Iranian 12th-grade English Language Final Examinations in the Light of Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy

Articles in Press

Document Type : مقالات علمی پژوهشی

Authors
Z. Dolati 1
A. Tahriri 1
S. A. Razmjoo 2
1 University of Guilan
2 Shiraz University
Abstract
Being a promising component of educational and occupational success, the inclusion of critical thinking in various aspects of schooling has gained momentum in recent years. Therefore, the present study investigated the Iranian 12th grade English language final examinations based on Bloom’s revised taxonomy in terms of “knowledge dimension” and “cognitive process dimension” over the last five years of exam administration. Using a quantitative content analysis design, the items of the aforementioned examinations administered from 2019 to 2023 were analyzed. The findings of the study showed that the frequency of “conceptual knowledge” items in the “knowledge dimension” and “understand” items in the “cognitive process dimension” were significantly higher based on the results of Chi-square test. Moreover, the frequency of items relevant to lower-order thinking skills was found to be considerably higher than that of the items related to higher-order thinking skills, although instances of top cognitive level items could be traced in these examinations. It was also revealed that there was no considerable change with regard to the inclusion of the two dimensions of Bloom’s revised taxonomy over the five years of administration under study. The results of this study can be a fillip for policy makers, textbook developers, and teachers to accelerate the required changes regarding the consideration of inclusion of critical thinking-based tasks in textbooks, lesson plans and examinations.

Keywords

Subjects

Amer, A. (2006). Reflections on Bloom's revised taxonomy. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 4(1), 213-230. http://dx.doi.org/10.25115/ejrep.v4i8.1217
Anderson, L. W. (1999). Rethinking Bloom's taxonomy: Implications for testing and assessment. (ED435630). ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED435630.pdf
Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., Raths, J., & Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
Dabbagh, A., & Safaei, A. (2019). Comparative textbook evaluation: Representation of learning objectives in locally and internationally published ELT textbooks. Issues in Language Teaching, 8(1), 249-277. https://doi.org/10.22054/ilt.2020.48071.440
Ebadi, S. & Shahbazian, F. (2015). Exploring the cognitive level of final exams in Iranian high schools: Focusing on Bloom’s taxonomy. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 2(4), 1-11.
Forehand, M. (2005). Bloom's taxonomy: Original and revised. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. CreateSpace.
Ghaderinezhad, F., Aliakbari, M., & Khani, R. (2021). Evaluating the Iranian senior ELT high school Vision series in terms of Bloom’s revised taxonomy. Iranian Journal of Applied Language Studies, 13(2), 181-196. https://doi.org/10.22111/IJALS.2021.6825
Gorjian, B. (2011, November 14-16). Evaluation of final achievement examinations of third grade junior high school English textbook [Paper presentation]. 4th International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation, Madrid, Spain.
Heer, R. (2009). Revised Bloom's Taxonomy (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001) [Visual Model]. Iowa State University.
Köksal, D., Ulum, Ö. G., & Yürük, N. (2023). Revised Bloom’s taxonomy in reading texts in EFL/ESL settings. Acta Educationis Generalis, 13(1), 133-146. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/atd-2023-0007
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002) A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 212-218, http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159-174.
Lai, E. R. (2011). Critical thinking: A literature review. Pearson's Research Reports, 6(1), 1-49.
Muhayimana, T., Kwizera, L., & Nyirahabimana, M. R. (2022). Using Bloom’s taxonomy to evaluate the cognitive levels of primary leaving English exam questions in Rwandan schools. Curriculum Perspectives, 42(1), 51-63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-021-00156-2
Omar, N., Haris, S. S., Hassan, R., Arshad, H., Rahmat, M., Zainal, N. F. A., & Zulkifli, R. (2012). Automated analysis of exam questions according to Bloom's taxonomy. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 59, 297-303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.278
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (1992). Critical thinking: What, why, and how. New Directions for Community Colleges, 77(2), 3-24. https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.36819927703
Rezaee, M., & Golshan, M. (2016). Investigating the cognitive levels of English final exams based on Bloom’s taxonomy. International Journal of Educational Investigations, 3(4), 57-68.
Riazi, A. M., & Mosalanejad, N. (2010). Evaluation of learning objectives in Iranian high-school and pre-university English textbooks using Bloom's taxonomy. TESL-EJ, 13(4).
Stringer, J. K., Santen, S. A., Lee, E., Rawls, M., Bailey, J., Richards, A., ... & Biskobing, D. (2021). Examining Bloom’s taxonomy in multiple choice questions: Students’ approach to questions. Medical Science Educator, 31(4), 1311-1317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-021-01305-y
Saidi, M., & Mokhtarpour, H. (2020). Can Vision 3 notch up a win over pre-university English textbook? Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 15, 21-32. https://doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2020.15.02
Supreme Council for Cultural Revolution & Ministry of Education. (2011). Document of Fundamental Evolution in Education. Secretariat of Supreme Council for Cultural Revolution.
Swart, A. J. (2010). Evaluation of final examination papers in engineering: A case study using Bloom's taxonomy. IEEE Transactions on Education, 53(2), 257-264. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2009.2014221
Wilson, L. O. (2016). Anderson and Krathwohl, Bloom’s taxonomy revised: Understanding the new version of Bloom's taxonomy. Retrieved from https://quincycollege.edu/wp-content/uploads/Anderson-and-Krathwohl_Revised-Blooms-Taxonomy.pdf
Zorluoglu, S. L., & Güven, Ç. (2020). Analysis of 5th grade science learning outcomes and exam questions according to revised Bloom taxonomy. Journal of Educational Issues, 6(1), 58-69. https://doi.org/10.5296/jei.v6i1.16197
Language Related Research

Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript
Available Online from 13 July 2025