Developing Dispersion and Polarization Conceptual Inventory (DiPolCI) to Identify Students’ Mental Model
Abstract
Identifying a student's mental model is important for understanding scientific concepts. Dispersion and polarization are the sub concept of physics that studied in high school on light waves concept. This study aimed to develop dispersion and polarization conceptual inventory (DIPOLCI) to identify students’ model mental using Rasch analysis. The research method utilized analyzing, designing, developing, implementing and evaluating (ADDIE) method. The participants involved 34 students (26 female and 8 male) from senior high school in Patokbeusi, West Java, Indonesia and their average 17-18 ages old. DIPOLCI consists of 7 items in the form of one tier and then developed to be four tiers test. DIPOLCI examined through Rasch analysis based on fit statistics, Cronbach Alpha, item reliability and person reliability, and students’ mental model. The results show that DIPOLCI were valid and reliable to identify students’ mental model. Students’ mental model are mostly in the synthetic (SY) and scientific (SC) mental models were also analyzed in this research. It can be concluded the developed of DIPOLCI was able to analyze students’ mental model.
Keywords
Full Text:
Download PDFReferences
Aminudin, A., Hadiana, R., Adimayuda, R., Kaniawati, I., Suhendi, E., Samsudin, A., & Coştu, B. (2019). Rasch analysis of multitier open-ended light-wave instrument (MOLWI): Developing and assessing second-years Sundanese-scholars alternative conceptions. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 7(3), 557–579. https://doi.org/10.17478/jegys.574524
Andrich, D. (1988). Rasch models for measurement. SAGE Publications.
Battaglia, M. (2008). Purposive sample. In Encyclopedia of survey research methods (P. J. Lavrakas, Ed.). SAGE Publications.
Berndt, A. E. (2020). Sampling methods. https://doi.org/10.1177/0890334420906850
Boone, W. J., & Noltemeyer, A. (2017). Rasch analysis: A primer for school psychology researchers and practitioners. Cogent Education, 4(1), 1416898.
Boone, W. J. (2016). Rasch analysis for instrument development: Why, when, and how? CBE Life Sciences Education, 15(4). https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-04-0148
Buber, A., & Coban, G. U. (2017). The effects of learning activities based on argumentation on conceptual understanding of 7th graders about the "Force and Motion" unit and establishing thinking-friendly classroom environment. European Journal of Educational Research, 6(3), 367–384.
Caleon, I., & Subramaniam, R. (2010). Do students know what they know and what they don’t know? Using a four-tier diagnostic test to assess the nature of students’ alternative conceptions. Research in Science Education, 40(3), 313–337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-009-9122-4
Cohen, E., Mason, A., Singh, C., & Yerushalmi, E. (2008). Identifying differences in diagnostic skills between physics students: Students’ self-diagnostic performance given alternative scaffolding. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1064, 99–102. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3021284
Docktor, J., & Heller, K. (2008). Gender differences in both force concept inventory and introductory physics performance. American Institute of Physics, 1064(1), 15–18.
Fratiwi, N., Samsudin, A., Ramalis, T. R., Diani, R., Irwandani, Rasmitadila, Saregar, A., & Ravanis, K. (2019). Developing MeMoRI on Newton’s laws: For identifying students’ mental models. European Journal of Educational Research, 9(2), 699–708. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.9.2.699
Giancoli, D. C. (2017). Physics principles with application (6th ed.). Pearson.
Hadad, R., Thomas, K., Kachovska, K., & Yin, Y. (2020). Practicing formative assessment for computational thinking in making environments. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(1), 162–173.
Henderson, C. R. (2014). About the force concept inventory. American Journal of Physics, 66(2), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1534822
Kaewkhong, K., Mazzolini, A. A., Emarat, N., & Arayathanitkul, K. (2010). Thai high-school students’ misconceptions about and models of light refraction through a planar surface. Physics Education, 45(1), 97–107.
Kirk, M. A., Kelley, C., Yankey, N., Birken, S. A., Abadie, B., & Damschroder, L. (2015). A systematic review of the use of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Implementation Science, 11(1), 1–3.
Klar, S., & Leeper, T. J. (2019). Identities and intersectionality: A case for purposive sampling in survey-experimental research. Research & Politics, 6(3), 419–433.
Kucukozer, H., & Kocakulah, S. (2007). Secondary school students’ misconceptions about simple electric circuits. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 4(1), 101–115.
Kurnaz, M., & Eksi, C. (2015). An analysis of high school students’ mental models of solid friction in physics. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 15(3), 997–1014.
Linacre, J. M. (2002). What do infit and outfit, mean-square and standardized mean? Rasch Measurement Transactions, 16(2), 878–879.
Liu, G., & Fang, N. (2016). Student misconceptions about force and acceleration in physics and engineering mechanics education. International Journal of Engineering Education, 32(2), 19–29.
Moutinho, S., Moura, R., & Vasconcelos, C. (2016). Mental models about seismic effects: Students’ profile-based comparative analysis. Geological Society, Special Publications, 416, 391–415.
Van der Nest, A., Long, C., & Engelbrecht, J. (2018). The impact of formative assessment activities on the development of teacher agency in mathematics teachers. South African Journal of Education, 38(1), 1–10.
Nguyen, V. T., & Truong, H. T. (2023). Item reliability analysis using the Rasch model in educational assessment. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 22(3), 15–30.
Park, M. (2019). Effects of simulation-based formative assessments on students’ conceptions in physics. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(7). https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/103586
Prabowo, A., Widodo, W., & Sukarmin, S. (2022). Development of four-tier multiple-choice tests to diagnose students’ misconceptions. Kreano, Jurnal Matematika Kreatif-Inovatif, 13(2), 234–241. https://doi.org/10.15294/kreano.v13i2.43489
Putranta, H., & Supahar, P. (2019). Development of Physics-Tier Tests (PysTT) to measure students’ conceptual understanding and creative thinking skills: A qualitative synthesis. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists. https://doi.org/10.17478/jegys.587203
Sagala, R., Umam, R., Thahir, A., Saregar, A., & Wardani, I. (2019). The effectiveness of STEM-based learning on gender differences: The impact on physics concept understanding. European Journal of Educational Research, 8(3), 753–761.
Samsudin, A., Suhandi, A., Rusdiana, D., Kaniawati, I., & Costu, B. (2014). Fields Conceptual Change Inventory: A diagnostic test instrument on the electric field and magnetic field to diagnose students’ conceptions. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 13(2), 74–77.
Samsudin, A., Fratiwi, N. J., & Wibowo, F. C. (2017). Alleviating students’ misconceptions about Newton’s first law through comparing PDEODE*E tasks and POE tasks: Which is more effective? Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology.
Saputra, O., Setiawan, A., & Rusdiana, D. (2019). Identification of student misconceptions about static fluid. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1157(3), 1–6.
Severiens, S. E., & Ten Dam, G. T. (1994). Gender differences in learning styles: A narrative review and quantitative meta-analysis. Higher Education, 27, 487–501.
Stains, M., & Sevian, H. (2015). Uncovering implicit assumptions: A large-scale study on students’ mental models of diffusion. Research in Science Education, 45(6), 807–840.
Urey, M. (2019). Defining the relationship between perceptions and misconceptions about photosynthesis topic of pre-service science teachers. European Journal of Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.7.4.813
Widiyatmoko, A., & Shimizu, K. (2018). Literature review of factors contributing to students’ misconceptions in light and optical instruments. Journal of Science Education International, 13(1), 853–863.
Zhu, Z. (2007). Learning content, physics self-efficacy, and female students’ physics course-taking. International Education Journal, 8(2), 204–212.
Van Zile-Tamsen, C. (2017). Using Rasch analysis to inform rating scale development. Research in Higher Education, 58(8), 922–933. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-017-9448-0
DOI: https://doi.org/10.17509/jsl.v7i3.69058
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2024 Fini Alfionita Umar, Achmad Samsudin, Hasan Özgür Kapıcı, Taufik Ramlan Ramalis, Adam Hadiana Aminudin, Shobrina Nurul Mufidah, Jajang Kunaedi, Itsna Rona Wahyu Astuti, Fanny Herliyana Dewi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Jl. Dr. Setiabudhi 229 Bandung 40154, West Java, Indonesia