10.2478_atd-2023-0019

Acta Educationis Generalis Volume 13, 2023, Issue 3 DOI: 10.2478/atd-2023-0019 15 Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy in a Principles of Economics Textbook Matthew Metzgar  Received: May 8, 2023; received in revised form: July 7, 2023; accepted: July 10, 2023 Abstract: Introduction: Among the contemporary models developed, the updated Bloom’s taxonomy has become the most widely used cognitive process model for gauging learning questions. This model emphasizes the cognitive levels starting from remembering information and progresses to advanced levels such as producing knowledge. Even though students use a variety of strategies to synthesize information and learn, there is an urgent need for teachers to adopt better pedagogies to facilitate meaningful learning. Adams (2015) established that Bloom’s taxonomy places emphasis on student’s ability to acquire prior knowledge before interpreting or applying it into a real-world scenario. It is of interest then to determine the Bloom’s levels in princ iples of economics textbooks. Methods: This study utilized qualitative research to determine whether the aspects of Bloom’s revised taxonomy were utilized in end of chapter questions. The questions at the end of the chapters of the “Principles of Economics” by Gregory Mankiw (2021) were classified based on Bloom’s revised taxonomy. Results: The study revealed that most of the questions utilized the apply level of Bloom’s cognitive domain. There were few questions regarding evaluation or creating. Discussion: Faculty need to be aware of the different Bloom’s levels available to them and potentially focus more on the higher levels of Bloom’s revised taxonomy. Limitations: One limitation is that only the leading Principles of Economics textbook was surveyed. Other textbooks may produce different results. Conclusions: The leading Principles of Economics textbook had many end-of- chapter questions at the apply level of the revised Bloom’s taxonomy. There may * Matthew Metzgar, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, USA; mmetzgar@charlotte.edu

Acta Educationis Generalis Volume 13, 2023, Issue 3 16 be opportunities to develop more questions at the higher levels of the revised Bloom’s taxonomy. Key words: Bloom’s taxonomy, principles of economics, undergraduate education. Introduction The classification of information into a precise sequence which is durable in an individual’s memory allows learners to effectively store, retrieve and apply facts. It is essential for students to acquire fundamental knowledge before applying it in the real- world scenario. Measuring the updated Bloom’s taxonomy cognitive levels utilized by learners in textbook questions allows curriculum developers and authors to formulate information that facilitate meaningful learning. Storing knowledge in long-term memory requires the involvement of higher cognitive processes (Forehand, 2005). Köksal, Ulum, and Yürük (2023) established th at teachers, researchers, and textbook writers should use Bloom's innovative cognitive abilities to enable the learners to enrich texts based on vocabulary, structure, and context. They should also consider using strategies that enable learners to develop their low cognitive skills, standard memory tests, including ability to express themselves in appropriate language and content. The principles of economics course is often the only economics course that business or general students take. Often the course is broken into two different semesters, one for microeconomics and one for macroeconomics. Other options include a compressed one-semester course in the essentials of economics. Whatever the approach, the principles course is the most important opportunity to reach general students and expose them to economic thinking. Therefore, the effectiveness of the textbook selected is of vital importance. The leading textbook for introductory economics is “Principles of Economics” by Gregory Mankiw (2021). For the purposes of this paper, the 9th edition is used for analysis. This textbook has been used for decades and continues to dominate the market. As such, it is of interest to check the effectiveness of the end-of-chapter questions in terms of their learning potential. One approach is to classify the questions in terms of Bloom’s taxonomy (Bloom et al., 1956). The original Bloom’s taxonomy had six levels of ascending difficulty which were knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Over time, Bloom’s taxonomy has been revised by several authors (Darwazeh, 2017; Krathwohl, 2002).

Acta Educationis Generalis Volume 13, 2023, Issue 3 18 1.1 Cognitive domain Cognitive domain holds critical importance in Bloom’s taxonomy as it establishes the basic cognitive processes that outline students’ understanding. Huitt (2011) established that Lorraine Anderson also looked at the cognitive aspect of the classification of education and perhaps the two most prominent aspects being the renaming of six categories from nouns to verbs. This new classification represents a more powerful and potentially more accurate way of thinking. Students have varied levels of cognitive understanding and their process skills are diverse (Özgelen, 2012). The key aspects of the cognitive domains are elaborated below. - Remembering: It is the ability of the individual to remember the information memorized before. - Understanding: It is the ability to understand the meaning and interpret instructions and problems. - Applying: It is the ability to use ideas in new ways (Abidin et al., 2013). In the learning environment, students are expected to apply what they learn in the classroom to new workplace situations. - Analyzing: It is the process of breaking down material or ideas into parts to define an organizational structure. - Evaluating: It involves expressing a judgment about the value of an idea or thing. - Creating: A structure or model has several parts. Creating is the process of combining parts as a whole to create new behaviours or structures. 1.2 Affective domain - Receiving phenomena: This indicates the active student’s participation and the learning outcomes that are response-oriented. - Valuing: The aspect denotes the values or morals that a person has about an object, situation or behaviour. Morality is based on a specific set of values, and evidence of these values can be seen in the general behaviour of students, which is often observed. - Organization: It involves prioritizing values by comparing different values, resolving conflicts between them, and creating a unified value system. Emphasis is placed on comparison, cooperation, and convergence of values. - Internalizing values: It is the value system that governs a person's behaviour. The behaviour is positive, stable and predictable, especially the personality of the student. Learning goals relate to students' general coping mechanisms characterized as personal, social, and emotional.

Acta Educationis Generalis Volume 13, 2023, Issue 3 19 2 Method The approach of this study involved analyzing the end of chapter questions in the identified textbook and classifying them based on the levels of revised Bloom’s taxonomy. The textbook provides a variety of low and high reading cognitive level questions which students are ready to answer. Bloom's new rule was only used to ask reading questions in this study. There is an increased need to establish the theoretical basis for teachers to determine which strategies related to the use of textbooks can enhance student’s reading com prehension skills. In the study, a qualitative research approach that uses descriptive analysis was utilized. The reading questions at the end of the selected chapters identified the cognitive levels in Bloom's taxonomy. The key words and verbs that make up the assessment sections, sample questions, and targeted activities at each chapter were used to indicate the level of conceptual organization and how each aspect of Bloom’s taxonomy was utilized. The data obtained were reviewed and analyzed. Frequencies have also been presented in research as a quantitative research design, but reading comprehension questions show similar examples in qualitative research. Low- level cognitive skills include memory, comprehension and practice while advanced cognitive skills include analysis, evaluation and reasoning. The frequency and proportion of each cognitive level were calculated. Bloom's taxonomy has been modified to examine assessment tools related to the cognitive fields of memory, cognition, and related psychology. The textbook utilized for this study is the “Principles of Economics” by Gregory Mankiw (2021) which provides extensive information about economics. Mankiw uses a clear and engaging writing style to present information, useful facts and real-life scenarios. The economics concepts presented in the book have a significant role in the decisions made by practitioners in the field. Since the book is widely used in the field of economics and utilized in this course study, it was selected for review in this study. Each of the chapters was analyzed with each question at the end of the chapter being classified to determine cognitive levels utilized. To clearly present the data in this study, the ratio and frequency of individual information levels are presented in a table. In summary, Bloom's taxonomy was developed as the theoretical basis for this study. Based on this, points were calculated for the relevant examples to reflect each level of Bloom's new perspective. The chapters analyzed for this research study are Chapters 1 through 12. This represents the first four major sections of the textbook: Introduction, How Markets Work, Markets and Welfare, and The Economics of the Public Sector. The specific chapters analyzed are listed below for each major section:

Acta Educationis Generalis Volume 13, 2023, Issue 3 21 majority of the questions reflected the applying aspect followed by the analyzing aspects. Questions are an important part of effective learning. Nappi (2017) established that every day, experts use questions to stimulate students' thinking and imagination which also tests students' memorization and application of knowledge. Effective questions reflect the educational goals to be achieved which makes it an effective instrument used in the classroom environment. Effective questions include narrative or problem-solving questions, as well as more complex questions that stimulate students' intellectual activity. The questions selected in this case were not vague or ambiguous and did not contain complex vocabulary, complex grammar or unclear punctuation. Table 1 Classification of textbook questions for Section 1 Introduction (Chapters 1 - 3) Level # % Remembering 0 0.00% Understanding 1 0.00% Applying 16 62.96% Analyzing 7 25.93% Evaluating 3 11.11% Creating 0 0.00% Total 27 100.00% The data in Table 1 reveal that number of text book questions which utilized the remembering aspect of revised Bloom’s Taxonomy were none, those that utilized understanding was 1, those that utilized applying were 16 (62.96%) while which utilized analyzing were 7 (25.93%), those that utilized evaluating were 3 (11.11%) while those that utilized creating were none. Sample questions from the text illustrating these levels are listed below: “Describe some of the trade - offs faced by each of the following:” (Understanding level, p. 14) “Draw a circular - flow diagram.” (Apply level, p . 34) “How can you compare the benefits to the costs?” (Analyze level, p . 14) “Are the following statements true or false? Explain in each case.” (Evaluate level, p. 59)

Acta Educationis Generalis Volume 13, 2023, Issue 3 22 Table 2 Classification of textbook questions for Section 1 Introduction (Chapters 4 - 6) Level # % Remembering 0 0.00% Understanding 4 12.12% Applying 21 63.64% Analyzing 6 18.18% Evaluating 2 6.06% Creating 0 0.00% Total 33 100.00% The data in Table 2 reveal that number of textbook questions which utilized the remembering aspect of revised Bloom’s Taxonomy were none, those that utilized understanding were 4 (12.12%), those that utilized applying were 21 (63.64%) while which utilized analyzing were 6 (18.18%), those that utilized evaluating were 2 (6.06%) while those that utilized creating were none. It is evident that the majority of the questions reflected the applying aspect followed by the analyzing aspects. Sample questions from the text illustrating these levels are listed below: “Is the demand curve elastic or inelastic?” (Understanding level, p . 107) “What is each driver’s price elasticity of demand?” (Apply level, p . 108) “What happens to the price of donuts?” (Analyze level , p. 108) “Should you inc rease or decrease the price of admission?” (Evaluate level, p . 108) Table 3 Classification of textbook questions for Section 1 Introduction (Chapters 7 - 9) Level # % Remembering 0 0.00% Understanding 3 10.00% Applying 14 46.67% Analyzing 6 20.00% Evaluating 6 20.00% Creating 1 3.33% Total 30 100.00%

Acta Educationis Generalis Volume 13, 2023, Issue 3 24 “Based on your calculations, would you support the mayo r’s policy?” (Evaluate level, p. 207) “Can you think of ways the private market can solve this problem?” (Create level, p. 223) 4 Discussion The purpose of this study was to investigate the low and high levels of reading comprehension in textbook questions and characterize it based on Bloom’s revised taxonomy. The data revealed that the text questions examined did not focus on the remembering aspect of Bloom’s taxonomy. It is also evident that most of the questions reflected the applying aspect followed by the analyzing aspects. In general, the reading questions measured a moderate level of cognitive ability rather than a high level. Memorization, comprehension, and application are the most assessed processes in this case; advanced skills have not been carefully evaluated. The data showed that the essay questions did not show a high level of reading proficiency. The results of the study also revealed that the level of cognition and the cognitive processes that are undertaken when the different types of questions are presented vary significantly. This is because some of the questions require deeper understanding, memory, and comprehension before it can be stored which means that the level of cognition required for such tasks is higher. The textbook questions presented in this study required varying cognitive levels. While some of the questions required the students to use a small portion of their cognitive abilities, others required the student to utilize a large proportion of their cognitive ability. Most of the questions presented, however, did not target the students to exhibit higher cognitive levels. Köksal, Ulum and Yürük (2023) established that it was ubiquitous that learners rarely reinforced their lexical, contextual, and syntactical knowledge unless the information provided in the reading text required so. Due to limited time and heavy workload, some teachers cannot prepare adequate teaching materials for the class. Therefore, most of them use textbooks in their classes and mention these books as their main teaching tools (Ulum, 2016). Disciplines, such as teaching and learning methods, research studies and psychology, show that the brain uses various cognitive processes to process, interpret, store, and retrieve information. These cognitive processes include memory, perception, sensation, and analysis. According to Smith and Kelly (2015) cognition involves complex operations, such as learning, problem solving, reasoning, critical thinking, and intelligence. All of these processes have sub-tasks which can occur simultaneously or sequentially depending on the activities of the person. The complexity of these thought processes also varies, with some having low, medium, or high complexity. To correctly obtain the

Acta Educationis Generalis Volume 13, 2023, Issue 3 25 intellectual scores for the learners and measure these cognitive processes, complexity is considered part of the psychological rating system. Unlike the first taxonomy developed in 1956, the new Bloom’s taxonomy allows the combination of different levels defined as a function. Both original and revised taxonomy refers to a hierarchical structure that identifies cognitive levels from simple memory to more complex operations (Adams, 2015). Forehand (2010) established that Bloom's Taxonomy of Learning Objectives plays an important role in the development of higher and lower knowledge learning activities, assessment tools, and learning materials because of the importance of assessing whether students have engaged in meaningful learning. Bloom's assessment of educational goals was first proposed by educational psychologist Benjamin Bloom and later by Anderson et al. (2001) and Krathwohl (2002). The basic classification measures the difficulty of thinking in 6 classification levels, classified into subgroups of cognitive skills (Rahman & Manaf, 2017). In the first edition, three objectives were clearly defined: types of learning objectives, curriculum development models and facilitating communication between teachers when administering learning assessment. Hierarchy states that the ability to succeed at one level of Bloom's hierarchy is the result of success at the previous level (Rahayu, 2018). Therefore, it is ubiquitous that the level of knowledge and understanding is important. Verenna et al. (2018) established that if students are not sufficiently successful at basic levels of general understanding, they are less likely to succeed at higher levels, including application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation which require more explanation and complex understanding. Design, instruction, and assessment are among the most important steps in determining whether students' conceptual development is consistent with learning objectives. Jones et al. (2009) established that assessment is used to identify and determine student and teacher effectiveness. It also determines the curriculum content and is an important way to assess students' knowledge. Bloom's taxonomy is a system for ranking educational goals according to the level of knowledge students need to succeed (Poluakan et al., 2019). There are six levels and the rule is that the strength at the highest level is an accurate indication of meaningful understanding. At the lowest level, which is remembering, students can repeat facts when asked without understanding their meaning. The next level is "understanding" which is higher because the student has reached the level of knowledge to understand the meaning of the truth (Akib & Muhsin, 2020). When students are challenged to deviate from prior learning, students demonstrate that understanding through knowledge transfer. At the advanced level of collaboration and evaluation, students are expected to demonstrate exceptional ability to set and achieve goals, some academic support, and exceptional ability to evaluate material.

Acta Educationis Generalis Volume 13, 2023, Issue 3 27 References Abidin, S. Z., Bahrin, S. K., & Razak, N. F. A. (2013). Defining the cognitive levels in Bloom’s taxonomy through the quranic levels of understanding -initial progress of developing an Islamic concept education. International Journal of Asian Social Science, 3 (9), 2060-2065. Adams, N. E. (2015). Bloom’s taxonomy of cognitive learning objectives. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 103(3), 152. Akib, E., & Muhsin, M. A. (2020). Critical thinking in cognitive domain: Exploring assessment of English teaching at pandemic period of covid-19. JEES (Journal of English Educators Society), 5 (2), 178-184. Bertucio, B. (2017). The Cartesian heritage of Bloom’s taxonomy. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 36 (4), 477-497. Bloom, B. S., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2020). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Book 1, Cognitive domain. Longman. Darwazeh, A. N. (2017). A new revision of the [revised] Bloom's taxonomy. Distance Learning, 14 (3), 13-28. Forehand, M. (2005). Bloom's taxonomy: Original and revised. Emerging Perspectives on Learning, Teaching, and Technology , 8, 41-44. Forehand, M. (2010). Bloom’s taxonomy. Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology, 41 (4), 47-56. Gul, R., Kanwal, S., & Khan, S. S. (2020). Preferences of the teachers in employing revised blooms taxonomy in their instructions. Sir Syed Journal of Education & Social Research (SJESR), 3 (2), 258-266. Huitt, W. (2011). Bloom et al.'s taxonomy of the cognitive domain. Educational Psychology Interactive, 22, 1-4. Jones, K. O., Harland, J., Reid, J. M., & Bartlett, R. (2009). Relationship between examination questions and bloom's taxonomy . In 2009 39th IEEE frontiers in education conference (pp. 1-6). IEEE. Keeling, J., & Major, D. (2018). Transition-focused chapter 3 reflection and personal development planning. Transition to Nursing Practice: From Student to Registered Nurse, 47. 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. https://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. Mankiw, N. G. (2021). Principles of Microeconomics (9th Ed.). CENGAGE Learning Custom Publishing. Nappi, J. S. (2017). The importance of questioning in developing critical thinking skills. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 84 (1), 30. Özgelen, S. (2012). Students’ science process skills within a cognitive domain framework. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 8 (4), 283-292. Poluakan, C., Tilaar, A. L., Tuerah, P., & Mondolang, A. (2019 ). Implementation of the Revised Bloom Taxonomy in Assessment of Physics Learning. Retrieved from

Acta Educationis Generalis Volume 13, 2023, Issue 3 28 https://www.academia.edu/40038731/Implementation_of_the_Revised_Bloom_Tax onomy_in_Assessment_of_Physics_Learning Rahayu, 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, 3 (2), 80-85. Rahman, S. A., & Manaf, N. F. A. (2017). A critical analysis of Bloom's taxonomy in teaching creative and critical thinking skills in Malaysia through English literature. English Language Teaching, 10 (9), 245-256. Sarfraz, H. (2 017). Strategic leadership development: Simplified with Bloom’s taxonomy. Industrial and Commercial Training , 49(1), 40-47. Smith, A. D., & Kelly, A. (2015). Cognitive processes. In The encyclopedia of adulthood and aging (pp. 1-4). John Wiley & Sons. Ulum , Ö. G. (2016). A descriptive content analysis of the extent of bloom's taxonomy in the reading comprehension questions of the course book Q: Skills for success 4 reading and writing. The Qualitative Report, 21 (9), 1674. Verenna, A. M. A., Noble, K. A., Pearson, H. E., & Miller, S. M. (2018). Role of comprehension on performance at higher levels of Bloom's taxonomy: Findings from assessments of healthcare professional students. Anatomical Sciences Education, 11 (5), 433-444. Wilson, L. O. (2016). Anderson and Krathwohl- Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised. Understanding the New Version of Bloom's Taxonomy. Retrieved from: https://thesecondprinciple.com/essential-teaching-skills/blooms-taxonomy-revised/