The Profile of Students’ Questions Based on Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy on Life Organizations System Topic
Abstract
The aim of this study to determine student questions based on Revised Bloom's Taxonomy. This study was done by quantitative approach with descriptive research method. Research data were obtained through analysis of student questions sheets and interviews. Guide the student’s question were analysid sheet was used to record student questions while learning in class. Based on the results of the analysis it is known that 20% of students' questions at the cognitive domain level C1 (Remembering), 37% at the C2 level (Understanding), 20% at the C3 level (Applying), 11,5% at the C4 level (Analyzing), 11,5% at the C5 level (Evaluating), and 0% at the C6 level (Creating). While based on the dimension of knowledge, factual level questions were asked by 26% of students, conceptual level questions by 74%, and there was no question in procedural and metacognitive level.
References
Anderson, L. W. et al. (2001) A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy Of Educational Objectives. 1st edn. Addison Wesley Longman Inc. Available at: https://www.uky.edu/~rsand1/china2018/texts/Anderson-Krathwohl - A taxonomy for learning teaching and assessing.pdf.
Budiati, H. (2014) ‘Analisis Soal Ujian Nasional IPA SMP Tahun 2014 Berdasarkan Dimensi Pengetahuan dan Dimensi Proses Kognitif’, Prosiding Seminar Nasional XI Pendidikan Biologi FKIP UNS, pp. 1196–1201. Available at: https://jurnal.uns.ac.id/prosbi/article/view/8034.
Effendi, Teguh Rachmatuloh, Suhendar, J. A. (2018) ‘Analisis jenis pertanyaan yang diajukan mahasiswa magang di sma kota sukabumi berdasarkan taksonomi bloom revisi pada konsep pencemaran lingkungan’, Journal of Biology Education Vol, 1(1), pp. 57–68.
Jannah, A. N., Yuliati, L. and Parno. (2016) ‘Penguasaan Konsep Dan Kemampuan Bertanya Siswa Pada Materi Hukum Newton Melalui Pembelajaran Inquiry Lesson Dengan Strategi LBQ’, Jurnal Pendidikan : Teori, Penelitian dan Pengembangan, 1(2), pp. 409–420
Krueger, P. M., Lieder, F. and Griffiths, T. L. (2017) ‘Enhancing Metacognitive Reinforcement learning using reward structures and feedback’, Proceedings of the 39th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 1. Available at: http://cocosci.princeton.edu/papers/Accelerating_Metacognitive_RL-CameraReady.pdf.
Kyriakides, L., Anthimou, M. and Panayiotou, A. (2020) ‘Searching for the impact of teacher behavior on promoting students’ cognitive and metacognitive skills’, Studies in Educational Evaluation. Elsevier, 64(October 2019), p. 100810. doi: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2019.100810.
Pantiwati, Y. and Husamah (2017) ‘Self and peer assessments in active learning model to increase metacognitive awareness and cognitive abilities’, International Journal of Instruction, 10(4), pp. 185–202. doi: 10.12973/iji.2017.10411a.
Ramadhan, F., Mahanal, S. and Zubaidah, S. (2017) ‘Kemampuan Bertanya Siswa Kelas X Sma Swasta Kota Batu Pada Pelajaran Biologi’, BIOEDUKASI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi), 8(1), p. 11. doi: 10.24127/bioedukasi.v8i1.831.
Royani, M. and Muslim, B. (2014) ‘Keterampilan Bertanya Siswa SMP Melalui Strategi Pembelajaran Aktif Tipe Team Quiz pada Materi Segi Empat’, EDU-MAT: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 2(1), pp. 22–28. doi: 10.20527/edumat.v2i1.586.
Smith, V. G. and Szymanski, A. (2013) ‘Critical Thinking : More Than Test Scores’, NCPEA International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 8(2), pp. 16–26.
Widodo, A. (2006) ‘Profil Pertanyaan Guru dan Siswa dalam Pembelajaran Sains’, Jurnal pendidikan dan pembelajaran, 4(2), pp. 139–148.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
