Study smarter with Fiveable
Get study guides, practice questions, and cheatsheets for all your subjects. Join 500,000+ students with a 96% pass rate.
Bloom's Taxonomy isn't just an abstract framework—it's the backbone of how curriculum developers design learning experiences that actually work. When you're tested on curriculum development, you're being asked to demonstrate that you understand cognitive progression, assessment alignment, and instructional scaffolding. The taxonomy gives you a shared vocabulary for discussing what students should be able to do at each stage of learning, and why certain activities belong at certain points in a unit.
Here's the key insight: the six levels aren't a checklist to rush through. They represent increasingly complex cognitive demands, and effective curriculum design requires intentional movement between them. Don't just memorize the level names—know what distinguishes lower-order thinking skills (LOTS) from higher-order thinking skills (HOTS), and be ready to explain why a particular assessment matches a particular level. That's what separates surface-level recall from genuine understanding of curriculum design.
These levels establish the cognitive groundwork students need before they can engage in more complex thinking. Without solid recall and comprehension, higher-order tasks become guesswork rather than genuine analysis.
Compare: Remember vs. Understand—both are lower-order skills, but Remember asks "what is it?" while Understand asks "what does it mean?" On an exam about assessment design, if a question asks students to define a term, that's Remember; if it asks them to explain why that term matters, that's Understand.
This transitional level moves students from passive reception to active use of knowledge. Application requires students to execute procedures and transfer learning to novel contexts.
Compare: Understand vs. Apply—a student who Understands photosynthesis can explain the process; a student who Applies can predict what happens to a plant under different light conditions. For FRQs asking you to design instruction, Apply-level activities are your go-to for demonstrating transfer of learning.
These three levels—Analyze, Evaluate, and Create—represent higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) that require students to work with knowledge in sophisticated ways. Curriculum that stops at application misses opportunities for deep, lasting learning.
Compare: Analyze vs. Evaluate—Analysis asks "how does this work?" while Evaluation asks "how well does this work?" Both are HOTS, but Analyze is descriptive (breaking down structure) and Evaluate is judgmental (assessing worth). If an FRQ asks about formative assessment design, Analyze-level tasks help students see their own gaps; Evaluate-level tasks help them judge their progress.
Compare: Evaluate vs. Create—Evaluation works with existing material (judging it), while Creation produces something new. A student who Evaluates a curriculum might critique its weaknesses; a student who Creates would design an improved version. Both are essential for curriculum development coursework.
| Concept | Best Examples |
|---|---|
| Lower-Order Thinking Skills (LOTS) | Remember, Understand |
| Transitional Skills | Apply |
| Higher-Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) | Analyze, Evaluate, Create |
| Recall-Based Assessment | Multiple choice, matching, definitions |
| Comprehension-Based Assessment | Summarizing, paraphrasing, explaining |
| Performance-Based Assessment | Projects, simulations, case studies |
| Critical Thinking Development | Analyze, Evaluate |
| Innovation and Synthesis | Create |
Which two levels both require students to work with existing information rather than produce something new, yet differ in whether they describe structure or judge quality?
A teacher asks students to design an original lesson plan incorporating three learning theories. Which Bloom's level does this primarily target, and why does it require competence at all lower levels?
Compare and contrast Remember and Understand: what distinguishes a student who can define "scaffolding" from one who can explain why scaffolding supports learning?
If an FRQ asks you to evaluate a curriculum's alignment with learning objectives, which two Bloom's levels would you demonstrate in your response, and in what order would you apply them?
A curriculum developer wants to ensure students progress from surface-level knowledge to independent critical thinking. Which sequence of assessment types would best scaffold this progression, and which Bloom's levels does each target?