Development of AI–CBL Learning Materials to Promote Pre-Service Physics Teachers’ Representational Competence in Solid-State Physics
Abstract
This study aimed to develop and validate AI–CBL learning materials for solid-state physics that were designed to support pre-service physics teachers’ representational competence. A research and development approach using the ADDIE framework was applied and limited to the Analysis, Design, and Development stages. The analysis stage identified key learning difficulties and representational demands in solid-state physics instruction for pre-service physics teachers. Based on these findings, an AI-integrated Case-Based Learning package was designed and developed, consisting of contextual case studies, structured learning tasks aligned with case-based learning phases, and guidelines for responsible interaction with open-access generative artificial intelligence. The materials were organized through a learning management system to support consistent access, structured sequencing, and documentation of learning artifacts. The developed materials were reviewed by three expert validators using the Learning Object Review Instrument (LORI) 2.0 across eight aspects on a five-point scale. The validation data were analyzed descriptively and supported by Many-Facet Rasch Measurement using Minifac to examine rater consistency and measurement quality. The expert validation results showed an average feasibility percentage of 76.50% across the eight LORI aspects, indicating that the developed materials were feasible for further implementation. Rasch-based analysis also indicated good unidimensionality, with 47.84% of variance explained by Rasch measures, and acceptable rater consistency, with reliability of 0.87. Revisions were made based on validators’ comments to improve clarity, learning-goal alignment, usability, and responsible artificial intelligence integration. These findings indicate that the developed AI–CBL learning materials are feasible as a validated instructional product and provide a foundation for subsequent classroom implementation studies in solid-state physics.
Downloads
References
Adadan, E. (2013). Using Multiple Representations to Promote Grade 11 Students’ Scientific Understanding of the Particle Theory of Matter. Research in Science Education, 43(3). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-012-9299-9
Adeoye, M. A., Indra Wirawan, K. A. S., Satya Pradnyani, M. S., & Intan Septiarini, N. (2024). Revolutionizing Education: Unleashing the Power of the ADDIE Model for Effective Teaching and Learning. JPI (Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia), 13(1).
Arifiyanti, F., & Pásztor, A. (2025). Representational Competence in Science Learning: A Systematic Review. Tadris: Jurnal Keguruan Dan Ilmu Tarbiyah, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.24042/tadris.v10i1.26755
Boonlue, S. (2024). Guidance For Generative Ai In Education And Research" For Teachers. Journal Of Industrial Education, 23(2). https://doi.org/10.55003/jie.23202
Daniel, K. L., Bucklin, C. J., Austin Leone, E., & Idema, J. (2018). Towards a Definition of Representational Competence. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89945-9_1
Dewi, C. A., & Rahayu, S. (2023). Implementation of case-based learning in science education: A systematic review*. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 20(4). https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2023.041
Edelsbrunner, P. A., Malone, S., Hofer, S. I., Küchemann, S., Kuhn, J., Schmid, R., Altmeyer, K., Brünken, R., & Lichtenberger, A. (2023). The relation of representational competence and conceptual knowledge in female and male undergraduates. International Journal of STEM Education, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00435-6
Edwards, N., & Maree, L. (2025). A comparison between preservice science teachers’ representational competence and fluency in chemistry and physics. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 22(2). https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2025.015
Fratiwi, N. J., Suhandi, A., Nurdini, N., Linuwih, S., Samsudin, A., & Susilowati, N. E. (2024). Reducing Alternative Conception of Action-Reaction Forces: The Impact of E-Rebuttal Texts After Learning and Over Time. Tadris: Jurnal Keguruan Dan Ilmu Tarbiyah, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.24042/tadris.v9i2.22995
Gamlem, S. M., McGrane, J., Brandmo, C., Moltudal, S., Sun, S. Z., & Hopfenbeck, T. N. (2025). Exploring pre-service teachers’ attitudes and experiences with generative AI: a mixed methods study in Norwegian teacher education. Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2025.2528663
Gkitzia, V., Salta, K., & Tzougraki, C. (2020). Students’ competence in translating between different types of chemical representations. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1039/c8rp00301g
Gruber, C., James, A., Berchtold, J. T., Wood, Z. J., Scott, G. E., & Alghoul, Z. (2020). Interactive unit cell visualization tool for crystal lattice structures. ACS Publications.
Hoth, J., Schwarz, B., Kaiser, G., Busse, A., König, J., & Blömeke, S. (2016). Uncovering predictors of disagreement: ensuring the quality of expert ratings. ZDM - Mathematics Education, 48(1–2). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-016-0758-z
Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeffer, J., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., … Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. In Learning and Individual Differences (Vol. 103). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
Koswojo, J., Kusairi, S., Sutopo, S., & Supriana, E. (2024). Improving Representational Competence in Physics Education: A Systematic Review and Future Research Directions. Jurnal Pendidikan MIPA, 25(4). https://doi.org/10.23960/jpmipa/v25i4.pp1906-1924
Laru, J., Celik, I., Jokela, I., & Mäkitalo, K. (2025). The antecedents of pre-service teachers’ AI literacy: perceptions about own AI driven applications, attitude towards AI and knowledge in machine learning. European Journal of Teacher Education, 48(5). https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2025.2535623
Lavi, R., & Marti, D. (2023). A Proposed Case-Based Learning Framework for Fostering Undergraduate Engineering Students’ Creative and Critical Thinking. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 32(6). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-022-10017-w
Lim, J. J., & Veasuvalingam, B. (2025). Does online case-based learning foster clinical reasoning skills? A mixed-methods study. Future Healthcare Journal, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fhj.2024.100210
McDonald, N., Johri, A., Ali, A., & Collier, A. H. (2025). Generative artificial intelligence in higher education: Evidence from an analysis of institutional policies and guidelines. Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans, 3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100121
Nesbit, J., Belfer, K., & Leacock, T. (2009). Learning Object review Instrument (LORI) User Manual. Nuevos Sistemas de Comunicación e Información.
Nickel, S., Brockmüller, S., Boone, W. J., & Habig, S. (2025). Measuring representational competence–analyses of dimensionality and the relationship to general content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2025.2515621
Nisa, W. L., Ismet, I., & Andriani, N. (2020). Development of E-Modules Based on Multi-representations in Solid-State Physics Introductory Subject. Berkala Ilmiah Pendidikan Fisika, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.20527/bipf.v8i1.7690
Nurdini, N., Suhandi, A., Fratiwi, N. J., & Samsudin, A. (2025). E-CDCCText Development : An Instructional Facilitating Conceptual Change in Fluid Concepts Material for. 8(1), 93–110. https://doi.org/10.24014/jnsi.v8i1.32928
Nurita, T., Yuliati, L., Handayanto, S. K., Hidayat, A., & Saleah, P. (2025). Case-Based Learning For Creative Thinking Skills On The Ideal Gas Law: Application Of The Understanding By Design Framework. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v14i1.16938
Pande, P., & Chandrasekharan, S. (2017). Representational competence: towards a distributed and embodied cognition account. Studies in Science Education, 53(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2017.1248627
Prilop, C. N., Mah, D. K., Jacobsen, L. J., Hansen, R. R., Weber, K. E., & Hoya, F. (2025). Generative AI in teacher education: Educators’ perceptions of transformative potentials and the triadic nature of AI literacy explored through AI-enhanced methods. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100471
Rahmawati, I., Nisrina, N., & Abdani, M. R. (2022). Multi-representation-based interactive physics electronic module as teaching materials in online learning. Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Fisika Al-Biruni, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.24042/jipfalbiruni.v11i1.10544
Rane, N. (2024). Enhancing the quality of teaching and learning through ChatGPT and similar large language models: Challenges, future prospects, and ethical considerations in education. TESOL and Technology Studies, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.48185/tts.v5i1.1000
Salumita, U., & Putranta, H. (2025). Analysis of the multirepresentation ability of physics education students in problem-solving related to physics. Jurnal Riset Dan Kajian Pendidikan Fisika, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.12928/jrkpf.v12i1.1185
Saraçoğlu, H. (2020). Uncovering and repairing teacher candidates’ misconceptions about Miller indices with 3D models. Latin-American Journal of Physics Education, 14(4), 5.
Şen Akbulut, M., & Hill, J. R. (2020). Case-based pedagogy for teacher education: An instructional model. Contemporary Educational Technology, 12(2). https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/8937
Sumintono, B., & Widhiarso, W. (2014). Aplikasi Model Rasch untuk Penelitan Ilmu-Ilmu Sosial. Trim Komunikata Publishing House.
Tillmanns, T., Salomão Filho, A., Rudra, S., Weber, P., Dawitz, J., Wiersma, E., Dudenaite, D., & Reynolds, S. (2025). Mapping Tomorrow’s Teaching and Learning Spaces: A Systematic Review on GenAI in Higher Education. In Trends in Higher Education (Vol. 4, Number 1). https://doi.org/10.3390/higheredu4010002
Yamashita, T. (2024). An application of many-facet Rasch measurement to evaluate automated essay scoring: A case of ChatGPT-4.0. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 3(3). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2024.100133
Copyright (c) 2026 Nurdini Nurdini, Heni Rusnayati, Raden Giovanni Ariantara, Tiara Husnul Khotimah, Feri Apryandi, Asep Akmal Fadia Nurhalim, Iyon Suyana, Nor Farahwahidah Abdul Rahman
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.
.png)
_(3).png)
