A Working Version of Bloom’s Cognitive Levels of Complexity
[pic]
Department of Social Work
A Working Version of Bloom’s Cognitive Levels of Complexity (THINKING)
|Level |Examples |
|1. Knowledge recall - remembering |* Recites a policy or procedure. |
| |* Outlines the steps in a client assessment. |
| |* Lists the major roles played by social workers in practice. |
|2. Comprehension - understanding |* Accurately explains the reasons for each step in a mental health assessment. |
| |* Summarizes the facts relevant to an policy advocacy initiative. |
|3. Application - using |* Uses the standardized assessment process with an assigned client/consumer. |
| |* Completes each step in a community needs assessment. |
|4. Analysis – taking apart and differentiating |* Gathers specific information on all policies, procedures and rules that impact agency clients. |
| |* Categorizes survey data. |
| |* Breaks down the steps in the community assessment and decides which questions call for demographic data and which |
| |questions ask for community member opinions. |
|5. Synthesis – creating or refining |* Develops a revised format for mental health assessments, incorporating more items related to client strengths of needs |
| |assessment questions and revises instrument to reflect more culturally relevant data gathering techniques. |
| |* Based on a survey of best practices in the field, develops a new tool for gathering constituent opinions regarding |
| |community needs. |
|6. Evaluation - appraising, making judgments based on stated criteria |* Completes a pilot study using two mental health assessment tools and evaluates results from each along specified quality |
| |criteria |
| |* Using data from community participant evaluations, evaluates overall satisfaction with revised needs assessment process |
A Working Version of Bloom’s Affective Levels of Complexity (FEELING, VALUING)
|Level |Examples |
|1. Receiving phenomena – being aware |* Student is aware of client’s non-verbal communication. |
|2. Responding to phenomena – responding |* Student responds to concerns raised by group members. |
|3. Valuing – accepting or committing to |* Student demonstrates commitment to strengths-base practice in client assessments. |
| |* Student adheres to agency’s HIPPA policies and procedures. |
|4. Organization - integrating, prioritizing | * Student engages in an ethical decision-making process when faced with competing ethical mandates. |
|5. Internalization – integrating more deeply and consistently |* Student consistently demonstrates commitment to social justice in all aspects of their social work practice. |
| | |
A Working Version of Bloom’s Psychomotor Levels of Complexity (INTEGRATING IN PRACTICE)
|Level |Examples |
|1. Perception – using sensory cues to guide motor activity |* Student detects client’s specific non-verbal communication and modifies own eye contact to accommodate. |
|2. Set – being ready to act |* Student displays willingness to interview new client using agency’s assessment format. |
| |* Student prepares for and leads one segment in an agency psycho - educational group. |
|3. Guided response – imitating; practicing |* Student practices answering crisis line calls according to field supervisor’s instructions and agency format. |
|4. Mechanism – engaging in more habitual responses performed with some |* Student is able to complete DSM-based clinical assessments with minimal field instructor coaching during the process. |
|confidence and proficiency | |
|5. Complex Overt Response – skillful, accurate, coordinated performance |* Student comfortably and effectively provides foster parent training on behalf of field agency. |
|6. Adaptation – modification of skills to fit new situations, requirements |* Student is able to consistently “think on her feet” when facilitating large community meetings. |
|7. Origination – creates new patterns to fit specific situations |* Student develops a new method of engaging seniors in community assisted living by offering a weekly coffee hour for |
| |reminiscing. |
| | |
Resources Used:
Clark, D. (Created June 5, 1999 and updated May 21, 2000). Learning domains or Bloom’s taxonomy. Retrieved January 22, 2007 from
Granello, D.H. (2000). Encouraging the cognitive development of supervisees: Using Bloom’s taxonomy in Supervision.
Counselor Education & Supervision, 40 (1). Retrieved January 23, 2007 from Academic Search Premier database.
University of Minnesota School of Social Work (2006). MSW field manual. Retrieved January 24, 2007 from .
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- bloom s taxonomy level of evaluation
- limitations of piaget s cognitive development
- sternberg s cognitive analysis of intelligence
- examples of using bloom s taxonomy
- bloom s levels of questioning
- definition of newton s 3 law of motion
- costa s three levels of questions
- costa s three levels of questioning
- levels of bloom s taxonomy
- strengths of piaget s cognitive development
- six levels of bloom s taxonomy
- is there a new version of windows