Community Engagement for Educational Innovation: Implementing the SOLO Taxonomy to Foster Higher-Order Learning at Yala Rajabhat University, Thailand
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51601/ijcs.v6i3.1025Abstract
Community engagement plays an important role in promoting educational innovation and enhancing higher-order learning in higher education. This community engagement program aimed to introduce and implement the Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome (SOLO) Taxonomy to support students' higher-order thinking skills at Yala Rajabhat University, Thailand. The program was delivered through an international academic collaboration involving interactive lectures, collaborative discussions, case-based learning, and practical activities focused on designing learning tasks using the SOLO Taxonomy. Program effectiveness was evaluated using pre- and post-program assessments, participant observations, reflective feedback, and satisfaction questionnaires. The results indicated improved understanding of the SOLO Taxonomy and greater ability among participants to design and analyze learning activities that promote relational and extended abstract thinking. Participants also reported increased confidence in applying reflective and critical thinking strategies within academic contexts. Overall satisfaction with the program was very high, highlighting the relevance of the training materials, interactive learning approach, and opportunities for international academic exchange. These findings demonstrate that community engagement based on the SOLO Taxonomy provides an effective strategy for fostering higher-order learning, strengthening pedagogical competence, and supporting educational innovation in higher education through international collaboration.
Downloads
References
[1] L. F. Claudia, T. A. Kusmayadi, and L. Fitriana, “The SOLO taxonomy: Classify students’ responses in solving linear program problems,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1538, no. 1, pp. 1–15, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1538/1/012107.
[2] A. De la Hoz Serrano, A. Álvarez-Murillo, E. J. Fernández Torrado, M. Á. González Maestre, and L. V. Melo Niño, “A Case Study of Computational Thinking Analysis Using SOLO Taxonomy in Scientific–Mathematical Learning,” Computers, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 1–14, May 2025, doi: 10.3390/computers14050192.
[3] R. Wikrama Wardana, F. A. Yanti, M. Ummas Genisa, M. Anas Thohir, E. Heryensi, and R. F. Handayani, “Mapping the Knowledge Structure of Students with Intellectual Disabilities Through SOLO Taxonomy-Based Automated Assessment,” Journal of Intellectual Disability-Diagnosis and Treatment, vol. 14, pp. 15–27, 2026.
[4] Q. Gao, “A Study on the Application of SOLO Taxonomy theory in Senior School English Writing Teaching from the perspective of the integration of teaching evaluation,” Education and Social Work, vol. 1, no. 2, p. 106, Jun. 2025, doi: 10.63313/esw.9065.
[5] A. Boikou, A. A. Economides, and S. A. Nikou, “Business simulation games: impact on SOLO taxonomy learning outcomes, learning performance and teamwork competency,” Interaction Design and Architectures Journal, vol. 53, no. 53, pp. 161–175, 2022.
[6] P. Yuanita, M. Maimunah, K. Kartini, and N. Arif, “Analysis of SOLO taxonomy-based test instruments in approaching the Merdeka curriculum,” Jramathedu, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 12–29, Jan. 2023, doi: 10.23917/jramathedu.v8i1.1270.
[7] L. Rembach and L. Dison, “Transforming taxonomies into rubrics: Using SOLO in social science and inclusive education,” Perspectives in Education, vol. 1, no. 43, pp. 68–83, 2016, doi: 10.18820/2519593X/pie.
[8] S. M. Adeniji, P. Baker, and M. Schmude, “Structure of the Observed Learning Outcomes (SOLO) model: A mixed-method systematic review of research in mathematics education,” Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 1–15, 2022, doi: 10.29333/ejmste/12087.
[9] G. K. W. Wong, S. Jian, and H. Y. Cheung, “Engaging children in developing algorithmic thinking and debugging skills in primary schools: A mixed-methods multiple case study,” Educ. Inf. Technol. (Dordr)., vol. 29, no. 13, pp. 16205–16254, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.1007/s10639-024-12448-x.
[10] P. Yuanita, M. Maimunah, K. Kartini, and N. Arif, “Analysis of SOLO taxonomy-based test instruments in approaching the Merdeka curriculum,” Jramathedu, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 12–29, Jan. 2023, doi: 10.23917/jramathedu.v8i1.1270.
[11] C. M. Sudaria and J. M. P. Sanchez, “SOLO-based Formative Assessments in Teaching and Learning Earthquakes,” Science Education International, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 408–420, 2024, doi: 10.33828/sei.v35.i4.11.
[12] Y. Lin, “An Analysis of the Flipped Classroom Based on the Bloom’s Taxonomy of the Educational Objectives,” Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, vol. 1, no. 615, pp. 679–685, 2021.
[13] C. M. Sudaria and J. M. P. Sanchez, “SOLO-based Formative Assessments in Teaching and Learning Earthquakes,” Science Education International, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 408–420, 2024, doi: 10.33828/sei.v35.i4.11.
[14] A. Alhammadi, I. Alsyouf, C. Semeraro, and K. Obaideen, “The role of industry 4.0 in advancing sustainability development: A focus review in the United Arab Emirates,” Clean. Eng. Technol., vol. 18, no. 1, Feb. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.clet.2023.100708.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Wanda Nugroho Yanuarto, Gunawan, Ira Hapsari, Sainee Tamphu
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
