A Transformer-Based Cognitive Classification Framework for Integrating Bloom’s Taxonomy into Adaptive Testing Systems

Authors

  • ISAAC IFINJU University of Ilorin image/svg+xml Author
  • Mayowa O OGUNJIMI Author
  • Timothy Obasuyi OGHOGHO Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.71291/944erk32

Keywords:

Machine Learning, Bloom’s Taxonomy, Adaptive Testing, Educational Data Mining, Transformers Model, NLP

Abstract

This study proposes a transformer-based machine learning framework for automated classification of test items according to Bloom’s taxonomy of cognitive processes, aiming to enhance cognitive alignment in adaptive testing systems. Manual classification of assessment items is often time-intensive and susceptible to subjectivity, posing challenges for large-scale and real-time adaptive testing environments. To address this limitation, the study employs Natural Language Processing techniques, specifically fine-tuning a BERT-based model, to classify Economics test items into six cognitive levels. A balanced dataset comprising 3,000 expert-annotated items (Cohen’s κ = 0.87) was used, with stratified training, validation, and testing procedures to ensure robustness. Model performance was evaluated using accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score, alongside stratified 5-fold cross-validation and comparative analysis with Logistic Regression and Support Vector Machine baselines. The proposed model achieved an accuracy of 97.7% on the held-out test set and a cross-validated mean accuracy of 96.7% (SD = 0.5), substantially outperforming baseline models. While classification performance was consistently high across most categories, relatively lower recall for the “Understand” level suggests inherent semantic overlap between adjacent cognitive processes. The findings demonstrate the potential of transformer-based models to capture nuanced cognitive demand in assessment items. Importantly, the study conceptualises this classification framework as a complementary layer to Item Response Theory-based adaptive testing systems, enabling item selection that accounts for both psychometric properties and cognitive complexity. The study contributes a scalable approach to improving the consistency and pedagogical alignment of item classification, while highlighting the need for further validation using diverse and imbalanced datasets and for integration into operational adaptive testing environments.  

References

AlKhuzaey, S., Grasso, F., Payne, T. R., & Tamma, V. (2021). A systematic review of data-driven approaches to item difficulty prediction. International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, 29–41.

An, X., & Yung, Y.-F. (2014). Item response theory: What it is and how you can use the IRT procedure to apply it. SAS Institute Inc, 10(4), 364–2014.

Asthana, P., Mishra, S., & Hazela, B. (2024). Text Identification for Questions Generation According to Bloom’s Taxonomy Using Natural Language Processing. In Machine Learning in Educational Sciences: Approaches, Applications and Advances (pp. 335–357). Springer. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-9379-6_16

Banda, S., Phiri, F., Kaale, J., Banda, A. M., Mpolomoka, D. L., Chikopela, R., & Mushibwe, C. (2023). Application of bloom’s taxonomy in categorization of cognitive process development in colleges. Journal of Education and Practice, 14(4), 6–13.

Besar, M. N. A., Abd Aziz, K. H., & Halim, H. A. (2025). The Validity of Multiple-True-False and One-Best-Answer in the Final Professional Undergraduate Medical Examination. Education in Medicine Journal, 17(2), 5–21.

Bhopale, A. P., & Tiwari, A. (2024). Transformer based contextual text representation framework for intelligent information retrieval. Expert Systems with Applications, 238, 121629.

Bichi, A. A., & Talib, R. (2018). Item Response Theory: An Introduction to Latent Trait Models to Test and Item Development. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 7(2), 142–151.

Chandio, M. T., Pandhiani, S. M., & Iqbal, R. (2016). Bloom’s Taxonomy: Improving Assessment and Teaching-Learning Process. Journal of Education and Educational Development, 3(2), 203–221.

Cunha, W., Viegas, F., França, C., Rosa, T., Rocha, L., & Gonçalves, M. A. (2023). A comparative survey of instance selection methods applied to non-neural and transformer-based text classification. ACM Computing Surveys, 55(13s), 1–52.

Dogra, V., Verma, S., Kavita, Chatterjee, P., Shafi, J., Choi, J., & Ijaz, M. F. (2022). A complete process of text classification system using state-of-the-art NLP models. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, 2022(1), 1883698.

Du, X., Yang, J., Hung, J.-L., & Shelton, B. (2020). Educational data mining: a systematic review of research and emerging trends. Information Discovery and Delivery, 48(4), 225–236.

Forehand, M. (2010). Bloom’s taxonomy. Emerging Perspectives on Learning, Teaching, and Technology, 41(4), 47–56.

https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=e277af328821afe28b0c9f 506319ce6bf7228e5e

Gavhane, J. M., & Pagare, R. (2025). Revolutionizing Academic Evaluation: Bloom’s Taxonomy Meets Deep Learning and NLP. 2025 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), 1–10.

Lu, C., & Cutumisu, M. (2021). Integrating Deep Learning into an Automated Feedback Generation System for Automated Essay Scoring. International Educational Data Mining Society.

Madhavi, A., Nagesh, A., & Govardhan, A. (2023). Efficient Course Recommendation using Deep Transformer based Ensembled Attention Model. EAI Endorsed Transactions on E-Learning, 9.

Meissner, R., Jenatschke, D., & Thor, A. (2020). Evaluation of approaches for automatic e-assessment item annotation with levels of Bloom’s taxonomy. International Symposium on Emerging Technologies for Education, 57–69. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66906-5_6

Selva Birunda, S., & Kanniga Devi, R. (2021). A review on word embedding techniques for text classification. Innovative Data Communication Technologies and Application: Proceedings of ICIDCA 2020, 267–281.

Sung, C., Dhamecha, T. I., & Mukhi, N. (2019). Improving short answer grading using transformer-based pre-training. International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, 469–481.

Weibelzahl, S., Paramythis, A., & Masthoff, J. (2020). Evaluation of adaptive systems. Proceedings of the 28th ACM Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization, 394–395.

Zaidi, N. L. B., Grob, K. L., Monrad, S. M., Kurtz, J. B., Tai, A., Ahmed, A. Z., Gruppen, L. D., & Santen, S. A. (2018). Pushing critical thinking skills with multiple-choice questions: does Bloom’s taxonomy work? Academic Medicine, 93(6), 856–859.

Zhang, L., & VanLehn, K. (2016). How do machine-generated questions compare to human-generated questions? Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 11(1), 7.

Published

2025-12-23

Issue

Section

Computer Adaptive Testing Research

How to Cite

IFINJU, I., OGUNJIMI, M. O., & OGHOGHO, T. O. (2025). A Transformer-Based Cognitive Classification Framework for Integrating Bloom’s Taxonomy into Adaptive Testing Systems. Journal of Computer Adaptive Testing in Africa, 4, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.71291/944erk32