on the notion of variable strengths that reflect the frequency of the input and the connections between incoming data and prior schema. Parallel distributed processing (PDP) clearly explicates this process. It is a neural network that contains nodes that are connected in terms of pathways. Within connectionism, pathways are weakened or strengthened through constant use or activation of new data. Learning takes place as the learner is able to make associations and connections, and these come through exposure to repeated patterns of data. The more frequent an association is made, the stronger that association becomes. New associations are created and new connections are made between larger and larger units until complexes of networks are produced (higher-order thinking levels). The strength of associations will change as a function of interaction with the environment, or with the incoming information. 2.4 Bohr’s Atomic Theory and Understanding Neils Bohr proposed that electrons could merely move in fixed orbits of certain energies and they orbit the nucleus without losing energy (Bohr, 1913). He used spectral light emissions to suggest that the negative charges had specific quantized energy levels (1885–1962). Bohr’s atomic theory contained spherical shells of electrons on various states around the positively charged nucleus. He argued that each electron has a stable specific amount of energy, which corresponds to its fixed orbit. In this model electrons



have certain locations and energy levels on fixed orbits surrounding the nucleus which consist of protons (Bohr, 1913). In terms of the amount of practice with new data, the new information connects with prior knowledge and becomes stabilized in particular regions in the brain. Since the incoming information is integrated with the existing knowledge various thinking skills (the orbits around the nucleus) such as interpreting, exemplifying, classifying, inferring, summarizing, comparing, and explaining at the Understanding level is possible.

Figure 5. Orbits of electrons surrounding the nucleus As we indicated, when the goal of learning is to promote retention (rote learning), the focus is on the thinking skill Remembering. On the other hand, when the goal is to promote transfer (meaningful learning), the focus shifts to the other five cognitive thinking skills, Understanding through Creating (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). In contrast to retention, transfer emphasizes the future. Students understand material when they are able to construct meaning from messages in input. At this level students are able to interpret, exemplify, classify, summarize, infer, compare and explain information. Through interpretation they are able to convert information from one representational form to another. It may involve converting words to words (paraphrasing), words to pictures, pictures to words, numbers to words, etc. (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Exemplifying involves defining and identifying a general principle or concept and using these features to construct or select a specific instance. Classifying is a complementary process to exemplifying. While exemplifying begins with a general principle or



ISSN: 2345 - 4962

concept and requires learners to find a specific instance, classifying starts with a specific instance and requires learners to find a general concept (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Alternative terms are subsuming and categorizing. According to Anderson and Krathwohl (2001), Summarizing involves constructing a representation of the information such as determining a theme or main points in a text. Abstracting and generalizing are other terms in this category. Moreover inferring occurs when a learner is able to abstract a principle or concept that accounts for a set of elements by encoding the relevant properties of each element and by noticing relationships among them (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). In addition, Comparing involves detecting similarities and differences between two or more events, objects, situation or problems. And finally the thinking skill Explaining occurs when a learner is able to use and construct a cause and effect model of a system.

2.5 Chadwick’s Atomic Theory and Apply In 1932, James Chadwick identified the neutron. In addition to protons, neutrons are neutral particles that also reside in the nucleus which eradicates the repulsion between protons and enables protons to stick together (Chadwick, 1932). This level is in line with the level Applying. According to Anderson’s ACT model, the move from conceptual knowledge to procedural knowledge takes place in three stages, i.e. cognitive, associative and autonomous stages. The associative stage acts like the neutron particles and connects the cognitive to the associative stage. In order to solve a problem, first in the cognitive stage a description of the procedure is learnt (declarative knowledge). In the associative stage the method for solving the problem is worked out, i.e. the learner will work out how to do it and select an appropriate procedure and technique that are available to solve the problem. And finally in the autonomous stage the learner’s actions become increasingly rapid and automatic. When knowledge becomes proceduralized they are accessed rapidly and automatically without resorting to the working memory.



2.6 The Quantum Model of the Atom and Analyzing/Evaluating/Creating According to the quantum Theory, in an atom the position and momentum of an electron can never be determined (Greiner & Walter, 2010). Hence, electrons do not move in well-defined orbits around the nucleus. Schrodinger suggested that electrons which move on particular orbits act as waves and it is difficult to spot its exact location (Schrödinger, 1926). Like electrons which do not have a clear fix position, and are always moving back and forth between orbitals, new data are not stable in the brain either, yet; make various connections with pre-existing data depending on the amount of time one spends working with the incoming information. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) state that in the cognitive level analyzing the learner breaks the material into its constituent parts, specifies how different parts are related and makes connections to one another and to the overall structure. The learner struggles to identify the important parts of a communication and their relevance (differentiating), how these important parts are organized (organizing), and the objective of the communication (attributing).

Figure 6. Quantum model of the atom 2.7 The wave-particle duality Instead of locating electrons on an orbit, this theory suggests a three-dimensional space for an electron. Likewise, in the cognitive level “Evaluating”, the learner is placed in a multi-dimensional space and uses as many sources available to make decisions based on particular standards and criteria such as consistency,



ISSN: 2345 - 4962

efficiency, effectiveness, and quality. This level involves checking and critiquing. Checking is concerned with testing material for internal inconsistencies (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). For example it occurs when a learner tests whether data support or disconfirm a hypothesis, whether material includes parts that contradict one another or whether a conclusion follows its premises (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). And critiquing includes judging material based on external standards and criteria. According to Anderson and Krathwohl (2001), Critiquing lies at the heart of what has been called critical thinking. Electrons could operate as waves and particles. By shining a light wave on an electron which is smaller than the wavelength of an electron, its orbit can be viewed. The light wave has a high energy which the electron absorbs and will change the electron's position to higher levels. When an electron moves to a lower layer, it give offs its energy in the form of light. If new information is not utilized over a long period of time or not integrated well, like an electron wave, it moves away from the nucleus and gradually fades away from memory. On the contrary, if incoming data integrates and connects well with prior knowledge through prolonged practice with the new material, it sparkles a tiny light in the brain which is the starting point of the highest level create. This is when complete meaningful learning occurs. The quantum theory builds upon the previous atomic theories. Creation builds upon previous cognitive processes in the sense that it is concerned with multiple perspectives and suggests that creating is a personal interpretation of the world. It is related to the concept of schema and building upon existing knowledge and experience. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) state that, the cognitive process Creating involves putting elements together to form a functional or coherent whole. The creative process according to Anderson & Krathwohl (2001) involves three phases including the problem representation phase, when the learner tries to understand the activity and generates different solutions; in the second phase which is the solution planning phase, the learner devises a plan after



investigating the different possibilities; and finally, in the solution execution phase the learner turns the plan into action. Therefore this creative process is divergent at the onset (generating) where various solutions are taken into account and examined as the learner tries to understand the activity. The divergent phase is followed by a convergent phase (planning), when the learner devises a technique or plan to do the task and eventually, the implementation of the method (producing). 3. Conclusion This paper attempted to illustrate Anderson & Krathwohl’s cognitive taxonomy in terms of the development of the atomic theory. The analogy initiated from comparing the lower-order thinking skills, Remember, Understand and Apply with Dalton, Thompson, Rutherford, Bohr and Chadwick’s atomic theory, followed by creating an assimilation between Quantum theory and higher-order thinking skills in which meaningful learning occurs. Meaningful learning is achieved through knowledge construction, when learners actively engage in mental processing, like making sense of their experiences, attending to related incoming information in the input, mentally organizing the new knowledge into a coherent whole and integrating the new knowledge with existing information in the memory. On the contrary in rote learning, learners add new information to their existing body of knowledge without making connections. Constructivist learning is regarded as an essential goal in education. It requires that teaching go beyond the instruction of facts and assessment entails more than the simple recall and recognition of such knowledge. Higher-order thinking skills which enables meaningful learning provides learners with the cognitive processes and knowledge they need for successful problem solving. Nitko & Brookhart (2007), define problem solving as the non-automatic strategizing required for reaching a goal. A problem is a goal that cannot be solved with a memorized solution. Bransford and Stein (1984) state that problem solving is the general system behind all kinds of thinking, even recall. To recall something, learners have to recognize it as a problem. The goal of teaching



ISSN: 2345 - 4962

then is to equip students to be able to recognize and solve problems in their academic work and in life. References Anderson, L.W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Longman. Bohr, N. (1913). On the constitution of atoms and molecules. Philosophical Magazine 26 (153), 476–502. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/atomic theory. Bransford, J., & Stein, B. (1984). The IDEAL problem solver. New York: W. H. Freeman. Chadwick, J. (1932). Possible Existence of a Neutron. Nature, 129 (3252), 312. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/atomic theory. Dalton, J. (1803). On the Absorption of Gases by Water and Other Liquids. Memoirs of the Literary and Philosophical Society of Manchester. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/atomic theory. Greiner, Walter. Quantum Mechanics: An Introduction. Retrieved 2010-06-14 from http://en.wikipedia.org/atomic theory. Krathwohl, D. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212-218.



Nitko, A. J., & Brookhart, S. M. (2007). Educational assessment of students (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Rutherford, E. (1919). Collisions of alpha Particles with Light Atoms. IV. An Anomalous Effect in Nitrogen". Philosophical Magazine, 37 (222), 581. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/atomic theory Schrödinger, E. (1926). Quantization as an Eigen value Problem. Annalen der Physik, 81 (18), 109– 139. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/atomic theory. Thomson, J.J. (1897). Cathode rays ([facsimile from Stephen Wright, Classical Scientific Papers, Physics (Mills and Boon, 1964)]). Philosophical Magazine, 44 (269), 293. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/atomic theory.
