Developing Performance Assessment Instruments to Measure 4C Skills in Online Discussion Activities of Science Learning

The 21st century learning utilizes information technology for various activities, including online discussion forums, to increase students’ learning activities and learning interaction. The 4C’s performance assessment instrument in the online discussion forum is not yet available, thus, a 4C’s assessment, including communication, collaboration, critical thinking, and innovative creative thinking skills, is necessary to assess students’ performance in the process of online discussion activities. This research aims to develop 4C’s performance assessment instruments in the online discussion process using the ADDIE model. Meanwhile, instrument development included analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation. The instruments were in the form of observation sheets and assessment rubrics. This study tested 4C’s observation instruments in 104 students in online discussion activities during four online discussion activities. Data analysis included construct validity and reliability of each instrument indicator. The data analysis reveals that the 4C’s performance instruments are useable to measure students’ 4C’s skills in online discussion forums.


Introduction
Online learning has become a trend and is the best learning solution during the COVID-19 pandemic. Several limited preliminary studies denote that many educational practitioners use social media as a means of discussion activities. This is related to the essence of learning as an interactive process between educators and learners. The advantage of discussion activities is the possibility of knowledge transfer among participants. Moreover, online discussion forums discuss various alternative references to solve problems in science learning. The 21st century learning is characterized by ICT-based learning utilizing various internet facilities as a learning resource (Kivunja, 2015). This underlies the importance of applying the internet as a learning resource in online learning discussions to solve science learning content problems. The 21st century skills describe strategies used to teach the skills to students, and educational institutions must facilitate the improvement of students' skills through the learning process for their 21st century success. Learning by utilizing mobile devices and technology improves internet access and optimizes limitless learning. The 21st century skills refer to the framework of 4C skills Many online discussion activities are conducted using various paid and unpaid platforms.
Online discussions offer better interaction and information and knowledge sharing than offline discussions. Some educators find that assessing online discussion activities integrated with the 21st century skills, which is 4C's, is difficult. Evaluation tools that measure 4C's (communication, collaboration, critical thinking, and innovative-creative thinking skills) and applicable for any online learning discussions are not yet available. An assessment could be performed by observing students' active participation in classroom learning (Armstrong, 1978;Armstrong & Boud, 1983;Cann et al., 2006). Discussion activities are conducted in online classes, then data are collected by observing the participants' interactive and interpersonal responses to online discussion activities (Beuchot & Bullen, 2005). Student interaction by giving mutual responses in discussion activities is student performance (Balla & Boyle, 1994;Lee, 2008;Brent et al., 2009). Online discussion activities require an instrument to measure the 4C's of student interaction through their responses in the online discussion activities. Therefore, it is necessary to develop a valid and reliable evaluation tool that measures 4C's in online discussion activities of any subject.

Method
This study aims to develop a performance assessment of students' 4C's in online discussion activities. This study employed the ADDIE model approach consisting of five phases: analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation to develop a 4C's assessment (Kurt, 2019). The stages of developing 4C's instruments with the ADDIE model are presented in Table   1.  Innovative-creative thinking Donovan et al. (2014) The next stage was designing 4C's assessment instruments by determining the framework and compiling each framework into several indicators. An assessment rubric was created and derived from the indicators of each 4C's domain. These Indicators are presented in Table 3 until   Table 6. Listening to others carefully, patiently, and honestly 7 Treating teammates respectfully and professionally 8 Respecting the teammates' differences in generating new ideas 9 Prioritizing group's goals Improving innovation and quality of work as a team 10 Prioritizing, planning, and managing the division of tasks to achieve the desired group results

11
Using interpersonal skills to influence and direct team members towards common goals 12 Contributing to the achievement of the group's goals Using problem-solving skills to influence and direct team members toward common goals 13 Responding with an open mind to ideas and values 14 Acting responsibly to the larger community's interests Clarifying conclusions based on the relationship between the questions and the information in the problems 5 Evaluation Assessing the credibility of a statement or other representations of someone's opinion 6 Assessing a conclusion based on the relationship between information as well as concepts and the 'a problem's questions 7 Inference Identifying the necessary elements to draw rational conclusions by considering relevant information to an existing problem 8 Identifying the necessary elements to draw rational conclusions and considering relevant information and its consequences based on existing data 9 Explanation Providing reasons 10 Expressing evidence-based reasons, concepts, methodology, and information-based logical criteria  Table 3 until Table 6 shows the 4C's domains and their indicators based on the referenced framework in Table 2. Each domain's indicators were then derived in an assessment rubric representing in a scoring system. The 4C's observation instruments developed were then tested in 104 students during four online discussion activities.
The 4C's instrument trial was conducted in an online discussion about the concept of genetic engineering in the genetics course. The 4C's instruments were tested in 104 students; the research participants were divided into three large groups. Each large group was divided into three small discussion groups. During the online discussion, the members' opinions were monitored and observed to discover their 4C's. This research developed discussion themes applied in online discussions using the Gen-21cs application platform , as presented in Table 7. The 4C's data were collected by observing the participants' responses in online discussion activities. This result agrees with Beuchot and Bullen (2005), who asserted that there were interactions and interpersonal skills in online discussion forum activities; thus, assessing online discussion activities was conducted through responses (Cann, et al., 2006;Balaji & Chakrabarti, 2010;Cross & Palese, 2015) to discover the discussion participants' high level of thinking analysis was gained by using the product-moment test, and its reliability was gained by using the Cronbach alpha test.

Result and Discussion
The test results of the 4C's assessment instruments are in scores for each 4C's domain indicator. The mean score of each 4C's domain from the discussion participants' responses was analyzed by using r count of the product moment to gain construct validity and by consulting the Cronbach values to gain reliability. The results of the construct validity test on the instruments' indicator items are presented in Table 8.  Table 5 show that the 4C's observation instruments are valid, and thus, the observation instruments are applicable to measure 4C's in online discussion activities. The reliability test results of the observation instrument for each 4C's domain are shown in Table 9.  Table 9 shows that the observation instruments for each 4C's domain are reliable because the Cronbach alpha values of nearly all indicator items are above 0.5, and it means that the instruments' criteria are above the fairly reliable ranges: reliable and very reliable. This proves that the 4C's observation instruments consistently measure 4C's in online discussion activities.
The analysis results of the construct validity and reliability of the 4C's instruments presented in Table 5 and Table 6 reveal that the observation instruments had met the requirements to measure 4C's. The construct validity of the 4C's domains relates to what extent the observation instruments can measure 4C's. Therefore, the validity of 4C's domain instruments was fulfilled.
This implies that the students' 4C's information from the measurement can be interpreted as the results obtained. This statement agrees with Ancok's (2002) statement asserting that if the measuring tool has construct validity, all the measurement items will measure the concept.
The 4C's instruments observed in online discussion activities will be a non-test instrument with valid construct validity if the instruments are applicable to measure 4C's. The Cronbach alpha values of each 4C's domain indicator item obtained reliable criteria. This result indicates that the instruments used to measure 4's are consistent, and result scores are consistent. The observation instruments measured 4C's repeatedly for 4 discussion activities, and the results were relatively stable or consistent. This finding proves that the 4C's instruments are reliable.
The reliability level is indicated by numbers called the reliability coefficient. The higher the reliability coefficient of an instrument is, the smaller the possible errors will occur. The measurement error is relatively small when the Cronbach alpha value obtained is high. As a result, the 4C's instruments developed are applicable to measure 4C's in online discussion activities. The analysis of the product moment and Cronbach tests were conducted to gain construct validity and reliability, and the results reveal that the 4C's assessment instruments are valid and reliable. This proves that the 4C's observation instruments developed are valid and reliable; thus, they are applicable to measure (Biasutti, 2017;Wolf et al., 2015;Ercikan & Oliveri, 2016;Todd & Romine, 2017) students' 4C's in online discussion activities. Black and Wiliam (2018) explained that in assessing students' performance, the pedagogical aspects of classroom assessment were compulsorily considered. This research developed an assessment to measures 4C's in online discussion activities by considering pedagogical aspects and assessing all online classroom activities. Integrating all 4C's domains in a learning process agrees with studies which state that students' classroom learning activities can assess their performance in general (Baird et al., 2017;Black & Wiliam, 2018). An interaction between educators and learners occurs in the learning process. It is a process of learners' performance and assessable. The 4C's consist of communication, collaboration, critical thinking, and innovative creative thinking skills measured by observing online discussion activities. This statement is consistent with the statement who asserted that the assessment was conducted by observing participants' active participation in online classes (Armstrong, 1978;Armstrong & Boud, 1983;Cann et al., 2006). 4C's data were collected by observing the participants interactions and interpersonal skills in their responses during online discussion activities (Beuchot & Bullen, 2005). The interaction of participants' responses in the online discussion process indicates that they are performing (Balla & Boyle, 1994;Lee, 2008;Brent, et al., 2009 their communication, collaboration, critical thinking results, and innovative-creative thinking reflections. The 4C's assessment instruments developed are effective because it can measure four skills in one activity. Students' performance derived from their responses in discussion activities agrees with the standards of learning objectives in higher education (Rovai, 2007;Christopher et al., 2004). These objectives measure the profile of students' 21st century abilities using comprehensive assessment techniques in online classrooms (Landis et al., 2007;Akyol & Garrison, 2011;Cross & Palese, 2015;Dubuclet et al., 2015;Wolf et al., 2015;Black & Wiliam, 2018). Students' responses to online discussion activities are a combination of collaborative work between their written responses and their online discussion activities (Matheson et al., 2012;Liu et al., 2017;Biasutti, 2017). Students' responses in online discussion activities are in the form of texts (McLoughlin & Mynard, 2009;Spatariu et al., 2004;Thomas & Graham, 2018;Wanas et al., 2008) and transcripts of discussion activities. These forms were then coded and analyzed. The coded text was then analyzed based on the 4C's domains. The data of each 4C's domain is in the form of scores as they are a non-test instrument (Wanas et al., 2008;Wilson et al., 2016). Moreover, the levels of consistency and consistency in measurement were analyzed. The constant and consistent validity and reliability prove that the 4C's assessment instruments developed are directly applicable and adoptable in online discussion activities of science learning.
An important element of online communication in discussion activities, as evidence of feedback, interaction, and in online class processes, is to assess students' conversational transcripts (Charalambos et al., 2004;Copping, 2016). Online classrooms utilize structuredalternative assessment methods to provide broad freedoms for learners to make decision in the learning process (Huxham et al., 2012;Fattah, 2015;Awada, 2016). Online discussion technology provides the ability for each learner to respond to questions (O'Reilly & Newton, 2002), participate equally, and potentially support learners' independent knowledge construction in meaningful discourse (Conole & Fill, 2005). The learning process of online discussion forums increases the learning process activities through the responses given in discussion activities. Discussion participants' comments are linked to reference sources, trigger, and synthesize learners' new thoughts; and thus, they share information, experiences, and supports with other discussion participants.

Conclusion
Online discussion activities are a learning process, in which there is interaction between learners, sharing information and knowledge. The active participation of discussion participants is a student's learning performance and psychomotor aspects. The 4C skills assessment in online discussion activities developed is valid and reliable, so it can be used to measure 4C skills in students through online discussion activities. This 4C skill instrument can be used for online discussion activities on learning any content.