Asesmen Diagnostik dalam Pembelajaran IPA: Studi Komparatif Platform Digital dan Format Kertas terhadap Umpan Balik Konseptual

Abstract

This article compares two diagnostic assessment regimes in secondary science learning: digital platform-based diagnostics and paper-based diagnostics. Rather than asking which format is universally superior, the study examines how each regime shapes item use, feedback quality, instructional adjustment, and conceptual understanding. Using a comparative case study based on policy documents, classroom assessment literature, and implementation reports, the analysis demonstrates that digital diagnostics provide rapid aggregation and pattern recognition, while paper-based diagnostics often allow richer teacher noticing when used deliberatively. The strongest learning gains emerge not from the medium itself but from how diagnostic evidence is translated into feedback and re-teaching. The article argues that diagnostic assessment should be understood as an instructional system rather than a testing event. Its novelty lies in specifying the mediating role of feedback design and teacher interpretation between assessment format and science achievement. The article contributes to science education research by clarifying how assessment infrastructure affects conceptual change in science, particularly in systems implementing curriculum reform and differentiated instruction.