•  
  •  
 

Jurnal Penelitian dan Evaluasi Pendidikan

Keywords

Test development, critical thinking, item response theory

Document Type

Article

Abstract

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menghasilkan sebuah alat ukur (tes) berpikir kritis yang valid dan reliabel untuk digunakan, baik dalam lingkup pendidikan maupun kerja di Indonesia. Tahapan penelitian dilakukan berdasarkan tahap pengembangan tes menurut Hambleton dan Jones (1993). Kisi-kisi dan pembuatan butir didasarkan pada konsep dalam tes Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA). Pada WGCTA, berpikir kritis terdiri dari lima dimensi yaitu Inference, Recognition Assumption, Deduction, Interpretation dan Evaluation of arguments. Uji coba tes dilakukan pada 1.453 peserta tes seleksi karyawan di Surabaya, Gresik, Tuban, Bojonegoro, Rembang. Data dikotomi dianalisis dengan menggunakan model IRT dengan dua parameter yaitu daya beda dan tingkat kesulitan butir. Analisis dilakukan dengan menggunakan program statistik Mplus versi 6.11 Sebelum melakukan analisis dengan IRT, dilakukan pengujian asumsi yaitu uji unidimensionalitas, independensi lokal dan Item Characteristic Curve (ICC). Hasil analisis terhadap 68 butir menghasilkan 15 butir dengan daya beda yang cukup baik dan tingkat kesulitan butir yang berkisar antara -4 sampai dengan 2.448. Sedikitnya jumlah butir yang berkualitas baik disebabkan oleh kelemahan dalam menentukan subject matter experts di bidang berpikir kritis dan pemilihan metode skoring.

Kata kunci: Pengembangan tes, berpikir kritis, item response theory

DEVELOPING CRITICAL THINKING TEST UTILISING ITEM RESPONSE THEORY

Abstract

The present study was aimed to develop a valid and reliable instrument in assesing critical thinking which can be implemented both in educational and work settings in Indonesia. Following the Hambleton and Jones's (1993) procedures on test development, the study developed the instrument by employing the concept of critical thinking from Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA). The study included five dimensions of critical thinking as adopted from the WGCTA: Inference, Recognition Assumption, Deduction, Interpretation dan Evaluation of arguments. 1453 respondents from Surabaya, Gresik, Tuban, Bojonegoro and Rembang were used for trailing the test. The dichotomous data were analized using the Item Response Theory with two parameter logistic model using statistical program Mplus ver. 6.11. Several assumptions were tested prior the IRT analysis; the test of unidimensionality, local independency and Item Characteristic Curve (ICC). Amongst 68 items only 15 items had good discrimination parameter. Difficulty item level ranged from - 4.95 to 2.448. The study was limited in producing high number of qualified items due to its failure in finding subject matter experts in critical thinking area and inadequate choice in scoring method.

Keywords: test development, critical thinking, Item response theory

First Page

45

Last Page

55

Issue

1

Volume

20

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.21831/pep.v20i1.6304

References

Angelo, T.A. & Cross, P. (1995). Classroom assessment techniques: a Handbook for college teachers (2nd edition). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Baker, F. B. (2001). The basics of item response Theory (2nd edition). USA: ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation.

Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Hambleton, R. K., & Jones, R. W. (1993). An NCME instructional module on: Comparison of classical test theory and item response theory and their applications to test development. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 12(3). 38-47.

Hossoubah, Z. (2007). Develoving creative and critical thinking skills (terjemahan). Bandung: Yayasan Nuansa Cendia.

Kaupp, J., Frank, B., & Chen, A. (2014). Evaluating critical thinking and problem solving in large classes: Model eliciting activities for critical thinking development. Toronto: Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario.

Kurfiss, J. G. (1988). Critical thinking: Theory, research, practice, and possibilities. (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 2). Association for the Study of Higher Education. http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED304041.pdf (diunduh 14 April 2014).

Lai, E. R. (2011). Critical thinking: a Literature review. Author, Pearson Assessments. http://www.pearsonassessments.com/hai/images/tmrs/CriticalThinking (diunduh 14 April 2014).

MacCann, C.E. (2006). New approaches to measuring emotional intelligence: Exploring methodological issues with two new assessment tools. Doctoral dissertation. Sydney: University of Sydney.

Norris, S. P. & Ennis, R. H. (1989). Evaluating critical thinking. Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publications.

Possin, K. (2014). Critique of the Watson-Glaser critical thinking appraisal test: The more you know, the lower your score. Informal Logic, Vol 34, No 4.

Stassen, M.L.A., Herrington, A., & Henderson, L. (2011). To improve the academy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Sternberg, R. J. (1986). Critical thinking: Its nature, measurement, and improvement. National Institute of Education. http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED272882.pdf (diunduh 14 April 2014).

Essential Skills for the 21stCentury Workplace: Keys to Succeeding in the Global Economy. www.21stcenturyskills.org (diunduh 14 April 2014)

Wagner, T. A., (2002). Critical thinking: The development of a new measure. Thesis. Blacksburg, Virginia: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.

Walker, P. & Finney, N. (1999). Skill development and critical thinking in higher education. London: Higher Education Research & Development Unit, University College

Download

Share

COinS