TAXONOMI’S BLOOM AND LEVEL IN READING COMPREHENSIONTEST

Main Article Content

Erlidawati
Shirma Aulia

Abstract

The capacity to comprehend the factual information provided in a text passage after reading it is known as reading comprehension. Reading comprehension is divided into four categories: literal, interpretive, evaluative, and creative. The goals of the study were to identify the levels and characteristics that teachers employed when administering reading comprehension tests. The researcher employed a descriptive qualitative method to collect the data. Interviews and documentation sheets are the tools used to collect data. This study's findings are qualities and levels that teachers use in their reading comprehension assessments. First, questions are tested in a mixed category, which indicates a medium's quality even though more questions fall into the high category than the low category. Twelve products that revealed the dominating. Out of all the reading comprehension test questions in the classification, the literal level (which appears five times) and the form C1 (remember) comprise the twelve items that determined the dominant cognitive thinking and levels of the category. The second question, which had three appearances throughout the test overall, was in the format of C2 (comprehend), C4 (analyze), interpretive, and critical level. The third, the C5 (evaluate) question form and creative level, appeared once during the entire test.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Erlidawati, & Aulia, S. (2023). TAXONOMI’S BLOOM AND LEVEL IN READING COMPREHENSIONTEST. ABANNA: Journal Of Contemporary Islamic Education, 1(2), 137–152. https://doi.org/10.21268/ajcie.v1i2.156
Section
Articles

References

Anderson, et,al. 2001. A Taxonomy for Learning Teaching and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Abridged Edition. (Longman: New York San Francisco Boston London Toronto Sydney Tokyo Singapore Madrid Mexieo City Munich Paris Cape Town Hong Kong Montreal)

AnasSudijono. (2011). PengantarEvaluasiPendidikan. Jakarta: PT RajagrafindoPersada.

BambangSubali. 2012. PrinsipAsesmen&EvaluasiPembelajaran. Yogyakarta: UNY Press.

Doff Adrian, (1998). Teach English: A training Course for Teacher, Trainers Hand Book, (New York: University Press)

Gary, W. 2011.Reading Comprehension: Assisting Children With Learning Difficulties. (New York: Springer).

Heilman, A, et.al. 1988. The Principles and The Practices of TeachingReading.

Ohio. Charles E. Merill Publishing Co.

Harvey L,. 2006. “Understanding Quality” Section B 4.1-1 of “Introduction Bologna Objectives and Tools’ In Purser, L. (Ed) EUA Bologna Handbook: Making Bologna Work, Brussels European University Association and Berlin, Raabe.

Karen R. Harris and Steve Graham. 2007. Teaching Reading Comprehension to Student Learning Difficulties, (New York: The Gullford Press)

Matthew B. Miles, A. MichaleHuberman and Johnny Saldana, 2014. Qualitative Data Analysis A method Sourcebook Edition 3, America: SAGE Publications.

Robert C Bogdan and Knop Sari Biklen, 2000. Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction on Theory and Methods. London: Boston.

SalinanLampiran I. 2014.PeraturanMenteriPendidikandanKebudayaanRepublik Indonesia.Nomor 59.TentangKurikulum 2013 SMA/MA

Sabouri, N. B, 2016. How Can Students Improve Their Reading Comprehension Skill?, Vol. 6, No.2.

WowoSunaryoKusnawa, 2012. TaksonomiKognitif, Bandung: PT RemajaRosdakarya.