Mathematical Refractive Thinking Ability in Multivariable Calculus: Instrument Design and Quality of Use
(1) Department of Mathematik Education, Institut Agama Islam Negeri Batusangkar, West Sumatra, Indonesia
(2) Department of Mathematics Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, West Java, Indonesia
(3) Department of Mathematics Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, West Java, Indonesia
(*) Corresponding Author
Abstract
Mathematical refractive thinking ability must be given in every lecture because it is needed in decision making. This study aims to produce a quality mathematical refractive thinking ability instrument, especially for calculus material. Instrument quality is measured in terms of validity and reliability. Content validity, construct validity and face validity were assessed by three material experts. The instrument was tested by 32 mathematics education students to measure empirical validity and reliability. This research resulted in three items of mathematical refractive thinking ability tests that are valid and have instrument reliability in the medium category.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Adams, W. K., & Wieman, C. E. (2011). Development and Validation of Instruments to Measure Learning of Expert‐Like Thinking. International journal of science education, 33(9), 1289-1312. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.512369.
Azwar, S. (2016). Reliabilitas dan Validitas, Edisi Keempat. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
Burton, L. J., & Mazerolle, S. M. (2011). Survey Instrument Validity Part I: Principles of Survey Instrument Development and Validation in Athletic Training Education Research. Athletic Training Education Journal, 6(1), 27-35. https://doi.org/10.4085/1947-380X-6.1.27.
Colton, D., & Covert, R. W. (2007). Designing and Constructing Instruments for Social Research and Evaluation. John Wiley & Sons.
Drost, E. A. (2011). Validity and Reliability in Social Science Research. Education Research and Perspectives, 38(1), 105-123.
Gall, M. D. & Borg, W. R. (2003). Educational Research: An Introduction. Longman Publishing.
Gliem, J. A., & Gliem, R. R. (2003). Calculating, Interpreting, and Reporting Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability Coefficient for Likert-Type Scales. Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education.
Hamdi, S., Kartowagiran, B. & Haryanto (2018). Developing a Testlet Model for Mathematics at Elementary Level. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 375-390. -390. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji. 2018.11326a.
Harjo, B., Kartowagiran, B., & Mahmudi, A. (2019). Development of Critical Thinking Skill Instruments on Mathematical Learning High School. International Journal of Instruction, 12(4), 149-166. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12410a.
Hoogland, K., Pepin, B., Bakker, A., de Koning, J., & Gravemeijer, K. (2016). Representing Contextual Mathematical Problems in Descriptive or Depictive Form: Design of an Instrument and Validation of its Uses. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 50, 22-32. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.stueduc. 2016.06.005.
Laine, A., Näveri, L., Pehkonen, E., Ahtee, M., & Hannula, M. S. (2018). Connections of Primary Teachers’ Actions and Pupils’ Solutions to an Open Problem. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(5), 967-983. https://doi.org /10.1007/s10763-017-9809-3.
Lestari, K.E. & Yudhanegara, M. R. (2015). Penelitian Pendidikan Matematika: Panduan Praktis Menyusun Skripsi, Tesis dan Karya Ilmiah dengan Pendekatan Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan Kombinasi Disertai dengan Model Pembelajaran dan Kemampuan Matematika. Bandung: Refika Aditama.
Karanicolas, P. J., Bhandari, M., Kreder, H., Moroni, A., Richardson, M., Walter, S. D., ... & Collaboration for Outcome Assessment in Surgical Trials (COAST)
Musculoskeletal Group. (2009). Evaluating Agreement: Conducting a Reliability Study. JBJS, 91(Supplement_3), 99-106. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.H.01624.
Kashefi, H., Ismail, Z., Yusof, Y. M., & Rahman, R. A. (2012). Fostering Mathematical Thinking in the Learning of Multivariable Calculus through Computer-Based Tools. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 5534-5540. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.47.
Kimberlin, C. L., & Winterstein, A. G. (2008). Validity and Reliability of Measurement Instruments Used in Research. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 65(23), 2276-2284. https://doi.org/10.2146/ajhp070364.
Mardapi, D. (2008). Teknik Penyusunan Instrumen Tes dan Non Tes. Yogyakarta: Mitra Cendekia Press.
Maslukha, M., Lukito, A., & Ekawati, R. (2018). Refractive Thinking Profile in Solving Mathematical Problem Reviewed from Students Math Capability. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 947(1), hlm. 012022. IOP Publishing. doi: 10.1088/ 1742-6596/947/1/012022.
Mumu, J., & Tanujaya, B. (2019). Measure Reasoning Skill of Mathematics Students. International Journal of Higher Education, 8(6), 85-91. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v8n6p85
Muntholib, J. M., Pratiwi, Y. N., Muchson, R. J., & Yahmin, S. R. (2017). Development of Simple Multiple-Choice Diagnostic Test of Acid-Base Concepts to Identify Students’ Alternative Conceptions. In 1st Annual International Conference on Mathematics, Science, and Education (ICoMSE 2017). Atlantis Press (pp. 251-268).
Pagano, M. & Roselle, L. (2009). Beyond Reflection: Refraction and International Experiential Learning. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad. 18, 217-229.
Pardimin, P., Widodo, S. A., & Purwaningsih, I. E. (2017). Analisis butir soal tes pemecahan masalah matematika. Wacana Akademika: Majalah Ilmiah Kependidikan, 1(1).
Peraturan Presiden Republik Indonesia Nomor 8 Tahun 2012 tentang Kerangka Kualifikasi Nasional Indonesia.
Prayitno, A. (2015). Proses Berpikir Refraktif Mahasiswa dalam Menyelesaikan Masalah Matematika. (Disertasi). Pascasarjana Universitas Negeri Malang.
Prayitno, A., Sutawidjaja, A., Subanji & Muksar, M. (2014a). Konstruksi Teoritik tentang Berpikir Refraksi dalam Matematika. Dalam Widodo, dkk (Eds.), Prosiding Seminar Nasional Pendidikan Matematika Ke-2 (hlm. 58-68). Yogyakarta: PPPPTK Matematika.
Prayitno, A., Sutawidjaja, A., Subanji & Muksar, M. (2014b). Proses Berpikir Refraksi Siswa Menyelesaikan Masalah Data “Membuat Keputusan”. Dalam Prosiding Seminar Nasional TEQIP (Teachers Quality Improvement Program) dengan tema “Membangun Karakter Bangsa melalui Pembelajaran Bermakna TEQIP (hlm. 154-162). Malang: Universitas Negeri Malang.
Prihati, C. N., & Wijayanti, P. (2017). Profil Berpikir Refraktif Siswa SMP dalam Memecahkan Masalah Geometri Ditinjau dari Tipe Kepribadian Keirsey. Mathedunesa: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Matematika, 1(6), 48-57.
Purwaningsih, I., Widodo, S., Harini, E., Kusumaningrum, B., Putrianti, G., & Muanifah, M. (2018). Adaptation Measuring Instrument Keyrsey Temperament
Sorter. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Science and Technology for an Internet of Things. European Alliance for Innovation (EAI).
Salvucci, S., Walter, E., Conley, V., Fink, S., & Saba, M. (1997). Measurement Error Studies at the National Center for Education Statistics. Washington: National Center for Education Statistics.
Schober, P., Boer, C., & Schwarte, L. A. (2018). Correlation coefficients: appropriate use and interpretation. Anesthesia & Analgesia, 126(5), 1763-1768. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE. 0000000000002864.
Scholtes, V. A., Terwee, C. B., & Poolman, R. W. (2011). What Makes a Measurement Instrument Valid and Reliable?. Injury, 42(3), 236-240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2010.11.042.
Setiawan, A., & Mardapi, D. (2019). The Development of Instrument for Assessing Students' Affective Domain Using Self-and Peer-Assessment Models. International Journal of Instruction, 12(3), 425-438. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12326a.
Sugiyono. (2015). Penelitian dan Pengembangan. Bandung: Alfabeta.
Taber, K. S. (2018). The Use of Cronbach’s Alpha When Developing and Reporting Research Instruments in Science Education. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1273-1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2.
Wichit, N., Mnatzaganian, G., Courtney, M., Schulz, P., & Johnson, M. (2018). Psychometric Testing of the Family‐Carer Diabetes Management Self‐Efficacy Scale. Health & Social Care in the Community, 26(2), 214-223. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.12511.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30738/indomath.v4i2.2
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2021 Isra Nurmai Yenti, Yaya S Kusuma, Jarnawi Afgani Dahlan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.