Critics:
Allen, Deborah;Tanner, Kimberly (2002). Approaches to Cell Biology Teaching: Questions about Questions. Cell Biology Education, vol.1, pg. 63-67.
Athanassiou, Nicholas; McMett, Jeanne M.; Harvey, Carol (2003). Critical Thinking in the Management Classroom: Bloom's Taxonomy as a learning tool. Journal of Management Education, vol.27, pg. 533-555.
Although Bloom's Taxonomy is a widely accepted classification system, it has its full share of critics. Some critics have questioned its validity because of its behaviorally specified goal-that is, because it requires individuals to demonstrate mental processes in observable ways, including task performance (Pring,1971).
Many critics have suggested that although research supports the basic hierarchical structure of the classification system, the hierarchy falls down at the synthesis and evaluation levels, that these are instead two divergent processes that operate at the same level of complexity (Seddon, 1978).
Other critics have pointed out that Bloom's Taxonomy fails to acknowledge past history or context and the knowledge and comprehension levels do not acknowledge that some types of information are more difficult to remember and understand (Braxton (1996).
In addition to the criticism, educators also have two basic concerns, one related to its design and the other to its lack of theory and validation. The major problems critics find with the taxonomy's design is that its levels are not always distinct, that it is not strictly hierarchical, and that the underlying structural principle-increasing complexity-is naive (Chrisman, Hofer, & Boulton, 1988).