The Analysis of Students Misconceptions by Using Four-Tier Diagnostic Test on Periodic Table of the Elements Lesson

Riska Yanti, Arif Yasthophi

Abstract


Periodic Table of the Elements is an abstract topic with many new terms and vocabularies, encompassing subjects such as groups, periods, and periodic properties of elements—such as atomic or ionic radius, ionization energy, electronegativity, electron affinity—as well as the physical and chemical properties of elements. These characteristics make it a challenging topic often leading to misconceptions.  This research aimed at finding out student misconceptions regarding Periodic Table of the Elements lesson and finding out the extent of these misconceptions.  Mixed method was used in this research with explanatory sequential design.  The samples consisted of 35 the eleventh-grade students of class A1 at State Senior High School 1 Rambah, and they were selected by using purposive sampling technique.  The instruments of collecting data were four-tier diagnostic test, interview, and documentation.  The research findings showed that misconceptions were present across all concepts tested within Periodic Table of the Elements lesson.  The highest rate of misconception, 53%, was found in indicator (6), determining the relationship between an element electron configuration and its group placement in the periodic table.  The lowest rate of misconception, 11%, was observed in indicator (4), determining isotopes, isobars, and isotones.  The mean percentages of student concept comprehension level on Periodic Table of the Elements lesson at the eleventh-grade of class A1 at State Senior High School 1 Rambah were 32% of students understanding the concepts with moderate criterion, 19% of students partially understanding the concepts with moderate criterion, 38% of students experiencing misconceptions with moderate criterion, and 11% of students who did not understand the concepts with low criterion.

Keywords: Misconceptions, Four-Tier Diagnostic Test, Periodic Table of the Elements 

DOI: 10.23960/jppk.v13.i3.32640


Full Text:

PDF

References


Anggraeni, S., & Rahmawan, S. (2024). Development of an E-Module Based on Integrated Scientific Literacy with Islamic Values in Chemical Equilibrium Material for SMA/MA. Journal of Chemistry Education and Learning. 13(2),28-41.

Arikunto, S. (2012). Research on a Practical Approach BUMI. AKSARA

Arikunto, S. (2013). Research Procedures on a Practical Approach BUMI AKSARA.

Ayuni, A., & Arif, S. (2023). Misconception Analysis Reviewed from Learning Styles with. Certainty of Response Index. Jurnal Tadris IPA Indonesia, 3(1), 69–82.

Halimatusya'diah, S., Helsy, I., & Sari. (2021). Pembuatan Media Pembelajaran UNO SPIN KIMIA Pada Materi Sistem Periodik Unsur. Jurnal Gunung Djati Conference Series. 2, ISSN: 2774-6585

Hidayat, F. A., Irianti, M., & Faturrahman. (2020). Analisis Miskonsepsi Siswa dan Faktor Penyebabnya pada Pembelajaran Kimia di Kabupaten Sorong. Jurnal Inovasi Pembelajaran IPA, 1(1), 1-8.

Izza, RI, Nurhamidah, N., & Elvinawati, E. (2021). Analysis of Students' Misconceptions Using the Cri (Certainty of Response Index) Essay Assisted Diagnostic Test on Acid Base Topics. Allotrop, 5(1), 55–63. https://doi.org/10.33369/ atp.v5i1.16487

Kurniawati, Y. (2018). Research Methods: Field of Chemical Education. Pekanbaru: Light of Paradise.

Magdalena, I., Fauziah, SN, Faziah, SN, & Nupus, FS (2021). Validity Analysis, Reliability, Difficulty Level and Distinguishing Power of Final Semester Exam Questions for Theme 7, Class III, Sdn Karet 1 Sepatan. BINTANG: Journal of Education and Science, 3(2), 198–214.

Mellyzar, M., Fakhrah, F., & Isnani, I. (2022). Analysis of High School Students' Misconceptions: Using Three Tier Multiple Choice Instrument on Atomic Structure Material with the Certanty of Response Index (CRI) Technique. Edukatif: Journal of Educational Sciences, 4(2), 2556–2564. https://doi.org/10.31004/edukatif.v4i2.2438

Nisa, K., & Sudrajat, A. (2023). Development of Five-Tier Diagnostic Test Instrument to Identify Misconceptions of Grade XI Students on Reaction Rate Material. PENDIPA Journal of Science Education, 7(2), 127–136. https://doi.org/ 10.33369/pendipa.7.2.127-136

Okmarisa & Hasmina. (2021). Identification of Misconceptions and Causes of Misconceptions Electrolyte and Nonelectrolyte Solution Material Using Four Tier Multiple Choice Diagnostic Test. Configuration, 5(1), 23–31.

Ritonga, PS, & Yasthophi, A.-. (2019). Development of Diagnostic Test Instruments Multiple Choice Four Tier On Chemical Bonding Material. Configuration: Journal of Applied Chemistry Education, 3(1),23. https://doi.org/10.24014/ konfigurasi.v3i1.6797

Rosa, Y. H. E., Nawawi, E., & Sari, N. A. (2024). Implementation of a Teaching at The Right Level Approach to Improve Chemistry Learning Outcomes at X.3 SMAN 5 Palembang. Journal of Chemistry Education and Learning.13(1). 101-112.

Rosita, I., Liliawati, W., & Samsudin, A. (2020). Development of the FiveTier Instrument Newton's Laws Test (5TNLT) to Identify Students' Misconceptions and Causes of Misconceptions (Development of the Five-Tier Newton's Laws Test (5TNLT) Instrument to Identify Students' Misconceptions and Causes of Misconception. Journal of Physics Education and Technology, 6(2), 297–.

Siska, & Ritonga, PS (2021). Acid Base Using Four-Tier Diagnostic Test. JEDCHEM Sugiyono. (nd). Educational Research Methods: Quantitative, Qualitative, R & D Approaches D. andung: Alfabeta Publisher. Suparno, P. (nd). Misconceptions and Changes in Physics Education Concepts. PT.Grasindo.

Trisan Amelia, Rina Elvia, DH (2022). Identification of Students' Misconceptions in Chemistry Learning Using the Four-Tier Diagnostic Test Method at State Senior High School 03, Bengkulu City.

Wahyuningtyas, W., Sumarti, S. S., Susilaningsih, E., & Wijayati, N. (2020). Analisis Miskonsepsi Asam Basa Menggunakan Instrumen Diagnostic Test Terintegrasi Multirepresentasi Berbasis Web. Chemistry in Education, 9(1), 1-7.

Widoyoko, E. P. (2012). Teknik Penyusunan Instrumen. Pustaka Pelajar.

Yusran. (2020). Analysis of students' misconceptions using certainly of response index ( cri ) in the. 5(2), 210–220. https://doi.org/10.30870/educhemia.v5i2.8285


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.