jcer Journal of Computer and Education Research 2148-2896 Tamer KUTLUCA 10.18009/jcer.1780003 Mathematics Education Matematik Eğitimi Cognitive Complexity in Elementary Mathematics Curriculum: A SOLO Analysis of the Maarif Model of the Century of Türkiye Cognitive Complexity in Elementary Mathematics Curriculum: A SOLO Analysis of the Maarif Model of the Century of Türkiye https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9401-6561 Doğan Coşkun Sümeyra ESKİŞEHİR OSMANGAZİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4007-7518 Bağdat Osman ANADOLU ÜNİVERSİTESİ, EĞİTİM FAKÜLTESİ 04 08 2026 14 09 08 2025 03 16 2026 Copyright © 2013, Journal of Computer and Education Research 2013 Journal of Computer and Education Research

This study investigates the cognitive complexity embedded in the Elementary School Mathematics Curriculum (Grades 1, 2, 3, and 4): The Maarif Model of the Century of Türkiye, using the SOLO (Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes) taxonomy as an analytical lens. Adopting a qualitative document analysis method, the study systematically examined all learning outcomes and their associated process components in the 2024 mathematics curriculum according to the SOLO taxonomy. The findings indicate a gradual progression in cognitive complexity across grade levels, with Multistructural and Relational components being most prevalent. While Unistructural components decrease significantly from Grade 1 to Grade 4, Extended Abstract components begin to emerge in Grade 2 and increase thereafter. However, the presence of Extended Abstract components remains limited, especially in earlier grades and in the theme Data-Driven Research/Probability of Events and Data-Driven Research. The results suggest that the curriculum is structured to support a transition from procedural fluency to conceptual understanding and generalization. Nonetheless, further emphasis on abstract reasoning and generalization tasks may enhance the curriculum’s capacity to foster students who are able to engage in mathematical reasoning.

This study investigates the cognitive complexity embedded in the Elementary School Mathematics Curriculum (Grades 1, 2, 3, and 4): The Maarif Model of the Century of Türkiye, using the SOLO (Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes) taxonomy as an analytical lens. Adopting a qualitative document analysis method, the study systematically examined all learning outcomes and their associated process components in the 2024 mathematics curriculum according to the SOLO taxonomy. The findings indicate a gradual progression in cognitive complexity across grade levels, with Multistructural and Relational components being most prevalent. While Unistructural components decrease significantly from Grade 1 to Grade 4, Extended Abstract components begin to emerge in Grade 2 and increase thereafter. However, the presence of Extended Abstract components remains limited, especially in earlier grades and in the theme Data-Driven Research/Probability of Events and Data-Driven Research. The results suggest that the curriculum is structured to support a transition from procedural fluency to conceptual understanding and generalization. Nonetheless, further emphasis on abstract reasoning and generalization tasks may enhance the curriculum’s capacity to foster students who are able to engage in mathematical reasoning.

 Mathematics curriculum elementary school SOLO taxonomy cognitive complexity Maarif model Mathematics curriculum elementary school SOLO taxonomy cognitive complexity Maarif model Acar, S. & Peker, B. (2023). Investigation of 2018 secondary school mathematics curriculum outcomes according to SOLO Taxonomy. Inonu University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 24(2), 1155-1171. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of education objectives. Longman. Biggs, J., & Collis, K. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy (Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome). Academic Press. Biggs, J. B. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does?. McGraw-Hill Education (UK). Bloom, B.S., Engelhart , MD, Furst , E.J., Hill , WH, & Krathwohl , D.R. (1956). Taxonomy of education objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. Longmans. Bowen, G.A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal 9(2), 27–40. Cihan, F., & Doruk, M. (2024). Evaluation of 2024 high school mathematics curriculum according to SOLO taxonomy and cognitive demand levels. Usak University Journal of Educational Research, 10(3), 144-157. Diktaş, A., Girgin, D., Satmaz, İ., & Yabanova, U. (2025). Analysis of the social studies course curriculum of the Türkiye century education model according to the solo taxonomy. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversity Faculty of Education Journal, 25(1), 667-690. Findell, B., Swafford, J., & Kilpatrick, J. (Eds.). (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. National Academies Press. Hess, K., Jones, B.S., Carlock, D., & Walkup, J.R. (2009). Cognitive rigor: Blending the strengths of Bloom's taxonomy and Webb's depth of knowledge to enhance classroom-level processes. The Standards Company LLC. Karabey, B., & Erdoğan, A. (2023). K12 skills framework Turkey holistic model mathematics field skills. Journal of National Education, 52(1), 971-996. Kılıç, R. (2025). Investigation of the learning outcomes of the Turkish century education model primary school mathematics course in the context of SOLO taxonomy. HAYEF: Journal of Education, 22, 1-10. Kılıçgün, M. Y. (2025). An analysis and evaluation of the learning area skills of the century of Türkiye education model preschool education program: SOLO taxonomy example. Journal of the Human and Social Science Researches, , 14(5), 2495-2519. Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B.S., & Masia, B.B. (1964). Taxonomy of education objective. Handbook II: Affective domain. David McKay. Li, J., Xue, E., & Guo, S. (2025). The effects of PISA on global basics education reform: A systematic literature review. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12, Article 106.https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-04403-z Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook: Qualitative data analysis (R. Holland (ed.); 2nd ed., Vol. 1304). SAGE Publications, Inc. Ministry of National Education [MoNE] (2018). Elementary school mathematics curriculum. https://.meb.gov.tr Ministry of Education Singapore. (2021). Mathematics syllabus–Primary. https://www.moe.gov.sg Ministry of National Education [MoNE] (2024). Türkiye's century maarif model elementary school mathematics curriculum. https://tymm.meb.gov.tr National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM]. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. NCTM. Ornstein, A.C., & Hunkins, F.P. (2017). Curriculum: Foundations, principles, and Issues (7th ed.). Pearson. Özcan, N., & Masal, E. (2025). Assessment of learning outcomes in the 2024 secondary school mathematics curriculum according to SOLO taxonomy levels and process standards. Erzincan University Journal of Education Faculty, 27(4), 648-664. Pegg, J. (2003). The SOLO taxonomy: A tool to analyze understanding of students and developing curricula. In J. Royer (Ed.), Mathematical cognition (pp. 65–86). Information Age Publishing. Posner, G. J. (2004). Analyzing the curriculum (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill. Print, M. (1993). Curriculum development and design (2nd ed.). Allen & Unwin. Satmaz, I., & Yabanova, U. (2024). Analysis of Türkiye century maarif model secondary school mathematics curriculum according to SOLO Taxonomy. International Journal of Curriculum and Instructional Studies, 14(2), 195-219 Smith, M. S., & Stein, M. K. (1998). Reflections on practice: Selecting and creating mathematical tasks: From research to practice. Mathematics teaching in the middle school, 3(5), 344-350. Stein, M. K., Smith, M. S., Henningsen, M. A., & Silver, E. A. (2000). Implementing standards-based mathematics instruction: A casebook for professional development. Teachers College Press. Taguma, M., Feron, E., & Lim, M. H. (2018). Future of education and skills 2030: Conceptual learning framework. Organization of Economics Co-operation and Development. Temur, Ö., & Özcan, Z. Ç. (2020). Investigation of students' fraction problem solving processes according to SOLO taxonomy. Gazi University Gazi Faculty of Education Journal, 40(1), 255–279. Yaralı, D. (2024). Examination of the learning outcomes of the 2024 chemistry course curriculum according to the solo taxonomy. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 24(1), 238-258. Yıldırım, A., & Şimsek, H. (2016). Qualitative research methods in social sciences (10th Eds). Seçkin.