Validity and Reliability of the Two-tier Diagnostic Test to Identify Students’ Alternative Conceptions of Intermolecular Forces

Authors

Asriah N. Mardiyyaningsih , Erlina , Maria Ulfah , Azwa Fadilla Wafiq

DOI:

10.29303/jppipa.v9i6.2797

Published:

2023-06-25

Issue:

Vol. 9 No. 6 (2023): June

Keywords:

Diagnostic test, Item analysis, Misconceptions, University student

Research Articles

Downloads

How to Cite

Mardiyyaningsih, A. N. ., Erlina, E., Ulfah, M., & Wafiq, A. F. (2023). Validity and Reliability of the Two-tier Diagnostic Test to Identify Students’ Alternative Conceptions of Intermolecular Forces . Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(6), 4375–4381. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i6.2797

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Abstract

Alternative conceptions or misconceptions is believed as the main barrier for most students who learn chemistry. Students who hold alternative conceptions will struggle to understand the advanced concepts. Therefore, identifying those alternative conceptions is important. In this study a diagnostic test was designed and developed to identify students’ alternative conceptions about intermolecular forces (IMFs). The diagnostic test developed in this study consist of 19 multiple choice questions with open reason. The test was administered to 88 university students who learn chemistry. Data collected were analyzed using SPSS. The validity and the reliability of the test were 0.526 and 0.878 respectively. The result indicates that the test is valid and reliable. The mean difficulty value and discriminatory index are 0.623 and 0.45 respectively. The findings of the item analysis showed that the test is in moderate difficulty and the discriminatory of the test is in good category. Meanwhile, the average distractor effectivity for the diagnostic test is 3 options (out of 4 options), which means the distractors are in good category and well function. Those findings indicate that the two-tier diagnostics test could be used to identify students’ alternative conceptions and understanding about IMFs.

References

Arifin, Z. (2016). Evaluasi Pembelajaran (Prinsip, Teknik, dan Prosedur), Cetakan Kedelapan. Jakarta: Rosda Karya.

Arikunto, S. (2016). Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Birk, J. P., & Kurtz, M. J. (1999). Effect of Experience on Retention and Elimination of Misconceptions about Molecular Structure and Bonding. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(1), 124. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed076p124

Cengiz, T. Y. Z. (2009). Development of Two-Tier Diagnostic Instrument and Assess Students’ Understanding in Chemistry. Scientific Research and Essays, 4(6), 626–631. Retrieved from https://academicjournals.org/journal/SRE/article-full-text-pdf/0B2C90A18467

Cho, H.-H., Kahle, J. B., & Nordland, F. H. (1985). An investigation of high school biology textbooks as sources of misconceptions and difficulties in genetics and some suggestions for teaching genetics. Science Education, 69(5), 707–719. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730690512

Coll, R. K., & Taylor, N. (2001). Alternative Conceptions of Chemical Bonding Held by Upper Secondary and Tertiary Students. Research in Science & Technological Education, 19(2), 171–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635140120057713

Cooper, M. M., Williams, L. C., & Underwood, S. M. (2015). Student Understanding of Intermolecular Forces: A Multimodal Study. Journal of Chemical Education, 92(8), 1288–1298. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00169

Eisingerich, A. B., & Rubera, G. (2010). Drivers of brand commitment: A cross-national investigation. Journal of International Marketing, 18(2), 64–79. https://doi.org/10.1509/jimk.18.2.64

Ghozali, I. (2016). Aplikasi Analisis multivariete dengan program IBM SPSS 23 (Edisi 8). Cetakan ke VIII. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.

Gregory, R. J. (2015). Psychological testing: History, principles and applications seventh edition. In Pearson Education.

Halim, A., Elmi, Elisa, Wahyuni, A., Ngadimin, Musdar, & Balqis, N. N. (2020). Development of concept maps diagnostic test for identification of students’ misconceptions. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2215, 050003. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0000613

Ivanjek, L., Morris, L., Schubatzky, T., Hopf, M., Burde, J. P., Haagen-Schützenhöfer, C., … Wilhelm, T. (2021). Development of a two-tier instrument on simple electric circuits. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 17(2), 20123. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.020123

Keig, P. F., & Rubba, P. A. (1993). Translation of representations of the structure of matter and its relationship to reasoning, gender, spatial reasoning, and specific prior knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(8), 883–903. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660300807

Kind, V. (2004). Beyond appearances: Students’ misconceptions about basic chemical ideas. School of Education, Durham University, UK. London: Royal Society of Chemistry.

Laliyo, L. A. R., Botutihe, D. N., & Panigoro, C. (2019). The development of two-tier instrument based on distractor to assess conceptual understanding level and student misconceptions in explaining redox reactions. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 18(9), 216–237. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.18.9.12

Loh, A. S. L., Subramaniam, R., & Tan, K. C. D. (2014). Exploring students’ understanding of electrochemical cells using an enhanced two-tier diagnostic instrument. Research in Science & Technological Education, 32(3), 229–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2014.916669

Mann, M., & Treagust, D. (1998). A pencil and paper instrument to diagnose students’ conceptions of breathing, gas exchange and respiration. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 44(2), 55–59.

Ma’rufah, D. M., Effendy, & Wonorahardjo, S. (2022). Identification of intermolecular force misconceptions in students with different scientific thinking skills and the improvement efforts using conceptual change text. Improving Assessment and Evaluation Strategies on Online Learning, 123–128. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003261346-19

Milenković, D. D., Hrin, T. N., Segedinac, M. D., & Horvat, S. (2016). Development of a Three-Tier Test as a Valid Diagnostic Tool for Identification of Misconceptions Related to Carbohydrates. Journal of Chemical Education, 93(9), 1514–1520. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00261

Mulford, D. R., & Robinson, W. R. (2002). An Inventory for Alternate Conceptions among First-Semester General Chemistry Students. Journal of Chemical Education, 79(6), 739. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed079p739

Nakhleh, M. B. (1992). Why some students don’t learn chemistry: Chemical misconceptions. Journal of Chemical Education, 69(3), 191. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed069p191

Nicoll, G. (2001). A Report of Undergraduates’ Bonding Misconceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 23(7), 707–730. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690010025012

Odom, A. L., & Barrow, L. H. (1995). Development and application of a two-tier diagnostic test measuring college biology students’ understanding of diffusion and osmosis after a course of instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(1), 45–61. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660320106

Peterson, R. F., & Treagust, D. F. (1989). Grade-12 students’ misconceptions of covalent bonding and structure. Journal of Chemical Education, 66(6), 459. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed066p459

Peterson, R. F., Treagust, D. F., & Garnett, P. (1989). Development and application of a diagnostic instrument to evaluate grade-11 and -12 students’ concepts of covalent bonding and structure following a course of instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26(4), 301–314. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660260404

Sadler, P. M., & Sonnert, G. (2016). Understanding Misconceptions Teaching and Learning in Middle School Physical Science. American Educator, Spring, 26–32. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1094278

Schmidt, H.-J., Kaufmann, B., & Treagust, D. F. (2009). Students’ understanding of boiling points and intermolecular forces. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 10(4), 265–272. https://doi.org/10.1039/B920829C

Sudijono, A. (2020). Pengantar Evaluasi Pendidikan. Jakarta: Rajawali Press.

Taber, K. S. (2003). Mediating mental models of metals: Acknowledging the priority of the learner’s prior learning. Science Education, 87(5), 732–758. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10079

Taber, K. S. (2009). Challenging Misconceptions in the Chemistry Classroom : Resources to Support Teachers. Educació Química EduQ, 4(5), 13–20. https://doi.org/10.2436/20.2003.02.27

Tan, D. K. C., & Chan, K. S. (2003). Content framework for intermolecular forces. Journal of Science and Mathematics Education in Southeast Asia, 26(2), 61–75. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10497/15466

Tan, K. C. D., Goh, N. K., Chia, L. S., & Treagust, D. F. (2002). Development and application of a two-tier multiple choice diagnostic instrument to assess high school students’ understanding of inorganic chemistry qualitative analysis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(4), 283–301. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10023

Tarhan, L., Ayar-Kayali, H., Urek, R. O., & Acar, B. (2008). Problem-Based Learning in 9th Grade Chemistry Class: ‘Intermolecular Forces.’ Research in Science Education, 38(3), 285–300. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9050-0

Treagust, D. F. (1988). Development and use of diagnostic tests to evaluate students’ misconceptions in science. International Journal of Science Education, 10(2), 159–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069880100204

Uyulgan, M. A., Akkuzu, N., & Alpat, Ş. (2014). Assessing the students’ understanding related to molecular geometry using a two-tier diagnostic test. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 13(6), 839–855. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/14.13.839

Vladušić, R., Bucat, R. B., & Ožić, M. (2016). Understanding ionic bonding – a scan across the Croatian education system. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(4), 685–699. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6RP00040A

Widarti, H. R., Marfuaf, S., & Retnosari, R. (2019). Identifying Students’ Misconception About Intermolecular Forces Topic in Organic Chmeistry I Course. Unnes Science Education Journal, 8(1), 46–56. https://doi.org/10.15294/usej.v8i1.23527

Yamtinah, S., Indriyanti, N. Y., Saputro, S., Mulyani, S., Ulfa, M., Mahardiani, L., … Shidiq, A. S. (2019). The identification and analysis of students’ misconception in chemical equilibrium using computerized two-tier multiple-choice instrument. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1157(4). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1157/4/042015

Author Biographies

Asriah N. Mardiyyaningsih, Universitas Tanjungpura

Erlina, Universitas Tanjungpura

Maria Ulfah, Universitas Tanjungpura

Azwa Fadilla Wafiq, Universitas Tanjungpura

License

Copyright (c) 2023 Erlina Erlina, Maria Ulfah, Azwa Fadilla Wafiq

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY License). This license allows authors to use all articles, data sets, graphics, and appendices in data mining applications, search engines, web sites, blogs, and other platforms by providing an appropriate reference. The journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions and will retain publishing rights without restrictions.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).