Education plays a vital role in development of any country. In this context, Bloom’s taxonomy play a key role in defining learning objectives and assessment of the courses. The purpose of the study is to identify the teacher educators’ and teacher trainees’ awareness and application towards the Bloom’s taxonomy in Thiruvannamalai District, Tamil Nadu. The factors taken for the study are perceived easy of use, perceived usefulness, perceived barriers, adoption of bloom’s taxonomy and its effectiveness. The main study of this research was conducted among 150 samples, in which 50 samples includes teacher educators and another 100 samples includes teacher trainees from five different teacher training institutes located at Tiruvannamalai District. The samples were chosen based on Non-Probability sampling (i.e. Quota sampling technique), since few teacher educators and trainees were not shown their interest to respond to the research. The data collected were analyzed through IBM SPSS 24.0 and IBM AMOS 24.0 software package and descriptive statistical analysis and Structural Equation Modeling analysis were performed. The results of study evident that perceived easy of use, perceived usefulness, perceived barriers, adoption of bloom’s taxonomy is having impact on perceived effectiveness of Bloom’s taxonomy, however teacher educators and Teacher trainees still need more training programmes to be well-versed in this concept in order to minimize the perceived barriers effect on implementation of Bloom’s taxonomy, which will improve perceived easy of use, perceived usefulness and its adoption in their teaching learning process effectively.  

Aviles, Christopher B, Teaching and Testing for Critical Thinking with Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, available at https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED446023

Daire Hooper D, Coughlan J, Mullen M. (2008). Structural Equation Modelling: Guidelines for Determining Model Fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53-60.

Deal, John; Hegde, S. Aaron (2013). Seinfeld and Economics: How to Achieve the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy in an Introductory Economics Class.,  International Journal of Teaching & Learning in Higher Education, 25 (3), 388-395.

Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., and Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis (5th Edition), Prentice-Hall International, Inc.: Newjersy.

Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Pearson Prentice Hall: Uppersaddle River, N.J., 172-175.

Hamad I. Odhabi (2007). Investigating the impact of laptops on students’ learning using Bloom's learning taxonomy, June, DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00730.x.

John W. Hansen, Cognitive Styles and Technology-Based Education, available at http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JOTS/Winter-Spring-1997/PDF/4-Hansen-article.

Martin Valcke, Bram De Wever, Chang Zhu, and Craig Deed (2009). Supporting active cognitive processing in collaborative groups: The potential of Bloom's taxonomy as a labeling tool, December, DOI: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.08.003.

Razzouk, N., & Razzouk, J. (2011). Analysis In Teaching With Cases: A Revisit To Blooms Taxonomy Of Learning Objectives. College Teaching Methods & Styles Journal (CTMS), 4(1), 49-56. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.19030/ctms.v4i1.5049

Robert Horner, Anita Zavodska, and John Rushing, (2005). How Challenging? Using Bloom's Taxonomy To Assess Learning Objectives In A Degree Completion ProgramJournal of College Teaching & Learning, 2(3), 47-52.

Tabachnick, Barbara G, and Linda S. Fidell (2007), “Using Multivariate Statistics”, Boston: Pearson / Allyn& Bacon, pp. 120-124.

Toni Noble (2004). Integrating the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy With Multiple Intelligences: A Planning Tool for Curriculum Differentiation, Teachers College Record, 106(1),  193–211.

Wheaton, B., Muthen, B., Alwin, D., F., and Summers, G. (1977), Assessing Reliability and Stability in Panel Models, Sociological Methodology, 8(1), 84-136.