Pengembangan instrumen penilaian Higher order thinking skills (hots) pada materi hukum newton

Ulfah, Rani Yatin (2022) Pengembangan instrumen penilaian Higher order thinking skills (hots) pada materi hukum newton. Undergraduate thesis, IAIN Palangka Raya.

Text SKRIPSI RANI YATIN ULFAH 1801130420.pdf Download (4MB)

Abstract

Penelitian ini didasarkan pada kebutuhan pengembangan instrumen penilaian HOTS. Analisis kebutuhan soal berbasis HOTS di SMA Negeri 1 Palangka Raya masih belum memadai dikarenakan pendidik kesulitan dalam melakukan pengembangan soal HOTS. Soal HOTS pada tingkat kognitif C4 (menganalisis)lebih banyak diterapkan dibandingkan soal pada tingkat C5 (mengevaluasi) dan C6 (mencipta). Penelitian ini mengangkat materi Hukum Newton tentang gerak. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui pengembangan dan kualitas instrumen penilaian HOTS pada materi Hukum Newton.

Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian R&D (Research and Development) dengan model pengembangan ADDIE. Namun, penelitian ini terbatas sampai pada uji coba kelompok kecil. Teknik pengumpulan data yaitu wawancara, tes, dan angket untuk memperoleh kelayakan instrumen penilaian. Instrumen pengumpulan data berupa lembar pedoman wawancara, soal-soal HOTS pada materi hukum Newton, angket validasi ahli materi dan ahli evaluasi, serta angket respons untuk pendidik dan peserta didik.

Hasil penelitian ini yaitu: Pengembangan instrumen penilaian melalui beberapa tahapan yaitu menetapkan tujuan tes, merancang kisi-kisi tes, menuliskan butir pertanyaan, dan menyusun pedoman penskoran. Soal tersebut sesuai dengan indikator pembelajaran dan indikator instrumen penilaian terdiri dari materi, penggunaan bahasa, kemenarikan, dan keterpakaian. Kualitas instrumen penilaian berdasarkan validasi ahli materi dan evaluasi memperoleh persentase sebesar 90,07% (sangat layak) dan 79,82% (layak). Sedangkan berdasarkan respons pendidik dan peserta didik memperoleh persentase sebesar 80,21% (sangat tinggi) dan 74,71% (menarik). Soal HOTS tergolong valid sebesar 100% dan reliabel dengan koefisien reliabilitas 0,78. Soal HOTS termasuk dalam kategori sukar dengan persentase sebesar 92,31%. dan memiliki daya pembeda cukup sebesar 76,92%.

ABSTRACT

This research was constituted on the need of developing HOTS assessment instruments. HOTS-based needs analyses at SMAN 1 Palangka Raya were inadequate because the educators had difficulty in developing HOTS questions. The result of needs analyses showed that the HOTS questions at the cognitive level C4 (analyzing) were more implemented than questions at the C5 (evaluating) and C6 (creating) levels. The research was related to Newton’s law of motion. It aimed to determine the development and quality of the HOTS assessment instruments on Newton’s Law materials.

This research used R&D (research and development) method using the ADDIE development model. However, the implementation of this research was limited to small group trials. The data collection techniques were interviews, tests, and questionnaires to acquire the feasibility of assessment instruments. Instrument data were collected from interview guideline sheets, HOTS questions of Newton’s Law materials, material experts’ validation questionnaires, evaluation experts’ validation questionnaires, and response questionnaires for educators and students.

The results were; the development of the assessment instrument had implemented through several stages (planning test objectives, designing test grids, writing questions, and compiling scoring guidelines). The questions which had been tested in accordance to the teaching and assessment instrument indicators. The indicators were from materials, language usage, attractiveness and applicability. The quality results of the assessment instrument were required based on the experts’ validations; the material experts were 90.07% (very feasible) and evaluation experts were 79.82% (feasible). Meanwhile, the responses for educators were 80.21% (very high) and students responses were 74.71% (attractive). The HOTS questions were valid; the results were 100% (reliable) with the reliability coefficient was 0.78 and the questions were included in the difficult category; the result was 92.31% and had sufficient discriminatory power of 76.92%.

Actions (login required)

View Item