The Interpreting Ability on Science Kinematics Graphs of Senior High School Students in South Sulawesi, Indonesia

B. D. Amin, E. P. Sahib, Y. I. Harianto, A. J. Patandean, H. Herman, E. H. Sujiono


This research was a descriptive case study. The purpose of this research was to describe the student’s ability to interpret the kinematics graph. The subjects of the study were 347 students of class XI science in the even semester of 2018/2019 in Luwu Raya, South Sulawesi Province, Indonesia. The research data were obtained from multiple-choice test results using instruments adapted from Test of Understanding Graph – Kinematics 2.6 and the results of in-depth interviews to find out the reasons learners choose answers and casual factors. The results of the study based on descriptive data analysis were 90 students or 25.94% in the low category, and 257 students or 74.06% were in the very low category. These results indicate the ability to interpret the graphs of students were still low, with the average achievement in answering questions on each of the highest indicators was 20.99 % on indicators identifying graphs based on the description. While the lowest average achievement was11.91%, which is the indicator to identify the graph that has a different variable. Base on the qualitative data analysis, the results are students had difficulties in solving the test, as follows: a) the difficulty in distinguishing symbol of the variables on the graph, b) the difficulty in determining the formula for solving test in graphical form, c) to determine when the curve on the graph v-t decreases then the object will move with speed slowed. The factors causing these difficulties are because students did not understand deeply about how to read graphs, how to solve test in graphical form, and did not understand the formula used to solve the test.


interpreting; ability on science; kinematics; graphs; senior high school students

Full Text:



Antwi, V., Savelsbergh, E., & Eijkelhof, H. (2018, September). Understanding kinematics graphs using MBL tools, simulations and graph samples in an interactive engagement context in a Ghanaian university. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1076, No. 1, p. 012002). IOP Publishing.

Bektasli, B., & White, A. L. (2012). The Relationships between Logical Thinking, Gender, and Kinematics Graph Interpretation Skills. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 48, 1-19.

Blackley, S., Sheffield, R., & Koul, R. (2018). Using a Makerspace approach to engage Indonesian primary students with STEM. Issues in Educational Research, 28(1), 18.

Bunawan, W., Setiawan, A., & Rusli, A. (2015). Penilaian pemahaman representasi grafik materi optika geometry menggunakan tes diagnostik. Jurnal Cakrawala Pendidikan, 34(2).

Charli, L., Amin, A., & Agustina, D. (2018). Kesulitan Siswa dalam Menyelesaikan Soal Fisika pada Materi Suhu dan Kalor di Kelas X SMA Ar-Risalah Lubuklinggau Tahun Pelajaran 2016/2017. JOEAI (Journal of Education and Instruction), 1(1), 42-50.

Dresch, A., Lacerda, D. P., & Antunes, J. A. V. (2015). Design science research. In Design Science Research (pp. 67-102). Springer, Cham.

Ergül, N. R. (2018). Pre-service Science Teachers’ Construction and Interpretations of Graph. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 6(1), 139-144.

Furwati, S., Sutopo, S., & Zubaidah, S. (2017). Conceptual Understanding and Representation Quality through Multi representation Learning on Newton Law Content. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains, 5(3), 80-88.

Gilmanshina, S. I., Gilmanshin, I. R., Sagitova, R. N., & Galeeva, A. I. (2016). The Feature of Scientific Explanation in the Teaching of Chemistry in the Environment of New Information of School Students’ Developmental Education. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 11(4), 349-358.

Gültepe, N. (2016). Reflections on High School Students’ Graphing Skills and Their Conceptual Understanding of Drawing Chemistry Graphs. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 16(1), 53-81.

Hasbullah, H., & Nazriana, L. (2017, October). Peningkatan Kemampuan Interprestasi Grafik Melalui Pendekatan Multi-Representasi Pada Materi Gerak Lurus. In Prosiding Seminar Nasional USM (Vol. 1, No. 1).

Ismet. (2013). Impact Of Multiple RepresentationsBased Mechanics Learning On Prospective Physics Teachers’spatial Intelligence. Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika Indonesia-Indonesian Journal Of Physics Education, 9(2), 132-143.

KaramustafaoÄŸlu, S. (2011). Improving the science process skills ability of prospective science teachers using I diagrams. Eurasian Journal of Physics and Chemistry Education, 3(1), 26-38.

Kilic, D., Sezen, N., & Sari, M. (2012). A study of preservice science teacher’s graphing skills. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 2937-2941.

Kukliansky, I. (2016). Student’s Conceptions in Statistical Graph’s Interpretation. International Journal of Higher Education, 5(4), 262-267.

Manurung, S. R., Mihardi, S., Rustaman, N. Y., & Siregar, N.(2018). Improvement of Graph Interpretation Ability Using Hypertext-Assisted Kinematic Learning and Formal Thinking Ability.Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika Indonesia, 14(1), 1-6.

Maries, A., & Singh, C. (2013). Exploring one aspect of pedagogical content knowledge of teaching assistants using the test of understanding graphs in kinematics. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 9(2), 020120.

Mudyahardjo, R. (2001). Pengantar pendidikan. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada.

Nugraha, A., Darsikin, D., & Saehana, S. (2017). Kesulitan Siswa Dalam Menyelesaikan Permasalahan Grafik Kinematika. Jurnal Inovasi dan Pembelajaran Fisika, 4(1), 79-90.

Parmalo, Y., Djudin, T., & Oktavianty, E. (2016). Deskripsi Kemampuan Menafsirkan Grafik Kinematika Siswa Kelas X SMA Negeri 3 Sungai Kakap. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran Khatulistiwa, 5(7).

Petrova, H. (2016). Developing students graphic skills in physics education at secondary school. IOSR Journal of Research and Method in Education, 6(5), 123-126.

Pujianto, A. (2013). Analisis konsepsi siswa pada konsep kinematika gerak lurus. JPFT (Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika Tadulako Online), 1(1), 16-21.

Rahmawati, L. F., Ali, M., & Kendek, Y. (2013). Perbedaan Hasil Belajar Fisika Antara Model Pembelajaran Sains Teknologi Masyarakat Dan Model Pembelajaran Direct Instruction Pada Siswa Kelas X SMA Negeri 1 Palu. JPFT (Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika Tadulako Online), 1(1), 48-54.

Rumahlatu, D., Huliselan, E. K., & Takaria, J. (2016). An Analysis of the Readiness and Implementation of 2013 Curriculum in the West Part of Seram District, Maluku Province, Indonesia. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 11(12), 5662-5675.

Setyono, A., Nugroho, S. E., & Yulianti, I. (2016). Analisis Kesulitan Siswa dalam Memecahkan Masalah Fisika Berbentuk Grafik. UPEJ Unnes Physics Education Journal, 5(3), 32-39.

Sharma, S. (2013). Assessing Students’ Understanding of Tables and Graphs: Implications for Teaching and Research. International Journal of Educational Research and Technology, 4 (4), 51, 70.

Subali, B., Rusdiana, D., Firman, H., & Kaniawati, I. (2015). Analisis Kemampuan Interpretasi Grafik Kinematika pada Mahasiswa Calon Guru Fisika. Simposium Nasional Inovasi dan Pembelajaran Sains (SNIPS), 269-272.

Swennen, J. M. H., & Bates, T. (2010). The professional development of teacher educators. Professional Development in Education, 36(1-2), 1-7.

Theasy, Y. (2018, March). Multi-representation ability of students on the problem solving physics. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 983, No. 1, p. 012005). IOP Publishing.

Uzun, M. S., Sezen, N., & Bulbul, A. (2012). Investigating Students’ Abilities Related to Graphing Skill. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 2942-2946.

Vaara, R. L., & Sasaki, D. G. G. (2019). Teaching kinematic graphs in an undergraduate course using an active methodology mediated by video analysis. LUMAT: International Journal on Math, Science and Technology Education, 7(1), 1-26.

Zavala, G., Tejeda, S., Barniol, P., & Beichner, R. J. (2017). Modifying the test of understanding graphs in kinematics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13(2), 020111.


  • There are currently no refbacks.