We consider the impact on student learning outcomes of a re-design of an undergraduate macroeconomics course. Changes were made to move from lower- to higher-order taxonomic dimensions, with emphasis on application and analysis. We use 13 questions which appeared on final exams before and after the re-design to evaluate changes in student learning outcomes. The analysis shows that after the re-design students improved performance on questions classified as higher-order, while performance suffered on questions classified as lower-order. These results suggest that the re-design was a shift of teaching and learning resources, not an overall improvement that impacted equally all taxonomic dimensions. The course before the re-design may have used its resources well, but in pursuit of improving application and analysis over memorization and understanding.