Development of a Higher-Order Thinking Skills Assessment Instrument Using Socioscientific Issue Contexts on Chemical Solutions
Keywords:
Assessment Instrument; Higher Order Thinking Skills; Socioscientific Issue
Abstract
This study aimed to develop a HOTS assessment instrument using socioscientific issue contexts related to chemical solutions for Senior High School students. The HOTS assessment instrument was developed through five stages: preliminary study, item development, validation, trials, and implementation. The result of this development was a valid and reliable instrument consisting of 35 multiple-choice and 5 essay questions with 9 SSI contexts. The results were analyzed using the Partial Credit Model for Rasch modeling to examine the feasibility of the instrument. The validity and reliability of the assessment instrument were established by the item and person reliability, item and person separation, Alpha Cronbach value, item validity in the form of the infit value and the outfit MNSQ, Pt-measure correlation value, and unidimensionality. The developed assessment instrument provides a feasible tool for measuring students’ higher-order thinking skills in chemical solution topics using socioscientific issue contexts.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Complete Edition. Longman.
Baird, J.-A., Andrich, D., Hopfenbeck, T. N., & Stobart, G. (2017). Assessment and learning: Fields apart? Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 24(3), 317–350. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2017.1319337
Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2012). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Routledge.
Boone, W. J., Staver, J. R., & Yale, M. S. (2014). Rasch analysis in the human sciences. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6857-4
Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (2003). Educational research: An introduction (7th ed.). Pearson Education, Inc.
Chowning, J. T., Griswold, J. C., Kovarik, D. N., & Collins, L. J. (2012). Fostering Critical Thinking, Reasoning, and Argumentation Skills through Bioethics Education. PLoS ONE, 7(5), e36791. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0036791
Dahlan, Permana, L., & Oktariani, M. (2020). Teacher Competence and Difficulties in Constructing HOTS Instruments in Economics Subject. Cakrawala Pendidikan, 39(1), 111–119.
Dawson, V., & Venville, G. (2022). Testing a methodology for the development of socioscientific issues to enhance middle school students’ argumentation and reasoning. Research in Science & Technological Education, 40(4), 499–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2020.1830267
Driana, E., & Ernawati, E. (2019). TEACHERS’ UNDERSTANDING AND PRACTICES IN ASSESSING HIGHER ORDER THINKING SKILLS AT PRIMARY SCHOOLS. ACITYA Journal of Teaching & Education, 1(2), 110–118. https://doi.org/10.30650/ajte.v1i2.233
Duncan, P. W., Bode, R. K., Min Lai, S., & Perera, S. (2003). Rasch analysis of a new stroke-specific outcome scale: the stroke impact scale11No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit upon the author(s) or upon any organization with which the author(s) is/are associated. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 84(7), 950–963. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-9993(03)00035-2
Engelhard Jr., G. (2013). Invariant measurement: Using Rasch models in the social, behavioral, and health sciences. Routledge.
Fensham, P. J., & Bellocchi, A. (2013). Higher order thinking in chemistry curriculum and its assessment. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 10, 250–264. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2013.06.003
FitzPatrick, B., & Schulz, H. (2015). Do Curriculum Outcomes and Assessment Activities in Science Encourage Higher Order Thinking? Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 15(2), 136–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2015.1014074
Iskandar, D., & Senam. (2015). Studi Kemampuan Guru Kimia SMA Lulusan UNY dalam Mengembangkan Soal UAS Berbasis HOTS. Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan IPA, 1(1), 86–101.
Lee, H.-B., Yoo, J., Choi, K., Kim, S.-W., Krajcik, J., & Herman, B. C. (2013). Socioscientific issues as a vehicle for promoting character and values for global citizens. International Journal of Science Education, 35(12), 2079–2113.
Nadhifah, Y. (2019). Analisis keterlaksanaan aspek Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) pada soal-soal ujian mata pelajaran kimia kurikulum 2013 SMA di Kota Malang.
Qamariyah, S. N., Rahayu, S., Fajaroh, F., & Alsulami, N. M. (2021). The Effect of Implementation of Inquiry-based Learning with Socio-scientific Issues on Students’ Higher-Order Thinking Skills. Journal of Science Learning, 4(3), 210–218.
Rahayu, S., & Alsulami, N. M. (2024). Assessing higher order thinking skills of the 21st century learners using socio-scientific issues as a context. AIP Conference Proceedings, 3106(1). https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0214793
Ratcliffe, M., & Grace, M. (2003). Science education for citizenship: Teaching socioscientific issues. Open University Press.
Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513–536.
Sadler, T. D. (2011). Situating socioscientific issues in classrooms as a means of achieving goals of science education. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socioscientific issues in the classroom: Teaching, learning and research (pp. 1–9). Springer.
Sadler, T. D., Barab, S. A., & Scott, B. (2007). What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry? Research in Science Education, 37, 371–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9030-9
Schulz, H., & FitzPatrick, B. (2016). Teachers’ understandings of critical and higher order thinking and what this means for their teaching and assessments. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 62(1), 61–86.
Zeidler, D. L., Herman, B. C., & Sadler, T. D. (2019). New directions in socioscientific issues research. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0008-7
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering student’s knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35–62.
Baird, J.-A., Andrich, D., Hopfenbeck, T. N., & Stobart, G. (2017). Assessment and learning: Fields apart? Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 24(3), 317–350. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2017.1319337
Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2012). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Routledge.
Boone, W. J., Staver, J. R., & Yale, M. S. (2014). Rasch analysis in the human sciences. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6857-4
Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (2003). Educational research: An introduction (7th ed.). Pearson Education, Inc.
Chowning, J. T., Griswold, J. C., Kovarik, D. N., & Collins, L. J. (2012). Fostering Critical Thinking, Reasoning, and Argumentation Skills through Bioethics Education. PLoS ONE, 7(5), e36791. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0036791
Dahlan, Permana, L., & Oktariani, M. (2020). Teacher Competence and Difficulties in Constructing HOTS Instruments in Economics Subject. Cakrawala Pendidikan, 39(1), 111–119.
Dawson, V., & Venville, G. (2022). Testing a methodology for the development of socioscientific issues to enhance middle school students’ argumentation and reasoning. Research in Science & Technological Education, 40(4), 499–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2020.1830267
Driana, E., & Ernawati, E. (2019). TEACHERS’ UNDERSTANDING AND PRACTICES IN ASSESSING HIGHER ORDER THINKING SKILLS AT PRIMARY SCHOOLS. ACITYA Journal of Teaching & Education, 1(2), 110–118. https://doi.org/10.30650/ajte.v1i2.233
Duncan, P. W., Bode, R. K., Min Lai, S., & Perera, S. (2003). Rasch analysis of a new stroke-specific outcome scale: the stroke impact scale11No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit upon the author(s) or upon any organization with which the author(s) is/are associated. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 84(7), 950–963. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-9993(03)00035-2
Engelhard Jr., G. (2013). Invariant measurement: Using Rasch models in the social, behavioral, and health sciences. Routledge.
Fensham, P. J., & Bellocchi, A. (2013). Higher order thinking in chemistry curriculum and its assessment. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 10, 250–264. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2013.06.003
FitzPatrick, B., & Schulz, H. (2015). Do Curriculum Outcomes and Assessment Activities in Science Encourage Higher Order Thinking? Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 15(2), 136–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2015.1014074
Iskandar, D., & Senam. (2015). Studi Kemampuan Guru Kimia SMA Lulusan UNY dalam Mengembangkan Soal UAS Berbasis HOTS. Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan IPA, 1(1), 86–101.
Lee, H.-B., Yoo, J., Choi, K., Kim, S.-W., Krajcik, J., & Herman, B. C. (2013). Socioscientific issues as a vehicle for promoting character and values for global citizens. International Journal of Science Education, 35(12), 2079–2113.
Nadhifah, Y. (2019). Analisis keterlaksanaan aspek Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) pada soal-soal ujian mata pelajaran kimia kurikulum 2013 SMA di Kota Malang.
Qamariyah, S. N., Rahayu, S., Fajaroh, F., & Alsulami, N. M. (2021). The Effect of Implementation of Inquiry-based Learning with Socio-scientific Issues on Students’ Higher-Order Thinking Skills. Journal of Science Learning, 4(3), 210–218.
Rahayu, S., & Alsulami, N. M. (2024). Assessing higher order thinking skills of the 21st century learners using socio-scientific issues as a context. AIP Conference Proceedings, 3106(1). https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0214793
Ratcliffe, M., & Grace, M. (2003). Science education for citizenship: Teaching socioscientific issues. Open University Press.
Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513–536.
Sadler, T. D. (2011). Situating socioscientific issues in classrooms as a means of achieving goals of science education. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socioscientific issues in the classroom: Teaching, learning and research (pp. 1–9). Springer.
Sadler, T. D., Barab, S. A., & Scott, B. (2007). What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry? Research in Science Education, 37, 371–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9030-9
Schulz, H., & FitzPatrick, B. (2016). Teachers’ understandings of critical and higher order thinking and what this means for their teaching and assessments. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 62(1), 61–86.
Zeidler, D. L., Herman, B. C., & Sadler, T. D. (2019). New directions in socioscientific issues research. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0008-7
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering student’s knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35–62.
Published
2026-01-30
How to Cite
Rosawati, E. E. (2026). Development of a Higher-Order Thinking Skills Assessment Instrument Using Socioscientific Issue Contexts on Chemical Solutions. ISEJ : Indonesian Science Education Journal, 7(1), 34-43. https://doi.org/10.62159/isej.v7i1.2227
Section
Articles
Copyright (c) 2026 Ervita Eka Rosawati
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with ISEJ: Indonesian Science Education Journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the ISEJ: Indonesian Science Education Journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors can enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or edit it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) before and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
_(3).png)
