A Four-Tier Diagnostic Instrument in Acid-Base Properties of Salt Solution: Development Procedure
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.71289/xsj76636Keywords:
four-tier diagnostic instruments, misconceptions, salt hydrolysis, students’ understandingAbstract
This study aims to determine the feasibility of a four-tier diagnostic instrument on salt hydrolysis. The development uses a four-tier diagnostic instrument development procedure by Habiddin & Page (2019) with 6 stages: concept identification, initial test and interview, identification of unscientific student concepts, development of a four-tier diagnostic instrument prototype, prototype validation, and final prototype improvement. The four-tier diagnostic instrument was developed from a multiple-choice instrument open to reasons for capturing student concepts. At last, the finding from this research and development obtained the final product in the form of a four-tier diagnostic instrument with 27 questions that have four levels (tier), the first tier is in the form of questions and answers, second tier is in the level of confidence in the answer chosen, third tier is in the form of selecting the first tier, and the fourth tier is the level of confidence in the reasons chosen. The level of confidence is measured on a scale of 1-5. The instrument developed has an average content validity of 89.45%, with a very decent category and very high reliability (0.858). This shows that the developed four-tier diagnostic instrument is highly feasible for identifying students' misconceptions about salt hydrolysis material.
References
Amala, F., & Habiddin, H. (2022). Pemahaman konsep dalam topik sifat asam basa larutan garam: studi pada siswa SMA di Blitar. Jurnal Zarah, 10(2), 91–100. https://doi.org/10.31629/Zarah.V10I2.4321
Amelia, D., Marheni, M., & Nurbaity, N. (2014). Analisis Miskonsepsi Siswa Pada Materi Hidrolisis Garam Menggunakan Teknik CRI (Certainty Of Response Index) Termodifikasi. JRPK: Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Kimia. https://doi.org/10.21009/jrpk.041.05
Ardina, D., & Habiddin, H. (2023). Acid-base properties of salt solution: Study at a secondary school in Banyuwangi. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2569(1), 30018. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0112074
Beichner, R. J. (1994). Testing student interpretation of kinematics graphs. American Journal of Physics, 62(8), 750–762. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.17449
Billah, A. A., Octavia, D. A., Sholihah, F. H., Febriliyanto, M. R., Aisyah, N. N., Rohmah, N. H., Rahayu, S. M. S., Salsabela, T. A., Basimin, M. Q., & Habiddin, H. (2024). University Students’ Understanding of Intermolecular Forces: A Comparison of First & Third-Year Students. STEM Education International, 1(1 SE-Research Articles), 1–7. https://sciencesustain.com/index.php/stem/article/view/5
Demircioǧlu, G., Ayas, A., & Demircioǧlu, H. (2005). Conceptual change achieved through a new teaching program on acids and bases. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 6(1), 36–51. https://doi.org/10.1039/B4RP90003K
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
Gurel, D. K., Eryilmaz, A., & McDermott, L. C. (2017). Development and application of a four-tier test to assess pre-service physics teachers’ misconceptions about geometrical optics. Research in Science & Technological Education, 35(2), 238–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2017.1310094
Habiddin, H., & Page, E. M. (2019). Development and validation of a four-tier diagnostic instrument for chemical kinetics (FTDICK). Indonesian Journal of Chemistry, 19(3), 720–736. https://doi.org/10.22146/ijc.39218
Habiddin, H., & Page, E. M. (2023). Uncovering Students’ Genuine Misconceptions: Evidence to Inform the Teaching of Chemical Kinetics. Acta Chimica Slovenica, 184–195.
Laliyo, L. A. R., Hamdi, S., Pikoli, M., Abdullah, R., & Panigoro, C. (2021). Implementation of four-tier multiple-choice instruments based on the partial credit model in evaluating students’ learning progress. European Journal of Educational Research, 10(2), 825–840. https://doi.org/10.12973/EU-JER.10.2.825
Maratusholihah, N. F., Sri, R., & Fauziatul, F. (2017). Analisis Miskonsepsi Siswa SMA pada Materi Hidrolisis Garam dan Larutan Penyangga. Jurnal Pendidikan:Teori, Penelitian, Dan Pengembangan, 2(7), 919—926.
Novak, J. D. (1990). Concept Mapping - A Useful Tool For Science-Education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 937–949.
Orwat, K., Bernard, P., & Mikuli, A. M. (2017). Alternative Conceptions of Common Salt Hydrolysis Among Upper-Secondary-School Students. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 16(1), 64–76. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/17.16.64
Osborne, R. ., & Gilbert, J. K. (1980). A Method for Investigating Concept Understanding in Science. European Journal of Science Education, 2(3), 311–321.
Pesman, H., & Eryilmaz, A. (2010). Development of a Three-Tier Test to Assess Misconceptions About Simple Electric Circuits. Journal of Educational Research, 103(3), 208–222.
Seçken, N. (2010). Identifying student’s misconceptions about SALT. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.004
Taber, K. S. (1999). Ideas About Ionisation Energy: A Diagnostic Instrument. School Science Review, 81(295), 97–104.
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.
Tuysuz, C. (2009). Development of two-tier diagnostic instrument and assess students’ understanding in chemistry. Scientific Research and Essays, 4(6), 626–631.
Ulfah, M., Ulfah, M., Erlina, E., Pratiwiningrum, F. M., Wafiq, A. F., & Juahir, Y. B. (2024). Misconceptions of Intermolecular Forces in General Chemistry Courses. Jurnal IPA & Pembelajaran IPA, 8(1), 39–51. https://doi.org/10.24815/jipi.v8i1.35641
