The Implementation of Physics Learning through Online Mode during Pandemic Covid-19 Using Metacognitive Knowledge-based Materials
Abstract
This study aims to analyze the effect of metacognitive knowledge-based physics teaching materials (MKBPTM) on the ability to analyze metacognitive knowledge. These teaching materials were used in online learning during the Covid-19 pandemic. The research employed a post-test only control group design. The participants were divided into two groups: the experimental group consisting of 120 students and the control group comprising 124 students, who came from public senior high schools. The results showed that the MKBPTM experimental group had better learning outcomes than the control class using conventional-based teaching materials (CBPTM). The hypothesis testing results indicate a difference in the average score between the experimental and control groups’ metacognitive knowledge analysis skills (MKAS). The results suggest that MKBPTM has an influence on MKAS compared to CBPTM.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Anderson, L. W., & Bloom, B. S. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
Archibald, S., Coggshall, J. G., Croft, A., & Goe, L. (2011). High-Quality Professional Development for All Teachers: Effectively Allocating Resources. Research & Policy Brief. National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.
Arends, R. I. (2010). Learning To Teach. Translated by Soetjipto, H.P & Soetjipto, S. M. 2008, Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
Brophy, J. (2004). Motivating students to learn. Routledge.
Brown, M.C, Mcneil., N. M & Glenberg, A. M. (2009). Using concreteness in education; real problems, potential solutions. Child development perspectives, 3(3),160-164.
Caliskan, M., & Sunbul, A. M. (2011). The Effects of Learning Strategies Instruction on Metacognitive Knowledge, Using Metacognitive Skills and Academic Achievement (Primary Education Sixth Grade Turkish Course Sample). Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 11(1), 148-153.
Coskun, A. (2010). The Effect of Metacognitive Strategy Training on The Listening performance of Beginner Student, Novitas Royal, 4(1), 35-50.
Dawson, T. L. (2008). Metacognition and Learning in Adulthood, Prepared in response to tasking from ODNI/CHCO/IC Leadership Development Office. Development Service, LLC.
Dhull, P., & Verma, G. (2020). Use of Concept Mapping for Teaching Science. The International journal of analytical and experimental modal analysis, 12, 2481-2491.
Duque, D.F., Baird, J.A., & Posner, M.I. (2000). Executive Attention and Metacognitive Regulation, Consciousness and Cogniton, 9(2), 288-307.
Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta‐analysis of school‐based universal interventions. Child development, 82(1), 405-432.
Ellis, A. K., Denton, D. W., & Bond, J. B. (2014). An analysis of research on metacognitive teaching strategies. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 4015-4024.
Giancoli, D.C. (2014). Fisika Edisi 7. Jakarta: Erlangga
Gillborn, D., Warmington, P., & Demack, S. (2018). QuantCrit: education, policy,‘Big Data’and principles for a critical race theory of statistics. Race Ethnicity and Education, 21(2), 158-179.
Hermayawati, H. (2020). Teachers’ efforts in understanding the factual, conceptual, procedural and metacognitive assessment using the revised 2013 curriculum. lnternational Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research (IJLTER) Scopus lndexed Journal, 19(5), 156-199.
Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Objectivism versus constructivism: do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(3), 5-14.
Kerr, C., & Lloyd, C. (2008). Pedagogical learnings for management education: Developing creativity and innovation, Journal of Management and Organization,14(5), 486-503.
Kim M, Cheong Y, & Song J. (2018). The Meanings of Physics Equations and Physics Education, Journal of the Korean Physical Society, 73(2), 145-151.
Langley, D., & Eylon, B. S. (2006). Probing High School Physics Students’ Views and Concerns about Learning Activities. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4(2), 215-239.
Lederman, N. G. (2006). Research on nature of science: Reflection on the past, anticipations of the future foreword. Asian-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 7(1), 1–11.
Lee, M & Baylor, A.L. (2006). Designing Metacognitive Map for Web-Based Learning. Educational Technology & Society, 9(1), 344-348.
Lewis, B. (2019). TLM: Teaching/Learning Materials. https://www.thoughtco.com/tlm-teaching-learning-materials-2081658.
Lin, X. (2001). Designing Metaconitive Activities, ETR & D, 49(2), 23-40.
Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action? Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
McLaughlin, M. W. (2013). Implementation as mutual adaptation: Change in classroom organization. In Curriculum Studies Reader E2 (pp. 174-184). Routledge.
Michalsky, T., Mevarech, Z. R., & Haibi, L. (2009). Elementary school children reading scientific texts: Effects of metacognitive instruction. The Journal of Educational Research, 102(5), 363–376.
Napoli, R. D. (2004). What is student-centered learning? Educational Initiative Centre University of Westminster.
Nottingham, J. (2015). Challenging learning: Theory, effective practice and lesson ideas to create optimal learning in the classroom. Routledge.
Özsoy, G., & Ataman, A. (2009). The effect of metacognitive strategy training on mathematical problem solving achievement. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 1(2), 67-82.
Pennequin, V., Sorel, O., Nanty, I., & Fontaine, R. (2010). Metacognition and low achievement in thematics: The effect of training in the use of metacognitive skills to solve mathematical word problems. Thinking & Reasoning, 16(3), 198-220.
Pithers, R. T. (2002). Cognitive learning styles: A review of field dependence-independent approach. Journal of Vocational Education and raining, 13(4), 267-279.
Ramsden, J. M. (1998). Mission impossible? Can anything be done about attitudes to science? International Journal of Science Education, 20(2), 125-137.
Rebecca, L. (2003). Language Learning Styles and Strategies: An Overview. Online publication. Retrieved November 2012 from web.ntpu.edu.tw/~language/workshop/read2.pdf.
Riding, R & Douglas, G. (1993). The effect of cognitive style and mode of presentation on learning performance.
Romizsowski, A. J. (2008) Developing Auto-Instructional Materials. New York: Routledge.
Sadler-Smith, E., Zhang, L. F., Sternberg, R. J., & Rayner, S. (2012). Metacognition and styles. Handbook of intellectual styles: Preferences in cognition, learning, and thinking, 153-172.
Santrock, J. W. (2007). Educational Psychology. Translated by B.S Wibowa, T., 2010, Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group.
Shannon, S. V. (2008). Using metacognitive strategies and learning styles to create self-directed learners. Institute for Learning Styles Journal, 1(1), 14-28.
Stoica I, Moraru S, & Miron C, (2011). Concept Maps, a Must for The Modern Teaching-Learning Process, Romanian Reports in Physics, 63(2), 567–576.
Torkamani H.T. (2010). On the Use of Metacognitive Strategies by Iranian EFL Learners in Doing Various Reading Task Across Different Proficiency Level., International Journal of Language Student, 4(1), 47-58
Veenman, M. V., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and learning, 1(1), 3-14.
Wernke S. Wagener U., Anschuetz A. & Moschner B. (2011). Assessing Cognitive and Metacognitive Learning Strategies in School Children: Conduct Validity and Arising Questions. The International Journal of Research and Review, 6 (2), 19-37.
Wentzel, K. R. (2020). Motivating students to learn. Routledge.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
