A slideshow I made containing an overview of Bloom's Digital Taxonomy and comparing it to Bloom's (original) Taxonomy.

2. Table of Contents
 Overview
 Foundation
 The Taxonomy Broken Down
 The Digital Taxonomy Explained
 Differences from Bloom’s Taxonomy
 Similarities with Bloom’s Taxonomy
 Conclusion
 Works Cited

3. Overview
 A refresher of Bloom’s Revised
Taxonomy (1956)
 Examining the six levels of Bloom’s
Digital Taxonomy as defined by Andrew
Churches (2001)

4. Foundation
 Original Taxonomy was created by Benjamin S.
Bloom in 1956
 Revised in 2001 by Anderson and Krathwohl
 The largest difference was replacing the nouns of the
original taxonomy with verbs and a change in their
order
 Identified and outlined the cognitive domain which
involves the development of intellectual skills
 Each level builds on the previous level
 An educator begins with Lower Order Thinking Skills
(LOTS) and works up toward Higher Order Thinking
Skills (HOTS)
 Typically viewed as a pyramid with LOTS on the
bottom and HOTS toward the top

5. Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy

6. The Taxonomy Broken
Down
 Remembering– memorization and the ability to recall
information
 Understanding – the ability to understand the
meaning behind instructions
 Applying – applying what was learned to a real world
task
 Analyzing– separating information into parts and
making distinctions between hearsay and fact
 Evaluating – bringing the parts together to form a
whole with new meaning
 Creating – making decisions based on the merits of
an idea

7. Bloom’s Digital Taxonomy

8. The Digital Taxonomy
Explained
 Remembering – modern examples include the use of
social bookmarking websites, use of search engines
and social networking
 Understanding – blog journaling, commenting on
websites and categorizing items using folders
 Applying – playing educational games, editing a wiki
and sharing photos or documents online
 Analyzing – creating “mashups” and leveraging
Google Docs
 Evaluating – moderating a forum, structured and
reasoned blog responses and software beta-testing
 Creating – directing or filming a video or
podcast, programming software

9. Differences from Bloom’s Taxonomy
 While the ideas still reverberate with today’s
learners, they must be applied in a different
manner to better engage these students
 Using the Digital Taxonomy, educators will be
able to teach HOTS to these younger students
 Educators do not necessarily need to begin
their lessons at the bottom of the pyramid
 Strong emphasis on collaboration between
learners
 Larger integration of multimedia into lesson
plans

10. Similarities with Bloom’s Taxonomy
 Both taxonomies maintain the same
verbage and basic principles
 Maintain pyramid structure with lower
order thinking skills at the bottom and
gradual increase to higher order thinking
skills

11. Conclusion
 Churches’ update to Bloom’s Taxonomy
allows educators to bring it into the
modern classroom and apply it to the
current, quickly changing technological
environment
 Bloom’s Taxonomy has been tweaked
for well over 50 years and the Digital
Taxonomy still needs to be better
defined and will grow and adapt as it
ages

12. Works Cited
 Anderson, I.W. & Krathwohl. A Taxonomy for
Learning, Teaching, and Assesing: A Revision of Bloom’s
Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York:
Longman, 2001.
 Michael Fisher. Digigogy: A New Digital Pedagogy. 2009.
http://digigogy.blogspot.net.
 Andrew Churches. Bloom’s Taxonomy and Digital
Approaches. 2007. Edorigami.
http://edorigami.wikispaces.com/Bloom%27s+and+ICT+tools