Construction of biology critical thinking test of high school students

Full text

JURNAL BIOEDUKATIKA Vol. 9(1) 2021 | 9 – 16
doi.org/10.26555/bioedukatika.v9i1.16887
bioedukatika@uad.ac.id
JURNAL BIOEDUKATIKA
http://journal.uad.ac.id/index.php/BIOEDUKATIKA
2338-6630 (Print) | 2541-5646 (Online)
Construction of biology critical thinking test of high school students
Taufiq Satria Mukti 1, *, Melly Elvira 2, Fantika Febry Puspitasari 3
Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teacher Training, Universitas Islam Negeri Maulana Malik Ibrahim Malang,
Malang, Indonesia
2 3 fantika@mpi.uin-malang.ac.id
* Corresponding author
ARTICLE INFO
ABSTRACT
Article history
Students must have various abilities, one of which is critical
thinking skills. Critical thinking is an ability that is an
indicator of successful learning and is directly related to
real life. Should carry out the development of critical
thinking skills effectively and efficiently in education.
Critical thinking skills of students, accurate measurement
tools are needed. The measuring instrument is in the form
of a test instrument developed through research. Conduct
the researched with a quantitative approach by describing
the characteristics of the critical thinking test instrument.
The research method was the development of a test with
the research subjects of class X MIPA students from seven
public high schools in Kendal Regency with the criteria of
high, medium, and low-ranking schools. Developed the test
in the form of multiple-choice reasoned with three scoring
categories for each item according to the scoring of the
polytomous items in the PCM 1-PL model (Partial Credit
Model 1 Parameter Logistic). The feasibility test of the
critical thinking test instrument was carried out with
experts in measurement, assessment, and Biology Learning
and was tested empirically on 1118 students. The research
data were analyzed using the EXCEL, SPSS 16, QUEST and
PARSCALE applications. The results showed that: (1) The
test instrument with four categories of scores fit the PCM
1-PL model; (2) the test instrument has a high-reliability
value; (3) The test instrument has a right level of difficulty;
(4) The test instrument can be used to measure the ability
of students in the range of -3.7 to 2.9. The test instrument
developed was feasible to be used to measure students'
critical thinking skills with three categories of polytomous
scoring with the PCM 1-PL model.
This is an open access article under the CC–BY-SA license.
Received
Revised
Accepted
June 4, 2020
November 5, 2020
November 16, 2020
Keyword:
Critical thinking
Polytomous scoring
Partial credit model
Reasoned multiple choice
Introduction
Critical thinking is a combination of
mental processes, strategies and a person's
representations that use to solve problems,
make decisions, and learn new concepts
(Sternberg, 1986). This opinion is also
confirmed by Wilson (2004) that critical
thinking is also a unity of understanding
concepts and complex ways of thinking.
The agreement of the idea of critical
thinking is a combined representation. It is
related to knowledge which can be in the
form of concepts, opinions, or ideas in
1 tsatriam@uin-malang.ac.id *; melly@uin-malang.ac.id;

Mukti, et. al. | Construction of biology critical......
10| JURNAL BIOEDUKATIKA
humans to find reasonable and reflective
thinking patterns to responses in the way
of decisions or conclusions to take various
actions on what is believed (Arends, 2012;
Ennis, 2011; Moon, 2007).
In the context of learning, especially
biology, Moon (2007) states that critical
thinking is the result of training and
habituation of daily, continuous learning
activities so that complex thinking
processes will occur. In the learning
process and real life, critical thinking can
be in the form of the ability to respond to
and solve problems related to real
biological objects (Addy et al., 2014). In line
with that, following the nature of biology
as part of science the learning process
carried out by the scientific method must
involve various skills, especially critical
thinking to solve problems (Towle & Twole,
1989). Therefore, we need action to detect
critical thinking skills in students.
Detecting critical thinking skills
according to York et al. (2015) needs to be
done through a process of measuring
students because this ability is an essential
ability that can use as an indicator of the
success of the learning process that has
reached competency standards. Besides,
according to the opinion (Paul & Elder,
2005), the need for critical thinking in
learning is to get used to complex thinking
to conceptualize, synthesize or evaluate
information obtained through observation,
experience, reasoning or reflection.
Measure critical thinking in learning
through a test. Critical thinking tests can
also be used as a form of training and
habituation of ways of thinking to face and
solve problems in real life (Chiras, 1992;
Palm, 2008) so that based on this
description. Critical thinking tests need to
develop because in essence Biology
learning is very close to real problems that
exist in everyday life that require various
responses to find solutions to all problem
conditions (Hidayati, 2016).
Measuring critical thinking skills is
generally done through a measurement
process using a test instrument in the form
of a description. However, essay questions
have weaknesses as described in the study
(McPeck, 2016), test in the way of opinions
had faults and problems that cannot
tolerate in the assessment process. This
problem is the existence of an element of
subjectivity from the assessors when
examining the test results or scoring the
responses and affect the measurement
results that do not reflect the actual
products. Also, the process of scoring
takes a long time is also a weakness of this
test. The implementation of the
assessment of critical thinking skills in the
education sector is still in the low category,
which is around 45% (Lane, 2015). The
results of research conducted Huber and
Kuncel (2016) show that the
implementation of the assessment of
critical thinking skills takes a relatively
long time when compared to the evaluation
of learning outcomes in general. The length
of time is the whole from planning to
implementation. Based on the results of
other research, the assessment of critical
thinking ability still focused on the results
of achieving competency standards in
certain subjects (Anisa, 2017). Thus, not
many researchers have reviewed the
characteristics of the instruments used to
estimate critical thinking skills.
Lack of researchers who measure and
review critical thinking skills with a variety
of test models, it is necessary to use a new
test model which is assumed to use in
estimating abilities accurately. So far,
critical thinking skills are rarely measured
using a multiple-choice test model. It is
influenced by the guessing factor in
implementation (Osterlind, 1998) and
requires particular expertise in compiling
the test items to be used. However,
research Hartini and Sukardjo (2015),
Akbar et al. (2017) found that multiple-
choice tests can measure critical thinking
skills. In physics, similar research was
conducted by Putri and Istiyono (2017) who
found that the critical thinking skills of
high school students in Physics subjects
can be measured using multiple-choice
tests, namely by modifying the regular
multiple-choice model. The model is a
reasoned multiple choice. In the field of
Biology, can also estimate the ability to
think critically with a similar test model
(Mukti & Istiyono, 2018).
The reasoned multiple-choice test
model that developed E Istiyono et al.
(2014) with a polytomous scoring model
with four score categories. In this model,
based on modern measurement theory
(item response theory), analysis with PCM
(Partial Credit Model) can be carried out
(Hambleton et al., 1991). In the PCM model,
the logistical parameter 1 PL means that
the calibration process only includes the
difficulty level of the questions based on
the response, and does not consider the

Mukti, et. al. | Construction of biology critical......
JURNAL BIOEDUKATIKA |11
answer roughly as suggested by Adams
and Khoo (1996). This model is also known
as the tau model or other forms of
development in the RM model (Rasch
Model) (Hambleton et al., 1991). The results
of the study Edi Istiyono et al. (2014) state
that the form of the test is sufficient for
measuring and describing higher-order
thinking skills and critical thinking skills.
That is because the thinking process
involves knowledge and the ability to solve
complex problems. Critical thinking
aspects developed in the test indicators
include assumptions, arguments, analysis,
evaluation, and conclusions.
Based on the description above, the
researchers developed a measuring tool
that can estimate the critical thinking
ability of SMA Negeri students in Biology
Class X Mathematics and Natural Sciences
in Kendal Regency. Data analysis uses IRT
(Item Response Theory) analysis to
describe the characteristics of the
instrument which include: model fit
(Goodness of Fit Test), test reliability,
difficulty level, and test instrument
information function based on existing
criteria. The PCM 1-PL model used involved
three scoring categories. That is based on
differences in the concept of scoring in
predecessor researchers conducted by E
Istiyono et al. (2014). In the field of physics,
can mistake the completion of items using
the counting method for an answer with a
pattern of wrong answer responses and
right reasons. That happens because of
miscalculations or inaccurate factors.
However, in Biology which is emphasized
by B Subali (2009) that misconceptions are
not possible when students can provide
reasons, but the answers are wrong, this
confirms that there is no guessing element
in the scoring model used.
Method
The test development model adopted
from Mardapi (2016) consists of compiling
test specifications, writing tests, content
validity, testing, examining instrument
characteristics based on empirical data,
and taking measurements. This article
analysis of the characteristic of the
instrument on the response data of State
Senior High School students in Biology
Class X MIPA in Kendal Regency. The
quality of the instrument is based on the
information from the analysis of the
characteristics of the instrument.
Developing quality instruments requires
detailed and specific developmental stages
to obtain information capable of describing
the actual conditions.
The first stage of test development is
compiling test specifications based on
determining the competencies to be tested.
The test is a competency in the subject of
Biology subject in class X MIPA SMA Negeri
1 semester which consists of 1) Biological
Scope, 2) Scientific Methods, 3)
Classification, 4) Biodiversity, 5) Fungi, 6)
Protists, 7) Bacteria, 8) Viruses. Meanwhile,
the critical thinking theory used includes:
Aspect 1 (A1) Assumptions, sub-aspect 1
(SA11): determining relevant hypotheses,
sub-aspect 2 (SA12): determining the
results of considerations based on
background and facts; Aspect 2 (A2):
Argument, sub-aspect 1 (SA21): make
arguments based on facts and knowledge,
sub-aspect 2 (ASA22): Identify a cause and
effect/ reason relationship; Aspect 3 (A3):
Analysis, sub-aspect 1 (SA31): Analysis of
the background and purpose of
information, sub-aspect 2 (SA32): linking
information to human activities; Aspect 4
(A4): Evaluation, sub-aspect 1 (SA41):
checking the suitability of a problem with
a solution, sub-aspect 2 (SA42): making
criticism of a problem; Aspect 5 (A5):
Summing up, Sub-aspect 1 (SA51): Inducing
informed thinking, sub-aspect 2 (SA52):
Deducing thinking based on information.
Based on the determination of competence,
it was then compiling test specifications
suitable for use.
Test specification consists of the form
of the test and the length of the test/length
of the test. The format of the test is a
reasoned multiple choice. That is observing
students' critical thinking skills through
the answers and reasons they choose. The
development of critical thinking tests
consists of 45 items with A and B tests,
each of which is 25 points (5 anchors) with
a duration of 90 minutes or the equivalent
of 2 hours of Biology subjects. For each
item, there are five answer choices and five
choices of reasons so that the scoring of
the items is 1-3 scoring.
The second stage is determining
material in Biology competence and writing
test items. Items distribution refers to the
highest percentage of items based on
essential material and material on the
competency standards of Biology class X
material graduates. The matrix serves as
control over the suitability of test items to

Mukti, et. al. | Construction of biology critical......
12| JURNAL BIOEDUKATIKA
aspects, sub-aspects and material of
Biology. The selected material then
becomes a reference for making the grid.
The third and fourth stages are the
stages of arranging the grid and arranging
the items that refer to the grid. The items
consist of two sets A and B with each group
consisting of 20 items and five anchor
items. The available answer choices are
multiple-choice with reasonable answer
choices. The choice of reasoned answers
aims to be able to analyze the critical
thinking skills of students.
The fifth stage of test development is
to determine the form of scoring. The
multiple-choice model argues that it uses a
polytomous scoring model which functions
to determine the critical thinking ability in
each category of answer choices. Analysis
of the response data of students' answers
using the PCM model (Partial Credit Model)
1-PL. The scoring provisions in each
category are: Category-1 if the answer is
wrong and the reason is wrong with a score
of 0; Category-2 if the answer is correct and
the reason is wrong with a score of 1;
Category-3 if the answer is correct and the
reason is correct with a score of 2.
The sixth stage is the validation stage.
Content validity by expert judgment
consisting of measurement, assessment,
Biology Learning experts, and teachers.
Content validity by looking at the
suitability of competencies, indicators and
items from the Biology material in the
critical thinking test instrument. The
purpose of content validity is to determine
the feasibility of the items in terms of
concept, construction, language and the
effectiveness of the items to measure the
level of students' critical thinking skills.
The sixth stage is the validation stage.
Content validity by expert judgment
consisting of measurement, assessment,
Biology Learning experts, and teachers.
Content validity by looking at the
suitability of competencies, indicators and
items from the Biology material in the
critical thinking test instrument. The
purpose of content validity is to determine
the feasibility of the items in terms of
concept, construction, language and the
effectiveness of the items to measure the
level of students' critical thinking skills.
The implementation of a wide-scale
trial of the test subjects was as many as
1118 students of class X MIPA Public
Senior High School in Kendal Regency who
met the criteria for the ability of students
from schools with low, medium and high
categories. The selection is based on the
2017 National Exam Score ranking in the
Biology subject for Public High Schools.
The implementation of the test uses test
sets A and B with the design of seats for
front, back, right, and left students
working on the questions differently and
alternating with the code questions A and
B, as illustrated in the following Figure 1.
Figure 1. Seating design in test
The last stage is to collect data and
analyze data. Data analysis of test
development results in the form of student
responses with the help of Excel, SPSS,
Quest, and Parscale application programs
is in the form of model fit (goodness of fit
test), difficulty level, reliability, and test
information functions.
Results and Discussion
Results of the estimation of the
suitability of the test instrument model
(goodness of fit test) are presented in Table
1.
Table 1. Estimated Test Item Parameters
Criterion
Item
Estimation
Average and standard deviation
-0.14 ± 0.26
Reliability
0.93
MNSQ INFIT mean and standard
deviation
1.01 ± 0.04
Estimation of test parameters with the
QUEST application program is in a suitable
category if it meets the criteria according
to Adams and Khoo (1996) by looking at
the average MNSQ Infit value (Infit Mean of
Square) and its standard deviation value.
The fit score is in the MNSQ Infit range ±
1.00 and the default deviation is 0.00. The
acquisition of the MNSQ Infit value is 1.0,
B
A
teacher's desk
B
A
B
A
A
B
A
B
A
B
B
A
B
A
B
A

Mukti, et. al. | Construction of biology critical......
JURNAL BIOEDUKATIKA |13
and the standard deviation value is 0.04 so
that all items on the test fit for the PCM 1-
PL model. Criteria for the fit of the test
instrument items (goodness of fit test) on
each test item can be seen in Figure 2 which
states that all items are in the value range
of 0.73 to 1.30 so that all items are fit and
fit for use.
Another characteristic of the
instrument's feasibility is the reliability
index. The reliability criteria on the
instrument serve as an indicator of the
stability of the test, describing the
reliability value of the test so that the
measurement results can provide
information, make decisions, accurate
(Hambleton et al., 1991). The instrument
reliability estimates of 0.93 (Guilford,
1956) states that the reliability index
obtained is in the high category and the
test instrument is very suitable to be used
to measure students' critical thinking
skills.
The PCM 1-PL model of the test
instrument needs to pay attention to the
difficulty level of the test items. This test
item is an assumption in the
implementation of tests that can measure
the ability of students by covering all levels
of students' ability both high, medium and
low (Hambleton et al., 1991). The difficulty
level of the test instrument base on the test
results on the following histogram (Figure
2).
Figure 2. Distribution of difficulty levels
The distribution of the difficulty level
of the test instrument is close to the
normal distribution. However, there is no
requirement that one test must have a
difficulty level with the distribution
following the normal distribution
(Bambang. Subali, 2011). Thus, the test
results of the test instrument meet the
requirements and are declared feasible
according to Hambleton et al. (1991)
because it has a difficulty level range of
-2.00 to 2.00.
Table 2. Level of difficulty in aspects and sub-
aspects
A
Average
SA
Average
A1
-0.15
SA11
0.12
SA12
-0.42
A2
0.10
SA21
-0.04
SA22
0.24
A3
-0.05
SA31
-0.16
SA32
0.06
A4
0.04
SA41
0.05
SA42
0.03
A5
0.14
SA51
0.29
SA52
-0.01
Information: A (aspect), SA (Sub-aspect)
The matrix in Table 2 serves to
describe the level of difficulty of the
critical thinking test instrument developed
by the following aspects, sub-aspects of
critical thinking, and biology material.
Table 2 shows the average level of
difficulty of the distribution of test items
according to aspects, sub-aspects and
material of Biology. Still, the emphasis on
the level of difficulty is the distribution of
items that state the level of difficulty in
critical thinking aspects and sub-aspects.
The highest level of difficulty in the critical
thinking aspect is at A5 (Concluding), and
the lowest level of difficulty is at A1
(Assumption). Meanwhile, the sub-aspect
with the highest difficulty level was SA51
(Inducing thought based on information),
and the lowest was SA12 (determining
considerations based on background and
facts).
Analysis with the PCM 1-PL model is to
follow a partial credit, and if the
individual's higher abilities will have a
score in the high stage category as well

Mukti, et. al. | Construction of biology critical......
14| JURNAL BIOEDUKATIKA
(Widhiarso, 2010). The percentage of item
responses with score categories 1, 2, and 3
on the test results of the test instrument is
in Table 3.
Table 3. Percentage of answer in the score
category
A
SA
Score category (%)
1
2
3
A1
SA11
41.49
14.65
44.00
SA12
14.85
7.11
78.04
A2
SA21
25.89
13.27
58.87
SA22
54.20
11.03
34.78
A3
SA31
28.08
5.06
66.86
SA32
37.89
15.95
46.15
A4
SA41
43.08
11.45
45.47
SA42
42.19
6.74
51.07
A5
SA51
53.14
9.55
37.31
SA52
35.79
10.99
53.21
Information: A (aspect), SA (Sub-aspect)
The interpretation of Table 3 is that
the Partial Credit pattern in the test
instrument has characteristics that include
a moderate level of difficulty, this
evidenced by the total percentage between
categories 1, 2 and 3 does not occur
significantly.
The test information function on the
results of the analysis serves as a form of
strengthening the test parameter estimates
for the reliability value (Retnawati, 2015).
In the analysis of IRT, the information
function and SEM (Standard Error of
Measurement) also apply to explain the
functionality, stability and accuracy of the
tests used by calibrating the item
responses to the abilities of students on a
logit scale. The results of the test
information function estimation based on
the test instrument trials in Figure 3.
Figure 3. Information functional and measurement error standards
Response analysis with Parscale shows
that in Figure 3, the critical thinking test
instrument can measure the ability of
students with a range of ability levels of -
2.7 to 2.9. These results conclude that the
test instrument is excellent and feasible
because it can measure students' high or
lowest ability according to the response
data of the test results.
Figure 4. Item example (translate version)
31. Flagellates are parasitic protozoa on red, white blood cells and liver cells. The presence of flagellates in
freshwater is an indicator of water pollution. The life phase is flagella in the extracellular phase and not in
the intracellular phase. The impact is elephantiasis caused by Trypanosoma through a mosquito bite
intermediary host.
The information to be conveyed is ...
a. The existence of Flagellates has a beneficial role for humans.
b. It needs deep environmental concern to create a healthy environment.
c. Protozoa have a role as indicators for uncontaminated waters.
d. Trypanosoma is a group of protozoa that has a negative role on humans.
e. Must be wise in using water to make ends meet.
Reason:
a. Concern for the environment must start from itself to make the environment healthy.
b. Trypanosoma plays a positive role because it functions as a drug.
c. Trypanosoma plays a negative role because it can cause health problems in humans.
d. Trypanosoma is very unlikely to live in the environment around us.
The use of water that is done wisely can make the water still suitable for consumption.

Mukti, et. al. | Construction of biology critical......
JURNAL BIOEDUKATIKA |15
Figure 4 example of test items to
measure critical thinking skills in Biology
Class X Semester 1. One indicator that
students have the ability to think critically
is being able to deduce information from
the substance/content of learning
according to the competencies to be
achieved. This problem sharpens the
ability to think critically about biological
material (Protozoa) as well as examining
information about its application in life.
The answer to the example problem is D
for the answer and C for the reason.
Conclusion
The test instrument fulfils the
requirements to measure the critical
thinking skills of students of SMA Negeri
Class X MIPA in Semester 1 Biology subject.
Two sets of test instruments (Test A and
Test B) with the number of items 25 with
five anchor points fulfil empirical evidence
of model suitability (goodness of fit test)
on the PCM model (Partial Credit Model)
based on the polytomous score of four
categories. The test instrument has a right
level of difficulty with a value range of
-2.00 and 2.00. The test instrument has a
high-reliability value of 0.86, so it qualifies
as a useful measuring tool. The test
instrument can measure critical thinking
skills with the respondent's ability range of
-3.7 to 2.90.
References
Adams, R. J., & Khoo, S. T. (1996).
. The Australian Council
for Educational Research.
Addy, T. M., LePrevost, C., & Stevenson, M.
(2014). Thinking critically in
undergraduate biology: Flipping the
classroom and problem-based
learning.
, (1),
1–9. https://doi.org/10.37514/
DBH-J.2014.2.1.09
Akbar, M. N., Firman, H., & Rusyati, L.
(2017). Developing science virtual
test to measure students’ critical
thinking on living things and
environmental sustainability
theme.
, , 012106.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-
6596/812/1/012106
Anisa, A. (2017). Meningkatkan
keterampilan berpikir kritis peserta
didik melalui pembelajaran IPA
berbasis potensi lokal Jepara.
, (1),
1–11. https://doi.org/10.21831/
jipi.v3i1.8607
Arends, R. (2012). (9th
ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Chiras, D. D. (1992). Teaching critical
thinking skills in the biology &
environmental science classrooms.
,
(8), 464–468. https://doi.org/
10.2307/4449551
Ennis, R. (2011). Critical thinking.
, (2), 5–19.
https://doi.org/10.5840/inquiryct
news201126215
Guilford, J. P. (1956).
(3rd
ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., &
Rogers, H. J. (1991).
. Sage
Publications.
Hartini, H., & Sukardjo, S. (2015).
Pengembangan higher order
thinking multiple choice test untuk
mengukur keterampilan berpikir
kritis IPA kelas VII SMP/MTs.
, (1), 86–
101. https://doi.org/10.21831/jipi.
v1i1.4535
Hidayati, N. (2016). Hasil belajar dan
keterampilan berpikir kritis siswa
Madrasah Tsanawiyah dalam
pembelajaran IPA melalui kerja
ilmiah.
, 118–127.
https://jurnal.uns.ac.id/prosbi/arti
cle/view/5672
Huber, C. R., & Kuncel, N. R. (2016). Does
college teach critical thinking? A
meta-analysis.
, (2), 431–
468. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034
654315605917
Istiyono, Edi, Mardapi, D., & Suparno, S.
(2014). Pengembangan tes
kemampuan berpikir tingkat tinggi
fisika (PysTHOTS) peserta didik
SMA.
, (1), 1–12. https://
doi.org/10.21831/pep.v18i1.2120

Mukti, et. al. | Construction of biology critical......
16| JURNAL BIOEDUKATIKA
Istiyono, E, Mardapi, D., & Suparno, S.
(2014). Effectiveness of reasoned
objective choice test to measure
higher order thinking skills in
physics implementing of
curriculum 2013.
, 101–110.
https://repository.bbg.ac.id/handl
e/399
Lane, S. (2015). Performance assessment. In
L. Darling-Hammond & F. Adamson
(Eds.), (pp.
131–184). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
https://doi.org/10.1002/97811192
10863.ch5
Mardapi, D. (2016).
. Nuha
Litera.
McPeck, J. E. (2016).
. Routledge.
Moon, J. (2007).
(1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org
/10.4324/9780203944882
Mukti, T. S., & Istiyono, E. (2018). Multiple-
choice with reason (MCR) to
measure the critical thinking skill
on natural science: plant and
animal movement system.
, 35–40.
http://seminar.uny.ac.id/icriems/s
ites/seminar.uny.ac.id.icriems/files
/proceeding2018/SE06_Taufiq
Satria Mukti.pdf
Osterlind, S. J. (1998).
(Seconds). Kluwer Academic
Publishers.
Palm, T. (2008). Performance assessment
and authentic assessment: A
conceptual analysis of the
literature.
, ,
Article 4. https://doi.org/10.7275/
0qpc-ws45
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2005).
.
https://www.criticalthinking.org/r
esources/PDF/CT-competencies
2005.pdf
Putri, F. S., & Istiyono, E. (2017). The
development of performance
assessment of stem-based critical
thinking skill in the high school
physics lessons.
, (5), 1269–
1281. http://www.ijese.net/makale
/1894.html
Retnawati, H. (2015). The comparison of
accuracy scores on the paper and
pencil testing vs. computer-based
testing.
, (4),
135–142. http://www.tojet.net/
volumes/v14i4.pdf#page=144
Sternberg, R. J. (1986).
. National Inst. of
Education. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=
ED272882
Subali, B. (2009). Pengembangan tes
pengukuran keterampilan proses
sains pola divergen mata pelajaran
biologi SMA.
, 581–593.
http://staff.uny.ac.id/sites/default
/files/penelitian/Bambang Subali,
Dr/semnas bio _Bambang
Subali_UNY-2009.pdf
Subali, Bambang. (2011). Pengukuran
kreativitas keterampilan proses
sains dalam konteks assessment
for learning.
, (1), 130–144.
https://doi.org/10.21831/cp.v1i1.4
196
Towle, A., & Twole, A. (1989).
. Holt Rinehart & Winston.
Widhiarso, W. (2010).
.
Repository Universitas Gajah Mada.
https://repository.ugm.ac.id/2759
84/
Wilson, M. (2004).
. Routledge. https://doi.
org/10.4324/9781410611697
York, T. T., Gibson, C., & Rankin, S. (2015).
Defining and measuring academic
success.
, ,
Article 5. https://doi.org/10.7275/
hz5x-tx03