Learning taxonomies
Learning taxonomies help bring order to the complexity of instructional goals. They offer structured ways to categorize what you’re asking learners to know or do—whether it’s recalling facts, solving problems, or demonstrating judgment. While not theories themselves, learning taxonomies are essential tools for planning, articulating, and assessing learning outcomes. This section covers the most widely used learning taxonomies in corporate L&D.
Bloom's Taxonomy
Explore Bloom's Taxonomy as a tool for classifying learning objectives and aligning instructional design with cognitive complexity.
Comparison of Learning Taxonomies
Compare six instructional taxonomies—Bloom's, Gagné's, SOLO, Krathwohl's, RLAT, and CDT—to choose the best fit for corporate L&D needs.
Fink's Taxonomy
Fink's Taxonomy offers a holistic approach to designing impactful corporate L&D programs, integrating cognitive, emotional, and reflective learning.
Gagné's Taxonomy of Learning Outcomes
Gagné's Taxonomy of Learning Outcomes categorizes learning goals into five types, providing a structured approach to effective training design.
Krathwohl's Taxonomy
Krathwohl's Taxonomy helps L&D professionals design training that addresses emotional, attitudinal, and behavioral outcomes for deeper learner engagement.
Rapid Learning Analysis Taxonomy (RLAT)
The Rapid Learning Analysis Taxonomy (RLAT) simplifies instructional design by categorizing six types of learning outcomes, each with tailored strategies and assessments.
SOLO Taxonomy
SOLO Taxonomy helps L&D professionals assess and develop learning from basic recall to advanced synthesis, enhancing training design and outcomes.
The Component Display Theory Taxonomy
The Component Display Theory Taxonomy helps L&D professionals design focused, effective training by categorizing content and learning tasks.