An Evaluation of Indonesian Textbooks Using Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy

Denda Rinjaya; Sisilia Setiawati Halimi

doi:10.19105/ojbs.v16i1.5813

Denda Rinjaya Linguistics Department, Faculty of Humanities, Universitas Indonesia, Depok 16424
Sisilia Setiawati Halimi Linguistics Department, Faculty of Humanities, Universitas Indonesia, Depok 16424 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4403-7003

https://doi.org/10.19105/ojbs.v16i1.5813

Abstract views: 895 ,

PDF downloads: 891

Keywords: Textbook Evaluation, BIPA, Revised Bloom's Taxonomy, High-order thinking skills, Low-order thinking skills

Abstract

Implementing higher-order thinking skills into teaching-learning practice has become a priority for any teaching program anywhere today. This study aims to evaluate two books of BIPA (Bahasa Indonesia bagi Penutur Asing) 7 Sahabatku Indonesia (2019) based on the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy (RBT). The content analysis approach was used in this study to analyze research data in the form of instructions and questions classified using the RBT category. First, the analysis results showed that the instructions and questions in the two BIPA books were dominated by lower-order thinking skills (‘understanding' and 'remembering'). Second, although lower-order thinking skills dominated the instructions and questions in the two BIPA books, this study revealed that the majority of the instructions and questions classified as lower-order thinking skills in both textbooks analyzed can be changed into higher-order thinking skills. The findings of this study infer that the majority of instructions and questions in the BIPA 7 Sahabatku Indonesia need to be revised to encourage higher-order thinking skills-oriented teaching. These findings serve as a reminder for textbook writers of the importance of providing cognitive activities that can help learners develop both lower-order and higher-order thinking skills in textbooks.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Afandi, Sajidan, Muhammad Akhyar, and Nunuk Suryani. “Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Perception About High Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) in the 21st Century.” International Journal of Pedagogy and Teacher Education 2, no. 1 (2018): 107–14. https://doi.org/10.20961/ijpte.v2i1.18254.

Anderson, Lorin, David Krathwohl, Peter Airasian, Kathleen Cruikshank, Richard Mayer, Paul Pintrich, James Raths, and Merlin Wittrock. A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Longman, 2001.

Asakereh, Ahmad, Nouroddin Yousofi, and Hiwa Weisi. “Critical Content Analysis of English Textbooks Used in the Iranian Education System: Focusing on ELF Features.” Issues in Educational Research 29, no. 4 (2019): 1016–38.

Assaly, Ibtihal R, and Oqlah M. Smadi. “Using Bloom’s Taxonomy to Evaluate the Cognitive Levels of Master Class Textbook’s Questions.” English Language Teaching 8, no. 5 (2015): 100–110. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v8n5p100.

Ching, Hong Yuh, and Edson Coutinho da Silva. “The Use of Bloom’s Taxonomy to Develop Competences in Students of a Business Undergrad Course.” Academy of Management Proceedings 1 (2017): 107–26. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2017.10153abstract.

Creswell, John W. Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Boston: Pearson, 2012.

Ebadi, Saman, and Vida Mozafari. “Exploring Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy of Educational Objectives in TPSOL Textbooks.” Journal of Teaching Persian Language to Non-Persian Speaker 5, no. 1 (2016): 1–29.

Forehand, Mary. “Bloom’s Taxonomy: Original and Revised.” In Emerging Perspective on Learning, Teaching, and Technology, edited by Michael Orey, 41–47, 2010. https://textbookequity.org/Textbooks/Orey_Emergin_Perspectives_Learning.pdf.

Gholami, Pasand Parastou, and Ali Asghar Ghasemi. “An Intercultural Analysis of English Language Textbooks in Iran: The Case of English Prospect Series.” Apples - Journal of Applied Language Studies 12, no. 1 (2018): 55–70. https://doi.org/10.17011/apples/urn.201804172107.

Gordani, Yahya. “An Analysis of English Textbooks Used at Iranian Guidance Schools in Terms of Bloom’s Taxonomy.” The Journal of AsiaTEFL 7, no. 2 (2010): 249–78.

Hua, Tzu-Ling. “Textbooks for Teaching and Learning a Foreign English Language: Do They Really Facilitate Students’ Acquisition of English Relative Clauses?” International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning 8, no. 2 (2019): 17–28. https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrsll.2019.4006.

Jahangard, Ali. “Evaluation of EFL Materials Taught at Iranian Public High Schools.” Asian EFL Journal 9, no. 2 (2007): 130–50.

Krathwohl, David R. “A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An Overview.” Theory Into Practice 41, no. 4 (2002): 212–18. https://doi.org/10.%201207/s15430421tip4104_2.

Krippendorff, Klaus. Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE, 2004.

Mithans, Monika, and Milena Ivanuš Grmek. “The Use of Textbooks in the Teaching-Learning Process.” In New Horizons in Subject-Specific Education: Research Aspects of Subject-Specific Didactics, edited by Alenka Lipovec, Janja Batič, and Eva Kranjec, 1st ed., 201–28. Maribor: University of Maribor Press, 2020. https://doi.org/10.18690/978-961-286-358-6.10.

Öztürk, Esra. “An Evaluation of Secondary School 9th Grade English Program and 9th Grade Coursebook Activities from the Perspective of Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy.” Master Thesis, Gazi University Graduate School of Education, 2019.

Sadighi, Shiva, Mortaza Yamini, Mohammad Sadegh Bagheri, and Mustafa Zamanian. “Using Bloom’s Revised Cognitive Skills Taxonomy To Evaluate Iranian Students’ Pre-University English Textbook and University Entrance Exams.” Journal of Studies in Learning and Teaching English, 7 (13), (2018), 69-97.

Shuyi, Natalie Soong, and Willy A Renandya. “An Analysis of the Cognitive Rigour of Questions Used in Secondary School English Language Textbooks in Singapore.” Asian Journal of English Language Studies (AJELS) 7 (2019): 169–89.

Stanny, Claudia J. “Reevaluating Bloom’s Taxonomy: What Measurable Verbs Can and Cannot Say about Student Learning.” Education Sciences 6, no. 4 (2016): 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci6040037.

Sunggingwati, Dyah, and Hoa Thi Mai Nguyen. “Teachers’ Questioning in Reading Lessons: A Case Study in Indonesia.” Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching 10, no. 1 (2013): 80–95.

Tabrizi, Sirous, and Glenn Rideout. “Active Learning: Using Bloom’s Taxonomy to Support Critical Pedagogy.” International Journal for Cross-Disciplinary Subjects in Education 8, no. 3 (2017): 3202–9. https://doi.org/2010.20533/ijcdse.2042.6364.2017.0429.

Tomlinson, Brian, and Hitomi Masuhara. The Complete Guide to the Theory and Practice of Materials Development for Language Learning. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2018.

Ulum, Ömer Gökhan. “Is the revised Bloom’s Taxonomy revisited in the EFL/ESL reading textbooks?” OPUS– Journal of Society Research, no. 19 (2022): 170-177. https://doi.org/10.26466/opusjsr.1062878.

Widana, I Wayan. “Higher Order Thinking Skills Assessment (HOTS).” Journal of Indonesian Student Assessment and Evaluation (JISAE) 3, no. 1 (2017): 32–44. https://doi.org/10.%2021009/jisae.v3i1.4859.

Zareian, Gholamreza, Mohammad Davoudi, Zahra Heshmatifar, and Javad Rahimi. “An Evaluation of Questions in Two ESP Coursebooks Based on Bloom’s New Taxonomy of Cognitive Learning Domain.” International Journal of Education and Research 3, no. 8 (2015): 313–26.

Zohar, Anat, and Yehudit J. Dori. “Higher Order Thinking Skills and Low-Achieving Students: Are They Mutually Exclusive?” Journal of the Learning Sciences 12, no. 2 (2003): 145–81. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15%20327809JLS1202_1.