Artificial Intelligence-Based Science Literacy Assessment Integrated with Papuan Ethnochemistry: Content Validity and Readability on Stoichiometry
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59211/mjpjetl.v4i2.378Keywords:
literasi sains; etnokimia Papua; Artificial Intelligence; validitas isi; keterbacaan instrumen.Abstract
Penelitian ini mengembangkan serta menguji validitas isi dan keterbacaan instrumen Scientific Literacy Assessment (SLA) terintegrasi etnokimia berbasis sistem Artificial Intelligence (AI) pada materi stoikiometri kelas XI. Penelitian menggunakan metode Research and Development yang diadaptasi dari model ADDIE, dibatasi sampai tahap Development (Analysis, Design, Development), dan dilaksanakan di SMA YPPK Taruna Dharma, Jayapura. Analisis kebutuhan yang melibatkan guru kimia menunjukkan bahwa asesmen selama ini masih berorientasi pada penguasaan konsep dan perhitungan rutin, belum mengukur literasi sains, dan belum mengintegrasikan budaya lokal. Sebanyak 15 butir soal uraian dikembangkan dengan menyisipkan konteks etnokimia Papua, seperti pengolahan sagu, pembakaran kayu tradisional, pengasapan ikan, dan pemanfaatan kapur sirih, yang masing-masing dilengkapi rubrik penskoran dan struktur umpan balik berbasis AI. Validitas isi yang dinilai oleh 10 validator (tujuh dosen pendidikan kimia dan tiga guru kimia) menggunakan indeks Aiken's V menunjukkan seluruh butir valid, dengan nilai berkisar 0,85 hingga 0,97 (rerata 0,91). Uji coba terbatas terhadap 15 siswa kelas XI menunjukkan keterbacaan yang baik serta respons positif terhadap penskoran dan umpan balik langsung dari sistem AI, meskipun sebagian siswa masih kesulitan mengubah informasi naratif menjadi langkah kuantitatif. Instrumen ini berpotensi menjadi alternatif asesmen yang valid dan kontekstual, namun memerlukan pengujian empiris skala luas
Downloads
References
[1] OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 Results (Volume I): The State of Learning and Equity in Education. Paris: OECD Publishing.
[2] Fuadi, H., Robbia, A. Z., Jamaluddin, J., & Jufri, A. W. (2020). Analisis faktor penyebab rendahnya kemampuan literasi sains peserta didik. Jurnal Ilmiah Profesi Pendidikan, 5(2), 108-116. https://doi.org/10.29303/jipp.v5i2.122
[3] Shwartz, Y., Ben-Zvi, R., & Hofstein, A. (2006). The use of scientific literacy taxonomy for assessing the development of chemical literacy among high-school students. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 7(4), 203-225.
[4] Listiani, H., Satar, S., Nurbaya, N., & Akobiarek, M. (2024). Profil kemampuan literasi sains (scientific literacy) siswa kelas X SMA YPK Diaspora Kotaraja, Papua. Pendas: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Dasar, 9(4), 767-778. https://doi.org/10.23969/jp.v9i4.18952
[5] Putri, V. L., & Dj, L. (2022). Description of students learning difficulties in the basic law of chemistry. Jurnal Pijar MIPA, 17(5), 597-603. https://doi.org/10.29303/jpm.v17i5.3855
[6] Azizah, N., & Premono, S. (2021). Identifikasi potensi budaya lokal berbasis etnokimia di Kabupaten Bantul. Journal of Tropical Chemistry Research and Education, 3(1), 53-60. https://doi.org/10.14421/jtcre.2021.31-06
[7] Wardani, L. K., Mulyani, B., Ariani, S. R. D., Yamtinah, S., Masykuri, M., Ulfa, M., & Shidiq, A. S. (2023). Effect of ethnochemistry-based teaching approach on students’ learning outcomes. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(12), 11029-11037. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i12.5532
[8] Muniroh, N., Rusilowati, A., & Isnaeni, W. (2022). Instrument development of science literacy assessment with socio-sciences contents in natural science learning for elementary school. Journal of Educational Research and Evaluation, 11(1), 15-22. https://doi.org/10.15294/jere.v11i1.55421
[9] Dwivedi, Y. K., Hughes, L., Ismagilova, E., Aarts, G., Coombs, C., Crick, T., et al. (2021). Artificial intelligence (AI): Multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportunities, and agenda for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 57, 101994. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.08.002
[10] Khlaif, Z., Odeh, A., & Bsharat, T. R. K. (2024). Generative AI-powered adaptive assessment. In Generative Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 157-176). https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-6397-3.ch007
[11] Aiken, L. R. (1980). Content validity and reliability of single items or questionnaires. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 40(4), 955-959. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316448004000419
[12] Musyarofah, A. A. S., Anggraini, A. L., Sudarti, S., Handayani, R. D., Jamhari, M., & Haeruddin, H. (2023). Analysis of the comparison of science literacy skills of students at MTs Nurul Huda Situbondo. EDUKASIA: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran, 4(2), 2507-2516. https://doi.org/10.62775/edukasia.v4i2.619
[13] Morales-Doyle, D., Childress Price, T., & Chappell, M. J. (2019). Chemicals are contaminants too: Teaching appreciation and critique of science in the era of NGSS. Science Education, 103(6), 1347-1366. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21546
[14] Branch, R. M. (2009). Instructional Design: The ADDIE Approach. New York: Springer.
[15] Gormally, C., Brickman, P., & Lutz, M. (2012). Developing a Test of Scientific Literacy Skills (TOSLS): Measuring undergraduates’ evaluation of scientific information and arguments. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 11(4), 364-377. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-03-0026
[16] Pratiwi, Z. E., Hidayati, S. N., & Aulia, E. V. (2024). Analisis profil literasi sains siswa kelas VIII di Sidoarjo berdasarkan indikator PISA 2015. Nusantara: Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia, 4(4), 1131–1140. https://doi.org/10.14421/njpi.2024.v4i4-17
[17] Yusmar, F., & Fadilah, R. E. (2023). Analisis rendahnya literasi sains peserta didik Indonesia: Hasil PISA dan faktor penyebab. LENSA (Lentera Sains): Jurnal Pendidikan IPA, 13(1), 11–19. https://doi.org/10.24929/lensa.v13i1.283
[18] Sari, D. N. A., Rusilowati, A., & Nuswowati, M. (2017). Pengaruh pembelajaran berbasis proyek terhadap kemampuan literasi sains siswa. PSEJ (Pancasakti Science Education Journal), 2(2), 114–120. https://doi.org/10.24905/psej.v2i2.741
[19] Dinata, A. N., Adisendjaja, Y. H., & Amprasto, A. (2018). Pengaruh field trip terhadap kemampuan literasi sains dan sikap terhadap sains siswa SMA pada materi ekosistem. Assimilation: Indonesian Journal of Biology Education, 1(1), 8–13. https://doi.org/10.17509/aijbe.v1i1.11449
[20] OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 Assessment and Analytical Framework. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/dfe0bf9c-en
[21] Lestari, E. A., Harjito, Susilaningsih, E., & Wijayati, N. (2021). Analisis miskonsepsi menggunakan tes diagnosa three-tier multiple choice pada materi stoikiometri. Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan Kimia, 15(2), 2824–2830. https://doi.org/10.15294/jipk.v15i2.29171
[22] Sidauruk, S. (2005). Miskonsepsi stoikiometri pada siswa SMA. Jurnal Penelitian dan Evaluasi Pendidikan, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.21831/pep.v7i2.2024
[23] Sari, S. F. I., Fatah, A. H., & Anggraeni, M. E. (2020). Analisis materi ajar kimia SMA/MA kelas X pada konsep stoikiometri. Jurnal Ilmiah Kanderang Tingang, 11(1), 139–151. https://doi.org/10.37304/jikt.v11i1.82
[24] Basuki, K. H. (2020). Analisis kesalahan mahasiswa dalam menyelesaikan soal stoikiometri. Jurnal Ilmiah Wahana Pendidikan, 6(4), 641–651. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4298027
[25] Sariati, N. K., Suardana, I. N., & Wiratini, N. M. (2020). Analisis kesulitan belajar kimia siswa kelas XI pada materi larutan penyangga. Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran, 4(1), 100–108. https://doi.org/10.23887/jipp.v4i1.15469
[26] Jofrishal, & Seprianto. (2020). Implementasi modul kimia pangan melalui pendekatan etnokimia di SMK Negeri Aceh Timur program keahlian tata boga. Jurnal IPA & Pembelajaran IPA, 4(2), 168–177. https://doi.org/10.24815/jipi.v4i2.17262
[27] Jumriani, Mutiani, Putra, M. A. H., Syaharuddin, & Abbas, E. W. (2021). The urgency of local wisdom content in social studies learning: Literature review. The Innovation of Social Studies Journal, 2(2), 103–109. https://doi.org/10.20527/iis.v2i2.3076
[28] Wahyudiati, D., & Fitriani. (2021). Etnokimia: Eksplorasi potensi kearifan lokal Sasak sebagai sumber belajar kimia. Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia Indonesia, 5(2), 102–111. https://doi.org/10.23887/jpk.v5i2.38537
[29] Aldiansyah, Pasa, J. I., Muttaqin, M. R., Awaliyah, N. N., & Erika, F. (2023). Literatur review: Keterkaitan pembelajaran kimia terhadap pendekatan etnokimia di Indonesia. CHEDS: Journal of Chemistry, Education, and Science, 7(2), 238–246. https://doi.org/10.30743/cheds.v7i2.8416
[30] Zahro, A. N., Sumarni, W., & Kurniawan, C. (2023). Tradition of making lontong tuyuhan in Rembang Regency as a science learning resource. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(1), 207–215. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i1.2197
[31] Gazali, Z., & Andriani, R. (2025). Integrasi etnokimia dalam pengajaran IPA: Analisis literatur sistematis pada pendekatan berbasis kearifan lokal di SMA. Jurnal Pendidikan MIPA, 15(4), 1843–1853. https://doi.org/10.37630/jpm.v15i4.3783
[32] Lee, S. S., & Moore, R. L. (2024). Harnessing generative AI (GenAI) for automated feedback in higher education: A systematic review. Online Learning, 28(3), 82–104. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v28i3.4593
[33] Banihashem, S. K., Kerman, N. T., Noroozi, O., Moon, J., & Drachsler, H. (2024). Feedback sources in essay writing: Peer-generated or AI-generated feedback? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(1), 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00455-4
[34] Naseer, F., Khalid, M. U., Ayub, N., Rasool, A., Abbas, T., & Afzal, M. W. (2024). Automated assessment and feedback in higher education using generative AI. In R. C. Sharma & A. Bozkurt (Eds.), Transforming Education With Generative AI: Prompt Engineering and Synthetic Content Creation (pp. 433–461). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-1351-0.ch021
[35] Meyer, J., Jansen, T., Schiller, R., Liebenow, L. W., Steinbach, M., Horbach, A., & Fleckenstein, J. (2024). Using LLMs to bring evidence-based feedback into the classroom: AI-generated feedback increases secondary students' text revision, motivation, and positive emotions. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6, 100199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100199
[36] Haudek, K. C., & Zhai, X. (2024). Examining the effect of assessment construct characteristics on machine learning scoring of scientific argumentation. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 34(4), 1482–1509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-023-00385-8
[37] Swindell, A., Greeley, L., Farag, A., & Verdone, B. (2024). Against artificial education: Towards an ethical framework for generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) use in education. Online Learning, 28(2), 7–28. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v28i2.4438
[38] Zhai, X., Yin, Y., Pellegrino, J. W., Haudek, K. C., & Shi, L. (2020). Applying machine learning in science assessment: A systematic review. Studies in Science Education, 56(1), 111–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2020.1735757
[39] Beggrow, E. P., Ha, M., Nehm, R. H., Pearl, D., & Boone, W. J. (2014). Assessing scientific practices using machine-learning methods: How closely do they match clinical interview performance? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(1), 160–182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-013-9461-9
[40] Baker, R. S., & Hawn, A. (2022). Algorithmic bias in education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 32(4), 1052–1092. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-021-00285-9
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
URN
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Cartika Candra Ledoh
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors grant the journal the right of first publication. which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is properly cited. Authors are responsible for ensuring that any third-party materials included in their work have proper permissions.
