Comparison of the Cognitive Level of the Topic Of Mixed Operations in Mathematics Year 5 Primary Schools in Malaysia and Brunei
Perbandingan aras Kognitif Topik Operasi Bercampur Matematik Tahun 5 Sekolah Rendah Malaysia dan Brunei
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37134/jpsmm.vol13.1.7.2023Keywords:
mixed operations, math textbooks, primary school, HOTS, year 5, cognitive levelAbstract
The reference for teachers, students and even parents is the textbook. It should consist of mathematical tasks that can foster creative thinking skills and student reasoning. Therefore, this study was carried out to compare the cognitive levels of the questions used in the samples and exercises contained in the mathematics textbooks of Malaysia and Brunei. The study involved the title of mixed operations. The process of analyzing the content of such textbooks uses a survey design approach with a quantitative approach to the content of textbooks. Bloom taxonomy and TIMSS 2019 mathematical framework focus on cognitive domains to facilitate the analysis carried out. The findings found that the cognitive level of mixed-operational questions from the year five math textbook of Brunei Darussalam was lower than that of textbooks used in Malaysia. The percentage of questions involving problem-solving in Brunei textbooks for the topic was only 16.3% compared to Malaysian textbooks at 44.5%. Visual illustrations can also help students to facilitate the students' understanding. The percentage of pictorial questions in year five math textbooks in Malaysia was 35.14% compared to Brunei, which only involved 9.18%. This study is to help the Curriculum Division of the Ministry of Education Malaysia (MOE) to improve the content of HOTS elements in textbooks and to improve the visual illustrations in the contents of future textbooks to help students better understand and master questions with HOTS elements.
Downloads
References
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Pearson.
Arthur, Y. D., Dogbe, C. S. K., & Asiedu-Addo, S. (2022). Enhancing Performance in Mathematics Through Motivation, Peer Assisted Learning, And Teaching Quality: The Mediating Role of Student Interest. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(2), em2072. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11509
Ayusrijuniantari, I. (2017). Pentingnya Peningkatan Kompetensi Guru Dalam Pencapaian Hasil Belajar Siswa. ResearchGate.
Azis, A. B. A., & Rosli, R. (2021). Analisis Aras Kognitif Bagi Soalan dalam Buku Teks Matematik Tahun 4 KSSR Semakan. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH), 6(3), 146–158. https://doi.org/10.47405/mjssh.v6i3.712
Behnke Y. (2018). Textbook effects and efficacy. In: Fuchs, E., & Bock, A. (2018). The Palgrave Handbook of Textbook Studies. 383-396.
Bjorklund, D. F., & Causey, K. B. (2017). Children’s Thinking: Cognitive Development and Individual Differences [6 ed.] 9781506334356. (405 C.E., July 12).
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook I The cognitive domain. New York David McKay Co Inc. - References - Scientific Research Publishing. (n.d.).
Brookhart, S. M. (2010). How to Assess Higher-order Thinking Skills in Your Classroom. ASCD.
Buletin Anjakan. (2015). Pelan Pembangunan Pendidikan Malaysia 2013-2025 (Bil.4). Kuala Lumpur: Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia.
Chuen, T. L., & Rosli, R. (2021). The Content Domain Analysis of the Revised KSSR Standard 4 Mathematics Textbook Version 2017. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains Dan Matematik Malaysia, 11(2), 51–66. https://doi.org/10.37134/jpsmm.vol11.2.5.2021
Downs, R. M., & Stea, D. (Eds.). (2017). Image & Environment: Cognitive Mapping and Spatial Behavior. Transaction Publishers.
Embretson, S., & Daniel, R. (2008). Understanding and quantifying cognitive complexity level in mathematical problem-solving items. Psychology Science, 50, 328-344.
Fan, L., Trouche, L., Qi, C., & Visnovska, J. (2018). Research on Mathematics Textbooks and Teachers’ Resources : Advances and Issues. Springer International Publishing.
Fan, L., Zhu, Y., & Miao, Z. (2013). Textbook research in mathematics education: development status and directions. The International of Journal in Mathematics Education, 45(5), 633–646. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0539-x
Fujita, T., & Jones, K. (2003). The Place Of Experimental Tasks In Geometry Teaching: Learning From The Textbook Designs Of The Early 20th Century. Research in Mathematics Education, 5(1), 47 62. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794800008520114
Gracin, D. G. (2018). Requirements in mathematics textbooks: a five-dimensional analysis of textbook exercises and examples. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 49(7), 1003 - 1024. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739x.2018.1431849
Gunawan, I., & Palupi, A. R. (2016). Taksonomi Bloom – Revisi Ranah Kognitif: Kerangka Landasan Untuk Pembelajaran, Pengajaran, Dan Penilaian. Premiere Educandum: Jurnal Pendidikan Dasar Dan Pembelajaran, 2(02). https://doi.org/10.25273/pe.v2i02.50
Gupta, T., & Mishra, L. (2021). Higher-Order Thinking Skills in Shaping the Future of Students. ResearchGate. 58. 9305-9311.
Hadar, L. L. (n.d.). Cognitive Opportunities in Textbooks: The Cases of Grade Four and Eight Textbooks in Israel. 21(1), 54–77. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1206374
Hadi, S., Retnawati, H., Munadi, S., Apino, E., & Wulandari, N. F. (2018). The Difficulties Of High School Students In Solving Higher-Order Thinking Skills Problems. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 76(4), 520–532. https://doi.org/10.33225/pec/18.76.520
Haji Tengah, Ampuan Haji Brahim bin Ampuan. (2013). “Sistem Pendidikan Negara Abad ke-21: Isu dan Cabaran di Brunei Darussalam” in SOSIOHUMANIKA: Jurnal Pendidikan Sains Sosial dan Kemanusiaan, Vol.6, No.2 [November], pp.197-208. Bandung, Indonesia: Minda Masagi Press owned by ASPENSI, ISSN 1979-0112.
Hilmi, I., Fadlila, N., Ramadanti, E., Retnawati, H., & Arliani, E. (2022). Development of Higher Order Thinking Skills Test based on Revised Bloom Taxonomy. JTAM (Jurnal Teori Dan Aplikasi Matematika), 6(2), 341–353. https://doi.org/10.31764/jtam.v6i2.7292
Hoogland, K., De Koning, J., Bakker, A., Pepin, B., & Gravemeijer, K. (2018). Changing representation in contextual mathematical problems from descriptive to depictive: The effect on students’ performance. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 58, 122–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.06.004
Huitt, W. (2006). The Cognitive System. Educational Psychology Interactive, Valdosta, GA Valdosta State University. - References - Scientific Research Publishing. (n.d.).
Hwang, W., Chen, N., Dong, J., & Yang, Y. (2007). Multiple Representation Skills and Creativity Effects on Mathematical Problem Solving using a Multimedia Whiteboard System. 10(2): 191–212.
Ismail, H., & Hamzu, N. (2020). Pengintegrasian KBAT dalam Pengajaran Matematik semasa Praktikum dalam Kalangan Bakal Guru Sekolah Rendah Integration of HOTS in Mathematics Teaching during Practices in Primary Schools. Journal of Advanced Research in Social and Behavioural Sciences Journal Homepage, 19, 80–89. https://doi.org/10.37934/arsbs.19.1.8089
Ismail, Z., Tan, K. J., & Abidin, M. (2018). A Comparative Analysis on Cognitive Domain for the Malaysian Primary Four Textbook Series. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(4), 1273-1286. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/82625
Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. (2001). Falsafah Pendidikan Kebangsaan, Matlamat dan Misi. Kuala Lumpur: Pusat Perkembangan Kurikulum.
Kristanto, Y. D., & Santoso, E. B. (2020). Towards a mathematics textbook for supporting 21st century learning: The student perspective. Journal of Physics, 1657(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1657/1/012037
Leonard, J. (2018). Culturally Specific Pedagogy in the Mathematics Classroom: Strategies for Teachers and Students. In Google Books. Routledge.
Lepik, M., Grevholm, B., & Viholainen, A. (2015). Using textbooks in the mathematics classroom – the teachers’ view. Nordic Studies in Mathematics Education, 20 (3–4), 129–156.
Mamat, N., & Abdul Wahab, M. N. (2022). Kajian Masalah Pembelajaran Matematik di kalangan Pelajar Sekolah Rendah Luar Bandar. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH), 7(6), e001531. https://doi.org/10.47405/mjssh.v7i6.1531
Mazana, M. Y., Montero, C. S., & Casmir, R. O. (2018). Investigating Students’ Attitude towards Learning Mathematics. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 14(1), 207-231. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/3997
Mokhlis, S. (2019). Kepimpinan Guru Besar dalam Pelaksanaan Pendidikan Abad Ke-21: Satu Kajian Preliminari Malaysian Online Journal of Education, 3(2), 11– 21. https://doi.org/10.53840/attarbawiy.v3i2.30
Moseley, D., Baumfield, V., Elliott, J., Higgins, S. I., Miller, J., Newton, D. P., & Gregson, M. (2005). Frameworks for Thinking. A Handbook for Teaching and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511489914
Mullis, I. V. S., & Martin, M. O. (2019). PIRLS 2021 Assessment Frameworks. In ERIC. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED606056
Ngussa, B. M., & Mbuti, E. E. (2017). The Influence of Humour on Learners’ Attitude and Mathematics Achievement: A Case of Secondary Schools in Arusha City, Tanzania. Journal of Educational Research, 2(3), 170 -181.
Noriati, A. R., Boon, P. Y., & Sharifah, F. S. A. (2017). Murid dan Pembelajaran. Selangor: Oxford Fajar.
Pertiwi, A., & Wahidin, W. (2020). Are the Mathematics Textbooks for Eighth-Grade Meet the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) 2019 Mathematics Framework? Edumatika : Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 3(2), 129–135.
Pike, G. R. (2000). The Influence of Fraternity or Sorority Membership on Students’ College Experiences and Cognitive Development. Research in Higher Education, 41(1), 117–139. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1007046513949
Pratama, G. S., & Retnawati, H. (2018). Urgency of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) Content Analysis in Mathematics Textbook. Journal of Physics, 1097, 012147. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1097/1/012147
Rasyidi, D. A., & Winarso, W. (2020). The Proportion of Cognitive Aspects of Question in Mathematics Textbook Based on Marzano’s Taxonomy: An Indonesian Case in Implementing New Curriculum. eduMa: Mathematics Education Learning and Teaching, 9(2), 79–89. https://doi.org/10.24235/eduma.v9i2.7374
Renz, S. M., Carrington, J. M., & Badger, T. A. (2018). Two Strategies for Qualitative Content Analysis: An Intramethod Approach to Triangulation. Qualitative Health Research, 28(5), 824–831. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732317753586
Ronda, E., & Adler, J. (2017). Mining Mathematics in Textbook Lessons. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(6), 1097– 1114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9738-6
Salsabella, S., & Juanengsih, N. (2021). Analysis of cognitive level biology exercise questions in science text books based on TIMSS frame work. Journal of Physics, 1836(1), 012063. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1836/1/012063
Stará, J., Chvál, M., & Starý, K. (2017). The Role of Textbooks in Primary Education. e-Pedagogium, 17(4), 60–69. https://doi.org/10.5507/epd.2017.053
Strijbos, J., Martens, R., Prins, F. J., & Jochems, W. (2006). Content analysis: What are they talking about? Computers Education, 46(1), 29–48.
Tanalol, S. H, Fattah, S., & Sulong, R.S. (2008). Mining Exam Question based on Bloom’s Taxonomy. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Mining-Exam-Question-based-on-Bloom%27s-Taxonomy-Tanalol-Fattah/97c252f2124d554c5fe5732cb8eb2047a23e8558. Knowledge Management International Conference: 424–427.
Tanujaya, B., Prahmana, R. C. I., & Mumu, J. (2017). Mathematics instruction, problems, challenges and opportunities: A case study in Manokwari Regency, Indonesia. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, 15(3), 287–291.
Tarman, B., & Kuran, B. (2015). Examination of the Cognitive Level of Questions in Social Studies Textbooks and the Views of Teachers Based on Bloom Taxonomy. Kuram Ve Uygulamada Egitim Bilimleri. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2015.1.2625
Thompson, T. (2008). Mathematics Teachers’ Interpretation of Higher-Order Thinking in Bloom’s Taxonomy. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 3(2), 96–109. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/221
Valverde, G. A., Bianchi, L. J., Wolfe, R. G., Schmidt, W. H., & Houng, R. T. (2003). According to the Book: Using Timss to Investigate the Translation of Policy Into Practice Through the World of Textbooks. British Journal of Educational Viholainen, A., Partanen, M., Piiroinen, J., & Hirvonen, P. E. (2015). Te role of textbooks in Finnish upper secondary school mathematics: theory, examples and exercises. Nordic Studies in Mathematics Education, 20(3–4), 157–178.
Yahya, M., & Sa’ari, C. Z. (2015). Sistem Pendidikan Negara Abad ke-21 Brunei Darussalam dalam Melestari Ketamadunan Islam Negara Zikir: Cabaran dan Harapan. Jurnal Akidah & Pemikiran Islam, 16(1), 61–92. https://doi.org/10.22452/afkar.vol16no1.3
Yang, Y. (2019). A comparative study of the example design in Chinese and Singapore junior high schools mathematics textbooks: Taking Shanghai Education Version and New Express Mathematics Used in Singapore as an example [Master dissertation, Hunan Normal University].
Yee, L. C., & Rosli, R. (2021). Analisis Contoh dan Latihan bagi Topik Penambahan dan Penolakan dalam Buku Teks Matematik SJKC. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH), 6(9), 254–270. https://doi.org/10.47405/mjssh.v6i9.1008
Yeh, C. S., Cheng, H. N., Chen, Z., Liao, C. C., & Chan, T. (2019). Enhancing achievement and interest in mathematics learning through Math-Island. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 14(1), 1-19. [NR1]
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Rosliza Yacob, Roslinda Rosli
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
