I have been teaching for sixteen years. For the last eight years, I have tried to align my lesson plans, classroom activities, and assessments with Bloom’s Taxonomy. I believed that planning teaching in steps (according to the Bloom’s) would help my students reach higher-order thinking skills. However, despite my efforts, I did not see the success I hoped for. Many students remained at the lower levels: just recalling facts or showing basic understanding, without moving on to analysis, evaluation, or creation. This led me to wonder why my work with Bloom’s Taxonomy was not producing notable results.

What Is Bloom’s Taxonomy?

For those listening Bloom’s Taxonomy for the first time: it is a model introduced by Benjamin Bloom in 1956. It describes different levels of human capabilities (cognitive, physical, and affective) and helps teachers design curriculum, lesson plans, class activities, and assessments. The taxonomy’s phases can be seen as steps on a staircase: each step builds on the previous one. By following all the steps, students can reach the top.

The six levels in the cognitive domain are:

1. Remembering: Recalling facts or basic concepts.
2. Understanding: Explaining ideas in your own words.
3. Applying: Using knowledge in new situations.
4. Analyzing: Breaking information into parts and seeing relationships.
5. Evaluating: Judging ideas or methods based on criteria or evidence.
6. Creating: Combining elements to form new ideas, designs, or products.

Example: Teaching Addition with Bloom’s Levels

Let’s use a simple concept like addition in mathematics to see how Bloom’s Taxonomy works:

• Remembering: Students learn basic addition facts (e.g., 2 + 3 = 5) and recall the meaning of the plus sign.
• Understanding: Students explain addition in their own words, such as “adding means combining two groups to find a total.”
• Applying: Students use addition in real-life tasks, for example adding prices or counting objects in daily scenarios.
• Analyzing: Students compare methods for adding larger numbers, like column addition versus using a number line, and discuss which method is more efficient or less error-prone.
• Evaluating: Students judge which addition strategy is best in different contexts, explaining their reasoning about accuracy, speed, or clarity.
• Creating: Students design their own puzzles or games that involve addition, or write new word problems that reflect their interests.

This example shows why Bloom’s Taxonomy is extremely important for teaching: without applying its steps, students may stay on the first one or two steps and never reach their full potential.

Bloom’s Taxonomy and National Progress

If students cannot climb the full staircase of Bloom’s Taxonomy, they miss out on higher-order thinking skills. In developing countries, failure to reach these higher levels can hinder our ability to compete in technology and science. If students remain at basic recall or simple understanding, they cannot innovate or solve complex problems. Thus, applying Bloom’s concepts is not only vital for individual learning but also for broader national development.

Why Am I Not Seeing Success?

Despite my continuous effort to design lessons around Bloom’s Taxonomy, many students do not advance to higher levels. There are many factors affecting this outcome, but the most dominant factor I found is Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. I realized that without meeting students’ basic needs, it is unrealistic to expect them to reach the top of Bloom’s staircase.

 Hierarchy of Needs: Explanation of Levels

Maslow’s model divides human needs into five levels. Each level serves as a foundation for the next:

1. Physiological Needs: These are basic needs like food, water, shelter, sleep, and health. If students lack these, their energy and focus suffer.
2. Safety Needs: This includes feeling safe at home, in school, and in the community. Without safety, students may be anxious or fearful.
3. Love and Belonging: Having friends, supportive relationships, and a sense of community. Feeling connected helps students engage in group work and discussions.
4. Esteem: Feeling respected, confident, and capable. When students have self-esteem and receive recognition, they are more willing to take on challenging tasks.
5. Self-Actualization: Realizing one’s potential, creativity, and personal growth. This level links strongly with Bloom’s highest thinking skills: evaluating, creating, and designing new ideas.

According to Maslow, each need forms the base for the next. To reach self-actualization—understanding one’s true potential and having the confidence to do something novel—all earlier needs must be met.

Linking Maslow’s Top Level with Bloom’s Higher-Order Skills

The fifth level, self-actualization, aligns closely with Bloom’s higher-order thinking: evaluating, creating, and designing. If Maslow’s needs are not met, we cannot expect students to reach these top phases of Bloom’s Taxonomy. That means we cannot expect them to create or design anything novel, which would be disastrous for any nation aiming to innovate.

Consequences in Underdeveloped or Repressive Contexts

Consider an underdeveloped or Repressive country where basic human needs are not prioritized. Physiological needs are unmet: people struggle to find enough food, clean water, or secure shelter. In such a context, expecting students to reach even the second step of Bloom’s staircase (remembering and understanding) is unrealistic when their minds are focused on survival.

There is a famous quote:

“If you ask the hungry for 1 + 1, their answer will be: two breads.”

This highlights how immediate needs dominate thinking. If you doubt this, visit a public school in an underdeveloped or repressive region. Observe the children: many look weak from hunger, and a large proportion may not have enough nutritious food regularly. In this state, focusing on cognitive tasks beyond basic survival is nearly impossible. Studies on food insecurity and learning show that hunger reduces concentration, memory, and motivation, making basic learning difficult.

Similarly, safety is a major concern in these environments. When families cannot secure enough resources, crime often increases, making homes and streets unsafe. Under such stress, students live with anxiety, fearing for their own or their family’s well-being. This fear reduces willingness to attend school, participate in class, or take intellectual risks. Research on trauma and education indicates that insecure environments impair brain functions linked to learning, reinforcing that safety is essential for any thinking beyond rote tasks.

Limited resources and high population pressures worsen poverty, weakening relationships and community bonds. When families compete for scarce resources, social trust declines. Students without supportive social networks feel isolated and may avoid group activities, which are important for higher-level thinking like analysis and collaboration.

These issues weaken entire systems. Even low-level public officials in such contexts may abuse power, treating people poorly. When citizens face disrespect, corruption, or insecurity in everyday interactions, they cannot build self-esteem. Without respect and trust from authority, children learn a sense of helplessness rather than confidence.

Without self-esteem, students cannot reach self-actualization. They remain stuck in lower cognitive stages: remembering limited facts or performing simple tasks. They lack the confidence to analyze, evaluate, or create. This absence of higher-order thinking skills (creativity and innovation) is a serious barrier to individual and societal progress. Nations that fail to support basic needs inadvertently suppress the intellectual growth needed for development, perpetuating cycles of poverty and stagnation.

At the same time, this view does not deny individual resilience. Some students overcome adversity and achieve high thinking levels; they are exceptions, not the rule. Relying on a few resilient individuals cannot drive broad progress.

Therefore, the argument stands: in underdeveloped or repressive contexts where basic needs are unmet, expecting broad student advancement through Bloom’s Taxonomy is unrealistic. It is not a lack of teaching or learning ability, but a lack of foundational support. This defense emphasizes that addressing cognitive development must begin with addressing human needs. By combining evidence from research, economic data, and real-world observations, we defend the point that without meeting physiological, safety, social, and esteem needs, higher-order thinking and innovation cannot flourish in most students.

Responsibility and Collective Change

Who is responsible for these conditions? Certainly the authorities who make decisions for the nation. If leaders think only of their own growth and not of the people, the nation will decline and people lose self-esteem. But responsibility also lies with the people: they must collectively change their thinking and behavior toward each other. However, this is extremely difficult when basic needs are unmet; for a hungry person, 1 + 1 often means two pieces of bread.

Recognition of Exceptions

Maslow’s hierarchy does not apply to 100% of people. Some individuals use the absence of needs as motivation and achieve high-order thinking despite hardship. These exceptions are inspiring but rare. We cannot rely on such cases for the majority of students. Instead, we must work to fill basic needs so more students can succeed.

A Holistic Approach to Teaching

My experience shows that aligning teaching with Bloom’s Taxonomy is important but not enough. We must also consider Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. Only when students’ basic needs (physiological, safety, love and belonging, and esteem) are met can they climb Bloom’s staircase to evaluation and creation. In contexts where needs are unmet, teaching strategies alone will not lead to innovation or higher-order thinking.

As educators, we should design lessons following Bloom’s steps but also look out for students’ well-being. We can check for signs of hunger or stress, foster a safe and supportive classroom, build community, and boost confidence through recognition. At a larger level, we should advocate for policies and community efforts that ensure basic needs are met. By combining Bloom’s Taxonomy with Maslow’s insights, we create a path for students to reach their full potential and drive progress for our nation.