Development E-Assessment Using Kahoot! in Learning Chemistry of Electrolyte And Non-Electrolyte Solution Materials for SMA/MA

This research aims to develop an e-assessment using Kahoot! Valid, reliable, also practical in learning the chemistry of electrolyte and non-electrolyte solution materials. The research subjects consisted of validators in their fields, subject teachers, and class XI students of SMA Negeri 13 Padang. This development research uses the Borg & Gall development model. The instrument in conducting this study used validation sheets and practicality questionnaires. The average result from the expert validation questionnaire was obtained at 0.91, meaning the product is valid and can be used. Analysis of question items received an average validity and reliability of questions of 0.50 and 0.88, respectively, indicating that the product is valid and reliable. The difficulty level is 20 "moderate" and 5 "easy" questions, the average differentiating power is 0.42 with good categories, and all deception works well. Based on the results of the practicality questionnaire, an average field trial of 89% of student responses and 91% of teacher responses was obtained, which means that the e-assessment tool uses Kahoot! Easy to use by teachers and learners.


Introduction
 According to the Minister of Education and Culture number 23 of 2016 concerning educational assessment standards, assessment is a process of collecting and processing information to measure the achievement of student learning outcomes. In general, the assessment process is carried out through a paper-based test. This assessment process has weaknesses in terms of the cost of paper pawning, the duration of correction time, errors in a correction, and even often causes fraudulent actions and nervousness in students (Hamid, 2016).
The weaknesses in the paper-based test can be corrected using technology that can be done anywhere and anytime. The benefits of technology provide immediate feedback and enable rapid change to learners' misconceptions (Jeljeli et al., 2018). Developments in information and communication technology have had a significant influence on the methods used in assessment and have provided new opportunities to conduct electronic-based evaluations, otherwise known as eassessments, on learning through computers, laptops, and mobile devices (Astalini & Putri, 2018).
The results of interviews conducted at several schools in Padang found that teachers have applied technology to the assessment process, but not entirely because paper and pen are still used. Students collect their answers through photos of their writings on paper and then send them to the teacher. Another problem is that students' answers are the same. Correcting the answers takes a long time because teachers must download and check the students' responses individually.
The assessment activities carried out by the teacher can also be called Eassessment. E-assessment uses digital technology to create, distribute, assess, and provide feedback for formative, summative, diagnostic, or self-assessment assessments. This process involves electronic technology for evaluating and giving feedback to specific individuals. Therefore, the function of e-assessment in education is beneficial. For example, to correct weaknesses in a paper-based grading system, such as the time required for assessment, provide high-quality data for teachers and administrators, and reduce printing costs (Ridgway & Pead, 2004).
The e-assessment process utilizes technological advances, one of which is using applications in its activities. One form of utilization is the use of Kahoot!. Kahoot! is an application and a free learning platform based on games and educational technology that can be used to create interactive tests (Zhang & Yu, 2021). The scoring system uses Kahoot! allows teachers to know students' learning outcomes immediately because the points obtained by students can be displayed after students have finished answering all questions (Heni et al., 2019). Utilizing e-assessment using Kahoot! in the material, electrolyte and nonelectrolyte solutions can stimulate students' minds because they present questions with the appearance of animated videos or images as if students directly connect the material with their daily lives.
Based on the description above, developing e-assessment in electrolyte and nonelectrolyte material is necessary using Kahoot!. Therefore, researchers conducted research with the aim of developing an electrolyte and non-electrolyte eassessment using Kahoot! for SMA/MA students that are valid, reliable, and practical.

Methodology
This type of research is research and development (Research and Development).
Research and development is a type of research used to produce a specific product as well as test the effectiveness of the product (Sugiyono, 2013). This research used a development model, according to Borg and Gall. It was only carried out in seven steps: 1) Research and information collection, finding out through interviews with several high school teachers in the city of Padang about common problems that occur in the evaluation of chemistry learning, the search for reference sources and literature review is also carried out at this stage to strengthen the solutions that will be used as a product later; 2) Planning, this stage analyzes the Basic Competencies (KD) for the formulation of learning indicators, makes a learning evaluation grid; 3) Initial product development, developing the grid into a collection of multiple-choice type questions and inputted into Kahoot!. Perform validations and revisions based on validator input; 4) Initial trial, initial trial stage, evaluation product using Kahoot! will be tested on six learners, with categories of two intelligent, two intermediate, and two less intelligent students of class XI MIPA 2. Then an analysis of the test results will be carried out to determine the level of validity, reliability, differentiability, and difficulty of the question item items; 5) Revision of the initial product; the tested results will be revised according to the suggestions and input from respondents; 6) Main field test, field trial stage, evaluation tool product using Kahoot app! will be trialed to one class XI MIPA 6. Then, the test results will be analyzed to determine the validity, reliability, differentiability, and difficulty of the question item items. Suggestions and input from teachers and learners are obtained to revise the product; 7) Operational product revision, the final product revision stage, is carried out after getting the results of the last field trial of one class XI at SMAN 13 Padang (Gall & D., 2007).
This research was conducted at SMA 13 Padang. The research subjects used were FMIPA UNP lecturers, chemistry teachers and students of SMA 13 Padang. The object of this study is a collection of questions on the Kahoot application! for electrolyte and non-electrolyte solution materials. The instruments in this study used multiple-choice tests using Kahoot! , validation questionnaires were given to FMIPA UNP lecturers and high school chemistry teachers, and practicality questionnaires were given to chemistry teachers and students. The validation questionnaire was analyzed using Aiken's V formula (Purnomo et al., 2016)  Validity is acceptable if the value of the index V meets the minimum value of validity based on the coefficient of validity. The study used nine validators. In this case, the general value of V is 0.70 (Lewis, R. 1985). The degree of validity of the developed e-evaluation product will be visible after being converted to a category in Table 1 (Aiken's, 19985). Analysis of practicality questionnaires to find out the responses of teachers and students to the media created; the data obtained is analyzed and calculated based on calculations from the Likert scale value. The practicality sheet is calculated using the formula ( The level of practicality of the product assessment questions using Kahoot! will be visible after converting to categories like Table 2  Analyze question items to determine the validation of question items, the reliability of question items, the difficulty of the questions, and the differentiating power of the questions using the formulas below: 1. Validity of question items The validity conclusions to be obtained from the items about whether they are valid or not can be analyzed using correlation techniques. The correct correlation technique in looking at the validity of multiple-choice questions that have a variable I in the form of pure discrete data or dichotomic data and have variable II, namely continuous data, is a biserial point correlation technique that is given a symbol that can be obtained using the formula: Information: : Biseral point correlation coefficient : Average score of the subject who answered correctly for the item for which validity was sought : Total score average : Standard deviation from the total score p : Proportion of learners who answered correctly q : Proportion of learners who answered incorrectly (q = 1p) If the value > , then the question item is declared valid, but If the value < , maka item soal dinyatakan tidak valid (Sudiyono, 2009).

2.
Reliability of question items Reliability of questions related to the problem of the determination of test results; if the results are arbitrary, the changes that occur can be meaningless (Arikunto, 2013 (Sudjono, 2011). The reliability category of a question item can be seen in Table 3 (Jihad, 2012):

4.
Differentiating Power of Problem Items Good question items are question items that have a differential power index of 0.4 to 0.7 (Arikunto, 2013). Analyze the differentiating power of the question items using the formula, namely: The item in question has a very ugly distinguishing power 5. Deceptor A deceiver who the learner does not choose indicates that the deceiver is ugly and too far from the material. On the contrary, deception can be interpreted as functioning correctly if the deception has great appeal to students who do not understand the concept or do not master the material. It's a good idea if at least 5% of students choose the answer choice. The steps in determining the quality of deception in the following questions: a) Setting P (difficulty level) on alternative answer key b) Determining the differentiating power of alternative answer key The determination of deception is seen from the result of the first and second steps. An item is said to be good if the deceiver is no more than 10% of the learners' vote (Arikunto, 2013) 3.

Results and Discussion
The research results on developing a collection of electronic evaluation questions that have been carried out. Then an e-evaluation tool was obtained using the help of Kahoot! on electrolyte and non-electrolyte solution materials for SMA / MA students. The research conducted using the Borg and Gall model with the overall research results for each stage is described as follows:

Research and information collection
The first stage carried out by the researcher is to identify problems in students at SMA Negeri 13 Padang; researchers obtain information about an issue related to learning evaluation activities. Before the pandemic, teachers conducted learning assessments using written tests as question sheets. Still, during the pandemic, teachers gave questions in the form of soft files and sent them in word or pdf documents, sometimes also using google forms to conduct assessments. The problem that can be obtained when collecting information is that many students do not collect answers on time or have the same answers as friends, so the students' sense of honesty is reduced. This problem was corroborated by the researchers' interviews with two teachers in two different schools who experienced the same problem.
Therefore, researchers solve these problems by developing e-assessments using Kahoot! on the material chemistry of electrolyte and non-electrolyte solutions. The use of Kahoot! in the process of e-assessment is fascinating because Kahoot! supported by a back sound when the question starts, a set time for each number, and the score obtained automatically comes out when five students get the highest score. Kahoot! has the advantage of being able to use during distance learning or face-to-face learning.
Another source obtained by researchers is to conduct a literature review. The literature review aims to be used for designing and developing products. Based on the results of several literature studies obtained, relevant research on evaluation tools using Kahoot!. In another study (Dewi, 2018), validation results from material experts got a final percentage of 82% with very feasible criteria. The validation results from media experts received a final percentage of 83% with a decent category. The validation results from linguists got a final percentage of 84% with a decent category. The reliability obtained in the first stage was 0.943, and in the second stage was 0.537. In the assessment, students got a final percentage of 81% with fascinating criteria. So, it can be concluded that the evaluation tool using Kahoot! what researchers have developed can be feasible as an evaluation tool by analyzing materials that can be used in this development, namely electrolyte and non-electrolyte solutions in SMA / MA.

Planning
Researchers Before conducting research, researchers validate products first to validators who are experts in their fields if the product is valid and can be tested on students.

Initial product development
In addition to moving the question items, the initial product development process was created based on the question grid in Kahoot! , an expert assessment was also carried out at this stage which was carried out by five chemistry lecturers and four chemistry teachers. This validation involves validating the developed question items' material, construct, and language. A collection of questions that have been made on Kahoot! at the next stage, validity testing will be revised by validators who are experts in their fields. Analysis of the validity of the question items was carried out using the formula Aiken's V, and the question items have a very high level of validity. The results of question validation can be seen in Table 6. The data on the validity analysis of question items carried out by validators show that these items are received with an average Aiken's v index of 0.91. There are suggestions and input from validators to revise the question product to be better and worth using.

Initial trial
After validating and revising per the input provided by the validator, the next step is the initial product trial carried out in class XI MIPA 2 SMAN 13 Padang with six students. This initial trial aims to see the implementation of Kahoot! and minimize errors before conducting field trials. The test results found that many students had questions that were not answered because the questions on Kahoot! were too fast, so it took a revision and a second trial.

Initial product revision
Product revision of evaluation tools using the Kahoot app! After getting input from the lecturer and analyzing the student's answers.

Main field tests
After revising, the next stage is field trials. The subjects at this stage are all class XI MIPA 6 SMAN 13 Padang students to see the validity, reliability, differentiating power and difficulty level of the question items. The data on the results of the field trials are contained in Table 7. All questions that students have done are analyzed using formulas in Excel; out of 25 numbers, 20 valid questions indicate that the question items are positively correlated, and five invalid questions suggest that the questions are not correlated or invalid. A question can be said to have high validity if the score of the question item is aligned with the total score. This alignment can be interpreted by correlating question items with total scores (Arikunto, 2013).

Reliability test
The reliability test analyzed using the KR20 formula shows a result of 0.88, indicating that the question item is highly reliable. The reliable results during the initial product trial had a not-too-far difference of 0.78, which can be ignored. The question items' high and low validity values can influence the high and lowreliability values. Tests with a large value of question items usually have a high validity level compared to tests with only a few question items (Arikunto, 2013).

Difficulty test
The results of the calculation of the difficulty level of the question item are shown in Table 8. The results show 20 questions in the "moderate" and five questions in the easy category. A question item representing the moderate category can be done for students who are smart, medium, and not smart students. Question items with a difficulty index of 0.30 -0.70 are categorized with a moderate difficulty level and are considered good questions to use (Arikunto, 2013).

Power test difference
The results of calculating the difference in question items in field trials are found in Table 9. The difference power obtained based on the table above from the results of field trials obtained from the calculation results of the different power tests; there are very good categories of 3 questions, questions with good categories of 10 questions, questions with quite categories of 9 questions, and questions with bad categories of 3 questions. The function of analyzing the differentiability of this question item is to see the ability of a question to distinguish the abilities of students who are smart, medium and not good (Arikunto, 2013). In comparison, question items with a bad differentiating power category may be caused by deceptive factors that do not work or are not good (Latisma, 2011). The field trial tested in one class showed that the questions had a very good distinguishing power because they could distinguish students according to their abilities; this was seen from the previous values and compared to the results of students' answers to the researcher's questions.

Deception level
The results of the deception level analysis from the field trial found that all deceptions worked well, and there were only four options that did not work correctly; it's just that the option worked well if 5% of the number of test takers was selected.

Revision of operational products
Before the product of these questions is widely used for classes at the same level as the target object made are revised again so that later a question product will be obtained that has good quality in terms of validity, reliability, level of difficulty and differentiating power.

Level of practicality
The practicality sheet assessment is obtained from the provision of teacher and student response questionnaires which are analyzed and calculated based on calculations from the Likert scale value. The results of the practicality test calculation are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Practicality Test Results
The chart results from calculating the practicality questionnaire of field trials with 28 students and 3 teachers, concluding that the product is very practical.

Conclusion
Based on the results of research and data analysis that has been done, it can be concluded that the researchers only took questions with valid categories.
Developing an e-assessment using Kahoot! in learning the chemistry of electrolyte and non-electrolyte solution materials for SMA/MA has very high reliability and is practical to use.