A test of analytical thinking and chemical representation ability on rate of reaction topic

Muhd Ibrahim Bin Muhamad Damanhuri

QR Code Link :
Type :	article
Subject :	Q Science (General)
Main Author :	Muhd Ibrahim Bin Muhamad Damanhuri
Additional Authors :	Didi Supriadi Atina Rizanatul Fahriyah Antuni Wiyarsi
Title :	A test of analytical thinking and chemical representation ability on rate of reaction topic

Place of Production :	Tanjong Malim
Publisher :	Fakulti Sains dan Matematik
Year of Publication :	2019
Corporate Name :	Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris

Abstract : Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris

Assessments play an important role in chemistry learning and for specific uses. The construction of a test based on multiple representation approaches is needed for measuring the 21st century thinking skills. This study aims to construct and validate a standardized test to measure students’ analytical thinking and chemical representation ability in rate of reaction topic. The test captures four aspects on analytical thinking and four levels of multiple representations (macroscopic, sub-microscopic, symbolic and mathematic). A group of experts confirmed the construct and face validity of the Test of Analytical Thinking based on Multiple Representation (TAT-MR) with 32 items. The TAT-MR was then validated by participating 449 high school students. The test characteristics were analyzed usingRasch model with Partial Credit Model-1 Parameter Logistic (PCM-1PL) approach. The results of theRaschmodeling show that there are 22 TAT-MR items with excellent reliability. Hence, the TAT-MR is acceptable as a good instrument to collect the data. This study suggests that TAT-MR will prove to be a useful instrument for measuring the students’ ability on analytical thinking and chemical representation for rate of reaction topic in chemistry learning.

References

Abdurrahman, Liliasari, Rusli, A., & Waldrip, B. (2011). Implementasi pembelajaran berbasis multi representasi untuk peningkatan penguasaan konsep fisika kuantum. Cakrawala Pendidikan, 30(1), 30-45. doi:10.21831/cp.v1i1.4189.

Adedoyin, O. O., & Mokobi, T. (2013). Using IRT psychometric analysis in examining the quality of junior certificate mathematics multiple choice examination test items. International Journal of Asian Social Science, 3(4), 992-1011.

Anderson, L. W., &Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing. New York, NY: Longman.

Areesophonpichet, S. (2013). A development of analytical thinking skills of graduate students. The Asian Conference on Education (pp. 1-5). Osaka, Japan: The International Academic Forum.

Beavers, A. S., Lounsbury, J. W., Richard, J. K., Huck, S. W., Skolits, G. J., & Esquivel, S. L. (2013). Practical considerations for using exploratory factor analysis in educational research. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 18(6), 1-13.

Boone, W. J., Staver, J. R., & Yale, M. S. (2014). Rasch analysis in the human sciences. Dordrecht: Netherlands.

Bucat, B., &Mocerino, M. (2009). Learning at the sub-micro level: structural representations. In Gilbert, J. K., &Treagust, D. F. (Eds), Multiple representations in chemical education. (pp.1-8). Dordrecht: Springer.

Brown, R. L., Obasi, C. N., & Barret, B. P. (2016). Rasch analysis of the WURSS-21 dimensional validation and assessment of invariance. J. Lung. Pulm. Respir. Res., 3(2), 1-16. doi:10.15406/jlprr.2016.03.00076.

Çakmakçý, G., Leach, J., & Donnelly, J. (2006). Students’ ideas about reaction rate and its relationship with concentration or pressure. International Journal of Science Education, 28(15), 1795-1815. doi:10.1080/09500690600823490.

Calik, M., Kolomuc¸ A., & Karagolge, Z. (2010). The effect of conceptual change pedagogy on students’ conceptions of rate of reaction. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19(5), 422-433. doi:10.1007/s10956-010-9208-9.

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, 293-307. doi:10.1039/b7rp90006f.

Dalgety, J., Coll, R. K., & Jones, A. (2003). Development of chemistry attitudes and experiences questionnaire (CAEQ). Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(7), 649-668. doi: 10.1002/tea.10103.

Davidowitz, B., Chittleborough, G., & Murray, E. (2010). Student-generated submicro diagrams: a useful tool for teaching and learning chemical equations and stoichiometry. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 11(3), 154-164.doi: 10.1039/C005464J.

Devetak, I. E. (2009). Comparing Slovenian year 8 and year 9 elementary school pupils’ knowledge of electrolyte chemistry and Energy Education Science and Technology Part B: Social and Educational Studies, 4(2), 979-992.

Leech, N. L., Barret, K. C., & Morgan, G. A. (2005). SPSS for intermediate statistics: Use and interpretation. New Jersey, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Li, W. S., & Arshad, M. Y. (2014). Application of multiple representation levels in redox reactions among tenth grade chemistry teachers. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 11(3), 35-52.doi:10.12973/tused.10117a.

Mayer, R. E. (2002). Rote versus meaningful learning. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 226- 232. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4104_4.

Milenkoviæ, D., Segedinac, M., Hrin, T., & Cvjetiæanin, S. (2014). Cognitive load at different levels. Croatian Journal of Education, 16(3), 699-722.

Olakanmi, E. (2015). The effects of a webbased computer simulation on students’ conceptual understanding rate of reaction and attitude towards chemistry. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 14(5), 627-640.

Petrovska, S., & Veselinovska, S. S. (2013). Contemporary pedagogical approaches for developing higher level thinking on science classes. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 92, 702-710. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.08.72.

Pratiwi, Y., Rahayu, S., & Fajaroh, F. (2016). Socioscientific issues (SSI) in reaction rates topic and its effect on the critical thinking skills of high school student. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 5(2), 164-170. doi:10.15294/jpii.v5i2.7676.

Ramirez, R. P. B., & Ganaden, M. S. (2008). Creative activities and students’ higher order thinking skills. Education Quarterly, 66(1), 22-33. doi: 10.1.1.824.9279

Reckase, M. D. (1979). Unifactor latent trait models applied to multifactor tests: Results and implications. Journal of Educational Statistics, 4(3), 207-230. doi:10.3102/10769986004003207.

Redhana, I. W., & Merta, L. M. (2017). Green chemistry practicum to improve student learning outcomes of reaction rate topic. Cakrawala Pendidikan, 34(3), 382-403. doi:10.21831/cp.v36i3.13062.

Retnawati, H. (2014). Teori respon butir dan penerapannya untuk peneliti, praktisi pengukuran, dan pengujian mahasiswa pascasarjana. Yogyakarta: Parama Publishing.

Retnawati, H. (2016). Validitas reliabilitas & karakteristik butir. Yogyakarta: Parama Publishing.

Sangoseni, O., Hellman, M., & Hill, C. (2013). Development and validation of a questionnaire to assess the effect of online learning on behaviors, attitudes, and clinical practices of physical therapist in the United States regarding evidencebase clinical practice. The International Journal of Allied Health Sciences and Practice, 11(2), 1-12.

Seçken, N & Seyhan, H.G. (2015). An analysis of high school students’ academic achievement and anxiety over graphical chemistry problems about the rate of reaction: The case of Sivas province. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 347-354.doi:10.1016/j. sbspro.2015.01.671.

Sunyono, Yuanita, L., & Ibrahim, M. (2015). Mental models of students on stoichiometry consept in learning by method based on multiple representation. The Online Journal of New Horizons in Education, 5(2), 30-45.

Supasorn, S., & Promarak, V. (2015). Implementation of 5E inquiry incorporated with analogy learning approach to enhance conceptual understanding of chemical

reaction rate for grade 11 students. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(1), 121–132.doi:10.1039/c4rp00190g.

Taleb, D. M., & Chadwick, C. (2016). Enhancing student critical and analytical thinking skills at a higher education level in developing countries: Case study of the british university in dubai. Journal of Educational and Instructional Studies, 6(1), 67-77.

Talanquer, V. (2011). Macro, submicro, and symbolic: The many faces of the chemistry “triplet”. International Journal of Science Education, 33(2), 179-195. doi:10.1080/09500690903386435.

Tastan, Ö., Yalcinkaya, E., & Boz, Y. (2010). Preservice chemistry teachers’ ideas about reaction mechanism. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 7(1), 47-60.

Thaneerananon, T., Triampo, W., & Nokkaew, A. (2016). Development of a test to evaluate students’ analytical thinking based on fact versus opinion differentiation. International Journal of Instruction, 9(2), 123-138. doi:10.12973/iji.2016.929a.

Treagust, D. F., Chittleborough, G., & Mamiala, T. L. (2003). The role of subsub-microscopic and symbolic representations in chemical explanations. International Journal of Science Education, 25(11), 1353-1368. doi:10.1080/0950069032000070306.

Trochim, W.M. (1999). The research methods knowledge base (2nd Ed.). Cincinnati, OH: Atomic Dog.

Turányi, T., & Tóth, Z. (2013). Hungarian university students’ misunderstandings in thermodynamics and chemical kinetics. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 14(1), 105–116. doi:10.1039/c2rp20015e.

Wahyuningsih, H. (2009). Validitas konstruk alat ukur spirituality orientation inventory (SQI). Jurnal Psikologi, 36(2), 116-129. doi:10.22146/jpsi.7890.

Wiberg, M. (2004). Classical test theory vs item response theory: An evaluation of the theory test in the Swedish driving-license test. Santiago: Centro de EstudiosPúblicos.

This material may be protected under Copyright Act which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials.
You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research.

Back to previous page