Development of an integrated ability assessment instrument in reaction rate material

Wan Zahara Zaitu Hania; Hari Sutrisno

doi:10.21831/jk.v6i1.38390

Development of an integrated ability assessment instrument in reaction rate material

Wan Zahara Zaitu Hania, Yogyakarta State University, Indonesia
Hari Sutrisno, Yogyakarta State University, Indonesia

10.21831/jk.v6i1.38390

Abstract

This research aimed to develop a valid and reliable integrated ability assessment instrument (IAAI) to measure the multiple representations and chemical literacy of senior high school students related to the reaction rates. The framework developed in this research was implemented based on a 4-D model (defining, designing, developing, and disseminating). The integrated assessment consisted of five items of essay questions. The preliminary version of the IAAI was initially piloted on reviews by experts, and the paper-pencil test was given to a group of students. The obtained data were analyzed using Item Response Theory (IRT). In addition, Generalized Partial Credit Model (GPCM) model was conducted to examine the parameter quality, which estimated the test items. The content validity, construct validity, and quality of the items suggest that the integrated assessment ability instrument has a high score in validity and reliability. The analysis results of the instrument trial data indicate that the integrated abilities of students are in the medium category.

Keywords

development, integrated assessment, reaction rate

Full Text:

PDF

References

Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representation. Learning and Instruction, 3(16), 183-198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.03.001

Avikasari, Rukayah, & Indriayu, M. (2018). Keefektifan penggunaan bahan ajar science literacy terhadap peningkatan prestasi belajar. Jurnal Kependidikan, 2(2), 221-234. https://doi.org/10.21831/jk.v2i2.19167

Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2015). Applying the GPCM model fundamental measurement in the human science (3th ed.). Routledge.

De Aayala, R. J. (1993). An introduction to polytomus item response theory models. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 25, 172-189.

De Ayala, R. J. (2009). The theory and practice of item response theory. Guilford Publications.

Ebel, R. L., & Frisbie, D. A. (1991). Essential of educational measurement (5th ed.). Prentice-Hall.

Fahriyah, A. R., & Wiyarsi, A. (2017, 12-13 September). Multiple representation skill of high school students on reaction rate material. Paper presented at Conference: International Seminar on Chemical Education (2nd ISCE), UII, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.

Gilbert, J. K. (2006). On the nature of “context” in chemical education. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 957-976.

Giles, D., & Earl, K. (2014). Being “in” assessment: The ontological layer(ing) of assessment practice. Journal of Applied Reaserch in Higher Education, 6(1), 22-29. https://doi.org/ 10.1108/jarhe-01-2012-0001.

Hambleton, R. K., & Swaminathan, H. (1985). Item respon theory. Kluwer Inc.

Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item respon theory. Sage Publication, Inc.

Martinez-Hernandez, K., Ikpeze, C., & Kimaru, I. (2015). Perspectives on Science Literacy: A comparative study of United States and Kenya. Educational Research International, 4(2), 25.

Johnstone, A. (2000). Chemical education reaserch: Where from here? University Chemistry Education, 4(1), 34-48.

Juita, E., Zulva, R., & Edial, H. (2019). Pengembangan perangkat asesmen pembelajaran geografi bencana untuk meningkatkan kemampuan berpikir kritis. Jurnal Kependidikan, 3(1), 85-105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21831/jk.v3i1.18623.

Laksono, E. W., Rohaeti, E., Suyanta, & Irwanto. (2017). The evaluation instrument of analytical thinking and science process skill in chemistry subject. Jurnal Kependidikan, 1(1). 100-110. https://doi.org/10.21831/jk.v1i1.8205

Ministry of Education and Culture Indonesia. (2013). Regulation of ministry of education and culture number 66 in 2013 regarding the standard for education assessment. Ministry of Education and Culture Indonesia.

Plush, S. E., & Kehrwald, B. A. (2014). Supporting new academics’ use of student centred strategies in traditional university teaching, Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 11(1), 1-16. Retrieved from http://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol11/iss1/5.

Rosaroso, R. C. (2015). Using reliability measure in test validation. European Scientific Journal, 11(8), 367-377. https://doi.org/10.1166/asl.2017.990

Rudner, L. M. (2001). Item respon theory. Educational Resources Information Center, USA.

Sadhu, S., & Laksono E. W. (2018). Development and validation of an integrated assessment for measuring critical thinking and chemical literacy in chemical equilibrium. International Jornal of Instruction, 11(3), 557-572. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11338a

Schwartz, Y., Ben-Zvi, R., & Hofstein, A. (2006).The use of scientific literacy taxonomy for assessing the development of chemical literacy among high-school student. Chemistry Education Reaserch and Practice, 7(4), 203-225. https://doi.org/10.1039/B6RP90011A.

Smith, K. C., & Nakhleh, M. B. (2011). University students’ conceptions of bonding in melting and dissolving phenomena. Chemistry Education Reaserch and Practice, 12(4), 398-408. https://doi.org/ 10.1039/c1rp90048j

Tima, M. T., & Sutrisno, H. (2018). Influence of problem solving based on multiple representations model on teaching and learning of chemistry on student’s academic self-efficacy and student’s cognitive achievement. American Journal of Educational Research, 6(7), 887-892. Retrieved from http://pubs.sciepub.com/education/6/7/1.

Wiyarsi, A., Damanhuri, M. I. M., & Fitriyana, N. (2020). Exploring pre-service chemistry teachers’ problem solving skills on vocational context-based learning. Jurnal Kependidikan, 4(2), 185-199. Retrieved from journal.uny.ac.id/index.php/jk/article/view/35302/pdf.

Yilmaz, K., Altinkurt, Y., & Cokluk, O. (2011). Developing the educational belief scale: The validity and reliability study. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 11(1), 343-350

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21831/jk.v6i1.38390