期刊名称：Indonesian Journal of Learning and Instruction
印刷版ISSN：2614-8250
电子版ISSN：2614-5677
出版年度：2019
卷号：2
期号：01
页码：65-70
DOI：10.25134/ijli.v2i01.1685
出版社：Faculty of Teacher Training and Education in collaboration with School of Postgraduate Studies
摘要：This study aims to analyze the question items on two supplementary Indonesian mathematics textbooks (revised edition 2016) of 2013 curriculum for XI graders and compare the analysis using 2015 TIMSS assessment framework. This study apply qualitative study with naturalistic approach. The analysis results consist of 104 question items and 85 items of practice test. On a book published by PT. SEWU Bandung shows 3.5% of knowing cognitive domain, 4.71% applying, and 91.76% reasoning. The analysis on 19 items of practice test on a book is published by PT. Bumi Aksara Jakarta. It shows 10.53% applying, 89.47% reasoning, but not showing a percentage on knowing cognitive domain. Results of the question items analysis on knowing and applying cognitive domain for both the books are less percentage than reasoning cognitive domain. Thus, the results of analysis of two textbooks are not yet in accordance with TIMSS. Nevertheless, the comparison of the analysis on knowing cognitive domain in a book published by PT. SEWU Bandung is close to what have expected by TIMSS. Meanwhile, on applying and reasoning cognitive domain the book published by PT. Bumi Aksara Jakarta is close to what have expected by TIMSS.
其他摘要：This study aims to analyze the question items on two supplementary Indonesian mathematics textbooks (revised edition 2016) of 2013 curriculum for XI graders and compare the analysis using 2015 TIMSS assessment framework. This study apply qualitative study with naturalistic approach. The analysis results consist of 104 question items and 85 items of practice test. On a book published by PT. SEWU Bandung shows 3.5% of knowing cognitive domain, 4.71% applying, and 91.76% reasoning. The analysis on 19 items of practice test on a book is published by PT. Bumi Aksara Jakarta. It shows 10.53% applying, 89.47% reasoning, but not showing a percentage on knowing cognitive domain. Results of the question items analysis on knowing and applying cognitive domain for both the books are less percentage than reasoning cognitive domain. Thus, the results of analysis of two textbooks are not yet in accordance with TIMSS. Nevertheless, the comparison of the analysis on knowing cognitive domain in a book published by PT. SEWU Bandung is close to what have expected by TIMSS. Meanwhile, on applying and reasoning cognitive domain the book published by PT. Bumi Aksara Jakarta is close to what have expected by TIMSS.
关键词：cognitive aspects of TIMSS; dimensions; domains; items; textbooks.
