THE USE OF DRAWING METHOD FOR DIAGNOSING STUDENTS’ MISCONCEPTION ABOUT PLANT STRUCTURE IN RELATION TO PHOTOSYNTHESIS.

(1)

STRUCTURE IN RELATION TO PHOTOSYNTHESIS

RESEARCH PAPER

Submitted as Requirement to Obtain Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan in International Program on Science Education (IPSE) Study Program

by: Desty Nurbaety

1100139

INTERNATIONAL PROGRAM ON SCIENCE EDUCATION FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE EDUCATION

UNIVERSITAS PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA 2015

(2)

ABOUT PLANT STRUCTURE

IN RELATION TO PHOTOSYNTHESIS

Oleh Desty Nurbaety

Sebuah skripsi yang diajukan untuk memenuhi salah satu syarat memperoleh gelar Sarjana Pendidikan pada Fakultas Pendidikan Matematika dan Ilmu Pengetahuan

Alam

Agustus 2015

Hak Cipta dilindungi undang-undang.

Skripsi ini tidak boleh diperbanyak seluruhya atau sebagian, dengan dicetak ulang, difoto kopi, atau cara lainnya tanpa ijin dari penulis.

(3)

THE USE OF DRAWING METHOD FOR DIAGNOSING STUDENTS’ MISCONCEPTION ABOUT PLANT STRUCTURE IN RELATION TO

PHOTOSYNTHESIS

By Desty Nurbaety

1100139

Approved and Authorized by, Supervisor I

Prof. Dr. Hj. Nuryani Y. Rustaman, M. Pd

NIP. 195012311979032029

Supervisor II

Dr. Yayan Sanjaya, M. Si

NIP. 197112312001121001

Perceived,

Head of International Program on Science Education Study Program

Dr. Diana Rochintaniawati, M. Ed

(4)

THE USE OF DRAWING METHOD FOR DIAGNOSING

STUDENTS’ MISCONCEPTION ABOUT PLANT

STRUCTURE IN RELATION TO PHOTOSYNTHESIS

Desty Nurbaety

International Program on Science Education (IPSE) Indonesia University of Education, Indonesia

desty.nurbaety@student.upi.edu

Abstract

The study of diagnosing students’ misconception about plant structure in relation to photosynthesis among middle school using drawing method was conducted to identify

students’ misconception using drawing method concerning on this important concept. A

descriptive research was applied in this study and a number of eight grade students (N=32) is participated in this research. Purposive sampling was implemented as the sampling technique of this study. Data was gathered from thirty two students’ drawings, modified Certainty of Response Index (CRI), interview, and questionnaire. These drawings were analyzed and categorized based on five level of drawings criteria by Köse. The result showed that the students intensify on Level 4 in which students’ drawings mostly demonstrate partial understanding and no misconception found in the concept of plant structure in relation to photosynthesis. From the drawings, there were 25% students identified which held misconception on plant structure and it is followed by 40,63% drawings with misconception for photosynthesis concept. This findings was supported by modified CRI analysis which shows there was 37,63% students that held misconceptions. Based on modified CRI analysis and interview result also found that students mostly held misconception on determining time when photosynthesis happen, location of photosynthesis occurred, and structure and function of plant that related with photosynthesis concept. Besides that, other interesting facts showed that the students cannot grasp the idea of root system, shoot system, and photosynthesis as interrelated concept in science. The main causes of students’ misconception come from students’ itself, textbook, and their interaction with environment.

(5)

PENGGUNAAN METODE MENGGAMBAR UNTUK

MENDIAGNOSA MISKONSEPSI SISWA PADA KONSEP

STRUKTUR TUMBUHAN DALAM KAITANNYA DENGAN

KONSEP FOTOSINTESIS

Desty Nurbaety

International Program on Science Education (IPSE) Indonesia University of Education, Indonesia

desty.nurbaety@student.upi.edu

Abstrak

Penelitian mengenai diagnosa miskonsepsi siswa pada konsep struktur tumbuhan dalam kaitannya dengan konsep fotosintesis telah dilaksanakan untuk mengidentifikasi miskonsepsi siswa pada konsep tersebut dengan menggunakan metode menggambar. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah metode deskriptif dengan melibatkan sejumlah siswa (N=32) kelas VIII dan pengambilan sampel dilakukan secara purposive sampling. Data penelitian ini diperoleh melaui gambar siswa, tes pilihan ganda disertai modifikasi Certainty of Response Index (CRI), wawancara, dan angket siswa. Data gambar siswa dianalisis dan dikategorikan berdasarkan lima level gambar yang dikembangkan oleh Köse. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa presentasi tertinggi dari gambar siswa berada pada Level 4. Berdasarkan data gambar, terdapat 25% siswa yang mengalami miskonsepsi pada konsep struktur tumbuhan dan 40,63% siswa pada konsep fotosintesis. Penemuan ini ditunjang dengan analisa tes pilihan ganda beralasan terbuka yang disertai dengan modifikasi CRI. Berdasarkan analisis CRI dan wawancara juga menunjukkan bahwa terdapat 37,63% siswa mengalami miskonsepsi dalam menentukan waktu dan tempat terjadinya fotosintesis, struktur dan fungsi tumbuhan yang berkaitan dengan konsep fotosintesis. Selain itu, penelitian ini menemukan bahwa siswa belum berhasil memahami konsep sistem akar, sistem pucuk, dan fotosintesis sebagai konsep yang saling berhubungan. Penyebab utama miskonsepsi siswa berasal dari siswa itu sendiri, buku, dan interaksinya dengan lingkungan.

Kata kunci: metode menggambar, miskonsepsi siswa, konsep struktur tumbuhan, fotosintesis.

(6)

TABLE OF CONTENTS SHEET OF LEGITIMATION

DECLARATION

ABSTRACT ... i

PREFACE ... ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ... iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS... v

LIST OF TABLES ... vii

LIST OF FIGURES ... viii

LIST OF APPENDICES... ix

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A. Background ... 1

B. Research Problem... 3

C. Research Question ... 3

D. Limitation of Problem ... 4

E. Research Objective ... 4

F. Organization Structure of Research Paper ... 5

CHAPTER II STUDENTS’ MISCONCEPTION ABOUT PLANT STRUCTURE IN RELATION TO PHOTOSYNTHESIS A. Misconception 1. Conceptualizing Misconception ... 6

2. Sources of Misconception ... 7

B. The Use of Drawing Method for Diagnosing Misconception ... 9

C. Identification of Misconception Using CRI ... 11

D. An Overview of Plant Structure and Photosynthesis Concept 1. Plant Structure Concept ... 13

(7)

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

A. Research Design ... 24

B. Population and Sample ... 24

C. Operational Definition ... 25

D. Research Instrument ... 26

E. Research Procedure ... 43

F. Research Plot ... 44

CHAPTER IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION A. Research Result 1. Result of Students’ Drawings... 45

2. Result of CRI... 50

3. Result of Students’ Interview ... 51

4. Result of Questionnaire . ... 52

B. Research Discussion 1. Analysis of Students’ Misconception Through Drawings ... 54

2. Analysis of Students’ Misconception Using CRI ... 59

3. Analysis of Questionnaire ... 67

CHAPTER IV CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION A. Conclusion... 69

B. Recommendation... 70

REFERENCES. ... 71

(8)

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1 Rubric for Students’ Drawing ... 26

Table 3.2 Questionnaire Item Specification ... 27

Table 3.3 Specification of Multiple Choice with Open Reason Item ... 28

Table 3.4 Classification Validity Coefficient... 30

Table 3.5 Classification of Reliability Coefficient ... 31

Table 3.6 Discriminating Power Classification... 32

Table 3.7 Coefficient C lassification Of Difficulty Index ... 33

Table 3.8 Recapitulation of Multiple Choice Item Test... 34

Table 3.9 Interview Guideline ... 36

Table 3.10 Rubric of Level of Drawing . ... 38

Table 3.11 Modified Certainty of Response Test ... 41

Table 4.1 The most frequent elements for function of plants’ organs ... 46

Table 4.2 The most frequent elements for photosynthesis ... 48

Table 4.3 The most frequent organs and organelles ... 48

Table 4.4 Students’ misconception obtained from drawings ... 49

Table 4.5 Percentage of Students’ Misconception Using CRI ... 50

(9)

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1 A typical body plant of angiosperm... 13

Figure 2.2 Monocots and eudicots leaf venation ... 16

Figure 2.3 Variation of leaf shape ... 17

Figure 2.4 Energy from the sun drives the process of photosynthesis ... 18

Figure 2.5 Zooming in on the location of photosynthesis in a plant ... 20

Figure 3.12 Research Plot ... 44

Figure 4.1 Percentage of Students’ Drawing Level ... 45

Figure 4.2 Drawings with Misconception (Level 3) about Plant Structure ... 54

(10)

LIST OF APPENDICES

A. INSTRUMENT JUDGEMENT FORM

Appendix A1. Result of Instruments Judgment ... 77

Appendix A2. Instrument Judgment Forms ... 92

B. RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS Appendix B1. Drawing Instruction Form of Plant Structure ... 98

Appendix B2. Drawing Instruction Form of Photosynthesis ... 99

Appendix B3. Questionnaire Form ...100

Appendix B4. Interview Guideline Form ...102

Appendix B5. Multiple Choice Item Test (PROPOSED) ...104

Appendix B6. Multiple Choice Item Test (USED) ...112

C. RESEARCH RESULTS Appendix C1. Drawings Result for Plant Structure ...126

Appendix C2. Drawings Result for Photosynthesis ...128

Appendix C3. Recapitulation of Misconception ...130

Appendix C4. Interview Transcription ...134

Appendix C5. Questionnaire Result ...137

Appendix C6. Recapitulation of Level of Drawings ...140

D. DOCUMENTATION ...142

E. ADMINISTRATION ...144

(11)

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

A. Background

Students come to school with varying experience and ideas about the natural word. The scope of these ideas are as diverse as the students’ background and they are often different from those of scientist. Fisher stated that these differing frameworks have been described as misconception (Tekkaya, 2002).

Misconceptions can be resulted due to the number of contacts students make with the physical and social world around them (Wiley and Klosterman, 2012), they may occur due to something the student experienced in their personal life, from communication with different teachers and friends or through source of media (Stajonavska et al., 2012). Previous studies also highlighted that textbooks are another prevalent source that contributes to the formation of misconceptions by students (Abimbola and Baba, 1996).

All of the above statements could be described as the origin of formation of misconception and it can result a powerful, extremely persistent, and hard to change, and creating obstacle to further learning (Canpolat et al. in Stajonavska et al., 2012). Then, misconception also is one of important factors which prevent students’ meaningful learning (Köse, 2008). This dangerous condition is one crucial reason why the study of misconception should be investigated well by the science educators.

In education major, there are several methods that used for diagnosing conceptual understanding and misconception, such as open-ended questions (Mondal and Chakraborty, 2013; Ozcan, Yildrim, and Ozgur, 2012), two-tier diagnostic test (Bayrak, 2013; Balushi et al., 2012), interviews about concepts (Stajonavska et al., 2012; Lemma, 2013; Thompson, 2006; Gültekin and Topsakal, 2014), drawings (Halim et al., 2014; and Gultekin and Topsakal, 2014; Wekesa, 2013), and word association (Kurt, 2013). According to Köse (2008), drawings could be considered as simple research instruments that enable easy comparisons at the international level. While many children

(12)

dislike answering the questions, drawings can be completed quickly, easily and in an enjoyable way. Children’s drawings provide a window into their thoughts and feelings; mainly because they reflect an image of his/her mind (Köse, 2008).

Recent research shows that drawing can be used as an effective form of providing a creative way to gather misconceptions and giving insight to alternative conceptions. Drawing activities and interview section are successfully carried out to explore children’s idea about abstract concept, e.g. basic chemical concept (Lemma, 2013). In another studies, drawing is used to improve the students’ performance in biology (Wekesa, 2013) and determine the level of misconception in forces concept (Halim et al., 2014). In the previous studies, the children were asked to draw a plant and label parts of them after the researcher showed them the plants (Gultekin and Topsakal, 2014) and Köse (2008) showed that drawing method is applied to determine university students’ misconception concerning on photosynthesis and respiration. In this study, misconception about plant structure and photosynthesis concept using drawing method in combination with interview are exposed.

Plant structure and photosynthesis are important science concepts which are in the middle school curriculum of many countries. Plant structure concept describes the basic morphology of plants and bridges the students to understand another correlated topics, such as photosynthesis. By acquiring the knowledge of plant structure concept, the students could understand how the plant basic organs as the external structure of plant form specialized function and take the crucial roles in photosynthesis process. Since these fundamental concepts are extremely necessary to be learnt, thus it is very important to determine the misconception and trace the sources of misconception on the relationship between plant structure and photosynthesis concept among middle school students using drawing method.

(13)

B. Research Problem

The research problem of this study is “How is the misconception concerning plant structure in relation to photosynthesis among middle school students that is diagnosed using drawing method?”

C. Research Question

Based on the research problem above, the research questions that developed and explore in this study as follow:

1. What kind of misconceptions that is holded by the middle school students regarding to plant structure include root system and shoot system that diagnosed using drawing method?

2. How is the misconception holded with the photosynthesis in plant among middle school students that diagnosed using drawing method?

3. How is the misconception holded by middle school students about plant structure in relation to photosynthesis that diagnosed using drawing method and modified Certainty of Response Index?

D. Limitation of Problem

In order to bring this study into focus, the problem is limited as follow:

1. Students’ misconceptions are diagnosed using drawing method based on Köse (2008) item test with Modified Certainty of Response Index (CRI) based on Hakim et al. (2012), and interview.

2. Students’ misconception that examined in this study about plant structure that includes the root system and shoot system (i.e. Stems, leaves, and flowers).

3. Students’ misconception that examined in this study about photosynthesis process in plant, include sites of photosynthesis, components needed for photosynthesis, product of photosynthesis, and the role of plant basic organs in relation to photosynthesis.

(14)

E. Research Objective

The objective of this research is to identify students’ misconception about plant structure in relation to photosynthesis using drawing method.

F. Research Benefit

The study was expected to provide some benefits for students, teachers, schools and researcher as follow:

1. Teacher

Enrich teacher’s knowledge of diagnosing method to identify student’s misconception about science concept and discover a better learning strategy that can reduce misconception.

2. Student

Helping the students to contruct and reveal their understanding about certain science concepts (e.g. plant structure and photosynthesis concept) through drawings.

3. School

Planning and preparing a learning strategy and select teaching media (e.g. textbook) which can decrease the potential of misconception in the classroom.

4. Further Research

a. Giving experience to implement drawing method and interview as the method combination for determining students’ misconception in science concept.

b. Contribute the study about student’s misconception that could be reference for other study.

(15)

G. Organization Structure of Research Paper

Chapter one tells about the background and problem identification which become the base of this research. Based on the research problem, the study will be brought into several research questions which determine the objectives of this research. This chapter also is crucial to determine the flow of the next chapters, such as literature review and methodology.

Chapter two gives the fundamental concepts and theories that needed by the author to analyze the result of the findings. Chapter two will be divided into different focus, namely misconception, drawing method, and an overview of plant structure and photosynthesis concept. This chapter is designed to support the argument and result analysis in this research.

Chapter three describes the methodology used in this research. Besides that, the population, sampling technique, and a brief explanation related operational definition. In this chapter three, a set of instruments that applied in this research is explained concisely.

Chapter four contains the research result and discussion. This chapter tells about the findings and analysis concerning on this study. Chapter four also will answer the research problem that has been described in the first chapter. Through chapter 4, each findings are analyzed using a selected theory and supported by previous findings in the same field of research.

Chapter five is the closure chapter which draw the conclusion of this research and give recommendation for the next research.

(16)

(17)

CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY

A. Research Design

The study applied descriptive research method to diagnose students’

misconception about plant structure in relation photosynthesis. According to Best, descriptive research is concerned with how what is or what exists is related to some preceding event that has affected a present condition or event (Cohen et al., 2007). Furthermore, Fraenkel and Wallen (2007) reveal that descriptive studies describe a given state of affairs as fully and carefully as possible.

In this research, the data is gathered using drawing method, while the interview and questionnaire are implemented as the supporting data to complete the study. Then, these data are analyzed and used to describe the current misconception that experienced by the sample of this research.

B. Population and Sample

The location of this research is International Junior High School in Bandung. This school uses English as the formal language of instruction and applies Cambridge Curriculum in combined with National Curriculum of 2013.

The population of this research will be all 8th grade students at International Junior High School X in Bandung. The samples are 32 students

who have learnt about Plant Structure and Photosynthesis in School “X”. The sampling technique that will be chosen is Purposive sampling. Fraenkel and Wallen (2007) stated that purposive sampling is different from convenience sampling in that researchers do not simply study whoever is available but rather use their judgment to select a sample that they believe, based on prior information, will provide the data they need. By using purposive sampling, the researcher selects the samples who have learnt plant structure and photosynthesis concept. It has purpose to diagnose students’ misconception after the students learn plant structure and photosynthesis concept.

(18)

C. Operational Definition

In order to avoid misconception about this research, some operational definitions are explained in this study. Those terminologies are described as follow.

1. Misconceptions in plant structure is the number of students’ drawing about root system and shoot system which not aligned with scientific concept and adjusted to the criteria in the rubric scale and interview as the supporting data. The drawing method of this study is based on Köse (2008).

2. Misconception in photosynthesis is the number of students’ drawings that show scientifically incorrect photosynthesis concept and suit to the criteria of drawing with misconception in the rubric scale which based on Köse (2008). In addition, the interview session is applied to support the findings and the analysis of this study.

3. Drawing method that used in this study was developed by Köse (2008) and

composed by five level of drawings. The students’ misconceptions are

diagnosed based on the third level of drawings which contains spesific criteria to describe students misconception concerning on plant structure in relation to photosynthesis.

4. Certainty of Response Index that applied in this study was developed by Hasan et. al (1999) in combined with answers to multiple choice and open-

reasons that have been developed by Hakim et. al (2012). The students’

misconception about plant structure in relation to photosynthesis are determined, if they give correct answer and incorrect reason; incorrect answer and correct reason; or incorrect answer and reason, with Certainty of Response Index > 2,5.

(19)

D. Research Instrument

In this research, instrument is necessary to be used for gaining idea. These are four types instrument that are used in this research. Those instruments are described below.

1. Drawing Instruction

The drawing instruction is applied to lead the students reflect their understanding about plant structure concept in relation to photosynthesis concept through drawing. This instruction consists of several guided statement related to the concept of plant structure and photosynthesis, which ask the students to draw on the A4- sized paper. The design of drawing instruction is shown in Appendix B1 and B2.

2. Rubric Scale

The rubric scale is used to identify the misconception about plant structure concept and photosynthesis concept that hold by junior high school students. This rubric contains a set of criteria, which categorize the students based on the five levels of conceptual understanding and misconception for these concepts. The design of the rubric scale will be used in this study is the similar rubric that have been used by Köse (2008) and it is shown in Table 3.1. Meanwhile, the modification of Rubric Scale of Drawing is presented in Table 3.10.

Table 3.1 Rubric for Students’ Drawing

Level Criteria

1 No drawing

2 Non-representational drawings 3 Drawings with misconceptions

4 Partial drawings

(20)

3. Questionnaire

The questionnaire is arranged to gain the data of students’ interest in

drawing and learning biology concept. The open- ended questions will be chosen as the format of the questionnaire. Moreover, the questionnaire provide additional findings about students’ interest in drawing and other information which could be used to support analysis in this research.

Table 3.2 Questionnaire Item Specification

No. Indicator Question

1. Students’ interest in learning biology

Do you like learning biology?

(If yes, you may state the reason”)

2. The use of drawing in biology instruction

Have you ever used drawing in learning Plant Structure and Function, photosynthesis? (If yes, you could mention the topics taught by the teacher that involve drawings) 3. Media or source of

teaching that used to adapt the drawings

Where do you usually take/ adapt the figures that used for learning plant structure and function, photosynthesis concept? A. Teacher draws it by him/ herself B. Drawings are adapted from the book C. Models, such as torso

D. Video

E. Flash Animation F. Pictures

Others (please, mention it.) 4. The role of drawing to

increase students’

interest

Could the drawings increase your interest to plant structure and photosynthesis concept? 5. The contribution of

drawing to stimulate

students’ motivation

Could the drawings used by the teacher increase your motivation to learn plant structure and photosynthesis concept? 6. The contribution of

drawing to improve

students’ understanding

Could the drawings improve your

understanding concerning on plant structure and photosynthesis concept?

7. Drawing interest Do you like drawing?

(21)

No. Indicator Question

9. Readability of drawings in teaching media

Are the drawings (e.g. figure) on the book or other teaching media understandable well in learning plant structure and photosynthesis concept?

10. Frequency of drawing usage in describing the

biology concept

Do you often describe the plant structure and photosynthesis concept in the form of

drawing?

4. Item Test in Combined with Certainty of Response Index (CRI)

Besides using drawing method, the students’ misconception about

plant structure in relation to photosynthesis will be identified using multiple choice questions with open- reason and Certainty of Response Index (CRI) that have been developed by Hasan et al. (Hakim et al., 2012). Multiple choice questions consist of 30 questions in combined with open- reason. The content of each questions is adjusted with the plant structure in relation to photosynthesis concept that have been taught in Secondary 2 level or equal with 8th Grade.

Table 3.3 Specification of Multiple Choice with Open Reason Item

Concept Number of

Questions

Plant organs that made up root system and shoot system

1, 2, 3, 4 Function of root system and shoot system and its

relationship with photosynthesis

5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Plant organs and organelles as site of

photosynthesis

11, 12, 13 Components needed for photosynthesis 14, 15, 29, 30 Products of photosynthesis 16, 17, 18, 19,

21, 22, 23 Time when photosynthesis occur 25

General equation of photosynthesis 26

Factors that affect photosynthesis 20, 27, 28

In addition, Certainty of Response Test (CRI) values shows the magnitude of the level of confidence in answering questions. Following criteria set by the CRI value: 0 for total guess the answer; 1 almost guess; 2 not sure; 3 sure; 4 is almost certain; 5 for sure. This value given by the

(22)

students themselves about beliefs when answering each question. In other words, when learners give CRI, actually provide an assessment of the learners themselves for choosing rules or concepts that have been ingrained in his mind so that they can determine the answer to a question (Hakim et al., 2012).

As a diagnostic test, there are several steps that have been designed to develop this instrument, such as:

a. Determining the standard competency and indicators for item test. b. Constructing the specification of concept that will be used in multiple

choice questions with open- reason. c. Making a draft of instrument.

d. Instrument justification that judged by: 1) Assessments in science education lecturer 2) Plant anatomy experts

3) Science teaching and learning lecturers. e. Try out on students.

After being judged by lecturers and some experts in related field, the instrument should be revised and tried out on another class which had learned the topic before. Based on the test results, the instrument questions will be analyzed with the following requirements:

1) Validity

Anderson, S. B. as quoted in Arikunto (2003) revealed that “A

test is valid if it measure what it purpose to measure”. Validity of an instrument is used to measure what it is designed to measure. The aspect that measured through this instrument is cognitive aspect toward plant structure in relation to photosynthesis concept.

The researcher use the Coefficient of Product Moment Karl Pearson to measure the validity of each test item, there is:

(23)

With, : correlation coefficient between x and y variable n : amount of student

x : total score in test item y : total score of student

Interpretation about will be divided into different categories based on Guilford quoted by Arikunto (2003):

Table 3.4 Classification Validity Coefficient Value Interpretation

0,90 ≤ ≤ 1,00 Very high validity

0,70 ≤ <0,90 High validity

0,40 ≤ < 0,70 Medium validity

0,20 ≤ < 0,40 Low validity

0,00 ≤ < 0,20 Very low validity

< 0,00 Invalid

2) Reliability

Anderson stated that validity and reliability are two important factors in developing test instrument, “A reliable measure in one that provides consistent and stable indication of the characteristic

being investigated” (Arikunto, 2003). In order to be said as a reliable, the research instrument has to be stable and consistent, which resulted the similar results even it is done by different people, times and places.

The value of reliability is determined based on coefficient value which is gained by Alpha formula, as follows:

r

=               





2 1 1 _t i s s n n

(Arikunto, 2003) \

(24)

Table 3.5 Classification of Reliability Coefficient

Value

r

₁₁ Interpretation

0,90 ≤ ≤ 1,00 Very high reliability degree

0,70 ≤ <0,90 High reliability degree

0,40 ≤ < 0,70 Medium reliability degree

0,20 ≤ < 0,40 low reliability degree

< 0,20 Very low reliability degree

3) Discriminating Power

Another important procedure in item analysis is calculating the item discrimination power (DP) which can be defined an item test discriminates between high achiever students with low achiever students. Arikunto (2003) to obtain the discrimination power of the items the following formula has been used:

T

RL

RU

DP

2 1





(Arikunto, 2003) Explanation:

DP = Discriminatory power.

RU = The number of tests in the upper group who got the item right.

RL = The number of tests in the lower group who got the item right.

Explanation:

r

_{: reliability coefficient}

s : score variant each test item

n : amount of test item

(25)

Table 3.6 Discriminating Power Classification

4) Difficulty Level

A difficulty index will affect the quality of the item test, because an item test which has a low difficulty index (very difficult) probably cause the students desperate and decrease their spirit to solve the problem of the item test (Arikunto, 2003). This case has led the researcher to investigate the difficulty index for each item test. The difficulty index (P) is calculated using the formula below.

JS B P

Where:

P = Difficulty index

B = students who answer right JS = total amount of students

Arikunto (2003) Value DP Interpretation

Very poor

Poor

Fair

Good

(26)

Classification of difficulty level in each test item that used is based on Arikunto (2003):

Table 3.7 Coefficient Classification of Difficulty Index

Value P Interpretation IK = 0,00 Very difficult 0,00 < IK



0,30 Difficult 0,30< IK



0,70 Medium 0,70< IK <1,00 Easy

(27)

Table 3.8 Recapitulation of Multiple Choice Item Test Question

Number

Discriminating Power (%)

Difficulty

Level Correlation

Significance

Correlation Status

1 42,86 Very Easy 0,624 Very

Significance Accepted

2 0,00 Very Easy NAN NAN Rejected

3 _-14,29 _{Very Easy} _-0,230 _- _Rejected

57,14 Very

Difficult 0,375 Significance Accepted

5 0,00 Medium -0,009 - Revised

6 _14,29 _{Very Easy} _0,267 _- Rejected

7 -14,29 Medium -0,012 - Rejected

8 28,57 Very Easy 0,253 - Rejected

9 28,57 Very Easy 0,580 Very

Significance Accepted

10 42,86 Very

Difficult 0,320 Significance Accepted

11 28,57 Easy 0,325 Significance Accepted

12 0,00 Medium 0,093 - Rejected

13 14,29 Easy 0,379 Significance Accepted

14 28,57 Easy 0,021 - Revised

15 57,14 Medium 0,651 Very

Significance Accepted

16 42,86 Very easy 0,678 Very

Significance Accepted

17 57,14 Medium 0,492 Very

Significance Accepted

18 42,86 Medium 0,337 Significance Accepted

19 57,14 Very

Difficult 0,467

Very

Significance Accepted

20 42,86 Easy 0,533 Very

Significance Accepted

21 57,14 Very Easy 0,561 Very

Significance Accepted

22 57,14 Medium 0,432 Very

Significance Accepted

23 14,29 Medium 0,218 - Rejected

24 0,00 Medium 0,053 - Rejected

25 42,86 Very Easy 0,772 Very

Significance

(28)

Question Number

Discriminating Power (%)

Difficulty

Level Correlation

Significance

Correlation Status

26 -42,86 Very

Difficult -0,645 - Revised

27 28,57 Very Easy 0,267 - Revised

28 57,14 Medium 0,564 Very

Significance Accepted

29 42,86 Medium 0,365 Significance Accepted

30 14,29 Very Easy 0,323 Significance Accepted

31 42,86 Very Easy 0,630 Very

Significance Accepted

32 57,14 Medium 0,442 Very

Significance Accepted

33 57,14 Easy 0,343 Significance Accepted

34 0,00 Difficult 0,041 - Revised

35 14,29 Very Easy 0,351 Significance Accepted

36 71,43 Medium 0,627 Very

Significance Accepted

37 28,57 Medium 0,090 - Rejected

38 42,86 Easy 0,226 - Rejected

39 57,14 Medium 0,390 Significance Accepted

40 14,29 Medium 0,177 - Revised

5. Interview Guideline

After the drawings is evaluated and categorized according to the criteria above, individual interviews will be conducted among the students with randomly chosen. The purpose was to check the validity of the interpretation of the drawings.

In the interview section, students are asked to answer the questions like what is the function of each plant basic organ, photosynthesis concept, in which parts of the plants they take place, the role of leaves as the basic structure of plant in photosynthesis, and what the nutriment of plants is and where they get it from. A detail description of interview guideline is shown in the table below.

(29)

Table 3.9 Interview Guideline

Name :

Class :

Signature :

No. Aspect Indicator Question

1. Teaching methodology Teaching method that

implemented in

learning plant structure and photosynthesis concept

What kind of teaching method (e.g. lecturing, field observation, and etc.) does your teacher choose in teaching plant structure and photosynthesis concept?

2. How should the teacher teach the

concept of plant structure and photosynthesis?

3. Teaching media Learning sources What kind of teaching media that used

in learning structure and photosynthesis concept?

4. Book as the media to

learn plant structure and photosynthesis concept

What kind of book that used to learn these concepts? Mention the name of the book and publisher.

5. Plant structure and

function,

photosynthesis concept on learning biology

The most difficult of plant structure and function concept should be understood by the students?

Which parts of plant structure and function concept are most difficult to be understood?

6. The most difficult of

photosynthesis concept should be understood by the students?

Which parts of plant structure and function concept are most difficult to be understood?

7. Students’

Understanding

Difficulty to describe the concepts using drawing

Is it hard to describe the plant structure and photosynthesis in the form of drawing?

(30)

No. Indicator Question

8. When you are asked to draw the

plant structure concept and photosynthesis, have you ever found the difficulties? Could you like to explain it?

9. Reason of the students’

answer

Why do you draw the concept of plant structure and photosynthesis like this

(researcher shows the interviewees’

drawings)?

10. Students’ certainty of

the answer and the drawings

Are you sure with your answer and the drawings?

11. Concept mastery Researcher several questions related to

structure and function of root system and shoot system.

12. Teacher asks several questions

concerning on plant structure and photosynthesis concept, such as: a. Where are the organelle cells as

the site of photosynthesis?

b. What are the major organs in plant that take a role as sites for

photosynthesis?

c. What are the components needed for photosynthesis?

d. What are products that resulted from photosynthesis?

e. When does photosynthesis occur?

(31)

E. Data Processing

Data obtained from the students’ drawing, questionnaire, multiple choice

questions with open- reason and Certainty of Response Index (CRI), and interview. The detail description of data processing techniques are explained as follows:

1. Drawing Analysis

The students’ drawing of plant structure in relation to photosynthesis concept is analyzed through two steps as follow:

a. Drawing is categorized based on the criteria of level of drawing The concept of plant structure in relation to photosynthesis that has been drawn by the students would be categorized based on the criteria on the level of drawing rubric. The criteria of the rubric is adopted from the rubric that has been developed by Köse (2008).The

students’ drawings are categorized into five level of drawing

according to the specific criteria as shown in the table below.

Table 3.10 Rubric of Level of Drawing

Level of Drawing

Concept Structure and Function

of Plant Photosynthesis

1 No Drawing No response was given to the statements.

No response was given to the statements.

2 Non-

representational Drawings

State identifiable elements of plant structure.

a. State identifiable elements of photosynthesis. b. Include diagrams and

formulations, instead of drawings.

(32)

Level of Drawing Structure and Function

of Plant Photosynthesis

3 Drawing with Misconception

a. Show some

understanding about plant structure. b. Demonstrate some

misconception on the drawings (e.g. students cannot differ petiole and stem; Students draw plant structure and state incorrect function).

a. Show understanding about plant structure. b. Demonstrate some

misconception on the drawings (e.g. students draw the raw materials needed for

photosynthesis and product of

photosynthesis interchangeably). 4 Partial Drawings Draw the structure of plant

incompletely and there is no misconception. For instance, the students only draw the stem to represent the whole plant basic organs.

Draw the components of photosynthesis incompletely and there is no

misconception. For instance, the students only draw water and CO2 as the materials

needed for photosynthesis. 5 Comprehensive

Representation Drawings

Drawings show sound understanding and contained five or more elements of plant structure in combined with the function for each plant parts.

Drawings show sound understanding and contained five or more elements of photosynthesis, as follow: a. Site for photosynthesis:

Leaves, include chlorophyll and chloroplast.

b. Components needed for photosynthesis: carbon dioxide, light, water, mineral, and nutrients. c. Simple Process of

Photosynthesis. d. Product of

(33)

b. Calculation of Students’ Drawing Percentage

After the students’ level of drawing is categorized based on the

criteria above, then the percentage for each level of drawing would be calculated using formula as follow:

% Level of Drawing =

2. Questionnaire Analysis

The questionnaire is used to analyze the students’ interest in

drawing. This instrument contains a set of questions that could give

additional information and findings to support the analysis of students’

misconception about plant structure in relation to photosynthesis. The questionnaire will be processed using a simple formula as follow.

% Students =

3. Certainty of Response Index (CRI) Analysis

Besides using students’ drawing as qualitative data, the identification of students’ misconception about plant structure in relation to photosynthesis concept involves certainty of response index (CRI) which developed by Hasan et al. (1999). Certainty of response index (CRI) is one technique to distinguish the students who understand the concept, misconception, and do not understand the concept (Hakim et al., 2012). In order to analyze the result of CRI data, there are several steps that administered in this research as follow: a. The item test consists of 30 multiple choice questions that

combined with open reason and scale of CRI for each number. b. The category of students’ understanding is determined by the

answer of multiple choice question, reason, and the scale of CRI that chosen by the students. The categorization which adapted from Hakim et. al (2012) is described in the table below.

(34)

Table 3.11 Modified Certainty of Response Test Answer Reason Value of

CRI Description

Correct Correct > 2,5 Understand the concept well Correct Correct <2,5 Understand the concept, but

not sure Correct Incorrect >2,5 Misconception

Correct Incorrect <2,5 Do not understand the concept Incorrect Correct >2,5 Misconception

Incorrect Correct <2,5 Do not understand the concept Incorrect Incorrect >2,5 Misconception

Incorrect Incorrect <2,5 Do not understand the concept

c. Analyze students’ answer to differ the students who understand the concept well, understand the concept but not sure, misconception, and do not understand the concept.

d. The result of students’ understanding category is calculated using a simple formula as follow:

P =

Description:

P : Percentage for each category

f : Number of students for each category N: Total number of students.

(35)

4. Interview Result

After the drawings and CRI item tests were evaluated, individual interviews were conducted about the detailed subjects with randomly chosen 14 students. In this interview, the students were asked several questions which have been constructed by researcher. The interview section is implemented to check and clarify the

drawings and dig more information about students’ misconception. The students’ responses during interview were recorded and written

(36)

F. Research procedure

The procedure of this study consisted of following sequential step, which divide into three stages:

1. Preparation Stage

The activities consist of several steps, they are: a. Conducting literature study.

This part is an initial step that conducted to gain actual information related to the theories and research problem. These data could be taken from compatible resource, such as the latest book, journal, articles, and etc.

b. Choose the topic for implementing research.

c. Determine the school as the place to conduct the research. d. Contact the schools and science teacher.

e. Make a permission letter. f. Conducting prior study.

It could be done by examining schools’ archived file about students

achievement in science subject and observe how the lesson is conducted in the classroom.

g. Determine the research sample. h. Construct and justify the instrument.

2. Implementation Stage

a. Administration the instrument. b. Analyze the data.

c. Recording misconceptions and identifying students holding those misconceptions.

d. Conducting interviews to the students who hold the misconceptions.

(37)

G. Research Plot

Figure 3.12 Research Plot

Problem Identification

Instrument Validation Constructing instrument Choosing topic for conducting the study

Administration the instrument

Recording and identifying students misconceptions

Conducting interviews

Implementation

Stage

Data analysis

Draw conclusion Data processing

Completion

Stage

Determine the sample of research Conducting prior study on

students’ misconception

about plant structure and photosynthesis concept

Preparation

stage

(38)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

A. Conclusion

The drawing method in combined with individual interview and Certainty of Response Index (CRI) has been applied to explore students’ misconception about plant structure in relation to photosynthesis concept and it provides valuable information which can be used as a mirror of

students’ representational world misconceptions and the conclusion can be drawn as follow:

1. The implementation of drawing method in combined with interview have

identified students’ misconception about photosynthesis concept which is

higher than plant structure concept and the misconception intensify on determining time when photosynthesis happen, location of photosynthesis occurred, as well as structure and function of plant that related with photosynthesis concept.

2. The students cannot grasp the idea of root system, shoot system, and photosynthesis as interrelated concept in science.

3. The multiple choice item test in combined with open reason and Certainty of Response Index (CRI) has shown that the percentage of students with misconception is higher than the students understand the

concept well. The students’ misconceptions are mostly found on plant

structure related to the higher plants and lower plants, structure of types of root, function of chlorophyll, products of photosynthesis and components needed for photosynthesis, and time when photosynthesis occur.

(39)

B. Recommendation

Based on the research findings, there are several recommendation that could be considered for a better and more qualified research as follow: 1. The drawing method as one instrument to diagnose misconception

could be used to identify the misconception in other science concepts. Then, it would be better if the construction of item test in combined with CRI should be based on the misconception pattern on the topic that used, so that the misconception could be identified precisely.

2. The researcher should consider the students’ interest of drawings, because this aspect gives influence to the result of the drawings. 3. Not only descriptive study, the drawing method also could be

developed by next researcher in other design of research, such as

experiment that focus on diagnosing students’ misconception and

remediation.

4. In order to obtain the data which merely represent students’ misconception among middle school students, the number of samples should be increased. So that the samples do not only come from one school.

(40)

REFERENCES

Abimbola, I. O. and Baba, S. (1996). Misconception and Alternative Conceptions in Science Textbooks: The Role of Teachers as Filters. The American

Biology Teacher. Vol. 58 (No.1), 14- 19. [Online]. Retrieved from

http://www.unilorin.edu.ng/publications/abimbolaio/MISCONCEPTION% 20&%20ALTERNATIVE%20CONCEPTION%20IN%20SCI.%20TEXT BOOKS.pdf. [Accessed on September 26, 2014]

Al- Balushi et al. (2012). Omani Twelfth Grade Students’ Most Common Misconceptions In Chemistry. Science Education International Journal. Vol. 23 (No. 3), 221-240. [Online]. Retrieved from http://www.icaseonline.net/.

[Accessed on September 5, 2014].

Alias, M., Gray, D. E., and Black, T. R. (2002). Attitudes towards Sketching and Drawing and the relationship with Spatial Visualisation Ability in Engineering Students. International Education Journal. Vol. 3 (No. 3),

165- 175. [Online]. Retrieved from

http://ehlt.flinders.edu.au/ucation/iej/articles. [Accessed on October 7, 2014].

Anderson et al. (2014). Understanding Early Elementary Children’s Conceptual Knowledge of Plant Structure and Function through Drawings. Life

Sciences Education. Vol. 13 (--), 375–386. [Online]. Retrieved from www.lifescied.org. [Accessed on November 18, 2014].

Ariandini et. al. (2013). Identifikasi Miskonsepsi Siswa SMP pada Konsep Fotosintesis Melalui Analisis Gambar. Jurnal Pengajaran MIPA. Vol. 18 (No. 2), 178- 184.

Arikunto, S. (2003). Dasar- dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara. Azman, et al. (2013). The Level of Misconceptions on Force and Motion among

Physics Pre-Services Teachers in UPSI. [Online]. 2nd International

Seminar on Quality and Affordable Education. October 7-10, 2013.

Retrieved from http://educ.utm.my/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/191.pdf. Bayrak, B. K. (2013). Using Two-Tier Test to Identify Primary Students’

Conceptual Understanding and Alternative Conceptions in Acid Base.

Mevlana International Journal of Education. Vol. 3 (No. 2), 19-26.

[Online]. Retrieved from http://mije.mevlana.edu.tr/http://dx.doi.org/. [Accessed on September 7, 2014].

(41)

[Online]. Retrieved from http://www.staffs.ac.uk/personal/sciences/rj2/. [Accessed on October 7, 2014].

Campbell et. al. (2012). Campbell Biology Concepts and Connections 8th Edition.

San Fransisco: Pearson Benjamin Cummings.

Cherney et al. (2006). Children’s Drawings: A mirror to their minds. Educational Psychology. Vol. 26, (No. 1), 127–142. [Online]. Retrieved from http://www.icherney.com/Research/Publications/Cherney_Drawings.pdf.

[Accessed on October 7, 2014].

Chin, C. (2009). Eliciting Students' Ideas and Understanding In Science: Diagnostic Assessment Strategies for Teachers. Teaching and Learning. Vol. 21(No. 2), 72-85. [Online]. Retrieved from https://repository.nie.edu.sg/bitstrea. [Accessed on October 7, 2014]. Cohen et. al. 2007. Research Methods in Education. New York: Routledge Taylor

and Francis Group. [Online]. Retrieved from http://knowledgeportal.pakteachers.org/sites/knowledgeportal.pakteachers. org/files/resource/RESEARCH%20METHOD%20COHEN%20ok.pdf. [Accessed on October 17, 2014].

Çokadar, H. (2012). Photosynthesis and Respiration Processes: Prospective

Teachers’ Conception Levels. Education and Science. Vol. 37 (No. 164).

[Online]. Retrieved from http://egitimvebilim.ted.org.tr/index.. [Accessed on September 7, 2014].

Esau, K. (1964). Plant Anatomy. Singapore: John Wiley & Sons. Inc.

Fraenkel, J. R. and Wallen, N. E. (2007). How to Design and Evaluate Research

in Education, Sixth Edition. New York: Mc-Graw Hill.

Gültekin, M. and Topsakal, Ü. U. (2014). Diagnosing Students’ Misconceptions about Plant Parts in Turkey. International Journal of Humanities and

Social. Vol. 4, (No. 7), 134- 142. [Online]. Retrieved from

http://www.ijhssnet.com/journals/Vol_4_No_7_1_May_2014/17.pdf. [Accessed on September 2, 2014].

Hakim et. al. (2012). Student Concept Understanding of Natural Products Chemistry in Primary and Secondary Metabolites Using the Data Collecting Technique of Modified CRI. International Online Journal of

Educational Sciences. Vol. 4, (No. 7), 544-553. [Online]. Retrieved from

http://journaldatabase.info/download/pdf/student_concept_understanding_ natural.pdf

Halim, L., Yong T. K., and Meerah, T. S. M. (2014). Overcoming Students’ Misconceptions on Forces in Equilibrium: An Action Research Study.

(42)

http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ce.2014.511117. [Accessed on September 5, 2014].

Hasan, et al. (1999) Misconception and The Certainty of Response Index (CRI).

Physics Education. Vol. 34 (No. 5). [Online]. Retrieved from

http://iopscience.iop.org/0031-9120/34/5/304/. [Accessed on March 1, 2015].

Karasov et al. (2014). CK-12 Life Science For Middle School. [Online]. Retrieved from http://www.ck12.org. [Accessed on October 5, 2014].

Keles et al. (2010). The Understanding Levels of Pre- Service Teachers’ of Basic Science Concepts' Measurement Units and Devices, Their Misconceptions and Its Causes. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences. Vol. 9 (--) 390– 394. [Online]. Retrieved from http://educ.utm.my/wp-content/.

[Accessed on September 5, 2014].

Korstanje, M. E. (2010). The Power of Projective Drawings: A New Method for Researching Tourist Experiences. e-Review of Tourism Research (eRTR), Vol. 8 (No. 5), 85- 101. [Online]. Retrieved from http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/1777884/3133_eRTR_ Korstanje-libre.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJ56TQJRTWSMT. [Accessed on October 7, 2014].

Köse, S. (2008). Diagnosing Student Misconceptions: Using Drawings as a Research Method. World Applied Sciences Journal, Vol. 3 (No. 2), 283-293. [Online]. Retrieved from http://www.idosi.org/wasj/wasj3(2)/20.pdf. [Accessed on September 5, 2014].

Kurt, H. (2013). Biology student teachers’ cognitive structure about “Living thing". African Journal of Medical Education. Vol. 1 (5), 085-093.

Retrieved from

[Online].http://internationalscholarsjournals.org/download.php?id=501488 445 [Accessed on September 26, 2014].

Lemma, A. (2013). A Diagnostic Assessment of Eighth Grade Students’ and Their

Teachers’ Misconceptions about Basic Chemical Concepts. African

Journal of Chemical Education. Vol. 3 (No. 1), 39- 59. [Online]. Retrieved

from http://www.ajol.info/index.php/ajce/article/download/84852/74838. [Accessed on September 5, 2014].

Levetin and McMahon. (2008). Introduction to Plant Life: Botanical Principles.

(43)

Mahardika, R. (2014). Identifikasi Miskonsepsi Siswa Menggunakan Certainty Of

Response Index (CRI) dan Wawancara Diagnosis Pada Konsep Sel.

Undergraduate Thesis. Jakarta: UIN Syarifhidayatullah.

Mondal, B. C. and Chakraborty A. (2013). Misconceptions in Chemistry: Its

Identification and Remedial Measures. [Online]. Retrieved from on

Agustus 15, 2013].

Mustaqim, T. A. (2014). Identifikasi Miskonsepsi Siswa Menggunakan Certainty

Of Response Index (CRI) dan Wawancara Diagnosis Pada Konsep Fotosintesis dan Respirasi. Undergraduate Thesis. Jakarta: UIN Syarifhidayatullah. Undergraduate Thesis. Jakarta: UIN Syarifhidayatullah.

Ozcan, T., Yildirim, O., and Ozgur, S. (2012). Determining of the University

Freshmen Students’ Misconceptions and Alternative Conceptions about Mitosis and Meiosis. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences.Vol. 46(--), 3677- 3680. [Online]. Retrieved from http://ac.els-cdn.com/S187704281. [Accessed on October 1, 2014].

Posner at al. (1982). Accommodation of a Scientific Conception: Toward a Theory of Conceptual Change. Science Education. Vol. 66 (No. 2), 221-

227. [Online]. Retrieved from

http://www.ijese.com/IJESE_v3n4_Cakir.pdf.

Provasnik, S. (2011). TIMSS 2011 Grade 8 Released Science Items. [Online]. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/timss/pdf/TIMSS2011_G8_Science.pdf. [Accessed on March 2, 2015].

Salisbury, F. B. and Ross, C. W. (1992). Plant Physiology. California: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Stojanovska et al. 2012. Addressing Misconceptions about the Particulate Nature of Matter among Secondary-School and High-School Students in the Republic of Macedonia. Scientific Research Journal. Vol. 3 (No. 5) 619-631. [Online]. Retrieved from http://www.scirp.org/journal/. [Accessed on September 6, 2014].

Tekkaya. (2002). Misconceptions as Barrier to Understanding Biology. Hacettepe

Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 23 (--), 259- 266. [Online]. Retrieved from http://www.efdergi.hacettepe.edu.tr/. [Accessed on September 26, 2014].

Thompson F. and Logue S. (2006). An exploration of common student misconceptions in science. International Education Journal. Vol. 7(No. 4), 553-559. [Online]. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/. [Accessed on September 17, 2014].

(44)

Treagust, D. F. (1988). Development and Use of Diagnostic Tests to Evaluate

Students’ Misconception in Science. International Journal of Science Education. Vol. 10 (No.2), 159-169. [Online]. Retrieved from http://www.researchgate.net/profile/David_Treagust2/publication/2489746 62_Development_and_use_of_diagnostic_tests_to_evaluate_students%27_ [Accessed on March 23, 2014]

Wiley, A. and Klosterman, M. (2012). More is Less. [Online]. Retrieved from

http://childrenscenteratcaltech.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Early-Childhood-Misconceptions.pdf. [Accessed on September 26, 2014]. Wekesa, E. T. (2013). An Assessment of How Students’ Mastery of Drawing

Skills in Secondary Schools Affects Performance in Biology in Bungoma West District, Kenya. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational

Research and Policy Studies. Vol. 4 (No.3), 525-533 [Online]. Retrieved

from

http://jeteraps.scholarlinkresearch.com/articles/AN%20ASSESSMENT%2 0OF%20HOW%20STUDENTS.pdf. [Accessed on September 26, 2014].

(1)

B. Recommendation

developed by next researcher in other design of research, such as

experiment that focus on diagnosing students’ misconception and

remediation.

(2)

REFERENCES

Abimbola, I. O. and Baba, S. (1996). Misconception and Alternative Conceptions in Science Textbooks: The Role of Teachers as Filters. The American

Biology Teacher. Vol. 58 (No.1), 14- 19. [Online]. Retrieved from

http://www.unilorin.edu.ng/publications/abimbolaio/MISCONCEPTION% 20&%20ALTERNATIVE%20CONCEPTION%20IN%20SCI.%20TEXT BOOKS.pdf. [Accessed on September 26, 2014]

[Accessed on September 5, 2014].

165- 175. [Online]. Retrieved from

http://ehlt.flinders.edu.au/ucation/iej/articles. [Accessed on October 7, 2014].

Anderson et al. (2014). Understanding Early Elementary Children’s Conceptual Knowledge of Plant Structure and Function through Drawings. Life

Sciences Education. Vol. 13 (--), 375–386. [Online]. Retrieved from www.lifescied.org. [Accessed on November 18, 2014].

Ariandini et. al. (2013). Identifikasi Miskonsepsi Siswa SMP pada Konsep Fotosintesis Melalui Analisis Gambar. Jurnal Pengajaran MIPA. Vol. 18 (No. 2), 178- 184.

Arikunto, S. (2003). Dasar- dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.

Azman, et al. (2013). The Level of Misconceptions on Force and Motion among Physics Pre-Services Teachers in UPSI. [Online]. 2nd International

Seminar on Quality and Affordable Education. October 7-10, 2013.

Retrieved from http://educ.utm.my/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/191.pdf.

Bayrak, B. K. (2013). Using Two-Tier Test to Identify Primary Students’ Conceptual Understanding and Alternative Conceptions in Acid Base.

Mevlana International Journal of Education. Vol. 3 (No. 2), 19-26.

[Online]. Retrieved from http://mije.mevlana.edu.tr/http://dx.doi.org/. [Accessed on September 7, 2014].

Bekhit, N. S., Thomas, G. V., and Jolley, R. P. (2005). The use of drawing for psychological assessment in Britain: Survey ﬁndings. Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice. Vol. 78 (--), 205–217.

(3)

[Online]. Retrieved from http://www.staffs.ac.uk/personal/sciences/rj2/. [Accessed on October 7, 2014].

Campbell et. al. (2012). Campbell Biology Concepts and Connections 8th Edition.

San Fransisco: Pearson Benjamin Cummings.

[Accessed on October 7, 2014].

Cohen et. al. 2007. Research Methods in Education. New York: Routledge Taylor

and Francis Group. [Online]. Retrieved from

http://knowledgeportal.pakteachers.org/sites/knowledgeportal.pakteachers. org/files/resource/RESEARCH%20METHOD%20COHEN%20ok.pdf. [Accessed on October 17, 2014].

Çokadar, H. (2012). Photosynthesis and Respiration Processes: Prospective Teachers’ Conception Levels. Education and Science. Vol. 37 (No. 164).

[Online]. Retrieved from http://egitimvebilim.ted.org.tr/index.. [Accessed on September 7, 2014].

Esau, K. (1964). Plant Anatomy. Singapore: John Wiley & Sons. Inc.

Fraenkel, J. R. and Wallen, N. E. (2007). How to Design and Evaluate Research

in Education, Sixth Edition. New York: Mc-Graw Hill.

Gültekin, M. and Topsakal, Ü. U. (2014). Diagnosing Students’ Misconceptions about Plant Parts in Turkey. International Journal of Humanities and

Social. Vol. 4, (No. 7), 134- 142. [Online]. Retrieved from

http://www.ijhssnet.com/journals/Vol_4_No_7_1_May_2014/17.pdf. [Accessed on September 2, 2014].

Educational Sciences. Vol. 4, (No. 7), 544-553. [Online]. Retrieved from

http://journaldatabase.info/download/pdf/student_concept_understanding_ natural.pdf

Halim, L., Yong T. K., and Meerah, T. S. M. (2014). Overcoming Students’ Misconceptions on Forces in Equilibrium: An Action Research Study.

(4)

http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ce.2014.511117. [Accessed on September 5, 2014].

Hasan, et al. (1999) Misconception and The Certainty of Response Index (CRI).

Physics Education. Vol. 34 (No. 5). [Online]. Retrieved from

http://iopscience.iop.org/0031-9120/34/5/304/. [Accessed on March 1, 2015].

Karasov et al. (2014). CK-12 Life Science For Middle School. [Online]. Retrieved from http://www.ck12.org. [Accessed on October 5, 2014].

[Accessed on September 5, 2014].

Kurt, H. (2013). Biology student teachers’ cognitive structure about “Living thing". African Journal of Medical Education. Vol. 1 (5), 085-093.

Retrieved from

[Online].http://internationalscholarsjournals.org/download.php?id=501488 445 [Accessed on September 26, 2014].

Lemma, A. (2013). A Diagnostic Assessment of Eighth Grade Students’ and Their

Teachers’ Misconceptions about Basic Chemical Concepts. African

Journal of Chemical Education. Vol. 3 (No. 1), 39- 59. [Online]. Retrieved

from http://www.ajol.info/index.php/ajce/article/download/84852/74838. [Accessed on September 5, 2014].

Levetin and McMahon. (2008). Introduction to Plant Life: Botanical Principles.

[Online]. Retrieved from

http://www.life.illinois.edu/ib/102/Levetin/4.%20P. [Accessed on October 13, 2014].

Loveless, A. R. (1991). Prinsip- prinsip Biologi Tumbuhan untuk Daerah Tropik. Jakarta: PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama.

(5)

Mahardika, R. (2014). Identifikasi Miskonsepsi Siswa Menggunakan Certainty Of

Response Index (CRI) dan Wawancara Diagnosis Pada Konsep Sel.

Undergraduate Thesis. Jakarta: UIN Syarifhidayatullah.

Mondal, B. C. and Chakraborty A. (2013). Misconceptions in Chemistry: Its

Identification and Remedial Measures. [Online]. Retrieved from on

Agustus 15, 2013].

Mustaqim, T. A. (2014). Identifikasi Miskonsepsi Siswa Menggunakan Certainty

Ozcan, T., Yildirim, O., and Ozgur, S. (2012). Determining of the University Freshmen Students’ Misconceptions and Alternative Conceptions about Mitosis and Meiosis. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences.Vol. 46(--), 3677- 3680. [Online]. Retrieved from http://ac.els-cdn.com/S187704281. [Accessed on October 1, 2014].

Posner at al. (1982). Accommodation of a Scientific Conception: Toward a Theory of Conceptual Change. Science Education. Vol. 66 (No. 2), 221-

227. [Online]. Retrieved from

http://www.ijese.com/IJESE_v3n4_Cakir.pdf.

Provasnik, S. (2011). TIMSS 2011 Grade 8 Released Science Items. [Online]. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/timss/pdf/TIMSS2011_G8_Science.pdf. [Accessed on March 2, 2015].

Salisbury, F. B. and Ross, C. W. (1992). Plant Physiology. California: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Tekkaya. (2002). Misconceptions as Barrier to Understanding Biology. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 23 (--), 259- 266. [Online]. Retrieved from http://www.efdergi.hacettepe.edu.tr/. [Accessed on September 26, 2014].

(6)

Treagust, D. F. (1988). Development and Use of Diagnostic Tests to Evaluate Students’ Misconception in Science. International Journal of Science Education. Vol. 10 (No.2), 159-169. [Online]. Retrieved from http://www.researchgate.net/profile/David_Treagust2/publication/2489746 62_Development_and_use_of_diagnostic_tests_to_evaluate_students%27_ [Accessed on March 23, 2014]

Wiley, A. and Klosterman, M. (2012). More is Less. [Online]. Retrieved from

http://childrenscenteratcaltech.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Early-Childhood-Misconceptions.pdf. [Accessed on September 26, 2014].

Wekesa, E. T. (2013). An Assessment of How Students’ Mastery of Drawing Skills in Secondary Schools Affects Performance in Biology in Bungoma West District, Kenya. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational

Research and Policy Studies. Vol. 4 (No.3), 525-533 [Online]. Retrieved

from

http://jeteraps.scholarlinkresearch.com/articles/AN%20ASSESSMENT%2 0OF%20HOW%20STUDENTS.pdf. [Accessed on September 26, 2014].

THE USE OF DRAWING METHOD FOR DIAGNOSING STUDENTS’ MISCONCEPTION ABOUT PLANT STRUCTURE IN RELATION TO PHOTOSYNTHESIS.

STRUCTURE IN RELATION TO PHOTOSYNTHESIS

ABOUT PLANT STRUCTURE

IN RELATION TO PHOTOSYNTHESIS

THE USE OF DRAWING METHOD FOR DIAGNOSING

STUDENTS’ MISCONCEPTION ABOUT PLANT

STRUCTURE IN RELATION TO PHOTOSYNTHESIS

PENGGUNAAN METODE MENGGAMBAR UNTUK

MENDIAGNOSA MISKONSEPSI SISWA PADA KONSEP

STRUKTUR TUMBUHAN DALAM KAITANNYA DENGAN

KONSEP FOTOSINTESIS

r



r

T

RL

RU

DP





r





Implementation

Stage

Completion

Stage

Preparation

stage

Parts

Dokumen yang terkait

The Use of Visualization in Desuggestopedia Teaching Method to Improve the Students’ Reading Comprehension

THE USE OF TENSE DIAGRAM MEDIA AS THE EFFORT TO DECREASE THE STUDENTS MISCONCEPTION IN LEARNING TENSES.

The Use Of Drawing Method For Diagnosing Students’ Misconception About Plant Structure In Relation To Photosynthesis.

THE EFFECT OF ROLE PLAY LEARNING METHOD TO STUDENT’S ACHIEVEMENT IN PHOTOSYNTHESIS TOPIC.

The use of reflection to enhance ELESP students` self-awareness in Learning Structure II.

The use of reflection to enhance ELESP students` self awareness in Learning Structure II

THE USE OF ROUNDROBIN STRUCTURE TO IMPROVE STUDENTS SPEAKING SKILLS.

THE USE OF PERSON DEIXIS IN RELATION TO POLITENESS FUNCTION

The Vaisnava Writings of a Saiva Intelle

5. The use of ICT for motivating students to learn English - The use of ICT for motivating students to learn English

Dokumen yang Anda mencari sudah siap untuk unduhkan