The Development of Social Attitude Assessment Instrument and Social Studies Learning Outcomes Grade IV on Theme of Indahnya

Abstrak The purpose of this study was to determine the quality of the results of the development of social attitude assessment instrument and social studies learning outcomes of grade IV on theme of Indahnya Keragaman di Negeriku. The development model used in this study is the 4D model. The 4D model consists of four stages: define, design, develop and disseminate. These four stages of the development model are used as a reference in producing and validating developed assessment instruments. The validation of the assessment instrument was carried out by two subject matter experts and 113 students for field trials. Data collected by questionnaire and test methods. The test instrument used was an objective test to assess student learning outcomes and the non-test instrument used was a questionnaire to assess students' social attitudes. The results of this study were the content validity test of 1.00 including the very high category, the item validity test produced 36 valid test items, the reliability test of 0.820 included very high criteria, the analysis of different power problems obtained 3 very good questions, 15 good enough questions, 11 questions good, and 7 questions are not good, the difficulty level analysis shows that there are 22 questions with easy criteria and 14 questions with moderate criteria.


Introduction
The rapid development of Science and Technology (IPTEK) demands an increase in human resources. Along with the times, the human need for education has increased because education is the most important and most important sector. The education sector is the main key to other development growth (Widiansyah, 2017;Kusaeri, et al. 2018). Education in elementary school has changed, especially in improving the curriculum. At present, almost all elementary schools have implemented the 2013 Curriculum.
The 2013 curriculum is a curriculum that includes integrated attitude, knowledge and skills competencies and aims to develop productive, creative, innovative and affective students through maintaining their attitudes, skills and knowledge in an integrated manner (Mustafa et al., 2019;Habiby & Sayekti, 2018;Suyanto, 2018;Noviar, 2016). Kunandar (in Sa'adah & Sigit, 2018) states that the 2013 curriculum as a new educational curriculum in Indonesia promotes learning competencies by strengthening assessment to achieve competencies in the realm of knowledge, attitudes, and skills. Assessment is the process of gathering information to find out how the process of achieving student learning outcomes (Mustafa et al., 2019;Inteni et al., 2013;Amalia & Susilaningsih, 2014). In the assessment process, teachers need an assessment instrument to assess students' readiness, process, and learning outcomes. The preparation of the assessment instruments must be carried out well starting from the determination of the instrument, the preparation of the instrument, the review of the instrument, the implementation of the assessment, the analysis of the results of the assessment, and the program of follow-up of the results of the assessment. In line with the opinion (Chng & Lund, 2018;Inteni, et al. 2013) which says that in the assessment process, it is necessary to pay attention to the determination of the object to be assessed, make and determine criteria for measurement, collect data, and determine decisions.
Based on the results of an interview on October the twenty one, 2019 together with 2 teachers of grade IV SD 12 Jimbaran, South Kuta District related to the constraints in social studies learning, the results were obtained that the teacher still used the lecture, assignment and question and answer methods in the learning process. Teachers are also still less varied in the use of models and learning media, assessments conducted by teachers are still focused on the cognitive realm. Social attitudes of students still need guidance because students are still less sensitive to their social environment. The average student learning outcomes in social studies learning are still relatively low because they are still below the KKM. Based on the above problems related to social attitudes that still need guidance and learning outcomes that are still under the KKM, then it needs another alternative which is to develop instruments for assessing social attitudes and social studies learning outcomes.
Social studies learning is a subject related to social attitudes because social studies subjects are integration subjects of various social sciences and humanities. Social studies is one of the subjects in schools which is concluded with a discussion of various events, facts, concepts, and generalizations about social issues with an interdisciplinary approach involving various branches of social science (Atmaja et al., 2019;Herijanto, 2012;Surahman & Mukminan, 2017). Supardi (in Suryani & Aman, 2019) states that social studies is a study of integration of various social sciences and humanities that are integratedly designed to be more meaningful. Trianto (in Suryani & Aman, 2019) also stated that social studies is an integration of various branches of social sciences.
Based on this statement, it can be concluded that character education is very important for students to have. One of the 18 characters that are important for students to have in character education is social attitude. Social attitudes are needed to establish relationships with others in everyday life. Social attitude is an act of someone to live in their community such as mutual help, mutual respect, mutual interaction, and so on. Social attitude is a repetitive attitude or action related to human social life and related to social rules and values as a form of interaction with the surrounding environment (Kusuma, 2017;Sanjiwana et al., 2015;Gusviani, 2016). Ahmadi (in Virani et al., 2016) states that social attitudes are individual consciousness in carrying out tangible and repetitive actions towards social objects.
Several previous studies conducted by Muslimah et al., (2017) have shown that the social attitude assessment instruments developed are valid, reliable and practical. Then research conducted by Candra et al., (2018) which shows that the statement items on social attitude assessment instruments are valid. Then the research conducted by Juniarta & Winarno (2016) showed that the assessment instrument contained 119 items that had met the standards of good test criteria. Based on the three studies mentioned earlier, the focus of research studies is developing assessment instruments. However, there are weaknesses from these studies. Such research is conducted by Muslimah et al., (2017) and Candra et al., (2018) which only examines the development of social attitude assessment instruments. Then the research conducted by Juniarta & Winarno (2016) only examined the development of cognitive assessment instruments. Yet in the learning process, assessment must include knowledge, attitudes, and skills to find out how the students are in the learning process.
The difference between this research and the previous research is that in this study, the researcher will develop two instruments, which are social attitude assessment instruments and social studies learning outcomes. The advantage of this research is that it will make it easier for teachers and students to know social attitudes and student learning outcomes during the learning process so that later it will be able to improve the quality of learning because the response from social attitudes will affect individual feelings towards objects that are in line with their assessment and will produce a process. This process will produce new values and this will influence the cognitive domain (Candra et al., 2018). Based on the description that has been described, this study aims to produce assessment instruments that fit the criteria for social attitude assessment instrument and social studies learning outcomes grade IV on theme of indahnya keragaman di negeriku.

Methods
The development model of social attitude assessment instruments and social studies learning outcomes of grade IV elementary school on theme of Indahnya Keragaman di Negeriku uses the 4D model. The selection of this development model is based on the consideration that the 4D development model is clearer at each stage of its development. This model consists of 4 phases: define, design, develop, disseminate (Thiagarajan in Dewi & Akhlis, 2016).
The implementation of the 4 stages in this study is as follows: The defining stage consists of several steps, namely the analysis of needs, analysis of student characteristics, and task analysis. The second stage is the design stage. The design phase consists of designing social attitude assessment instruments in the form of questionnaires and learning outcomes instruments in the form of multiple choice tests. The attitude assessment that will be used in the instrument includes honest, disciplined, responsible, caring, polite, and confident behavior. Whereas the instrument for learning outcomes in the form of multiple choice tests begins with determining the KI and KD. KI and KD are used to determine learning indicators that are consistent with KKO.
This development phase consists of two steps, namely: expert validation aimed at improving the assessment instruments. This validation is carried out by material experts. (Trials with students conducted in grade V in two elementary schools namely SD Negeri 11 Jimbaran and MI Insan Mulia Jimbaran.
The population in this study were all fourth grade students of SD Negeri 12 Jimbaran, South Kuta District, totaling 80 students. While the sample in this study is to use a total sample technique or in other terms is a census, which in this study all members of the sample are sampled. The data in this study were collected by the non-test method, namely the social attitude questionnaire and the test method, namely the objective test instrument of 40 questions. The data analysis technique used is the analysis of validity, difference power, reliability, and level of difficulty.

Results and Discussion
The results of the initial product development in this study were social attitude assessment instruments and social studies learning outcomes for grade IV on the theme of Indahnya Keragaman di Negeriku which was used to measure social attitudes and social studies learning outcomes of students. The instrument for evaluating students' social attitudes was in the form of a questionnaire and consists of 36 statements. The learning achievement assessment instrument is a multiple choice test consisting of 40 questions. The initial products of social attitude assessment instruments and social studies learning outcomes are first validated by experts. Expert validation was carried out to determine the theoretical feasibility of the instrument. The experts involved were two lecturers who actively taught social studies. Scores from the two validator lecturers were then analyzed using the Gregory formula to determine content validity. Based on the results of the calculation of the validity of social attitude assessment instruments and learning outcomes instruments, it was found that each instrument content validity was 1 and was at a very high criteria. There are some comments from experts on social attitude instruments and social studies learning instruments. Comments from experts on social attitude instruments can be seen in Table 1 and comments from experts on social studies learning instruments can be seen in Table 2.

Judges (The Expert) I
Judges (The Expert) II Questions number 7 and 8 please students are asked to choose the regional language in accordance with the list of names of regional languages in question number 6 Question number 2 can be changed into Indonesia's very strategic location Question number 38 please make a list of job choices with a random number so students later pair Question number 5 can be changed to Indonesia is a country that consists of various ethnic groups with different cultures. This is caused by factors After validating the expert, the next step is to test the instrument. A trial was conducted to find out whether the items had met the quality of the questions that were good or not. As for what is used in this test includes the validity of the test, reliability, different power, and the level of difficulty. Based on the trial results, out of 40 items, there were 36 questions that were declared valid (90%) and 4 questions were declared invalid (10%). The invalid questions indicate that the quality of the questions is not good. As such, invalid questions are declared void and will not be used as an assessment instrument.
After the validity test is done, then the reliability test is performed on the instrument. The reliability test is used to determine the consistency level of the instrument's answers. Good instruments accurately have consistent answers. The reliability test was carried out using items that were declared valid. Instrument reliability was tested using the KR-20 formula. The result of the calculation of reliability is 0.820. This means that the reliable level of the problem is very high because the correlation coefficient is very high. Like the reliability criteria in Table 3.

Reliability
Criteria 0,00 < r ≤ 0,20 Very low 0,20 < r ≤ 0,40 Low 0,40 < r ≤ 0,60 Enough 0,60 < r ≤ 0,80 High 0,80 < r ≤ 1,00 Very high (Candiasa, 2010:80) After doing the reliability, the next step is to do a different power test. Differentiation level test is only done on items that are declared valid only (36 items). The differentiation test was calculated using the help of the Microsoft Office Excel 2010. The differentiation test used 27% of the total sample with the highest value as the upper group, and 27% of the total sample with the lowest value as the lower group. The results of the calculation of the instrument's distinguishing power are that there are 3 questions with very good criteria, 15 questions with good enough criteria, 11 questions with good criteria, and 7 questions with poor criteria.
After conducting a different power test, the next step is to analyze the difficulty level of the questions. The level of difficulty test items are only done on items that are declared valid only (36 items). Difficulty level test is calculated using the help of Microsoft Office Excel 2010. The results of the calculation of the level of difficulty of the instrument there are 22 questions with easy categories (61.1%) and 14 questions with moderate criteria (38.9%).
The results of the initial product development in this study were social attitude assessment instruments and social studies learning outcomes for grade IV on theme of Indahnya Keragaman di Negeriku which was used to measure social attitudes and social learning outcomes of students. The instrument was in the form of a social attitude questionnaire totaling 36 statements and multiple choice questions totaling 40 items. Expert validation shows the content validity of each instrument is 1 and is at very high criteria. There are some expert comments on each instrument to make the instrument even better before being tested. The trial of the learning outcomes instrument was conducted in 2 elementary schools and produced 36 valid items from the 40 items available. This indicates that the instrument is valid. A valid or valid instrument has high validity (Inteni et al., 2013). Then the reliability test was carried out and the instrument reliability was 0.820. This means that the reliable level of the problem is very high because the value of the correlation coefficient is very high and shows constancy. The average level of difficulty of the questions is 0.756 with the easy category and the average power of the different questions is 0.366 with a fairly good category.
This study supports a similar study conducted by Agustika (2018) found that the rpbi value was compared with the r table value with the number of test participants as many as 90 students and obtained r table value of 0.207, then the reliability coefficient obtained was 0.84, which means the instrument Reliable developed tests. There are items with easy categories of 23.33%, items with medium categories of 53.33%, and items with difficult categories of 23.33%. Based on the difficulty index of each item, the difficulty index was obtained by 0.508 with a medium difficulty level category. It is also known that items with different power categories are very good at 16.67%, items with different power categories are good at 33.33%, items with power category are quite good at 33.33% and items with different power categories not good at 16.67%. Based on the different power indexes of each item obtained a different power index for the test instrument of 0.492.
This study is also in line with research by Utami & Wardani (2017) with the results of research in the main group trial with 30 respondents, out of 40 items, there are 34 items declared valid, the reliability index is 0.926 which means very reliable, 39 items with the difficulty level category of "moderate" items while 1 item with the difficulty level category of "easy" items and there are different power above 0.25 as many as 28 items while the power difference below 0.25 is 12 items. Then in a large group trial with 40 respondents, out of 40 items, 36 items were declared valid, the reliability index was 0.925 which means very reliable, 39 items were in the category of "moderate" questions while the items were in the item difficulty category "easy" questions and there are 36 different points as many as 36 items while 4 different items under 0.25.

Conclusion
Based on the calculation and analysis of validity that there are 36 questions that are declared valid, the level of reliability of the questions is very high because the correlation coefficient is very high, the results of the calculation of the power of distinguishing instruments are there are 3 questions with very good criteria, 15 questions with quite good criteria, 11 questions with good criteria, and 7 questions with unfavorable criteria, the results of the calculation of the level of difficulty of the instrument there are 22 questions with easy categories (61.1%) and 14 questions with moderate criteria (38.9%). Thus it can be concluded that the instrument developed has been tested for validity and reliability so that it can be used as an accurate learning assessment tool on aspects of social studies learning outcomes.