Keywords
problem solving skill, testing, physics, assessment
Document Type
Article
Abstract
This research aimed to develop a physics problem-solving skill (PSS) test for grade X students of senior high school which met test instrument characteristics and feasibility. The development stages included: (a) test designing, (b) test trial, and (c) test revision and preparation. The designing stage included: (1) needs analysis, (2) mapping, (3) drawing conclusion, (4) determining test purpose, (5) determining competencies, (6) determining materials, (7) preparing answers, (8) writing items, (9) validating content, (10) improving and preparing the test, and (11) preparing the scoring guide with PCM. The trial stage consisted of: (1) determining trial subjects, (2) performing trial, and (3) analyzing trial result data based on IRT. The study was performed in Kulonprogo involving 281 students. The result shows that the instrument fulfills content validity with Aiken's V of 0.95 to 0.98. Based on INFIT MNSQ criteria, 52 items fit PCM, item difficulty index ranges from -1.47 to 0.88, meaning that all items are good, and information function analysis and SEM show that the test fits the ability between -1.3 and 2.7. Therefore, the test instrument meets the characteristics and feasibility to measure physics PSS in high school.
Page Range
114-123
Issue
2
Volume
3
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
10.21831/reid.v3i2.14982
Source
https://journal.uny.ac.id/index.php/reid/article/view/14982
Recommended Citation
Nadapdap, A. T., & Istiyono, E. (2017). Developing physics problem-solving skill test for grade X students of senior high school. REID (Research and Evaluation in Education), 3(2). https://doi.org/10.21831/reid.v3i2.14982
References
Adams, R. J., & Khoo, S.-T. (1996). Quest: The interactive test analysis system version 2.1. Victoria: Australian Council for Educa-tional Research.
Aiken, L. R. (1980). Content validity and reliability of single items or question-naires. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 40(4), 955-959. https:// doi.org/10.1177/001316448004000419
Brookhart, S. M. (2010). How to assess higher-order thinking skills in your classroom. Alexandria: ASCD.
Cangelosi, J. (1995). Merancang tes untuk menilai prestasi siswa. (D. Tedjasudhana, Ed.). Bandung: Institut Teknologi Bandung.
Carvalho, C., FÃuza, E., Conboy, J., Fonseca, J., Santos, J., Gama, A. P., & Salema, M. H. (2015). Critical thinking, real life problems and feedback in the sciences classroom. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 12(2), 21-31.
Eraikhuemen, L., & Ogumogu, A. E. (2014). An assessment of secondary school physics teachers conceptual under-standing of force and motion in Edo South Senatorial District. Academic Research International, 5(1), 253-262.
Gok, T. (2010). The general assessment of problem solving processes and metacognition in physics education. Eurasian Journal of Physics and Chemistry Education, 2(2), 110-122. Retrieved from http://www.eurasianjournals.com/index.php/ejpce
Hambleton, R. K., & Swaminathan, H. (1985). Item response theory : principles and applications. Boston, MA: Kluwer Nijhoff.
Helaiya, S. (2010). Development and implemen-tation of life skills programme for student teachers. Vadodara: Maharaja Sayaji Rao University of Baroda.
Istiyono, E. (2016). The application of GPCM on MMC test as a fair alternative assessment model in physics learning. In Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference on Research, Implementation and Education of Mathematics and Science (ICRIEMS), 16-17 May 2017 (pp. 25-30). Yogyakarta: Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta. Retrieved from http:// seminar.uny.ac.id/icriems/sites/seminar.uny.ac.id.icriems/files/prosiding/PE-04.pdf
Istiyono, E., Mardapi, D., & Suparno, S. (2014). Pengembangan tes kemampuan berpikir tingkat tinggi fisika (Pys-THOTS) peserta didik SMA. Jurnal Penelitian Dan Evaluasi Pendidikan, 18(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.21831/pep. v18i1.2120
Nadapdap, A. T. Y., & Lede, Y. (2016). Authentic assessment of problem solving and critical thinking skill for improvement in learning physics. In Proceeding of International Seminar on Science Education (ISSE), 29 October 2016 (pp. 37-42). Yogyakarta: Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta.
Oriondo, L. L., & Dallo-Antonio, E. M. (1998). Evaluation educational outcomes. Manila: Rex Printing Compagny.
Piaget, J. (2005). The psychology of intelligence (Electronic version). Taylor & Francis.
PoÌlya, G. (1957). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method. Doubleday: Garden City.
Regulation of Minister of Education and Culture No. 59 of 2014 on the curriculum 2013 of senior high school/Madrasah Aliyah (2014). Republic of Indonesia.
Shin, S.-H. (2009). How to treat omitted responses in Rasch model-based equating. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 14(1), 1-8. Retrieved from http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=14&n=1
Slameto. (2010). Belajar dan faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.
Suryabrata, S. (2002). Pengembangan alat ukur psikologis. Yogyakarta: Andi Offset.
Thorpe, G. L., McMillan, E., Sigmon, S. T., Owings, L. R., Dawson, R., & Bouman, P. (2007). Latent trait modeling with the Common Beliefs Survey III: Using item response theory to evaluate an irrational beliefs inventory. Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 25(3), 175-189. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s10942-006-0039-9
Tonidandel, S., Quiñones, M. A., & Adams, A. A. (2002). Computer-adaptive test-ing: The impact of test characteristics on perceived performance and test takers' reactions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 320-32.
