Evaluation of Activities in Secondary School Level Turkish Workbooks According to Types of Memory and Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study analyzes the activities in the Turkish student workbooks in the framework of secondary school level Turkish courses based on the literature of “memory, information processing process, memory-learning relationship and the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy.” It seeks to determine which activities are associated with which type of information in the parts of the long-term memory (semantic memory and episodic memory), and to identify the steps in the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy which these information are linked to. The study further presents the distribution of the activities in the books according to the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy. Based on the results, the inspection of the distribution of the activities in the books in terms of semantic and episodic information reveals that there are more activities for the semantic dimension in all grade levels. Most of the activities in the semantic dimension, which includes academic knowledge and skills, are intended for the lower-order thinking skills; in the episodic dimension, the highest number of the activities are designed at the level of create whilst the lowest number of the activities are intended for the level of analyze and evaluate in all grade levels. The inspection of the distribution of all the activities in the books according to the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy points to that there are less activities at the level of analyze, evaluate and create, which entail higher-order thinking skills, whilst there are more activities at the level of remember, understand and apply in all grade levels.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".