Available via license: CC BY-SA 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Phenomenon, 2022, Vol. 12 (No. 1), pp. 48-62
JURNAL PHENOMENON
phenomenon@walisongo.ac.id
Universitas Negeri Jakarta
©2022 Universitas Islam Negeri Walisongo
48
Email: dumayantihelda@gmail.com
ISSN: 2088-7868, e-ISSN 2502–5708
Two-Tier Test: Development of Critical Thinking Instruments for
Ecosystem Concepts
Helda Dumayanti1, Risda Putri Indriani2, Evita Nury
Hariyanti3, Rizhal Hendi Ristanto4, Mieke Miarsyah5
1,2,3,4,5Pendidikan Biologi, Fakultas Matematika dan Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam Universitas Negeri
Jakarta, Indonesia
Abstract
Critical thinking is necessary in improving the quality of education. Students' critical
thinking includes interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, interpretation, and
self-regulation. The two-tier test instrument was developed to determine students
critical thinking skills in the ecosystem at class X MIPA di MAN 1 Bogor City. This
research method used was based on 4D development model (Define, Design,
Develop, and Disseminate). The instrument was tested on two expert validators and
35 students. To test the success rate of the test, validation, reliability, and item
analysis were used. The item anlaysis used is the level of difficulty of the questions
and differentiating power of answer choice. Based on the results of the product trial,
10 valid questions and 5 unvalid questions. The reliability test result was 0,671 which
the interpretation that 45% of respondents considered the instrument developed to
be reliable. In addition, 10 questions are in the difficult category and 5 questions are
in the medium category. The differentiating power of answer choice results was 1
question in the very good category, 6 questions in the good category, 4 questions in
the moderate category, and 4 questions in the poor category. The two-tier test
instrument for ecosystem critical thinking in this study is declared valid and reliable
so this can be used as an instrument in student’s learning.
Kata kunci : 21st century skills, assessment, critical thinking
Two-tier Test : Pengembangan Instrumen Berpikir Kritis
Konsep Ekosistem
Abstrak
Berpikir kritis diperlukan dalam meningkatkan kualitas pendidikan. Berpikir kritis
siswa meliputi interpretasi, analisis, evaluasi, kesimpulan, interpretasi dan regulasi
diri. Instrumen two tier test ini dikembangkan untuk mengetahui keterampilan
berpikir kritis ekosistem siswa kelas X MIPA di MAN 1 Kota Bogor. Penelitian ini
menggunakan model pengembangan 4D (Define, Design, Develop, and
Disseminate). Instrumen diujikan kepada dua validator ahli dan 35 siswa. Untuk
menguji tingkat keberhasilan tes, maka digunakan uji validasi, reliabilitas, dan
analisis butir soal. Analisis butir soal yang digunakan adalah tingkat kesulitan soal
dan daya beda. Berdasarkan hasil uji coba produk diperoleh 10 soal yang valid dan
5 soal tidak valid. Hasil reliabilitas tes sebesar 0,671 dengan interpretasi bahwa 45%
responden menilai instrumen yang dikembangkan dapat dipercaya (reliabel). Selain
Helda Dumayanti, Risda Putri Indriani, Evita Nury Hariyanti, Rizhal Hendi Ristanto, Mieke Miarsyah/
Phenomenon Vol. 12, No. 1, July 2022
49
itu, 10 soal dengan kategori sulit, dan 5 soal kategori sedang. Daya beda soal
menunjukkan 1 soal kategori baik sekali, 6 soal kategori baik, 4 soal kategori cukup,
dan 4 soal kategori kurang. Instrumen two tier test berpikir kritis ekosistem dalam
bentuk pilihan ganda yang telah dikembangkan pada penelitian dinyatakan valid dan
reliabel sehingga dapat digunakan sebagai instrumen dalam pembelajaran siswa.
Kata kunci: Evaluasi, Berpikir Kritis, Keterampilan Abad 21
INTRODUCTION
Evaluation of e-learning-based biology learning can assist teachers in designing
assessment systems and checking student learning outcomes (Zahara, 2015). Learning
evaluation is directed at the components of the input, process and output of learning with
a variety of student growth assessment processes. Learning must pay attention to the
principles, benefits, requirements and objectives of conducting evaluations (Magdalena
et al., 2020). The purpose of the evaluation is to determine the effectiveness and efficiency
of learning (Ngafifah, 2020).
21st century learning prepares students to grasp deep knowledge and apply effective
critical thinking skills to tackle challenges in an ever-changing society. Critical thinking
must be mastered before problem solving, creative thinking, and decision making are
carried out (Ikhsanudin & Subali, 2018). Teachers need to develop critical thinking in the
learning process and make evaluations of biology learning that can open students'
mindsets. Students' critical thinking skills can be trained through providing practice
questions that require critical thinking efforts (Aripin, 2017).
Many researchers define critical thinking, among others, as analyzing arguments or
evidence (Facione, 2015) solving a problem or making a decision (Duchscher, 1999) or
as a process in which a person questions all aspects of a situation and is critical of it
(Simpson & Courtney, 1999). 2002). Based on the research results, students' average
critical thinking skills are low because they have not reached the minimum standard of
completeness (Allanta & Puspita, 2021; Harahap et al., 2020).
According to Fascione, students' critical thinking includes interpretation, analysis,
evaluation, inference, interpretation and self-regulation. Critical thinking can explain
what is thought and how to achieve that assessment. The ideal critical thinker is curious,
broad-minded, open-minded, flexible, fair judgment, wise judgment, willing to rethink,
eager to find relevant information and persistent in seeking research results (Facione,
Helda Dumayanti, Risda Putri Indriani, Evita Nury Hariyanti, Rizhal Hendi Ristanto, Mieke Miarsyah/
Phenomenon Vol. 12, No. 1, July 2022
50
2015). The results of developing critical thinking skills from research on biological
critical thinking in class XI will increase students' ability to access information and define
problems based on accurate facts and data (Sari & Paidi, 2019).
Critical thinking is important to improve the quality of education. Currently, quality
education focuses more on the extent to which students' performance on teacher-made
tests can predict their potential performance on standardized tests. This test as a test for
formative assessment and evaluation. In recent years, assessment is a central issue in the
field of education and is often discussed by many stakeholders from the classroom level
at school, regional, national and international levels. Educational assessment is important
to do to obtain data on the extent to which the level of achievement of educational goals
is implemented (Ikhsanudin & Subali, 2018). The existence of a two tier test is expected
to help teachers to prepare learning according to the abilities of students (Eriza et al.,
2020). Research on the two-tier test was also conducted to assess students' conceptual
understanding of ecosystem material (Firman et al., 2021).
At the school level, formal learning assessment refers to a curriculum designed in
the form of learning for students (Ikhsanudin & Subali, 2018). The importance of
acquiring higher order thinking skills can help students apply information, make
decisions, analyze and solve complex problems (Noviana et al., 2014). Capturing
inference as a sub-question is used to improve higher order thinking skills and identify
students' critical thinking skills (Hala et al., 2019). The purpose of this second level is to
encourage students to acquire high-level thinking and reasoning skills (Yamtinah et al.,
2016). One of the keys to the success or failure of a learning can be seen from the
evaluation or assessment. With the evaluation, we can find out to what extent students'
understanding, as input for teachers regarding the learning process, but can also be used
as a value.
Most forms of evaluation questions are multiple choice. Its easy nature in making
and processing and the results of student answers can come out quickly, making teachers
often use multiple choice models both on tests and exams (Dibattista & Kurzawa, 2011).
In multiple choice questions, students often guess the answer so that it is not valid to
determine the level of students' critical thinking. Treagust developed a two-tier or two-
tier assessment, in which the first-level and second-level multiple choice questions select
reasons for the first-level questions (Treagust, 1986). Two-tier assessment has been used
Helda Dumayanti, Risda Putri Indriani, Evita Nury Hariyanti, Rizhal Hendi Ristanto, Mieke Miarsyah/
Phenomenon Vol. 12, No. 1, July 2022
51
in various disciplines including science. This is in line with st udi previous research that
has been done on the subject of Biology.
Various two-tier assessment studies have been carried out including on archaea and
bacteria material (Kurniasih & Haka, 2017), cell reproduction and division (Sesli & Kara,
2012), genetics (Tsui & Treagust, 2010), photosynthesis (Griffard & Wandersee, 2001).
; Haslam & Treagust, 1987; Treagust, 1986), global warming (Suryawirawati et al.,
2018), and environmental changes (Haka et al., 2019). Critical thinking is very important
as a tool of inquiry and a pervasive and self-correcting human phenomenon (Facione,
2015). The learning process has not been implemented optimally in helping students to
have critical thinking skills (Husna et al., 2021). Rukayah's research results show that the
two-tier test is effective in determining concept understanding and is an alternative for
assessing student learning outcomes (Rukayah et al., 2020).
The instrument that will be developed in this research is a two tier test instrument
in the form of multiple choice to measure ecosystem critical thinking skills. The questions
in the assessment will refer to critical thinking indicators, which include interpretation,
analysis, interference, explanation and self-regulation (Facione, 2015). Based on this
statement, it is necessary to conduct research on "Two-tier Test: Development of Critical
Thinking Instruments for Ecosystem Concepts"
RESEARCH METHODS
The research method uses R&D with the Thiagarajan 4D development model, but
this research does not use the disseminate stage.
Figure 1. 4D Development Model Chart
The define stage aims to collect information related to the development of the instrument
and analyze it such as analyzing core competencies, basic competencies, and making
question grids based on material sub-concepts and indicators of critical thinking skills.
The design stage is the planning or design stage to determine ecosystem sub-concepts,
measured evaluation indicators and critical thinking, formulation of level 1 questions,
Define Design Develop Dissiminate
Helda Dumayanti, Risda Putri Indriani, Evita Nury Hariyanti, Rizhal Hendi Ristanto, Mieke Miarsyah/
Phenomenon Vol. 12, No. 1, July 2022
52
formulation of level 2 questions, answer keys, discussion and reference sources used. In
addition, it also creates a product assessment sheet for expert validation to make it easier
for the assessment.
Table 1. Indicators of critical thinking skills according to Facione in ecosystems
Interpretation
Interpret and classify ecosystem components, interactions
between components and various ecosystems
Analysis
Analyzing the interactions between ecosystem components, the
ecological pyramid
Conclusion
Draw conclusions about food chains, food webs and ecological
pyramids
Evaluation
Evaluating the components that make up the ecosystem and
various ecosystems
Explanation
Explain about food chains, food webs, biogeochemical cycles
Self Regulation
Estimating the impact on problems related to biogeochemical
cycles
The develop stage is by developing the instrument into two levels of test questions
(Two-tier test) in accordance with critical thinking indicators. To determine the success
of the test in measuring students' critical thinking level, validity, reliability, and item
analysis were conducted.
Expert validation is carried out by biology education lecturers and certified
biology teachers using the validity rubric. The validation rubric consists of assessments,
namely material, construction and language. The analysis uses a scale of 1-4. Instruments
that have been tested by expert validators and declared valid, can be tested on students to
get empirical validation. The trial was carried out on 35 students of class X MIPA at
MAN 1 Bogor City 2021/2022. The trial technique was carried out using random
sampling, which was carried out randomly regardless of class strata. Scoring is done on
a scale of 0-1. Students who gave wrong answers at one level or both levels were given a
score of 0. Students who gave correct answers at both levels were given a score of 1. The
results of empirical validation were then processed by the biserial point correlation
validation test formula. A test question is said to be valid if rcount > rtable (α = 0.05 or =
0.01). Furthermore, reliability testing is carried out. Data that gives consistent results can
be said to be reliable. A test is considered reliable if the reliability is high and the standard
error of measurement is small. Reliability test using the KR-20 formula.
The item analysis was carried out by calculating the level of difficulty of the
questions and the power of difference. The difficulty level of the questions is the ability
of students to answer questions correctly at a certain level of proficiency. The goal is to
Helda Dumayanti, Risda Putri Indriani, Evita Nury Hariyanti, Rizhal Hendi Ristanto, Mieke Miarsyah/
Phenomenon Vol. 12, No. 1, July 2022
53
provide an introduction to concepts that require re-teaching. Meanwhile, the
discriminatory power of questions is the ability of the items to be able to distinguish
between students who have mastered the material and students who have not mastered
the material. The higher the discriminatory index, the more likely the question is to
distinguish between students who understand and do not know.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The instrument was developed with the Thiagarajan 4D development model. In the
define stage, information about the test instrument is based on the curriculum and syllabus
for class 10 SMA. Ecosystem material is selected based on the basic competencies
contained in the 2013 curriculum, namely 3.5 Analyzing ecosystem components and
interactions between these components and 3.6 Analyzing data on environmental
changes, their causes, and their impacts on life
Table 2. Written Test Grid
Sub-Concept
Critical Thinking Indicator
∑
Questions
1
2
3
4
5
6
Components of the ecosystem
1
1
2
Interaction between components
1
1
1
3
Food chains and food webs
1
1
2
Ecological pyramid
2
1
3
Kinds of ecosystem
1
1
2
Biogeochemical cycle
1
2
3
Total Questions
3
3
2
2
3
2
15
Description: (1) Interpretation, (2) Analysis, (3), Conclusion, (4) Evaluation (5)
Explanation, (6) Self Regulation (Facione, 2015).
The design stage begins with determining sub-materials, question indicators,
critical thinking indicators, and formulating level 1 and 2 questions, making answer keys
and discussion. Designing a two tier test instrument for critical thinking skills in the form
of multiple choice. The critical thinking skill instrument developed consisted of 15
multiple choice questions. All items of the instrument have been tested for validity and
reliability so that they can represent all indicators of critical thinking skills.
Helda Dumayanti, Risda Putri Indriani, Evita Nury Hariyanti, Rizhal Hendi Ristanto, Mieke Miarsyah/
Phenomenon Vol. 12, No. 1, July 2022
54
Table 3. Instruments and Indicators of Critical Thinking Skills
Sub Material:
Various ecosystems
Question Indicator :
Students can explain the
meaning and animals that
live in the tundra
ecosystem
Key : C-D
Critical Thinking Indicator
: Interpretation
Formulation of level 1
questions
The following include examples
of animals that are in the tundra
ecosystem are ....
a. cow, deer, giraffe
b.snake, crocodile, fish
c. penguin, bear, wolf
d.tiger, tiger, elephant
e. shark, whale, squid
Formulation of level 2
questions
Reason:
a. an ecosystem that is
mostly filled with water
b.Ecosystems with high
rainfall
c. hot and arid ecosystem
d.low temperature
ecosystem
e. an ecosystem where only
one type of plant grows
Discussion :
Tundra is an ecosystem that
has low rainfall and a low
temperature of less than
10℃. Animals that live in
the tundra ecosystem are
penguins, bears and wolves.
Source :
Campbell, Neil A 2008..
Biologi Jilid 3. Jakarta:
Erlangga.
Sub Material:
Ecological pyramid
Question Indicators:
Students can analyze the
comparison of 2 paramida
Key : A - E
Critical Thinking Indicator
: Analysis
Formulation of level 1
questions
The pyramid of numbers
describes the size of the
population density in an area. Of
these pyramids, which pyramid
is the most balanced?
a. pyramid (a), because there are
more producers than
consumers 1
b. pyramid (a), because consumer
1 can eat consumer 2
c. pyramid (b), because
consumer needs 1 can be met
d. pyramid (b), because
consumer 2 has an abundance
of food
e. pyramid (b), because food for
consumers is still fulfilled
Formulation of level 2
questions
Reason:
a. consumer 2 dominates so
that it becomes enough
food for other
consumers.
b.Producers that are few in
number have no effect on
the balance of the pyramid
because they are easy to
breed
c. pyramid (b) will be
profitable for consumers 3
d.consumer 3 has an
abundance of food in the
pyramid
e. producers act as providers
of food, so there must be
plenty of them
Discussion :
The most balanced pyramid
is pyramid A, because there
are more producers than 1
consumers and so on.
Producers act as providers of
food for other organisms.
Pyramid B is unbalanced
because there are 1 more
consumers than producers.
So that if the producer will
run out if there are too many
consumers
Sumber :
Anshori, Moch., dll. 2009.
Biologi 1: Untuk siswa
menengah atas-madrasah
Aliyah. Jakarta: Pusat
Perbukuan.
Helda Dumayanti, Risda Putri Indriani, Evita Nury Hariyanti, Rizhal Hendi Ristanto, Mieke Miarsyah/
Phenomenon Vol. 12, No. 1, July 2022
55
Table 3 shows an example of a two tier test instrument to measure students' critical
thinking skills. Two tier test has two levels of multiple choice, the first level asks students'
critical thinking knowledge about concepts. The second level is students' reasoning from
the answering process at the first level (Sudirman et al., 2021). The second level is
reasoning about the reasons for choosing the answer at the first level. The two tier test
instrument helps in testing students' higher thinking levels than with ordinary multiple
choice questions (Laksono, 2018). The product development or development stage
produces a two-tier test instrument to measure critical thinking skills on the ecosystem
concept. To determine the success of the product, validity, reliability and item analysis
were conducted. The instruments tested were 15 two-level questions.
The validation test was carried out in two steps, namely expert validation and
empirical validation. Expert validation is carried out by two experts. The first validator is
an education lecturer who is an expert in biology and ecosystem education. The second
validator is by a certified biology education teacher. Expert validation is done by
comparing the contents of the instrument, indicators of ecosystem questions, and
indicators of critical thinking skills.
Table 4. Suggestions from expert validators
No.
Expert Validator Suggestions
1.
There is some ambiguous use of language
2.
Inappropriate answer choices
3.
The picture is not clear
4.
More variety in making questions
The development of this instrument is also assessed by the validator. Aspects
assessed by the validator are material, construction and language aspects. The average
results of the two validators then become a benchmark for further to the next stage,
presented in table 5 below:
Table 5. Expert Validation Results
Rated aspect
Percentage
Criteria
Materi
- Relevance between material sub-concepts and critical
thinking indicators
- Formulation of questions and answer keys
- Relevance between material sub-concepts and
measurement
- Relevance between sub-concepts with level, type of
school, and grade level
95%
Very valid
Helda Dumayanti, Risda Putri Indriani, Evita Nury Hariyanti, Rizhal Hendi Ristanto, Mieke Miarsyah/
Phenomenon Vol. 12, No. 1, July 2022
56
Rated aspect
Percentage
Criteria
- Use of the right words and language
Construction
- Clarity of questions and answer choices
- Instructions from the questions given with the correct
answer choices
- Homogeneous answer choices
- There is only one correct answer key
- Case descriptions, tables, figures or graphs work well
92,5%
Very worth it
Language
- Communicative questions
- Sentences using standard spelling according to EYD and
KBBI
- Sentences have no double meaning and misperception
- Using a familiar language (not a local language or a new
absorption language that is not well known)
- Sentence does not offend the respondent
97,5%
Very worth it
Average
95%
Very worth it
From table 5, information is obtained that expert validation produces a two-tier
test instrument to measure critical thinking skills in very feasible criteria and there are
several suggestions to improve the instrument. After repairs are made, empirical
validation is carried out. Empirical validity is carried out to find similarities between
research results and facts in the field. How to collect data using google form and
calculated with biserial points. The validation results show 10 valid questions and 5
invalid questions. Questions can be said to be valid if the value of rcount is greater than
the value of rtable. The rtable value is 0.329 with an alpha value of 0.05. The results of
the 10 valid questions have met the 6 indicators of critical thinking skills that are being
tested. This shows that the 10 questions have been able to test students' critical thinking
skills. Meanwhile, 5 invalid questions must be corrected to meet the standards in
measuring students' critical thinking skills.
The reliability of the test was carried out using the formula of Kuder Richardson-
20 (KR-20). The reliability calculation shows a reliability coefficient of 0.671. Based on
this, it can be interpreted that 45% of respondents considered the instrument developed
to be reliable (reliable), presented in table 6 below:
Table 6. Empirical Validity Results
Criteria
Critical Thinking
Indicator
Question Number
Total
Valid
Interpretation
11
1
Analysis
4, 8, 9
3
Helda Dumayanti, Risda Putri Indriani, Evita Nury Hariyanti, Rizhal Hendi Ristanto, Mieke Miarsyah/
Phenomenon Vol. 12, No. 1, July 2022
57
Criteria
Critical Thinking
Indicator
Question Number
Total
Conclusion
7, 10
2
Evaluation
12
1
Explanation
5, 13
2
Self Regulation
15
1
Amount
10
Invalid
Interpretation
1, 3
2
Evaluasi
2
1
Explanation
6
1
Self Regulation
14
1
Amount
5
Based on table 6 the results of empirical validation, it is known that 10 of the 15
questions can be declared valid. Validity value based on biserial points. This calculation
produces a coefficient value that shows the strength of an item score to support all items
(Zein et al., 2013). The 10 questions have exceeded the correlation coefficient value by
0.329 at an alpha of 0.05. This can be interpreted if the problem is applied to another
population, it will show the same results. In addition, the resulting reliability coefficient
is 0.671 with the interpretation that 45% of respondents consider the developed
instrument to be reliable (reliable). Analysis of the items that are calculated is the level of
difficulty of the questions and the differentiating power of the questions. Item analysis
was carried out to reveal the cause of the invalidity of the item. The level of difficulty of
the questions is done to assess the ability of questions that are too easy or too difficult.
Questions that are too easy or too difficult will affect the distribution of scores, causing a
decrease in the value of the validity of the test to measure critical thinking skills, presented
in table 7 below:
Table 7. Result of Problem Difficulty
Criteria
Question Number
Amount
Sedang
4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15
10
Mudah
1, 2, 3, 11, 12
5
Total
15 Questions
Based on the information in table 7, information about the questions in the easy category
indicates that students can work on the questions. The questions in the medium category
indicate that the upper and lower groups can answer the questions with the appropriate
proportions. That is, students from the upper class tend to answer more than students from
the lower class. The index of difficulty level is calculated on each question. In principle,
the average value obtained by students on the items is called the item difficulty level. The
Helda Dumayanti, Risda Putri Indriani, Evita Nury Hariyanti, Rizhal Hendi Ristanto, Mieke Miarsyah/
Phenomenon Vol. 12, No. 1, July 2022
58
function of the level of difficulty of the items for the purpose of the test, namely questions
with a moderate level of difficulty and easy to use for examination purposes and
measuring students' critical thinking levels.
The discriminatory power index is the ability of items to distinguish between
students who already have high and low critical thinking skills. Basically, evaluation
activities are carried out to measure students' abilities individually. The results show that
the discriminatory power index varies from less, enough, good, and very good. The higher
the discriminatory power index, the better the question is able to distinguish students who
understand and do not understand the material, as shown in table 8 below:
Table 8. Results of Differential Power Questions
Criteria
Question Number
Amount
Very good
10
1
Good
4, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13
6
Enough
5, 6, 7, 15
4
Not enough
1, 2, 3, 14
4
Total
15 Question
From table 8, the following information can be described; Item analysis is used to
uncover the causes of invalid questions. Items that are not valid are items 1, 2, 3, 6, and
14. Items 1, 2 and 3 have a difficulty level of easy questions and a lack of differentiating
power index. The questions are easy because the questions being tested are basic concepts
that have been mastered by students. So that the question has not been able to distinguish
students who already have good critical thinking skills or not. These questions can be
discarded and cannot be used for further tests.
Item number 6 has a moderate level of difficulty and sufficient discriminating
power. While item number 14 has a moderate level of difficulty and less discriminating
power. Although the level of difficulty of the questions is moderate and the power of
difference is sufficient, the validity of the questions remains low. This shows that there
are other factors that affect the validity of the questions in addition to the level of difficulty
of the questions and discriminating power. Other factors such as the use of ambiguous
language so that students are confused about choosing the right answer, the time allocated
to students is too loose because it is done online and internal factors of students such as
fatigue, illness, or other psychological factors. So that questions number 6 and 14 are
discarded and cannot be used for further tests. Based on the discussion, it is known that
there are 10 questions worthy of being used as an instrument for evaluating students'
Helda Dumayanti, Risda Putri Indriani, Evita Nury Hariyanti, Rizhal Hendi Ristanto, Mieke Miarsyah/
Phenomenon Vol. 12, No. 1, July 2022
59
critical thinking skills. This instrument was developed so that the evaluation of critical
thinking skills can be measured specifically. Students who have critical thinking skills
are able to distinguish between facts and opinions that develop in society, are able to make
an action solution and analyze problems, as well as develop skills, expand thinking
processes and increase concentration (Chukwuyenum, 2013; Rizal, 2017).
It was found that the use of a two-level test evaluation instrument to measure
students' critical thinking skills could be done with multiple choice questions. This is in
line with Dharmawati's research (Dharmawati et al., 2016; Walid et al., 2021) which
developed multiple choice questions for critical thinking evaluation with a one-level test
for junior high school students. This study was developed to test the critical thinking skills
of high school students. Therefore, the development of this instrument can raise the level
of evaluation to a higher stage.
CONCLUSION
Based on the research results, the developed two tier test instrument can be used to
determine students' critical thinking skills regarding ecosystem materials. Based on the
results of the product trial, 10 valid questions were obtained and the reliability of the test
was 0.671 with the interpretation that 45% of respondents considered the instrument
developed to be reliable (reliable). Thus, the two tier test instrument for ecosystem critical
thinking in the form of multiple choice that has been developed is valid, feasible and
reliable. In connection with the results of the development of the instrument, it is hoped
that teachers always try to design variations of the two tier test of ecosystem critical
thinking instruments at the level of difficulty of easy, medium and difficult questions.
REFERENCES
Asrul. (2015). Evaluasi Pembelajaran. Bandung, Citapustaka.
Allanta, T. R., & Puspita, L. (2021). Analisis keterampilan berpikir kritis dan self efficacy
peserta didik: Dampak PjBL-STEM pada materi ekosistem. Jurnal Inovasi
Pendidikan IPA, 7(2), 158–170. https://doi.org/10.21831/jipi.v7i2.42441
Aripin, I. (2017). Pengembangan soal-soal pilihan ganda untuk mengukur kemampuan
berpikir kritis siswa pada konsep sistem regulasi manusia untuk jenjang SMA.
Mangifera Edu, 2(1), 43–49. https://doi.org/2622-3384
Bailin, S. (2002). Critical thinking and science education. Science and Education, 11(4),
361–375. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016042608621
Helda Dumayanti, Risda Putri Indriani, Evita Nury Hariyanti, Rizhal Hendi Ristanto, Mieke Miarsyah/
Phenomenon Vol. 12, No. 1, July 2022
60
Chukwuyenum, A. N. (2013). Impact of critical thinking on performance in mathematics
among senior secondary school students in Lagos State. IOSR Journal of Research
& Method in Education (IOSRJRME), 3(5), 18–25. https://doi.org/10.9790/7388-
0351825
Dharmawati, Rahayu, S., & Mahanal, S. (2016). Pengembangan instrumen asesmen
berpikir kritis untuk siswa SMP kelas VII pada materi interaksi makhluk hidup
dengan lingkungan. Jurnal Pendidikan Pengembangan, 1(64), 1598–1606.
Dibattista, D., & Kurzawa, L. (2011). Examination of the quality of multiple-choice items
on classroom tests examination of the quality of multiple-choice items on classroom
tests. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(2).
https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2011.2.4
Duchscher, J. E. B. (1999). Catching the wave : understanding the concept of critical
thinking. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 29(3), 577–583.
Eriza, A. S., Selaras, G. H., Yogica, R., & Armen, A. (2020). Analisis pemahaman peserta
didik tentang konsep materi keanekaragaman hayati menggunakan two-tier multiple
choice test di SMAN 1 Rupat Utara. Atrium Pendidikan Biologi, 5(April), 48–55.
https://doi.org/2656-1700
Facione, P. A. (2015). Critical thinking : What it is and why it counts (7th ed.). Measured
Reason LLC.
Griffard, P. B., & Wandersee, J. H. (2001). The two-tier instrument on photosynthesis:
What does it diagnose? International Journal of Science Education, 23(10), 1039–
1052. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690110038549
Grigg, L. M., & Pomahac, G. U. Y. A. (2016). Faculty of Education , University of
Calgary Critical Thinking in Science Education : Can Bioethical Issues and
Questioning Strategies Increase Scientific Understandings ? Author ( s ): THELMA
M . GUNN , LANCE M . GRIGG and GUY A . POMAHAC Source : The Jo. The
Journal of Educational Thought, 42(May).
Haka, N. B., Hamid, A., Dwi, A., Rudhini, M., & Riski, R. A. (2019). Pengembangan
instrumen evaluasi two-tier multiple choice terhadap literasi sains berbantuan
personal computer. Biosfer: Jurnal Tadris Biologi, 10(2), 201–214.
https://doi.org/2580-4960
Hala, Y., Arifin, A. N., Satar, S., & Saenab, S. (2019). Identification of biology student’s
misconception in Makassar State University on cell biology by applying two-tier
MCQs Method. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1387.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1387/1/012004
Harahap, L. J., Ristanto, R. H., & Komala, R. (2020). Assesing critical thinking skills and
mastery concept: The case of ecosystem material. EDUSAINS, 12(2), 223–232.
https://doi.org/http:// doi.org/10.15408/es.v12i2.16544
Haslam, F., & Treagust, D. (1987). Diagnosing secondary students’ misconceptions of
photosynthesis and respiration in plants using a two-tier multiple choice instrument.
Journal of Biological Education, 21(3), 203–211.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.1987.9654897
Helda Dumayanti, Risda Putri Indriani, Evita Nury Hariyanti, Rizhal Hendi Ristanto, Mieke Miarsyah/
Phenomenon Vol. 12, No. 1, July 2022
61
Husna, N. A., Zaini, M., & Winarti, A. (2021). The validity of biology module for senior
high school on grade X in even semester based on critical thinking skills. BIO-
INOVED: Jurnal Biologi-Inovasi Pendidikan, 3(1), 28–38.
https://doi.org/10.20527/bino.v3i1.9918
Ikhsanudin, & Subali, B. (2018). Content validity analysis of first semester formative test
on biology subject for senior high school. Journal of Physics: Conference Series,
1097(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1097/1/012039
Kurniasih, N., & Haka, N. B. (2017). Penggunaan tes diagnostik two-tier multiple choice
untuk menganalisis miskonsepsi siswa kelas X pada materi archaebacteria dan
eubacteria. Biosfer: Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi, 8(1), 114–127.
Laksono, P. J. (2018). Pengembangan dan penggunaan instrumen two-tier multiple choice
pada materi termokima untuk mengukur kemampuan berpikir kritis. Orbital: Jurnal
Pendidikan Kimia, 2(2), 80–92.
Magdalena, I., Fauzi, H. N., & Putri, R. (2020). Pentingnya evaluasi dalam pembelajaran
dan akibat memanipulasinya. Bintang: Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Sains, 2(2), 244–257.
https://ejournal.stitpn.ac.id/index.php/bintang
Ngafifah, S. (2020). Penggunaan google form dalam meningkatkan efektivitas evaluasi
pembelajaran daring siswa pada masa COVID19 Di SD IT Baitul Muslim Way
Jepara. As-Salam: Jurnal Studi Hukum Islam & Pendidikan, 9(2), 123–144.
https://doi.org/10.51226/assalam.v9i2.186
Noviana, M., Sajidan, S., & Puguh, P. (2014). Pengembangan instrumen evaluasi two-
tier multiple choice question untuk mengukur keterampilan berpikir tingkat tinggi
pada materi kingdom plantae. Jurnal Inkuiri, 3(2), 60–74. https://doi.org/2252-7893
Rizal. (2017). Mengajar cara berpikir, meraih ketrampilan abad 21. Seminar Nasional
Pendidikan PGSD UMS & HDPGSDI Wilayah Jawa Pendidikan, 390–406.
http://hdl.handle.net/11617/9134
Rukayah, R., Atmojo, I. R. W., Hartono, H., & Daryanto, J. (2020). Conceptual
biotechnology measured by using a two-tier multiple test. Advances in Social
Science, Education and Humanities Research, 397(Icliqe 2019), 565–569.
Sari, K., & Paidi. (2019). Metacognitive knowledge and critical thinking biology 11 th of
public senior high school in Bogor. IOP Publishing, 1241, 1–6.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1241/1/012056
Sesli, E., & Kara, Y. (2012). Development and application of a two-tier multiple-choice
diagnostic test for high school students understanding of cell division and
reproduction. Journal of Biological Education, 46(4), 37–41.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2012.688849
Simpson, E., & Courtney, M. (2002). Critical thinking in nursing education: Literature
review. International Journal of Nursing Practice, 8, 89–98.
Sudirman, Halima, & Hidayat, M. Y. (2021). Implementation of guided inquiry learning
model assisted by three tier test on critical thinking. Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika, 9(2).
https://doi.org/2550-0325
Suryawirawati, I. G., Ramdhan, B., & Juhanda, A. (2018). Analisis penurunan
Helda Dumayanti, Risda Putri Indriani, Evita Nury Hariyanti, Rizhal Hendi Ristanto, Mieke Miarsyah/
Phenomenon Vol. 12, No. 1, July 2022
62
miskonsepsi siswa pada konsep pemanasan global dengan tes diagnostik (Two-tier
test) setelah pembelajaran Predict-Observe--Explain (POE). Journal of Biology
Education, 1(1), 93–105.
Treagust, D. (1986). Evaluating students ’ misconceptions by means of diagnostic
multiple choice items. Research in Science Education, December 1986, 119–207.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02356835
Tsui, C. Y., & Treagust, D. (2010). Evaluating secondary students scientific reasoning in
genetics using a two‐tier diagnostic instrument. International Journal of Science
Education, 32(8), 37–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690902951429
Walid, A., Marfhadella, P., & Satria, I. (2021). Development of an assessment to measure
science process skills for the interaction of living things with their environment in
junior high school. Science Education and Application Journal, 3(2), 113.
https://doi.org/10.30736/seaj.v3i2.427
Yamtinah, S., Saputro, S., & Utami, B. (2016). Content validity and scoring of two tier
as measuring instrument of science process skills for knowledge aspects in chemistry
learning. Prosiding ICTTE FKIP UNS, 1(1), 911–916. https://doi.org/2502-4124
Zahara, N. (2015). Evaluasi pembelajaran online berbasis web sebagai alat ukur hasil
belajar siswa pada materi dunia tumbuhan kelas X MAN Model Banda Aceh.
“Evaluasi Pembelajaran Online Berbasis Web Sebagai Alat Ukur Hasil Belajar
Siswa Pada Materi Dunia Tumbuhan Kelas X Man Model Banda Aceh, 53(9), 1689–
1699.
Zein, A., Fadillah, M., & Novianti, R. (2013). Hubungan antara validitas butir , reliabilitas
, tingkat Kesukaran dan daya pembeda soal ujian semester genap bidang studi
biologi kelas XI SMA / MA Negeri di Kota Padang tahun pelajaran 2010 / 2011 *.
Prosiding Semirata FMIPA Universitas Lampung, 2009.
