Analysis of the questions in 11th Grade Philosophy Coursebook in terms of higher-order thinking skills

Pub Date : 2020-07-31 DOI:10.19128/turje.695928
Tuba Acar Erdol
{"title":"Analysis of the questions in 11th Grade Philosophy Coursebook in terms of higher-order thinking skills","authors":"Tuba Acar Erdol","doi":"10.19128/turje.695928","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present study aimed to investigate the questions included in the 11th grade Philosophy Coursebook prepared in 2018 by the Ministry of Education in Turkey in terms of higher-order thinking skills. Document analysis was utilized in the study, and frequencies and percentages were used in answering the first sub-research question. Cognitive processes domain of Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy was utilized in conducting analyses to answer the second sub-research question. And Moodley’s (2013) categorization supported the analyses to answer the third sub-research question. The results suggested that the distribution of warm-up, practice, discussion, text analysis, writing, and measurement and evaluation questions were organized in a similar systematic across the coursebook. As a result of the research, not only summative but also formative assessment methods were included in the coursebook. Most of the questions were in the understand level of cognitive processes. The book included only a limited number of questions on the ‘apply’, ‘analyze’, and ‘create’ levels included in Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy. Most of the questions were designed for the mid-level of the cognitive domain and the low-level questions were the second most frequently used questions. Only 6.1 % of the questions were designed for high-levels of the cognitive domain. Last but not least sample questions for the analyze, evaluate, and create dimensions were prepared in an effort to encourage more frequent uses of such types of questions.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19128/turje.695928","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The present study aimed to investigate the questions included in the 11th grade Philosophy Coursebook prepared in 2018 by the Ministry of Education in Turkey in terms of higher-order thinking skills. Document analysis was utilized in the study, and frequencies and percentages were used in answering the first sub-research question. Cognitive processes domain of Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy was utilized in conducting analyses to answer the second sub-research question. And Moodley’s (2013) categorization supported the analyses to answer the third sub-research question. The results suggested that the distribution of warm-up, practice, discussion, text analysis, writing, and measurement and evaluation questions were organized in a similar systematic across the coursebook. As a result of the research, not only summative but also formative assessment methods were included in the coursebook. Most of the questions were in the understand level of cognitive processes. The book included only a limited number of questions on the ‘apply’, ‘analyze’, and ‘create’ levels included in Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy. Most of the questions were designed for the mid-level of the cognitive domain and the low-level questions were the second most frequently used questions. Only 6.1 % of the questions were designed for high-levels of the cognitive domain. Last but not least sample questions for the analyze, evaluate, and create dimensions were prepared in an effort to encourage more frequent uses of such types of questions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
高二哲学教材中高阶思维技能问题分析
本研究旨在调查土耳其教育部2018年编写的11年级哲学教材中包含的高阶思维技能问题。本研究采用文献分析法,在回答第一个子研究问题时采用频率和百分比。修订布鲁姆分类法的认知过程领域被用于进行分析,以回答第二个子研究问题。Moodley(2013)的分类支持了回答第三个子研究问题的分析。结果表明,在整个教材中,热身、练习、讨论、文本分析、写作以及测量和评估问题的分布被组织在一个类似的系统中。研究结果表明,教材中不仅包括总结性评价方法,还包括形成性评价方法。大多数问题都在认知过程的理解层面。这本书只包含了“应用”、“分析”和“创造”三个层次的有限的问题。大多数问题是为认知领域的中级水平设计的,低级问题是使用频率第二高的问题。只有6.1%的问题是为高层次的认知领域设计的。最后但并非最不重要的是,为了鼓励更频繁地使用这类问题,我们准备了分析、评估和创建维度的样题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1