The Study of Reading Comprehension Questions in Bright an English 2 Based on Barrett's Taxonomy
Abstract
Abstrak
Penelitian kualitatif ini menerapkan metode analisis konten untuk menganalisis relevansi pertanyaan pemahaman membaca dalam buku Bright an English 2 (versi kurikulum Merdeka) terhadap jenis-jenis pemahaman dalam taksonomi Barrett. Selain itu, penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mendeskripsikan proporsi pertanyaan di tiga tingkat pemahaman. Tabel checklist digunakan sebagai instrumen untuk mengklasifikasikan setiap pertanyaan membaca ke dalam lima jenis pemahaman: literal, reorganisasi, inferensial, evaluasi, dan apresiasi, berdasarkan kriteria Barrett. Analisis menunjukkan bahwa pertanyaan membaca dalam buku teks hanya relevan dengan empat jenis pemahaman, kecuali 'apresiasi'. Keempat jenis tersebut selanjutnya dikelompokkan menjadi tiga tingkat pemahaman: tingkat rendah (pemahaman literal dan reorganisasi), tingkat menengah (pemahaman inferensial), dan tingkat tinggi (evaluasi). Untuk memeriksa proporsi pertanyaan di ketiga tingkat ini, peneliti menjumlahkan persentase dari setiap jenis pemahaman dalam kelompok tingkat yang sesuai. Hasilnya menunjukkan bahwa pertanyaan tingkat rendah memiliki proporsi tertinggi dalam buku, yaitu 81% dari total pertanyaan, sementara pertanyaan tingkat tinggi memiliki proporsi terendah, yaitu hanya 4%. Akhirnya, menjadi jelas bahwa buku tersebut tidak mencakup semua jenis pemahaman dalam taksonomi Barrett dan tidak mencerminkan proporsi yang seimbang dari ketiga tingkat pemahaman di dalamnya. Buku tersebut seharusnya disusun dengan proporsi yang lebih seimbang dari ketiga tingkat tersebut agar lebih efektif dalam meningkatkan keterampilan berpikir kritis dan pemahaman membaca siswa.
This qualitative research applied content analysis method to analyze the relevance of reading comprehension questions in the textbook Bright an English 2 (kurikulum Merdeka/Freedom curriculum version) to the comprehension types in Barrett’s taxonomy. Additionally, the study aimed to describe the proportions of questions across three comprehension levels. A checklist table was used as an instrument to classify each reading question into five comprehension types: literal, reorganization, inferential, evaluation, and appreciation, based on Barrett’s criteria. The analysis revealed that the reading questions in the textbook were relevant to only four comprehension types, excluding ‘appreciation’. These four types were further grouped into three comprehension levels: low-level (literal comprehension and reorganization), middle-level (inferential comprehension), and high-level (evaluation). To examine the proportions of questions across these levels, the researcher summed up the percentages of each comprehension type within their corresponding level groups. The results showed that low-level questions have the highest proportion in the textbook, representing 81% of the total questions, while high-level questions have the lowest proportion, at only 4%. Finally, it became evident that the textbook does not cover all the types of comprehension in Barrett’s taxonomy and fails to reflect a balanced proportion of the three comprehension levels within it. The textbook should be organized to include a more balanced proportion of these levels to more effectively enhance students’ critical thinking and reading comprehension.
Downloads
References
Amalya, R. V. A., Anugerahwati, M., & Yaniafari, R. P. (2020). An analysis of reading comprehension questions based on Barrett’s Taxonomy of an English coursebook entitled “Bright for Eight Graders.” In NEELLS Proceedings National English Education, Language, and Literature Seminar.
Alderson, J. C. (2000). Assessing reading. Cambridge University Press.
Aqeel, M., & Farrah, M. (2019). Eighth grade textbook reading comprehension questions and Barrett's Taxonomy: Teachers' perspectives at Hebron District, Palestine.
Arlansyah, A., Puspita, H., & Saputra, E. (2023). Reading questions in “English for Nusantara" textbook by using revised Bloom's Taxonomy. Journal of English Education and Teaching, 7(2), 361-375.
Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Razavieh, A. Introduction to research in education. (2006). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
Barrett, T. C. (1976). Taxonomy of reading comprehension. Teaching reading in the middle class, 51-58.
Brown, H. D., & Abeywickrama, P. (2004). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practices. White Plains, NY: Pearson Education, 20.
Budiarsih, L. (2022). Textbook evaluation: Models of checklist methods. In Proceedings International Conference on Teaching and Education (ICoTE) (Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 11-16).
Casey, M. (2022, October 18). Inference in reading comprehension. Bedrock Learning. https://bedrocklearning.org/literacy-blogs/inference-in-reading-comprehension/
Cunningsworth, A. (1995). Choosing your coursebook. Macmillan.
Delican, B. (2022). Examination of the questions in the primary school Turkish worksheets in terms of various classification systems. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 14(3), 2283-2303.
Fitria, E., & Syarif, H. (2014). An analysis of reading comprehension questions in textbooks “English texts in use and look ahead” for senior high school grade X. English Language Teaching (ELT), 2(2).
Freahat, N. M., & Smadi, O. M. (2014). Lower-order and higher-order reading questions in secondary and university level EFL textbooks in Jordan. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(9), 1804-1813.
Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to practice. Cambridge university press.
Grant, N. 1987. Making the most of your textbook. New York & London: Longman.
Harmer, J. (2008). How to teach English (Vol. 62, No. 3, pp. 313-316). Oxford University Press.
Hutchinson, T., & Torres, E. (1994). The textbook as agent of change. ELT Journal, 48(4), 315 – 328. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/48.4.315
Javed, M., Eng, L. S., Mohamed, A. R., & Ismail, S. A. M. M. (2016). Identifying reading strategies to teach literal, reorganization and inferential comprehension questions to ESL students. Journal of Asia TEFL, 13(3), 204.
Kemendikbudristek. (2022). Buku saku: Tanya jawab kurikulum merdeka. Kementerian pendidikan, kebudayaan, riset dan teknologi. http://repositori.kemdikbud.go.id/id/eprint/25344
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2005). Second language research: Methodology and design. Routledge.
Mineshima, M., & Imai, R. (2019). Importance of evaluative reading for the development of critical thinking. In P. Clements, A. Krause, & P. Bennett (Eds.), Diversity and inclusion. Tokyo: JALT.
Nunan, D. (2003). Practical english language teaching. McGraw-Hill
Nurjanah, R. L., & Putri, S. R. (2022, June). The effect of literal comprehension on the higher levels of comprehension in reading skill: A longitudinal case study. In English Language and Literature International Conference (ELLiC) Proceedings (Vol. 5, pp. 471-476).
Oakhill, J., Cain, K., & Elbro, C. (2014). Understanding and teaching reading comprehension: A handbook. Routledge.
Rahmadani, N., & Zainil, Y. (2023). An analysis of reading comprehension questions in English textbooks “Work in Progress” and “Pathway to English” based on Barrett’s Taxonomy. Journal of English Language Teaching, 12(3), 976-987.
Reeves, C. (2012). Developing a framework for assessing and comparing the cognitive challenge of home language examinations. Umalusi: Pretoria.
Ripalga, R., & Fitrawati, F. (2023). An analysis of questions on reading tasks in the English textbook “Work in Progress” in merdeka curriculum. Journal of English Language Teaching, 12(2), 570-581.
Sakinah, N., & Fudhla, N. (2023). An analysis of reading questions in “English for Senior High School Grade XII” textbook published by Masmedia. Journal of English Language Teaching, 12(4), 1078-1088.
Silva, M., & Cain, K. (2015). The relations between lower and higher level comprehension skills and their role in prediction of early reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(2), 321.
Sukma, M. A., & Trisno, E. (2023). Analysis of implementation of kurikulum merdeka in English learning process at SMA Negeri 1 Palembayan. Journal of English Language Teaching, 12(4), 1200-1207.
Surtantini, R. (2019). Reading comprehension question levels in grade X English students’ book in light of the issues of curriculum policy in Indonesia. Journal of Linguistics and Education, 9(1), 44-52.
Tharmalingam, S. (2014). A study of teachers’ questioning techniques and its implications for teaching literature in English. Discourse Analysis in Malaysian English Language Teaching. http://irep. iium. edu. my/53926/1/Discourse% 20Analysis% 20in% 20Malaysian% 20ELT. pdf.
Woolley, G. (2011). Reading comprehension (pp. 15-34). Springer Netherlands.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section

