Published date: Nov 11 2020

Journal Title: KnE Social Sciences

Issue title: International Conference on Humanities, Education and Social Sciences (IC-HEDS) 2019

Pages: 124–134

DOI: 10.18502/kss.v4i14.7864

Miftakhul Hudamiftakhul.huda@ums.ac.idDepartment of Indonesian Language and Literature Education, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Muhammadiyah University of Surakarta

Eko PurnomoDepartment of Indonesian Language and Literature Education, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Muhammadiyah University of Surakarta

This study seeks to identify the basic values of humanity presented in the Indonesian language textbook used in Junior High Schools. This study used a qualitative approach, with a textbook as a case study (specifically the Indonesian language textbook for the seventh, eighth, and ninth grades). The data considered took the form of words, phrase, sentences, discourse, and pictures showing the basic values of humanity. Data was collected a questionnaire which was subsequently analyzed. First, data were firstly classified according to the taxonomy and characteristic. Then codes were assigned to the different classifications. Then referential comparison techniques were used to measure the structure of basic values of humanity in the textbooks. This was followed by the construction of a basic pattern and the validation of the data. The research identified fifteen main points, they were scientific perspective, materials concept explication, curriculum relevance, interesting, increasing motivation, stimulating students’ activities, illustrative, understandable, supporting the other subjects, respecting individual differences, stabilizing values, protecting men and women’s rights, appreciation towards achievements, supporting freedom of speech, and respecting the essence of human being. From those fifteen main points, four points need to be improved, they are: stimulating students’ activities, illustrative, protecting men and women’s rights, and supporting freedom of speech.

Keywords: humanity values, textbook, Indonesian language

[1] Westbrook, C. and Holt, P. (2015). Addressing the Problem of Outside Assistance in Pre-sessional Writing Assessments. J. English Acad. Purp., vol. 18, pp. 78–83.

[2] Ranker, J. (2019). Children’s Sign-Making and Construction of Signifying Chains in Relation to Texts: Book Interactions as Discursive Processes. Linguist. Educ., vol. 51, pp. 46–58.

[3] Brooks, M. D. (2016). Tell Me What You are Thinking’: An Investigation of Five Latina LTELs Constructing Meaning with Academic Texts. Linguist. Educ., vol. 35, pp. 1–14.

[4] Frisson, S. (2015). About Bound and Scary Books: The Processing of Book Polysemies. Lingua, vol. 157, pp. 17–35.

[5] Zhdanko, A. (2019). Identification of Cognitive Manipulations that Have the Greatest Impact on Students in the Internet. Int. J. Cogn. Res. Sci. Eng. Educ., vol. 7, issue 1, pp. 35–42.

[6] Singer, R. (2018). A Small Speech Community with Many Small Languages: the Role of Receptive Multilingualism in Supporting Linguistic Diversity at Warruwi Community (Australia). Lang. Commun., pp. 1–17.

[7] Rumsey, B. A. (2018). The Sociocultural Dynamics of Indigenous Multilingualism in Northwestern Australia. Lang. Commun., pp. 1–11.

[8] Silverstein, M. (2015). How language Communities Intersect: Is ‘Superdiversity’ an Incremental or Transformative Condition? Lang. Commun., pp. 1–12.

[9] Neumann, H. and Mcdonough, K. (2014). Exploring the Relationships among Student Preferences, Prewriting Tasks, and Text Quality in an EAP Context. J. English Acad. Purp., vol. 15, pp. 14–26.

[10] Rivers, D. J. and Ross, A. S. (2017). Interaction Communicative Interactions in Foreign Language Education: Contact Anxiety, Appraisal and Distance. Learn. Cult. Soc. Interact., vol. 16, pp. 20–30.

[11] Deringer, S. A. (2017). Mindful Place-Based Education: Mapping the Literature. J. Exp. Educ., vol. 0(0), pp. 1–16.

[12] Jannai, M. E. (2015). Student-Text Interface in Gifted Children: Case Description. Gift. Educ. Intemational, vol. 20, pp. 200–219.

[13] Huda, M. (2018). Blended Learning: Improvisasi dalam Pembelajaran Menulis Pengalaman. Lensa Kaji. Kebahasaan, Kesusastraan, dan Budaya, vol. 8, issue 2, pp. 117–130.

[14] Huda, M. (2018). Strategi Berpikir Integratif dalam Pembelajaran Membaca Lintas Kurikulum di Sekolah Dasar. J. Kredo, vol. 1, issue 2, pp. 26–35.

[15] Shao, X. and Purpur, G. (2016). Effects of Information Literacy Skills on Student Writing and Course Performance. J. Acad. Librariansh.

[16] Davis, M. and Davis, M. (2017). Approaching Conversational Humour Culturally: A Survey of the Emerging Area of Investigation. Lang. Commun., pp. 1–9.

[17] Yan, X., Lu, Y. and Liu, L. (2019). A General Progressive Secret Image Sharing Construction Method. Signal Process. Image Commun., vol. 71, pp. 66–75.

[18] Roberts, G., Langstein, B. and Galantucci, B. (2016). Sensitivity to Incoherence in Human Communication. Lang. Commun., vol. 47, pp. 15–22.

[19] Ohlsson, R. (2018). Student-Teacher Conferencing in Swedish Upper Secondary School: Dimensions of Dominance and Relations Between Perspectives in Institutional Discourse. Learn. Cult. Soc. Interact., vol. December, pp. 0–1.

[20] Daiute, C., Todorova, R. S. and Kovács-cerovi, T. (2015). Narrating Participation and Power Relations in a Social Inclusion Program. Lang. Commun., vol. 45, pp. 46–58.