Bloom's Taxonomy...

 The longer I live the more I see that fashions come and go. My wife buys skirts today that 2 years ago she would have screwed her nose up at! I think to myself... I don't get it? Why didn't you buy this 2 years ago when it was half the price and just wait until now to wear it?

I read an article quite a number of years ago suggesting that potatoes may very well be linked to cancer and so I avoided eating them. Later that same year, scientific information was released that potatoes were in fact a healthy food choice so long as they were prepared properly and so I started eating them again.

I would like to relate these examples to learning theories; all you have to do is Google learning theories or learning taxonomies and you will be instantly bombarded with as many theories/articles as you would like to read or learn about. From time to time one or more learning theories seems to come 'into fashion' again and learning managers jump on board until another becomes more favourable or should I say 'flavourable'. There are theories that come and go but there are also those that are 'evergreens', Bloom's Taxonomy being one of them.

Recently I have had the opportunity to study Bloom's Taxonomy, and I agree with it in principle. I view it as being an 'idealistic' way to learn. A step by step 'text book' example of how the learning process 'should' occur from start to finish as our learning expands and deepens. However, my question is: does learning always occur this way... and... does it always occur in this sequence?

(Simplified version)




Tom Bodett suggests that “The difference between school and life is that in school, you're taught a lesson and then given a test. In life, you're given a test that teaches you a lesson". This statement is hard to argue with and poses the questions of which learning is more effective: school's lessons or life's lessons?

In relation to my previous comments regarding Bloom's Taxonomy, some of my greatest and most effective lessons in 'life' have been by surprise - I haven't had any time to acquire information, to analyse or comprehend anything properly until after the application. It's not until after the application that I get the opportunity to learn and comprehend more about my experience. I get the opportunity to reflect and evaluate my performance for personal development and improvement and I very rarely forget these types of lessons - I'm sure that I'm not alone here!


So how does all of this relate to us as learning managers? Is there really a 'set of rules' or 'guidelines' for how learning occurs? I don't really think so. The theories that I have read and studied thus far have all been very relevant in helping us to see what learning 'should look like', how we should 'go about it', the 'learning style' considerations, more 'effective ways' in which to manage it and ideally how learning 'should occur'... but in my opinion learners are so complex, vast and varied that it really is impossible to pinpoint any fixed set of rules or guidelines.

One thing that has haunted me for some time now is a statement made by Einstein in which he said: "education is all that remains after one has forgotten everything he learned in school". This has raised many questions for me. Why would Einstein make such a statement? Is it perhaps that we forget the details to 'see' the picture or that we 'see' the picture and so forget the details?

Either way, I think I'm beginning to 'see' the picture!