Analysis of Students Critical Thinking Skills Using Partial Credit Models (PCM) in Physics Learning

Year 2019, Volume: 4 Issue: 2, 245 - 253, 01.04.2019

Diena Shulhu Asysyifa Jumadi . İnsih Wilujeng Heru Kuswanto

https://doi.org/10.24331/ijere.518068

Cited By: 7

Abstract

The ability to think is divided into low-order thinking skills (LOTS) and high-order thinking skills (HOTS). The abilities expected by the learners through physics learning is the ability to think critically. Therefore, in the assessment of physics learning outcomes of learners, should contain items that are intended to measure the ability. This study aims to analyze the critical thinking skills of learners using the response theory item (Item Response Theory / IRT), with Partial Credit Models (PCM) approach. The form of test used is two tier multiple choice (TTMC) according to the scoring polytomous. TTMC was chosen because have reasoning option to analyze critical thinking skills. PCM was chosen because it corresponds to the characteristics of the test response, namely the form of a polytomous. The subjects were sciences senior high school students. The result of parameter estimation of critical thinking ability of learners shows that there are no students who have highest critical thinking ability, 1.67% of students have high critical thinking ability, 60% of students have average critical thinking ability, 1.67% learners have low critical thinking skills, and 3.33% of learners who have lowest critical thinking skills. Thus, the critical thinking skills of learners in physics lessons still need to be developed.

Keywords

Critical Thinking Skill, PCM, Two Tier Multiple Choice, Physics Education, İtem Response Theory

References

• Adams, R.J dan Khoo, S.T. (1996). Quest : The interactive test analysis system version 2.1. Victoria. The Australian Council for Educational Research. Adodo, S. O. (2013). Effects of two-tier multiple choice diagnostic assessment ıtems on students’ learning outcome in basic science technology (BST). Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 2(2),201–210. doi:org/10.5901/ajis.2013.v2n2p201. Bailin, S., & Siegel, H. (2003). Critical thinking. In N. Blake, P. Smeyers, R. Smith, & P. Standish (Eds.), The Blackwell guide to the philosophy of education (pp. 181-193). Blackwell Publishing. Baker, J. G., Rounds, J. B., & Zeron, M. A. (2000). A comparison of graded response and rasch partial credit models with subjective wellbeing. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistic, 25(3), 253- 270. Chee, T.C. (2010). Common misconceptions in frictional force among university physics students. Journal on Teaching and Learning, 16(2), 107-116. Du Toit M. (2003). IRT from SSi: Bilog-MG, Multilog, Parscale, Testfact. Lincolnwood: Scientific Software International. Inc. Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologist. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc. Ennis, R.H. (2002). Goals for a critical thinking curriculum and its assessment. In Arthur L. Costa (Ed.), Developing minds (3rd Edition). Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Pp. 44-46. Fan, X. (1998). Item response theory and classical test theory: An empirical comparison of their ıtem/response person statistics. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58 (3), 357-381.; Gronlund NE., & Linn RL. (1990). Measurement and evaluation in teaching (6th ed). New York: Collier Macmillan Publishers. Hambleton, R. K., & Swaminathan, H. (1985). Item response theory: Principles and application. Boston, MA: Kluwer Inc. Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of ıtem response theory. CA: Sage Publication Inc. Harvey, R. J., & Hammer, A. L. (1999). Item response theory. The Counseling Psychologist, 27 (3), 353-383. Hogg RV, Craig AT. (1978). Introduction to mathematical statistics. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co Inc. Istiyono, E. (2014). Pengukuran kemampuan berpikir tingkat tinggi fisika peserta didik SMA di DIY. Disertasi doktor, tidak diterbitkan, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Yogyakarta. Istiyono, E. (2017). The analysis of senior high school students’ physics HOTS in bantul district measured using PhysReMChoTHOTS. AIP Conference Proceedings 1868, 070008 (2017); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4995184. Jensen, J. L, et al. (2014). Teaching to the Test or Testing to Teach: Exams Requiring Higher Order Thinking Skills Encourage Greater Conceptual Understanding. Educational Psychology Review, 1-24. Khol, P.B. & Noah, D.F. (2008). Patterns of multiple representation use by experts and novices during physics problem solving. Physical Review Special Topic- Physics Education Research 4.010111. Kubiszyn, T., & Borich, G. D. (2013) Educational testing and measurement: Classroom application and practice. Hoboken, NJ: Willey. Masters, G.N. (1999). Partial credit model. Dalam J.P. Keeves & G.N. Masters (Eds.). Advances in Measurement in Educational Research and Assessment. Amsterdam: Pergamon. Matthew, SJ. (2007). Marginal maximum likelihood estimation of ıtem response model in R. Journal of Statistical Software,20(10). http://www.jstatsoft.org/ [27 April 2012]. Newton, P. G. (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 553-576. Noer, S.H. (2009). Peningkatan Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis Matematis Siswa SMP Melalui Pembelajaran Berbasis Masalah. Prosiding. Obaidat, I. & Malkawi, E., (2009). The grasp of physics concepts of motion: ıdentifying particular patterns in students’ thinking‖. Georgia Southern University: International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 3, (1), Januari, 11-12. Oliveira; M. and Rodrigues, A. (2004). Portfolio as a strategy to interrelate research in education and physics teachers practices. In M. Michelini (Ed.), Quality development in teacher education and training: Second International GIREP Seminar 2003 selected contributions, Forum, Udine, Italy. Rivard, L. P. (2004). Are language-based activities in science effective for all students, including low achievers? Science Education, 88(3), 420-442. Sapriya. (2011). Pendidikan IPS: Konsep dan Pembelajaran. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya. Sari, ALR., Parno & Taufiq, A. (2016). Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis dan Pemahaman Konsep Fisika Siswa SMA pada Materi Hukum Newton. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Pend.IPA Pascasarjana Universitas Negeri Malang. Subali, Bambang & Surastuti, Etty. (1991). Persepsi Siswa Kelas III SMA terhadap Lembaga Bimbingan Tes. Jurnal Kependidikan, 21(2): 1-9. Sudjana, N. (2013). Penilaian Hasil Belajar Mengajar. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya. Sugiyono. (2012). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif Kualitatif dan R&D. Bandung: Alfabeta. Suryabrata, S. (2000). Pengembangan Alat Ukur Psikologi. Yogyakarta: Andi. Suwarto (2012). Pengembangan The Two-Tier Diagnostic Tests Pada Bidang Biologi. Proceeding Seminar Nasional: Profesionalisme Guru Dalam Perspektif Global. Tjalla, A. (2010). Potret Mutu Pendidikan Indonesia Ditinjau dari Hasil-Hasil Studi Internasional. In: Temu Ilmiah Nasional Guru II: Membangun Profesionalitas Insan Pendidikan Yang Berkarakter dan Berbasis Budaya, 24–25 November 2010, Tangerang Selatan. Tognolini, J., & Davidson, M. (2003). How do we operationalise what we value? Some technical chalenges in assessing higher order thinking skills. Paper presented in the National Roundtable on Assessment Conference, Darwin, Australia. 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 Trilling, B. & Fadel, C (2009). Learning and innovation skills. 21st century skills learning for life in our times. (pp45-60). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Tuysuz, C. (2009). Development of two-tier diagnostic ınstrument and assess student’s misunderstanding in chemistry. Scientific Research and Essay 4. Van der Linden, W. J & Hambleton, R. K. (1997). Handbook of modern ıtem response theory. New York: Springer-Verlag New York, Inc Wagner, T. (2008). The global achievement gap: Why even our best schools don't teach the new survival skills our children need--and what we can do about it. New York: Basic Books. Walser, N. (2008). Teaching 21st century skills. Harvard Education Letter, 24(5), 1-3. Wang, F.-H. (2006). Application of componential IRT model for diagnostic test in a standard conformant elearning system. In Sixth international conference on advanced learning technologies (ICALT’06). Wardani, R. K., Yamtinah, S., & Mulyani, B. (2015). Instrumen Penilaian Two-Tier Test Aspek Pengetahuan Untuk Mengukur Keterampilan Proses Sains (KPS) Pada Pembelajaran Kimia Untuk Siswa SMA/MA Kelas X, 4(4),156–162. Widhiarso W., (2010). Model Politomi dalam Teori Respon Butir. Fakultas Psikologi UGM, Yogyakarta. Widhiarso, W. (2010). Model politomi dalam teori respons butir. Yogyakarta: Psikologi UGM. Wright, B.D. & Masters, G.N. (1982). Rating scale analysis. Chicago: Mesa Press. Zainul, A., & Nasution, N. (2001). Penilaian hasil belajar. Jakarta: PAU-PPAI, UT. 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), 145–181.