The policy to state HOTS in Basic Competence (KD) of 2013 English curriculum and English teachers’ practice in developing indicator achievement
Main Article Content
(1)  Oikurema Purwati
Universitas Negeri Surabaya
(2)  Ahmad Munir
Universitas Negeri Surabaya
(3) * Gusti Nur Hafifah
Universitas Muhammadiyah Surabaya
(*) Corresponding Author
Higher order thinking skills (HOTS) are already a trend in educational sector. The concepts of HOTS are applied in statements of ‘basic competences’ (as known as KD) in the 2013 English Curriculum (syllabus). The purpose of stating HOTS concepts in ‘KD’ to make all of the process of teaching and learning resulted on the students’ ability to be able to think and practice higher order thinking skills in their daily life. As represented in the ‘basic competences’ (KD) of 2013 English curriculum (syllabus revised edition), HOTS can be considered as the significant point in developing indicator (as the objective) of teaching and learning. The development of indicators should be in line with the theory of HOTS, from analyzing, evaluating and creating (based on the revised Bloom taxonomy). However, there are a lot of English teachers who still get difficulties in developing appropriate teaching learning indicators in fulfilling HOTS concepts. In national practice, the policy of implementing HOTS as the basic competences may not be carried out fully by the Indonesian English teachers. There is also a tendency to ignore the discussion of developing appropriate indicator achievement as the learning objectives.
- Curriculum developers should comprehend the concepts of the curriculum and the language theories applied to the curriculum.
- Basic competence should be developed following the level of Bloom's cognitive skills, particularly to generate students' higher-order thinking.
Copyright (c) 2022 Dr. Gusti Nur Hafifah, Oikurema Purwati, Ahmad Munir
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A Taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of educational objectives. Allyn & Bacon. Pearson Education Group.
Beacco, J.-C., Fleming, M., Goullier, F., Thürmann, E., & Vollmer, H. (2016). A handbook for curriculum development and teacher training.
Cuoco, A., Goldenberg, E. P., & Mark, J. (2021a). Contemporary curriculum issues: Organizing a curriculum around Mathematical habits of mind. The Mathematics Teacher, 103(9), 682–688.
Cuoco, A., Goldenberg, E. P., & Mark, J. (2021b). Contemporary curriculum issues: Organizing a curriculum around Mathematical habits of mind. The Mathematics Teacher, 103(9), 682–688. https://doi.org/10.5951/mt.103.9.0682
Dharma, Y. P., Joni, T., Aristo, V., Persada, S., & Sintang, K. (2018). An analysis of English textbook relevance to the 2013 English curriculum. Journal of English Educational Study, 1(1), 6611. https://doi.org/10.31932/JEES.V1I1.277
Ghonsooly, B., & Showqi, S. (2012). The effects of foreign language learning on creativity. English Language Teaching, 5(4), 161–167. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v5n4p161
Graves, K., & Lopriore, L. (2009). Developing a New Curriculum for School-Age Learners. TESOL Language Curriculum Development Series. Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc. 1925 Ballenger Avenue Suite 550, Alexandria, VA 22314.
Guardado, M., & Light, J. (2020). Curriculum Development in English for Academic Purposes: A Guide to Practice. Springer Nature.
Indriyana, B. S., & Kuswandono, P. (2019). Developing Students Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) in reading: English teachers strategies in selected Junior High Schools. JET (Journal of English Teaching), 5(3), 204. https://doi.org/10.33541/jet.v5i3.1313
Indriyanto, B. (2012). Pengembangan kurikulum sebagai intervensi kebijakan peningkatan mutu pendidikan. Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Kebudayaan, 18(4), 440. https://doi.org/10.24832/jpnk.v18i4.100
Kaya, S., & Ok, A. (2016). The second grade English language curriculum: Theory-practice congruence. Pegem Eğitim ve Öğretim Dergisi, 6(4), 491–512. https://doi.org/10.14527/pegegog.2016.024
Kohler, M. (2019). Language education policy in Indonesia: A struggle for unity in diversity. In The Routledge international handbook of language education policy in Asia (pp. 286-297). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315666235-20
Kostka, I., & Bunning, L. (2017). Curriculum design in English language teaching. TESOL Press. Available from: TESOL International Association. http://www.tesol.org.
Li, H., Liu, J., Yang, X., Xiao, J., & Yang, G. (2016). An empirical study on developing higher-order thinking skills of primary students with e-schoolbag. Proceedings - 2016 International Symposium on Educational Technology, ISET 2016, 44–49. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISET.2016.26
Lie, A. (2007). Education policy and EFL curriculum in Indonesia: Between the commitment to competence and the quest for higher test scores. TEFLIN Journal, 18(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.15639/TEFLINJOURNAL.V18I1/1-15
Madya, S. (2002). Developing standards for EFL in Indonesia as part of the EFL teaching reform. TEFLIN Journal, 13(2), 142–151. https://doi.org/10.15639/TEFLINJOURNAL.V13I2/142-151
Mickan, P., & Wallace, I. (2019). The routledge handbook of language education curriculum design. In The Routledge Handbook of Language Education Curriculum Design. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315661032
Moore, A. (2012). Teaching and learning: Pedagogy, curriculum, and culture. Taylor and Francis.
Null, W. (2017). Curriculum: From theory to practice (Second Edi). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. www.rowman.com
Nurhattati, Matin, Buchdadi, A. D., & Yusuf, C. F. (2020). Teacher certification in Indonesia: An education policy analysis. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(5), 1719–1730. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.080508
Permendikbud No. 20, 21, 22, dan 23 Tahun 2016 dan Permendikbud No.24 Tahun 2016. (n.d.). Retrieved August 18, 2022, from http://20283530.siap-sekolah.com/2016/09/02/permendikbud-no-20-21-22-dan-23-tahun-2016/#.Yv4GoHZBw2w
Porter, P. A., & Brown, D. (1997). The elements of language curriculum: A systematic approach to program development. TESOL Quarterly, 31(4), 814. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587769
Rachmawati, D. L., Purwati, O., Anam, S., & Setiawan, S. (2021). Between perception and practice: The emergency of encouraging EFL teachers to implant HOTS in their classrooms. TESOL International Journal, 16(4.4), 40–58.
Richards, J. C. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511667220
Setyono, B. (2016). Providing variations of learning modalities to scaffold pre-service EFL teachers in designing lesson plan. Prosiding Ictte Fkip Uns 2015, 1(1), 336–343.
Sholikah, E., Suprihadi, S., & Nuraeningsih, N. (2021). Relationship between Higher-order Thinking Skills (HOTS) and English achievement. Prominent, 4(1), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.24176/pro.v4i1.5791
Soenoewati, D. I. D. (2015). English core competencies, basic competencies, and assessment for junior high school in curriculum 2013; between facts and hopes. Register Journal, 8(2), 1. https://doi.org/10.18326/rgt.v8i1.1-18
Sukmawijaya, A., Yunita, W., & Sofyan, D. (2020). Analyzing Higher Order Thinking Skills on the compulsory English textbook for tenth graders of Indonesian Senior High Schools. JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics & Literature), 5(2), 137–148. https://doi.org/10.33369/joall.v5i2.10565
Widodo, H. P. (2016). Language policy in practice: Reframing the English language curriculum in the Indonesian secondary education sector. In English language education policy in Asia (pp. 127-151). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22464-0_6
Wilson, L. O. (2013). Understanding the new version of Bloom’s Taxonomy. The Second Principle, 721(2001), 1–16.
Yunita, W., Syahrial, & Hati, G. M. (2020). English teachers’ knowledge on higher order thinking skills (HOTS). ENGLISH REVIEW: Journal of English Education, 9(1), 205–216. https://doi.org/10.25134/ERJEE.V9I1.3800