Development of Formative Assessment Instruments Misconception Check to Analyze the Conception of Thermodynamics in High School Students
DOI:
10.29303/jpft.v11i2.10220Published:
2025-12-11Issue:
Vol. 11 No. 2 (2025): July - December (In Press)Keywords:
Assessment instrument, Conception Level, MisconceptionsArticles
Downloads
How to Cite
Downloads
Abstract
The demands of formative assessment in the kurikulum merdeka should ideally be able to diagnose students’ conceptual patterns in depth. However, common assessment practices are still limited to instruments that only measure correct or incorrect answers, so they cannot reveal conceptual understanding. The gap between these demands and reality has led to the development of more targeted instruments, especially for complex thermodynamics material. This study aims to develop a formative assessment instrument in the form of a misconception check to analyze high school students’ conceptions of thermodynamics. The method used is quantitative with an instrument development approach based on the Mardapi model. The developed instrument is a formative assessment tool in the form of a misconception check with a multiple-choice format, with answer options designed to represent various categories of conceptions. The instrument was tested on 262 students from three high schools, and its validity was evaluated through content validity, construct validity, and readability tests. After a series of evaluations, it was found that 3 items were invalid and were eliminated, leaving 33 items that were suitable for use. This instrument has a unidimensionality value of 21%, an average Aiken's V coefficient of 0.96, and reliability of 0.92. The results of the study indicate that the developed formative misconception check assessment instrument is feasible and effective for analyzing the conceptions held by high school students on thermodynamics material. Therefore, this instrument can help teachers specifically analyze students' conceptions and design targeted learning.
References
Aditomo, A. (2024). Panduan Pembelajaran dan Asesmen Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini, Pendidikan Dasar, dan Pendidikan Menengah Edisi Revisi Tahun 2024.
Aiken, L. R. (1985). Three coefficients for analyzing the reliability and validity of ratings, educational and psychological measurument. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 45(1), 131–142.
Aufschnaiter, C. von, & Alonzo, A. C. (2018). Foundations of formative assessment: Introducing a learning progression to guide preservice physics teachers’ video-based interpretation of student thinking. Applied Measurement in Education, 31(2), 113–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2017.1408629
Backhaus, A. (2024). Diagnosing Misconceptions. Carpentries. https://carpentries.github.io/lesson-development-training/misconceptions-mcqs.html
Bhaw, N., Kriek, J., & Rampho, G. (2024). The Use of Multiple-choice Questions as an Assessment Tool in First-year University Physics Modules. Journal of Education and Practice, July, 0–3. https://doi.org/10.7176/jep/16-1-07
Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2013). Applying the Rasch Model. In Applying the Rasch Model. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410614575
Boone, W. J., & Noltemeyer, A. (2017). Rasch analysis: A primer for school psychology researchers and practitioners. Cogent Education, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2017.1416898
Burfitt, J. (2017). Partial credit in multiple-choice items. 40 years on: We are still learning! Proceedings of the 40th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, 117–124.
Chandrasegaran, A. L., Treagust, D. F., & Mocerino, M. (2007). The development of a two-tier multiple-choice diagnostic instrument for evaluating secondary school students’ ability to describe and explain chemical reactions using multiple levels of representation. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8(3), 293–307. https://doi.org/10.1039/B7RP90006F
Cross, K. P., & Angelo, T. A. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for faculty. The National Center for Research to Improve Post-secondary Teaching and Learning. http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-84873961428&partnerID=tZOtx3y1
Derya Kaltakci. (2012). Development and Application of a Four-Tier Test to Assess Pre-Service Physics Teachers Misconceptionts About Geometrical Optics. In Middle East Technical University (Nomor September). Middle East Technical University.
Dewi, S. Z., & Ibrahim, T. (2019). Pentingnya Pemahaman Konsep Untuk Mengatasi Miskonsepsi Dalam Materi Belajar IPA di Sekolah Dasar. Jurnal Pendidikan UNIGA, 13(1), 130–136. http://dx.doi.org/10.52434/jpu.v17i1.2 553
Engelhard, G., & Wind, S. (2017). Invariant measurement with raters and rating scales: Rasch models for rater-mediated assessments. In Invariant Measurement with Raters and Rating Scales: Rasch Models for Rater-Mediated Assessments. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315766829
Holbeck, R., Bergquist, E., & Lees, S. (2014). Classroom Assessment Techniques: Checking for Student Understanding in an Introductory University Success Course. Journal of Instructional Research, 3, 38–42. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1127694.pdf
Jannah, R., & Rahmi, I. (2020). Pengembangan E- Diagnostic Four Tier Test Untuk Mengidentifikasi Miskonsepsi Peserta Didik. Natural Science, 6(2), 151–160. https://ejournal.uinib.ac.id/jurnal/index.php/naturalscience/article/view/1721
Kiray, S. A., & Simsek, S. (2021). Determination and Evaluation of the Science Teacher Candidates’ Misconceptions About Density by Using Four-Tier Diagnostic Test. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 19(5), 935–955. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-020-10087-5
Leonard, D. (2024). 28 Ways to Quickly Check for Understanding From sketching comics to drafting tweets, these fun—and fast—ways to check for understanding are creative and flexible. edutopia. https://www.edutopia.org/article/quick-ways-to-check-for-understanding/
Liliawati, W., Efendi, R., Purwana, U., & Muslim. (2022). Meningkatkan Konsepsi Asesmen Guru Fisika SMA Melalui Program Penguatan Kompetensi. Online Submission, 7, 69–74. http://electronicportfolios.com/portfolios/njedgenet.pdf
Mardapi, D. (2020). Teknik Penyusunan Instrumen Tes dan Non Tes. Parama.
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
Retnawati, H. (2020). Validitas Reliabilitas & Karakteristik Butir. Parama.
Sadler, D. R. (1998). Formative assessment: Revisiting the territory. International Journal of Phytoremediation, 21(1), 77–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050104
Saputri, L., Maison, M., & Kurniawan, W. (2021). Pengembangan Four-Tier Diagnostic Test Berbasis Website untuk Mengidentifikasi Miskonsepsi pada Materi Suhu dan Kalor. Jurnal Ilmiah Teknologi Informasi Asia, 15(1), 61. https://doi.org/10.32815/jitika.v15i1.563
Schuwirth, L. W. T., & Van Der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2011). Programmatic assessment: From assessment of learning to assessment for learning. Medical Teacher, 33(6), 478–485. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2011.565828
Setiawati, F. A., Mardapi, D., & Azwar, S. (2013). Penskalaan Teori Klasik Instrumen Multiple Intelligences Tipe Thurstone Dan Likert. Jurnal Penelitian dan Evaluasi Pendidikan, 17(2), 259–274. https://doi.org/10.21831/pep.v17i2.1699
Suherly, T., Azizahwati, A., & Rahmad, M. (2023). Kemampuan Pemahaman Konsep Awal Siswa dalam Pembelajaran Fisika : Analisis Tingkat Pemahaman pada Materi Fluida Dinamis. Jurnal Paedagogy, 10(2), 494. https://doi.org/10.33394/jp.v10i2.7239
Sumaryanta. (2021). Teori Tes Klasik dan Teori Respon Butir: Konsep dan Contoh Penerapannya. In Cetakan Pertama (Vol. 15, Nomor 2).
Sumintono, B., & Widhiarso, W. (2015). Aplikasi Pemodelan RASCH Pada Assessment Pendidikan. Trim Komunikata.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (D. Russel (ed.)). Julie Houtz.
Wulandari, K., Khoiroh, M., & Prihatiningtyas, S. (2023). Pengembangan Instrumen Penilaian Formatif Materi Usaha Dan Energi Pada Mata Pelajaran Fisika SMA/MA. Diffraction, 5(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.37058/diffraction.v5i1.6216
Author Biographies
Clarinta Alvani, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
Physics Education Study Program
Ridwan Efendi, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
Physics Education Study Program
Rizki Zakwandi, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
Physics Education Study Program
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Clarinta Alvani, Ridwan Efendi, Rizki Zakwandi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika dan Teknologi (JPFT) agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International License (CC-BY-SA 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.
- 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 acknowledgement of its initial publication in Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika dan Teknologi (JPFT).
- 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).
