Candra Jaya


The primary purpose of this qualitative study was to investigate two dimensions of Cognitive domains, which consist of Cognitive process dimension and Knowledge dimension, in Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy by gauging each category of thinking skills utilized on 35 reading comprehension questions in the English National Examination 2015/2016 of Senior Secondary School in Indonesia. The categories of Cognitive process dimension consist of six including remember, understand, apply, analyze, evaluate, and create; and, of Knowledge dimension consist of four including factual, conceptual, procedural, and meta-cognitive. Model questions of Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy, Structure of Cognitive process dimension, Structure of Knowledge dimension, and Taxonomy Table were deployed as instruments in this study. The findings, out of six categories of thinking skills, of Cognitive process dimension uncovered that, out of 35 reading questions, 22 questions, which indicated 63%, appeared as remember category, 10 questions, which indicated 28%, appeared as understand category, and 3 questions, which indicated 9%, appeared as analyze category. Meanwhile, the findings, out of four knowledge categories, of Knowledge dimension uncovered that, out of 35 reading questions, 27 questions, which indicated 77%, appeared as factual knowledge, 6 questions, which indicated 17%, appeared as conceptual knowledge, and 2 questions, which indicated 6%, appeared as procedural knowledge.


blooms’ revised taxonomy; cognitive process dimension; knowledge dimension; reading comprehension questions

Full Text:



Agustien, H,I,R. (2006). Genre-based approach and the 2004 English curriculum. Retrieved from https://aguswuryanto.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/helena- paper2.doc

Ary, D., Jacobs, L.C., Sorensen, C., & Razavieh, A. (2010). Introduction to Research in Education (8th Ed). Belmonth, CA: Wardsworth, Ceng Learning.

Badan Standar Nasional Pendidikan (2007). Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Nasional No. 20 Tahun 2007 tentang Standar Penilaian Pendidikan. Jakarta: Badan Standar Nasional Pendidikan.

Badan Standar Nasional Pendidikian (2012). Tanya-jawab-UN-2012. Retrieved from http://bsnp-indonesia.org/id/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Tanya-jawab-UN-2012-revisi-20-Desember.pdf.

Badan Standar Nasional Pendidikan (2012). Peraturan badan standar nasional pendidikan no.0019/P/BSNP/XI/2012 tentang kisi kisi ujian nasional untuk satuan pendidikan dasar dan menengah TP 2012/2013. Retrieved from: http://www.invir.com/downloads/simdik/SK-Kisi-Kisi-tahun-2012-2013.pdf

Badan Standar Nasional Pendidikan (2013) Peraturan badan standar nasional pendidikan no. 0020/P/BSNP/I/2013 tentang prosedur operasi standar penyelenggaraan ujian nasional sekolah menengah atas tahun pelajaran 2013/2014. Retrieved from http://www.kemdiknas.go.id/kemdikbud/node/1918

Badan Standard Nasional Pendidikan. (2013) Prosedur Operasi Standar : Penyelenggaran Ujian SMA/MA. Jakarta. Retrieved from http://kalsel.kemenag.go.id/file/file/Pekapontren/ajpc1360688329.pdf.

Creswell, J.W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (4th Ed). Boston: Pearson Education.

Department Pendidikan Nasional. (2003). Kurikulum 2004 SMA: Pedoman Khusus Pengembangan Silabus dan Penilaian Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris. Jakarta : Departement Pendidikan Nasional

Department Pendidikan Nasional. (2003). Pelayanan Profesional Kurikulum 2004. Jakarta: Department Pendidina Nasional

Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.(2006). Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Nasional No. 23 Tahun 2006 tentang Standar Kompetensi Lulusan. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional

Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.(2008). Panduan Umum Pengembangan Silabus. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional

Gezer, M., Sunker, M,O,. & Sahin, I,F. (2014). An Evaluation of the Exam Questions of Social Studies Course According to Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy. Education Science and Psychology Journal,2(28)3—17.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indiana Polis (IUPUI ) The Center for Teaching and Learning (2002). Bloom’s Taxonomy “Revised” Key Words, Model Questions, and Instructional Strategies. Indianapolis. Retrieved from: https://www.uni.edu/coe/sites/default/files/wysiwyg/BloomRevisedTaxonomy.pdf

Krathwohl, D,R. (2002). A Revision of Blooms’ Taxonomy: An Overview. THEORY INTO PRACTICE / Autumn, 41, 212-218.

Karadeniz. (2010). Analyzing “Science and Technology Courses Exam Questions” According to Revised Bloom Taxonomy. Journal of Turkey Science Education ,7(1)26-29

Mayer, R,E. (2002). Rote Versus Meaningful Learning . THEORY INTO PRACTICE Autumn, 41 (4). 226-232.

Munzenmaier, C., & Rubin, N. (2013). Blooms’ Taxonomy: What’s Old is New Again. Retrievedfromhttp://educationalelearningresources.yolasite.com/resources/guildresearch_blooms2013%20(1).pdf


  • There are currently no refbacks.

International Conference on Education and Language (ICEL)
Bandar Lampung University
ISSN: 2303-1417