Global Journal of Human Social Science, G: Linguistics and Education, Volume 22 Issue 9

© 2022 Global Journals Volume XXII Issue IX Version I 8 ( ) Global Journal of Human Social Science - Year 2022 G The Status and the Specifications of the Questions of an Achievement Exam from the Points of View of the Teaching Staff- Members of Palestine Technical University- Kadoorie (PTUK)\Tulkarm-Campus to get more information and feedback which molds the modification and the accommodation processes of the communicative situation. The previous review also confirmed that questions, throughout the process of teaching and learning, occupy a spacious room of importance as questions, generally, constitute an inescapable means of communication between teachers at one end and students or learners at the other end; questions in this educational sense are inevitable when assessing and measuring: how much learning has occurred over a period of time, how much achievement has been reached, the type and quality of the educational performance, the desired skills, the comprehension magnitude, the knowledge depth, the levels of competency, and the clout in test-taking skills. The previous review considered that questions are normally connected with various educational purposes such as diagnosing problems within the learners' learning repertoire, reviewing the has been studied material, stimulating students' and learners' thinking, classroom management, activating classroom motivation and reaction, and orienting the learning processes. The abovementioned review connected questions, of a given achievement exam, with effective instruction methodologies as they are considered to be a very common strategy that is enhanced by teachers and educators so as to get better understanding of the learners' progress. b) Bloom's Taxonomy and the classification and categorization of exam questions Ali (2005) confirms that "The most common criteria used when analyzing the instructional objectives and questions is Bloom’s taxonomy that is developed by Benjamin Bloom and known as by his name (Bloom taxonomy (BT))." Lord & Baviskar (2007) propose that "Developing questions based on Bloom's hierarchy would be a productive way of reversing the dangerous trend of graduating college students with a large number of misunderstandings in courses they have taken. Chang & Chung (2009, as cited in Abduljabbar & Omar, 2015)" also applied Bloom’s taxonomy to evaluate and classify English question item’s cognition level. "Omar, Haris, Hassan, Arshad, Rahmat, Zainal & Zulkifli (2012) indicate that "Normally, academicians would categorize a question according to the Bloom’s cognitive level manually. "Abduljabbar & Omar (2015) concludes that "the Bloom’s Taxonomy has become a common reference for the teaching and learning process used as a guide for the production of exam." Abduljabbar & Omar (2015) also states that "Many studies have sought to automatically classify exam questions based on Bloom’s taxonomy. Furthermore, although limited, research has addressed the use of Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques to resolve this problem. "Chandio, Pandhiani & Iqbal (2016); Stanny (2016), propose that" Bloom’s taxonomy guides the development of test questions to assess higher-level thinking skills by drawing attention to what test questions and assessment prompts require students to do (retrieve facts, apply knowledge, make a prediction, solve a problem, or evaluate a theory)." Stanny (2016) further explains that "Bloom argued that teachers who write objective exam questions can use the taxonomy to determine whether questions require only a superficial knowledge. "Köksal & Ulum (2018) state that "Based on the findings, some assumptions have been made with the aim of suggesting how the exam papers which are being written or will be written should refer to Bloom’s taxonomy. "van Hoeij, Haarhuis, Wierstra & van Beukelen (2004, as cited in Abduljabbar & Omar, 2015) "developed a classification-based tool that uses Bloom’s anatomy to evaluate the cognitive level of short essay questions." Abduljabbar & Omar (2015), add that "To overcome the problem of exam question classification with a more effective solution, this study proposes a combination model which combines three machine learning approaches using a combination voting algorithm adopted to classify question items to agree with Bloom’s cognitive levels." Yüksel (2007, as cited in Demir & Eryaman, 2012) classifies an "alternative categorizations based on Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956) aims to formulate the Bloom’s Taxonomy as truer and accurate. Some of the alternative categorizations propound against Bloom’s Taxonomy are listed as follows: Categorization of Gerlach and Sullivan, Categorization of De Block, Categorization of Tuckman, Categorization of Williams, Categorization of Hannah and Michaelis, Categorization of Gagné and Briggs, Categorization of Stahl and Murphy, Categorization of Romizowski, Categorization of Quellmalz and Categorization of Haladayna. "Chang & Chung (2009, as cited in Yusof & Hui, 2010 ); Omar, Haris, Hassan, Arshad, Rahmat, Zainal & Zulkifli (2012) "presented an online test system to classify and analyze the cognitive level of Bloom’s taxonomy to English questions. The system accepts the exam question as an input, which will then be segmented. This system has a database where various verbs of Bloom's taxonomy are stored. The database includes verbs with lower-case and capital letters. The system then compares all the verb tenses present in the questions. When a keyword is found in the test item, then the particular question belongs to the keyword. "Haris & Omar (2012, as cited in Abduljabbar & Omar, 2015)" employed a rule- based approach for question classification using Bloom’s taxonomy in NLP. A rule-based approach evaluates and classifies written examination questions for computer subjects." recommended that "a study needs to be conducted to analyze the prevailing examination system through Bloom’s Taxonomy." Jayakodi, Bandara, Perera & Meedeniya (2016) indicate that "Bloom’s taxonomy of learning outcomes has been applied to classify the exam questions." Bloom (1956), as cited in Aviles (1999)