Diagnosis of science process skills of physics education students using three-tier assessment based on ccientific reasons
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30862/jri.v6i2.158Keywords:
Diagnostic assessment, scientific reasons, three-tier assessmentAbstract
This study aims to diagnose students’ Science Process Skills (SPS) using a three-tier assessment that requires students to provide an answer, select the underlying reason, and indicate their confidence in both responses. The scientific reason refers to the evidence- or principle-based explanation selected by students to justify their answers. The research uses an quantitative approach by involving 15 physics education students selected through nonprobability sampling. The instrument consists of 20 questions representing 10 SPS indicators. The validity of the content of the instrument obtained an Aiken's V coefficient of 0.87. Of the 300 expected responses, 295 responses were filled in and analyzed without imputation. The results showed that the average SPS achievement was 79.11, with the highest achievement the indicator measuring and collecting data of 95.56, while the observing indicator was the lowest achievement of 61.11. The results showed that students were relatively strong in data collection and processing activities, but still needed to strengthen skills related to the early stages of investigation, especially observation, problem formulation, hypothesis formulation, and variable identification. In addition, 16.61% of responses were wrong scientific reasons with high confidence. Diagnostic analysis showed that 57.63% of responses were in the category of mastering SPS, while 19.32% showed pseudo-understanding and 13.22% conceptual errors. The findings showed that three-tier assessments based on scientific reasons can reveal the characteristics of SPS mastery comprehensively that are not seen through the accuracy of answers alone..
Downloads
References
Aiken, L. R. (1985). Three Coefficients for Analyzing the Reliability and Validity of Ratings. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 45(1), 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164485451012
Andaria, M., & Hadiwinarto, H. (2023). Development and Validation of a Two-Tier Multiple Choice Instrument to Assess Students’ Science Process Skills in Acid-Base Chemistry. ISEJ : Indonesian Science Education Journal, 4(1), 11–18. https://doi.org/10.62159/isej.v4i1.141
Baur, A. & Emden, M. (2021). How to Open Inquiry Teaching? An Alternative Teaching Scaffold to Foster Students’ Inquiry Skills. Chemistry Teacher International, 3(1), 20190013. https://doi.org/10.1515/cti-2019-0013
Betries, M., Leoniza, T., Styawati, R., Umami, S. R., Thohir, M. A., & Utama, C. (2024). Identifikasi Miskonsepsi Materi Sistem Tata Surya Menggunakan Three-Tier Diagnostic Test dengan Certainty Response Index. Pendipa: Journal of Science Education, 9(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.33369/pendipa.9.1.1-9
Cabello, V. M., Moreira, P. M., & Griñó, M. P. (2021). Elementary Students’ Reasoning in Drawn Explanations Based on a Scientific Theory. Education Sciences, 11(10), 581. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11100581
Caleon, I. S., & 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
Caleon, I., & Subramaniam, R. (2010). Development and Application of a Three‐Tier Diagnostic Test to Assess Secondary Students’ Understanding of Waves. International Journal of Science Education, 32(7), 939–961. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690902890130
Cheung, K. L., & Yang, D.-C. (2020). Performance of Sixth Graders in Hong Kong on a Number Sense Three-Tier Test. Educational Studies, 46(1), 39–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2018.1516631
Chiu, T. K. F., Chai, C. S., Williams, P. J., & Lin, T. J. (2021). Teacher Professional Development on Self-Determination Theory–Based Design Thinking in STEM Education. Educational Technology & Society, 24(4), 153–165. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48629252
Darmaji, D., Kurniawan, D. A., & Irdianti, I. (2019). Physics Education Students’ Science Process Skills. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 8(2), 293–298. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v8i2.16401
Ekici, M., & Erdem, M. (2020). Developing Science Process Skills through Mobile Scientific Inquiry. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100658
Ghasemi, A., Hosseinpanah, F., Kashfi, K., & Bahadoran, Z. (2025). Research Hypothesis: A Brief History, Central Role in Scientific Inquiry, and Characteristics. Addiction & Health, 17, 1623. https://doi.org/10.34172/ahj.1623
Gizaw, G. G., & Sota, S. S. (2023). Improving Science Process Skills of Students: A Review of Literature. Science Education International, 34(3), 216–224. https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v34.i3.5
Grazziotin-Soares, R., Blue, C., Feraro, R., Tochor, K., Ardenghi, T. M., Curtis, D., & Ardenghi, D. M. (2021). The Interrelationship Between Confidence and Correctness in a Multiple-Choice Assessment: Pointing Out Misconceptions and Assuring Valuable Questions. BDJ Open, 7(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41405-021-00067-4
Haudek, K. C., Prevost, L. B., Moscarella, R. A., Merrill, J., & Urban-Lurain, M. (2012). What are they thinking? Automated Analysis of Student Writing About Acid-base Chemistry in Introductory Biology. CBE Life Sciences Education, 11(3), 283–293. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.11-08-0084
Hull, M. M., Jansky, A., & Hopf, M. (2022). Does Confidence in a Wrong Answer Imply a Misconception? Physical Review Physics Education Research 18(2), 20108. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.18.020108
Irmak, M., Inaltun, H., Ercan-Dursun, J., Yanis-Kalleci, H., & Yuruk, N. (2023). Development and Application of a Three-Tier Diagnostic Test to Assess Pre-service Science Teachers’ Understanding on Work-Power and Energy Concepts. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 21(1), 159–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10242-6
Jusniar, J., Effendy, E., Budiasih, E., & Sutrisno, S. (2020). Developing a Three-Tier Diagnostic Instrument on Chemical Equilibrium (TT-DICE). Educación Química, 31, 84–102. https://dx.doi.org/10.22201/fq.18708404e.2020.3.72133
Kranz, J., Baur, A., & Möller, A. (2023). Learners’ Challenges in Understanding and Performing Experiments: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Studies in Science Education, 59(2), 321–367. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2022.2138151
Kurniawati, A. (2021). Science Process Skills and Its Implementation in the Process of Science Learning Evaluation in Schools. Journal of Science Education Research, 5(2), 16–20. https://doi.org/10.21831/jser.v5i2.44269
Lestari, T. (2023). An Analysis of Junior High Student’s Science Process Skills After Covid-19. Magister Scientae, 51(1), 31–38. https://doi.org/10.33508/mgs.v51i1.4501
Lim, W. M. (2025). What Is Quantitative Research? An Overview and Guidelines. Australasian Marketing Journal, 33(3), 325–348. https://doi.org/10.1177/14413582241264622
Ma, H., Yang, H., Li, C., Ma, S., & Li, G. (2025). The Effectiveness and Sustainability of Tier Diagnostic Technologies for Misconception Detection in Science Education: A Systematic Review. Sustainability, 17(7), 3145. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17073145
Maison, M., Darmaji, D., Kurniawan, D. A., Astalini, A., Dewi, U. P., & Kartina, L. (2019). Analysis of Science Process Skills in Physics Education Students. Jurnal Penelitian dan Evaluasi Pendidikan, 23(2), 197–205. https://doi.org/10.21831/pep.v23i2.28123
Mandasari, F., Iwan, I., & Damopolii, I. (2021). The relationship between science process skills and biology learning outcome. Journal of Research in Instructional, 1(1), 23–32. https://doi.org/10.30862/jri.v1i1.9
Masters, H. (2020). Using Teaching Rehearsals to Prepare Preservice Teachers for Explanation-Driven Science Instruction. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 31(4), 414–434. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2020.1712047
McNeish, D., & Wolf, M. G. (2020). Thinking twice About Sum Scores. Behavior Research Methods, 52(6), 2287–2305. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-020-01398-0
Mertens, D. M. (2010). Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology Integrating Diversity With Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Methods. SAGE Publications.
Özer, F., & Sarıbaş, D. (2023). Exploring Pre-service Science Teachers’ Understanding of Scientific Inquiry and Scientific Practices Through a Laboratory Course. Science & Education, 32(3), 787–820. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00325-3
Park, Y. S., Konge, L., & Artino Jr, A. R. (2020). The Positivism Paradigm of Research. Academic Medicine, 95(5), 690–694. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000003093
Ploj, V. M. (2022). Teaching Science & Technology: Components of Scientific Literacy and Insight into the Steps of Research. International Journal of Science Education, 44(12), 1916–1931. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2105414
Rumalolas, N., Rosely, M. S., Nunaki, J. H., Damopolii, I., & Kandowangko, N. Y. (2021). The inquiry-based student book integrated with local resources: The impact on student science process skill. Journal of Research in Instructional, 1(2), 133–146. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.30862/jri.v1i2.17
Sands, D., Parker, M., Hedgeland, H., Jordan, S., & Galloway, R. (2018). Using Concept Inventories to Measure Understanding. Higher Education Pedagogies, 3(1), 173–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/23752696.2018.1433546
Sari, D. N., Arif, K., Yurnetti, & Putri, A. N. (2024). Identification of Students ’ Misconceptions in Junior High Schools Accredited A using the Three Tier Test Instrument in Science Learning. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 10(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v10i1.5064
Saribas, D., & Ceyhan, G. D. (2015). Learning to Teach Scientific Practices: Pedagogical Decisions and Reflections During a Course for Pre-service Science Teachers. International Journal of STEM Education, 2(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-015-0023-y
Sıbıç, O., & Acar, S. B. (2022). Examining Science Process Skills Tests: A Case of Turkey TT - Examining Science Process Skills Tests: A Case of Turkey. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 9(1), 20–38. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.1058055
Sugiyono. (2019). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D. Alfabeta.
Sumargo, B., Budyanra, & Kurniawan, R. (2024). Metode dan Pengaplikasian Teknik Sampling. Bumi Aksara.
Watkins, J., & Manz, E. (2022). Characterizing Pedagogical Decision Points in Sense-Making Conversations Motivated by Scientific Uncertainty. Science Education, 106(6), 1408–1441. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21747
Wu, X. Ben, Sandoval, C., Knight, S., Jaime, X., Macik, M., & Schielack, J. F. (2021). Web-based Authentic Inquiry Experiences in Large Introductory Classes Consistently Associated with Significant Learning Gains for All Students. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1), 31. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00290-3
Yeo, J., & Yang, H. (2022). Using A Three-Tier Multiple- Choice Diagnostic Instrument Toward Alternative Conceptions Among Lower-Secondary School Students in Taiwan: Taking Ecosystems Unit as An Example. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 21(1), 69–83. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/22.21.69
Zembal-Saul, C. (2009). Learning to Teach Elementary School Science as Argument. Science Education, 93(4), 687–719. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20325
Zhu, M., Liu, O. L., & Lee, H.-S. (2020). The Effect of Automated Feedback on Revision Behavior and Learning Gains in Formative Assessment of Scientific Argument Writing. Computers & Education, 143, 103668. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103668
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Mahir Mahir, M. A. Martawijaya, Husain Husain, Abdul Hakim, Abdul Haris (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
