Skip to content

Paradigm Affordance Matrix

Run the Paradigm Affordance MicroSim Fullscreen Edit the Paradigm Affordance MicroSim Using the p5.js Editor

Description

This interactive MicroSim displays a matrix showing how different visualization paradigms support various cognitive levels in Bloom's Taxonomy. Understanding these affordances helps instructional designers select the most appropriate visualization type for their learning objectives.

Features

  • Interactive Matrix: Rows show visualization types, columns show Bloom's levels
  • Affordance Indicators: Visual strength indicators (Strong, Moderate, Weak)
  • Hover Details: Hover over any cell to see specific affordance descriptions
  • Row Selection: Click any row to highlight and lock selection
  • Color-Coded Headers: Bloom's levels use consistent taxonomy colors

Visualization Paradigms

  1. Timeline - Sequential visualization showing events over time
  2. Map - Spatial visualization showing geographic relationships
  3. Network - Graph visualization showing connections and relationships
  4. Chart - Statistical visualization for comparing quantities
  5. Flowchart - Process visualization showing steps and decisions

Bloom's Taxonomy Levels

Level Name Description
L1 Remember Recall facts and basic concepts
L2 Understand Explain ideas or concepts
L3 Apply Use information in new situations
L4 Analyze Draw connections among ideas
L5 Evaluate Justify decisions or judgments
L6 Create Produce new or original work

Key Insights

  • Charts excel at lower cognitive levels (Remember through Analyze) but have limited affordance for Create
  • Networks are particularly strong for Analyze tasks due to their relational nature
  • Flowcharts have strong affordance for Create as they naturally support designing new processes
  • Maps provide strong spatial anchoring that supports memory and understanding
  • Timelines naturally support sequential thinking and historical analysis

Embedding This MicroSim

You can include this MicroSim on your website using the following iframe:

1
<iframe src="https://dmccreary.github.io/automating-instructional-design/sims/paradigm-affordance/main.html" height="452px" scrolling="no"></iframe>

Lesson Plan

Objective

Students will analyze visualization paradigms and select appropriate types based on learning objectives aligned with Bloom's Taxonomy levels.

Activities

  1. Exploration (5 minutes): Have students hover over each cell to discover how different paradigms support different cognitive levels.

  2. Pattern Recognition (10 minutes): As a class, discuss:

  3. Which paradigms are best for lower-order thinking skills?
  4. Which paradigms support higher-order thinking?

  5. Why might certain paradigms have weak affordance for specific levels?

  6. Application (15 minutes): Give students three learning objectives at different Bloom's levels. Have them select the most appropriate visualization paradigm for each and justify their choices.

  7. Design Challenge (15 minutes): Have students design a lesson that uses at least two different visualization paradigms to address learning objectives at three different cognitive levels.

Assessment

Students demonstrate understanding by correctly matching visualization paradigms to learning objectives and articulating the affordance rationale for their choices.

References

  • Anderson, L.W., & Krathwohl, D.R. (Eds.). (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Longman.
  • Mayer, R.E. (2009). Multimedia Learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  • Card, S.K., Mackinlay, J.D., & Shneiderman, B. (1999). Readings in Information Visualization: Using Vision to Think. Morgan Kaufmann.