Evaluation of Science Teachers’ Exam and High School Entrance Exam Science Questions Based on the Revised Bloom Taxonomy
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Published
Jun 30, 2023
Abstract
This study aims to evaluate exam questions set by science teachers for eighth grade students and science questions from a central high school entrance exam (HSEE) according to the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy (RBT). In this study, document analysis technique was employed, as one of the recognized methods of qualitative research. The HSEE science questions and the teacher-prepared exam questions were evaluated separately in the dimensions of knowledge and cognitive process, and the frequency and percentage distribution of the questions were examined according to the RBT. The science teachers’ exam questions were found to be the most suitable for factual knowledge in the RBT knowledge dimension, and the most appropriate for the remembering and understanding levels of the cognitive process dimension. It was determined that the HSEE science questions were the most suitable for conceptual and procedural types of knowledge in the RBT knowledge dimension, and for the understanding and analyzing levels in the cognitive process dimension. Both the questions prepared by teachers and the HSEE science questions were not homogeneously distributed in terms of the RBT. It was determined that while the science teachers’ exam questions were at the lower level of the cognitive process, the HSEE science questions were at a level higher than those prepared by the teachers.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Keywords
Revised Bloom Taxonomy, Questions Prepared by Science Teachers, High School Entrance Exam (HSEE)
References
Akyürek, G. (2019). Examination of LGS ve TEOG exams according to science course curriculum and revised Bloom taxonomy. Master’s thesis, Necmettin Erbakan University, Konya, Turkey.
Alt, D., & Raichel, N. (2022). Problem-based learning, self-and peer assessment in higher education: towards advancing lifelong learning skills. Research Papers in Education, 37(3):370-394. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2020.1849371
Altun, H. (2016). Analysis of teachers’ opinion about maths questions of TEOG exam and classification of the questions according to the renewed Bloom Taxonomy. Master’s thesis, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Samsun, Turkey.
Amer, A. (2006). Reflections on Bloom’s revised taxonomy. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 4(1):213-230.
Anderson, L., & Kratwohl, D. (2014). Öğrenme öğretim ve değerlendirme ile ilgili bir sınıflama [A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing (D. Özçelik, Trans. Ed.)]. Pegem Akademi.
Anderson, L.W. (1999). Rethinking Bloom’s taxonomy: Implications for testing and assessment. Department of Education Reports. ED 435630.
Anderson, L.W. (2005). Objectives, evaluation, and the improvement of education. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 31:102-113. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2005.05.004
Ardahanlı, Ö. (2018). Analysis of questions in TEOG examination and questions in the mathematics written exam of 8th grade mathematics courses according to the revised Bloom’s taxonomy. Master’s thesis, Osmangazi University, Eskişehir, Turkey.
Arı, A. (2011). Finding acceptance of Bloom’s revised cognitive taxonomy on the international stage and in Turkey. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 11(2):767-772.
Ataş, E., & Güneş, P. (2020). Evaluation of the exam questions of the sixth grade science course according to the reconstructed Bloom taxonomy. Bolu Abant İzzet Baysal University Journal of Faculty of Education, 20(2):1066-1078. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2020.-632040
Ayvacı, Ş.A., & Türkdoğan, A. (2010). Analysing science and technology course exam questions according to revised Bloom taxonomy. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 7(1):13-25.
Baniasadi, A., Salehi, K., Khodaie, E., Bagheri Noaparast, K., & Izanloo, B. (2022). Fairness in classroom assessment: A systematic review. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 1-19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00636-z
Bloom, B.S., Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., & Krathwohl, D.R. (1979). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The Classification of educational goals. (B. S. Bloom Ed., 2nd ed.). Longman.
Bloom, B.S., Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., & Krathwohl, D.R. (1956). Handbook I: cognitive domain. David McKay.
Bowen, G.A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2):27-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
Çakıcı, Y., & Girgin, E. (2012). An assessment of end-of-unit questions in the middle school science textbooks. Erzincan University Journal of Education Faculty, 14(2):87-110.
Çakır, Z. (2019). TEOG, LGS and PISA science questions analysis and comparison. Master’s thesis, Uşak University, Uşak, Turkey.
Çalık, D., & Çınar, Ö.P. (2009). Geçmişten günümüze bilgi yaklaşımları bilgi toplumu ve internet [Information approaches from the past to the present information society and the internet]. XIV. Türkiye’de İnternet Konferansı, 77-88, Bilgi Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
Cangüven, H.D. (2019). Comparison of 2013 ve 2018 science teaching programs by renewed Bloom taxonomy. Master’s thesis, Mersin University, Mersin, Turkey.
Demir, M. (2011). The evaluation of 5th and 6th grades science and technology lesson exam questions according to Bloom’s taxonomy. The Journal of National Education, 41(189):131-143.
Demirel, Ö. (2007). Eğitimde program geliştirme [Program development in education] (2. Baskı). Pegem Akademi.
Dindar, H., & Demir, M. (2006). Evaluation of fifth grade primary teachers’ questions in science exams according to Blooms taxonomy. Gazi University Journal of Gazi Educational Faculty, 26(3):87-96.
Ekinci, O., & Bal, A.P. (2019). Evaluation of high school entrance exam (LGS) 2018 in terms of mathematics learning field and revised Bloom taxonomy. Journal of Social Sciences of Mus Alparslan University, 7(3):9-18.
Eş, H. (2005). The evaluation of science exam questions in basic education schools and in the high schools entrance examinations according to the Bloom’s taxonomy. Master’s thesis, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey.
Gökulu, A. (2015). Evaluation of exam questions of science and technology teachers and science and technology lesson TEOG questions according to revised Bloom taxonomy. Route Educational and Social Science Journal, 2(2):434-446.
Günaydın, S. (2018). An overview of Bloom’s digital taxonomy. International Journal of Computers in Education (IJCE), 1(1):39-48.
Güven, Ç. (2014). The analysing of 6th, 7th and 8th grades science and technology lesson curriculum questions according to revised Bloom’s taxonomy. Master’s thesis, Ahi Evran University, Kırşehir, Turkey.
Karaer, H. (2020). Analysis of organic chemistry questions in teaching field knowledge tests according to the revised Bloom taxonomy. Trakya Journal of Education, 10(3):726-743.
Karasar, N. (2016). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi [Scientific research method]. Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
Kaya, G., & Ahi, B. (2022). The epistemic role of children’s questions and teacher’s responses in preschool classroom discourse. Journal of Education, In press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00220574221088486
Korkmaz, H. (2004). Fen ve teknoloji eğitiminde alternatif değerlendirme yaklaşımları [Alternative assessment approaches in science and technology education]. Yeryüzü.
Krathwohl, D.R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4):212-218. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Krathwohl, D.R., & Anderson, L.W. (2010). Merlin C. Wittrock and the revision of Bloom’s taxonomy. Educational Psychologist, 45(1):64-65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520903433562
Küçükahmet, L. (2002). Ögretimde planlama ve değerlendirme [Planning and evaluation in instruction (13th ed.)]. Nobel.
Lee, Y.J., Kim, M., & Yoon, H.G. (2015). The intellectual demands of the intended primary science curriculum in Korea and Singapore: An analysis based on revised Bloom’s taxonomy. International Journal of Science Education, 37(13):2193-2213. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1072290
Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage.
Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2018). Ortaöğretime geçiş yönergesi [The transition to secondary education directive]. Available at: http://www.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/2018_03/26191912_yonerge.pdf
Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2020). Sınavla öğrenci alacak ortaöğretim kurumlarına ilişkin merkezi sınav başvuru ve uygulama kılavuzu. [Central examination application and implementation guide for secondary education institutions that will take students through the exam]. Available at: https://www.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/2020_05/06105923_BasYvuru_ve_Uygulama_KYlavuzu_2020_GuYncel.pdf
Nakiboğlu, C., & Yıldırır, H.E. (2011). Analysis of Turkish high school chemistry textbooks and teacher-generated questions about gas laws. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(5):1047-1071. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9231-6
Özkan, M., & Arslantaş, H.İ. (2013). A study of scaling with ranking judgment method on characteristic of effective teacher. Trakya University Journal of Social Science, 15(1): 311-330.
Özmen, H., & Karamustafaoğlu, O. (2006). The analysis of lycee-II physics-chemistry exam questions’ and students’ success in energy chapter as to cognitive domain. Kastamonu Education Journal, 14(1):91-100.
Panthalookaran, V. (2022). Beyond Bloom’s Taxonomy: Emergence of entrepreneurial education. Higher Education for the Future, 9(1):45-61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/23476311211046176
Rayahu, A. (2018). The analysis of students’ cognitive ability based on assessments of the revised Bloom’s taxonomy on statistic materials. European Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, 7(2):80-85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26417/ejms.v7i2.p80-85
Şad, S.N., & Şahiner, Y.K. (2016). Students’ teachers and parents’ views about transition from basic education to secondary education (BESE) system. İlköğretim Online, 15(1):53-76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17051/io.2016.78720
Sahnoun, M., & Abdennadher, C. (2021). Returns to investment in education in the OECD countries: Does governance quality matter? Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 1-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00783-0
Salmon, A.K., & Barrera, M.X. (2021). Intentional questioning to promote thinking and learning. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 40:100822. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100822
Salvato, S.W. (2011). Comparative analysis of a nontraditional general chemistry textbook and selected traditional textbooks used in Texas community colleges. Ph.D. dissertation, Texas A&M University, Texas.
Sezer, A. (2018). Analysis of science examination questions and central exam questions according to the revised Bloom taxonomy, TIMSS and PISA. Master’s thesis, Kırıkkale University, Kırıkkale, Turkey.
Tanık, N., & Saraçoğlu, S. (2011). Analysis of the exam questions for the science and technology course based on revised Bloom’s taxonomy. TUBAV Journal of Science, 4(4):235-246.
Tekindal, S. (2009). Duyuşsal özelliklerin ölçülmesi için araç oluşturma [Creating a tool for measuring affective traits (2nd ed.)]. Pegem Akademi.
Toksoy, S.A. (2018). Analysis of the 9th, 10th and 11th grade chemistry written exam questions by Bloom Taxonomy. Master’s thesis, Marmara University, İstanbul, Turkey.
Turgut, M.F., & Baykul, Y. (2014). Egitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme [Measurement and evaluation in education] (6th ed.). Pegem Akademi.
Tutkun, Ö.F., & Seçil, O. (2012). An overview of Bloom’s revised taxonomy. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 1(3):14-22.
Urinbayeva, D. (2022). Bloom’s Taxonomy is a system of tiered questions that systematize the thought process. Spanish Journal of Innovation and Integrity, 36-39. Available at: http://sjii.indexedresearch.org/index.php/sjii/article/view/337
Vural, C. (2020). Evaluation of Turkish course questions (SBS, TEOG and LGS) in the last 10 years in terms of revised Bloom Taxonomy. Master’s thesis, Gaziantep University, Gaziantep, Turkey.
Yan, Z., Li, Z., Panadero, E., Yang, M., Yang, L., & Lao, H. (2021). A systematic review on factors influencing teachers’ intentions and implementations regarding formative assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 28(3):228-260. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2021.1884042
Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in the social sciences] (8th ed.). Seçkin.
Yolcu, H.H. (2019). Analysis and evaluation of 3. and 4. grade science course learning outcomes according to revised Bloom taxonomy. Elementary Education Online, 18(1):253-262. DOI: https://doi:10.17051/ilkonline.2019.527214
Zorluoğlu, S.L., Kızılaslan, A., & Sözbilir, M. (2016). School chemistry curriculum according to revised Bloom taxonomy. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10(1):260-279. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17522/nefefmed.22297
Alt, D., & Raichel, N. (2022). Problem-based learning, self-and peer assessment in higher education: towards advancing lifelong learning skills. Research Papers in Education, 37(3):370-394. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2020.1849371
Altun, H. (2016). Analysis of teachers’ opinion about maths questions of TEOG exam and classification of the questions according to the renewed Bloom Taxonomy. Master’s thesis, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Samsun, Turkey.
Amer, A. (2006). Reflections on Bloom’s revised taxonomy. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 4(1):213-230.
Anderson, L., & Kratwohl, D. (2014). Öğrenme öğretim ve değerlendirme ile ilgili bir sınıflama [A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing (D. Özçelik, Trans. Ed.)]. Pegem Akademi.
Anderson, L.W. (1999). Rethinking Bloom’s taxonomy: Implications for testing and assessment. Department of Education Reports. ED 435630.
Anderson, L.W. (2005). Objectives, evaluation, and the improvement of education. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 31:102-113. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2005.05.004
Ardahanlı, Ö. (2018). Analysis of questions in TEOG examination and questions in the mathematics written exam of 8th grade mathematics courses according to the revised Bloom’s taxonomy. Master’s thesis, Osmangazi University, Eskişehir, Turkey.
Arı, A. (2011). Finding acceptance of Bloom’s revised cognitive taxonomy on the international stage and in Turkey. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 11(2):767-772.
Ataş, E., & Güneş, P. (2020). Evaluation of the exam questions of the sixth grade science course according to the reconstructed Bloom taxonomy. Bolu Abant İzzet Baysal University Journal of Faculty of Education, 20(2):1066-1078. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2020.-632040
Ayvacı, Ş.A., & Türkdoğan, A. (2010). Analysing science and technology course exam questions according to revised Bloom taxonomy. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 7(1):13-25.
Baniasadi, A., Salehi, K., Khodaie, E., Bagheri Noaparast, K., & Izanloo, B. (2022). Fairness in classroom assessment: A systematic review. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 1-19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00636-z
Bloom, B.S., Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., & Krathwohl, D.R. (1979). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The Classification of educational goals. (B. S. Bloom Ed., 2nd ed.). Longman.
Bloom, B.S., Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., & Krathwohl, D.R. (1956). Handbook I: cognitive domain. David McKay.
Bowen, G.A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2):27-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
Çakıcı, Y., & Girgin, E. (2012). An assessment of end-of-unit questions in the middle school science textbooks. Erzincan University Journal of Education Faculty, 14(2):87-110.
Çakır, Z. (2019). TEOG, LGS and PISA science questions analysis and comparison. Master’s thesis, Uşak University, Uşak, Turkey.
Çalık, D., & Çınar, Ö.P. (2009). Geçmişten günümüze bilgi yaklaşımları bilgi toplumu ve internet [Information approaches from the past to the present information society and the internet]. XIV. Türkiye’de İnternet Konferansı, 77-88, Bilgi Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
Cangüven, H.D. (2019). Comparison of 2013 ve 2018 science teaching programs by renewed Bloom taxonomy. Master’s thesis, Mersin University, Mersin, Turkey.
Demir, M. (2011). The evaluation of 5th and 6th grades science and technology lesson exam questions according to Bloom’s taxonomy. The Journal of National Education, 41(189):131-143.
Demirel, Ö. (2007). Eğitimde program geliştirme [Program development in education] (2. Baskı). Pegem Akademi.
Dindar, H., & Demir, M. (2006). Evaluation of fifth grade primary teachers’ questions in science exams according to Blooms taxonomy. Gazi University Journal of Gazi Educational Faculty, 26(3):87-96.
Ekinci, O., & Bal, A.P. (2019). Evaluation of high school entrance exam (LGS) 2018 in terms of mathematics learning field and revised Bloom taxonomy. Journal of Social Sciences of Mus Alparslan University, 7(3):9-18.
Eş, H. (2005). The evaluation of science exam questions in basic education schools and in the high schools entrance examinations according to the Bloom’s taxonomy. Master’s thesis, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey.
Gökulu, A. (2015). Evaluation of exam questions of science and technology teachers and science and technology lesson TEOG questions according to revised Bloom taxonomy. Route Educational and Social Science Journal, 2(2):434-446.
Günaydın, S. (2018). An overview of Bloom’s digital taxonomy. International Journal of Computers in Education (IJCE), 1(1):39-48.
Güven, Ç. (2014). The analysing of 6th, 7th and 8th grades science and technology lesson curriculum questions according to revised Bloom’s taxonomy. Master’s thesis, Ahi Evran University, Kırşehir, Turkey.
Karaer, H. (2020). Analysis of organic chemistry questions in teaching field knowledge tests according to the revised Bloom taxonomy. Trakya Journal of Education, 10(3):726-743.
Karasar, N. (2016). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi [Scientific research method]. Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
Kaya, G., & Ahi, B. (2022). The epistemic role of children’s questions and teacher’s responses in preschool classroom discourse. Journal of Education, In press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00220574221088486
Korkmaz, H. (2004). Fen ve teknoloji eğitiminde alternatif değerlendirme yaklaşımları [Alternative assessment approaches in science and technology education]. Yeryüzü.
Krathwohl, D.R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4):212-218. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Krathwohl, D.R., & Anderson, L.W. (2010). Merlin C. Wittrock and the revision of Bloom’s taxonomy. Educational Psychologist, 45(1):64-65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520903433562
Küçükahmet, L. (2002). Ögretimde planlama ve değerlendirme [Planning and evaluation in instruction (13th ed.)]. Nobel.
Lee, Y.J., Kim, M., & Yoon, H.G. (2015). The intellectual demands of the intended primary science curriculum in Korea and Singapore: An analysis based on revised Bloom’s taxonomy. International Journal of Science Education, 37(13):2193-2213. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1072290
Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage.
Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2018). Ortaöğretime geçiş yönergesi [The transition to secondary education directive]. Available at: http://www.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/2018_03/26191912_yonerge.pdf
Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2020). Sınavla öğrenci alacak ortaöğretim kurumlarına ilişkin merkezi sınav başvuru ve uygulama kılavuzu. [Central examination application and implementation guide for secondary education institutions that will take students through the exam]. Available at: https://www.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/2020_05/06105923_BasYvuru_ve_Uygulama_KYlavuzu_2020_GuYncel.pdf
Nakiboğlu, C., & Yıldırır, H.E. (2011). Analysis of Turkish high school chemistry textbooks and teacher-generated questions about gas laws. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(5):1047-1071. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9231-6
Özkan, M., & Arslantaş, H.İ. (2013). A study of scaling with ranking judgment method on characteristic of effective teacher. Trakya University Journal of Social Science, 15(1): 311-330.
Özmen, H., & Karamustafaoğlu, O. (2006). The analysis of lycee-II physics-chemistry exam questions’ and students’ success in energy chapter as to cognitive domain. Kastamonu Education Journal, 14(1):91-100.
Panthalookaran, V. (2022). Beyond Bloom’s Taxonomy: Emergence of entrepreneurial education. Higher Education for the Future, 9(1):45-61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/23476311211046176
Rayahu, A. (2018). The analysis of students’ cognitive ability based on assessments of the revised Bloom’s taxonomy on statistic materials. European Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, 7(2):80-85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26417/ejms.v7i2.p80-85
Şad, S.N., & Şahiner, Y.K. (2016). Students’ teachers and parents’ views about transition from basic education to secondary education (BESE) system. İlköğretim Online, 15(1):53-76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17051/io.2016.78720
Sahnoun, M., & Abdennadher, C. (2021). Returns to investment in education in the OECD countries: Does governance quality matter? Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 1-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00783-0
Salmon, A.K., & Barrera, M.X. (2021). Intentional questioning to promote thinking and learning. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 40:100822. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100822
Salvato, S.W. (2011). Comparative analysis of a nontraditional general chemistry textbook and selected traditional textbooks used in Texas community colleges. Ph.D. dissertation, Texas A&M University, Texas.
Sezer, A. (2018). Analysis of science examination questions and central exam questions according to the revised Bloom taxonomy, TIMSS and PISA. Master’s thesis, Kırıkkale University, Kırıkkale, Turkey.
Tanık, N., & Saraçoğlu, S. (2011). Analysis of the exam questions for the science and technology course based on revised Bloom’s taxonomy. TUBAV Journal of Science, 4(4):235-246.
Tekindal, S. (2009). Duyuşsal özelliklerin ölçülmesi için araç oluşturma [Creating a tool for measuring affective traits (2nd ed.)]. Pegem Akademi.
Toksoy, S.A. (2018). Analysis of the 9th, 10th and 11th grade chemistry written exam questions by Bloom Taxonomy. Master’s thesis, Marmara University, İstanbul, Turkey.
Turgut, M.F., & Baykul, Y. (2014). Egitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme [Measurement and evaluation in education] (6th ed.). Pegem Akademi.
Tutkun, Ö.F., & Seçil, O. (2012). An overview of Bloom’s revised taxonomy. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 1(3):14-22.
Urinbayeva, D. (2022). Bloom’s Taxonomy is a system of tiered questions that systematize the thought process. Spanish Journal of Innovation and Integrity, 36-39. Available at: http://sjii.indexedresearch.org/index.php/sjii/article/view/337
Vural, C. (2020). Evaluation of Turkish course questions (SBS, TEOG and LGS) in the last 10 years in terms of revised Bloom Taxonomy. Master’s thesis, Gaziantep University, Gaziantep, Turkey.
Yan, Z., Li, Z., Panadero, E., Yang, M., Yang, L., & Lao, H. (2021). A systematic review on factors influencing teachers’ intentions and implementations regarding formative assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 28(3):228-260. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2021.1884042
Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in the social sciences] (8th ed.). Seçkin.
Yolcu, H.H. (2019). Analysis and evaluation of 3. and 4. grade science course learning outcomes according to revised Bloom taxonomy. Elementary Education Online, 18(1):253-262. DOI: https://doi:10.17051/ilkonline.2019.527214
Zorluoğlu, S.L., Kızılaslan, A., & Sözbilir, M. (2016). School chemistry curriculum according to revised Bloom taxonomy. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10(1):260-279. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17522/nefefmed.22297
How to Cite
Koman, I., Bayrakceken, S., Oktay, O., & Canpolat, N. (2023). Evaluation of Science Teachers’ Exam and High School Entrance Exam Science Questions Based on the Revised Bloom Taxonomy. Science Insights Education Frontiers, 16(2), 2505–2536. https://doi.org/10.15354/sief.23.or335
Issue
Section
Original Article
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.