Barrett's Taxonomy

A reading-specific taxonomy of comprehension levels developed by Thomas C. Barrett and first published by Theodore Clymer (1968) in Innovations and Change in Reading Instruction, the 67th Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education. Where Bloom's Taxonomy covers cognition in general, Barrett's was built specifically for reading, which makes it sharper for analysing reading comprehension items.

The taxonomy organises comprehension into five major levels, ordered from explicit-textual to inferential to evaluative-affective. Each level subdivides further; the structure below summarises the canonical breakdown.

The five levels

1. Literal comprehension. Recognising and recalling information stated explicitly in the text. Sub-categories typically include recognition of details, main ideas, sequence, comparison, cause-and-effect relationships, and character traits, plus the recall counterparts of each. Item formats: detail questions, sequence-of-events questions, paraphrase of an explicit sentence.

2. Reorganisation. Analysing, synthesising, or organising information stated explicitly in the text. The reader must classify, outline, summarise, or synthesise across sentences and paragraphs without yet leaving the text. This level is what separates competent local readers from those who can hold a whole passage in working memory.

3. Inferential comprehension. Going beyond the surface text to infer details, sequence, comparisons, cause-and-effect relationships, character traits, main ideas, predicted outcomes, and figurative language. The reader uses textual evidence plus background reasoning. This is the level most reading tests under-sample and most teachers under-teach.

4. Evaluation. Judgements made by the reader against external criteria — reality versus fantasy, fact versus opinion, adequacy and validity, appropriateness, and worth/desirability/acceptability. Evaluation requires both accurate understanding of the text and a stance the reader can defend.

5. Appreciation. Affective and aesthetic response — emotional response to plot or theme, identification with characters or incidents, reactions to the author's use of language, and to imagery. The level Barrett added explicitly to mark reading as more than information extraction.

Use in research

Studies applying Barrett's taxonomy to textbook analysis routinely find that reading questions cluster at literal and inferential, with reorganisation patchy, evaluation thin, and appreciation almost entirely absent. The signal is consistent across contexts and gives teachers a balance check against their item set: if the literal and inferential rows are full and the evaluation row is empty, the item set will not discriminate at upper proficiency.

For IELTS-style high-stakes test analysis Nuttall's Taxonomy (and its Day & Park 2005 expansion) is the more common frame; Barrett earns its place when the test domain includes literary or evaluative reading, or when classroom item writing wants explicit pedagogical sub-categories.

Key References

• Clymer, T. (1968). What is "reading"?: Some current concepts. In H. M. Robinson (ed.), Innovations and Change in Reading Instruction, 67th Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part II. University of Chicago Press.
• Alderson, J. C. (2000). Assessing Reading. Cambridge University Press.
• Day, R. R. & Park, J. (2005). Developing reading comprehension questions. Reading in a Foreign Language, 17(1), 60–73.

See Also

• Nuttall's Taxonomy: the ELT-side descendant most used in IELTS-style item analysis
• Bloom's Taxonomy: the general-cognition counterpart applied broadly across content areas
• Reading Subskills: the inventory Barrett's levels target
• Reading Comprehension Test Design: how taxonomies feed item-writing decisions