Procedural Knowledge Instruments for Grade IV Elementary School

Authors

  • Ni Luh Putu Widiastiningsih Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha
  • Kadek Yudiana Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha
  • I Wayan Widiana Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.23887/jere.v5i3.34338

Keywords:

procedural knowledge, development, R&D model

Abstract

The assessment process is not far from using the instrument as a tool in measurement. Some schools have not been able to use instruments to measure the ability of students' knowledge dimensions, one of which is procedural knowledge. Many factors influence such as the lack of teacher motivation in assessing students' procedural knowledge and there is no procedural knowledge instrument. This study aims to produce a valid and reliable procedural knowledge instrument on Theme 6 grade IV Elementary School. This research is development research conducted in ten stages, according to Brog & Gall, namely: Researching and collecting information, reading literature, making observations, and preparing reports on development needs; Planning prototype components to be developed, defining, formulating goals, determining the sequence of activities; Develop initial products; Conduct expert team test; Revise the initial based on the results of product trials; Conduct main field trials; Revise the product based on the results of field trials; Conduct operational field trials; Carry out final revision of field test products, and Conduct dissemination and implementation. The subjects in this study were 5 material expert lecturers, 22 students in small groups, and 141 students in large groups. In this study, data collection was carried out by interviews, observation, documentation, questionnaires, validity tests, reliability tests, discriminatory tests, level tests. The difficulty, and distractor analysis. From the results of this study we found that the prototype of the procedural knowledge instrument development was carried out in four stages, the procedural knowledge instrument was declared valid with the criteria pbi > rtable 5%, the procedural knowledge instrument was declared to have reliability (0.934). Based on the results of the study, it can be concluded that the procedural knowledge instrument for fourth-grade elementary school students has met the valid and reliable criteria.

Author Biographies

Ni Luh Putu Widiastiningsih, Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha

PGSD

Kadek Yudiana, Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha

PGSD

I Wayan Widiana, Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha

PGSD

References

Agung, A. A. G. (2014). Metodologi Penelitian Pendidikan. Aditya Media Publishing.

Anita, A., Tyowati, S., & Zuldafrial, Z. (2018). Analisis Kualitas Butir Soal Fisika Kelas X Sekolah Menengah Atas. Edukasi: Jurnal Pendidikan, 16(1), 35–47. https://doi.org/10.31571/edukasi.v16i1.780.

Anshori, M., & Iswati, S. (2009). Uji Validitas dan Reliabilitas Instrumen Penelitian Kuantitatif. Jurnal Ilmiah Kependidikan, 7(1), 17–23. https://dx.doi.org/10.18592/tarbiyah.v7i1.2100.

Arifin, Z. (2017). Kriteria Instrumen dalam Suatu Penelitian. Jurnal Theorems (the Original Research of Mathematics), 2(1), 28–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.31949/th.v2i1.571.

Arisana, A. L., & Ismani. (2016). Analisis Kualitas Soal Pra Ujian Nasional Mata Pelajaran Ekonomi Akuntansi. Jurnal Pendidikan Akuntansi Indonesia, 14(1), 78–97.

Candiasa, I. M. (2010). Pengujian Instrumen Penelitian Disertai Aplikasi ITEMAN dan BIGSTEPS. Undiksha Press.

Carrington, S., Saggers, B., Webster, A., Harper-Hill, K., & Nickerson, J. (2020). What Universal Design for Learning Principles, Guidelines, and Checkpoints are Evident in Educators’ Descriptions of Their Practice When Supporting Students on the Autism Spectrum? International Journal of Educational Research, 102, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101583.

Dewi, N. D. L., & Prasetyo, Z. K. (2016). Pengembangan Instrumen Penilaian IPA untuk Memetakan Critical Thinking dan Practical Skill Peserta Didik SMP. Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan IPA, 2(2), 213. https://doi.org/10.21831/jipi.v2i2.11963.

Effendi, H., & Hendriyani, Y. (2018). Pengembangan Model Blended Learning Interaktif dengan Prosedur Borg and Gall. 62–70. https://doi.org/10.31227/osf.io/zfajx.

Eivind, K., & Ytterhaug, B. O. (2020). Measuring Mathematical Identity in Lower Secondary School. International Journal of Educational Research, 103(7491), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101620.

Fitriani, V., & Artikel, I. (2017). Analisis Soal Ulangan Harian pada Materi Perubahan Lingkungan di Kelas X SMA di Kota Padang. Jurnal Biologi Dan Pendidikan Biologi, 3(1), 36–43. https://doi.org/10.22202/bc.2017.v3i1.2724.

Hanafy, M. S. (2014). Konsep Belajar dan Pembelajaran. Lentera Pendidikan : Jurnal Ilmu Tarbiyah Dan Keguruan, 17(1), 66–79. https://doi.org/10.24252/lp.2014v17n1a5.

Hanifah, N. (2014). Perbandingan Tingkat Kesukaran, Daya Pembeda Butir Soal Pilihan Ganda Asosiasi Mata Pelajaran Ekonomi. SOSIO E-KONS, 6(1), 41–55. https:// dx.doi.org/10.30998/sosioekons.v6i1.1715.

Haviz, M. (2018). Designing and Developing Teaching Material of Human Anatomy With Thinking Map: What Is Internal Relevance and Consistency? Edusains, 10(1), 38–45. https://doi.org/10.15408/es.v10i1.7206.

Hellstrand, H., Korhonen, J., Räsänen, P., Linnanmäki, K., & Aunio, P. (2020). Reliability and Validity Evidence of the Early Numeracy Test for Identifying Children at Risk for Mathematical Learning Difficulties. International Journal of Educational Research, 102, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101580.

Hery Susanto, Achi Rinaldi, N. (2015). Analisis Validitas Reabilitas Tingkat Kesukaran dan Daya Beda pada Butir Soal Ujian Akhir Semester Ganjil Mata Pelajaran Matematika. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 6(2), 203–217. https://doi.org/10.18907/jjsre.37.3_343_4.

Iskandar, A., & Rizal, M. (2018). Analisis Kualitas Soal di Perguruan Tinggi Berbasis Aplikasi TAP. Jurnal Penelitian Dan Evaluasi Pendidikan, 22(1), 12–23. https://doi.org/10.21831/pep.v22i1.15609.

Junike, Yusrizal, H. (2016). Pengembangan dan Implementasi Instrumen Tes untuk Mengukur Pengetahuan Prosedural dengan Menggunakan Pendekatan Inkuiri di SMA Negeri 10 Banda Aceh. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains Indonesia, 8(2), 45–55. http://e-repository.unsyiah.ac.id/JPSI/article/view/6584.

Khamidah, L. (2017). Pemahaman Konseptual dan Pengetahuan Prosedural Siswa Kelas VIII dalam Penyelesaian Soal Matematika pada Materi Sistem Persamaan Linier Dua Variabel. Prosiding SI MaNis (Seminar Nasional Integrasi Matematika Dan Nilai Islami, 1(1), 611–616. http://conferences.uin-malang.ac.id/index.php/SIMANIS/article/view/297.

Laela Umi Fatimah, K. A. (2019). Analisis Kesukaran Soal, Daya Pembeda dan Distraktor. Jurnal Komunikasi Dan Pendidikan Islam, 8(2), 37–64. https://doi.org/10.36668/jal.v8i2.115.

Loka Son, A. (2019). Instrumentasi Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Matematis: Analisis Reliabilitas, Validitas, Tingkat Kesukaran dan Daya Beda Butir Soal. Gema Wiralodra, 10(1), 41–52. https://doi.org/10.31943/gemawiralodra.v10i1.8.

Mujianto, S. (2017). Analisis Daya Beda Soal, Taraf Kesukaran, Butir Tes, Validitas Butir Tes, Interpretasi Hasil Tes Valliditas Ramalan dalam Evaluasi Pendidikan. Jurnal Manajemen Dan Pendidikan Islam 2, 2(2), 192–213. https://dx.doi.org/10.26594/dirasat.v2i2.879.

Mulholland, S. (2016). ADHD-Specific Knowledge and Attitudes of Teachers (ASKAT): Development and Validation of A New Research Instrument. International Journal of Educational Research, 77, 109–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2016.03.010.

Ndiung, S., & Jediut, M. (2020). Pengembangan Instrumen Tes Hasil Belajar Matematika Peserta Didik Sekolah Dasar Berorientasi pada Berpikir Tingkat Tinggi. Premiere Educandum : Jurnal Pendidikan Dasar Dan Pembelajaran, 10(1), 94. https://doi.org/10.25273/pe.v10i1.6274.

Novferma, N. (2016). Analisis Kesulitan dan Self-Efficacy Siswa SMP dalam Pemecahan Masalah Matematika Berbentuk Soal Cerita. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 3(1), 76. https://doi.org/10.21831/jrpm.v3i1.10403.

Nurfarida, L., Yusup, P. M., & Komariah, N. (2017). Tingkat Pengetahuan Masyarakat Sekitar Observatorium Bosscha Lembang Mengenai Polusi Cahaya. Jurnal Kajian Informasi Dan Perpustakaan, 5(1), 13. https://doi.org/10.24198/jkip.v5i1.11327.

Nurjanah, & Marlianingsih, N. (2015). Analisis Butir Soal Pilihan Ganda dari Aspek Kebahasaan. Faktor Jurnal Ilmu Kependidikan, 2(1), 69–78. https://dx.doi.org/10.30998/fjik.v2i1.377.g359.

Pane, A., & Darwis Dasopang, M. (2017). Belajar dan Pembelajaran. FITRAH:Jurnal Kajian Ilmu-Ilmu Keislaman, 3(2), 333–352. https://doi.org/10.24952/fitrah.v3i2.945.

Pradipta, Sariyasa, & Lasmawan. (2020). Pengembangan Instrumen Kemampuan Berpikir Kreatif dan Literasi Matematika pada Materi Geometri Peserta Didik Kelas IV Sekolah Dasar. 10(1), 21–30. https://doi.org/10.23887/jpepi.v10i1.3504.

Preston, C. C., & Colman, A. M. (2000). Optimal Number of Response Categories in Rating Scales: Reliability, Validity, Discriminating Power, and Respondent Preferences. Acta Psychologica, 104(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-6918(99)00050-5.

Rahmi Nur Fauziah, I., Syihabudin, S., & Sopian, A. (2020). Analisis Kualitas Tes Bahasa Arab Berbasis Higher Order Thinking Skill (Hots). لسـانـنـا (LISANUNA): Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa Arab Dan Pembelajarannya, 10(1), 45–54. https://doi.org/10.22373/ls.v10i1.7805.

Rusmawan, P. N. (2018). Analisis Butir Soal Ujian Akhir Semester Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris Kelas VII SMPN 2 Tegalsiwalan. Linguista: Jurnal Ilmiah Bahasa, Sastra, Dan Pembelajarannya, 2(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.25273/linguista.v2i1.2686.

Salamah, U. (2018). Penjaminan Mutu Penilaian Pendidikan. 2(1), 274–293. https:// dx.doi.org/10.32478/evaluasi.v2i1.79.

Schildkamp, K., van der Kleij, F. M., Heitink, M. C., Kippers, W. B., & Veldkamp, B. P. (2020). Formative Assessment: A Aystematic Review of Critical Teacher Prerequisites for Classroom Practice. International Journal of Educational Research, 103, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101602.

Siregar, N., Armanto, D., & Saragih, S. (2011). Penerapan Pembelajaran Berbasis Masalah untuk Meningkatkan Pemahaman Konsep dan Pengetahuan Prosedural Matematika Siswa SMP. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 5(2), 137–150. http://digilib.unimed.ac.id/id/eprint/754.

Suharman. (2018). Tes sebagai Alat Ukur Prestasi Akademik. Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Agama Islam, 10(1), 93–115. http://ejournal.staindirundeng.ac.id/index.php/tadib/article/view/138.

Suryanto, A. (2012). Konsep Dasar Penilaian dalam Pembelajaran. Evaluasi Pembelajaran Di SD, 5(1), 63–111. https://pustaka.ut.ac.id.

Suzana, A. (2017). Analisis Tingkat Kesukaran dan Daya Beda Butir-Butir Soal Penilaian Akhir Tahun Matematika Kelas X di SMA Negeri 1 Purbalingga. MathGram Matematika, 2(2), 1–8. https://ejournal.unugha.ac.id/index.php/mthg/article/view/172.

Tohirin. (2012). Metode Penelitian Kualitatif dalam Pendidikan dan Bimbingan Konseling. PT Raja Grafindo Persada.

Yani, R. (2016). Pengembangan Instrumen dan Bahan Ajar untuk Meningkatkan Kemampuan Komunikasi, Penalaran, dan Koneksi Matematis dalam Konsep Integral. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan, 13(1), 44–52. http://jurnal.upi.edu/penelitian-pendidikan/view/1390.

Yulistianti, H. D., & Megawati, E. (2019). Analisis Instrumen Tes Higher Order Thinking Matematika SD. 13(1), 41–54. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/96cf/d86879287947093721888b83bee0d39950d2.pdf.

Yusuf, M. (2015). Asesmen dan Evaluasi Pendidikan Pilar Penyedia Informasi dan Kegiatan Pengendalian Mutu Pendidikan. Prenadamedia Group.

Zahro, I. F. (2015). Penilaian dalam Pembelajaran Anak Usia Dini. Tunas Siliwangi, 1(1), 92–111. https://doi.org/10.22460/ts.v1i1p92-111.95.

Downloads

Published

2021-08-04

How to Cite

Widiastiningsih, N. L. P., Yudiana, K., & Widiana, I. W. (2021). Procedural Knowledge Instruments for Grade IV Elementary School. Journal of Education Research and Evaluation, 5(4), 498–506. https://doi.org/10.23887/jere.v5i3.34338

Issue

Vol. 5 No. 4 (2021): November

Section

Articles

License

Authors who publish with the Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (JERE)  agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. 
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. (See The Effect of Open Access)