Revisit Bloom’s Taxonomy: A reflection of education in a digital era


  • Rizki Farani Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Indonesia



Bloom Taxonomy, Digital Era, Literature Review


Bloom’s taxonomy has been used in the education field since 1956. It promotes a higher form of thinking in education. However, the shift from traditional classroom interaction to technology-based education, such as e-learning, blended learning, and distance learning, changes the paradigm on how educators design learning instruction. This article presents a general description of Bloom’s taxonomy application in the digital era based on some literature reviews. The articles were selected purposively among open-access journals only in two reputable international journals: (1) Computer and Education and (2) Cogent Education. The journals were selected due to their publication mostly related to Bloom’s taxonomy in the education field. The review covers two aspects: (1) the identification of Bloom’s taxonomy applications and (2) the modification of Bloom’s taxonomy to promote thinking skills. The analysis presents information on how educators modify Bloom’s taxonomy to deliver content through technology-based learning. The results show that: (a) there is limited access to identify Bloom’s Taxonomy studies; (b) there is limited open access to literature reviews on Bloom’s Taxonomy in the education field; (c) modification of Bloom’s Taxonomy in the digital era position technology as a tool to facilitate students’ learning, and (d) most learning only builds students’ cognitive skills. There is still a limited exploration of affective and psychomotor domains. As a further recommendation for future research, there is a demand to provide more open-access journals on how to use technology to support affective and psychomotor domains.


Download data is not yet available.


Alamry, A., & Karaali, A. (2016). Flipped education: Transitioning to the homeschool environment. Cogent Education, 3(1), 1224607.

Bouwmeester, R. A. M., de Kleijn, R. A. M., van den Berg, I. E. T., ten Cate, O. T. J., van Rijen, H. V. M., & Westerveld, H. E. (2019). Flipping the medical classroom: Effect on workload, interactivity, motivation and retention of knowledge. Computers & Education, 139, 118–128.

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson.

Crogman, H., & Crogman, M. T. (2016). Generated questions learning model (GQLM): Beyond learning styles. Cogent Education, 3(1), 1202460.

Crogman, H., & Crogman, M. T. (2018). Modified generated question learning, and its classroom implementation and assessment. Cogent Education, 5(1), 1459340.

Dardjito, H. (2019). Students’ metacognitive reading awareness and academic English reading comprehension in EFL context. International Journal of Instruction, 12(4), 611–624.

Koumi, J. (2015). Learning outcomes afforded by self-assessed, segmented video–print combinations. Cogent Education, 2(1), 1045218.

Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212–218.

Manoharan, S. (2019). Cheat-resistant multiple-choice examinations using personalization. Computers & Education, 130, 139–151.

Mohseni, F., Seifoori, Z., & Ahangari, S. (2020). The impact of metacognitive strategy training and critical thinking awareness-raising on reading comprehension. Cogent Education, 7(1), 1720946.

Molin, F., Haelermans, C., Cabus, S., & Groot, W. (2020). The effect of feedback on metacognition-a randomized experiment using polling technology. Computers & Education, 152, 103885.

Purwaningsih, H., & Dardjito, H. (2021). Implementation of CIPP model for online learning evaluation during covid-19 pandemic. Getsempena English Education Journal, 8(2).

Shapiro, A. M., Sims-Knight, J., O’Rielly, G. V, Capaldo, P., Pedlow, T., Gordon, L., & Monteiro, K. (2017). Clickers can promote fact retention but impede conceptual understanding: The effect of the interaction between clicker use and pedagogy on learning. Computers & Education, 111, 44.

Van Seters, J. R., Ossevoort, M. A., Tramper, J., & Goedhart, M. J. (2012). The influence of student characteristics on the use of adaptive e-learning material. Computers & Education, 58(3), 942–952.

Whiteley, T. R. (2006). Using the socratic method and Bloom’s taxonomy of the cognitive domain to enhance online discussion, critical thinking, and student learning. Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, 33, 65–70.

Zhou, M., & Brown, D. (2015). Educational learning theories. Education Open Textbooks.




How to Cite

Farani, R. (2022). Revisit Bloom’s Taxonomy: A reflection of education in a digital era. Journal of English Language and Pedagogy, 5(1), 59–64.




Citation Check