Using Different Learning Taxonomies
InstructionsUsing Different Learning Taxonomies
What is this about?
Defining learning objectives serves as a cornerstone for creating successful and impactful learning environments. Rather than simply ticking a box, Learning objectives, that is what is it plays a critical role in several key aspects that the learners should learn by taking part in the training, guides the choice of the learning process.content, activities and assessment. Learning objectives can be defined by using different taxonomies. Bloom's taxonomy categorizes educational goals into a hierarchical model, from simple recall of facts to complex evaluation and creation tasks. The SOLO (Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes) taxonomy, on the other hand, describes levels of increasing complexity in a learner's understanding of subjects, ranging from unistructural to extended abstract levels.
Learning is what the learner does, but it can be facilitated through what trainers do and of appropriate teaching activities (Biggs, 1999). The Taxonomy of Significant Learning (Fink, 2013) (sometimes also referred as the Fink’s taxonomy) is not hierarchical in the same way as the other two, however, it builds on Blooms’ taxonomy by including a long-forgotten affective component into the discussion (, namely caring).. It encourages to include into the learning outcomes the objectives foundational knowledge, application, integration, a human dimension, caring, and learning to learn competencies (Fink, 2013) and this way offers a holistic approach to learning. However, since the existing material aligns with Bloom's and SOLO frameworks, this guide will primarily describe these two to ensure coherence and consistency in training delivery. Nevertheless, we encourage trainers to also consider the more effective type of learning objectives proposed in the Taxonomy of Significant Learning.Use the Bloom’s taxonomy
Bloom's Taxonomy is a well-known educational framework that offers a methodical way to classify learning objectives according to cognitive difficulty. (e.g., Adams, 2015). Bloom's taxonomy is a hierarchical framework that uses cognitive complexity to classify learning objectives. Benjamin Bloom created it in the 1950s, and it is now a vital instrument in educational theory and practice. The taxonomy is divided into six stages: remembering, understanding, applying, analysing, evaluating, and creating. The levels are arranged from lower to higher order cognitive skills. Fundamentally, remembering entails recollecting words, information, and fundamental ideas. Understanding is more than just remembering concepts; it also involves understanding meanings. Applying necessitates applying knowledge to novel contexts or problem-solving. Analysing means dissecting data into its constituent elements and identifying connections between them. Making decisions based on standards and criteria is the process of evaluating. Creating, in the end, involves coming up with original concepts and/or interpretations. The goal of applying Bloom's Taxonomy to training aims and results is to enhance comprehension by considering the knowledge, skills, and competencies that the specific training programmes were created to impart. The Remembering, Understanding, Applying, Analysing, Evaluating, and Creating domains of Bloom's Taxonomy each reflect a different cognitive process and the depth and complexity of learning.
All taxonomic levels are relevant irrespective of the study or career level. However, the taxonomic levels may mean different things for different individuals. For example, application of knowledge may mean engaging with research designs, but senior researchers often use more complex designs than students still learning how to do research. Nevertheless, it is essential that the learning extends beyond remembering and understanding, and that the complexity of activities at all levels gradually grow as the individual gains experience, knowledge and confidence.
Remembering and understanding:
Here, the focus is on memorising key facts, concepts and theories relevant to the field of research and innovation. Understanding these foundational elements is critical to moving forward. For example, undergraduate students need to master the basic principles and terminology related to ethics and integrity to effectively navigate through more complex topics later. Similarly, individuals pursuing a PhD or who are new to academia need a solid understanding of basic concepts before they can conduct more in-depth analyses and applications., such as mastering the ethics of their own PhD research. Moreover, senior researchers may need to understand the basic concept of supervision and mentoring practices when it comes to supervising a team and PhD candidates.
Apply and analyse:
Learning should always be an active endeavour irrespective of career or studies applying and analysing knowledge. This is where the emphasis shifts to practical application and critical thinking. Early career researchers, junior professors and academics need competencies for applying the ethics and integrity concepts they have learnt to real-life scenarios in connection to conducting experiments, collecting data and critically analysing the results to gain meaningful insights. Through these activities, participants develop the skills necessary to contribute to the advancement of their field and address research questions with greater depth and sophistication. In terms of research ethics and integrity, this involves applying such knowledge and values to every step of the research.
Evaluate and Create:
Use the SOLO taxonomy
Besides using the Bloom’ Taxonomy to define learning objectives, the SOLO Taxonomy can be used (Biggs, 1999; Biggs & Tang, 2007). The Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome, or SOLO, is a way to set the learning outcomes according to their complexity. (Biggs, 1999; Biggs & Tang, 2007).how complicated they are. This allows us to evaluate students' work based on its quality rather than how many pieces following the idea of this and that they got correctly.increasing understanding of complexities: Initially, we learn one or a few aspects of the task (unistructural), then multiple aspects that are unrelated to each other (multistructural), then we learn how to integrate them into a whole (relational), and lastly, we can generalise that whole to still-untaught applications (extended abstract).
The SOLO taxonomy has been used to evaluate effectiveness of trainings as well as the development of ethical sensitivity and has been proven to be effective in the context of research ethics and integrity training (Löfström, 2012; Tammeleht & Löfström, 2023; Tammeleht, Löfström & Rodríguez-Triana,2022; Tammeleht, Löfström & Rajando, 2024). The verbs emphasised in the descriptions below can be used as indicators of the appropriate levels in learning objectives.
Pre-structural level (0)
At the pre-structural level the learner fails to identify or approach topics in a meaningful way, but simply repeats the words in the question without understanding them.
Unistructural level (1)
At the unistructural level, the learner has sufficient knowledge to identify, recognise, count, find, label, match, name, and perform follow simple procedures. The learner identifies one relevant aspect displaying some familiarity with relevant concepts, but failing to outline multiple dimensions of it but failing to outline multiple dimensions of it. In the context of research ethics and integrity, this may mean identifying certain, perhaps common concepts, but having a limited view of them. For example, the learner may be able to identify some of the things that ought to be mentioned in an information letter to research participants but fails to understand all aspects of ensuring voluntary participation in research.
Multi-structural level (2)
At the multistructural level, the learner can enumerate, describe, illustrate, list, sequence, select, combine, and follow procedures, but struggles to make connections between concepts or draw conclusions based on interrelations. For example, the learner may understand that informed consent is necessary in research but fails to understand that this is so because of the need to respect people’s autonomy and right to make decisions that concern themselves.
Relational level (3)
At the relational level, the learner displays an ability to address the most relevant aspects of the concept and provide explanations pointing out interrelations and providing examples demonstrating their own reasoning. Corresponding action verbs include; analyse, apply, argue, compare, contrast, critique, explain causes, relate and justify. For example, the learner understands at least the main mechanisms and connections between FFP and the detrimental effects to science.
Extended abstract level (4)
