Analisis Butir Soal Dynamic Assessment untuk Mengukur Pemahaman Konsep Klasifikasi Tumbuhan pada Mahasiswa

Tutik Wulandari, Murni Ramli*, Muzzazinah Muzzazinah

Abstract


Based on the study of literature and documents, the material analysis of plant classification is considered difficult. The assessments that have been used on plant classification materials have not been equipped with feedback. This study aims to determine the validity, reliability, level of difficulty, discriminatory power, detection of bias and unidimensionality of dynamic assessment instruments on plant classification materials. Development research method with the ADDIE model. The research sample was 121 biology education students who were selected by purposive random sampling. The results showed the validity of the questions in the form of 12 fit questions with the Rasch modeling having an MNSQ infit of 0.80-1.22. The reliability of the items in the 0.97 category is very good and the respondent's reliability is 0.31 in the weak category. While the level of difficulty of the questions is unknown, there are four categories, namely 3 very easy questions, 4 easy questions, 2 difficult questions, and 3 very difficult questions. The discriminatory power of questions with a separation index of 6.71 and an index of separation of questions of 0.67. Detection bias shows that gender does not discriminate against item items and unidimensionality of item items with 36.5% raw variance with sufficient category. The dynamic assessment instrument is suitable to be used to measure the understanding of the concept of plant classification in students

Keywords


analysis of items, dynamic assessment, multiple-choice, plant classification

Full Text:

PDF

References


Aghaebrahimian, A., Rahimirad, M., Ahmadi, A., & Alamdari, J. K. (2014). Dynamic Assessment of Writing Skill in Advanced EFL Iranian Learners. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 60–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.389

Alemi, M. (2015). The Impact of Dynamic Assessment on Iranian EFL S tudents ’ Writing Self-Assessment. Tell, 9(1), 145–169.

Allal, L., & Ducrey, G. P. (2000). Assessment of Or in The zone of proximal development. Learning and Instruction, 10(2), 137–152.https://doi.org/10.1016/s0959-4752(99)00025-0

Amalia, A. N., & Widayati, A. (2016). Jurnal Pendidikan Akuntansi Indonesia, Vol. XIV, No. 1, Tahun 2016. Jurnal Pendidikan Akutansi Indonesia, XIV(1), 78–97.

Amedu, O. I. (2015). The Effect of Gender on the Achievement of Students in Biology Using the Jigsaw Method. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(17), 176–179.

Amiri, F., & Saberi, L. (2016). Dynamic Assessment : The Effect of Mediated Learning Experience on Iranian EFL Learners ’ Writing Skills. International Academic Journal of Humanities, 3(2), 1–9.

Bisson, M.-J., Gilmore, C., Inglis, M., & Jones, I. (2016). Measuring Conceptual Understanding Using Comparative Judgement. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 2(2), 141–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-016-0024-3

Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2007). Applying the rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences: Second edition. Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental Measurement in the Human Sciences: Second Edition, 1–340. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410614575

Chung, L. Y., & Chang, R. C. (2017). The effect of gender on motivation and student achievement in digital game-based learning: A case study of a contented-based classroom. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(6), 2309–2327. https://doi.org/10.12973/EURASIA.2017.01227A

Çimer, A. (2012). What Makes Biology Learning Difficult and Effective: Students’ Views. Educational Research and Reviews, 7(3), 61–71. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR11.205

Demirbas, M., & Ertugul, N. (2014). A study on preschoolers ’ conceptual perceptions of states of matter : a case study of Turkish students. South African Journal of Education, 34(3).

Derakhshan, A., & Kordjazi, M. (2015). Implications of Dynamic Assessment in Second/Foreign Language Contexts. English Linguistics Research, 4(1), 41–48. https://doi.org/10.5430/elr.v4n1p41

Dörfler, T., Golke, S., & Artelt, C. (2009). Dynamic assessment and its potential for the assessment of reading competence. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 35(2–3), 77–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2009.10.005

El-Hani, C. N., Amaral, E. M. R. do, Sepulveda, C., & Mortimer, E. F. (2015). Conceptual Profiles: Theoretical-methodological Grounds and Empirical Studies. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 167, 15–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.12.636

Halpern, D. F., Benbow, C. P., Geary, D. C., Gur, R. C., Hyde, J. S., & Gernsbacher, M. A. (2007). The science of sex differences in science and mathematics. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Supplement, 8(1), 1–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2007.00032.x

Iskandar, A., & Rizal, M. (2017). Analisis Kualitas Soal Di Perguruan Tinggi Berbasis Aplikasi TAP. Jurnal Penelitian Dan Evaluasi Pendidikan, 21(2), 12–23.

Jayawardana, H. B. A. (2017). Paradigma Pembelajaran Biologi Di Era Digital. Jurnal Bioedukatika, 5(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.26555/bioedukatika.v5i1.5628

Konzulin, A., Gindis, B., Ageyev, V. S., & Suzanne M. Miller. (2003). Vygotsky’s Educational Theory in Cultural Context. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840975

Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2011). Dynamic assessment in the classroom: Vygotskian praxis for second language development. Language Teaching Research, 15(1), 11–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168810383328

Lidz, C. S., & Gindis, B. (2003). Dynamic assessment of the evolving cognitive functions in children. Vygotsky’s Educational Theory in Cultural Context, 99–116. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840975.007

Marriott, P. (2009). Students’ evaluation of the use of online summative assessment on an undergraduate financial accounting module. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2), 237–254. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00924.x

Maskour, L., Alami, A., & Agrraki, M. (2016). Study of some learning difficulties in plant classification among university students. The Eurasia Proceedings of Educational & Social Sciences (EPESS), 5, 294–297. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/download/article-file/384190

Maskour, L., Alami, A., Zaki, M., & Agorram, B. (2019). Plant classification knowledge and misconceptions among university students in morocco. Education Sciences, 9(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9010048

Mauludin, L. A. (2018). Dynamic assessment to improve students’ summary writing skill in an ESP class. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 36(4), 355–364. https://doi.org/10.2989/16073614.2018.1548296

Md Ghazali, N. H. (2016). A Reliability and Validity of an Instrument to Evaluate the School-Based Assessment System: A Pilot Study. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), 5(2), 148. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v5i2.4533

Mehri, E., & Amerian, M. (2015). Challenges to Dynamic Assessment in Second Language Learning. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(7), 1458. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0507.19

Miao, T., & Mian, L. (2013). Dynamic Assessment in ESL Writing Classroom. International Conference on Education Technology and Management Science (ICETMS 2013), (Icetms), 676–679. https://doi.org/10.2991/icetms.2013.1

Mitha, P., Setyaningrum, P., Ramli, M., & Rinanto, Y. (2018). Analisis kualitas butir soal instrumen Assessment Diagnostic untuk mendeteksi miskonsepsi siswa SMA pada materi virus. Jurnal Bioedukatika, 6(2), 91–101.

Mohamadi, Z. (2018). Comparative effect of online summative and formative assessment on EFL student writing ability. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 59(February), 29–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.02.003

Moore-Brown,B.,Huerta,M.,Uranga-Hernandez,Y.,& Peña,E.D.(2006). Using dynamic assessment to evaluate children with suspectedcv learning disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 41(4), 209–217. https://doi.org/10.1177/10534512060410040301

Özarslan, M., & Çetin, G. (2018). Biology Students’ Cognitive Structures about Basic Components of Living Organisms. Science Education International, 29(2), 62–74.

Shakki, F. (2016). The Interplay between Language Skills and Dynamic Assessment. International Journal of Linguistics, 8(2), 141. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijl.v8i2.9221

Shrestha, P., & Coffin, C. (2012). Dynamic assessment, tutor mediation and academic writing development. Assessing Writing, 17(1), 55–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2011.11.003

Sumintono, B., & Widhiarso, W. (2015). Aplikasi Permodelan Rasch pada Assessment Pendidikan. Cimahi: Trim komunikata

Wang, T. H. (2010). Web-based dynamic assessment: Taking assessment as teaching and learning strategy for improving students’ e-Learning effectiveness. Computers and Education, 54(4), 1157–1166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.11.001

Yangin, S., Sidekli, S., & Gokbulut, Y. (2014). Prospective teachers’ misconceptions about classification of plants and changes in their misconceptions during pre-service education. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 13(1), 105–117.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24815/jpsi.v10i1.22082

Article Metrics

Abstract view : 0 times
PDF - 0 times

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2021 Tutik Wulandari, Murni Ramli, Muzzazinah Muzzazinah


Jurnal Pendidikan Sains Indonesia (Indonesian Journal of Science Education)

ISSN 2338-4379  (print) | 2615-840X (online)
Organized by Universitas Syiah Kuala 
Published by Master of Science Education Study Program Graduate School Universitas Syiah Kuala, Banda Aceh, Indonesia
Website : http://jurnal.usk.ac.id/jpsi
Email     : jpsi@usk.ac.id

  

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