Open Access
Issue
E3S Web Conf.
Volume 695, 2026
2nd International Conference on Sustainable Chemistry (ICSChem 2025)
Article Number 05005
Number of page(s) 8
Section Education
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202669505005
Published online 24 February 2026
  1. OECD, PISA 2015 Assessment and Analytical Framework: Science, Reading, Mathematic, Financial Literacy and Collaborative Problem Solving (OECD Publishing, Paris, 2017). https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264281820-en. [Google Scholar]
  2. OECD, PISA 2018 Results – Country Note: Indonesia (OECD Publishing, Paris, 2019). https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/about/programmes/edu/pisa/publications/national-reports/pisa-2018/featured-country-specific-overviews/PISA2018_CN_IDN.pdf [Google Scholar]
  3. OECD, PISA 2022 Results – Country Note: Indonesia (OECD Publishing, Paris, 2023). https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2023/11/pisa-2022-results-volume-i-and-ii-country-notes_2fca04b9/indonesia_0e09c072/c2e1ae0e-en.pdf [Google Scholar]
  4. S. Chairam, N. Klahan, R. Coll, Exploring secondary students’ understanding of chemical kinetics through inquiry-based learning activities, Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 11(5), 937–956 (2015). https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1365a [Google Scholar]
  5. I. Rahayu, S. Mulyani, T. Widhiyanti, Analysis of misconceptions on the factors that affect the reaction rate, KnE Social Sciences 9(13), 140–150 (2024). https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v9i13.15914 [Google Scholar]
  6. J. Jusniar, E. Effendy, E. Budiasih, S. Sutrisno, Misconceptions in rate of reaction and their impact on misconceptions in chemical equilibrium, European Journal of Educational Research 9(4), 1405–1423 (2020). https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.9.4.1405 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. K.M. Jegstad, Inquiry-based chemistry education: a systematic review, Studies in Science Education 60(2), 251–313 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2023.2248436 [Google Scholar]
  8. R.L. Ebel, D.A. Frisbie, Essentials of Educational Measurement, 5th edn. (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1991). [Google Scholar]
  9. S. Hassan, R. Hod, Use of item analysis to improve the quality of single best answer multiple-choice questions in summative assessment of undergraduate medical students in Malaysia, Education in Medicine Journal 9(3), 33–43 (2017). https://doi.org/10.21315/eimj2017.9.3.4 [Google Scholar]
  10. S. Testa, A. Toscano, R. Rosato, Distractor Efficiency in an Item Pool for a Statistics Classroom Exam: Assessing Its Relation With Item Cognitive Level Classified According to Bloom’s Taxonomy. Frontiers in Psychology 9, 1585 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01585 [Google Scholar]
  11. M. Tavakol, R. Dennick, Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha, International Journal of Medical Education 2, 53–55 (2011). https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd [Google Scholar]
  12. A.W. Lazonder, R. Harmsen, Meta-analysis of inquiry-based learning: Effects of guidance, Review of Educational Research 86(3), 681–718 (2016). https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315627366 [Google Scholar]
  13. B. Öztürk, M. Kaya, M. Demir, Does inquiry-based learning model improve learning outcomes? A second-order meta-analysis, Journal of Pedagogical Research 6(4), 201–216 (2022). https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202217481 [Google Scholar]
  14. M. Muntholib, S. Ibnu, S. Rahayu, F. Fajaroh, S. Kusairi, B. Kuswandi, Chemical literacy: Performance of first year chemistry students on chemical kinetics, Indonesian Journal of Chemistry, 20(2) , 468-482 (2020). https://doi.org/10.22146/ijc.43651 [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.