Identifying Student Misconceptions on Momentum and Impulse Using Four-Tier Diagnostic Test Instrument with CRI

Authors

Uci Vebia Paramita , Mukhayyarotin Niswati Rodliyatul Jauhariyah

DOI:

10.29303/jpm.v19i1.6086

Published:

2024-01-30

Issue:

Vol. 19 No. 1 (2024): January 2024

Keywords:

CRI; Four-Tier Diagnostic Test; Misconceptions; Reliability; Validity

Articles

Downloads

How to Cite

Paramita, U. V., & Jauhariyah, M. N. R. (2024). Identifying Student Misconceptions on Momentum and Impulse Using Four-Tier Diagnostic Test Instrument with CRI. Jurnal Pijar Mipa, 19(1), 75–82. https://doi.org/10.29303/jpm.v19i1.6086
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Abstract

Identification of students' misconceptions is crucial in Physics learning as an evaluation tool to address and reduce these misconceptions. This study aims to assess the quality of a four-tier diagnostic test using the CRI instrument, assisted by JotForm, and describe the profile of students' misconceptions related to momentum and impulse. The quality of the instrument is evaluated based with validity and reliability. The research follows the ADDIE (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation) method. The instrument is developed during the analysis, design, and development stages. The implementation and evaluation stages involve capturing the profile and causes of students' misconceptions. The instrument's quality is assessed based on theoretical validity, which reached 89.29%. Empirical content validity haved percentages of false positives 6.93%and false negatives 6.53%. The empirical validity of the construct, with a significance level of 0.05, resulted in an rtableof 0.273. From the 15 questions tested, 12 questions were found to have empirical validity, and a reliability score of 0.475 was obtained. The study revealed that 3 students had low misconceptions, 14 students had medium misconceptions, and 6 students had high misconceptions. The causes of students' misconceptions were primarily false positives and humanistic thinking, accounting for 28.56%. In conclusion, the instrument developed in this study is valid and reliable, and it effectively identifies the profile and causes of students' misconceptions.

References

Didik, Lalu A., & F. Aulia. (2019). Analisa Tingkat Pemahaman dan Miskonsepsi pada Materi Listrik Statis Mahasiswa Tadris Fisika Menggunakan Metode 3-Tier Multiple Choices Diagnostic. Phenomenon, 9(1), 99–112.

Suparno, Paul. (2013). Miskonsepsi dan Perubahan Konsep Pendidikan Fisika. Jakarta: PT. Grasindo.

Mulyastuti, H., W. Setyarsih., & M. N. R. Jauhariyah. (2016). Profil Reduksi Miskonsepsi Siswa Materi Dinamika Rotasi Sebagai Pengaruh Penerapan Model Pembelajaran ECIRR Berbantuan Media Audiovisual. Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan Fisika (JIPF). 5(2), 82-84.

Saputri, L., Maison, & W. Kurniawan. (2021). Pengembangan Four-Tier Diagnostic Test Berbasis Website untuk Mengidentifikasi Miskonsepsi pada Materi Suhu dan Kalor. Jurnal Ilmiah Teknologi Informasi Asia, 15(1), 61-68.

Gurel D. K., A. Eryilmaz, & L. C. McDermott. (2015). A Review and Comparison of Diagnostic Instruments to Identify Student’s Misconceptions in science. Erusia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(5), 989-1008.

Hanum, A., Maison, & W. Kurniawan. (2021). Pengembangan Instrumen Miskonsepsi Materi Usaha dan Energi pada SMA menggunakan Aplikasi Dreamweaver Berbasis Web. Edumaspul – Jurnal Pendidikan, 5(1), 222-229.

Zayyinah., Fatimatul, M., & Irsad R. (2018). Identifikasi Miskonsepsi Siswa SMP dengan Certainty of Response Index (CRI) pada Konsep Suhu dan Kalor. Prosiding Senco: Pendidikan IPA, 78-89.

Jannah, Emita M., & Frida U. Ermawati. (2019). Validitas dan Reliabilitas Instrumen Tes Diagnostik Berformat Four-Tier untuk Materi Dinamika Rotasi dan Kesetimbangan Benda Tegar. Inovasi Pendidikan Fisika, 08(02), 560-564.

Fenditasari, K., Jumadi, E. Istiyono, & Hendra. (2020). Identification of misconceptions on heat and temperature among physics education students using four-tier diagnostic test. Journal of Physics: Conference series, 1407 012055.

Cheung, L. (2016). Using the ADDIE Model of Instructional Design to Teach Chest Radiograph Interpretation. Journal of Biomedical Education. 1–6.

Sugiyono. (2019). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, & RnD. Bandung: Alfabeta.

Hestenes, D., & Halloun, I. (1995). Interpreting the Force Concept Inventory: A Response to March 1995 Critique by Huffman and Heller. The Physics Teacher, 33, 502-506.

Riduwan, & Akdon. (2013). Rumus dan Data dalam Analisis Statistika. Bandung: Alfabeta.

Rokhim, D. A., S. Rahayu., & I. W. Dasna. (2023). Analisis Miskonsepsi Kimia dan Instrumen Diagnosisnya: Literatur Review. Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan Kimia, 17(1), 23-34.

Putri, R. E., & H. Subekti. (2021). Analisis Miskonsepsi Menggunakan Metode Four- Tier Certainty Of Response Index: Studi Eksplorasi Di SMP Negeri 60 Surabaya. Pensa E-Jurnal: Pendidikan Sains, 9(2), 220-226.

Ulfah, Siti & H. Fitriyani. (2017). Certainty of Response Index (CRI): Miskonsepsi Siswa SMP pada Materi Pecahan. Seminar Nasional Pendidikan, Sains dan Teknologi. ISBN: 978-602-61599-6-0.

Ilhamdi, M. L., Rahmani, A. V., & Syazali, M. (2022). Analysis of misconceptions of senior high school students on biodiversity materials, interactions, and their role in nature. Jurnal Pijar Mipa, 17(6), 764-769.

Rahmi, S., & Azra, F. (2023). Description of student learning difficulties in the thermochemistry. Jurnal Pijar Mipa, 18(5), 736-742.

Zia, R., Dewi D., & Zainuddin Z. (2022). Identifikasi Miskonsepsi Peserta Didik Menggunakan Four-tier Diagnostic Test pada Materi Impuls Momentum di MAN Kabupaten Banjar. Seminar Nasional Pendidikan Fisika VII, E-ISSN, 2830-4535.

Prayitno, T. A., & Hidayati, N. (2022). Analysis of Students' Misconception on General Biology Concepts Using Four-Tier Diagnostic Test (FTDT). IJORER: International Journal of Recent Educational Research, 3(1), 1-10.

Thompson, W. B. (2019). Alpha is not the false alarm rate: An activity to dispel a common statistical misconception. Teaching of Psychology, 46(1), 72-79.

Treff, N. R., & Marin, D. (2021). The “mosaic” embryo: misconceptions and misinterpretations in preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy. Fertility and Sterility, 116(5), 1205-1211.

Author Biographies

Uci Vebia Paramita, State University of Surabaya

Mukhayyarotin Niswati Rodliyatul Jauhariyah, Physics Education Department, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science, Universitas Negeri Surabaya

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Uci Vebia Paramita, Mukhayyarotin Niswati Rodliyatul Jauhariyah

Creative Commons License

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

The following terms apply to authors who publish in this journal:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal first publication rights, with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International License (CC-BY License) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and first publication in this journal.

2. Authors may enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., posting it to an institutional repository or publishing it in a book), acknowledging its initial publication in this journal.
3. Before and during the submission process, authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website), as this can lead to productive exchanges as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).