Bloom’s Taxonomy…was it dated? Yes, but like all things old that seem to work, we revise them to fit with current trends or they become obsolete. With Technology becoming such an integral part of today’s learning, it’s only natural that Bloom’s gets a makeover too. In 2008 Andrew Churches presented us with his version of the Bloom’s Revised Digital Taxonomy: http://www.techlearning.com/article/8670. This new digital version stays true to the revised version by Anderson and Krathwohl, which applies the use of verbs rather than nouns. However terminology associated with today’s use of technology has also been embedded into each sub category for the Lower Order of Thinking Skills (LOTS) and Higher Order of Thinking Skills (HOTS).
In order for Bloom’s Taxonomy to continue to be used in the teaching realm, it will need to evolve more rapidly to include the ever changing and advancing trends in technology. Andrew Churches’ 2008 version is a good framework from which to start and one which seems to be most popular result of a search, however it’s only a matter of “little” time before this version will also be out of date. This then poses another question. With the speed of technology advancement, who will have the right to regularly modify Bloom’s Taxonomy? How does someone’s version become “the version” in which we all choose to follow? What legitimizes it?