EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 344 (2025) EPJ Web Conf., 344 (2025) 01038 References
Open Access
Issue
EPJ Web Conf.
Volume 344, 2025
AI-Integrated Physics, Technology, and Engineering Conference (AIPTEC 2025)
Article Number 01038
Number of page(s) 7
Section AI-Integrated Physics, Technology, and Engineering
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/202534401038
Published online 22 December 2025
  1. O. Pedrera, U. Ortega-Lasuen, A. Ruiz-González, J. R. Díez, O. Barrutia, Branches of plant blindness and their relationship with biodiversity conceptualisation among secondary students. J. Biol. Educ. 57, 3, 566–591 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2021.1933133 [Google Scholar]
  2. J. Marcos-Walias, J. Bobo-Pinilla, J. D. Iglesias, R. R. Tapia, Plant awareness disparity among students of different educational levels in Spain. Eur. J. Sci. Math. Educ. 11, 2, 234–248 (2023). https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/12570 [Google Scholar]
  3. S. Blue, C. L. M. Hargiss, J. Norland, E. S. Dekeyser, P. Comeau, Plant blindness represents the loss of generational knowledge and cultural identity. Nat. Sci. Educ. 52, 1 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1002/nse2.20106 [Google Scholar]
  4. P. Lindemann-Matthies, E. Heber, M. Remmele, Find the Plant—An Educational Game Fosters Plant Species Literacy. Sustainability. 16, 11 (2024). https://doi.org/10.3390/su16114702 [Google Scholar]
  5. A. Bebbington, The ability of A-level students to name plants. J. Biol. Educ. 39, 2, 63–67 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2005.9655963 [Google Scholar]
  6. S. Diana, Q. Mukhoyyaroh, A. Amprasto, T. Hidayat, Applying phenetics approach to improve 21st century student plant literacy. J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 1521, 4, 042007 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1521/4/042007 [Google Scholar]
  7. A. Cosby, J. Manning, D. Power, B. Harreveld, New decade, same concerns: A systematic review of agricultural literacy of school students. Educ. Sci. 12, 4, 235 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12040235 [Google Scholar]
  8. G. E. Uno, Botanical literacy: What and how should students learn about plants? Am. J. Bot. 96, 10, 1753–1759 (2009). https://doi.org/10.3732/ajb.0900025 [Google Scholar]
  9. W. P. Arif, M. S. Sari, S. R. Lestari, Unveiling the roots of botanical literacy: A systematic literature review on its concepts and domains. Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 21, 4, 1–12 (2025). https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/16121 [Google Scholar]
  10. M. S. Sari, A. K. Sudrajat, Z. Hassan, Scientific writing skills activity: A strategy for empowering botanical literacy. Biosfer 16, 2, 312–322 (2023). https://doi.org/10.21009/biosferjpb.28282 [Google Scholar]
  11. P. Pongsophon, A. Jituafua, Developing and assessing learning progression for botanical literacy using Rasch analysis. Sci. Educ. Int. 32, 2, 125–130 (2021). https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v32.i2.5 [Google Scholar]
  12. K. Beasley, L. Lee-Hammond, S. Hesterman, A framework for supporting the development of botanical literacies in early childhood education. Int. J. Early Child. 53, 2, 119–137 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-021-00291-x [Google Scholar]
  13. D. P. Anggrella, A. K. Sudrajat, Profile and views on botanical literacy: A study from a final year preservice biology teacher. J. Pendidik. Biol. Indones. 11, 2, 548–561 (2025). https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v11i2.40470 [Google Scholar]
  14. B. Sumintono, W. Widhiarso, Aplikasi Model Rasch untuk Penelitian Ilmu-ilmu Sosial (Trim Komunikata Publishing House, Cimahi, 2015). http://eprints.um.edu.my/id/eprint/11413 [Google Scholar]
  15. T. A. Kholisah, H. Rofiqoh, A. N. Alia, B. M. Pramudito, S. Suhardi, Analisis efektivitas implementasi kebijakan deep learning di sekolah. Khatulistiwa: J. Pendidik. Sos. Humaniora 5, 3, 833–845 (2025). https://doi.org/10.55606/khatulistiwa.v5i3.7322 [Google Scholar]
  16. N. Zebua, Education transformation: Implementation of deep learning in 21st-century learning. Harmoni Pendidik. 2, 2, 146–152 (2025). https://doi.org/10.62383/hardik.v2i2.1405 [Google Scholar]
  17. F. Sastra, J. Jips, M. Wijaya, Kurikulum Deep Learning di Indonesia: Sebuah Harapan Baru. J. Ilm. Pendidik. Scholastic. 9,1 (2025). http://e-journal.sastra-unes.com/index.php/JIPS [Google Scholar]
  18. L. Fathimah, M. Sofwan, I. P. Pratama, S. Halimah, Transformasi kurikulum Indonesia: Adaptasi kebijakan pendidikan di era globalisasi melalui kurikulum merdeka dan integrasi deep learning. Tarbiatuna: J. Islam. Educ. Stud. 5, 100–109 (2025). [Google Scholar]
  19. R. Perline, B. D. Wright, H. Wainer, The Rasch model as additive conjoint measurement. Applied Psychological Measurement. 3, 2, 237-255 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1177/014662167900300213 [Google Scholar]
  20. S. N. Phillipson, A. K. O. Tse, Discovering patterns of achievement in Hong Kong students: An application of the Rasch measurement model. High Abil. Stud. 18, 2, 173–190 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1080/13598130701709640 [Google Scholar]
  21. G. J. Mellenbergh, P. Vijn, The Rasch model as a loglinear model. Applied Psychological Measurement. 5, 3, 369-376 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1177/014662168100500310 [Google Scholar]
  22. K. D. Bradley, Book review: Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Organ. Res. Methods. 8, 2, 249–250 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428105275397 [Google Scholar]
  23. I. Natsir, D. Mayasari, A. Munfarikhatin, Rasch model: Quality of test instruments to measure students’ ability in algebra. SHS Web Conf. 149, 01033 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202214901033 [Google Scholar]
  24. N. Aprilia, E. Susilaningsih, S. Sudarmin, W. Sumarni, F. W. Mahatmanti, N. U. Adhelia, Application of the Rasch model on the test instrument to analyze the problem-solving ability of students in acid-base solutions materials. Edusains. 13, 2, 106–118 (2021). https://doi.org/10.15408/es.v13i2.21375 [Google Scholar]
  25. S. Soeharto, Development of a diagnostic assessment test to evaluate science misconceptions in terms of school grades: A Rasch measurement approach. J. Turk. Sci. Educ. 18, 3, 351–370 (2021). https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2021.78 [Google Scholar]
  26. M. Bennink, M.A. Croon, J. Keuning, J.K. Vermunt, Measuring student ability, classifying schools, and detecting item bias at school level, based on student-level dichotomous items. J. Educ. Behav. Stat. 39, 3, 180–202 (2014). https://doi.org/10.3102/1076998614529158 [Google Scholar]
  27. D. Pratama, I. Husnayaini, F. Tarbiyah, I. Syaikh, A. Siddik, Applying Rasch model to measure students’ reading comprehension. J. Indones. Stud. Assess. Eval. 6, 2 (2020). https://doi.org/10.21009/JISAE [Google Scholar]
  28. B. Sumintono, Model Rasch: Edisi Revisi (2018). [Online]. [Google Scholar]
  29. R. Putri, Inovasi pendidikan dengan menggunakan model deep learning di Indonesia. J. Pendidik. Kewarganegaraan Polit. 2, 2, 69–77 (2024). https://doi.org/10.61476/186hvh28 [Google Scholar]
  30. O. Pedrera, O. Barrutia, J. R. Díez, Do textbooks provide opportunities to develop meaningful botanical literacy? A case study of the scientific model of plant nutrition. J. Biol. Educ. 59, 4, 561-587 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2024.2365679 [Google Scholar]
  31. B. Sumintono, Rasch model measurements as tools in assessment for learning. 1st International Conference on Education Innovation (ICEI). 38-42 (2018). https://doi.org/10.2991/icei-17.2018.11 [Google Scholar]
  32. C. N. Wells, M. Hatley, J. Walsh, Planting a native pollinator garden impacts the ecological literacy of undergraduate students. Am. Biol. Teach. 83, 4210–213 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2021.83.4.210 [Google Scholar]
  33. A. T. P. Retno, S. Saputro, M. Ulfa, Properness test: Development of an inquiry-based learning module to improve science literacy in thermochemistry subject. AIP Conf. Proc. 1, 080003 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5062822 [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.