" The two upper tiers were also adjusted synthesis was changed to evaluating and evaluation to creating. Anderson's work privileges the creative ability. This is a consistent reflection of the contemporary need for creative thinking to be applied to complex and complicated problems. The structural changes moved the original one dimensional taxonomy to a two dimensional construct. There is an expression of the types of knowledge that can be learnt as well as the processes that can also be learnt. This change advocates that the cognitive experience involves not only the apprehension of knowledge but also an understanding of accompanying processes. It also alludes to the possibility that individuals could have knowledge but be unaware of processes. This is a logical improvement over the original Bloom formulation and provides greater analytical tools for identifying and expressing learning outcomes.

The third area of change is the focus of the new taxonomy. Bloom's formulation admittedly did not actively consider a wider audience in its construction. The Anderson Taxonomy was created with divergent audiences in mind. It is expected that the taxonomy would be employed by diverse groups and used under many different conditions. In this regard it becomes a useful elaboration as the focus is wider and more expansive.

As noted earlier Stiggins work address the question of the patterns that can be identified in the reasoning employed in the higher levels of Bloom's Taxonomy. Stiggins finds congruence with Bloom in that he accepts that knowledge is a requisite base (Berry, 2008). To engage in higher order thinking a platform of knowledge...

Once this platform is in place then other complex cognitive processes can begin. Stiggins therefore fragments reasoning into six components.
When you consider Stiggins' work seven patterns of reasoning are identified. It is important to note that for Stiggins that acquiring knowledge without the accompanying reasoning is a pointless process. The seven patterns are similar to Blooms Taxonomy in that they are also a classificatory system. Stiggins' system however is not hierarchal and involves greater overlap between the various components. The seven components include; comparative reasoning, categorization, analysis, synthesis, inductive reasoning, deductive reasoning, and evaluative reasoning (Stiggins, 2008, p. 63).

The three taxonomies attempt to address a common problem but employ modified approaches to describing the problem. Bloom's Taxonomy being the original formulation required updating and expansion. The expansion provided by Anderson maintained much of the original structure but included new language and a more expansive focus. Stiggins' work addressed the limitation in the original Bloom's taxonomy by addressing gaps in the reasoning dimension of Bloom's work.

Works Cited

Berry, R. (2008). Assessment for Learning. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.

Iqbal, H.M., Azam, S., & Abiodullah, M. (2009). Using Assessment for Improving Students Learning:An analysis of University Teachers' Practices. Bulletin of Education and Research, 31(1), 47-59.

Stiggins, R. (2008). Student-involved assessment for learning . Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education Inc.