DEVELOP MODEL TASC TO IMPROVE HIGHER ORDER THINKING SKILLS

IN CREATIVE TEACHING

Surya Haryandi
Physical Science Education Concentration
Graduate School of Yogyakarta State University
Colombo Street, Karang Malang, Yogyakarta 55281
E-mail: [email protected]
Phone: 087815133121

Abstract

The new curriculum requires learning paradigm transformation, from the monotonous
and conventional learning (teacher centered) into active learning (student centered),
innovative, creative, and requires transformation from lower order thinking skills into higher
order thinking skills. Higher order thinking skills are part of 21st century skills. One
alternative to improve higher order thinking skills is to develop a learning model TASC
(Thinking Actively in a Social Context) that can be applied by teachers for senior years
students to improve higher order thinking skills. Actually, TASC is a commonly used model
for early years students in social and language subjects. The latest survey conducted by Belle
Wallace in 2007 showed more than 10,000 classes in the UK have used the TASC to improve
the ability of problem solving and thinking skills of students. This research is focussing to
develop model of TASC using development model 4-D type, which begins with a needs
assessment in several high schools in Yogyakarta. This research will conducted in January
2015 through February 2015. Based on the results of the needs assessment then developed the
new breakthroughs model of TASC in science subjects for senior years students that believed
can increase the higher order thinking skills in creative teaching.

Keywords: higher order thinking skills, TASC model, development model type 4-D

INTRODUCTION
Thinking skills is defined as a person's ability to process all the information both in
solving a problem, planning, or creating something (Editor, 2006: 3). Humans are born with
thinking skills, thinking skills born through a process called learning. Through thinking and
learning students get a more complete understanding and can even infer something
meaningful. If the higher order thinking skills of students are under the average then this
becomes a major problem that must be solved immediately.
As a step to determine the quality of students in aspects of science for senior years
students, their performance at the national or international level can be seen as a benchmark.
Achievement at the national level which disclosed the results of research by Edi Istiyono
(2014) show that higher order thinking skills of students in 11th grade of High School in
Yogyakarta is not satisfactory, ie 49% of students are below average skills. While the
achievement at the international level, according to data Program of International Student
Assessment (PISA), the science aspect of Indonesia was ranked 38th in a row in 2000 and
2003 with a score of 393 and 395, and ranked 50th in 2006 with a score of 393. It shows that
the average Indonesian science achievement scores are significantly below the international
average score set at 500. the same thing is also demonstrated by an international study into
the cognitive abilities of students in math and science that TIMSS (Trends in Mathematics
and Science study) held by the IEA (International Association for the Evaluation of
Educational Achievement). The results of TIMSS 2011 in science showed Indonesia scored
406 where this value is below the international average is 500. According the two
achievements at the international level, it is clear that student‘s higher order thinking skills
still needs to be improved.
Based on the analysis of need assessment through student questionnaire at six schools
in Yogyakarta with the intermediate level categories based on the ratings of the National
Exam in 2014, showed that the average percentage of the higher order thinking skills of
students in 10th and 11th grade MIA is approximately 71.38%. Ideally the average
percentage of the higher order thinking skills in the range of 80%. Other than that, the results
of the analysis of needs assessment through questionnaires of teachers, namely 1) In the
preparation of indicators of learning, 100% of teachers believe that identifying basic
competence to construct a model is important and 82% of teachers had to apply model-based
thinking skills, inquiry and problem solving that is a basic of TASC model; 2) In the
implementation of learning indicators, 97.8% of teachers have applied a scientific approach
in the learning process and they often use a variety of learning models to simplify the
understanding of the students in understanding the subject matter; 3) In reflecting on learning
indicators, 100% of teachers agreed to motivate students to reflect on the attitude of
knowledge into everyday life; 4) Application-oriented learning in higher order thinking
ability has been adopted by 83.7% of teachers but only 26% of teachers already know TASC
model; 5) 100% of the teachers are willing to apply the learning model TASC.
Most of the research in the education journal only apply TASC model in social or
Language subjects. Actually, if it is investigated more deeply, this model very well when
applied in the science subject for senior years students because the TASC based on
Vygotsky's constructivist theory which states that intellectual ability is not just based on
experience alone but also of social interaction as its main proponent

THINKING ACTIVELY IN A SOCIAL CONTEXT (TASC)

Thinking Actively in a Social Context (TASC) is a learning model developed by Belle
Wallace. Wallace (2000) said that TASC is universal, it means that can be used for a variety
of learning, inclusive, to help the process of problem solving, as well as stimulate thinking
skills. TASC is based on the brain's ability to receive and forward stimuli through the nervous
system that affects the success of learning.
Sekar, P.K (2014: 7) claims that TASC has four forming elements which are the basis
of the ability to think and problem-solving. Thinking, thinking is a dynamic process that is
continually made by students, aims to enable students to continue to develop the capacity to
think, especially higher order thinking skills. Actively, aims to enable students to actively
understand, figure out, and the expression of their learning experiences. Social, as social
beings, this model aims to enable students to undertake interaction, share knowledge, and
work together so that all students have equal opportunities in learning and knowledge that
obtained are more varied. Context, by learning to build thinking skills and problem solving
aims to enable students to have a strong basic concepts and set of real experience experienced
by students in the learning environment. Anything that includes the ability to think effectively
contained in the model which are presented in the form of TASC problem solving wheel.
Before using TASC, first students were given a description of the wheel which is the flow of
the problem solving of TASC. This is intended to allow students to remember and apply the
methods that they design themselves. The scheme of the wheel which is the logic of TASC as
follows:
 Figure 1.
Troubleshooting TASC wheel pattern (Sekar, PK, 2014: 6)

HIGHER ORDER THINKING SKILLS

Many expert opinion classifying which includes higher order thinking skills. Experts
who laid the foundation of the theory of higher order thinking skills, among others, Piaget,
Bruner, Bloom, Gagne, Marzano, Glaser, Vygotsky, and Haladyna. According to the revised
Bloom, which includes higher order thinking capabilities include analyzes (C4), evaluating
(C5), and create (C6) with a note that already mastered the ability to remembering (C1),
understanding (C2), and applying (C3). Ability to analyze (C4) according to Krathwohl is the
ability to separate the knowledge into sections and then identify the parts that relate to each
other. The ability to evaluate (C5) is the ability to match the knowledge which obtained or
works made with a criteria (Krathwohl, 2002: 214-215). The three categories of higher order
thinking (C4, C5, and C6) generally appears when triggered by cause such a face a new
problem, the uncertainty of something, or a dilemma. One way to stimulate students' higher
order thinking skills is the way its exposes students to a question and the unusual task they
received previously. This is where the teacher plays an active role in facilitating and
stimulating students. Success or failure is influenced by the ability of students to apply and
modify the way of thinking (King, Goodson, & Rohani, 2009: 1-20).

RESEARCH METHOD
Development model of this research adapted from 4-D type developed by Thiagarajan
(1974) namely, define phase, design, develop, disseminate with little change in phase due to
disseminate the resulting products only to one school, but did not dismiss if there are other
schools that are interested in using this product. Broadly speaking, the development
procedure described as follows.
 Figure 2
Stages of Product Development

Trials design in this research consisted of three stages: expert validation (expert
judgment), limited testing, and field testing.

1. Subjects
The subjects were students in 11th grade of SMAN 6 Yogyakarta which consists
of three classes, 11th grade of MIA 1, 11th grade of MIA 2, and 11th grade of MIA 3.
Subject test in the first stage or a small-scale testing involving 10 students of XI MIA 1.
While the second phase of the testing subject or field testing involving two classes
consists of 60 students from 11th grade of MIA 2 and 11th grade of MIA 3 were
conducted in January 2015 through February 2015.

2. Techniques and Instrument

Data obtained from this study is qualitative and quantitative data. Quantitative
data obtained from the scores given by the validator, the teacher assessment scores,
student assessment scores on the learning model Thinking Actively in a Social Context
(TASC), a score from implemented learning, as well as higher order thinking skills
student test scores. Qualitative data obtained from the quantitative data conversion. Data
collection instrument in this study consisted of (1) validation sheet, (2) practicality
assessment sheet by teachers and students, (4) observation of the implemented syntax
sheet, and (5) higher order thinking test. The data obtained were used to determine the
validity, practicality and effectiveness of the developed product. All of these three
criteria refers to the criteria of product quality proposed by Nieveen (1999).

3. Data Analysis Techniques

The results of the data analysis obtained from experts and practitioners are used
to determine the validity of the resulting product in terms of theoretical and consistency
among the components of the developed product. The results of the data analysis from
field testing are used as a basis to determine the practicality and effectiveness of the
 developed products.
For this purpose it is necessary to see conversion table. Conversion table is made by
convert the assessment scores from experts, teachers/practitioners, and students become
standard scale of five grades. For this purpose used benchmark adapted from Saifuddin
Azwar (2010: 163) as presented in the following table.

Tabel 1
Converting Qualitative to Quantitative Data

Interval Criteria
Mi + 1,5SBi < M excellent
Mi + 0,5SBi < M  Mi good
+ 1,5SBi
Mi - 0,5SBi < M  Mi + good
0,5SBi enough
Mi - 1,5SBi < M  Mi - low
0,5SBi
M  Mi - 1,5SBi bad

Explanation:
M = Actual score
Mi = 1/2 (maximum score + minimum score)
Mi = 1/6 (maximum score + minimum score)

Before performing experiments using the control class and the experimental class,
firstly the data from first semester exam results of students analyzed to determine whether
students' skills before treatment between the experimental class and the control class together
are the same (for controling variables). Then performed the prerequisite test of Kolmogorof-
Smirnov to see normality and Levene's to see homogeneity. Both of these prerequisites test
using statistical software with SPSS 21. Gain scores (positive difference score between
pretest and posttest) of higher order thinking skills is used to determine whether there is an
increased higher order thinking skills after learning process using TASC model.

REFERENCES
Bloom, Madaus., & Hasting. (1981). Methods Grading in Summative Evaluation. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Department of National Education. (2003). Law No. 20, 2003, on National Education System.
Edi Istiyono. (2014). Measurement of high-level thinking skills SMA students in physics in
the DIY. Doctoral Dissertation, unpublished. PPS Yogyakarta State University,
Yogyakarta.
Effianti. (2012). Speaking Learning Model Using Thinking Actively Methods In Social
Context (TASC) in Class VIIIA and VIIIB SMP PGRI Malangbong Garut. December 6,
2013 Downloaded from http:// publikasi.stkipsiliwangi.ac.id/files/2013/01/Ayu-
Efianti.pdf.
Emi Rofiah, Nonoh Siti Aminah, Elvin Yusliana Ekawati. (2013). Preparation of test
instruments the ability to think critically physics in junior high school students.
Surakarta: University FKIP of March, Journal of Physical Education, 18, 2338-0691.
Grinnell, R.M.Jr. (1988). Social work research and evaluation (3rd ed). Itasca: F.E.Peacock.
Krathwohl, D.R. (2002, Autumn). A revision of Bloom‘s Taxonomy: An Overview. Theory
into Practice, 41(4), 214-215.
Umi Kulsum. (2011). Implementation-Based Character Education PAIKEM (A New
Paradigm of Education in Indonesia).Surabaya: Gena Pratama Pustaka.
Mayer, R.E. (2002, Autumn). Rote versus meaningful learning. Theory into Practice, 41(4),
231-232.
H.E. Mulyasa. (2013). Curriculum 2013 Development and Implementation. Bandung:
Remaja Rosdakarya.
Nagappan, R. (2000, June 23-24). Teaching higher-order thinking skills in classrooms:
learning from the experiences of Malaysia. Paper was presented at the ‗Thinking
Qualities Initiative Conference Hong Kong 2000 at the Centre for Educational
Development, Hong Kong Baptist University.
Nieveen, N. (1999). Prototyping to Reach Product Quality. In Jan Van den Akker, R.M.
Branch, K. Gustafson, N. Nieveen & Tj. Plomp (Eds). Design Approaches and Tools in
Eduction and Training (pp 125-135), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, the
Nederlands.
Nitko A.L., & Brookhart S.M., (2007). Educational Assessment of Students. (6th ed.).
Columbus, Ohio: Perason Merrill Pretince Hall.
Revised Bloom‘s taxonomy. (2008). Editor, 3-6. Downloaded March 14, 2014 from
http://www.utar.edu.my/fegt/file/Revised_Blooms_Info.pdf.
Saifuddin Anwar. (2010). Research Methods.Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
Seeley, C. (2012). Using the TASC wheel. Downloaded on December 5, 2013 from
http://suffolklearning.co.uk./do_download.asp?did=3758?.
Sekar, P.K. (2014). TASC as an active learning strategy in primary schools [Electronic
version]. December 3, 2013 Downloaded from http://staff.uny.ac.id/content/sekar-
purbarini-kawuryan-sip.
Silvester Mas. (2012). Improved critical thinking skills fifth grade students SDI Daleng NTT
West Manggarai on the subject of globalization with TASC model. 53, J-TEQI, III (1).
Skiba, D.J. (2013, November). Digital taxonomy: evaluating and creating. Nursing Education
Perspectives, 34(6), 428-429.
Thiagarajan S., & Semmel, M.I. (1974). Instructional Development for Training Teachers of
Exceptional Children: A Source Book. Minnesota: Central for Innovation on Teaching
Handicaped.
TIMSS & PIRLS Internasional Study Center. (2012). TIMSS 2011 Internasional Result In
Science. Boston: The TIMSS & PIRLS Internasional Study Center, Boston College.
http//: timss.bc.edu/timss2011/release.html.
Wallace, B. & Adams, H. (1993). The „thinking actively in a social context‟ tasc project:
developing the potential of children in disadvantaged communities. Oxford: AB
Academic Publishers.
Wallace, B. (2000, Autumn). Teaching thinking and problem-solving skills. Educating able
children, 20-23.
Wallace, B. (2000). Thinking actively in a social context. http://
http://tascwheel.com/?page_id=289.
Wallace, B. & Bentley, R. (2002). Teaching Thinking Skills Across the Middle Years: A
Practical Approach for Children Aged 9-14. London: David Fulton Publishers.
Why develop thinking skills and assessment for learning in the classroom?. (2006). Editor, 3-
5.