Development of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) Assessment in Plant and Animal Reproduction Systems
Keywords:
Higher Order Thinking Skills, HOTS Assessment, 4D Model, Science Education, Reproduction System, Item DevelopmentAbstract
Background: Assessment practices in schools are still largely dominated by Lower Order Thinking Skills (LOTS) items, with 72% categorized as C1 and the remainder as C2, limiting students’ opportunities to develop higher-order thinking skills such as analysis, evaluation, and creation. Therefore, an appropriate assessment design strategy is needed to support the development of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS), particularly in science learning on the topic of plant and animal reproduction.
Methods: This study employed a research and development approach using the Four-D (4D) model, which consists of Define, Design, Develop, and Disseminate stages. Data were collected through analysis of existing assessment practices, expert validation, empirical testing, and responses from students and teachers.
Results: The Design stage produced 30 HOTS items aligned with core competencies and learning indicators and supported by contextual stimuli. The Develop stage indicated that the instrument was highly feasible, with expert validation results averaging 90.63% (Aiken’s V = 0.875). Empirical testing showed that 24 items were valid, with a reliability coefficient of 0.868, moderate difficulty levels, and good discrimination indices. Statistical analysis revealed significant differences in scores based on gender (p = 0.000), where female students performed better at C4–C5 levels, while male students excelled at C6. Student responses were highly positive (98.70%), and teachers confirmed the effectiveness of the assessment in measuring higher-order thinking skills.
Conclusion: The HOTS assessment design strategy based on the 4D model is effective in producing valid, reliable, and pedagogically relevant instruments, and it contributes to improving the quality of science education, particularly in fostering students’ higher-order thinking skills.
References
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555
Crowe, A., Dirks, C., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2019). Biology in Bloom: Implementing Bloom's taxonomy to enhance student learning in biology. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 7(4), 368–381. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.08-05-0024
Fuadiyah, S., Selaras, G. H., Melta, D., & Rahmi, D. (2023). The urgency of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) base on development of biology assessment instruments for class XI students of SMA/MA. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Biology, Science and Education (IcoBioSE 2021) (pp. 3–8). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-94-6463-166-1_2
Hake, R. R. (1999). Analyzing change/gain scores. American Educational Research Association's Division D, Measurement and Research Methodology.
Han, C., & Xiang, J. (2025). Alignment analysis between China college entrance examination physics test and curriculum standard based on E-SEC model. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 23(1), 215–234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-024-10468-0
Hussamah, Fatmawati, D., & Miharja, F. J. (2018). The development of biology learning materials based on Indonesian Qualifications Framework and learning outcomes of students. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 7(1), 17–24. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v7i1.11263
Jarupunphol, P., Flek, L., & Hui, S. C. (2025). Applying Cronbach's alpha to ensure reliable online testing in e-learning environments. In R. Silhavy & P. Silhavy (Eds.), Artificial intelligence and system engineering. CoMeSySo 2024. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems (Vol. 1490, pp. 91–100). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-96759-7_8
Khoy, B. (2025). Unlocking cognitive learning objectives: A comprehensive evaluation of how textbooks and syllabi align with revised Bloom's taxonomy across disciplines. Current Perspectives, 45, 189–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-024-00295-2
Kibble, J. D. (2017). Best practices in summative assessment. Advances in Physiology Education, 41(1), 110–119. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00116.2016
Knight, P. G., & Cogo, S. (2021). Human reproduction and development. In BI1HRD2 Module (pp. 1–3). University of Reading, School of Biological Sciences.
Kuncoro, K. S., Suyanto, E., & Suciati. (2022). The relationship between metacognitive awareness and critical thinking skills in science learning. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 11(3), 386–397. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v11i3.35790
Li, D., Meng, L., & Fan, X. (2024). Development and validation of a higher-order thinking skills scale for major students in the interior design discipline for blended learning. BMC Medical Education, 24, Article 287. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05268-5
Musliha, S., Ikhsan, M., & Fajrina, S. (2021). The analysis of higher order thinking skills (HOTs) in the test questions constructed by English teachers. English Language Teaching Educational Journal, 4(2), 118–127. https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v4i2.3250
Nkhoma, M. Z., Lam, T. K., Richardson, J., Kam, B., & Lau, K. H. (2017). Developing case-based learning activities based on the revised Bloom's taxonomy. Informing Science, 20, 85–105. https://doi.org/10.28945/3689
Ravand, H., Shahi, R., Effatpanah, F., & Moghadamzadeh, A. (2025). Measuring cognitive levels in high-stakes testing: A CDM analysis of a university entrance examination using Bloom's Taxonomy. Frontiers in Education, 10, Article 1644811. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1644811
Razmjoo, S. A., & Kazempourfard, E. (2012). On the representation of Bloom's revised taxonomy in Interchange coursebooks. The Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 4(1), 171–204.
Ritchie, K. L., Gingerich, A. C., Barr, N., Bateman, W., Boyce, S., Desy, J., Fuller, K., Hecker, K., Cameron, S., MacNeil, J., Oksanen, K., Philpott, B., & Wright, B. (2019). Incorporating higher order and deep learning in a large, lecture-based human physiology course: Can we do it? Advances in Physiology Education, 43(3), 359–369. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00126.2019
Sepriyanti, N., Murni, A., Jazwinarti, J., & Nasra, E. (2022). Analysis of students' higher-order thinking skills in mathematics learning based on gender perspective. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2157(1), Article 012018. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2157/1/012018
Simonsmeier, B. A., Peiffer, H., Flaig, M., & Schneider, M. (2025). The Cronbach's alpha of domain-specific knowledge tests before and after learning: A meta-analysis of published studies. Educational Psychology Review, 37, 1–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09982-y
Taber, K. S. (2017). The use of Cronbach's alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1273–1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2
Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach's alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53–55. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd
Thiagarajan, S., Semmel, D. S., & Semmel, M. I. (1974). Instructional development for training teachers of exceptional children: A sourcebook. Indiana University.
Vrbanović Lisac, M., Garašić, D., & Lukša, Ž. (2025). Enhancing higher order thinking skills to improve understanding of biological content: A quasi-experimental study. Natural Sciences Education, 54(1), Article e70023. https://doi.org/10.1002/nse2.70023
Watrin, L., Geiger, M., Wilhelm, O., & Rudinger, G. (2022). Change and stability in the factorial structure of knowledge in adulthood. Intelligence, 90, Article 101607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2021.101607
Widiantie, R., Handayani, H., Setiawati, I., & Roqiqulqolby, A. (2022). Development of higher order thinking skills assessment based on scientific article reviews. In Proceedings of the 2nd Universitas Kuningan International Conference on System, Engineering, and Technology, UNISET 2021 (pp. 288–294). EAI. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.2-12-2021.2320320
Zakariya, Y. F. (2022). Cronbach's alpha in mathematics education research: Its appropriateness, overuse, and alternatives in estimating scale reliability. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 1074430. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1074430
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Erna Juwita, Prasetyorini Prasetyorini, Dadang Jaenudin, Vinsensius Felix Putra Andy Liman
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
