Use any Web 2.0 tool at any Level of Bloom’s Taxonomy, Don’t be Limited by Listings

I have been teaching for many years.  In fact, one of my earliest presentations was on “Using Print Shop at All Levels of Bloom” (the original Print Shop).  Therefore, whenever I see the listings that supposedly say what Web 2.0 tools works at what level of Bloom’s taxonomy, I become very confused. A few of the many such listings are http://www.usi.edu/distance/bloom%20pyramid.jpg, http://tsheko.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/visualblooms1.jpg?w=500&h=359, http://www.bcps.org/offices/lis/Reference/images/web_2_Bloom.jpg, and http://edtech2.boisestate.edu/candacemcenespy/Images/vectormap.gif There is only a very slight overlap among the listing, each usually puts the same Web 2.0 tools at different thinking levels.

Let’s look at Google docs which a few sites place at the lowest level of Bloom, Remember/Knowledge. Google docs can be used to help students recall information. However, it can just as easily be used to paraphrase the information (from the original Shakespeare to modern day texting messages), to apply/use information (How does Pareto’s 20/80 rule apply to this story? ), to analyzing/contrasting (How are these two poems the same? Different?), to evaluating (Which literature that we have read this year best expresses man’s inhumanity to man? Why?), and synthesize/creating (Write a short story in which you mock some modern day thinking or organization.)

Teachers determine how any Web 2.0 tool is used. They determine at what Bloom’s level they will use the Web 2.0 tool. If they want their students to be bigger thinkers, they will use the higher levels of Bloom. If the teachers want their students to remain in small thinking, they will use the lower levels.

The choice of what level to use any Web 2.0 is up to the teacher. At what level do you use each Web 2.0 tools? Do you consciously build up Bloom’s taxonomy with each different technology you use during a unit?

Tuttle’s formative assessment books:   http://is.gd/tbook

Open-ended questions for higher level answers in Web 2.0

Often times teachers  ask many  closed-ended questions (lower level questions) about a learning goal and then they are surprised when they get lower level answers back.  Close-ended question usually begin with question words like “Who…?” as in “Who invented the ….?”,  “When ….?” as in “When did she invent …?,   “Where….?” as in “Where is Spain? ” and “What …?” as in “What  is the capital of New York?”.  In order to get higher level answers, one needs to ask big powerful questions.  These questions can be essential or critical questions; they can be open-ended questions which have many possible correct answers.   Open-ended questions often start with “Why….?” as in “Why do you think solar energy is better than water energy?”, “What..?” such as “What are the differences between ….?” and “How….?” such as “How are these two wars similar?”  When students think there is only one right answer, they limit their thinking.  Most real life problems do not have one right answer.

Here are some examples:

Texting in Social Studies:

Closed-ended question:  What does “occupy” mean?  There are a fixed number of answers. Once the students answer the question, they are done. They realize that the teacher has a specific  definition in mind and they try to guess it.

Open-ended question: How are the “occupy” movements in the USA similar or different to the “occupy” movements in Europe? Students can answer this question in many different correct  ways and, then, discuss their various answers. They widen their learning as they hear  the different responses. They consider aspects they had not thought about.

Wiffiti in English:

Close-ended questions:  Who did Don Quixote persuade to join him?   The  answer to this question is a factual answer. Once a student says the name of the person, he/she is done with learning.

Open-ended question?  What would Don Quixote have to offer you for you to join him?  Again, students will have a wide variety of correct answers. They see that the answer to this question goes far beyond the book.  What do other  people in your life offer you to join them? Do you join them?  Open-ended questions lead to powerful answers about the learning goal and about life.

Let’s ask open-ended higher level questions instead of closed-ended lower level thinking questions with our Web 2.0 tools.

Students’ Web 2 school projects: Redoing to be Web 2.0

Much of  students’ Web 2.0 use is for   “drop and run” projects.  Where is read-write? Building on Others?  Collaboration?  Global?  Higher Level Thinking?

Many 2.0 tools

Some example of how to transform some to be more 2.0 and less 1.0.

Podcast/Voki/Audacity:   George Washington Example

Glogster / QR poster:  English writing

Images (Flickr, …):  Whale example

Videoconferencing/Skype:   Books

Video:   Shakespeare

Facebook/Twitter:  Paper Use

Others?

Tuttle’s formative assessment books:   http://is.gd/tbook

Assessing Web 2.0 Projects Through Bloom And Time

I offer the following mini-assessment of any Web 2.0 project as a way to refocus our attention on student learning rather than the Web 2.0 tool.

Take the highest level of Bloom achieved during the project

1- Knowledge                                  2. Comprehension

3 – Application                               4. Analysis

5.5 Synthesis                                   5.5 Evaluation

and multiple it by the number of days in the project.

So, if Susan produces a Social Studies podcast that simply restates (Comprehension) information about George Washington after five days, her score is 2 (Comprehension) x 5 (days) or 10.

If Pablo produces a Social Studies podcast in which he goes through the problem solving steps that George Washington went through and evaluates his final solution (5.5) in two days, his score would be Evaluation (5.5) x 2 = 11

Based on this analysis, a two day project of higher level thinking rates a higher score than a longer project. Let’s focus on student learning!

My book, Formative Assessment: Responding to Students, is available through Eye-on-Education.

Formative Assessment and Successful Student Writing Through Formative Assessment by Harry Grover Tuttle

My book. Successful Student Writing Through Formative Assessment will be available from Eye-on-Education in the Fall.

Web 2.0 Learning Only Works With Critical Learning

Web 2.o  allows students to have more access to information through the social interactions. Collecting information is not creating knowledge.  Some  of my writing students have a ton of information about a topic through Web 2.0 tools but they cannot put the information together in a coherent fashion. The problem is not access to information; the problem is thinking.  As we get more into Web 2.0, we need to get more into Critical Thinking.  Students need to be able to analyze, synthesis, and evaluate information (Bloom) . They need to be able to see information from various perspectives (Chaffee) and to think through various aspects of the issue  such as purpose and  consequences  (Noisch). If we want to “teach” how to use Web 2.o tools, then we need to teach Critical Thinking.  Instead of  Web 2.o courses/”new literacies” courses, we need “Critical Thinking with Web 2.0” courses. The thinking skills will be transferable as new tech tools quickly evolve.

Let’s focus on critical 21st century thinking skills so we can use Web 2.0 tools wisely!

My book, Formative Assessment: Responding to Students, is available through Eye-on-Education.

Apply the Heat to Learning

Another thought about putting plastic on windows to insulate the window. After putting the tape on the window and putting the plastic over the tape, the last step is to apply heat. The heat forces the plastic to attach itself more firmly and tightly to the tape. It changes the loosely fitting plastic to very tight and firm plastic.

How often do we apply heat to our student’s learning after they have had some basic instruction and practice? Do we present them with a challenging task that causes them to apply their learning to a high degree? Do we have them think at the analysis, synthesis or evaluation levels? Do we have them take their “book” learning and apply it to real life? Do we have them evaluate present conditions based on past ones? Do we apply heat to their learning?

How do you apply the heat to your students’ learning?

For any one who is interested in implementing formative assessment in the classroom, my book,
Formative Assessment: Responding to Students is available through Eye-on-Education.

Mystery Object, Critical Thinking, and Pretest

I’m teaching a course in critical thinking to college students. I showed them a glass case, asked them to think of five questions to determine what was inside and then to write down the questions. Next, I had them get in groups of 5-6 and read aloud their questions. Then, I asked them to think about the answers of others and their own answers. Finally, I asked them to rewrite their questions based on the questions they had heard. I was amazed at how many students did not change their questions. 20 questions became 100 questions. They handed in their original questions,their reflection and their “revised” questions. I realize that pre-assessment revealed much about their critical thinking and the skills that I have to teach them.

Integrating Thinking Through Reading

As teachers we can incorporate many critical thinking through reading activities into our classroom. We can have students:

Annotate the text

Explain the context of the reading

Outline or Summarize

Predict

Ask questions about the text

Compare/ contrast to other readings

Connect to other readings or other things containing the ideas found in the text

Creating Thinking Curriculum

How do we change our curriculums from memorization of facts to higher level thinking curriculums?

One way is to ask questions that require our students to compare and contrast. How is the American Revolution like the French Revolution? How is it different? How  does the Spanish present tense compare to the Future tense?

Another way is to ask questions that ask our students to explain the consequences of some act.  For example, Science classes can explore the implications of every American home using five compact bulbs on the energy use for the nation.

In a third technique students evaluate a situation.  Which  of these solutions is better and why?  Math students can figure out which of three loans will be a better financial deal and explanation their reasoning.

Students will still know the basic but more important, they will be able to use the basic information in higher level thinking.

How do you  cause you students to engage in higher level thinking?