Development of Five-Tier Multiple Choice (5TMC) Instrument to Analyze Misconceptions in Stoichiometry Material

Idha Ayu Kusumaningrum, Maulidiningsih Maulidiningsih

Abstract

Stoichiometry is the basic of chemical calculations. However, students' understanding of the material is still poor. The characteristics of the material consist of abstract concepts, calculations, and related with other materials. That can cause misconception. The instrument to analyze misconceptions and the cause of student’s misconceptions is still rare. This study aims to determine the feasibility of the five-tier multiple choice (5TMC) instrument and analyze misconceptions and the causes of misconceptions. The instrument was developed using the 4-D model (Define, Design, Develop, and Dissemination). This research was conducted with 103 respondents. Data was obtained from questionnaires, interviews, and tests. Content validity used the Aiken method with 5 experts. This research also used the Rasch Model to analyze the reliability and validity of the instrument. The research concluded that the five-tier multiple choice (5TMC) instrument developed was feasible and the criteria were good based on Aiken validity, Rasch model, and response questionnaire. Misconception was found in 2nd students as moderate (38,09%) and 4th students as low (24,94%). Personal thinking is the factor that most influences misconceptions. This instrument can be used as an alternative for analyzing student’s misconceptions so that lecturers can take remediation

Keywords

Stoichiometry, Misconception, Five-tier multiple-choice, Aiken, Rasch Model

Full Text:

PDF

References

Aiken, L. (1985). Three coefficient for analyzing the realibility and validity of rating. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 45, 131–132.

Barke H D, H. A. (2009). Misconceptions in chemistry: Addressing perceptions. Heidelberg: Springer - Verlag.

Drastisianti, A., Susilaningsih, E., Supartono, M., & Wijayati, N. (2018). The Study of Chemistry Learning on The Material of Buffer Solution Supported by Teaching Material of Multiple Representation-Chemoentrepreneurship Viewed From Student Entrepreneurship Interest. 247(Iset), 27–31. https://doi.org/10.2991/iset-18.2018.6

Gurel, D. K., Eryilmaz, A., & McDermott, L. C. (2015). A review and comparison of diagnostic instruments to identify students’ misconceptions in science. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(5), 989–1008. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1369a

Härmälä-Braskén, A. S., Hemmi, K., & Kurtén, B. (2020). Misconceptions in chemistry among Finnish prospective primary school teachers–a long-term study. International Journal of Science Education, 42(9), 1447–1464. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1765046

Jammeh, A. L. J., Karegeya, C., & Ladage, S. (2023). Misconceptions on Basic Stoichiometry Among the Selected Eleventh-Grade Students in the Urban Regions of the Gambia. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 22(2), 254–268. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/23.22.254

Johnstone, A. H. (2000). Teaching of Chemistry - Logical or Psychological? Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 1(1), 9–15. https://doi.org/10.1039/a9rp90001b

Kanwal, S., & Farooq, M. S. (2021). Development of Diagnostic Assessment Test for Misconceptions (ATM) in Mathematics at Elementary School Level. Global Educational Studies Review, VI(I), 94–102. https://doi.org/10.31703/gesr.2021(vi-i).10

Kristyowati, V., & Priatmoko, S. (2023). Analisis Miskonsepsi Stoikiometri Melalui Tes Diagnostik Berbantuan Certainty of Response Index. Chemistry in Education, 12(1), 67–75. http://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/chemined

Lahinda, C. G., & Krisen, S. S. (2021). Analisis Miskonsepsi Siswa Pada Materi Hukum Dasar Kimia Menggunakan Two-Tier Diagnostic Test Di SMA Negeri 1 Tatapaan. General Chemistry Journal, 1(1), 5–10. https://doi.org/10.37033/ojce.v3i1.268

Lestari, E. A., Harjito, H., Susilaningsih, E., & Wijayati, N. (2021). Analisis Miskonsepsi Menggunakan Tes Diagnosa Three-Tier Multiple Choice Pada Materi Stoikiometri. Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan Kimia, 15(2), 2824–2830. https://doi.org/10.15294/jipk.v15i2.29171

Malaterre, C., Javaux, E. J., & López-García, P. (2023). Misconceptions in Science. Perspectives on Science, 31(6), 717–743. https://doi.org/10.1162/posc_a_00590

Mamombe, C., Mathabathe, K. C., & Gaigher, E. (2021). Teachers’ and Learners’ Perceptions of Stoichiometry using POGIL: A Case Study in South Africa. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(9), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11140

Mardeni, P. R. (2023). Review Artikel : Five-Tier Multiple Choice untuk Mendeteksi Penyebab Miskonsepsi Kesetimbangan Kimia Review Article : Five-Tier Multiple Choice to Detect the Causes of Chemical Equilibrium Misconceptions. Seminar Nasional Kimia (SNK) FMIPA Universitas Negeri Surabaya, September, 50–61.

Mufit, F., Festiyed, F., Fauzan, A., & Lufri, L. (2018). Impact of Learning Model Based on Cognitive Conflict toward Student’s Conceptual Understanding. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 335(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/335/1/012072

Nufus, S., & Silfianah, I. (2023). Analisis Miskonsepsi Peserta Didik pada Materi Struktur Atom Menggunakan Five-Tier Multiple Choice Diagnostic Test Berbasis Piktorial. Orbital: Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia, 7(2), 126–139. https://doi.org/10.19109/ojpk.v7i2.19239

Opara, M. F. (2014). Improving Students Performance in Stoichiometry through the Implementation of Collaborative Learning. Journal of Education and Vocational Research, 5(3), 85–93. https://doi.org/10.22610/jevr.v5i3.156

Polamolo, A. N., & Lukum, A. (2022). Analisis Miskonsepsi Materi Pereaksi Pembatas Menggunakan Tes Three Tier Multiple Choice. Jambura Journal of Educational Chemistry, 4(1), 51–56. https://doi.org/10.34312/jjec.v4i1.13180

Rahayu, I., . W., Widhiyanti, T., & Mulyani, S. (2024). Analysis of Misconceptions on the Factors that Affect the Reaction Rate. International Conference On Mathematics And Science Education, 2024, 140–150. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v9i13.15914

Ramadhan, A. F., & Hidayatullah, R. S. (2023). Analisis Kualitas Butir Soal Ujian Satuan Pendidikan (Usp) Materi C2 Teknik Pemesinan Kelas Xii Di Smk Pgri 1 Lamongan Melalui Model Rasch. Jurnal Pendidikan Teknik Mesin, 12(3), 1–10.

Resbiantoro, G., Setiani, R., & Dwikoranto. (2022). A Review of Misconception in Physics: The Diagnosis, Causes, and Remediation. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 19(2), 403–427. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2022.128

Rina Elvia, Amelia, T., & Handayani, D. (2022). Identifikasi Miskonsepsi Siswa Pada Pembelajaran Kimia Menggunakan Metode Four-Tier Diagnostik Test Di Sma Negeri 03 Kota Bengkulu. Alotrop, Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Ilmu Kimia, 6(2), 110–117. https://doi.org/10.33369/alo.v6i2.25099

Sa’adah, N., Haryani, S., & Mahatmanti, W. (2022). Analisys of Chemical Misconceptions of Stoichiometry Materials Using Certainty of Response Index. International Journal of Active Learning, 7(1), 94–102.

Salame, I. I., Casino, P., & Hodges, N. (2020). Examining Challenges that Students Face in Learning Organic Chemistry Synthesis. International Journal of Chemistry Education Research, 4(April), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.20885/ijcer.vol4.iss1.art1

Santi, A. N. is, & Rahayu, M. (2022). Analisis Miskonsepsi Siswa Pada Materi Larutan Elektrolit Dan Non Elektrolit Menggunakan Instrumen Multirepresentasi Four-Tier Diagnostic Test Berbasis Piktorial. UNESA Journal of Chemical Education, 11(3), 210–219. https://doi.org/10.26740/ujced.v11n3.p210-219

Shiddiqi, M. H. A., Arthamena, V. D., Ayyubi, M., Manarisip, A. J., & Aznam, N. (2024). Systematic Literature Review: Analysis of Misconception Problems and Diagnostic Instruments for Learning Chemistry. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 10(4), 168–179. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v10i4.5189

Simamora, R., Maison, & Kurniawan, W. (2023). Identifikasi Miskonsepsi Peserta Didik Menggunakan Five-Tier Diagnostic Test pada Materi Fluida Statis di SMAN 7 Kota Jambi. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan Fisika, 8(2), 139–144. https://doi.org/10.36709/jipfi.v8i2.18

Siswaningsih, W., Nahadi, & Widasmara, R. (2019). Development of Three Tier Multiple Choice Diagnostic Test to Assess Students’ Misconception of Chemical Equilibrium. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1280(3), 5–10. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1280/3/032019

Soeharto, Csapó, B., Sarimanah, E., Dewi, F. I., & Sabri, T. (2019). A review of students’ common misconceptions in science and their diagnostic assessment tools. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 8(2), 247–266. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v8i2.18649

Soeharto, S., & Csapó, B. (2022). Exploring Indonesian student misconceptions in science concepts. Heliyon, 8(9). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10720

Supatmi, S., Setiawan, A., Rahmawati, Y., Education, C., Program, S., & Jakarta, U. N. (2019). Students’ misconceptions of acid-base titration assessments using a two - tier multiple-choice diagnostic test. African Journal of Chemical Education, 9(1), 18–37.

Taha, H., Hashim, R., Jusoff, K., & Khoo, Y. Y. (2014). The Influence of Students’ Concept of Mole, Problem Representation Ability and Mathematical Ability on Stoichiometry Problem Solving Islamic Integrated Curriculum View project Philosophy for children View project. WEI International Academic Conference Proceedings, 122–136. http://scottishjournal.co.uk

Thiagarajan, S., Semmel, D. S. dan, & Semmel, M. I. (1976). Instructional development for training teachers of exceptional children: A sourcebook. University of Minnesota. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-4405(76)90066-2

Üce, M., & Ceyhan, İ. (2019). Misconception in Chemistry Education and Practices to Eliminate Them: Literature Analysis. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 7(3), 202. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v7i3.3990

Woldeamanuel,M., Atagana,H., & Engida, T. (2014). What Makes Chemistry Difficult. African Journal of Chemistry Education (AJCE), 4(2), 31–43.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.20961/paedagogia.v27i3.96615

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.