This study aims to identify students’ misconceptions about reaction rate using Google Forms three-tier tests. The integration of three-tier tests into web services has previously been developed by Tan, et al (2019). The digitalization of the three-tier tests allows researchers to organize the grouping of reasons in the second-tier according to the choice of answers in the first-tier. The web service used on the test is Google Forms. For this reason, 21 Google Forms three-tier test items were given to 11th-grade students with a sample of 174 respondents. This research uses descriptive research design. the research steps undertaken include : (1) reviewing the literature, (2) compiling multiple-choice open-ended tests, (3) validation testing by experts, (4) testing multiple-choice open reasoning tests, (5) compiling items Google Forms three-tier tests questions, (6) expert validation test, (7) Google Forms three-tier tests, (8) quality analysis and revision of Google Forms three-tier test questions, (9) data collection using a Google Forms three-tier tests, (10) Google Forms three-tier tests data analysis for identification of misconceptions. Analysis of the results of the study showed that the highest percentage of misconceptions experienced by students about the concept of factors affecting the rate of reaction. The conclusion is that the Google Forms three-tier test can be used to identify students’ misconceptions about the reaction rate.

1.
Sirhan
G.
Learning Difficulties in Chemistry : An Overview.
2007
;
4
(
2
):
2
20
.
2.
Kirik
O.
,
Zgecan
T.
,
Boz
Y.
Research and Practice Cooperative learning instruction for conceptual change in the concepts of chemical kinetics w.
2012
;(
2009
):
221
36
.
3.
Kolomu
A.
,
Tekin
S.
Chemistry Teachers ’ Misconceptions Concerning Concept of Chemical Reaction Rate.
2011
;
3
(
2
):
84
101
.
4.
Chang
R.
Chemistry.
2010
.
1
1170
p.
5.
Brown
TL
,
LeMay
HE
,
Bursten
BE
,
Murphy
CJ
,
Woodward
PM
,
Soltzfus
MW
.
Chemistry: The Central Science.
2015
.
1
1246
p.
6.
Whitten
K.
,
Davis
R.
,
Peck
M.
,
Stanley
G.
Chemistry.
2014
.
1
1190
p.
7.
Silberberg
MS
.
Chemistry: The Molecular Nature of Matter and Change.
2009
.
1
1221
p.
8.
McMurry
JE
,
Fay
RC
.
Chemistry.
2012
.
1
1075
p.
9.
Yan
YK
,
Subramaniam
R.
Research and Practice nature of students ’ alternative conceptions on
.
Chem Educ Res Pract [Internet].
2017
; Available from:
10.
Luxford
CJ
,
Bretz
SL
.
Development of the Bonding Representations Inventory To Identify Student Misconceptions about Covalent and Ionic Bonding Representations
.
J Chem Educ.
2014
;
91
:
312
20
.
11.
Gurel
DK
,
Eryılmaz
A
,
East
M
,
Mcdermott
LC
.
A Review and Comparison of Diagnostic Instruments to Identify Students ’ Misconceptions in Science.
2015
;
11
(
5
):
989
1008
.
12.
Pesman
H.
,
Eryilmaz
A.
Development of a Three-Tier Test
.
J Educ Res.
2010
;
103
:
208
22
.
13.
Hasan
S.
,
Bagayoko
D.
,
Kelley
EL
.
Misconceptions and the Certainty of Response Index (CRI)
.
1999
;
294
.
14.
Tan
KCD
,
Taber
KS
,
Liew
YQ
,
Teo
KLA
.
A web-based ionisation energy diagnostic instrument: Exploiting the affordances of technology
.
Chem Educ Res Pract.
2019
;
20
(
2
):
412
27
.
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.