Article Sidebar

Published
Sep 12, 2017
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 3590 Download : 2236

Main Article Content

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to explore pre-service mathematics teachers' conception of higher-order thinking in Bloom's Taxonomy, to explore pre-service mathematics teachers' ability in categorizing six cognitive levels of Bloom's Taxonomy as lower-order thinking and higher-order thinking, and pre-service mathematics teachers' ability in identifying some questionable items as lower-order and higher-order thinking. The higher-order thinking is the type of non-algorithm thinking which include analytical, evaluative and creative thinking that involves metacognition. This research is a descriptive quantitative research. The data were analyzed and visualized by percentages and diagrams. The participants are 50 Third-Year Students of Mathematics Education Department at Universitas Nusa Cendana. The results showed: (1) pre-service mathematics teachers' conception of lower-order and higher-order thinking more emphasis on the different between the easy and difficult problem, calculation problem and verification problem, conceptual and contextual, and elementary and high-level problem; (2) pre-service mathematics teachers categorized six cognitive levels at the lower-order and higher-order thinking level correctly except at the applying level, preservice mathematics teachers placed it at the higher-order thinking level; (3) pre-service mathematics teacher tend to made the wrong identification of the test questions that were included in the lower-order and higher-order thinking. One of the recommendations is pre-service mathematics teachers should be familiarized of higher-order thinking questions start from their first-year of study in University. 

Keywords

Higher-order thinking Bloom’s taxonomy

Article Details

References

  1. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A Taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman Publishing.
  2. Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Hill, H. H., Furst, E. J., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). The taxonomy of educational objectives, the classification of education goals, handbook I: cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Company.
  3. Bookhart, S. M. (2010). How to assess higher-order thinking skills in your classroom. Alexandria: ASCD.
  4. Coffman, D. M. (2013). Thinking about thinking: an exploration of preservice teachers’ views about higher order thinking skills. University of Kansas: Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation.
  5. Delima, N. (2017). A relationship between problem solving ability and students’ mathematical thinking. Infinity, 6(1), 21-28.
  6. Hamafyelto, R. S., Hamman-Tukur, A., & Hamafyelto, S. S. (2015). Assessing teacher competence in test construction and content validity of teacher made examination questions in Commerce in Borno State, Nigeria. Education, 5(5), 123-128.
  7. Harpster, D. L. (1999). A study of possible factors that influence the construction of teacher-made problem the assess higher-order thinking skills. Montana State University-Bozeman: Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation.
  8. Hendriana, H. (2017). Senior high school teachers’ mathematical questioning ability and metaphorical thinking learning. Infinity, 6(1), 51-58.
  9. Herlina, E. (2015). Meningkatkan advanced mathematical thinking mahasiswa. Infinity, 4(1), 65-83.
  10. Katagiri, S. (2004). Mathematical thinking and how to teach it. CRICED: University of Tsukuba.
  11. Kaya, D., & Aydin, H. (2016). Elementary mathematics teachers' perceptions and lived experiences on mathematical communication. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(6), 1619-1629.
  12. Kocakayaa, S., & Kotluka, N. (2016). Classifying the standards via revised bloom's taxonomy: a comparison of pre-service and in-service teachers. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 11(18), 11297-11318.
  13. Lewis, A., & Smith, D. (1993). Defining higher-order thinking. Theory into Practice, 32(3), 131-137.
  14. Miri, B., David, B. C., & Uri, Z. (2007). Purposely teaching for the promotion of higher-order thinking skills: A case of critical thinking. Research in science education, 37(4), 353-369.
  15. Murray, E. C. (2011). Implementing higher-order thinking in middle school mathematics classrooms. University of Georgia: Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation.
  16. Näsström, G. (2009). Interpretation of standards with Bloom’s revised taxonomy: a comparison of teachers and assessment experts. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 32(1), 39-51.
  17. Pegg, J. (2010). Promoting the acquisition of higher-order skills and understandings in primary and secondary mathematics. Research Conference 2010 (pp. 35-38). Melbourne: Crown Conference Centre.
  18. Richland, L. E., & Begolli, K. N. (2016). Analogy and higher order thinking: learning mathematics as an example. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(2), 160-168.
  19. Rubin, J., & Rajakaruna, M. (2015). Teaching and assessing higher order thinking in the mathematics classroom with clickers. International Society of Educational Research, 10(1), 37-51.
  20. Ryan, J., & McCrae, B. (2006). Assessing Pre-Service Teachers' Mathematics Subject Knowledge. Mathematics teacher education and development, 7, 72-89.
  21. Saeed, M., & Naseem, A. (2016). Analysis of secondary grade mathematics question papers of boards of intermediate and secondary education in punjab. Pakistan Journal of Education, 31(1), 1-16.
  22. Thompson, T. (2000). An analysis of higher-order thinking on algebra I end-of-course tests. International Journal for Mathematics Teaching and Learning, 12, 1-36.
  23. Thompson, T. (2008). Mathematics teachers’ interpretation of higher-order thinking in bloom’s taxonomy. International electronic journal of mathematics education, 3(2), 97-109.