Has anyone tried to incorporate Bloom's taxonomy into their note-making workflow?

What is Boom’s taxonomy: Bloom’s Taxonomy — York College / CUNY

More in the taxonomy: Bloom’s Taxonomy Verb Chart | Teaching Innovation and Pedagogical Support (uark.edu)

Anyway, I was thinking of incorporating a workflow tag with these headings and these reasons for those headings

Create

To put elements together or restructure to form something new/clear functional whole

  • Generate (hypothesize)
  • Plan (design)
  • Produce (construct)

This is a creative endeavour, so it would just mean writing an essay, a report, making a video, or contributing useful to society using everything you learned from below. Not everyone has to or needs to do this with their notes right away and the other parts of the taxonomy are NOT inferior to this part in any way. Maybe you invented the next 1 inch physics equation (like Einstein’s E=mc^2). Maybe you cured cancer. Make a note of this creation here.

TLDR; making your notes useful for making something new.

Evaluate

To make judgments based on defined criteria

  • Check (coordinate, detect, monitor, test)
  • Critique (judge)

Probing your notes for any imperfections. Peer-reviewing. Making sure your notes avoid confirmation bias. On my Zettels, I have supporting linked notes, but I try to have a placeholder for one directly opposing note in my Zettel so as to avoid confirmation bias in my own PKM system.

Analyze

To break down information into basic parts and determine how different parts relate to each other and as a whole

  • Differentiate (discriminate, distinguish, focus, select)
  • Organize (find, cohere, integrate, outline, parse, structure)
  • Attribute (deconstruct)

I guess you’re already doing this if you incorporated MOCs in your system, I personally don’t know how to incorporate this other than just reflect on how your whole local group of notes is a sum of its parts and how a lack of each part results in some issue with the big picture.

Apply

To use a process/procedure

  • Execute (carry out)
  • Implement (use)
  • Solve

This can be used as examples for your understanding. You can show how you solved or used the knowledge from your “understand” notes here.

Understand

To construct meaning from oral, written and graphic communication

  • Interpret (clarify/paraphrase/represent/translate)
  • Exemplify (illustrate/instantiate)
  • Classify (categorize/subsume)
  • Summarize (abstract/generalize)
  • Infer (conclude/extrapolate/interpolate/predict)
  • Compare (contrast/map/match)
  • Explain (construct)

This is where most of your Zettels are born. A note that has the ability to ELI5 a concept without a Wikipedia-esque copypasta explanation.

----

Remember

To retrieve knowledge from long-term memory

Recognize (identify)

Recall (retrieve)

Your note just shows a basic “just is” fact. This is Bill Gates. Pi is equal to 3.14. Doesn’t necessarily have a rhyme or reason to be by itself (like knowing what cryptology means but not knowing how to solve the German enigma code). I actually don’t make notes on “Remember” level notes. I shove them straight into the Spaced-repition plugin or Anki. E.g. the first few digits of of Pi, or dictionary words.

1 Like

I completely reorganized my file storage just recently. I removed almost all tags. Left only two tags - structural and atomic note.

However, I decided to try to also introduce a series of tags, that would reflect my level of competence on the Bloom scale.

Two simple examples. I have been into boardgames for about 12 years. And drawing for about six months. In the boardgame industry, I’ve been in a lot of positions: organizing events, developing game mechanics, selling boardgames, and writing many articles. Therefore, I plan to break the field of boardgames into several sub-areas and give myself “competencies” in the range from Apply to Evaluate.

In drawing, I try to prove to myself, that my hand is really capable of taking into account the advice of my teachers. Now I rate my level in drawing as Remember.

Once a quarter, I plan to check if there has been a “growth” in drawing and if there has been a “downturn” in the field of boardgames.

I started to incorporate the knowledge dimension of Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised into my notes by giving notes hashtags such as "#Factual, #Conceptual, #Procedural, #Metacognitive but eventually stopped doing it. I don’t think I was getting enough utility, it really only gave me an idea of what type of knowledge was being created in my vault, but wasn’t turned into any actionable insights.

I’m unsure how useful the cognitive process verbs would be as actionable to do items. It is worth experimenting with. I could definitely see this being useful if you keep your vault limited to high quality ideas/information, otherwise it just becomes a giant To Do list that never gets completed, like some peoples email inbox (e.g. Inflow of notes is greater than processing of notes).

Keep us updated on how this goes if you implement it because I don’t think it is a bad idea.

(p.s. it also seems that I have thought a bit about this in the past two years and have completely forgotten, see this post and this other post).