Orbital - Vol. 17 No. 5 - July-September 2025
PAPERS ON EDUCATION

Analysis of Students' Misconceptions on Mole Concept Materials and Chemical Formula Using Four-Tier Multiple Choice Diagnostic Test Based Indonesian Curriculum

Heru Christianto
Nusa Cendana University
Mariana Carvalho
University of Nusa Cendana
Lolita Agusta Magdalena Parera
University of Nusa Cendana
Published November 23, 2025
Keywords
  • misconception,
  • diagnostic test,
  • four-tier multiple choice,
  • mole concept,
  • chemical formula
How to Cite
(1)
Christianto, H.; Carvalho, M.; Parera, L. A. M. Analysis of Students’ Misconceptions on Mole Concept Materials and Chemical Formula Using Four-Tier Multiple Choice Diagnostic Test Based Indonesian Curriculum. Orbital: Electron. J. Chem. 2025, 17, 502-509.

Abstract

This research aims to determine the percentage level of students' misconceptions regarding the concept of moles and chemical formulas as well as each sub-concept where there are misconceptions and their causes in class XI-C SMA Negeri 5 Kupang. Misconceptions were measured using a four-tier diagnostic test instrument based on mixed method research with explanatory sequential design. The research sample was 32 students from class XI-C at SMAN 5 Kupang, who were determined using purposive sampling technique. Data collection techniques were carried out using a four-tier multiple choice diagnostic test, interview guide questionnaire and documentation. Based on the research results, the misconceptions that occur in class XI-C students at SMAN 5 Kupang are classified as moderate misconceptions with a percentage of 41.56%. Significant misconceptions were identified in 5 sub-concepts with an average CR (confidence rating) score above 4.00, namely: (1) Relative Atomic Mass and Relative Molecular Mass 18.75%; (2) Calculation of Mole Concept 24.99%; (3) Reaction Equalization 21.87%; (4) Empirical Formula and Molecular Formula 18.75%; (5) Hydrate Compound 23.43%. Students' misconceptions are caused by 5 factors based on questionnaire and interview data, namely: (1) Students 35.416%; (2) Teachers 6.25%; (3) Learning methods 25.78%; (4) Teaching context 13.125%; (5) Textbooks 20%.