Note: Updated high-quality versions of educational taxonomies are available here
Whilst the majority of writings and reflections on the use of taxonomies of educational objectives remain focused on the cognitive domain, typified by Bloom (1984), there is growing attention to the affective domain, particularly in professional education. Bloom’s now famous research project, which resulted in Book 2 of the ‘Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: the affective domain’ led by Krathwohl, has been much neglected, applied scantily (and often erroneously) to practice (Krathwohl, Bloom, & Masia, 1999).
Often described in terms of feelings or emotions, I think it is more useful to regard the affective as a question of degree of acceptance or rejection of values, of the evolution of value structures. It is certainly true that having one’s values challenged can result in emotional disturbance (Mezirow, 2000), but I think there is a danger to using language that describes the domain in terms of emotions, not least because it scares off academics!
In my interpretation of the affective domain, illustrated above as a circular representation, I have retained Krathwohl’s five divisions but choose to use active verbs rather than the passive. So receiving becomes to receive, responding becomes to respond, valuing becomes to value, organisation becomes to organise, and the final division, originally entitled characterisation, becomes to internalise.
| Original | Atkinson | Descriptor | Sample Verbs |
| Receiving | To Receive | Ability to learn from others | Sense, experience, concentrate, attend, perceive |
| Responding | To Respond | Ability to participate responsibly , respectively as appropriate to the context | Perform, contribute, satisfy, cite |
| Valuing | To Value | Ability to associate personal and collective values with contextual experiences and express value judgements | Justify, seek, respect, persuade |
| Organization | To Organize | Ability to structure, prioritize and reconcile personal and others’ value systems | Clarify, reconcile, integrate |
| Characterization | To Internalize | Ability to articulate one’s own values and belief systems and operate consistently within them | Conclude, internalize, resolve, embody |
The reason I think it is helpful to think about values rather than emotions is that, clearly, most of higher and professional education is concerned with changing not just what students know or how they know and apply that knowledge, but also how they ‘feel’ about knowing. At its simplest, we seek to instil a love of learning and a passion for the subject. In professional education, we also seek to instil our professional values into the learning process. Whilst it is clearly very difficult to evaluate the emotional impact of learning on students, there are ways to provide formative assessment to support affective development.
For those in the Academy who seek merely to perpetuate their academic DNA in their students, the latters’ changes in values may mean little to them. For those of us who teach to make the next generation better than we are, better able to adapt to the ever-changing world they face outside the Academy, having an interest in our students’ affective development is extremely important.
I have argued elsewhere that the relative weighting given to the domains in learning design depends largely on the subject and the learning context. Clearly, there will be foundational modules in a degree programme in which knowledge domain learning will be dominant. I would expect much of what is done in an undergraduate degree to be concerned with the cognitive domain; the ability to analyse, evaluate, and synthesise represents the higher-order skills we expect from graduates. I have also argued elsewhere that psychomotor skills are worthy of inclusion in higher education. But it occurs to me that much of the learning opportunity offered in our current universities neglects an equally important set of skills.
Almost all employers agree that they want to attract applicants who share their values. These oft-cited idealised values are in fact widely held: the ability to work well with others, to be an effective communicator, to be an effective listener, to work independently, and to take the initiative. It seems unrealistic to expect students to necessarily acquire such skills without being guided through the learning process and taught to identify their own development. And it is fair to say that, certainly in the United Kingdom, a huge amount has been added to the curriculum, with employability strategies and planning for personal development (PDP) initiatives, so that students do not want for opportunities.
But I maintain that we should instil in our students the values we expect them to demonstrate through the disciplines themselves, not bolt them on and relieve the academics from their responsibility. To my mind, it makes sense to write intended learning outcomes that encapsulate a range of affective outcomes, and to align learning and teaching activities to rehearse those skills with our students.
Why not include alongside an intellectual skills outcome (cognitive) that states “by the end of this module you will be able to critique at least three different perspectives on (whatever the subject is)” another outcome, this time an affective one that says “by the end of this module you will be able to reconcile two contrasting, and contentious, perspectives on (whatever the subject is)”. There is nothing touchy-feely about the second outcome. Still, it focuses on students’ value structures, supporting their ability to structure and reconcile their personal value systems with those held by others. Critiquing sounds very higher education, but to be able ‘to reconcile’ is a much needed skill in the workplace.