Students’ achievement of the 21st century skills in the process of teaching and learning biology among science students
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v9i3.29203Keywords:
Digital age literacy, effective communication, high productivity, inventive thinking, spiritual valueAbstract
Nearly one in five pupils in OECD nations do not possess the fundamental knowledge and abilities necessary to get by in today's communities (OECD, 2019), which is a sign of exclusion. There is an unfairness in that students from low socioeconomic origins are twice as likely to be low performers, suggesting that social or personal factors prevent them from fulfilling their educational potential. This study intends to investigate the achievement of the 21st Century Biology Skills Test (21CBST) and to compare it to students’ level of socio-economic status. The result (TIMSS) (2015) revealed that Indonesian students failed to achieve minimum standards in Science and Mathematics, with 33.3% achievement in science and 35% in mathematics for content domain and 33,3% in the cognitive domain. Comprising 37 multiple choice items, the 21st Century Biology Skills Test (21C-BST) includes representatives from five domains which are; i) Digital Age Literacy, ii) Inventive Thinking, iii) Effective Communication, iv) High Productivity, and v) Religion, Health and Civic. The respondents comprised 210 form students who took biology subject in school. The study revealed that students from high socio-economic status scored higher than their counterparts from low socioeconomic status. This paper concludes with some practical suggestions for improving students’ 21st-century skills, particularly within the context of biology teaching and learning.
Downloads
References
Aktamis, H., & Ergin, O. (2008). The effect of scientific process skills education on students’ scientific creativity, science attitudes and academic achievements. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 9(1).
Alt, D., & Raichel, N. (2020). Enhancing perceived digital literacy skills and creative self-concept through gamified learning environments: Insights from a longitudinal study. International Journal of Educational Research, 101, 101561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101561
Audrin, C., & Audrin, B. (2022). Key factors in digital literacy in learning and education: A systematic literature review using text mining. Education and Information Technologies, 27(6), 7395–7419. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10832-5
Barrios Aguirre, F., Forero, D. A., Castellanos Saavedra, M. P., & Mora Malagón, S. Y. (2021). The impact of computer and internet at home on academic results of the Saber 11 National Exam in Colombia. SAGE Open, 11(3), 21582440211040810. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211040810
Berisha, F., & Vula, E. (2021). Developing pre-service teachers conceptualization of stem and stem pedagogical practices. Frontiers in Education, 6. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2021.585075
Berkowitz, R., Moore, H., Astor, R. A., & Benbenishty, R. (2017). A research synthesis of the associations between socioeconomic background, inequality, school climate, and academic achievement. Review of Educational Research, 87(2), 425–469. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316669821
Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M., & Rumble, M. (2012). Defining Twenty-First Century Skills. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw, & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills (pp. 17–66). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2324-5_2
Bradley, R. H., & Corwyn, R. F. (2002). Socioeconomic status and child development. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 371–399. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135233
Bwalya, A., & Rutegwa, M. (2023). Technological pedagogical content knowledge self-efficacy of pre-service science and mathematics teachers: A comparative study between two Zambian universities. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(2), em2222. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12845
Cao, Y., Kurbanova, A. T., & Salikhova, N. R. (2017). Development of classification thinking in future teachers: technologies of reflective discussion. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(6), 1865–1879. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.01205a
Care, E., Kim, H., Vista, A., & Anderson, K. (2019). Education system alignment for 21st century skills: Focus on assessment.
Charalambous, E., Kyriakides, L., & Creemers, B. P. M. (2018). Promoting quality and equity in socially disadvantaged schools: A group- randomisation study. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 57, 42–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.06.001
Chen, C., Hardjo, S., Sonnert, G., Hui, J., & Sadler, P. M. (2023). The role of media in influencing students’ STEM career interest. International Journal of STEM Education, 10(1), 56. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00448-1
Chen, Q., Kong, Y., Gao, W., & Mo, L. (2018). Effects of socioeconomic status, parent–child relationship, and learning motivation on reading ability. Frontiers in Psychology, 9. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01297
Chirwa, M., & Boikanyo, D. (2022). The role of effective communication in successful strategy implementation. Acta Commercii, 22. https://doi.org/10.4102/ac.v22i1.1020
Donham, C., Barron, H. A., Alkhouri, J. S., Changaran Kumarath, M., Alejandro, W., Menke, E., & Kranzfelder, P. (2022). I will teach you here or there, I will try to teach you anywhere: Perceived supports and barriers for emergency remote teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of STEM Education, 9(1), 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-022-00335-1
Downey, D. B., & Condron, D. J. (2016). Fifty years since the coleman report: Rethinking the relationship between schools and inequality. Sociology of Education, 89(3), 207–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040716651676
Fan, C., & Wang, J. (2022). Development and validation of a questionnaire to measure digital skills of Chinese undergraduates. Sustainability, 14(6), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063539
Frey, B. B. (2018). The SAGE Encyclopedia of Educational Research, Measurement, and Evaluation. SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506326139
Gamage, S. H. P. W., Ayres, J. R., & Behrend, M. B. (2022). A systematic review on trends in using Moodle for teaching and learning. International Journal of STEM Education, 9(1), 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00323-x
Gladstone, J. R., & Cimpian, A. (2021). Which role models are effective for which students? A systematic review and four recommendations for maximizing the effectiveness of role models in STEM. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1), 59. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00315-x
Gneezy, U., Niederle, M., & Rustichini, A. (2003). Performance in competitive environments: gender differences. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(3), 1049–1074. https://doi.org/10.1162/00335530360698496
Gustafsson, J.-E., Nilsen, T., & Hansen, K. Y. (2018). School characteristics moderating the relation between student socio-economic status and mathematics achievement in grade 8. Evidence from 50 countries in TIMSS 2011. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 57, 16–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.09.004
Haleem, A., Javaid, M., Qadri, M. A., & Suman, R. (2022). Understanding the role of digital technologies in education: A review. Sustainable Operations and Computers, 3, 275–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susoc.2022.05.004
Hanrahan, M. (2009). Bridging the literacy gap: Teaching the skills of reading and writing as they apply in school science. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 5(3), 289–304. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75280
Hartono, H., Putri, R. I. I., Inderawati, R., & Ariska, M. (2022). The strategy of science learning in curriculum 2013 to increase the value of science’s program for international student assessment (PISA). Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 8(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v8i1.1185
Hordern, J. (2023). Educational studies and educational practice: A necessary engagement. British Journal of Educational Studies, 0(0), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2023.2213310
Kayan-Fadlelmula, F., Sellami, A., Abdelkader, N., & Umer, S. (2022). A systematic review of STEM education research in the GCC countries: Trends, gaps and barriers. International Journal of STEM Education, 9(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00319-7
Kryukova, N. I., Chistyakov, A. A., Shulga, T. I., Omarova, L. B., Tkachenko, T. V., Malakhovsky, A. K., & Babieva, N. S. (2022). Adaptation of higher education students’ digital skills survey to Russian universities. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(11), em2183. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12558
Kyriakides, L., & Creemers, B. P. M. (2018). Investigating the quality and equity dimensions of educational effectiveness. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 57, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2017.12.005
Lange, A. A., Robertson, L., Tian, Q., Nivens, R., & Price, J. (2022). The effects of an early childhood-elementary teacher preparation program in STEM on pre-service teachers. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(12), em2197. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12698
Lehmkuhl, G., Gresse von Wangenheim, C., Pacheco, L., Borgatto, A., & da Cruz Alves, N. (2021). SCORE – A model for the self-assessment of creativity skills in the context of computing education in K-12. Informatics in Education, 20. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2021.11
Lemke, C. (2002). enGauge 21st Century Skills: Digital literacies for a digital age.
Liu, J., Peng, P., & Luo, L. (2020). The relation between family socioeconomic status and academic achievement in China: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 32(1), 49–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09494-0
Nugrahanto, S., & Zuchdi, D. (2019). Indonesia PISA result and impact on the reading learning program in Indonesia. 373–377. https://doi.org/10.2991/icille-18.2019.77
OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 assessment and analytcal framework. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/education/pisa-2018-assessment-and-analytical-framework-b25efab8-en.htm
Osman, K., Soh, T. M. T., & Arsad, N. M. (2010). Development and validation of the Malaysian 21st century skills instrument (M-21CSI) for science students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 599–603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.204
Pathoni, H., Asyhar, R., Maison, M., & Huda, N. (2022). Measuring lecturer’s perception in STEM approach based contextual learning implementation. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 12(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.1297
Pillay, H, & Elliott, B. (2001). Emerging attributes of pedagogy and curriculum for the “New World Order". https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1010982303618
Rachmatullah, A., Roshayanti, F., Shin, S., Lee, J.-K., & Ha, M. (2018). The secondary-student science learning motivation in Korea and Indonesia. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(7), 3123–3141. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/91665
Reardon, S. F. (2018). The widening academic achievement gap between the rich and the poor. In Inequality in the 21st Century. Routledge.
Remenick, L., & Bergman, M. (2021). Support for Working students: Considerations for Higher education institutions. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 69(1), 34–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/07377363.2020.1777381
Romero, M., Lepage, A., & Lille, B. (2017). Computational thinking development through creative programming in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0080-z
Rukmana, D. (2015). The change and transformation of Indonesian spatial planning after suharto’s new order regime: The case of the Jakarta Metropolitan Area. International Planning Studies, 20(4), 350–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563475.2015.1008723
Scherer, R., & Siddiq, F. (2019). The relation between students’ socioeconomic status and ICT literacy: Findings from a meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 138, 13–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.04.011
Struyf, A., De Loof, H., Boeve-de Pauw, J., & Van Petegem, P. (2019). Students’ engagement in different STEM learning environments: Integrated STEM education as promising practice? International Journal of Science Education, 41(10), 1387–1407. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1607983
Sun, D., Zhan, Y., Wan, Z. H., Yang, Y., & Looi, C.-K. (2023). Identifying the roles of technology: A systematic review of STEM education in primary and secondary schools from 2015 to 2023. Research in Science & Technological Education, 0(0), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2023.2251902
Wahono, B., Narulita, E., Chang, C.-Y., Darmawan, E., & Irwanto, I. (2021). The role of students’ worldview on decision-making: An Indonesian case study by a socio-scientific issue-based instruction through integrated STEM Education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(11), em2027. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11246
Ye, H., Liang, B., Ng, O.-L., & Chai, C. S. (2023). Integration of computational thinking in K-12 mathematics education: A systematic review on CT-based mathematics instruction and student learning. International Journal of STEM Education, 10(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00396-w
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.
