Enhancing Scientific Problem-Solving and Learning Achievement of Lower Secondary Students through Active Learning Management
Abstract
Active learning is an essential part of good science education. It engages students in the learning process, allowing them to get a better comprehension of scientific subjects. This research aims to enhance scientific problem-solving and also learning achievement of eighth-grade students through active learning organization. This study employed a pre-experimental design. The target group was 30 eighth-grade students from one school in Thailand. Three-hour learning management plans provided 15 hours of active learning organization. The result indicated that active learning encourages students to solve scientific problems. Students actively engage in defining and improving the learning process based on their own interests. As a result, students’ academic achievement and problem-solving in science were improved. Furthermore, when comparing the academic achievement and scientific problem-solving scores between after experiment and criterion. Additionally, students expressed a high level of satisfaction with the active science learning activities, as these activities contributed to their academic achievement and problem-solving in the field of science. It can be concluded that active learning is very useful and engage students to science classroom.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Alqasa, K. M. A., & Afaneh, J. A. A. (2022). Active learning techniques and student satisfaction: role of classroom environment. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 98(98), 85-100.
Al Yakin, A., & Seraj, P. M. I. (2023). Impact of metaverse technology on student engagement and academic performance: the mediating role of learning motivation. International Journal of Computations, Information and Manufacturing (IJCIM), 3(1), 10-18.
American Chemical Society. (2019). Active learning in general chemistry: whole-class solutions. American Chemical Society.
Arık, S., & Yılmaz, M. (2020). The effect of constructivist learning approach and active learning on environmental education: A meta-analysis study. International Electronic Journal of Environmental Education, 10(1), 44-84.
Baepler, P., Walker, J. D., Brooks, D. C., Saichaie, K., & Petersen, C. I. (2016). A guide to teaching in the active learning classroom: History, research, and practice. Routledge.
Bean, J. C., & Melzer, D. (2021). Engaging ideas: The professor’s guide to integrating writing, critical thinking, and active learning in the classroom. John Wiley & Sons.
Brito, S. M. (Ed.). (2019). Active learning: Beyond the future. BoD–Books on Demand.
Cascolan, H. M. S. (2023). Exploring students’ academic performance, motivational orientation and self-regulated learning strategies towards chemistry. International Journal of STEM Education for Sustainability, 3(2), 225-239.
Cooperstein, S. E., & Kocevar‐Weidinger, E. (2004). Beyond active learning: A constructivist approach to learning. Reference Services Review, 32(2), 141-148.
Costa, A. M., Ferreira, M. E., & da Silva Loureiro, M. J. (2021). Scientific literacy: The conceptual framework prevailing over the first decade of the twenty-first century. Revista Colombiana de Educación, (81), 195-228.
Dalal, R. S., Howard, D. J., Bennett, R. J., Posey, C., Zaccaro, S. J., & Brummel, B. J. (2022). Organizational science and cybersecurity: abundant opportunities for research at the interface. Journal of Business and Psychology, 37(1), 1-29.
Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24(2), 97-140.
Dirks, N. B. (2022). The arts and sciences: The two cultures and the public face of science. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1518(1), 5-11.
Dyamayanti, L., Fatimah, S., Lestari, I. D., & Kurniawan, D. D. (2023). The effect of discovery learning model on students’ learning outcomes on the protists concept. Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia Gemilang, 3(1), 15-19.
Hadibarata, T., & Rubiyatno, R. (2019). Active learning strategies in the environmental engineering course: A case study at Curtin University Malaysia. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 8(4), 456-463.
Hassan, M. A., Habiba, U., Majeed, F., & Shoaib, M. (2021). Adaptive gamification in e-learning based on students’ learning styles. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(4), 545-565.
Hernández-de-Menéndez, M., Vallejo Guevara, A., Tudón Martínez, J. C., Hernández Alcántara, D., & Morales-Menendez, R. (2019). Active learning in engineering education. A review of fundamentals, best practices and experiences. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM), 13, 909-922.
Himanen, L., Geurts, A., Foster, A. S., & Rinke, P. (2019). Data‐driven materials science: status, challenges, and
perspectives. Advanced Science, 6(21), 1900808.
Hodges, L. C. (2020). Student engagement in active learning classes. Active Learning in College Science: The Case for Evidence-based Practice, 27-41.
Hoidn, S., & Reusser, K. (2020). Foundations of student-centered learning and teaching. In The Routledge International Handbook of Student-Centered Learning and Teaching in Higher Education (pp. 17-46). Routledge.
Janoušková, S., Pyskatá Rathouská, L., Žák, V., & Urválková, E. S. (2023). The scientific thinking and reasoning framework and its applicability to manufacturing and services firms in natural sciences. Research in Science & Technological Education, 41(2), 653-674.
Khammanee, S., Prasertsang, P., & Matchimo, P. (2023). Enhancing mathematical learning of grade 4 students through active learning. Journal of Green Learning, 3(2), 54-59.
Khan, K., Majoka, M. I., Khurshid, K., & Shah, S. M. H. (2017). Impact of active learning method on students academic achievement in physics at secondary school level in Pakistan. Journal of Education and Educational Development, 5(2), 134-151.
Korkmaz, S., Cetin-Dindar, A., & Oner, F. K. (2023). Impact of educational game development on students’ achievement and attitudes toward science. The Journal of Educational Research, 116(5), 268-279.
Kovarik, M. L., Robinson, J. K., & Wenzel, T. J. (2022). Why use active learning?. In Active Learning in the Analytical Chemistry Curriculum (pp. 1-12). American Chemical Society.
Lombardi, D., Shipley, T. F., & Astronomy Team, Biology Team, Chemistry Team, Engineering Team, Geography Team, Geoscience Team, and Physics Team. (2021). The curious construct of active learning. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 22(1), 8-43.
Lufri, L., Laili, F., & Anhar, A. (2020). Effect of active learning in form of scientific approach with assistance of student worksheets based problem based learning (PBL) towards students biology psychomotor competence in bacterial material. Journal of Educational Sciences, 4(1), 20-29.
McGowan, V. C., & Bell, P. (2020). Engineering education as the development of critical sociotechnical literacy. Science & Education, 29(4), 981-1005.
Mohammed, S. H., & Kinyó, L. (2020). The role of constructivism in the enhancement of social studies education. Journal of Critical Reviews, 7(7), 249-256.
Olivares, S. L., Adame, E., Treviño, J. I., López, M. V., & Turrubiates, M. L. (2020). Action learning: challenges that impact employability skills. Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning, 10(1), 203-216.
Ongon, S., Wongchantra, P., & Bunnaen, W. (2021). The effect of integrated instructional activities of environmental education by using community-based learning and active learning. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 10(2), 42-57.
Onsee, P., & Nuangchalerm, P. (2019). Developing critical thinking of grade 10 students through inquiry-based STEM learning. Jurnal Penelitian dan Pembelajaran IPA, 5(2), 132-141.
Owens, D. C., Sadler, T. D., Barlow, A. T., & Smith-Walters, C. (2020). Student motivation from and resistance to active learning rooted in essential science practices. Research in Science Education, 50, 253-277.
Polmart, P., & Nuangchalerm, P. (2023). Promoting productive thinking and physics learning achievement of high school students through STEAM education. Journal of Green Learning, 3(1), 27-35.
Poonputta, A., & Nuangchalerm, P. (2022). Professional development of active learning management in primary teachers: Small-sized schools study. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 9(12), 46-52.
Pruekpramool, C., Sangpradit, T., Wanakamol, P., & Supansomboon, S. (2023). Polymer science in action: Transforming the learning experience for undergraduates with active learning strategies. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 22(10), 54-78.
Qureshi, M. A., Khaskheli, A., Qureshi, J. A., Raza, S. A., & Yousufi, S. Q. (2023). Factors affecting students’ learning performance through collaborative learning and engagement. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(4), 2371-2391.
Rahman, A. A., Sahid, S., & Nasri, N. M. (2022). Literature review on the benefits and challenges of active learning on students’ achievement. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 17(12), 4856-4868.
Rahman, M. M. (2019). 21st century skill’ problem solving’: Defining the concept. Rahman, MM (2019). 21st Century Skill “Problem Solving”: Defining the Concept. Asian Journal of Interdisciplinary Research, 2(1), 64-74.
Reardon, M., & Derner, S. (2023). Strategies for great teaching: Maximize learning moments. Taylor & Francis.
Sawatruksa, C., & Rodpun, K. (2019). Chemistry experiment training for science high school teachers toward active learning approach. In AIP Conference Proceedings (Vol. 2081, No. 1). AIP Publishing.
Sharon, A. J., & Baram‐Tsabari, A. (2020). Can science literacy help individuals identify misinformation in everyday life?. Science Education, 104(5), 873-894.
Situmorang, M., Purba, J., & Silaban, R. (2020). Implementation of an innovative learning resource with project to facilitate active learning to improve students’ performance on chemistry. Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, 54(4), 905-914.
Surakarn, A., Junprasert, T., Chaiakkarakan, N., Peungposop, N., & Boonlop, R. (2020). Active learning and its outcomes: A case study from the education reform project in Thailand. The Journal of Behavioral Science, 15(1), 34-51.
Trinidad, J. E. (2020). Understanding student-centred learning in higher education: students’ and teachers’ perceptions, challenges, and cognitive gaps. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 44(8), 1013-1023.
Van Manen, M. (2016). The tact of teaching: The meaning of pedagogical thoughtfulness. Routledge.
Werder, C., & Otis, M. M. (Eds.). (2023). Engaging student voices in the study of teaching and learning. Taylor & Francis.
Wijayanti, M. D., Rahardjo, S. B., Saputro, S., & Mulyani, S. (2019). Item analysis of critical thinking skills instrument to measure effectiveness of scientific group inquiry learning (SGIL) model. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 8(4), 538-546.
Wolff, C. E., Jarodzka, H., & Boshuizen, H. P. (2021). Classroom management scripts: A theoretical model contrasting expert and novice teachers’ knowledge and awareness of classroom events. Educational Psychology Review, 33, 131-148.
Wongchantra, P., & Nuangchalerm, P. (2011). Effects of environmental ethics infusion instruction on knowledge and ethics of undergraduate students. Research Journal of Environmental Sciences, 5(1), 73-77.
Xiaofeng, L., Othakanon, L., & Saleewong, D. (2022). Enhancing learning achievement and students’ satisfaction among the first year students of Zhoukou Normal University through problem-based learning. Journal of Green Learning, 2(1), 16-20.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
