Pengembangan perangkat tes higher thinking skills untuk materi statistika SMP
Development of a test of higher thinking skills in statistics at junior high school
Abstract
Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk: (1) mengembangkan tes untuk mengukur higher thinking skills siswa kelas VIII SMP/MTs pada materi statistika dan (2) mengetahui karakteristik instrumen tes tersebut. Dengan proses pengembangan analisis, desain, pengembangan, implementasi, dan evaluasi, penelitian ini merupakan studi pengembangan dengan paradigma pengembangan ADDIE. Tes yang dikembangkan terdiri atas 10 butir soal pilihan ganda dan 5 butir soal uraian yang telah divalidasi oleh ahli. Teknik analisis data dilakukan secara kuantitatif dan deskriptif. Subjek uji coba yaitu 30 siswa kelas VIII SMP Negeri 1 Berbah. Berdasarkan hasil uji coba menunjukkan rata-rata indeks kesukaran butir-butir soal pilihan ganda adalah 0,44 (moderate) sedangkan rata-rata indeks kesukaran soal uraian adalah 0,35 (moderate). Rata-rata daya beda butir soal pilihan ganda adalah 0,40 (acceptable) dan daya beda untuk soal uraian adalah 0,47 (acceptable). Koefisien reliabilitas instrumen tes soal pilihan ganda dan uraian berturut-turut adalah 0,85 dan 0,74 dengan kriteria sangat tinggi. Dengan demikian, tes yang dikembangkan layak untuk digunakan untuk mengukur higher thinking skills siswa kelas VIII SMP/MTs pada materi statistika.
Downloads
References
Arifin, Z., & Retnawati, H. (2017). Pengembangan instrumen pengukur higher order thinking skills matematika siswa SMA kelas X. PYTHAGORAS: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 12(1), 98. https://doi.org/10.21831/pg.v12i1.14058
Barak, M., & Judy, Y. (2019). Enhancing Higher Order Thinking Skills Among Inservice Science Teachers Via Embedded Assessment. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20(5), 459–474.
Branch, R. M. (2009). Approach, Instructional Design: The ADDIE. Springer.
Christensen, L. B., Johnson, R. B., & Turner, L. A. (2015). Research Methods, Design. and Analysis. Pearson.
Clay, B. (2001). Is This a Trick Question ? Is This a Trick. Kansas Curriculum Center.
Dhakne-Palwe, S., Gujarathi, A., & Almale, B. (2015). Item Analysis of MCQs and Correlation between Difficulty Index, Discrimination Index and Distractor Efficiency in a Formative Examination in Community Medicine. Journal of Research in Medical Education & Ethics, 5(3), 254–259. https://doi.org/10.5958/2231-6728.2015.00052.9
Drost, E. A. (2011). Validity and Reliability in Social Science Research. Education Research and Perspectives, 38(1), 105–123.
Gugiu, C., & Gugiu, M. (2018). Determining the Minimum Reliability Standard Based on a Decision Criterion. Journal of Experimental Education, 86(3), 458–472. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2017.1315712
Haladyna, T. M. (1992). The Effectiveness of Several Multiple-Choice Formats. 5(1), 73–88. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324818ame0501
Haladyna, T. M. & Downing, S. M. (1989). A Taxonomy of Multiple-Choice Item-Writing Rules. Applied Measurement in Education, 2(1), 37–50.
Haladyna, T. M., & Downing, S. M. (2009). A Taxonomy of Multiple-Choice Item- Writing Rules. Applied Measurement in Education, 2(1), 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324818ame0201
Haladyna, T. M., Rodriguez, M. C., & Stevens, C. (2019). Are Multiple-choice Items Too Fat ? Applied Measurement in Education, 32(4), 350–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2019.1660348
Mohajan, H. K. (2017). Two Criteria for Good Measurements in Research: Validity and Reliability. Annals of Spiru Haret University. Economic Series, 17(4), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.26458/1746
Mohamed, R., & Lebar, O. (2017). Authentic Assessment in Assessing Higher Order Thinking Skills. 7(2), 466–476. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v7-i2/2021
Musa, A., Shaheen, S., & Elmardi, A. (2018). Item difficulty & item discrimination as quality indicators of physiology MCQ examinations at the Faculty of Medicine Khartoum University Abstract : Khartoum Medical Journal, 11(2), 1477–1468.
OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 Results Combined Executive Summaries. In OECD: Vol. I,II, II. https://doi.org/10.1787/g222d18af-en
Potenza, M. T., & Stocking, M. L. (1997). Flawed Items in Computerized Adaptive Testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 34(1), 79–96.
Prabowo, A., Puspa, P., & Setyawan, F. (2021). Development of test instruments to measure high level thinking ability of two linear variable equations system. International Journal on Education Insight, 1(2), 91. https://doi.org/10.12928/ijei.v1i2.3540
Prasetyani, E., Hartono, Y., & Susanti, E. (2016). Kemampuan Berpikir Tingkat Tinggi Siswa Kelas Xi Dalam Pembelajaran Trigonometri Berbasis Masalah Di Sma Negeri 18 Palembang. Jurnal Gantang, 1(1), 34–44. https://doi.org/10.31629/jg.v1i1.4
Putri, R. I. I., & Zulkardi, Z. (2018). Higher-order thinking skill problem on data representation in primary school: A case study. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 948(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/948/1/012056
Retnawati, H., Djidu, H., Kartianom, Apino, E., & Anazifa, R. D. (2018). Teachers’ knowledge about higher-order thinking skills and its learning strategy. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 76(2), 215–230. https://doi.org/10.33225/pec/18.76.215
Saraswati, P. M. S., & Agustika, G. N. S. (2020). Kemampuan Berpikir Tingkat Tinggi Dalam Menyelesaikan Soal HOTS Mata Pelajaran Matematika. Jurnal Ilmiah Sekolah Dasar, 4(2), 257. https://doi.org/10.23887/jisd.v4i2.25336
Sayyah, M., Vakili, Z., Masoudi Alavi, N., Bigdeli, M., Soleymani, A., Assarian, M., & Azarbad, Z. (2012). An Item Analysis of Written Multiple-Choice Questions: Kashan University of Medical Sciences. Nursing and Midwifery Studies, 1(2), 83–87. https://doi.org/10.5812/nms.8738
Schraw, G. J., & Robinson, D. H. (2011). Assessment Of Higer Order Thinking Skillss. Information Age Publishing.
Scully, D. (2017). Constructing Multiple-Choice Items to Measure Higher-Order Thinking. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 22(4), 1–13.
Shete, A., Kausar, A., Lakhkar, K., & Khan, S. (2015). Item analysis: An evaluation of multiple choice questions in Physiology examination. Journal of Contemporary Medical Education, 3(3), 106–109. https://doi.org/10.5455/jcme.20151011041414
Shim, G. T. G., Shakawi, A. M. H. A., & Azizan, F. L. (2017). Relationship between Students’ Diagnostic Assessment and Achievement in a Pre-University Mathematics Course. Journal of Education and Learning, 6(4), 364–371. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v6n4p364
Sim, S. M., & Rasiah, R. I. (2006). Relationship between item difficulty and discrimination indices in true/false-type multiple choice questions of a para-clinical multidisciplinary paper. Annals of the Academy of Medicine Singapore, 35(2), 67–71.
Sriwahyuni, K., & Maryati, I. (2022). Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Matematis Siswa Pada Materi Program Linear. Plusminus: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 2(2), 335–344. https://doi.org/10.35438/inomatika.v4i1.279
Wardhani, S., & Rumiati. (2011). Instrumen Penilaian Hasil Belajar Matematika SMP : Belajar dari PISA dan TIMSS. In Pusat Pengembangan dan Pemberdayaan Pendidik dan Tenaga Kependidikan (PPPPTK) Matematika. Pusat Pengembangan dan Pemberdayaan Pendidik dan Tenaga Kependidikan (PPPPTK) Matematika.
Widana, I. W. (2017). Higher Order Thinking Skills Assessment (HOTS). JISAE, 3(1), 32–44.
Wijaya, A., van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., & Doorman, M. (2015). Opportunity-to-learn context-based tasks provided by mathematics textbooks. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 89(1), 41–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-015-9595-1
Wijaya, A., van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., Doorman, M., & Robitzsch, A. (2014). Difficulties in solving context-based PISA mathematics tasks: An analysis of students’ errors. Mathematics Enthusiast, 11(3), 555–584. https://doi.org/10.54870/1551-3440.1317
Winarso, W. (2014). Membangun Kemampuan Berfikir Matematika Tingkat Tinggi Melalui Pendekatan Induktif, Deduktif Dan Induktif-Deduktif Dalam Pembelajaran Matematika. Eduma : Mathematics Education Learning and Teaching, 3(2), 95–118. https://doi.org/10.24235/eduma.v3i2.58
Zohar, A., & Dori, Y. J. (2003). Higher Order Thinking Skills and Low-Achieving Students: Are They Mutually Exclusive? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(2), 265–272. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1202
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright by Author(s)
