Bloom’s Taxonomy and Chat GPT

7/7/24

Going back to school I found that my YouTube recommendations have shifted towards including educational videos. Upon being recommended Six Levels of Thinking Every Student MUST Master on Justin Sung’s channel I became intrigued to use his prompt technique in my own discoveries about learning design and technology. Bloom’s Taxonomy was introduced in 1956 and it consists of six levels, each representing a different level of cognitive complexity. At the base you have (1) Remembering, the next level is (2) Understanding, followed by (3) Applying and (4) Analyzing, and the highest levels being (5) Evaluating and (6) Creating. Understanding these levels are important to fully grasping a topic when you are studying it, and Sung recommends focusing on level 4 and level 5 when trying to immerse yourself in learning.

When you watch his video you can learn the practical application for a student and specifically a graduate student.

You can see from the screenshot below that Sung is teaching us to use Chat GPT to help push our thinking into higher levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy, and is quite useful to see the differences in word choice the LLM uses when creating the questions.

Generated questions are by no means a replacement for coming up with your own questions when commenting on peers discussion groups in graduate school, but they can help in other ways.

Look at the three examples generated by Chat GPT below I asked relating levels of understanding to our week 2 discussion about the history of learning design and technology:

“Here are some questions that apply Bloom’s Taxonomy Level 4 (Analyzing) to the topic of Learning Design and Technology history:

1. What key factors contributed to the evolution of instructional design models over time? Analyze the impact of these factors on modern instructional design practices.
2. Compare and contrast the contributions of B.F. Skinner and Robert Gagné to the field of Learning Design and Technology. How have their theories influenced current educational technologies?
3. Evaluate the progression of technology integration in education from the 20th century to the present. What patterns can you identify in the adoption and adaptation of new technologies in instructional design?

Here are some questions that apply Bloom’s Taxonomy Level 5 (Evaluating) to the topic of Learning Design and Technology history:

1. Critique the effectiveness of the ADDIE model in the context of contemporary instructional design needs. How well does it address the challenges posed by modern educational technologies?
2. Assess the contributions of major historical figures in Learning Design and Technology, such as Richard Mayer or David Merrill. To what extent have their contributions remained relevant in today’s educational landscape?
3. Evaluate the impact of rapid technological advancements on traditional instructional design theories. Are these theories still valid, or do they need to be revised to fit the current technological context?

Here are some questions that apply Bloom’s Taxonomy Level 6 (Creating) to the topic of Learning Design and Technology history:

1. Design a new instructional design model that integrates the latest technological advancements and pedagogical theories. How would this model address the limitations of existing models?
2. Propose a comprehensive plan for incorporating virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) into a traditional instructional design curriculum. What historical precedents would you draw on, and how would you ensure the plan’s effectiveness?
3. Develop a framework for evaluating the long-term impact of historical instructional design theories on current educational technologies. How would you measure success, and what metrics would you use?“

Can you see the progression here? Notice as I am not considering the lower levels of remembering and understanding because of how encapsulating the upper level questions are. Think of the possibilities in education when you can get high-level questions essentially tailor-made for your specific coursework, or the increased level of understanding one can gain on a specific topic in the workplace simply by using Bloom’s Taxonomy with Chat GPT.

As someone with very basic or minimal knowledge on a topic like the history of Learning Design, I can now chase down the intellectual rabbit hole of possibilities that were before reserved to Google, which will never be able to ask ME the questions back. And perhaps I wanted to learn the answer to question 2 using Bloom’s Taxonomy level 6 regarding using VR in the classroom, could I get a blueprint for making this happen from chat GPT and take steps to forever change the landscape of education in the environment I am teaching in? A few simple prompts to come up with this plan, and the answer can be a resounding “YES.”

PROMPT:

I need a plan to develop this in my sailing school classrooms for the ASA sailing school drawing on the historical learning theory connectivism and consider a cost-effective solution to ensure long-term success: Propose a comprehensive plan for incorporating virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) into a traditional instructional design curriculum. What historical precedents would you draw on, and how would you ensure the plan’s effectiveness?

ANSWER:

“Comprehensive Plan for Incorporating VR and AR into ASA Sailing School Classrooms

Objective:

To integrate VR and AR technologies into the traditional instructional design curriculum of ASA sailing school, leveraging the connectivism learning theory to enhance learning outcomes and ensure a cost-effective, sustainable solution.

Step 1: Needs Assessment

Objective: Understand the current instructional challenges and the potential benefits of VR and AR.

• Conduct surveys and interviews with instructors and students to identify pain points and areas where VR/AR could enhance learning.
• Analyze current curriculum gaps and opportunities for technology integration.

Step 2: Research and Historical Precedents

Objective: Learn from historical precedents and existing applications of VR/AR in education.

• Study successful VR/AR implementations in similar educational settings, such as flight simulation in aviation training or medical simulations in healthcare education.
• Review literature on connectivism and its application in technology-enhanced learning environments, focusing on how networked learning and technology facilitate knowledge acquisition.

Step 3: Define Learning Objectives

Objective: Establish clear, measurable learning objectives that align with the ASA sailing curriculum.

• Identify specific skills and knowledge areas that will benefit from VR/AR integration (e.g., navigation, sail handling, emergency procedures).
• Align VR/AR activities with ASA standards and certification requirements.

Step 4: Develop VR/AR Content

Objective: Create or source VR/AR content tailored to the sailing curriculum.

• Partner with VR/AR content developers who specialize in educational simulations.
• Develop scenarios and simulations that reflect real-world sailing conditions, including weather changes, navigation challenges, and onboard emergencies.
• Ensure content is interactive and engaging to maximize student participation and retention.

Step 5: Cost-Effective Implementation Strategy

Objective: Ensure the integration is financially sustainable.

• Start with a pilot program using low-cost VR headsets and AR-enabled mobile apps.
• Utilize open-source platforms and freely available resources to develop and deploy content.
• Apply for grants and funding from educational technology foundations or maritime organizations.
• Explore partnerships with VR/AR companies for discounts or sponsorships.

Step 6: Instructor Training

Objective: Equip instructors with the skills and knowledge to effectively use VR/AR in the classroom.

• Conduct comprehensive training workshops to familiarize instructors with VR/AR technologies and pedagogical strategies.
• Provide ongoing support and resources, including user manuals, troubleshooting guides, and access to a dedicated support team.

Step 7: Integration into Curriculum

Objective: Seamlessly incorporate VR/AR into the existing curriculum.

• Develop a phased rollout plan, starting with key modules and gradually expanding.
• Blend VR/AR activities with traditional instructional methods to create a hybrid learning environment.
• Regularly update and adapt the content based on feedback and advancements in technology.

Step 8: Evaluation and Feedback

Objective: Continuously assess the effectiveness of VR/AR integration and make improvements.

• Implement formative and summative assessments to measure student performance and engagement.
• Gather feedback from students and instructors through surveys and focus groups.
• Use data analytics to track usage patterns and identify areas for improvement.

Step 9: Long-Term Sustainability

Objective: Ensure the continued success and relevance of VR/AR integration.

• Establish a maintenance plan for VR/AR equipment and software.
• Regularly update content to reflect new ASA standards and advancements in sailing technology.
• Foster a community of practice among instructors to share best practices and innovations.

Historical Precedents and Connectivism

Objective: Leverage historical insights and connectivism principles to enhance learning.

• Draw on the success of networked learning environments and simulations in other fields.
• Emphasize the principles of connectivism by creating opportunities for collaborative learning, peer feedback, and real-time data sharing within the VR/AR experiences.
• Encourage students to create and share their own VR/AR scenarios, fostering a participatory learning culture.

Conclusion

By strategically integrating VR and AR into the ASA sailing school curriculum, we can enhance the learning experience, improve skill acquisition, and ensure long-term success through cost-effective solutions and continuous improvement. This plan not only addresses current instructional challenges but also aligns with the principles of connectivism to create a dynamic, networked learning environment.”

NOT TOO BAD CHAT GPT! I say, not too bad at all.