ENHANCEMENT OF JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS’ CONCEPT COMPREHENSION IN HYDROSTATIC PRESSURE AND ARCHIMEDES LAW CONCEPTS BY PREDICT-OBSERVE-EXPLAIN STRATEGY

F. X. Berek, S. Sutopo, M. Munzil

Abstract

This study explored effectiveness of Predict-Observe-Explain (POE) strategy to enhance concept comprehension of junior high school students in hydrostatic pressure and Archimedes law concepts. Subjects of this study were 31 students of a private junior high school in East Flores in even semester year 2015/2016. By mixed-method design, this study concluded that (1) average score of concept comprehension was significantly increase (p = 0.000) from pre-test (36.77) to post-test (63.26) with strong category of effect size (1.62), and moderate category of N-gain (0.40); (2) learning was also succeed identifying some misconceptions and remedied it. Those misconceptions were: (a) hydrostatic pressure was influenced by liquid volume and or the shape of the container, (b) an object was floated for there was air within, (c) a sunken object had no buoyant force, and (d) the magnitude of buoyant force was equal to liquid volume; (3) some of common problems around the students in applying hydrostatics concept and buoyant force were as follow (a) related to mathematical representation of hydrostatic force Ph = P0 + ?gh, most all students interpreted h as the depth measured from the bottom of the liquid column (not from the surface of the liquid as it should be), (b) related to buoyant force, the problem depended on the context where the question given. In context of immovable objects in a certain fluid, almost all student was hard comparing buoyant force magnitude to the weight. In context of sliding object in liquid, almost all students failed to explain the object position to its buoyant force.

Keywords

POE Strategy; Misconception; Hydrostatics pressure; Archimedes Law

Full Text:

PDF

References

Akinbobola, A. O. 2015. Enhancing Transfer of Knowledge in Physics Through Effective Teaching Strategies. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(16): 37-44.

Berek, F. X., Sutopo.,& Munzil. 2016. Pentingnya Pengintegrasian Hukum Newton dalam Pembelajaran Gaya Apung di SMP.Prosiding Seminar Nasional Pendidikan Dasar dengan tema Peningkatan Kualitas Pendidikan Dasar dalam Menghadapi Daya Saing Regional (ASEAN), 611-619.

Cepni, S., Sahin, C.,& Ipek, H. 2010. Teaching Floating and Sinking Conceptswith Different Methods andBased on the 5E Instructional Model. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching,11(2): 1-39.

Cepni, S.,& Sahin, C. 2012. Effect of Different Teaching Methods and Techniques Embedded in The 5EInstructional Model on Students’ Learning aboutBuoyancy Force. Eurasian Journal ofPhysics andChemistry Education,4(2): 97-127.

Chen, Y., Irving, P. W.,& Sayre, E. C. 2013. Epistemic Game for Answer Making in Learning AboutHydrostatics. Physical Riview Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 9(1): 1-7.

Cohen, L., Manion, L.,& Morrison, K. 2007.Reseacrh Methods in Education.New York: Routledge.

Coletta, V. P., Phillips, J. A., & Steinert, J. J. 2007. Interpreting Force Concept Inventory Scores: Normalized Gain and SAT Scores. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 3, 010106.

Costu, B. 2008. Learning Science Through the PDEODE Teaching Strategy: Helping Students Make Senseof Everyday Situations. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education,4(1):3-9.

Costu, B., Ayas, A.,& Niaz, M. 2012. Investigating the Effectiveness of A POE-Based Teaching Activityon Students’ Understanding of Condensation. Instructional Science, 40(1):47-67.

Creswell, J.W., &Clark, V.L.P. 2007. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. London: SagePublications.

Docktor, J. L.,& Mestre, J. P. 2014. Synthesis of Discipline-Based Education Research in Physics.Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 10, 020119.

Ellis, P. D. 2010. The Essential Guide to Effect Size: Statistical Power, Meta-analysis, and theInterpretationof Research Results. New York, Cambridge University Press.

Etkina, E.,& Planinsic, G. 2015. Defining and Developing “Critical Thinking” Through Devising andTesting Multiple Explanations of the Same Phenomenon.Physics Teacher, 53(7): 432-437.

Everitt, B. S.,& Skrondal, A. 2010. The Cambridge Dictionary of Statistics (4th ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Finkelstein, N. D., & Pollock. S. J. 2005. Replicating and Understanding Successful Innovations:Implementing Tutorials in Introductory Physics. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 1,010101.

Hake, R. 1998. Interactive-Engagement Versus Traditional Methods:Asix-Thousand-Student Survey ofMechanics Test Data for Introductory Physics Courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1): 64-74.

Hardy, I., Moller, K.,& Stern E. 2006.Effect of Instructional Support within Constructivist LearningEnvironments for Elementary School Students’ Understanding of Floating and Sinking.Journal ofEducational Phychology, 98(2): 307-326.

Heron, P. R., Loverude, M. E., Shaffer, P. S.,& McDermott. L. C. 2003. Helping Students Develop anUnderstanding of Archimedes’ Principle. II. Development of Research-Based Instructional Materials.American Journal of Physics,71(11): 1188-1195.

Kala, N., Yaman, F.,& Ayaz, A. 2012. The Effectiveness of Predict–Observe–Explain Technique in ProbingStudents’ Understanding About Acid–Base Chemistry: A Case for The Concepts of Ph, Poh, andStrength. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(3): 555-574.

Kibirige, I., Osodo, J.,& Tlala, K. M. 2014.The Effect of Predict-Observe-Explain Strategy onLearners’Misconceptions about Dissolved Salts.Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences,5(4): 300-310.

Klein, J. L., Gray, P., Zhbanova, K. S., & Rule, A. C. 2015. Upper Elementary Students Creatively LearnScientific Features of Animal Skulls by Making Movable Books. Journal for Learning through theArts, 11(1): 1-32.

Longfield, J. 2009. Discrepant Teaching Event.International Journal of Teaching and Learning in HigherEducation, 2(21): 266-271.

Loverude, M. E., Kautz, C. H.,& Heron, P. R. 2003. Helping Students Develop an Understanding ofArchimedes Principle. I. Research on Student Undestanding. American Journal of Physics,71(11): 1178-1187.

Mayer, R.E.,& Moreno, R. 2003.Nine Ways to Reduce Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning.Educational Psychologist, 38(1): 43-52.

Morgan, G. A., Leech, N. L., Gloeckner, G. W., & Barret, K. C. 2004. SPSS for Introductory Statistics: Useand Interpretation 2nd Edition. New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.

National Research Council (NRC). 2001. Knowing What Students Know. Washington, DC: NationalAcademies Press.

National Research Council (NRC). 2012. A Framework for K-12 Sciece Education: Practices,Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Ozkan, G., & Selcuk, G. S. 2015. Effect of Technology Enhanced Conceptual Change Texts on Students’ Understanding of Buoyant Force. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 3(12): 981-988.

Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia Nomor 22 Tahun2006 Tentang Standar IsiUntuk Satuan Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah.

Pursitasari, I. D., Nuryanti, S., & Rede, A. 2015. Promoting of Thematic-Based Integrated Science Learningon the Junior High School.Journal of Education and Practice, 6(20): 97-101.

Radovanovic, J.,& Slisko, J. 2013. Applying A Predict-Observe-Explain Sequence in Teaching of BouyantForce. Physics Education, 48(1): 28-34.

Riveros, H. G. 2012. Popular Explanations of Physical Phenomena: Broken Ruler, Oxygen in the Air andWater Attracted by Electric Charges. European Journal of Physics Education, 3(2): 52-57.

Sinaga, P., & Suhandi, A. 2015.The Effectiveness of Scaffolding Design in Training Writing SkillsPhysics Teaching Materials.International Journal of Instruction, 8(1): 19-34.

Skoumios, M. 2009.The Effect of Sociocognitive Conflict on Students’ Dialogic Argumentation about Floating and Sinking.International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 4(4): 381-399.

Sutopo.,& Wadrip, B. 2014. Impact of a Representational Approach on Students, Reasoning and ConceptualUnderstanding in Learning Mechanics.International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education,12(4): 741-765.

Unal, S.,& Costu, B. 2005. Problematic Issue for Students: Does it Sink or Float. Asia Pacific Forum onScience Learning and Teaching, 6(1): 1-16.

White, R.,& Gunstone, R. 1992. Probing Understanding.New York: Falmer Press.

Wong, D., Lim, C. C., Munirah, S. K., & Foong S. K. 2010. Student and TeacherUnderstanding ofBuoyancy.Physics Education Research Conference.(Online).(http://www.compadre.org/per/perc/2010/detail.cfm), diakses 31 Oktober 2015.

Yin, Y., Tomita, M. K.,& Shavelson, R. J. 2008. Diagnosing and Dealing withStudent Misconceptions: Floating and Sinking. Science Scope, 31(8): 34-39.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v5i2.6038

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Bookmark and Share