Kesahan dan Kebolehpercayaan Instrumen Penilaian Kendiri Pembelajaran Ungkapan Algebra Tingkatan Dua

  • Sarimah Binti Baco Fakulti Psikologi dan Pendidikan, Universiti Malaysia Sabah (UMS), Malaysia
  • Mohd. Zaki Bin Ishak Fakulti Psikologi dan Pendidikan, Universiti Malaysia Sabah (UMS), Malaysia
Keywords: kesahan, kebolehpercayaan, pembelajaran ungkapan algebra, domain kognitif, penilaian kendiri

Abstract

Kesahan adalah sejauh mana instrumen mengukur apa yang hendak diukur dan kebolehpercayaan adalah keupayaan suatu kajian untuk memperoleh nilai yang serupa apabila pengukuran yang sama diulangi. Kesahan dan kebolehpercayaan instrumen amat penting bagi mempertahankan kejituan item soal selidik daripada kecacatan. Tujuan kajian ini adalah untuk menentukan kesahan dan kebolehpercayaan instrumen soal selidik penilaian kendiri pembelajaran Ungkapan Algebra Tingkatan Dua. Soal Selidik telah disahkan melalui kesahan muka dan kesahan kandungan instrumen yang melibatkan lima orang pakar dalam bidang Matematik dan dua orang pakar bidang Bahasa manakala kesahan konstruk dan kebolehpercayaan instrumen dianalisis menggunakan perisian Statistical Package of Social Science (SPSS) Versi 27.0. Seramai 145 orang pelajar Tingkatan Dua terlibat dalam kajian ini. Dapatan kajian menunjukkan indeks kesahan kandungan-item (I-CVI) berkisar antara 0.800 hingga 1.000 dan indeks kesahan kandungan-skala (S-CVI / Ave) adalah 0.973. Skor nisbah kesahan kandungan (CVR) menunjukkan bahawa semua item disahkan penting oleh pakar. Muatan faktor bagi setiap item berada dalam julat 0.539 hingga 0.846, manakala keputusan analisis kebolehpercayaan adalah

Statistics
Abstract views: 102 , PDF downloads: 62

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Adeleke, M. A. (2007). Strategic improvement of mathematical problem-solving performance of secondary school students using procedural and conceptual learning strategies. Educational Resarch and Review, 2(9), 259–263.

Ali, M. dan Abu Bakar, N. (2007). Tahap Kefahaman Pelajar Tingkatan Empat dalam Tajuk Ungkapan Algebra. Fakulti Penddikan: Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

Azrul Fahmi & Marlina Ali. (2007). Analisis Kesilapan dalam Tajuk Ungkapan Algebra di Kalangan Pelajar Tingkatan Empat.

Bahagian Pembangunan Kurikulum. (2017). Dokumen Standard Kurikulum dan Pentaksiran (DSKP) Matematik Tingkatan 1 dan 2. Putrajaya: Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.

Bahagian Perancangan dan Penyelidikan Dasar Pendidikan. (2020). Laporan Kebangsaan TIMSS 2019 -Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study. Cetakan Pertama. Purajaya: Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.

Bayat, S., & Meamar, A. (2016). Predicting Algebra Achievement: Cognitive and Meta cognitive Aspects. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 217, 169–176.

Bayat, S., & Tarmizi, R. A. (2010). Assessing Cognitive and Metacognitive Strategies During Algebra Problem Solving Among University Students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 8, 403-410.

Bond, T.G dan Fox, C.M. (2007). Applying The Rasch Model: Foundamental Maeasurement in the Human Sciences. 2nd Ed. London: Lawrence ErlboumAssociates, Publisers. Mahwah, New Jersey. 200-225.

Booth, L. R. (1981). Child Methods in Secondary Mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 12, 29-41. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00386044

Budiaji, W. (2013). Skala pengukuran dan jumlah respon skala likert. Jurnal ilmu pertanian dan perikanan, 2(2), 127-133.

Egodawatte, G. (2011). Secondary school students’ misconceptions in algebra. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Toronto, Canada. Retrieved from https://tspace.library. utoronto.

Foo, J. Y., Abdullah, M. F. N. L., Adenan, N. H., & Hoong, J. Y. (2021). Kajian keperluan pembangunan modul latihan berasaskan Kemahiran Berfikir Aras Tinggi bagi topik Ungkapan Algebra tingkatan satu. Jurnal Pendidikan Bitara UPSI, 14, 33-40.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Prentice Hall.

Hassan, N. F., Puteh, S., Muhamad Sanusi, A., & Che Mohamad Zahid, N. H. (2019). Student perspective on technology enabled/enhanced active learning in educational: Rasch measurement model. International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology, 8(6 Special Issue 3), 929–935. https://doi.org/10.35940/ijeat.F1061.0986S319

Herscovics, N and Linchevski, L. (1994). A Cognitive Gap Between Arithmetics and Algebra. Educational studies in Mathematics, 27, 59-78.

Joffrion, H. K. (2005). Conceptual and Procedural Understanding of Algebra Concepts in the Middle Grades. December, 79.

Kline, T. (2005). Psychological testing: A practical approach to design and evaluation. Sage.

Lau, A. S. Y., Yusoff, M. S. B., Lee, Y. Y., Choi, S. B., Xiao, J. Z., & Liong, M. T. (2018). Development and validation of a Chinese translated questionnaire: A single simultaneous tool for assessing gastrointestinal and upper respiratory tract related illnesses in pre-school children. Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences, 13(2), 135–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtumed.2017.11.003

Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel psychology, 28(4), 563-575.

Ling, G. C. L., Shahril, M., & An, A. (2016). Common Misconceptions of Algebraic Problems: Identifying Trends and Proposing Possible Remedial Measures. Advanced Science Letter, 22, 1547-1550. https://doi.org/10.1166/asl.2016.6675

Lodholz, r. (1999). The Transition from Arithmetic To Algebra. In B. Moses (Ed.), Algebraic Thinking, Grades K-12 (Pp.52-58). Reston, VA: National Council Of Teachers Of Mathematics.

Lucariello, J., Tine, M. T., & Ganley, C. M. (2014). A formative assessment of students’ algebraic

variable misconceptions. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 33, 30-41.

MacGregor, M., & Stacey, K. (1997). Students’ Understanding Of Algebraic Notation : 11-15, Educational Studies In Mathematics, Vol.33, pp.1-19.

Marpa, E. P. (2019). Common Errors in Algebraic Expressions: A Quantitative- Qualitative Analysis. International Journal on Social and Education Sciences, 1(2)

Matore, M. E. E. M., Idris, H., Rahman, N. A., & Khairani, A. Z. (2017). Kesahan Kandungan Pakar Instrumen IKBAR Bagi Pengukuran AQ Menggunakan Nisbah Kesahan Kandungan. In Proseeding of International Conference on Global Education V (ICGE V) (May) (pp. 979-997).

Mcintyre, Z. S. (2007). An Analysis of Variable Misconceptions Before and After Various Collage Level Mathematics Courses. Biography An Interdisciplinary Quarterly. The University of Maine

Mohd Faizal Nizam Lee Abdullah & Leow Tze Wei (2017). Kesahan Dan Kebolehpercayaan Instrumen Penilaian Kendiri Pembelajaran Geometri Tingkatan Satu (Learning Form One Geometry: Validity and Reliability Of A Self-Evaluation Instrument). Malaysian Journal of Learning And Instruction: Vol. 14 No. 1 (2017): 211-265

Mohd Faizal Nizam Lee Abdullah, Leow Tze Wei & Mohd Uzi Dollah (2016). Pembinaan instrumen penilaian kendiri pembelajaran algebra tingkatan empat. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains dan Matematik Malaysia (JPSMM UPSI), 6(2), 54-68.

Mohamad Najib Abdul Ghafar. (2011). Pembinaan dan analisi ujian bilik darjah. Johor Bahru: Penerbit Universiti Teknologi Malaysia Press.

Mohamed, Z., Lebar, O., & Shamsuddin, S. (2017). Pembinaan Dan Penilaian Instrumen Ujian Aptitud Kemasukan Ke Institut Pengajian Tinggi Malaysia. Journal of Science and Mathematics Letters, 5, 16-27.

Pallant, J. (2012). SPSS Survival Manual, A Step By Step Guide To Data Analysis Using IMB SPSS (5th Editio.). Two Penn Plaza, New York, USA: The Mc Graw Hill Companies.

Polite, D. F., Beck, T., & Owen, S. V. (2007). Focus on research methods is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Research in Nursing and Health, 30, 459–467. http://doi.org/10.1002/nur

Radah Krishna, S. (2015). “Analisis Kesilapan dalam Pengembangan dan Pemfaktoran Ungkapan Aljabar dalam kalangan Pelajar Tingkatan Empat”. Tesis Ijazah Sarjana Sastera (Pendidikan).

Sangit, Z. (2007). Kesilapan dalam ungkapan algebra di kalangan pelajar tingkatan 4: satu kajian kes. Doctoral dissertation, Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris.

Shrotryia, V. K., & Dhanda, U. (2019). Content Validity of Assessment Instrument for Employee Engagement. SAGE Open, 9(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244018821751

Stephanie, G. (2014). Cronbach’s Alpha: Simple Definition, Use and Interpretation. Retrieved on 5 Mei 2021, from https://www.statisticshowto.datasciencecentral.com/cronbachs-alpha-spss/

Sugiarti, L & Retnawati, H. (2019). Analysis of student difficulties on algebra problem solving in junior high school. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1320/1/012103

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using Multivariate Statistics (3rd ed.). Harper Collins.

Tan Yew Hor (2015). “The Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment Of The Learning Of Algebraic Expressions For Form Two Students”: Universiti Sains Malaysia.

Warren, E. (2003). The role of arithmetic structure in the transition from arithmetic to algebra. Mathematics Education Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217374

Yusoff, M. S. B. (2019). ABC of content validation and content validity index calculation. Resource, 11(2), 49-54.

Yusoff Daud & Ainun Syakirah. (2019). Student Error Analysis in Learning Algebraic Expression: A Study in Secondary School Putrajaya. Creative Education, 10, 2615-2630. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2019.1012189

Zainudin Abas (1995). Kesilapan Algebra Dan Masalah Dalam Pendidikan Matematik Di Peringkat Sekolah Menengah. Berita matematik, 46, 9-1
Published
2021-11-10
How to Cite
Baco, S. and Ishak, M. Z. (2021) “Kesahan dan Kebolehpercayaan Instrumen Penilaian Kendiri Pembelajaran Ungkapan Algebra Tingkatan Dua”, Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH), 6(11), pp. 127 - 137. doi: https://doi.org/10.47405/mjssh.v6i11.1136.
Section
Articles