The difficulty index of biology topics in Indonesian Senior High School: Biology undergraduate students’ perspectives
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v7i2.16538Abstract
Biology is a subject that contains of many difficult concepts to study. This study aimed to identify Biology topics taught in Senior High School (SHS) which were considered as difficult materials by undergraduate students. The data were gathered by means of a web-based survey from 198 Biology students of 25 universities and 51 Biology education students of nine universities in Indonesia. The biology students graduated from SHSs in 97 regions/municipality, while the biology education students were graduated from 34 regions/municipality. The data were analyzed using two formulas: 1) Biology Difficulty Index (BDI) to determine the difficulty index of Biology subject, and 2) Topic Difficulty Index (TDI) to examine the difficulty index of each Biology topics. The results showed that the highest value of TDI was Genetics. There was no significant difference of BDI between Biology students and Biology education students. The lower of the students’ BDI, the higher the level of their interest in Biology subject. The primary cause of difficulty encountered by the students in studying various topics of Biology was the complicated characteristics of the materials. The findings of this study can be followed up by designing diagnostic tests and instructional designs in biology topics which consider students’ difficulty.
Downloads
Author Biography
Ahmad Fauzi, Scopus ID: 57190423577; Department of Biology Education, University of Muhammadiyah Malang, East Java Province
References
Abubakar, N. I. (2017). Factors affecting students’ choice of programmes in the Faculty of Renewable Natural Resources of the University for Development Studies, Nyankpala Campus - Ghana. International Journal of Economics, Commerce and Management, V(12), 199–217. https://1library.net/document/ zwkvx37z-affecting-students-programmes-renewable-resources-university-development-nyankpala.html
Adams, N. E. (2015). Bloom’s taxonomy of cognitive learning objectives. Journal of Medical Library Association, 103(3), 152–153. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.103.3.010
Agboghoroma, T. E., & Oyovwi, E. O. (2015). Evaluating effect of students’ academic achievement on identified difficult concepts in senior secondary school biology in Delta State. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(30), 117–125. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1081378
Albrecht, J. R., & Karabenick, S. A. (2018). Relevance for learning and motivation in education. The Journal of Experimental Education, 86(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2017.1380593
Alfiraida, S. (2018). Identifikasi materi biologi SMA sulit menurut pandangan siswa dan guru SMA se-kota Salatiga. Journal of Biology Education, 1(2), 209–222. https://doi.org/10.21043/jobe.v1i2.4118
Amin, A. M., Corebima, A. D., Zubaidah, S., & Mahanal, S. (2017). The critical thinking skills profile of preservice biology teachers in Animal Physiology. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Education and Training (ICET 2017), 128(Icet), 179–183. https://doi.org/10.2991/icet-17.2017.30
Andayani, Y., Hadisaputra, S., & Hasnawati, H. (2018). Analysis of the Level of Conceptual Understanding. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1095, 012045. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1095/1/ 012045
Awang-Kanak, F., Masnoddin, M., Matawali, A., Daud, M.A., & Jumat, N. (2016). Difficulties Experience by science foundation students on basic mendelian genetics topic: A preliminary study. Transactions on Science and Technology, 3(1–2), 283–290. http://tost.unise.org/pdfs/vol3/no1_2/31-2_283_290.pdf
Bateson, M., & Feenders, G. (2010). The use of passerine bird species in laboratory research: implications of basic biology for husbandry and welfare. ILAR Journal, 51(4), 394–408. https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar.51.4. 394
Bolognesi, M., & Vernillo, P. (2019). How abstract concepts emerge from metaphorical images: The metonymic way. Language & Communication, 69, 26–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2019.05.003
Buah, E., & Akuffo, A. F. (2017). The science topics perceived difficult by junior high school students at Techiman North District: Effects on the teaching and learning of science. Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research, 3(1), 503–509. http://www.onlinejournal.in/IJIRV3I1/089.pdf
Carty, L. (2012). Creative approaches to teaching difficult content. Teaching and Learning Innovations, 15, 1–10. https://journal.lib.uoguelph.ca/index.php/tli/article/download/2708/2794
Cherif, A. H., Jedlicka, D. M., Al-arabi, A., Aron, R., & Verma, S. (2010). Effective understanding of the human body organs : A role-playing activity for deep learning. The American Biology Teacher, 72(7), 447–450. https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2010.72.7.11
Cicuto, C., Pazinato, M., & Torres, B. (2019). Teaching metabolism with scientific articles: A new approach. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 47(1), 85–92. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.21187
Çimer, A. (2012). What makes biology learning difficult and effective: Students’ views. Educational Research and Reviews, 7(3), 61–71. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR11.205
Cuff, B. M. P. (2017). Perceptions of subject difficulty and subject choices: Are the two linked, and if so, how ? (Issue October). https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/30159/
da Silva, J. R. S., Guimarães, F., & Sano, P. T. (2016). Teaching of Botany in higher education : representations and discussions of undergraduate students. Revista Electrónica de Enseñanza de Las Ciencias, 15(3), 380–393. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/76178109.pdf
Etobro, A. B., & Fabinu, O. E. (2017). Students’ perceptions of difficult concepts in Biology in senior secondary schools in Lagos State. Global Journal of Educational Research, 16, 139–147. https://doi.org/10.4314/gjedr.v16i2.8
Fauzi, A., & Fariantika, A. (2018). Courses perceived difficult by undergraduate students majoring in biology. Biosfer: Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi, 11(2), 78–89. https://doi.org/10.21009/biosferjpb.v11n2.78-89
Fauzi, A., & Mitalistiani. (2018). High school biology topics that perceived difficult by undergraduate students. Didaktika Biologi: Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan Biologi, 2(2), 73–84. https://doi.org/10.32502/dikbio.v2i2. 1242
Gonzalez-Angulo, A. M., Hennessy, B. T. J., & Mills, G. B. (2010). Future of personalized medicine in oncology: A systems biology approach. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 28(16), 2777–2783. https://doi.org/ 10.1200/JCO.2009.27.0777
Guillemaud, T., Ciosi, M., Lombaert, E., & Estoup, A. (2012). Biological invasions in agricultural settings : insights from evolutionary. In Comptes Rendus Biologies (Vol. 334, Issue 3, pp. 237–246). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crvi.2010.12.008
Gungor, S. N., & Ozkan, M. (2017). Evaluation of the concepts and subjects in Biology perceived to be difficult to learn and teach by the pre-service teachers registered in the pedagogical formation program. European Journal of Educational Research, 6(4), 495–508. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.6.4.495
Hardin, P. E. (2011). Molecular genetic analysis of circadian timekeeping in Drosophila. Aviation Week and Space Technology, 74, 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-387690-4.00005-2
Hasibuan, H., & Djulia, E. (2017). Analisis kesulitan belajar siswa pada materi virus di kelas X Aliyag Al-Fajri Tanjungbalai tahun pembelajaran 2016/2017. Jurnal Pelita Pendidikan, 4(4), 16–24. https://doi.org/10. 24114/jpp.v4i4.6629
Jua, S. K., Sarwanto, & Sukarmin. (2018). The profile of students’ problem-solving skill in physics across interest program in the secondary school. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1022, 012027. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1022/1/012027
Kamarulzaman, M. S., Sailin, S. N., Mahmor, N. A., & Shaari, A. J. (2017). Correlation between LOTS and HOTS scores among UMM students. Asian Journal of Educational Research, 5(3), 71–74. http://www. multidisciplinaryjournals.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Full-Paper-CORRELATION-BETWEEN-LOTS-AND-HOTS-SCORES-AMONG-UUM-STUDENTS.pdf
Kappe, R., & Flier, H. Van Der. (2012). Predicting academic success in higher education: What’s more important than being smart? European Journal of Psychology of Education, 27(4), 605–619. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10212-011-0099-9
Keshishian, F., Brocavich, J. M., Thomas Boone, R., & Pal, S. (2010). Motivating factors influencing college students’ choice of academic major. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 74(3), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.5688/aj740346
Leemans, C. R., Braakhuis, B. J. M., & Brakenhoff, R. H. (2011). The molecular biology of head and neck cancer. Nature Reviews. Cancer, 11(1), 9–22. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc2982
Lieu, R. M., Gutierrez, A., & Shaffer, J. F. (2018). Student perceived difficulties in learning organ systems in an undergraduate Human Anatomy Course. Journal of the Human Anatomy and Physiology Society, 22(1), 84–92. https://doi.org/10.21692/haps.2018.011
Lukša, Ž., Radanović, I., Garašić, D., & Perić, M. S. (2016). Misconceptions of primary and high school students related to the biological concept of human reproduction, cell life cycle and molecular basis of heredity. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 13(3), 143–160. https://doi.org/10.12973/tused.10176a
Martyniuk, C. J., Alvarez, S., & Denslow, N. D. (2012). DIGE and iTRAQ as biomarker discovery tools in aquatic toxicology. NIH Public Access, 76(2), 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2011.09.020
Mazzocchi, F. (2008). Complexity in biology. EMBO Reports, 9(1), 10–14. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.embor. 7401147
Miller, S. A., Perrotti, W., Silverthorn, D. U., Dalley, A. F., & Rarey, K. E. (2002). From college to clinic: Reasoning over memorization is key for understanding anatomy. The Anatomical Record, 269, 69–80. https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.10071
Miller, T. M. (2017). Measurement, theory, and current issues in metacognition: An overview. ACS Symposium Series, 1269, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1021/bk-2017-1269.ch001
Mirams, G. R., Arthurs, C. J., Bernabeu, M. O., Bordas, R., Cooper, J., Corrias, A., Davit, Y., Dunn, S. J., Fletcher, A. G., Harvey, D. G., Marsh, M. E., Osborne, J. M., Pathmanathan, P., Pitt-Francis, J., Southern, J., Zemzemi, N., & Gavaghan, D. J. (2013). Chaste: an open source C++ library for computational physiology and biology. PLoS Computational Biology, 9(3), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002970
Morris, J. (2018). What genetic concept(s) do you think are the hardest for the students to grasp? Trends in Genetics, 34(3), 162–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2018.01.007
Muspikawijaya, Iswari, R. ., & Marianti, A. (2017). Analisis kesulitan peserta didik SMA/MA Kabupaten Luwu Timur dalam memahami konsep pada materi metabolisme sel. Journal of Innovative Science Education, 6(2), 252–263. https://doi.org/10.15294/jise.v6i2.15439
Nurajizah, U., Windyariani, S., & Setiono, S. (2018). Improving students’ metacognitive awareness through implementing learning journal. Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia, 4(2), 105–112. https://doi.org/10. 22219/jpbi.v4i2.5788
Patterson, J. (2011). Metacognitive skills. In Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology (Vol. 28, Issue 1, pp. 1583–1584). Springer New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-79948-3_897
Paugh, B. S., Qu, C., Jones, C., Liu, Z., Adamowicz-Brice, M., Zhang, J., Bax, D. A., Coyle, B., Barrow, J., Hargrave, D., Lowe, J., Gajjar, A., Zhao, W., Broniscer, A., Ellison, D. W., Grundy, R. G., & Baker, S. J. (2010). Integrated molecular genetic profiling of pediatric high-grade gliomas reveals key differences with the adult disease. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 28(18), 3061–3068. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO. 2009.26.7252
Rooney, M. S., Shukla, S. A., Wu, C. J., Getz, G., & Hacohen, N. (2015). Molecular and genetic properties of tumors associated with local immune cytolytic activity. Cell, 160(1–2), 48–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.cell.2014.12.033
Rymbai, H., Sharma, R. R., & Srivastav, M. (2011). Biocolorants and its implications in health and food industry - a review. International Journal of PharmTech Research, 3(4), 2228–2244. http://sphinxsai. com/Vol.3No.4/pharm/pdf/PT=52(2228-2244)OD11.pdf.
Şahin, D., Meltem, A. G., Oya, O. K., & Erdal, P. (2014). Which elementary school subjects are the most likeable, most important, and the easiest? Why?: A study of science and technology, mathematics, social studies, and Turkish. Educational Research and Reviews, 9(13), 417–428. https://doi.org/10.5897 /ERR2014.1755
Sari, M. (2012). Usaha mengatasi problematika pendidikan sains di sekolah dan perguruan tinggi. Al-Ta ’Lim, 19(1), 74–86. https://doi.org/10.15548/jt.v19i1.9
Shirazi, S. (2017). Student experience of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 39(14), 1891–1912. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1356943
Sigolaeva, L. V., Gladyr, S. Y., Gelissen, A. P. H., Mergel, O., Pergushov, D. V., Kurochkin, I. N., Plamper, F. A., & Richtering, W. (2014). Dual-stimuli-sensitive microgels as a tool for stimulated spongelike adsorption of biomaterials for biosensor applications. Biomacromolecules, 15(10), A-K. https://doi.org/ 10.1021/bm5010349
Soe, H. Y. (2018). A study on high school students’ perceptions toward biology learning (Myanmar). International Journal of Applied Research, 4(9), 248–251. https://www.allresearchjournal.com/archives/ 2018/vol4issue9/PartD/4-9-46-236.pdf
Svandova, K. (2014). Secondary school students’ misconceptions about photosynthesis and plant respiration: preliminary results. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 10(1), 59–67. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2014.1018a
Tekkaya, C., Ozkan, O., & Sungur, S. (2001). Biology concepts perceived as difficult by turkish high school students. Journal of Education 21, 21, 145–150. http://www.efdergi.hacettepe.edu.tr/yonetim/icerik/ makaleler/1048-published.pdf
Tibell, L. A. E., & Rundgren, C.-J. (2010). Educational challenges of molecular life science: Characteristics and implications for education and research. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 9(1), 25–33. https://doi. org/10.1187/cbe.08-09-0055
Topçu, M. S., & Şahin-Pekmez, E. (2009). Turkish middle school students’ difficulties in learning genetics concepts. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 6(2), 55–62. https://www.tused.org/index.php/tused/ article/view/114
Verk, M. C. van., Bol, J. F., & Linthorst, H. J. M. (2011). Prospecting for genes involved in transcriptional regulation of plant defenses, a bioinformatics approach. BMC Plant Biology, 11, 1–12. https://doi.org/ 10.1186/1471-2229-11-88
Wong, I. Y., Bhatia, S. N., & Toner, M. (2013). Nanotechnology: emerging tools for biology and medicine. Genes and Development, 27(22), 2397–2408. https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.226837.113
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia) agree to the following terms:
- For all articles published in JPBI, copyright is retained by the authors. Authors give permission to the publisher to announce the work with conditions. When the manuscript is accepted for publication, the authors agree to automatic transfer of the publishing right to the publisher.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
