Cognitive domain analysis (LOTS and HOTS) assessment instruments made by primary school teachers

Puji Hartini, H. Setiadi, E. Ernawati
{"title":"Cognitive domain analysis (LOTS and HOTS) assessment instruments made by primary school teachers","authors":"Puji Hartini, H. Setiadi, E. Ernawati","doi":"10.21831/pep.v25i1.34411","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This research aims to qualitatively analyze the validity of items and the suitability of cognitive domains (LOTS and HOTS) assessment instruments on natural science subjects made by elementary school teachers in East Jakarta. The method used is descriptive qualitative method with analysis of observations, documents in the form of teacher-made assessment instruments, interviews, and results of expert validation which are analyzed by comparison analysis techniques. The observation results show that all schools use the questions that are available in textbooks owned by students for assessment and the results of analysis of teacher-made assessment instruments validated by experts, there are 81.25% items included in the LOTS category while 18.75% are included in the category HOTS, so it can be concluded that: (1) the instruments used by elementary school teachers in East Jakarta have fulfilled the content validity, (2) the cognitive domain (LOTS & HOTS) on the instruments used by elementary school teachers are proportional, (3) the quality of assessments conducted by elementary school teachers in East Jakarta is good with a record of improvement, and (4) the implementation of assessments conducted by elementary school teachers in East Jakarta has followed the assessment standards provided by the government.","PeriodicalId":33364,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Penelitian dan Evaluasi Pendidikan","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Penelitian dan Evaluasi Pendidikan","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21831/pep.v25i1.34411","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

This research aims to qualitatively analyze the validity of items and the suitability of cognitive domains (LOTS and HOTS) assessment instruments on natural science subjects made by elementary school teachers in East Jakarta. The method used is descriptive qualitative method with analysis of observations, documents in the form of teacher-made assessment instruments, interviews, and results of expert validation which are analyzed by comparison analysis techniques. The observation results show that all schools use the questions that are available in textbooks owned by students for assessment and the results of analysis of teacher-made assessment instruments validated by experts, there are 81.25% items included in the LOTS category while 18.75% are included in the category HOTS, so it can be concluded that: (1) the instruments used by elementary school teachers in East Jakarta have fulfilled the content validity, (2) the cognitive domain (LOTS & HOTS) on the instruments used by elementary school teachers are proportional, (3) the quality of assessments conducted by elementary school teachers in East Jakarta is good with a record of improvement, and (4) the implementation of assessments conducted by elementary school teachers in East Jakarta has followed the assessment standards provided by the government.
小学教师认知领域分析(LOTS和HOTS)评估工具
本研究旨在定性分析东雅加达地区小学教师自然科学科目认知领域(LOTS和HOTS)评估工具的效度和适宜性。使用的方法是描述性定性方法,分析观察结果、教师评估工具形式的文件、访谈和专家验证结果,并通过比较分析技术进行分析。观察结果显示,所有学校均使用学生拥有的教科书中可用的问题进行评估,并经专家验证的教师自制评估工具分析结果显示,LOTS类别的项目占81.25%,HOTS类别的项目占18.75%,因此可以得出结论:(1)东雅加达市小学教师所使用的测评工具均达到内容效度;(2)小学教师所使用测评工具的认知域(LOTS & HOTS)呈正比;(3)东雅加达市小学教师所进行的测评质量良好,且有改善的记录;(4)东雅加达小学教师评估的实施遵循了政府提供的评估标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
14 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信