Debbie Baughman

As I’ve been examining Bloom’s Taxonomy and discussing it with my colleagues at The Standards Company, I’ve been thinking of Howard Gardner’s theory of Multiple Intelligences (Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences, 1983) and how it relates to Bloom’s Taxonomy and ultimately lesson planning in the classroom. Both Bloom’s Taxonomy and Gardner’s Multiple Intelligence theory (MI) lend themselves to differentiated instruction, and research has proven that the best and most effective instruction is differentiated.

According to Carol Ann Tomlison (The Differentiated Classroom: Responding to the Needs of All Learners, 1999), the objective of differentiated instruction is that “teachers provide specific ways for each individual to learn as deeply as possible and as quickly as possible without assuming one student’s road map for learning is identical to anyone else’s” (pg 2).

Although I had studied both Bloom’s Taxonomy and MI in my teacher education courses, they were only in the “back” of my mind as I planned and delivered my lessons during my first few years of teaching.  Although I knew that good teaching would include implementing both,  I felt far too busy, and even overwhelmed by all the other seemingly more important tasks (including surviving the first year of teaching!), to be able to craft my lessons with Bloom’s and MI in mind.  This is not unusual, though, for a first year (or second or third year) teacher.  Even for experienced teachers, the challenge of differentiating instruction and crafting lessons with Bloom’s and M.I. in mind, can be daunting.

In fact, the majority of classroom activities remain at a certain level, according to Kimberly Gray and Jan Waggoner (”Multiple Intelligences Meet Bloom’s Taxonomy,” Kappa Delta Pi Record, Summer 2002),  in which students are asked to “define, label, explain, and express– lower-level thinking that only acknowledges two of the eight intelligences.” They claim that “traditionally,” most classroom activities remain at these levels and don’t go beyond them.

Good instruction- instruction that is differentiated- does implement Bloom’s and MI in the classroom.  But with time restraints and other challenges, it can seem daunting, if not impossible, to actually design and deliver lessons that integrate Bloom’s and MI. But it can be done, and the more a teacher does it, the easier it becomes.  Teachers need support and training, though, which should begin in teacher education courses and continue at the district and school level through things like teacher induction programs, professional development, and collaboration with colleagues. 

While researching Bloom’s and MI, I came across a matrix created by schools in New South Wales in which they have addressed the time-constraint issue. Working together, teachers have created thematic lessons for their grade levels using Bloom’s and MI “grids.” There are several of these grids which they have then posted at their website for easy teacher access.  It’s worth checking out and is an excellent teacher collaboration activity!  They can be found at the following site: http://cap.nsw.edu.au/teachers/tech_based_resources/tech_based_resources.htm