TESTING THE LEVEL OF STUDENT KNOWLEDGE

Benjamin Bloom proposed six hierarchical and cumulative levels of testing to measure different levels of student subject knowledge. A review of these levels would assist the business law teacher in developing tests to measure the desired level of student mastery of the subject. It might also prove to be a tool for the teacher to assist in instructional evaluation. The lowest of these levels is knowledge, the ability to remember material previously learned. This level is a prerequisite for all other levels as is each level to all higher levels. Comprehension is the next level, where one must go beyond knowledge by understanding what one knows. Application is the next highest level. At this level one must be able to apply what he/she has comprehended. Then comes analysis, in which the individual must be able to break down or separate into parts the knowledge comprehended and applied. At the higher level is synthesis, which requires the creative combination of knowledge analyze from several topics to create something which previously did not exist. Finally, evaluation, the highest level, requires critical appraisal of the knowledge one has analyzed and synthesized.

All business law instructors attempt to teach materials at different learning levels. While some material is quite elementary, other material is more complex or advanced. Students should be tested on all levels of material presented to determine what they have mastered. Studies show, however, that most college testing involves recalling memorized facts (Crooks, 1998). Not enough testing is done to evaluate the student's ability to analyze, synthesize and evaluate material. In other words, the student's critical thinking ability is not being evaluated.

BLOOM'S TAXONOMY

One approach for improving questioning and evaluating procedures in the classroom would be to follow Benjamin Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. This is a framework for analyzing and testing for levels of knowledge achievement.

Teachers who want to improve their questions, whether for essay tests or class discussions, will discover that constructing them on Bloom's model will make their task much simpler. In so doing, they will also guarantee a mix of questions on all cognitive levels and constrain students to perform the necessary critical thinking to answer them (Kloss, 1988, p. 245).

It is felt that a review of Bloom's taxonomy classification would be beneficial to business law instructors and would help them design more effective tests and questions to evaluate student progress. A taxonomy is a hierarchical ranking of classifications to describe the level of student subject matter knowledge. A taxonomy designates the complexity and differences among these classifications. Many different taxonomy models have been developed in education, but the Bloom handbook on taxonomy of educational objectives has probably had the most impact of any model in the last three decades. As originally designed by Bloom, the taxonomy was an attempt to establish a sequential and cumulative hierarchy depicting the stages of learning from the most elementary to the most complex (Bloom, 1956). The purpose of this paper is to show how they relate to educational testing in general and specifically to testing in business law.

EVALUATIVE TECHNIQUES FOR COGNITIVE OBJECTIVES IN TESTING

Bloom identified six levels of evaluation for cognitive objectives which relate to levels of testing. In order from lowest level of teaching or testing to the highest level these are:

1. Knowledge objectives

2. Comprehensive objectives

3. Application objectives

4. Analysis objectives

5. Synthesis objectives

6. Evaluation objectives

Bloom posited six cognitive operations in a hierarchy in which the operation above subsumes all those preceding it. Moving from lowest to highest these levels are first, that of knowledge, a prerequisite for all operations to follow. Comprehension is the next level, on which one must go beyond knowledge by understanding what one knows. At the next level is application, higher because one must be able to apply what he has comprehended. Then comes analysis, in which the individual must be able to break down into its parts the knowledge applied and comprehended. Higher still is synthesis, which requires the creative combination of knowledge analyzed from several domains. Finally, evaluation, the highest operation, requires critical appraisal of the knowledge on has analyzed and synthesized (Kloss, 1988, p. 245).

Each of these objectives will be discussed in the following pages.

KNOWLEDGE OBJECTIVES

The knowledge objective involves the recall of specifics and universals, the recall of methods and processes, or the recall of a pattern, structure, or setting. For measurement purposes, the recall situation involves little more than memorization. The knowledge objective primarily emphasizes the psychological processes of remembering (Bloom, 1956).

Items designed to test knowledge objectives have been more prevalent in teacher-made and publisher-made tests in almost all fields of study. True-false and multiple-choice questions typify this level. Some key words usually associated with this level are: name, list, recall, state and identify ("My Word," No Date).

The following is an example of a business law knowledge test question: Which of the following is not a requirement for the creation of a valid contract?

(A) Competent parties, (B) Agreement, (C) Consideration, (D) Promissory estoppel, (E) Legal object.

This question assumes the student has learned the four elements of a valid contract.

COMPREHENSION OBJECTIVES

The comprehension objective represents the lowest level of understanding. With comprehension an individual must not only have knowledge, but must also understand what he knows (Bloom, 1956).

The characteristics of comprehension items are fairly clear. The material for translation, interpretation, or extrapolation must not be the same as was used in instruction, but it must have similar characteristics in terms of language, complexity, and content. Some of the key verbs to use in asking comprehensive questions are: describe, rephrase, relate and explain ("My Word," No Date).

Following is an example of a business law comprehension test question:

ABC corporation contracts to build a new university gymnasium and stadium. In the final construction, the stadium contains 100 less seats than called for in the contract. Explain how ABC can collect most of its money due under the contract.

To answer the question correctly, the student must both know the doctrine of substantial performance, and comprehend the way it applies in a specific situation.

APPLICATION OBJECTIVES

Application is the use of abstractions in particular and concrete situations. The abstractions may be in the form of general ideas, rules of procedures or generalized methods. The abstractions may also be technical principles, ideas, and theories which must be remembered and applied (Bloom, 1956).

Educators have always recognized that a student does not really "understand" an idea or principle unless he/she can apply that idea or principle in new problem situations. Therefore, application is usually regarded as an indication that subject matter has been adequately mastered. Teachers realize that one of the difficult and complex objectives of education is to teach students to apply principles and generalizations to new problem situations. In other words, students must be able to use their knowledge in new concrete situations. This is especially true in law. Questions pertaining to the application objective can be asked in verbal directives such as: solve, choose, determine, employ, interpret, demonstrate and relate ("My Word," No Date).

The following is an example of a business law application test question: Paula Pitty lives in New York City. On a visit to her cousin Tiny, who lives in Dallas, they attended the Dizzy Doll Movie Theatre, where Paula slipped and injured her ankle. When she got back to New York, she discovered it was a serious break. Dizzy Doll is one of the few "mom and pop" movie theatres left.It is owned by an elderly couple who live in Dallas and have never been to New York. Paula files suit in New York. Determine the issue. Resolve the issue and decide who will win? Why?

Students must recognize that this is a jurisdictional problem involving the "long arm" statute. Then they must then apply the statute properly to conclude that New York has no jurisdiction over the elderly owners of the Dizzy Doll.

ANALYSIS JURISDICTION

Analysis is the breakdown of material into its constituent elements or parts so that the relative hierarchy of ideas is made clear and/or the relationships between the ideas expressed are made explicit. Such analyses are intended to clarify the communication, to indicate how the communication is organized, and the way in which it manages to convey its effects, as well as its basis and arrangement (Bloom, 1956). Verbs usually associated with the analysis level are: analyze why, support, categorize, classify and put in order ("My Word," No Date). The following is an example of a business law analysis question:

Sam Seller signed a contract to sell his beautiful country estate, Greenacre, to Billy Buyer. At the closing, he breaks down and says he just can't sell the old home place. He refuses to sign the deed, even though Billy has the down payment and financing in place. Billy consults you three days later. He really wants Greenacre. Analyze Billy's options. What will you recommend? List reasons to support your recommendations.

To answer this question, students must compare traditional remedies involving money damages, with the remedies available in equity, especially specific performance. Students must evaluate Billy's situation to determine which is best for him.

SYNTHESIS OBJECTIVES

Synthesis is "The putting together of elements and parts so as to form a whole". This process of working with elements, parts, etc., and combining them in such a way as to constitute a pattern or structure not clearly there before (Bloom, 1956).

Under the synthesis objective students must be able to put all the parts together into a whole. Each student must use his/her own ideas. Business law teachers must be aware that each student may have a different "correct" answer based on his/her ideas, background and experiences. The synthesis objective can be appraised by questions using verbs such as: design, create, construct, develop, devise and plan ("My Word," No Date).

The following is an example of a business law synthesis question:

Joe Wilson, Billy Watts and Jimmy Cole are operating a surprisingly successful computer repair and service business. It all started with a handshake among three buddies. Now they are making more money than any of them ever anticipated. They come to you to figure how they should structure their business. Should they form a partnership, a corporation, a limited liability company, or a limited partnership? Evaluate their options and create a viable financial plan for their business.

With this question, the student must bring together a number of factors relating to the formation of a business, and design a plan that will best fit this specific situation.

EVALUATION OBJECTIVES

Evaluation is defined as the making of judgments about the value, for some purpose, of ideas, works, solutions, methods, materials, etc. It involves the use of criteria as well as standards for appraising the extent to which particulars are accurate, effective, economical, and/or satisfying. The judgments may be either quantitative or qualitative, and the criteria may be either those determined by the student or those which are given to him/her (Bloom, 1956).

Evaluation found in educational objectives appears to be among the most complex testing level. In the taxonomy of educational objectives, evaluation is placed as the highest category of objectives. Implicit in this placement of evaluation in the cognitive domain is the assumption that objectives in this category require some competence in all the previous categories - knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis and synthesis. Evaluation, however, goes beyond these in that the student is required to make applied judgements about something he knows, and has analyzed, synthesized, on the basis of criteria which can be made explicit. With the evaluation objective students must give their viewpoint. There will be no correct answer. Verbs used in the evaluation objective are: judge, evaluate, criticize, choose, estimate, predict and argue. Some units in a business law course are more susceptible to this approach than others. This type of question is especially valuable in the area of ethics and law. Most major business law texts have entire chapters devoted to ethical standards (Beatty, 2000).

Following is an example of a business law test question involving ethics.

You are a CPA with a major corporation. You have worked hard and climbed the ladder, and have been appointed an associate vice-president. Now you are discovering things you would rather not know. Your supervisor, Alex, also a friend and mentor, is engaged in creating off-shore partnerships where he is hiding company debts to artificially pump up the company's stock value. He is also making a private fortune on the side, all unknown to the company's directors. You don't know what the company CEO knows about this. List and analyze your options. Set out your own ethical viewpoint. Which option is most consistent with your own ethical standards? Make a decision. Argue for your position. Now evaluate the long-range legal effects of your decision.

The student will have to analyze, synthesize and evaluate information to develop a recommendation. The evaluation of this question is demanding for the instructor. There is obviously no "right" answer. One must evaluate the logic, consistency, and persuasiveness of each response.

SUMMARY

The measurement of the degree of knowledge acquired by a student is a difficult task. The business law instructor must determine the level of knowledge he or she desires the student to obtain in a course. Then the instructor is faced with the task of measuring the amount of knowledge mastered by the student. The Bloom taxonomy model will assist an instructor in both areas. It provides a framework to which the instructor can relate desired levels of learning and an understanding of how to test for a degree of success in achieving these levels of learning. Constructing test questions based on the Bloom model will serve to make this an easier task.

References

Bloom, B. (Ed.), M. D. Englehard, E. J. Furst, W.H. Hill, and D.R. Krathwohl. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Handbook I - The Cognitive. New York: McKay, 1956.

Crooks, Terrance J., "Impact of Classroom Evaluation on Student," Review of Educational Research. Vol. 58 No. 4, Winter, 1998: p. 438-481.

Daines, D., "Are Teachers Asking Higher Level Questions?", Education, 1988, Vol. 106 No. 4, p. 368-374.

Kloss, Robert J., "Toward Asking The Right Questions," The Clearing House., Vol. 61, pp. 245-248.

Manton, Edgar J. and Donald E. English. "Bloom's Taxonomy Applied to Testing in Real Estate." Real Estate Association Journal. Spring, 1989, pp. 37 - 44.

My Word: Process Verbs for Blooms Taxonomy, (Phoenix: A M Publications, no date).

Sample business law texts: Beatty, Jeffrey F. and Susan S. Samuelson. Business Law For A New Century. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1996. Chapter Nine;Cheeseman, Henry R. Business Law: Ethical, International and E-Commerce Environment, Fourth Edition. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 2001. Chapter Eight; Miller, Roger LeRoy, and Gaylord A. Jantz. Business Law Today, Fifth Edition. Cincinnati: West Legal Studies in Business, 2000. Chapter Eight.

EDGAR MANTON

CHARLES TURNER

DONALD ENGLISH

Texas A & M University - Commerce.

Copyright Project Innovation Summer 2004
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved