Should Taxonomic Levels be Considered in Developing Examinations?

Abstract

This study investigates the relationship between cognitive taxonomic levels of multiple choice questions and student performance on basic medical sciences material. Parallel questions were developed testing the same factual information but at different taxonomic levels. First year medical students answered these questions as part of their diagnostic examinations. The results show that when content is held constant students perform as well on simple level questions, i.e., recall, as on more complex ones, i.e., interpretation and problem-solving. Also there was no relationship between student-ranking and performance on the different types of items. Several explanations of these results and recommendations are discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anderson, R. C. How to construct achievement tests to assess comprehension . Review of Educational Research, 1972, 42, 145-170.

Bloom, B. S. (Ed). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook I: The cognitive domain. New York: McKay, 1956.

Bormuth, J. R. On the theory of achievement test items. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970.

Bruning, J. L. and Kintz, B. L. Computational handbook of statistics. Glenview, Ill: Scott, Foresman and Co., 1977.

Craik, F. I. M. and Lockhart, R. S. Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1972, 11, 671-684.

Gagné, R. M. The conditions of learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1977.

Krathwohl, D. R. Taxonomy of educational objectives: Its use in curriculum building in C. M. Lindvall (Ed) Defining educational objectives. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1964.

Kropp, R. P. and Stroker, H. W. The construction and validation of tests of the cognitive processes as described in the taxonomy of educational objectives. Florida State University, Institute of Human Learning and Department of Educational Research and Testing, February, 1966. ERIC ED 010 044.

Madaus, G. F. , Woods, E. M. , and Nuttall, R. L. A causal model analysis of Bloom's taxonomy. American Educational Research Journal, 1973, 10, 253-262.

10.

Moscovitch, M. and Craik, F. I. M. Depth of processing, retrieval cues, and uniqueness of encoding as factors in recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1976, 15, 447-458.

11.

Nedelsky, L. Absolute grading standards for objective tests , Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1954, 14, 3-19.

12.

Seddon, G. M. The properties of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives for the cognitive domain . Review of Educational Research, 1978, 48, 303-323.