Mapping Students’ Cognitive Profiles on Newtonian Mechanics: A Rasch-Based Analysis via Four-Tier Digital Diagnostic Assessment
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58524/oler.v6i1.1218Keywords:
Cognitive profile, Diagnostic assessment, Four-tier instrument, Newtonian Mechanics, Rasch ModelAbstract
This study aims to develop a four-tier digital diagnostic instrument based on Google Forms and utilize it to map the cognitive ability profiles of high school students on Newton's Second Law across six levels of the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy. This study adopted a Research and Development design using the Research Design and Development model, and the resulting instrument was administered to 92 10th-grade students at a public high school in Bandar Lampung. Content validity was assessed by three experts with an average validity of 95.23%, while psychometric quality was analyzed using the Rasch Partial Credit Model through Ministep 5.10.0.0 based on 75 response records, resulting in a person reliability of 0.86 and a person separation of 2.47, sufficient to differentiate between student ability strata. Since each cognitive level is represented by only a few items, the overall psychometric quality of the instrument was evaluated using Rasch analysis, while the overall and Bloom-level cognitive profiles were mapped descriptively using achievement percentages. Profile mapping revealed high overall performance. Student achievement remained stable at the remembering, understanding, and applying levels, but declined at the analyzing and evaluating levels. C5 emerged as the lowest point, with significant student accumulation in the Sufficient category, particularly in reasoning about the role of friction and resultant force under balanced force conditions. This tiered profile allows teachers to design remediation that targets cognitive levels where students' understanding is weak, rather than simply re-teaching the material in its entirety.
References
Adimayuda, R., Suhandi, A., Samsudin, A., Suhendi, E., Setiawan, A., & Fratiwi, N. J. (2025). Breaking misconceptions: Technology-integrated MORE model for meaningful learning of momentum and impulse. Online Learning in Educational Research, 5(1), 25–40. https://doi.org/10.58524/oler.v5i1.606
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. Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Arief, M. K., Handayani, L., & Dwijananti, P. (2012). Identifikasi kesulitan belajar fisika pada siswa RSBI: Studi kasus di RSMABI se Kota Semarang. UPEJ Unnes Physics Education Journal, 1(2), 1-10.
Arikunto, S. (2010). Prosedur penelitian suatu pendekatan praktik. Rineka Cipta.
Aris, N. M., Ibrahim, N. H., & Halim, N. (2025). Design and development research (DDR) approach in designing design thinking chemistry module to empower students’ innovation competencies. Journal of Advanced Research in Applied Sciences and Engineering Technology, 44(1), 55–68. https://doi.org/10.37934/araset.44.1.5568
Arlianty, W. N., Febriana, B. W., Diniaty, A., & Fauzi’ah, L. (2018). Student profile in completing questions based on cognitive level of bloom’s taxonomy by Anderson and Krathwohl. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2026(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5065023
Bond, T. (2015). Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental Measurement in the Human Sciences. Routledge.
Boone, L., Soenens, B., & Luyten, P. (2014). When or why does perfectionism translate into eating disorder pathology? A longitudinal examination of the moderating and mediating role of body dissatisfaction. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 123(2), 412–418. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036254
Boone, W. J. (2016). Rasch analysis for instrument development: Why, when, and how? CBE—Life Sciences Education, 15(4), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-04-0148
Bouchée, T., de Putter-Smits, L., Thurlings, M., & Pepin, B. (2022). Towards a better understanding of conceptual difficulties in introductory quantum physics courses. Studies in Science Education, 58(2), 183–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2021.1963579
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn. National academy press.
Bussotti, P. (2025). The concept of force: an educational itinerary with a historical support. Proceedings of the 6th International Baltic Symposium on Science and Technology Education (BalticSTE2025), Šiauliai, 16–19 June, 2025 (pp. 47–70). Scientia Socialis. https://doi.org/10.33225/BalticSTE/2025.47
Chen, S. (2009). Shadows: Young Taiwanese children’s views and understanding. International Journal of Science Education, 31(1), 59–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701633145
Chen, Y.C. (2025). Cultivating a higher level of student agency in collective discussion: Teacher strategies to navigate student scientific uncertainty to develop a trajectory of sensemaking. International Journal of Science Education, 47(3), 440–473. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2024.2333714
Choiriyah, S., Ramadhan, S., Nugroho, A., Pembangunan, H. R. P., & Muharom, F. (2025). Artificial intelligence-driven learning assessment in faculties of education: An exploratory study. Munaddhomah: Jurnal Manajemen Pendidikan Islam, 6(3), 482–495. https://doi.org/10.31538/munaddhomah.v6i3.1937
Chu, H. C., Hwang, G. J., Tsai, C. C., & Tseng, J. C. (2010). A two-tier test approach to developing location-aware mobile learning systems for natural science courses. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1618–1627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.07.004
Csapó, B., & Molnár, G. (2019). Online Diagnostic assessment in support of personalized teaching and learning: The eDia system. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(7), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01522
Curtis, D. A., Lind, S. L., Boscardin, C. K., & Dellinges, M. (2013). Does student confidence on multiple‐choice question assessments provide useful information? Medical Education, 47(6), 578–584. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12147
Ding, K., Cai, Z., & Zheng, Z. (2024). Advanced diagnostic framework for analyzing student emotional and cognitive patterns: A big data approach to personalized teaching. Journal of Computational Methods in Sciences and Engineering, 1(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1177/14727978251322746
Fadillah, D. P., & Istikomah, I. (2021). The strategy of school literacy culture in elementary school. Nazhruna: Jurnal Pendidikan Islam, 4(3), 503–517. https://doi.org/10.31538/nzh.v4i3.1614
Foster, C., Woodhead, S., Barton, C., & Clark-Wilson, A. (2022). School students’ confidence when answering diagnostic questions online. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 109(3), 491–521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10084-7
Fratiwi, N. J., Samsudin, A., Ramalis, T. R., Saregar, A., Diani, R., Irwandani, Rasmitadila, & Ravanis, K. (2020). Developing MeMoRI on newton’s laws: for identifying students’ mental models. European Journal of Educational Research, 9(2), 699–708. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.9.2.699
Fulmer, G. W., Chu, H.-E., Treagust, D. F., & Neumann, K. (2015). Is it harder to know or to reason? Analyzing two-tier science assessment items using the rasch measurement model. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 1(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41029-015-0005-x
Grazziotin-Soares, R., Blue, C., Feraro, R., Tochor, K., Ardenghi, T. M., Curtis, D., & Ardenghi, D. M. (2021). The interrelationship between confidence and correctness in a multiple-choice assessment: Pointing out misconceptions and assuring valuable questions. BDJ Open, 7(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41405-021-00067-4
Gustina, E., Viyanti, V., & Herlina, K. (2025). A need analysis for developing multi-representation assessment instruments assisted by thunkable to measure argumentation skills in fluid materials. Indonesian Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(2), 502–518. https://doi.org/10.24042/bb6k5224
Horcajo, J., Santos, D., & Higuero, G. (2022). The effects of self-efficacy on physical and cognitive performance: An analysis of meta-certainty. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 58(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2021.102063
Irianti, E. (2021). Identifikasi miskonsepsi siswa pada materi cahaya menggunakan four tier diagnostics test. Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika Undiksha, 11(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.26740/bioedu.v11n1.p60-67
Istiyono, E., Dwandaru, W. S. B., Fenditasari, K., Ayub, M. R. S. S. N., & Saepuzaman, D. (2023). The development of a four-tier diagnostic test based on modern test theory in physics education. European Journal of Educational Research, 12(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.12.1.371
Janah, A., Mindyarto, B., & Ellianawati. (2021). Developing four-tier diagnostic test to measure students’ misconceptions on simple harmonic motion material. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1918(5), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1918/5/052050
Kaltakci-Gurel, D., Eryilmaz, A., & McDermott, L. C. (2017). Development and application of a four-tier test to assess pre-service physics teachers’ misconceptions about geometrical optics. ReseaRch in Science & Technological educaTion, 35(2), 238–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2017.1310094
Kuo, B. C., Chen, C. H., & de la Torre, J. (2018). A cognitive diagnosis model for identifying coexisting skills and misconceptions. Applied Psychological Measurement, 42(3), 179–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621617722791
Laliyo, L. A. R., Botutihe, D. N., & Panigoro, C. (2019). The development of two-tier instrument based on distractor to assess conceptual understanding level and student misconceptions in explaining redox reactions. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 18(9), 216–237. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.18.9.12
Li, D., Zong, X., Huang, Q., Wu, F., Huang, Y., Ge, Y., Zhang, W., & Yuan, C. (2023). Validation of the simplified Chinese version of PROMIS Parent Proxy-25 Profile in parents of children with cancer. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 72(1), 19–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedn.2023.05.016
Linacre, J. (1994). Sample size and item calibration stability. Rasch Mes Trans., 7(1), 1-6.
Linn, R. L. (2008). Measurement and assessment in teaching. Pearson Education India.
Liu, G., & Fang, N. (2016). Student misconceptions about force and acceleration in physics and engineering mechanics education. International Journal of Engineering Education, 32(1), 19–29.
Lubis, M. S. A., Fatmawati, E., Pratiwi, E. Y. R., Sabtohadi, J., & Damayanto, A. (2022). Understanding curriculum transformation towards educational innovation in the era of all-digital technology. Nazhruna: Jurnal Pendidikan Islam, 5(2), 526–542. https://doi.org/10.31538/nzh.v5i2.2110
Ma, H., Yang, H., Li, C., Ma, S., & Li, G. (2025). The effectiveness and sustainability of tier diagnostic technologies for misconception detection in science education: A systematic review. Sustainability, 17(7), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17073145
Maharani, L., Rahayu, D., Amaliah, E., Rahayu, R., & Saregar, A. (2019). Diagnostic test with four-tier in physics learning: Case of misconception in Newton’s Law material. Journal of Physics: Conference series, 1155(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1155/1/012022
Mahmudi, I., Ismail, M., Rizki Sista, T., Saifulloh, A., & Syarifah. (2026). ACTFL-based computerised adaptive testing for quality management in Arabic instruction at an Islamic university. Munaddhomah: Jurnal Manajemen Pendidikan Islam, 7(3), 604–620. https://doi.org/10.31538/munaddhomah.v7i3.2908
Maison, Asrial, Susanti, N., Effrita, A., & Tanti. (2021). Identification of students’ misconception about light using a four-tier instrument. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1876(1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1876/1/012063
Maiyanti, A. A., Huda, S., Anggraini, A., Laili, U. F., Muniroh, L., & Umam, R. (2025). Transformation of physics learning: Integrating virtual laboratories to improve students' scientific literacy skills. Online Learning in Educational Research, 5(1), 155–172. https://doi.org/10.58524/oler.v5i1.661
Malaterre, C., Javaux, E. J., & López-García, P. (2023). Misconceptions in Science. Perspectives on Science, 31(6), 717–743. https://doi.org/10.1162/posc_a_00590
Mardian, V., Samsudin, A., Utama, J. A., Suwarma, I. R., & Coştu, B. (2023). Validity and reliability of elasticity multiple-choice items (EMCI) using Rasch model. Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Fisika Al-Biruni, 12(2), 265–276. https://doi.org/10.24042/jipfalbiruni.v12i2.17037
Marinda, L. (2020). Teori perkembangan kognitif jean piaget dan problematika pada anak usia sekolah dasar. Jurnal Kajian Perempuan Dan Keislaman, 13(1), 116–152. https://doi.org/10.35719/annisa.v13i1.26
Maulina, D., Wijaya, A. P., Viyanti, V., Rakhmawati, I., Ibrahim, N. H., & Meriza, N. (2026). The relationship between self-efficacy and problem-solving ability in biology learning at the senior high school. Biosfer: Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi, 19(1), 78–88. https://doi.org/10.21009/biosferjpb.58149
Morton, J. P., Doran, D. A., & MacLaren, D. P. (2008). Common student misconceptions in exercise physiology and biochemistry. Advances in Physiology Education, 32(2), 142–146. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00095.2007
Mustofa, H. A., Sandanadas, E., Mohtar, L. E., & Faresta, R. A. (2024). Identifying student prior-knowledge and conceptual changes profile on Newton law using by using POE (predict, observe, and explain) as probing understanding strategy. Journal of Science and Mathematics Letters, 12(1), 80–91. https://doi.org/10.37134/jsml.vol12.1.10.2024
Nahadi, N., Firman, H., & Kurniadi, H. (2018). Development and validation of chemistry virtual test based multiple representations. Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn), 12(1), 44–51. https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v12i1.6963
Nahak, R. L. (2024). Pengembangan asesmen diagnostik kognitif berbasis kearifan lokal masyarakat ende lio. Edukatif : Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, 6(5), 5825–5835. https://doi.org/10.31004/edukatif.v6i5.7562
Nasution, R. H., Wijaya, T. T., Adi Putra, M. J., & Hermita, N. (2021). Analisis miskonsepsi siswa SD pada materi gaya dan gerak. Journal of Natural Science and Integration, 4(1), 11-21. https://doi.org/10.24014/jnsi.v4i1.10851
Novela, E., Viyanti, V., & Rohman, F. (2025). Adaptive assessment tool: Analysis of digital instrument development needs to measure critical thinking skills in static fluid materials. Indonesian Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(3), 820–829. https://doi.org/10.24042/ijsme.v8i3.29563
Önder Çelikkanlı, N., & Kızılcık, H. (2022). A review of studies about four-tier diagnostic tests in physics education. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 19(4), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2022.175
Patricia, A., & Sabani, S. (2025). Analisis miskonsepsi siswa sma pada hukum newton menggunakan four-tier test berbasis CRI. Relativitas: Jurnal Riset Inovasi Pembelajaran Fisika, 8(2), 160–168. https://doi.org/10.29103/relativitas.v8i2.22835
Payan-Carreira, R., Sacau-Fontenla, A., Rebelo, H., Sebastião, L., & Pnevmatikos, D. (2022). Development and validation of a critical thinking assessment-scale short form. Education Sciences, 12(12), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12120938
Petrillo, J., Cano, S. J., McLeod, L. D., & Coon, C. D. (2015). Using classical test theory, item response theory, and rasch measurement theory to evaluate patient-reported outcome measures: A comparison of worked examples. Value in Health, 18(1), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2014.10.005
Putranta, H., & Afifah, F. (2025). Development of the four-tier diagnostic test to identify student misconceptions in the static fluids chapter. Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, 18(4), 268–281. https://doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2025.180403
Rasikah, S. 2024. Profil kognitif peserta didik berdasarkan taksonomi bloom revisi menggunakan asesmen mathsci konteks keislaman jenjang kelas XII SMA/MA (Skripsi). Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah.
Resbiantoro, G., & Setiani, R. (2022). A review of misconception in physics: The diagnosis, causes, and remediation. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 19(2), 403–427.
Richey, R. C., & Klein, J. D. (2014). Design and development research. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_12
Romine, W. L., Schaffer, D. L., & Barrow, L. (2015). Development and application of a novel Rasch-based methodology for evaluating multi-tiered assessment instruments: Validation and utilization of an undergraduate diagnostic test of the water cycle. International Journal of Science Education, 37(16), 2740–2768. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1105398
Sagatbek, A., Oni, T. K., Miller, E. A., Gabdullina, G., & Balta, N. (2024). Do High school students learn more or shift their beliefs and attitudes toward learning physics with the social constructivism of problem-based learning? Education Sciences, 14(12), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14121280
Santosa, S., & Jazuli, M. F. (2022). The digital madrasah as an idea of IT-based Islamic education. Nazhruna: Jurnal Pendidikan Islam, 5(2), 379–391. https://doi.org/10.31538/nzh.v5i2.2121
Sari, A. N., Viyanti, V., & Ertikanto, C. (2023). Teachers’ perceptions of physics scientific argumentation test instruments based on modern test theory using question modeling through e-learning edpuzzle LMS. Indonesian Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6(3), 405–415. https://doi.org/10.24042/ijsme.v6i3.18991
Segado, M. A. 2025. Intuitive but wrong: Uncovering student misconceptions about force and motion with bayesian item-response methods (Doctoral dissertation). Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Septiyani, E., & Nanto, D. (2021). Four-tier diagnostic test assisted website for identifies misconceptions heat and temperature. Jurnal Penelitian & Pengembangan Pendidikan Fisika, 7(1), 35–42. https://doi.org/10.21009/1.07104
Soeharto, S., Csapó, B., Sarimanah, E., Dewi, F., & Sabri, T. (2019). A review of students’ common misconceptions in science and their diagnostic assessment tools. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 8(2), 247–266. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v8i2.18649
Suhandi, A., Samsudin, A., Fratiwi, N. J., Nurdini, N., Feranie, S., Purwanto, M. G., Linuwih, S., & Coştu, B. (2025). Altering misconceptions: How e-rebuttal texts on Newton’s laws reconstructs students’ mental models. Frontiers in Education, 10(4), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1472385
Sumintono, B. (2015). Aplikasi pemodelan rasch pada assessment pendidikan. Trim Komunikata.
Supurwoko, S., Gunawan, K. D. H., & Hudha, M. N. (2025). Validity analysis of VR-based particle dynamics module development using the rasch model. Online Learning In Educational Research (OLER), 5(2), 441–455. https://doi.org/10.58524/oler.v5i2.803
Sutopo. (2016). Pemahaman mahasiswa tentang konsep-konsep dasar gelombang mekanik. Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika Indonesia 12, 12(5), 41–53.
Sutrisno, S., Maison, M., Marzal, J., & Kurniawan, W. Rapid artificial diagnostic test in intelligent teacher assistant system (ITAS) to identify misconceptions on kinematics. In: M. L. Firdaus & A. Defianti, Ed., Mathematics and Science Education International Seminar 2021 (meseis 2021), Atlantis Press, Bengkulu, 2023, pp. 316-324. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-38476-012-1_39
Suwasono, P., Koes H. S., Adi P. N., & Saniso, E. (2025). A significant reducing misconception on newton’s law under purposive scaffolding and problem-based misconception supported modeling instruction. Open Education Studies, 7(1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1515/edu-2025-0091
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
Tan, A. L., Ong, Y. S., Ng, Y. S., & Tan, J. H. J. (2023). STEM problem solving: inquiry, concepts, and reasoning. Science & Education, 32(2), 381–397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00310-2
Taslidere, E. (2016). Development and use of a three-tier diagnostic test to assess high school students’ misconceptions about the photoelectric effect. Research in Science & Technological Education, 34(2), 164–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2015.1124409
Tsui, C., & Treagust, D. (2010). Evaluating secondary students’ scientific reasoning in genetics using a two‐tier diagnostic instrument. International Journal of Science Education, 32(8), 1073–1098. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690902951429
Uswatun, & Mubarak, S. (2024). Pengembangan instrumen tes diagnostik four-tier untuk mengidentifikasi miskonsepsi materi konsep mol dan stoikiometri. Al Kawnu: Science and Local Wisdom Journal, 4(1), 34–49.
Vaske, J. J., Beaman, J., & Sponarski, C. C. (2017). Rethinking internal consistency in Cronbach’s alpha. Leisure Sciences, 39(2), 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400.2015.1127189
Vicovaro, M. (2023). Grounding intuitive physics in perceptual experience. Journal of Intelligence, 11(10), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence11100187
Viyanti, Shintya, R. E., Rosidin, U., Suyatna, A., & Farawahidah, N. (2025). Analysis of project-based problem-solving skills of optical equipment materials with heller and heller steps. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 14(2), 241–250. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v14i2.23810
Viyanti, Sunyono, Rosdiana, T., Anggreini, Jarwadi, & Priowicaksono, N. (2024). Developing electronic student worksheets based on ethnoscience to train smart risk-taking behaviour and growth mindset. Jurnal Pendidikan MIPA, 25(1), 127–141. https://doi.org/10.23960/jpmipa/v25i1.pp127-141
Weber, J., & Wilhelm, T. (2024). Contributing factors to the improvement of conceptual understanding in a computer-based intervention in Newtonian dynamics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 20(2), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.20.020130
Wedana, I. W. W., Viyanti, & Permadi, D. (2025). Development of e-LKPD based on android-assisted problem-based learning to improve critical thinking ability of learners. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 3132(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/3132/1/012028
Winarti, W., Pardiyanto, P., & Kurnianto, A. (2021). Senior high school students' understanding of Newton's laws in outer space: Identification of misconceptions. Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Fisika Al-Biruni, 10(2), 219–230. https://doi.org/10.24042/jipfalbiruni.v10i2.8997
Yang, D., & Sianturi, I. A. J. (2019). Assessing students’ conceptual understanding using an online three‐tier diagnostic test. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 35(5), 678–689. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12368
Yordan, A., & Fahyuni, E. F. (2021). Child-friendly IRE learning through digital storytelling in the COVID-19 pandemic. Nazhruna: Jurnal Pendidikan Islam, 4(3), 590–605. https://doi.org/10.31538/nzh.v4i3.1682
Yulia, G., Liudmila, L., Anna, B., Valentina, L., & Sergei, S. (2022). The development of critical thinking skills in mobile learning: Fact-checking and getting rid of cognitive distortions. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education, 10(2), 51–68. https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2022-10-2-51-68
Zain, A. Z., Samsudin, A., & Hasanah, L. (2025). Diagnostic instrument test of renewable energy topics: Analysis of conceptual change students using the rasch approach. Online Learning In Educational Research (OLER), 5(2), 231–243. https://doi.org/10.58524/oler.v5i2.675
Zainuri, A., & Saepuloh, S. (2022). Electronic media pillar of learning evaluation in madrasah. Nazhruna: Jurnal Pendidikan Islam, 5(3), 1216–1227. https://doi.org/10.31538/nzh.v5i3.2383
Zhai, X. (2022). Assessing high‐school students’ modeling performance on Newtonian mechanics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 59(8), 1313–1353. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21758
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Viyanti Viyanti, Dinda Tara Cahyani, Fakthur Rohman
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Online Learning in Educational Research is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with Online Learning in Educational Research agree to the following terms:
Copyright Retention: Authors retain the copyright of their work without any restrictions.
Publishing Rights: Authors retain the right to publish and distribute their work without any restrictions.
License Agreement: By publishing with Online Learning in Educational Research, authors agree that their work will be licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA). This license allows others to share and adapt the work, provided that appropriate credit is given, any changes are indicated, and the new creations are licensed under the same terms.
