Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
0.23
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA (JPPIPA)
Mufiqoh, Mia Zubaidah
Unknown Affiliation
Agriculture, Biological Sciences & Forestry Biochemistry, Genetics & Molecular Biology Chemical Engineering, Chemistry & Bioengineering Chemistry Education Materials Science & Nanotechnology Physics

Published : 1 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 1 Documents
Search

 1 
Rasch Model: Analisis Soal Biologi pada Kurikulum Indonesia Merdeka Zainina, Kalika Azra; Mufiqoh, Mia Zubaidah; Aprilia, Nani; Isnaeni, Bekti
Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA Vol 10 No 12 (2024): December
Publisher : Postgraduate, University of Mataram

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.29303/jppipa.v10i12.7661

Abstract

The change from the 2013 curriculum to the independent curriculum has an impact on assessment, one of which is summative assessment. Summative assessment uses multiple choice questions, but the quality of the questions has not been analysed. This descriptive quantitative research aims to determine the quality of summative assessment questions in Biology class X odd semester which includes validity, reliability, difficulty level, and differentiating power. Research subjects were all grade X students. Object of research includes question grids, answer keys, questions, and student answer sheets. The sampling technique used was purposive sampling, and Kurmer Yogyakarta Pilot Project High School was selected. Data were collected through documentation. The instruments in this study were question grids, answer keys, questions, and student answer sheets. The data analysis technique used was quantitative descriptive analysis using Winsteps software version 3.73. The results of quantitative analysis of summative assessment questions in four schools showed valid results. The questions proved to be reliable, with difficulty levels in the easy and difficult categories. The questions had good and sufficient differentiating power. Distractor effectiveness was rated as poor, very good, good, and fair. Qualitative analysis of the 4 schools showed good results, but some improvements were still needed.
Co-Authors isnaeni, bekti Nani Aprilia Zainina, Kalika Azra