<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/platform.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar/30878775?origin\x3dhttp://ydouask.blogspot.com', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>

Why Do You Ask?

From asking questions that require an answer To asking questions that require a conversation.

Thursday, February 07, 2008

Just Wondering



The New Bloom's Taxonomy - Starts from bottom - Lower-Level Thinking to Higher-Level Thinking Skills

Then there is Understanding by Design.

Two thoughts:
  1. Is understanding as high as McTighe & Grant expect? Probably not.
  2. Why can't we use terminology that is consistent?
I think, in my cynical mind, that we eschew consistency so we sell products/services to school systems. Otherwise, Understanding By Design is not aiming very high for our students.

Knowledge
Understanding
Is that all we expect?
Critical thinking not needed?
Basic

Labels: , , ,

posted by Ric Murry @ 9:08 PM

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home