Tracking Student’s Order Thinking Process with AKT and Learning Path

Ahadia Busyaroh Asyhuri, Sajidan Sajidan, Baskoro Adi Prayitno

Abstract

This study is an exploratory qualitative, aimed to describe student’s order thinking process in remembering, understanding, and applying cognitive level based on Anderson Krathwohl Taxonomy (AKT) with learning path. There are 2 dimensions of AKT that cannot be separated and are equally important to maximize the potential of students and teachers in the learning process as well as learning outcomes. AKT differentiates the dimensions of the cognitive process into 2 levels of thinking, are low order thinking for the C1-C3 categories and high order thinking starting from C4-C6. The student must be mastered first on low-level thinking before reached a higher level. The development of a student’s order thinking process can be tracked with a learning path. A learning path is a route that students take to reach the learning goals. The selection of learning paths can be used as an alternative to developing student’s thinking process and scaffolding. Teachers are free to determine the route they feel more efficient to build students' high-order thinking. The sample of this research was selected by purposive random sampling consisted of 3 students in each level of high, middle, and low academic ability (HAA, MAA, and LAA). The research procedure sets up with knowing student's abilities, preparing instruments, conducting research, and analyzing the data. Results are: 1) The students' thinking process could be accessed using AKT and learning path; 2) The thinking process of students is influenced by academic ability in terms of the learning path; 3) All research subjects have not been able to reach the highest thinking process tested, namely PC3 so that a deeper analysis is needed to determine the cause; and 4) Learning path can be used as a tool to track students' unattainable thinking processes and scaffolding the “missed” thinking process as a solution

Keywords

Student's order thinking process, remembering, understanding, applying, learning path.

Full Text:

PDF

References

Alimuddin, Z., & Hariati, N. (2019). Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) Untuk Natural Sciences (1st ed.). HAFECS Press.

Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl Peter W Airasian, D. R., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., Raths, J., & Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing (A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives). Addison Wesley Longman, Inc. https://www.uky.edu/~rsand1/china2018/texts/Anderson-Krathwohl - A taxonomy for learning teaching and assessing.pdf

Azizah, N. R., Masykuri, M., & Prayitno, B. A. (2018). Scaffolding as an effort for thinking process optimization on heredity. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1006(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1006/1/012017

Jha, S. K. (2012). Mathematics performance of primary school students in Assam (India): An analysis using Newman Procedure. International Journal of Computer Applications in Engineering Sciences, II(I), 17–21. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.303.2464&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Karmana, I. W. (2011). Strategi Pembelajaran, Kemampuan Akademik, Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah, dan Hasil Belajar Biologi. Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan Universitas Negeri Malang, 17(5), 111523.

Kristianto, E., Mardiyana, & Saputro, D. R. S. (2019). Analysis of Students’ Error in Proving Convergent Sequence using Newman Error Analysis Procedure. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1180(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1180/1/012001

Mahanal, S. (2019). Asesmen Keterampilan Berpikir Tingkat Tinggi. Jurnal Penelitian Dan Pengkajian Ilmu Pendidikan: E-Saintika, 3(2), 51–73. https://doi.org/10.36312/e-saintika.v3i2.128

Marzano, R. J., & Kendall, J. S. (2007). The New Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Second Edition. In Corwin Press (2nd Editio). Corwin Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-85617-816-7.10013-X

Prayitno, B. A., Corebima, D., Susilo, H., Zubaidah, S., & Ramli, M. (2017). Closing the science process skills gap between students with high and low level academic achievement. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 16(2), 266–277.

Putri, R. R., Ahda, Y., & Rahmawati, D. (2018). Analisis Aspek Kemampuan Berpikir Tingkat Tinggi pada Instrumen Penilaian Materi Protista untuk Peserta Didik SMA / MA Kelas X Aspect Analysis in Higher Order Thinking Skills on the Evaluation Instrument of Protist Topic for the Grade 10 Senior H. Jurnal BIODIK, 4(1), 8–17.

Rahayuningsih, P., & Qohar, A. (2014). Analisis Kesalahan Menyelesaikan Soal Cerita Sistem Persamaan Linear Dua Variabel (Spldv) Dan Scaffolding-Nya Berdasarkan Analisis Kesalahan Newman Pada Siswa Kelas Viii Smp Negeri 2 Malang. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika Dan Sains, 2(2), 109–116. https://doi.org/10.21831/jpms.v4i2.7161

Rohmah, M., & Sutiarso, S. (2018). Analysis problem solving in mathematical using theory Newman. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(2), 671–681. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/80630

Susanto, H. A. (2011). Pemahaman pemecahan masalah pembuktian sebagai sarana berpikir kreatif. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Penelitian, Pendidikan, Dan Penerapan MIPA, Fakultas MIPA, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta,1997, 189–196.

Wulaningsih, S., Prayitno, B. A., & Probosari, R. M. (2012). Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Inkuiri Terbimbing Terhadap Keterampilan Proses Sains Ditinjau Dari Kemampuan Akademik Siswa. Pendidikan Biologi, 4(2), 33–43. https://doi.org/10.1161/RES.0b013e31821e0b53

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.