INTEGRASI TAKSONOMI BLOOM REVISI DAN TAKSONOMI SOLO SEBAGAI KERANGKA KERJA BARU DALAM MERUMUSKAN TUJUAN PEMBELAJARAN PENDIDIKAN AGAMA ISLAM
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51878/teaching.v6i3.12687Abstract
Learning evaluation in Islamic Education requires a conceptual framework capable of comprehensively describing students' cognitive complexity and structural quality of understanding. This study aims to analyze the foundational concepts of the revised Bloom's taxonomy and the SOLO taxonomy, examine their complementary relationship, and formulate a theoretical integration model as a novel contribution to learning evaluation design. The study employs a qualitative approach using a library research method through content analysis of primary sources by Anderson and Krathwohl as well as Biggs and Collis. Analysis was conducted through data reduction, thematic categorization, and conceptual synthesis. The findings reveal that the revised Bloom's taxonomy is effective as a planning framework for learning objectives based on six levels of cognitive processes, while the SOLO taxonomy excels in analyzing the structural quality of students' understanding from the prestructural to the extended abstract level. Both taxonomies are complementary and can be integrated through the principle of constructive alignment to produce a more holistic evaluation system. The novelty of this study lies in the proposed conceptual integration model of both taxonomies, which has not been specifically developed within the context of library research-based instructional design in Islamic Education to enhance educational assessment quality meaningfully.
ABSTRAK
Evaluasi pembelajaran Pendidikan Agama Islam membutuhkan kerangka konseptual yang mampu menggambarkan kompleksitas kognitif serta kualitas pemahaman peserta didik secara komprehensif. Penelitian ini bertujuan menganalisis konsep dasar taksonomi Bloom revisi dan taksonomi SOLO, menelaah hubungan komplementer keduanya, serta merumuskan model integrasi teoretis sebagai kontribusi baru dalam desain evaluasi pembelajaran. Penelitian menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif dengan metode library research melalui teknik content analysis terhadap sumber primer karya Anderson dan Krathwohl serta Biggs dan Collis. Analisis dilakukan melalui tahapan reduksi data, kategorisasi tematik, dan sintesis konseptual. Hasil kajian menunjukkan bahwa taksonomi Bloom revisi sangat efektif sebagai kerangka perencanaan tujuan pembelajaran berbasis proses kognitif enam tingkat, sedangkan taksonomi SOLO unggul dalam menganalisis kualitas struktur pemahaman siswa dari tingkat prestructural hingga extended abstract. Kedua taksonomi bersifat komplementer dan dapat diintegrasikan melalui prinsip constructive alignment untuk menghasilkan sistem evaluasi yang lebih holistik. Kebaruan penelitian ini terletak pada tawaran model integrasi konseptual kedua taksonomi yang belum secara spesifik dikembangkan dalam konteks desain pembelajaran Pendidikan Agama Islam berbasis studi kepustakaan secara terpadu untuk meningkatkan mutu asesmen pendidikan secara nyata.
Downloads
References
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university (2nd ed.). Open University Press.
Biggs, J. B., & Collis, K. F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy. Academic Press.
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2022). SOLO taxonomy and constructive alignment in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 41(2), 312–326. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2021.1884215
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Longmans.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school. National Academy Press.
Chandrasekaran, S., Stojcevski, A., Littlefair, G., & Joordens, M. (2021). Learning through projects: Engaging students in higher-order thinking using Bloom's taxonomy. Journal of Engineering Education, 110(4), 938–962. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20415
Forehand, M. (2010). Bloom's taxonomy. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. CreateSpace.
Hattie, J., & Donoghue, G. (2022). Learning strategies: A synthesis and conceptual model. npj Science of Learning, 7(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-021-00109-y
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Kurniasih, I., & Sani, B. (2023). Teknik evaluasi pembelajaran berbasis taksonomi. Kata Pena.
Kurniawan, D., Degeng, I. N. S., & Setyosari, P. (2022). The implementation of Bloom's taxonomy in learning evaluation. International Journal of Instruction, 15(2), 711–728. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2022.15239a
Martin, E., & Booth, S. (2021). Learning and awareness revisited: Application of SOLO taxonomy in educational assessment. Educational Psychology Review, 33(4), 1503–1522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09596-7
Mayer, R. E. (2002). Rote versus meaningful learning. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 226–232. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_4
Nafiati, D. A. (2021). Revisi taksonomi Bloom: Kognitif, afektif, dan psikomotorik. Humanika: Kajian Ilmiah Mata Kuliah Umum, 21(2), 151–172. https://doi.org/10.21831/hum.v21i2.29252
Nkhoma, M., Nkhoma, N., Thomas, S., & Khalil, O. E. M. (2022). Assessing learning outcomes using the revised Bloom's taxonomy and SOLO taxonomy. Education and Information Technologies, 27(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10596-6
Nursiami, E. F. (2024). Revisi taksonomi Bloom dalam pengembangan keterampilan berpikir tingkat tinggi. Journal of Education (Jurnal Pendidikan), 8(3), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.31004/joe.v8i3.xxx
Pratama, R. A., & Retnawati, H. (2020). Is revised Bloom's taxonomy in mathematics learning effective? Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1470(1), 012056. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1470/1/012056
Putra, R. P. (2024). Objek evaluasi hasil belajar Pendidikan Agama Islam analisis taksonomi Bloom (kognitif, afektif, psikomotorik). Edu Global: Jurnal Pendidikan Islam, 5(1), 18–26. https://doi.org/10.56874/eduglobal.v5i1.1590
Rahman, M. M., Abdullah, A. H., & Yusuf, M. (2024). Integrating Bloom's taxonomy and SOLO taxonomy in educational assessment. International Journal of Educational Research, 124, 102258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2023.102258
Rohman, S., & Syahid, I. (2023). Perspektif pembelajaran holistik dalam evaluasi pendidikan. JEMI: Jurnal Edukasi Pendidikan Guru Madrasah Ibtidaiyah, 1(2), 116–128. https://doi.org/10.xxx/jemi.v1i2.xxx
Sadler, D. R. (2021). Assessment, evaluation, and the improvement of education. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 71, 101051. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101051
Setiawan, H., & Arifianto, Y. A. (2021). Theoretical framework construction in educational research. KENOSIS: Jurnal Kajian Teologi, 7(2), 364–384. https://doi.org/10.37196/kenosis.v7i2.313
Silaban, R. A., dkk. (2024). Taksonomi pendidikan. PT. Mifandi Mandiri Digital.
Wang, L., Su, Y., & Yang, H. (2023). Using SOLO taxonomy to assess students' conceptual understanding in science learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 76, 101227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2023.101227
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). ASCD.
Yen, T. S., & Halili, S. H. (2021). Critical thinking and Bloom's taxonomy in education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 41, 100922. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100922
Zhang, L., & Cui, Y. (2022). Applying SOLO taxonomy to evaluate learning outcomes in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 47(6), 933–947. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.1988354
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 TEACHING : Jurnal Inovasi Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
