Assumptions about Learning Skills

The Classification of Learning Skills is based on several assumptions. First, by focusing on a small set of transferable, mutually exclusive learning skills, educators have an opportunity to build shared language about learning performance. Admittedly, there are many more learning skills than those featured in the Classification; in addition, the labels educators use to describe these often differ from one person to the next and from one discipline to the next.

So, in order to work more productively across classroom and temporal boundaries, it is helpful to have a broadly recognized system for naming these skills. Second, a rubric for learning skill development helps educators and learners to understand and assess individual skills. However, it is important to keep in mind that learning skills are developed through practice and feedback; they cannot be elevated through conceptual knowledge alone. Third, a person only recognizes the need to learn a new learning skill when he or she cannot perform a task at a certain level—in other words, when the current skill level is less than that required for the task. If the learner perceives a task to be less challenging than his or her level of competence, he or she will not seek higher-level skills to do it.

Organization of the Classification

The Classification of Learning Skills embodies a deliberately selective grouping of essential, yet discrete, learning skills. Each one is assigned only to the domain where it is most commonly applied; that placement is determined by a decision as to where it first becomes most critical to learning performance. While skills related to thinking processes are “housed” within the cognitive domain, those related to interpersonal processes can be found under the social domain. Similarly, skills related to attitude and emotional development are located in the affective domain, and those connected with body development and control, under the “psychomotor” domain.

The Classification of Learning Skills can be visualized using a four-sided pyramid situated on a base plate (see Figure 1), with each side of the pyramid representing one of the domains. Language development lies at the base of this pyramid because this is essential for conscious development of any learning skill in any domain. Assessment is a unifying feature that integrates learning skill improvement at all levels of learning skill use and development.

Along each side, the processes associated with each domain are listed in hierarchical order. High-level learning skills associated with processes at the top of the pyramid rely on lower-level learning skills associated with processes at the bottom of the pyramid. For example, within the cognitive domain, processing information should be addressed before tackling skills associated with the processes of constructing understanding, applying knowledge, solving problems, and conducting research.

Within each process area, learning skills are organized into clusters. This example explores one of the five skill clusters that support information processing. Unlike the process areas, the skill clusters associated with a particular process area and the specific skills associated with each cluster do not follow a hierarchy. A listing of skill clusters and specific skills in the process areas that make up the cognitive, social, affective, and psychomotor domains are shown in companion modules.

The development of this Classification scheme has evolved over time, with infusions from several different traditions of scholarly research. Initial work on this system, guided by Bloom’s taxonomy (Bloom, 1956), focused on the cognitive domain—specifically focusing on comprehension, critical thinking, and problem solving. Later, research projects such as the SCANS Report (Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills), focusing on communication and teamwork skills (SCANS, 1991), inspired much of the work on the social domain. Work on the affective dimension of the pyramid was shaped by current self-improvement and leadership literature that highlighted the role emotional skills play in personal and professional life (Goleman, 1997). It should also be noted that this Classification system has been debated, discussed, and developed extensively in a variety of educational institutions. By dialoguing about the design, implementation, and measurement of general education courses, educators across the nation have helped refine this approach. Even now, the Classification remains a work in progress, subject to new insights derived from classroom and clinical research.

Process educators have also noted that learning skill growth in one domain can leverage growth in other domains (Krumsieg and Baehr, 2000). For instance, growth of learning skills in the affective and social domains can occur relatively quickly and can have a positive impact on skill development in the cognitive domain, where growth occurs more slowly.