The aim of this study is to compare 2018 Science Course Curriculum (SCC), 2015 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and 2018 High School Entrance Examination (HSE) in terms of content domains, cognitive domains and learning objectives. Qualitative research method, was used in this study. Data were analyzed using document review matrices to determine the similarities and differences between the objectives of SCC, TIMSS and HSE. SCC outcomes and HSE science questions were also classified according to TIMSS cognitive domains. Results show that the learning objectives of the fields of Physics, Biology and Earth Sciences of TIMSS are compatible with those of all grade levels of SCC and that the objectives of Chemistry are compatible with those of the seventh and eighth grades. Most of HSE questions are compatible with the objectives of SCC, however, the latest revision in the curriculum has introduced some eighth grade objectives to other grade levels. HSE science questions measure higher-level skills than TIMSS science questions. The subject domain of the “Organisms and Life” of SCC has the most learning objectives in the levels of “knowing” and “reasoning” while the subject domain of the “Physical Events” has the most learning objectives in the levels of “applying.” Besides, the seventh-, fifth- and eighth-graders have the most objectives in the levels of “knowing,” “applying,” and “reasoning,” respectively. It is hoped that the results will contribute the literature in improvement of science curricula and interpretation of national and international exams.

Teacher-made tests (TMT) are the most used instruments for assessment and evaluation. This study investigates the cognitive requirements, test construction errors, and item types of TMTs. Content analysis technique is used in order to analyze and classify TMT items based on TIMSS-2019 assessment framework and based on criteria that is constructed to determine test construction errors. The data is consisted of 548 items in 30 exam papers of 18 mathematics teachers from 13 distinct schools. The distribution of TIMSS-2019 cognitive demands of all TMTs indicates that there is a strong emphasis on knowing or applying cognitive domains, with a total percentage of 93. Since 83% of all questions are of multiple choice and 17% are constructed-response type, teachers mostly prefer multiple choice item type. Findings also reveal that except face validity, there are errors concerning test constructions. Consequently, it is suggested that teachers should give more care on preparing items of higher cognitive levels, on tests of mixed type items, and on tests that involve lesser construction errors for more reliable tests. Finally, it is also suggested that measurement and evaluation specialists should be employed in each school or in each local Ministry of National Education Authority at least, in order to support teachers, but if this is not possible in a close time, there must be in-service training programs on measurement and evaluation for teachers to participate in.