Email this article An Integrated Diagnostic Profile of Undergraduate Students’ Cognitive Processes, Mental Models, and Learning Interest in Moon Phase Concepts Using Rasch Measurement and Qualitative Analysis
This study profiled undergraduate students’ cognitive processes, mental models, and learning interest regarding moon phases using an integrated empirical approach. A convergent mixed-methods design was employed in which quantitative and qualitative data were collected concurrently and then merged. Cognitive processes were measured using an eight-item test aligned with the revised Bloom’s taxonomy (C3–C5), and learning interest was assessed using a Likert scale questionnaire; mental models were inferred from students’ written explanations and confirmed through semi-structured interviews. A total of 65 first-year students from Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia participated through purposive sampling. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the Rasch model, whereas qualitative data were analyzed thematically. The Rasch analysis indicated acceptable item fit (MNSQ 0.65–1.27), high item reliability (0.96), and acceptable person reliability (0.73), although the two most difficult items (CE1 and T) exceeded most students’ ability level. Mean performance decreased systematically across cognitive levels, from applying (C3) to analyzing (C4) and evaluating (C5). Mental-model analysis showed that 40.0% of students held Initial models, 50.8% Synthetic models, and 9.2% Scientific models, while 61.5% reported high learning interest. These results reveal a consistent gap between students’ motivational readiness and their cognitive–conceptual readiness, indicating that high interest functions as an entry condition for engagement rather than an indicator of conceptual mastery. These findings indicate that students’ high learning interest should be treated as motivational readiness rather than evidence of conceptual mastery, thereby highlighting the need for scaffolded, diagnostic-based, and differentiated astronomy instruction.
Keywords: cognitive processes, learning interest, mental models, moon phases, rasch analysis.
Amiruddin, M. Z. Bin, Samsudin, A., Suhandi, A., Nata, E. P. D., Sari, & Arrafi, W. Q. L. (2023). The potential of artificial intelligence (Ai) in the field of education and physics learning: a literature review. UIN Imam Bonjol International Conference on Islamic Education / “Islamic Education in Era of Artificial Intelligence: Opportunities and Challenges,” December, 432–444.
Anderson, E, Santos, B. S., Marques, B., Santos, B. S., & Dias, P. (2024). EUROGRAPHICS 2024: An overview of teaching a virtual and augmented reality course at postgraduate level for ten years. Computers & Graphics, 124(September), 104088. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cag.2024.104088
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives.
Arslan, A. S., & Durikan, U. (2016). Teachers’ mental models of basic astronomy concepts. Science Education International, 27(1), 88–116.
Assem, H. D., Nartey, L., Appiah, E., & Aidoo, J. K. (2023). A review of students’ academic performance in physics: attitude, instructional methods, misconceptions and teachers qualification. European Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 4(1), 84–92. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejedu.2023.4.1.551
Bayraktar Ş. (2009). Velocity Ideas about lunar phases. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 6(2), 12–23.
Bryce, T. G. K., & Blown, E. J. (2012). Size of the earth, sun and moon children ’ s concepts of the shape and size of the earth, sun and moon. International Journal of Science Education, December, 1–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.750432
Greca, I., & Moreira, M. (2000). Mental models, conceptual models, and modelling. International Journal of Science Education - INT J SCI EDUC, 22, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006900289976
Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111–127.
Kaharu, S. N., & Mansyur, J. (2021). The development of a test to explore the students’ mental models and external representation patterns of hanging objects. Pegem Eğitim ve Öğretim Dergisi, 11(4), 110–125. https://doi.org/10.47750/pegegog.11.04.11
Kurnaz, M. A., & Değermenci, A. (2012). Mental models of 7th grade students on sun, earth and moon 7. sınıf öğrencilerinin güneş , dünya ve ay ile ilgili zihinsel modelleri. International Journal of Science Education, 11(1), 137–150.
Lelliott, A., & Rollnick, M. (2010). Big Ideas : A review of astronomy education research 1974 – 2008. International Journal of Science Education, 32: 13(917691900), 17771–1799. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903214546
Linacre, J. M. (1994). Sample size and item calibration or person measure stability. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 7(4), 328.
Lindsey, B. A., Boudreaux, A., Rosen, D. J., Stetzer, M. R., & Kryjevskaia, M. (2024). Reinforcing mindware or supporting cognitive reflection: Testing two strategies for addressing a persistent learning challenge in the context of air resistance. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 20(2), 20116. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.20.020116
Özcan, Ö., & Bezen, S. (2016). Students’ mental models about the relationship between force and velocity concepts. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 15(5), 630–641. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/16.15.630
Plummer, J. D. (2014). Running head: Spatial Thinking As The Dimension Of Progress Spatial thinking as the dimension of progress in an astronomy learning progression. Studies in Science Education, 50(2014), 1–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2013.869039
Rohadi, N., & Setiawan, I. (2020). Analisis deskriptif berbasis model mental fisika [Descriptive analysis based on physics mental models]. Jurnal Kumparan Fisika, 3(3), 255–260.
Roll, I., & Ford, H. (2016). Evolution and revolution in artificial intelligence in education. International Artificial Intelligence in Education Society 2016, 26, 582–599. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-016-0110-3
Sari, I. M., Fauzi, D., Malik, A., Saepuzaman, D., Ramalis, T. R., & Rusdiana, D. (2019). Excavating the quality of vocational students’ mental models and prediction on heat conduction. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1204(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1204/1/012042
Sumintono, B., & Widhiarso, W. (2014). Aplikasi rasch model untuk ilmu-ilmu sosial. Trim Komunikata Publishing House.
Syuhendri, S., Siahaan, S. M., & Pasaribu, A. (2022). Lunar phases refutation texts : supplement texts to overcome students ’ misconceptions. European Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 3(6), 157–160.
Tapalova, O., & Zhiyenbayeva, N. (2022). Artificial intelligence in education: AIEd for Personalised Learning Pathways. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 20(5), 639–653. https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.20.5.2597
Tomlinson, C. A., Brighton, C., Callahan, C. M., Moon, T. R., Brimijoin, K., Conover, L. A., & Reynolds, T. (2003). Differentiating instruction in response to student readiness, interest, and learning profile in academically diverse classrooms : a review of literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27(2), 119–145.
Tomlinson, C. A., Ostertag, G., Acquisitions, C., Houtz, J., Editing, B., Smith, L., Designer, S. G., Kalyan, M., Services, P., & Demmons, K. (2017). How To Differentiate Instruction. 3rd Edition. Alexandria, VA: ASCD, 30.
Treagust, D. F. (2008). Conceptual change : A discussion of theoretical, methodological, and practical challenges for science education 1. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 3(2), 297–328.
Ubben, M. S., & Bitzenbauer, P. (2022). Two cognitive dimensions of students’ mental models in science: fidelity of gestalt and functional fidelity. Education Sciences, 12(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12030163
Ubben, M. S., Hartmann, J., & Pusch, A. (2022). Holes in the atmosphere of the universe: An empirical qualitative study on mental models of students regarding black holes. Astronomy Education Journal, 02(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.32374/aej.2022.2.1.029ra
Unal, S., Sadoglu, G. P., & Durukan, U. G. (2014). Teacher educators’ views of “model” concept and their mental models. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 13(5), 674–694. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/14.13.674
Vergara, D., Extremera, J., Rubio, M. P., Ballu, A., Yan, X., Blanchard, A., Clet, T., Mouton, S., Niandou, H., Philippe, S., Souchet, A. D., Lameras, P., Petridis, P., Caporal, J., Coldeboeuf, G., Duzan, H., Zubatiuk, T., Isayev, O., Dai, C. P., … Campanelli, M. (2024). Artificial intelligence helps primary school teachers to plan and execute physics classroom experiments. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3(2), 100902. https://doi.org/10.54392/irjmt2351
Vogt, A., Babel, F., Hock, P., Baumann, M., & Seufert, T. (2021). Immersive virtual reality or auditory text first? Effects of adequate sequencing and prompting on learning outcome. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(5), 2058–2076. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13104
Vosniadou, S. (2008). Conceptual change in learning and instruction: The framework theory approach. Taylor & Francis.
Vosniadou, S. (2011). Stella Vosniadou (Ed.): international handbook. Science & Education, 563–576. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-010-9283-6
Wright, B. D., & Masters, G. N. (1982). Rating analysis scale. MESA Press.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
View My Stats