Matrix of Cognitive Rigor: Bloom’s Taxonomy meets Webb’s Depth of Knowledge

Bloom’s Taxonomy is a framework illustrating the progression of cognitive processes or learning goals. Originally created in 1956, this sequential model of learning was revised in 2001 and today consists of six actionable objectives: remember, understand, apply, analyze, evaluate, and create. A little more than 40 years after Bloom’s Taxonomy was originally developed, Norman Webb designed Webb’s Depth of Knowledge (DOK) in 1997. This framework illustrates the increase in levels of cognitive rigor as we engage in learning processes. These levels include acquisition (what is the knowledge), application (how can the knowledge be used), analysis (why can the knowledge be used), and augmentation (how else can the knowledge be used). (Francis, 2017)

Merging Bloom’s Taxonomy with Webb’s DOK, Karin Hess introduced the notion of the Cognitive Rigor Matrix (CRM) as a result of her argument that cognitive rigor is context-dependent and that depth of knowledge is more akin to a ceiling of thought and not necessarily scaffolded steps. Taken together, Bloom’s Taxonomy and Webb’s Depth of Knowledge create a matrix of rigorous instructional design and learner interaction and thought throughout the learning process.

The Matrix of Cognitive Rigor and the OEDS

The OEDS is framed with this matrix of cognitive rigor in mind. Parts I and II of the series focuses on building a foundation of knowledge concerning open educational practices and use of OER and as such, serves as an entry point for faculty to increase their awareness and understanding at a lower level of cognitive rigor.

Parts III – V focus on more active engagement with knowledge pertaining to open education and OER use, increasing in cognitive rigor as participants advance in their interactions with the knowledge they are building – from applying knowledge in the form of textbook evaluations, to the analysis and strategic thought associated with the integration and adaptation of existing OER into their course designs, and ultimately extending knowledge of open education and OER through the planning, developing, and publication of their own open textbook.

The following examines the OEDS as it aligns with the matrix of cognitive rigor in terms of focus, course interactions, and example cognitive processes:

Part I: Building a Foundation of Knowledge and Part II: Transforming Practice with OER Creation and Open Pedagogy

Parts I and II are the only parts of the series that share the same course in the Canvas LMS. Targeting the lower levels of both Bloom’s Taxonomy and Webb’s Depth of Knowledge, the first two parts of the series focus on exposure to key OER concepts and building a foundation of knowledge concerning the adoption and integration of OER. Course interactions consist primarily of recall and reproduction tasks.

• Cognitive processes include: define, identify, recognize, and tell

Part III: Putting it All Together – Finding and Evaluating OER

Part III moves into applied thinking as participants engage in applying foundational understandings while learning to identify criteria associated with high quality OER. Course interactions primarily consist of applied thinking tasks involving the use of a rubric.

• Cognitive processes include: apply, classify, interpret, make observation, summarize

Part IV: Putting it All Together – Adopting and Integrating OER

Part IV takes participants through a structured and supported approach at adopting and adapting existing OER for course integration. Course interactions primarily consist of strategic thinking tasks.

• Cognitive processes include: assess, critique, investigate, develop a plan, revise

Part V: Putting it All Together – Creating and Publishing Your Own Open Textbook

Part V is a culmination of Parts I-IV, resulting in the design, creation, and publication of an Open Textbook. Course interactions primarily consist of extended thinking tasks that promote continuous learning and growth.

• Cognitive processes include: planning, developing and thinking, applying concepts, compose, create, design, synthesize