Developing Physics-Integrated Computational Thinking Skills Assessment Instrument Using Rasch Measurement Model

Authors

  • Elisabeth Pratidhina Universitas Katolik Widya Mandala Surabaya
  • Heru Kuswanto Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta
  • Dadan Rosana Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.25273/jpfk.v9i2.20744

Keywords:

CT, physics, assessment, Rasch model

Abstract

Computational thinking skills (CT) are an essential skill for young generations. Integration of CT in physics has been studied widely since they are closely related to each other. However, instruments to assess CT in physics problem-solving are still limited. This study aims to develop a physics-integrated CT assessment instrument. Multiple choice items were developed and reviewed by experts in physics education. A pilot study is conducted with 121 undergraduate students. Based on the empirical data on the pilot study, the Rasch analysis using Winstep is conducted. The final instrument consists of 24 multiple-choice items. Each item has MNSQ in the range of 0.82-1.17. The ZSTD is in the range of -1.92-1.99 which can be classified in fit. Calculation with the Rasch model for 24 fit items shows person reliability of 0.81, item reliability of 0.89, and alpha Cronbach of 0.89. Those values can be classified as good.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Acevedo-Borrega, J., Valverde-Berrocoso, J., & Garrido-Arroyo, M. D. C. (2022). Computational Thinking and Educational Technology: A Scoping Review of the Literature. Education Sciences, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12010039

Aiken, L. R. (1985). Three Coefficient for Analyzing the Reliability and Validity of Ratings. Educational and Physchological Measurement, 45.

Barr, D., Harrison, J., & Conery, L. (2011). Computational Thinking: A Digital Age Skill for Everyone. Learning and Leading with Technology, 38(6), 20–23. http://quijote.biblio.iteso.mx/wardjan/proxy.aspx?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=59256559&lang=es&site=eds-live%5Cnhttps://content.ebscohost.com/ContentServer.asp?T=P&P=AN&K=59256559&S=R&D=ehh&EbscoContent=dGJyMMTo50Sep6

Cutumisu, M., Adams, C., & Lu, C. (2019). A Scoping Review of Empirical Research on Recent Computational Thinking Assessments. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 28(6), 651–676. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09799-3

Dzin, N. H. M., & Lay, Y. F. (2021). Assessing the Validity and Reliability of Science Multiple Choice Test Using Rasch Dichotomous Measurement Model. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 20(6), 927–941. https://doi.org/10.33225/JBSE/21.20.927

Fagerlund, J., Häkkinen, P., Vesisenaho, M., & Viiri, J. (2021). Computational thinking in programming with Scratch in primary schools: A systematic review. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 29(1), 12–28. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22255

Fisher, W. P. (2018). Rating Scale Instrument Quality Criteria. https://www.rasch.org/rmt/rmt211m.htm

Hsu, T. C., Chang, S. C., & Hung, Y. T. (2018). How to learn and how to teach computational thinking: Suggestions based on a review of the literature. Computers and Education, 126(July), 296–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.004

Hutchins, N. M., Biswas, G., Maróti, M., Lédeczi, Ã., Grover, S., Wolf, R., Blair, K. P., Chin, D., Conlin, L., Basu, S., & Mcelhaney, K. (2020). C2STEM : a System for Synergistic Learning of Physics and Computational Thinking. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29, 83–100. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09804-9

Katai, Z. (2015). The challenge of promoting algorithmic thinking of both sciences- and humanities-oriented learners. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31, 287–299. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12070

Kwon, K., & Cheon, J. (2019). Exploring problem decomposition and program development through block-based programs. International Journal of Computer Science Education in Schools, 3(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.21585/ijcses.v3i1.54

Lane, W. B., Galanti, T. M., & Rozas, X. L. (2023). Teacher Re-novicing on the Path to Integrating Computational Thinking in High School Physics Instruction. Journal for STEM Education Research, 6(2), 302–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-023-00100-1

Li, Y., Schoenfeld, A. H., diSessa, A. A., Graesser, A. C., Benson, L. C., English, L. D., & Duschl, R. A. (2020). On Computational Thinking and STEM Education. Journal for STEM Education Research, 3(2), 147–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-020-00044-w

Linacre, J. M. (2012). Winsteps Help for Rasch Analysis.

Orban, C. M. (2020). Computational Thinking in Introductory Physics. The Physics Teacher, 58, 247. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.5145470

Rijke, W. J., Bollen, L., Eysink, T. H. S., & Tolboom, J. L. J. (2018). Computational thinking in primary school: An examination of abstraction and decomposition in different age groups. Informatics in Education, 17(1), 77–92. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2018.05

Saxena, A., Lo, C. K., Hew, K. F., & Wong, G. K. W. (2020). Designing Unplugged and Plugged Activities to Cultivate Computational Thinking: An Exploratory Study in Early Childhood Education. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 29(1), 55–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-019-00478-w

Sengupta, P., & Kinnebrew, J. S. (2013). Integrating computational thinking with K-12 science education using agent-based computation : A theoretical framework. Education and Information Technologies, 18, 351–380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-012-9240-x

Swaid, S. I. (2015). Bringing Computational Thinking to STEM Education. Procedia Manufacturing, 3(Ahfe), 3657–3662. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.761

Tang, X., Yin, Y., Lin, Q., Hadad, R., & Zhai, X. (2020). Assessing computational thinking: A systematic review of empirical studies. Computers and Education, 148, 103798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103798

Utari, G. P., Liliawati, W., & Utama, J. A. (2021). Design and validation of six-tier astronomy diagnostic test instruments with Rasch Model analysis. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1806, 012028. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1806/1/012028

Voon, X. P., Wong, S. L., Wong, L. H., Khambari, M. N. M., & Syed-Abdullah, S. I. S. (2022). Developing Computational Thinking Competencies through Constructivist Argumentation Learning: A Problem-Solving Perspective. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 12(6), 529–539. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2022.12.6.1650

Weller, D. P., Bott, T. E., Caballero, M. D., & Irving, P. W. (2022). Development and illustration of a framework for computational thinking practices in introductory physics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 18(2), 20106. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.18.020106

Yin, Y., Hadad, R., Tang, X., & Lin, Q. (2020). Improving and Assessing Computational Thinking in Maker Activities : the Integration with Physics and Engineering Learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29, 189–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09794-8

Yoon, C. S., & Khambari, M. N. M. (2022). Design, Development, and Evaluation of the Robobug Board Game: An Unplugged Approach to Computational Thinking. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 16(6), 41–60. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v16i06.26281

Downloads

Published

2024-08-29

Issue

Vol. 9 No. 2 (2023)

Section

Articles

License

 

Creative Commons License
Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika dan Keilmuan (JPFK) by http://e-journal.unipma.ac.id/index.php/JPFK/index is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.