The effectiveness of BRADeR learning model to improve junior high school students' science literacy abilities
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22219/raden.v4i2.36040Keywords:
effectiveness, BRADeR learning model, scientific literacy abilitiesAbstract
The BRADeR learning model is an innovative model developed to help teachers train students' scientific literacy skills. The aim of this research is to determine the effectiveness of the BRADeR learning model in improving junior high school students' scientific literacy skills. This research is included in the type of quasi-experimental research. The research design used is quantitative research using descriptive methods (descriptive-quantitative). The subjects of this research were seventh class students at State Junior High School 5 of Pematangsiantar. Data collection techniques are in the form of tests, and the data analysis process uses descriptive quantitative-qualitative and n-gain. The results of the research show that the BRADeR learning model is effective, in terms of: a) its influence on the scientific literacy abilities of junior high school students, where: (1) n-gain in the scientific literacy abilities of junior high school students is in the medium to high category, and (2) there is an increase in literacy abilities science junior high school students. From the research results, it can be concluded that the BRADeR learning model is effective in improving junior high school students' scientific literacy skills. Other researchers can strengthen research in this area, expand its scope, and ensure that the learning models developed can be applied more effectively and are relevant to broader contexts.
Downloads
References
Abrori, F. M., Lavicza, Z., & Anđić, B. (2023). Enhancing socio-scientific reasoning of elementary school students through educational comics: a comprehensive exploration across diverse domain of knowledge. Education 3-13, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080 /03004279.2023.2266457
Adnan, A., & Bahri, A. (2018). Beyond effective teaching: Enhancing students’ metacognitive skill through guided inquiry. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 954, 012022. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/954/1/012022
Alake-Tuenter, E., Biemans, H. J. A., Tobi, H., Wals, A. E. J., Oosterheert, I., & Mulder, M. (2012). Inquiry-based science education competencies of primary school teachers: A literature study and critical review of the American National Science Education Standards. International Journal of Science Education, 34(17), 2609–2640. https://doi. org/10.1080/09500693.2012.669076
Arief, M. K., & Utari, S. (2015). Implementation of Levels of Inquiry on Science Learning To Improve Junior High School Student’S Scientific Literacy. Indonesian Journal of Physics Education, 11(2), 117–125. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpfi.v11i2.4233
Aulia, E. V., Poedjiastoeti, S., & Agustini, R. (2018). The effectiveness of guided inquiry-based learning material on students’ science literacy skills. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 947(1), 0–7. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/947/1/012049
Bao, L., & Redish, E. F. (2006). Model analysis: Representing and assessing the dynamics of student learning. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 2(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.2.010103
Barak, M., & Assal, M. (2018). Robotics and STEM learning: students’ achievements in assignments according to the P3 Task Taxonomy — practice, problem solving, and projects. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28(1), 121–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-016-9385-9
Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M., & Rumble, M. (2014). Defining twenty-first century skills. In Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2324-5_2
Bramastia, B., & Rahayu, S. (2023). Study of science learning based on scientific literacy in improving critical thinking : A scoping review. Jurnl Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(8), 499–510. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i8.5667
Chalkiadaki, A. (2018). A systematic literature review of 21st century skills and competencies in primary education. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.1131a
Diana, S., Rachmatulloh, A., & Rahmawati, E. S. (2015). Profil kemampuan literasi sains siswa SMA berdasarkan instrumen Scientific Literacy Assesments (SLA). Seminar Nasional XII Pendidikan Biologi FKIP UNS, 285–291. https://media.neliti.com/media/pu blications/171085-ID-none.pdf
Eggen, P., & Kauchak, D. (2020). Using educational psychology in teaching. https://nuacresults. com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/using-educational-psychology-in-teaching-pdf.pd f
Fahmi, F., Chalisah, N., Istyadji, M., Irhasyuarna, Y., & Kusasi, M. (2022). Scientific literacy on the topic of light and optical instruments in the innovation of science teaching materials. Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan IPA, 8(2), 154–163. https://doi.org/10.21831/jipi.v8 i2.41343
Fakhriyah, F., Masfuah, S., Roysa, M., Rusilowati, A., & Rahayu, E. S. (2017). Student’s science literacy in the aspect of content science? Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 6(1), 81–87. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v6i1.7245
Fortus, D., Lin, J., Neumann, K., & Sadler, T. D. (2022). The role of affect in science literacy for all. International Journal of Science Education, 44(4), 535–555. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09500693.2022.2036384
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (Eighth Edi). https://saochhengpheng.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/jack_fra enkel_norman_wallen_helen_hyun-how_to_design_and_evaluate_research_in_educ ation_8th_edition_-mcgraw-hill_humanities_social_sciences_languages2011.pdf
Greenstein, L. M. (2012). Assessing 21st Century skills. In Assessing 21st Century Skills (Issue September). Corwin Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13215
Hake, R. R. (1999). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 64(1998). https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18809
Hasanah, U., Hamidah, I., & Utari, S. (2017). Trained Inquiry Skills on Heat and Temperature Concepts. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 895(1), 0–6. https://doi.org/ 10.1088/1742-6596/895/1/012103
Heyworth-Thomas, E. M. (2023). Creating experiential learning opportunities in enterprise education: an example of a facilitator-led business simulation game in a taught setting. Journal of Work-Applied Management, 15(2), 173–187. https://doi.org/10.1108/JWAM-02-2023-0018
Holbrook, J., & Rannikmae, M. (2009). The meaning of scientific literacy. International Journal of Environment & Science Education, 4(3), 275–288. https://doi.org/10.1097/00 006199-195402000-00010
Hussin, A. A. (2018). Education 4.0 made simple: Ideas for teaching. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 6(3), 92–98. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.6n.3p.92
Kamsi, N. S., Radin Firdaus, R. B., Abdul Razak, F. D., & Ridha Siregar, M. (2019). Realizing Industry 4.0 through STEM education: But why STEM is not preferred? IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 506(1), 0–7. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/506/1/012005
Kan’an, A. (2018). The relationship between Jordanian students’ 21st Century skills (Cs21) and academic achievement in science. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 15(2), 82–94. https://doi.org/10.12973/tused.10232a
Ke, L., Sadler, T. D., Zangori, L., & Friedrichsen, P. J. (2021). Developing and using multiple models to promote scientific literacy in the context of Socio-Scientific Issues. Science and Education, 30(3), 589–607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00206-1
Kemendikbud, K. (2016). Pedoman pelaksanaan gerakan nasional literasi bangsa. https://gln.ke mdikbud.go.id/glnsite/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Pedoman-GLNB-2016-2019.pdf
Kemendikbudristek, Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknologi Republik Indonesia (2022). https://jdih.kemdikbud.go.id/sjdih/siperpu/dokumen /salinan/salinan_20220421_105322_Final JDIH Salinan Permendikbudristek No 16 Tahun 2022 ttg Standar Proses.pdf
McConney, A., Oliver, M. C., Woods-Mcconney, A., Schibeci, R., & Maor, D. (2014). Inquiry, engagement, and literacy in science: A retrospective, cross-national analysis using PISA 2006. Science Education, 98(6), 963–980. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21135
Moreno, R., & Park, B. (2010). Cognitive load theory: Historical development and relation to other theories. Cognitive Load Theory, 7–28. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO978051184 4744.003
Mumtaza, M. F., & Zulfiani, Z. (2023). Development of student worksheets based on science process skills on excretory system concepts. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(1), 265–272. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i1.1474
Odegaard, M., Haug, B., Mork, S., & Sorvik, G. O. (2015). Budding science and literacy: A classroom video study of the challenges and support in an integrated inquiry and literacy teaching model. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 167(1877), 274–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.12.674
OECD. (2016a). Country note – results from PISA 2015: Indonesia. OECD. https://www.oecd. org/content/dam/oecd/en/about/programmes/edu/pisa/publications/national-reports /pisa-2015/country-snapshots/PISA-2015-Indonesia.pdf
OECD. (2016b). PISA 2016 Assessment and Analytical Framework. In OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/pisa-for-development-assessment-and-analytical-framework_5j8mznrtw131.pdf%0A
OECD, O. (2019). PISA 2018 Results: What students know and can do: Vol. I. https://doi. org/10.1787/5f07c754-en
OECD, O. (2023a). PISA 2022 Results (Volume I): The state of learning and equity in education. In PISA: Vol. I. https://doi.org/10.31244/9783830998488
OECD, O. (2023b). PISA 2022 Results (Volume II): Learning During – and From – Disruption. In OECD Publishing: Vol. II. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/pisa -2022-results-volume-ii_a97db61c-en
Oral, I., & Erkilic, M. (2021). Investigating the effect of demographic features of undergraduate students on their 21st-century skills. Global Conference on Education and Research, 4. https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1068&conte xt=m3publishing#page=148
Orosz, G., Németh, V., Kovács, L., Somogyi, Z., & Korom, E. (2022). Guided inquiry-based learning in secondary-school chemistry classes: a case study. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 24(1), 50–70. https://doi.org/10.1039/d2rp00110a
Park, Y.-S., & Green, J. (2019). Bringing Computational Thinking into Science Education. Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 40(4), 340–352. https://doi.org/10.5467/jkess. 2019.40.4.340
Putra, M. I. S., Widodo, W., & Jatmiko, B. (2016). The development of guided inquiry science learning materials to improve science literacy skill of prospective mi teachers. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 5(1), 83–93. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v5i1.5794
Rospitasari, R., Harahap, M. B., & Derlina, D. (2017). The effect of scientific inquiry learning model and creative thinking skills on student’s science process skills. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education, 7(4), 55–57. https://doi.org/10.9790/7388-0704035557
Saxena, A., & Behari, A. (2021). ‘Engaging in an argumentative discourse’- narratives from biology classrooms. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 3(1), 14–32. https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/9418
Shamuganathan, S., & Karpudewan, M. (2015). Modeling environmental literacy of malaysian pre-university students. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 10(5), 757–771. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijese.2015.264a
Siagian, A. F., Simamora, R., & Simamora, A. B. (2023). Development of learning tools oriented to the BRADeR learning model to facilitate teachers in teaching science literacy. EDUTEC : Journal of Education And Technology, 7(2), 666–672. https://doi.org/ 10.29062/edu.v7i2.807
Simamora, A. B., Sanjaya, I. G. M., & Widodo, W. (2022). Validity of BRADeR learning model development: An innovative learning model to improve science literacy skills for junior high school students. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 11(8), 311–316. https://doi.org/10.5430/jct.v11n8p311
Simamora, A. B., Widodo, W., & Sanjaya, I. G. M. (2020). Innovative learning model: Improving the students’ scientific literacy of junior high school. IJORER : International Journal of Recent Educational Research, 1(3), 271–285. https://doi.org/10.46245/ijorer. v1i3.55
Situmorang, R. P. (2016). Integrasi literasi sains peserta didik dalam pembelajaran sains. Satya Widya, 32(1), 49. https://doi.org/10.24246/j.sw.2016.v32.i1.p49-56
Slavin, R. E. (2012). Cooperative Learning and Achievement: Theory and Research. Handbook of Psychology, Second Edition. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118133880.hop20 7008
Snow, C. E., & Dibner, K. A. (2016). Science literacy: Concepts, contexts, and consequences. In Science Literacy: Concepts, Contexts, and Consequences. https://doi.org/10.17226/23595
Solheri, S., Azhar, M., & Yohandri, Y. (2022). Analysis of ethnoscience integrated environmental literacy for junior high school. JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), 8(2), 178–188. https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v8i2.17657
Sun, D., Wang, Z. H., Xie, W. T., & Boon, C. C. (2014). Status of integrated science instruction in junior secondary schools of China: An exploratory study. International Journal of Science Education, 36(5), 808–838. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.82 9254
Tomovic, S., Yoshigoe, K., Maljevic, I., & Radusinovic, I. (2017). Software-defined fog network architecture for IoT. Wireless Personal Communications, 92(1), 181–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-016-3845-0
Walag, A. M. P., Fajardo, M. T. M., Bacarrisas, P. G., & Guimary, F. M. (2022). A canonical correlation analysis of Filipino science teachers’ scientific literacy and science teaching efficacy. International Journal of Instruction, 15(3), 249–266. https://doi.org/10.29333 /iji.2022.15314a
Wang, J., & Zhao, Y. (2016). Comparative research on the understandings of nature of science and scientific inquiry between science teachers from Shanghai and Chicago. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 15(1), 97–108. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/16.15.97
Wen, C. T., Liu, C. C., Chang, H. Y., Chang, C. J., Chang, M. H., Fan Chiang, S. H., Yang, C. W., & Hwang, F. K. (2020). Students’ guided inquiry with simulation and its relation to school science achievement and scientific literacy. Computers and Education, 149(February), 103830. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103830
Yanto, B. E., Subali, B., & Suyanto, S. (2019). Improving students’ scientific reasoning skills through the three levels of inquiry. International Journal of Instruction, 12(4), 689–704. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12444a
Zhou, C. (2021). The effectiveness of 5E model to improve the scientific creativity of teachers in rural areas. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 41(May), 100900. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100900
Zulkarnaen, Z., Supardi, Z. . I., & Jatmiko, B. (2017). Feasibility of creative exploration, creative elaboration, creative modeling, practice scientific creativity, discussion, reflection (C3PDR) teaching model to improve students’ scientific creativity of junior high school. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 16(6), 1020–1034. https://doi.org/10. 33225/jbse/17.16.1020
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Aprido Simamora, Andriono Manalu, Rianita Simamora
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with Research and Development in Education agree to the following terms:
- For all articles published in the Research and Development in Education, 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 the automatic transfer of non-exclusive publishing rights 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.
