COMPARISON OF WRITTEN ASSESSMENT TOOLS OF BUSINESS MATHEMATICS IN THE FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION BASED ON BLOOM’S TAXONOMY

Authors

  • Dr. Md. Abdus Sabur Associate Professor, Department of Accounting & Information Systems Islamic University Kushtia, Bangladesh
  • Professor Dr. Md. Abu Sina Professor Dr. Md. Abu Sina Department of Accounting & Information Systems Islamic University Kushtia, Bangladesh
  • Sanjoy Kumar Sarker Assistant Professor Dept. of Finance and Banking Islamic University Kushtia, Bangladesh

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29121/granthaalayah.v6.i6.2018.1356

Keywords:

Assessment, Cognitive Domain, Written Test, Bloom’s Taxonomy

Abstract [English]

The teaching learning is a continuous process by which the educators involving in this field are working to change the behavior of the students as the required human resources for the welfare of the society. Bloom’s Taxonomy is the most important and widely used process that helps the educators to provide the students equipped with knowledge perfectly in the different domains of the learning skills as suggested by Benjamin Bloom. To assess the learning skills written test is the very important tools that are applying on the students from the beginning of the formal education. In this paper an attempt has been taken to evaluate the allocation pattern of the marks of the course Business Mathematics of the three departments Accounting and Information System, Management and Finance & Banking under business faculty according to the components of Bloom’s Taxonomy. It is observed that there is a significant difference of the allocations of marks among the selected the three departments regarding the cognitive domain of the B.T. But no significant difference has been found in the allocation pattern of marks throughout the academic years under review. The marks allocation in LOCQ, IOCQ and HOCQ are found to be 43 percent 52 percent and 5 percent respectively which are not suited with the recommended marks allocation according to the recognized system. The suggestions and recommendation have been given to allocate the marks to prepare the written questions papers according to the cognitive domains of Bloom’s Taxonomy

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Anderson, L. W. (2005). Objectives, evaluation, and the importamt of education. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 100-113.

Singun, A. J. (November 3rd, 4th 2016). Application-based test bluprint for a sammatative classroom assessment. Procedings of the 10th International Management Conference (Pp. 170-181). Romania: Bucharest.

Sivarman, S. H., & Krishna, D. (September 2015). Blooms Taxonomy-applications in exam papers sssesment. International Journal Of Multidiscipplainary Science And Engineering, Vol.6, No.9 pp, pp. 5-8.

K, J., W. Z. A, W. M., Ghazali, N., W. N, W. J., S, S., & S. N. A, A. (2011). Allocation Marks Model for Examination Based on Bloom"s Taxonomy. International Conference on Modeling, Simulation and Control (pp. 53-60). Singapore: LACSIT Press, Singapore.

Adiguzel, O. C. (2013). Teacher recruitment in Turkey: Analysis of teacher selection exams in comparison with Revised Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives . Academ, ISSN 1990-3839,Vol. 8(21), pp. 2136-2146.

Bush, H. M., Daddysman, J., & Charnigo, R. (2014). Improving outcomes with Bloom’s Taxonomy: From statistics education to research partnerships. Biomet Biostat, 6155-6180. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4172/2155-6180.1000e130

Crowe, A., Dirks, C., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2008). Biology in Bloom: Implementing Bloom’s Taxonomy to enhance student learning in biology CBE . Life Sciences Education, Vol. 7, pp. 368 –381. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.08-05-0024

Nyef, E., Yaacob, N., & Ismail, H. (September 2013). Taxonomies of Educational Objective Domain. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences , Vol. 3, No. 9 ISSN: 2222-6990. DOI: https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v3-i9/199

Edams, N. E. (2015). Bloom’s taxonomy of cognitive learning objectives . J Med Libr Assoc, 103(3):152-153.

Soozandehfa, S. M., & Adeli, M. R. (2016). A Critical Appraisal of Bloom’s Taxonomy. American Research Journal of English and Literature (ARJEL), ISSN: 2378-9026 Volume 2, pp 9-10.

Pickard, M. J. (2007). The new Bloom’s Taxonomy:An overview for family and consumer sciences. Ournal of Family and Consumer Sciences Education , 3-5.

The Peak Performance Center. (2013). The Peak Performance Center. Retrieved 11 04, 2017, from The Peak Performance Center web site: Link-

http://thepeakperformancecenter.com/educational-learning/thinking/blooms-taxonomy/blooms-taxonomy-revised

Allen, M. (2004, 12). UCONN. Retrieved 11 03, 2017, from UCONN web site:

http://web2.uconn.edu/assessment/what/index.html

Huba, M. E., & Freed, J. E. (2000, 04 24). UCONN. Retrieved 11 03, 2017, from UCONN wed site: http://web2.uconn.edu/assessment/what/index.html

Erwin.T.D. (1991). UCONN. Retrieved 11 03, 2017, from UCONN web site:

http://web2.uconn.edu/assessment/what/index.html

California State University. (2016). http://www.csueastbay.edu/directory/index.html. Retrieved 11 03, 2017, from California State University Web site:

http://www.csueastbay.edu/cbe/about/assurance- of-learning/understand/what-is-assessment.html

The glossary of education reform. (2015, 10 11). The glossary of education reform. Retrieved 11 03, 2017, from The glossary of education reform web site: http://edglossary.org/assessment.

Downloads

Published

2018-06-30

How to Cite

Sabur, A., Sina, A., & Kumar Sarker, S. (2018). COMPARISON OF WRITTEN ASSESSMENT TOOLS OF BUSINESS MATHEMATICS IN THE FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION BASED ON BLOOM’S TAXONOMY. International Journal of Research -GRANTHAALAYAH, 6(6), 119–130. https://doi.org/10.29121/granthaalayah.v6.i6.2018.1356