Mapping Students’ Misconceptions on Atomic Structure Using a Four-Tier Diagnostic Test: The Roles of Gender and Learning Styles

Napsin Palisoa, Muhamad Fadli, Nurfiah Nurfiah, Noni Noviana

Abstract

Misconceptions in chemistry learning remain a major challenge, particularly in abstract topics such as atomic structure, which requires students to integrate multiple representations. This study aimed to analyze students’ misconceptions about atomic structure and examine their relationships with learning styles and gender using a four-tier diagnostic test. A quantitative approach with descriptive, comparative, and correlational designs was employed. The participants were 113 Grade X senior high school students from three public schools in Leihitu District, Central Maluku Regency. Data were collected using a four-tier diagnostic test and a learning style questionnaire based on visual, auditory, and kinesthetic (VAK) categories. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, an independent samples t-test, one-way ANOVA, and Spearman’s rho correlation. The findings showed that misconceptions were concentrated in specific diagnostic items, particularly those concerning atomic theory, determination of atomic number, and valence electrons. Male students exhibited significantly higher misconception levels than female students, with a moderate-to-large effect size, indicating a meaningful difference in conceptual understanding. In contrast, no significant differences or relationships were found between learning styles and misconception levels. These findings suggest that reducing misconceptions should prioritize diagnostic assessment, cognitive conflict-based learning, and multiple representations rather than reliance on learning style preferences.

Keywords

Chemistry Misconceptions; Atomic Structure; Four-Tier Diagnostic Test; Learning Styles; Gender Differences

Full Text:

PDF

References

[1] E. Syahputra, “Pembelajaran Abad 21 Dan Penerapannya di Indonesia,” Journal of Information System and Education Development, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 10–13, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.62386/jised.v2i4.104.

[2] A. Lahlali, N. Chafiq, M. Radid, Z. Atibi, “Students’ Alternative Conceptions and Teachers’ Views on the Implementation of Pedagogical Strategies to Improve the Teaching of Chemical Bonding Concepts,” International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy (iJEP), vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 90–107, Sep. 2023, doi: 10.3991/ijep.v13i6.41391.

[3] M. Kramer, C. Förtsch, W. J. Boone, T. Seidel, and B. J. Neuhaus, “Investigating Pre-Service Biology Teachers’ Diagnostic Competences: Relationships between Professional Knowledge, Diagnostic Activities, and Diagnostic Accuracy,” Educ. Sci. (Basel), vol. 11, no. 3, p. 89, Feb. 2021, doi: 10.3390/educsci11030089.

[4] A. B. Damarsha, D. W. Irani, I. M. Ariana, P. M. Pertiwi, N. Suprapto, and E. Hariyono, “Identification of misconceptions of moment of force and moment of inertia in senior high school using CRI method,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 3132, no. 1, p. 012009, Nov. 2025, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/3132/1/012009.

[5] H. Mulyastuti, A. Y. R. Wulandari, and M. N. R. Jauhariyah, “Identification of causes student’s misconception: rigid body equilibrium concept,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 3132, no. 1, p. 012001, Nov. 2025, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/3132/1/012001.

[6] Y. Qian and J. Lehman, “Students’ Misconceptions and Other Difficulties in Introductory Programming,” ACM Transactions on Computing Education, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 1–24, Mar. 2018, doi: 10.1145/3077618.

[7] R. P. Galistiani and U. Fatmahanik, “ANALISIS MISKONSEPSI SISWA PADA BILANGAN BERPANGKAT DITINJAU DARI GAYA KOGNITIF SISWA DENGAN MENGGUNAKAN CERTAINTY OF RESPONSE INDEX (CRI),” AL-THIFL: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Guru Madrasah Ibtidaiyah, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 197–219, Feb. 2023, doi: 10.21154/thifl.v3i1.1591.

[8] R. I. Izza, N. Nurhamidah, and E. Elvinawati, “ANALISIS MISKONSEPSI SISWA MENGGUNAKAN TES DIAGNOSTIK ESAI BERBANTUAN CRI (CERTAINTY OF RESPONSE INDEX) PADA POKOK BAHASAN ASAM BASA,” Alotrop, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 55–63, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.33369/atp.v5i1.16487.

[9] R. D. Rahayu, “Miskonsepsi Mahasiswa Menggunakan Four-Tier Diagnostic Test,” SIMETRIS, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 18–21, Dec. 2021, doi: 10.51901/simetris.v15i2.223.

[10] A. R. Fitriani, A. Rahmawati, and U. Lathifa, “Phenomenology of Conceptual Understanding Ability, Representation, and Student Algorithm on Stoichiometry Materials,” Journal of Educational Chemistry (JEC), vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 9–18, Jun. 2022, doi: 10.21580/jec.2022.4.1.9744.

[11] N. Sa’adah, S. Haryani, and W. Mahatmanti, “Analisys of Chemical Misconceptions of Stoichiometry Materials Using Certainty of Response Index,” International Journal of Active Learning, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 94–102, 2022.

[12] Z. Fitriza and F. Gazali, “Diagnosing Students’ conception on atomic structure using open ended questions,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1013, p. 012097, May 2018, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1013/1/012097.

[13] S. Suryelita, G. Guspatni, and P. Defriati, “Description of learning difficulties on atomic structure and periodic table topics of tenth grade students in SMAN 7 Padang,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1317, no. 1, p. 012147, Oct. 2019, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1317/1/012147.

[14] D. Kaltakci Gurel, A. Eryilmaz, and L. C. McDermott, “A Review and Comparison of Diagnostic Instruments to Identify Students’ Misconceptions in Science,” EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 11, no. 5, Oct. 2015, doi: 10.12973/eurasia.2015.1369a.

[15] S. Soeharto and B. Csapó, “Exploring Indonesian student misconceptions in science concepts,” Heliyon, vol. 8, no. 9, p. e10720, Sep. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10720.

[16] N. N. Resta, A. Halim, Mustafa, and I. Huda, “Development of e-learning-based three-tier diagnostics test on the basic physics course,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1460, no. 1, p. 012131, Feb. 2020, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1460/1/012131.

[17] A. Rusilowati, R. Susanti, T. Sulistyaningsing, T. S. N. Asih, E. Fiona, and A. Aryani, “Identify misconception with multiple choice three tier diagnostik test on newton law material,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1918, no. 5, p. 052058, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1918/5/052058.

[18] A. S. U. Putra, I. Hamidah, and Nahadi, “The development of five-tier diagnostic test to identify misconceptions and causes of students’ misconceptions in waves and optics materials,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1521, no. 2, p. 022020, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1521/2/022020.

[19] R. D. da Costa, G. F. de Souza, T. B. de Castro, R. A. de Medeiros Valentim, and A. de Pinho Dias, “Identification of Learning Styles in Distance Education Through the Interaction of the Student With a Learning Management System,” IEEE Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnologias del Aprendizaje, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 148–160, Aug. 2020, doi: 10.1109/RITA.2020.3008131.

[20] S. Sharuni, R. Dhana Lakshmi, and A. Murugappan, “Automatic Detection of Learner’s Learning Style,” 2024, pp. 77–87, doi: 10.1007/978-981-97-0037-0_6.

[21] T. M. B. Nababan and L. Pratiwi, Pengaruh Media Pembelajaran Berbasis Kimia Komputasi menggunakan Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe STAD terhadap Motivasi Belajar pada Pokok Bahasan Ikatan Kimia,” Jurnal Pendidikan Sosial dan Humaniora, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://publisherqu.com/index.php/pediaqu/article/view/154.

[22] M. S. Hasibuan and L. Nugroho, “Detecting learning style using hybrid model,” in 2016 IEEE Conference on e-Learning, e-Management and e-Services (IC3e), Oct. 2016, pp. 107–111, doi: 10.1109/IC3e.2016.8009049.

[23] N. R. Ngatirin and Z. Zainol, “Automatic Detection of Learning Styles: A Decade Review on Data-driven Approaches,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1997, no. 1, p. 012001, Aug. 2021, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1997/1/012001.

[24] I. Azzi, L. Laaouina, A. Jeghal, A. Radouane, A. Yahyaouy, and H. Tairi, “A Modeling Learner Approach for Detecting Learning Styles in Adaptive E Learning Systems,” 2022, pp. 351–360, doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-02447-4_37.

[25] J. Khouna, M. Achour, H. Fakhar, and A. Tahiri, “An Investigation of Secondary Pupils’ Misconception about Electric Current and Voltage Concepts,” International Research Journal of Multidisciplinary Scope, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 215–226, 2025, doi: 10.47857/irjms.2025.v06i03.04481.

[26] A. Zohar and A. Ben David, “Paving a clear path in a thick forest: a conceptual analysis of a metacognitive component,” Metacogn. Learn., vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 177–195, Dec. 2009, doi: 10.1007/s11409-009-9044-6.

[27] J. S. Hyde, “Gender Similarities and Differences,” Annu. Rev. Psychol., vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 373–398, Jan. 2014, doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115057.

[28] N. M. Else-Quest, J. S. Hyde, and M. C. Linn, “Cross-national patterns of gender differences in mathematics: A meta-analysis,” Psychol. Bull., vol. 136, no. 1, pp. 103–127, Jan. 2010, doi: 10.1037/a0018053.

[29] H. Pashler, M. McDaniel, D. Rohrer, and R. Bjork, “Learning Styles,” Psychological Science in the Public Interest, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 105–119, Dec. 2008, doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x.

[30] B. Prajapati, M. Dunne, H. Bartlett, and R. Cubbidge, “The influence of learning styles, enrolment status and gender on academic performance of optometry undergraduates,” Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 69–78, Jan. 2011, doi: 10.1111/j.1475-1313.2010.00798.x.

[31] O. Aloni, M. Zion, and O. Spektor-Levy, “Students’ voices—the dynamic interactions between learning preferences, gender, learning disabilities, and achievements in science studies,” Instr. Sci., vol. 52, no. 5, pp. 711–742, Oct. 2024, doi: 10.1007/s11251-024-09666-8.

[32] E. M. Jannah and F. U. Ermawati, “Identify 11th Grade of Senior High School Jogoroto students’ misconceptions on Dynamic Rotation and Rigid Body Equilibrium concepts using Four-Tier Diagnostic Test,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1491, no. 1, p. 012010, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1491/1/012010.

[33] A. H. Johnstone, “TEACHING OF CHEMISTRY - LOGICAL OR PSYCHOLOGICAL?,” Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 9–15, 2000, doi: 10.1039/A9RP90001B.

[34] K. S. Taber, “The Role of Conceptual Integration in Understanding and Learning Chemistry,” in Chemistry Education, Wiley, 2015, pp. 375–394, doi: 10.1002/9783527679300.ch15.

[35] M. R. M. Bruce, A. E. Bruce, Z. Prats, J. Walter, and M. Leland, “One Rule to Rule Them All: Inviting Discussions about Content and Process in Johnstone’s Triangle,” J. Chem. Educ., vol. 102, no. 12, pp. 5027–5035, Dec. 2025, doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.4c01475.

[36] H. R. Widarti, “Multiple representation-based cognitive dissonance: A strategy to reduce misconception in chemistry learning,” in Nucleation and Atmospheric Aerosols, 2023, p. 030003, doi: 10.1063/5.0112157.

[37] S. Syahrial, M. Ilmah, Y. Yahmin, M. Munzil, and M. Muntholib, “Remediation of chemistry teachers’ misconceptions about covalent bonding using cognitive conflict interviews: A case study,” Journal of the Serbian Chemical Society, vol. 88, no. 2, pp. 211–221, 2023, doi: 10.2298/JSC220117073S.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.20961/jkpk.v11i2.115467

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Bookmark and Share