Analysis of Students' Ability to make HOTS Questions Related to the Basic Physics Material that has been Studied
Published online: 18 Jun 2025
Abstract
Purpose-This study investigates the ability of undergraduate physics students to create Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) questions based on topics learned in basic physics. The focus is on how well students can formulate questions that require deeper thinking.
Research Methodology/Design/Approach-The research involved 40 students who were asked to construct HOTS-based questions and participate in semi-structured interviews. The questions were categorized into four types of HOTS: inferential, interpretive, transfer, and hypothetical. Data were analyzed to understand the distribution and quality of the questions created.
Findings-Most students were able to generate inferential (35%) and interpretive (30%) questions, which align closely with the content taught in class. However, fewer students produced transfer (20%) and hypothetical (15%) questions, which require applying knowledge in new contexts and engaging in speculative reasoning. Interviews revealed that students struggled with these latter types due to limited exposure to applied and creative thinking tasks.
Originality/Value-This study offers a fresh perspective by focusing on students’ ability to create rather than just answer HOTS questions. The findings emphasize the need for teaching strategies that promote contextual, critical, and innovative thinking to better prepare students for real-world problem-solving and scientific inquiry.
Keywords:
Higher Order Thinking Skills
Physics Education
Question Formulation
Critical Thinking
Cognitive SKills
References
Akinyemi, A. R. (2021). Investigation of Students ’ Use and Understanding of Evaluation Strategies. Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 3447. https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/etd/3447
Alkiyumi, M. (2023). New Classification of Higher-Order Thinking Skills (HOTS). Onomazein, March, 1054–1068. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/379153600
Apaydin, M., & Hossary, M. (2017). Achieving metacognition through cognitive strategy instruction. International Journal of Educational Management, 31(6), 696–717. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-05-2016-0130 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-05-2016-0130
Boon, M., Orozco, M., & Sivakumar, K. (2022). Epistemological and educational issues in teaching practice-oriented scientific research: roles for philosophers of science. European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 12(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-022-00447-z DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-022-00447-z
Chang, H. Y., Chang, Y. J., & Tsai, M. J. (2024). Strategies and difficulties during students’ construction of data visualizations. International Journal of STEM Education, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-024-00463-w DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-024-00463-w
Coban, A., & Buyukdede, M. (2024). Exploring Motion: Integrating Arduino in Physics Education for 21st Century Skills. https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.06647v2
Coenen, A., Nelson, J. D., & Gureckis, T. M. (2019). Asking the right questions about the psychology of human inquiry: Nine open challenges. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 26(5), 1548–1587. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-018-1470-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-018-1470-5
Falloon, G. (2020). From simulations to real: Investigating young students’ learning and transfer from simulations to real tasks. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(3), 778–797. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12885 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12885
Garbuio, M., & Lin, N. (2021). Innovative idea generation in problem finding: Abductive reasoning, cognitive impediments, and the promise of artificial intelligence. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 38(6), 701–725. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12602 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12602
Gozali, I., Lie, A., Tamah, S. M., & Jemadi, F. (2021). HOTS questioning ability and HOTS perception of language teachers in Indonesia. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 11(1), 60–71. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v11i1.34583 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v11i1.34583
Guo, D., Zhang, S., Wright, K. L., & McTigue, E. M. (2020). Do You Get the Picture? A Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Graphics on Reading Comprehension. AERA Open, 6(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858420901696 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858420901696
Hajian, S. (2019). Transfer of Learning and Teaching: A Review of Transfer Theories and Effective Instructional Practices. IAFOR Journal of Education, 7(1), 93–111. https://doi.org/10.22492/ije.7.1.06 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22492/ije.7.1.06
Hamzah, H., Hamzah, M. I., & Zulkifli, H. (2022). Systematic Literature Review on the Elements of Metacognition-Based Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) Teaching and Learning Modules. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14(2), 1–15. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/2/813 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su14020813
Healey, M. P., & Hodgkinson, G. P. (2024). Overcoming strategic persistence: Effects of multiple scenario analysis on strategic reorientation. Strategic Management Journal, 45(8), 1423–1445. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3589 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3589
Hestenes, D. (1987). Toward a modeling theory of physics instruction. American Journal of Physics, 55(5), 440–454. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.15129 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1119/1.15129
Karwasz, G. P., & Wyborska, K. (2023). How Constructivist Environment Changes Perception of Learning: Physics Is Fun. Education Sciences, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13020195 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13020195
Klein, P., Viiri, J., & Kuhn, J. (2019). Visual cues improve students’ understanding of divergence and curl: Evidence from eye movements during reading and problem solving. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 15(1), 10126. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.15.010126 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.15.010126
Lemons, P. P., & Lemons, J. D. (2013). Questions for assessing higher-order cognitive skills: It’s not just Bloom’s. CBE Life Sciences Education, 12(1), 47–58. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-03-0024 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-03-0024
Li, D., Fan, X., & Meng, L. (2024). Development and validation of a higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) scale for major students in the interior design discipline for blended learning. Scientific Reports, 14(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-70908-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-70908-3
Lyu, X. (2024). Exploring the Cognitive Obstacles in High School Students’ Learning of Physics and Mechanics. Contemporary Education Frontiers, 2(2), 36–42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18063/cef.v2i2.510
Magarelli, R. (2024). Critical Analyses in Science: Course Impact on Critical Thinking Skills and Hypothetical-deductive Reasoning.
Mc Pherson-Geyser, G., de Villiers, R., & Kavai, P. (2020). The use of experiential learning as a teaching strategy in life sciences. International Journal of Instruction, 13(3), 877–894. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13358a DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13358a
Meijer, J., Veenman, M. V. J., & Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M. (2006). Metacognitive activities in text-studying and problem-solving: Development of a taxonomy. Educational Research and Evaluation, 12(3), 209–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803610500479991 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13803610500479991
Schulz, H., & FitzPatrick, B. (2016). Teachers’ understandings of critical and higher order thinking and what this means for their teaching and assessments. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 62(1), 61–86. https://doi.org/10.55016/ojs/ajer.v62i1.56168 DOI: https://doi.org/10.55016/ojs/ajer.v62i1.56168
Shreiner, T. L. (2019). Students׳ use of data visualizations in historical reasoning: A think-aloud investigation with elementary, middle, and high school students. Journal of Social Studies Research, 43(4), 389–404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssr.2018.11.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssr.2018.11.001
Sitorus, M. M., Silalahi, L. H., Rajagukguk, H., Panggabean, N., & Nasution, J. (2021). The effect of Higher-Order thinking skill (HOTS) in reading comprehension. IDEAS Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, 9(1), 455–463.
Stefanel, A. (2019). Graph in Physics Education: From Representation to Conceptual Understanding. Mathematics in Physics Education, 195–231. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04627-9_9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04627-9_9
Stolte, M., Trindade-Pons, V., Vlaming, P., Jakobi, B., Franke, B., Kroesbergen, E. H., Baas, M., & Hoogman, M. (2022). Characterizing Creative Thinking and Creative Achievements in Relation to Symptoms of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Autism Spectrum Disorder. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 13(July), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2022.909202 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2022.909202
Sugiyono. (2013). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif dan R&D. Alfabeta.
Susanti, N., & Azhar, Y. (2019). Student Tutoring, Facilitator and Explaining Models: A Problem Solving Metacognition towards Learning Achievements of Informatics Students. Journal of Educational Sciences, 3(2), 145–154. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31258/jes.3.2.p.145-154
Sutarto, Dwi Hastuti, I., Fuster-Guillén, D., Palacios Garay, J. P., Hernández, R. M., & Namaziandost, E. (2022). The Effect of Problem-Based Learning on Metacognitive Ability in the Conjecturing Process of Junior High School Students. Education Research International, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/2313448 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/2313448
License
Copyright (c) 2025 The Author(s). Published by Borneo Novelty Publishing
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Permission is granted subject to the terms of the License under which the work was published. Permission will be required if your reuse is not covered by the terms of the License.
How to Cite
Martawijaya, M. A. ., & Mahir, M. (2025). Analysis of Students’ Ability to make HOTS Questions Related to the Basic Physics Material that has been Studied. Jurnal Edukasi Terkini, 2(2), 10-17. https://doi.org/10.70310/jet.2025.020206119
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
