The purpose of this study was to develop a valid and reliable scientific literacy test on buffers and to assess the eleventh graders’ scientific literacy. This study applied a survey research design. This research instrument was developed by own. The development was carried out in five steps, namely, a review of the 2018 PISA scientific literacy framework and buffer subject matter, development of test items, experts’ judgment, pilot study, and finalization of the instruments. Meanwhile, a scientific literacy survey was conducted on 71 eleventh graders of a high level of senior high school in Malang Regency. The developed scientific literacy test consists of 22 valid items with a Cronbach’s Alpha reliability coefficient of 0.867. The average score of the respondents’ scientific literacy was 74.61 out of a maximum score of 100 (high category).
REFERENCES
1.
C. T.
Forbes
, K.
Neumann
, and A.
Schiepe-Tiska
, “Patterns of inquiry-based science instruction and student science achievement in PISA 2015
,” International Journal of Science Education
, vol. 42
, no. 5
, Art. no. 5, Mar
. 2020
, doi: .2.
OECD
, PISA 2018 Results (Volume I): What Students Know and Can Do
. OECD
, 2019
. doi: .3.
MoEC
, “Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Republik Indonesia Nomor 20 Tahun 2016 tentang Standar Kompetensi Lulusan Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah
.” Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Republik Indonesia
, Jun. 28, 2016. Available: http://repositori.kemdikbud.go.id4.
MoEC
, “Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Republik Indonesia Nomor 22 Tahun 2016 tentang Standar Proses Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah
.” Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Republik Indonesia
, Jun. 28, 2016
. [Online]. Available: http://repositori.kemdikbud.go.id5.
S.
Kapelari
, Garden Learning: A Study on European Botanic Gardens Collaborative Learning Processes
. Ubiquity Press
, 2015
. doi: .6.
H.
Fives
, W.
Huebner
, A. S.
Birnbaum
, and M.
Nicolich
, “Developing a Measure of Scientific Literacy for Middle School Students: DEVELOPING A MEASURE OF SCIENTIFIC LITERACY
,” Sci. Ed.
, vol. 98
, no. 4
, Art. no. 4, Jul
. 2014
, doi: .7.
OECD
, PISA 2018 Assessment and Analytical Framework
. OECD
, 2019
. doi: .8.
Y.
Shwartz
, R.
Ben-Zvi
, and A.
Hofstein
, “The use of scientific literacy taxonomy for assessing the development of chemical literacy among high-school students
,” Chem. Educ. Res. Pract.
, vol. 7
, no. 4
.9.
OECD, Ed.,
PISA 2015 assessment and analytical framework: science, reading, mathematic and financial literacy
. Paris
: OECD Publishing
, 2016
.10.
C.
Cigdemoglu
, H. O.
Arslan
, and A.
Cam
, “Argumentation to foster pre-service science teachers’ knowledge, competency, and attitude on the domains of chemical literacy of acids and bases
,” Chem. Educ. Res. Pract.
, vol. 18
, no. 2
, Art. no. 2
, 2017
, doi: .11.
Muntholib,
E.
Khusmawardani
, Y.
Utomo
, Muchson, and Yahmin, “Development and implementation of multiple-choice chemical literacy survey in acid-base chemistry,”
Perm, Russia
, 2020
, p. 020013
. doi: .12.
Muntholib,
A. H.
Mauliya
, Y.
Utomo
, and M.
Ibnu
, “Assessing high school student’s chemical literacy on salt hydrolysis
,” IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci.
, vol. 456
, p. 012065
,.13.
M.
Muntholib
, S.
Ibnu
, S.
Rahayu
, F.
Fajaroh
, S.
Kusairi
, and B.
Kuswandi
, “Chemical Literacy: Performance of First Year Chemistry Students on Chemical Kinetics
,” Indones. J. Chem.
, vol. 20
, no. 2
, Art. no. 2, Mar
. 2020
, doi: .14.
OECD
, Measuring Student Knowledge and Skills: The PISA 2000 Assessment of Reading, Mathematical and Scientific Literacy
. OECD
, 2000
. doi: .15.
Y.
Shwartz
, R.
Ben-Zvi
, and A.
Hofstein
, “The use of scientific literacy taxonomy for assessing the development of chemical literacy among high-school students
,” Chem. Educ. Res. Pract.
, vol. 7
, no. 4
.16.
R.
Thummathong
and K.
Thathong
, “Chemical literacy levels of engineering students in Northeastern Thailand
,” Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences
, vol. 39
, no. 3
, pp. 478
–487
.17.
J. W.
Creswell
, Educational research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research.
2015
.18.
A. L.
Chandrasegaran
, D. F.
Treagust
, and M.
Mocerino
, “The development of a two-tier multiple-choice diagnostic instrument for evaluating secondary school students’ ability to describe and explain chemical reactions using multiple levels of representation
,” Chem. Educ. Res. Pract.
, vol. 8
, no. 3
, pp. 293
–307
, 2007
, doi: .19.
M. I. M.
Damanhuri
, D. F.
Treagust
, M.
Won
, and A. L.
Chandrasegaran
, “High School Students’ Understanding of Acid-Base Concepts: An Ongoing Challenge for Teachers
,” INT J ENV SCI ED
, 2016
, doi: .20.
P.
Wattanakasiwich
, P.
Taleab
, M.
Sharma
, and I. D.
Johnston
, “Development and implementation of a conceptual survey in thermodynamics
,” International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education
, vol. 21
, pp. 29
–53
, 2013
.21.
V.
de Andrade
, S.
Freire
, and M.
Baptista
, “Constructing Scientific Explanations: a System of Analysis for Students’ Explanations
,” Res Sci Educ
, vol. 49
, no. 3, pp. 787–807
,22.
L. L.
Heng
, J.
Surif
, and C. H.
Seng
, “Individual Versus Group Argumentation: Student’s Performance in a Malaysian Context
,” IES
, vol. 7
, no. 7
, p. 109
, Jun. 2014
, doi: .23.
J.
Jerrim
, M.
Oliver
, and S.
Sims
, “The relationship between inquiry-based teaching and students’ achievement. New evidence from a longitudinal PISA study in England
,” Learning and Instruction
, p. 101310
, Mar. 2020
, doi: .
This content is only available via PDF.
© 2023 Author(s).
2023
Author(s)
You do not currently have access to this content.
