Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2019 - 2024
0.23
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Pendidikan Administrasi Perkantoran (JPAP)
Fia Maulidia
Universitas Negeri Surabaya
Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Other

Published : 1 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 1 Documents
Search

 1 
Pengembangan Instrumen Penilaian Tes Soal Pilihan Ganda Berbasis HOTS Pada Mata Pelajaran Administrasi Umum Jurusan OTKP SMK Negeri 1 Lamongan Fia Maulidia; Triesninda Pahlevi
Jurnal Pendidikan Administrasi Perkantoran (JPAP) Vol 8 No 1 (2020): April 2020
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Surabaya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (471.169 KB) | DOI: 10.26740/jpap.v8n1.p136-145

Abstract

The development of HOTS-based assessment instruments for general administration subjects aims to find out developing assessment instruments, quality of developing assessment instruments, and students' high-level thinking skills. This type of research is R&D, using the 4D development model with the stages of defining, designing, developing, and disseminating. This study only reached the development stage because the subject of this study was limited to class X OTKP SMK Negeri 1 Lamongan. The results showed that, material quality by material experts 100% (very strong), evaluation experts 89% (very strong), and linguists 62% (strong). 25 questions are valid and 5 questions are invalid, the reliability is 0.666 (high). Of the difficulty of the questions, 7 questions (23%) are easy, 22 questions (74%) are moderate, and 1 question (3%) is difficult. From the power of differentiation, 14 questions (47%) are very good, 12 questions (40%) are good, 3 questions (10%) are enough, and 1 question (3%) is not good. From the questioners, 20 questions (67%) had several functions and 10 questions (33%) all functioned, then 25 best questions were taken based on validity. Of the high-level thinking skills of students, 6 students (9%) are very good, 18 students (26%) are good, 45 students (64%) are sufficient, and 1 student (1%) is lacking.
Co-Authors Triesninda Pahlevi