Implementing Cognitive Strategy Instruction to Improve the Actual Intellectual Abilities of the Undergraduate Students with Cognitive Expression Difficulties

Martini Jamaris


This research aims to find out the effectiveness of cognitive strategy instruction for improving intellectual abilities of undergraduate students with cognitive expressing difficulties, especially in actualizing their thinking abilities starting from lower order thinking up to higher order thinking. Therefore, the cognitive strategy instructional design based on Bloom’s Taxonomy is constructed in order to accomplish the research objectives. This research uses mixed method approach entailing the implementation of two research methods. The first is qualitative method which aims to get information of the cognitive strategy in instructional process. The second is quantitative method which is used to measure the students’ improvement in cognitive abilities or actual intellectual abilities after participating in cognitive strategies instruction. Research implementation is divided into three stages. The first stage is needs assessment, in which the students’ thinking / cognitive skill abilities are observed and measured in order to have evidence whether or not they have cognitive expression difficulties. The second stage is to use the needs assessment results in designing cognitive strategy instruction. The third stage is the implementation of the instructional design. There are 20 undergraduate students taking part in this research who are selected by purposive sampling technique. The results revealed that cognitive strategy instruction effectively improves the actual intellectual abilities of students with cognitive expression difficulties. Qualitatively, the students feel very satisfied with their actual intellectual abilities.


actual intellectual abilities; cognitive strategy instruction; students with cognitive expression difficulties

Full Text:



Anderson, V., & Roit, M. (1993). Planning and implementing collaborative strategy instruction for delayed readers in grades 6-10. The Elementary School Journal, 94(2), 121-137.

Anwar, H. N., & Sohail, M. M. (2014). Assessing the learning level of students through Bloom’s taxonomy in higher education in Punjab. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 4(3), 83-87.

Bunce, W. A. (2016). Information Processing Theory of Development: A Cognitive Theory Approah. University of West Georgia.

Clark, K. F., & Graves, M. F. (2005). Scaffolding students’ comprehension of text. The Reading Teacher, 58(6), 570-580.

Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1985). The systematic design of instruction 2nd. Ed. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Company.

Dole, J. A., Nokes, J. D., & Drits, D. (2009). 16 Cognitive Strategy Instruction. Handbook of research on reading comprehension, 347.

Greeno, J. G., Collins, A. M., & Resnick, L. B. (1996). Cognition and learning. Handbook of educational psychology, 77, 15-46.

Jamaris, M. (2014). Formal multiple intelligences assessment instruments for 4-6 years old children. American Journal of Educational Research, 2(12), 1164-1174.

Jamaris, M. (2016). The Impacts Of The Graduate Students’ Self-Evaluations To Their Achievements. International Journal Of Multidisciplinary Research And Development, 3(5), 242-249.

Jshabatu. (2018). Using Bloom’s Taxonomy to Write Effective Learning Objective. Taching Innovation & Padagogical Support.

Krathwohl, M. D., & Kaiser, J. L. (2004). Chemokines promote quiescence and survival of human neural progenitor cells. Stem Cells, 22(1), 109-118.

Leinhardt, G., & Greeno, G. J. (1986). Cognitve Skill of Teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology. 78(2), 75-81.

Linden, D. V. D., Keijsers, G. P., Eling, P., & Schaijk, R. V. (2005). Work stress and attentional difficulties: An initial study on burnout and cognitive failures. Work & Stress, 19(1), 23-36.

Mayilvaganan, M., & Kalpanadevi, D. (2015). Cognitive Skill Analysis for Students through Problem Solving Based on Data Mining Techniques. Procedia Computer Science, 47, 62-75.

McLean, J. F., & Hitch, G. J. (1999). Working memory impairments in children with specific arithmetic learning difficulties. Journal of experimental child psychology, 74(3), 240-260.

Morales, J., Calvo, A., & Bialystok, E. (2013). Working memory development in monolingual and bilingual children. Journal of experimental child psychology, 114(2), 187-202.

Ortiz, S. O., Lella, S. A., & Canter, N. A. (2010). Intellectual Ability and Assessment: A Primer for Parents and Educators. Bethesda: National Association of School Psychologists, 1-4.

Prins, F. J., Veenman, M. V., & Elshout, J. J. (2006). The impact of intellectual ability and metacognition on learning: New support for the threshold of problematicity theory. Learning and instruction, 16(4), 374-387.

Van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies for discourse comprehension. Orlando,

FL: Academic Press.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2019 Journal of ICSAR

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Journal of ICSAR is Indexing by:



counter  ---> View Statistic

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.