Abstract* Critical thinking is an essential skill in education as it enables students to develop problem-solving and analytical abilities. This study aims to analyze elementary school students’ critical thinking skills in understanding Serat Centhini texts from a gender difference perspective. A descriptive quantitative approach was employed to examine differences in critical thinking skills between male and female students in their understanding of Serat Centhini texts. The participants consisted of 186 fifth-grade elementary school students in Surakarta, which selected through stratified cluster random sampling, comprising 100 male students and 86 female students. The instrument used was Critical Thinking on Texts, developed based on Ennis’s critical thinking indicators, including focus, reasoning, inference, situation, and clarity. Data were collected through Indonesian language-learning activities incorporating cultural texts and analyzed using SPSS version 25 with descriptive statistics, crosstabulation, and odds ratio analysis. The finding reveals a clear difference between male and female students in critical skills toward Serat Centhini texts, where 66.3% of female students were categorized as having high critical thinking skills, whereas only 45% of male students reached the same level. The odds ratios indicate that female students are more likely than male students to achieve a high level of critical thinking. The most prominent differences were found in the indicators of inference and situation, which relate to the ability to understand implicit meanings and the text’s moral context. These findings confirm that reading experiences and gender-based cognitive-affective factors may influence children’s depth of critical thinking when engaging with traditional literary texts. This study recommends the integration of cultural texts such as Serat Centhini into Indonesian language learning to enhance students’ critical literacy and promote cognitive equity across genders from the elementary school level.
Sugara et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: