Developing Lup Instrument Test to Measure Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) Bloomian for Senior High School Students

Year 2019, , 320 - 329, 01.07.2019

Lilis Erfianti Edi Istiyono Heru Kuswanto

https://doi.org/10.24331/ijere.573863

Cited By: 6

Abstract

The study aims to developing lup instrument test for measurng higher order thinking skills of
students in physics learning. The 4D stage of the model consists of define, planning, design, and
disseminate stages. The assessment instrument was developed based on HOTS indicators include
the ability to analyze (C4), evaluate (C5), and creat (C6). The test form is a reasoning multiple choice.
Subject of this research were all student of XI MIA 1 and XI MIA2 on 2nd semester at SMA Negeri 1
Depok in academic year of 2017/2018. Result of this research are: 1) the higher order thinking skills
test instrument proved valid and worthy of use in the learning process. Based on expert validation,
the test is valid with Aiken V index value of 0.89, the average value and standard deviation of INFIT
MNSQ is 1.01 ± 0.09, and has a good degree of difficulty with a range of difficulty levels between -
1.29 to 1.35. The higher order thinking skills test can also be used to measure students higher order
thinking skills in physics learning with very low to excellent categories.

Keywords

Assessment, test, reasoning multiple choice, higher order thinking Bloomian, lup

References

• Arends, R.I (2012). Learning to teach: 9th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill. Atasoy, B. (2009). The effect of a conceptual change approach on understanding of sudennts’chemical equilibrium concept.Journal Research and Science & Technologycal Education, 27: 267—282. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635140903162587 Azwar, S. (2016). Metode penelitian. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar Barniol, Pablo., & Zavala, Genaro (2014). Test of understanding of vectors: A reliable multiple choice vector concept test. Physics Education Research, 10,12-13 http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.10.010121 Brooks, V. (2002). Assessment in secondary school: The new teacher’s Guide to monitoring ,assessment, recording, reporting and accountability. Philadephia: Open University Press Chua, Y. P., & Don, Z. M. (2013). Effects of computer-based educational achievement test on test performance and test takers’ motivation. Computers in Human Behavior,29(5),1889-1895. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.03.008 Frank, W., & Scherr, R,. (2012) . Interactional processes for stabilizing conceptual coherences in physics. Physical Review Special Topic–Physics Education Research, 8. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.8.020101 Griffin, P., Care, E., & McGaw, B. (2012). The changing role of education and school. Springer. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2324-5_1 Hambleton, R. K., & Swaminathan, H. (1985). Item response theory, principles and criteria: An example from wine ratings and prices. Wine Economics and Policy, 3(1) -9 Hammer, D. (2000). Students resource for learning introductory physics. American Journal of Physics, Physics Education Research Supplement, 68 (S1), S52—S59 Istiyono, E., Mardapi, D., & Suparno (2014). Pengembangan Instrument Untuk Mengukur Kemampuan Berfikir Tingkat Tinggi Fisika (PsyTHOTS) Peserta Didik SMA. Jurnal Penelitian dan Evaluasi Pendidikan Jeong, H. (2012). A comparative study of score on CB and PBT. Behaviour and information Technology https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2012.710647 Mardapi, D. (2008). Teknik Penyusunan Instrumen dann Nontes. Yogyakarta: Mitra Cendekia Offset. Mardapi, D., Kumaidi. & Kartowagiran, B. (2011). Pengembangan Instrumen Pengukur Hasil Belajar Nirbias dan Terskala Baru. Jurnal Penelitian dan Evaluasi Pendidikan 15(2): 326-341 Mendiknas (2007). Permendiknas Ri No.20 Tentang Standar Penilaian Pendidikan Nikou, S. A., & Economides, A. A. (2016.) The impact of paper based, computer based and mobile based self assessment on students science motivation and achievement. Computers in Human Behaviour, 55, 1241- 1248 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.025 Rahayu, D & U. Azizah. (2012). Pengembangan Instrumen Penilaian Kognitif Berbasis Komputer dengan Kombinasi Permainan “Who Wants To Be A Chemist” pada Materi Pokok Struktur Atom untuk Kelas X SMA RSBI. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Kimia UNESA. Hal. 41-50 Schraw , Gregory, & Robinson, D.H. (2011). Assessment of higher order thinking skills. New York: Information Age Publishing, Inc ISBN: ISBN-978-1-6173-5506-6 Suparno, Paul., SJ. (2013). Metodologi Pembelajaran Fisika Konstruktivistik dan Menyenangkan. Yogyakarta: Universitas Sanata Darma Treagust, D. F., & Duit, R. (2008). Conceptual change: A discussion of theoretical, methodological and practical challenges for science education. Handbook on Conceptual Change. Perth: In Press https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-008-9090-4 Westwood, P. (2008). What teachers need to know about teaching methods. Victoria: Acer Press Won,M., Yoon, H., & Treagust, D.F.(2014). Students’ learningstrategies with multiple representations: Explanations of the human breathing mechanism. Sci. Educ.,98(5), 840–866 https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21128 Yen, T.S., & Halili, S.H. (2015). Effective teaching of higher-order thinking (hot) in education. The Online Journal of Distance Education and e-Learning, 3(2), 41-47 Zohar, A., & Dori, Y. J., (2008). Higher order thinking skills and low achieving students: Are they mutually exclusive? The Journal Of The Learning Sciences, 12(2), 145-181.