In-Service Teachers’ Performance Using Guided Inquiry Computer Simulations to Learn Cellular Respiration
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23887/jet.v7i1.50696Kata Kunci:
Guided Inquiry, Computer Simulations, Performance, Cellular RespirationAbstrak
Respiration is one of the difficult biology topics, and teachers have challenges effectively teaching it to minimise misconceptions. The aims of this study was to analyse the effect of guided inquiry computer simulations on pre-service teachers' performance. A quasi-experimental design was used in this study. The subject in this study involving 65 in-service teachers, consist of 33 experimental groups taught using guided inquiry computer simulations, and 32 control groups received instructions using traditional chalk-and-talk. Data were collected using the Academic Performance Test and analysed using a T-test to determine the differences between the groups. Analysis of Covariance was used to find out the effect of the intervention. Both groups were pre-tested to gauge their previous knowledge and post-tested to establish changes after the teaching. The results show experimental group surpassed the control group. Also, males and females performance in the experimental group was similar, suggesting that guided inquiry computer simulations favoured both genders. It implies that guided inquiry computer simulations are effective tools to minimise misconceptions regarding cellular respiration. Thus, the researchers recommend using guided inquiry computer simulations in qualitative and quantitative approaches with a large sample of in-service teachers from different geographic regions.
Referensi
Ade‐Ojo, G. O., Markowski, M., Essex, R., Stiell, M., & Jameson, J. (2022). A systematic scoping review and textual narrative synthesis of physical and mixed‐reality simulation in pre‐service teacher training. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(3), 861–874. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12653.
Akkus, R., Gunel, M., & Hand, B. (2007). Comparing an inquiry‐based approach known as the science writing heuristic to traditional science teaching practices: Are there differences? International. Journal of Science Education, 29(14), 1745–1765. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690601075629.
Al Mamun, M. A., Lawrie, G., & Wright, T. (2022). Exploration of learner-content interactions and learning approaches: The role of guided inquiry in the self-directed online environments. Computers & Education, 178, 104398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104398.
Aslam, F., Adefila, A., & Bagiya, Y. (2018). STEM outreach activities: an approach to teachers’professional development. Journal of Education for Teaching, 44(1), 58–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2018.1422618.
Bell, S. (2010). Project-Based Learning for the 21st Century: Skills for the Future. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83(2), 39–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098650903505415.
Bhurekeni, J. (2020). Decolonial reflections on the Zimbabwean primary and secondary school curricu-lum reform journey. Educational Research for Social Change, 9(2), 101–115. https://doi.org/10.17159/2221-4070/2020/v9i2a7.
Byukusenge, C., Nsanganwimana, F., & Paulo Tarmo, A. (2022). Difficult topics in the revised biology curriculum for advanced level secondary schools in Rwanda: teachers’ perceptions of causes and remedies. Journal of Biological Education, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2021.2012225.
Cohen, J., Wong, V., Krishnamachari, A., & Berlin, R. (2020). Teacher coaching in a simulated environment. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 42(2), 208–231. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373720906217.
Dam, M., Ottenhof, K., Van Boxtel, C., & Janssen, F. (2019). Understanding cellular respiration through simulation using lego as a concrete dynamic model. Education Sciences, 9(2), 72. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9020072.
De Jong, T., & Van Joolingen, W. R. (1998). Scientific Discovery Learning with Computer Simulations of Conceptual Domains. Review of Educational Research, 68, 179–201. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543068002179.
Dudu, W. ., & Vhurumuku, E. (2012). Teacher practices of inquiry when teaching investigations: A case study. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(6), 579–600. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-012-9287-y.
Garba, S. A., Byabazaire, Y., & Busthami, A. H. (2015). Toward the use of 21st century teaching-learning approaches: The trend of development in Malaysian schools within the context of Asia Pacific. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 10(4), 72–79. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v10i4.4717.
Goeltz, J. C., & Cuevas, L. A. (2021). Guided inquiry activity for teaching titration through total titratable Acidity in a general chemistry laboratory course. Journal of Chemical Education, 98(3), 882–887. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c01198.
Gopalan, M., Rosinger, K., & Ahn, J. B. (2020). Use of quasi-experimental research designs in education research: Growth, promise, and challenges. Review of Research in Education, 44(1), 218–243. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X20903302.
Holland, C., & Ulrich, D. (2016). Critical thinking cards: An innovative teaching strategy to bridge classroom knowledge with clinical decision making. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 11(3), 108–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TELN.2016.01.005.
Hsiao, J. C., Chen, S. K., Chen, W., & Lin, S. S. (2022). Developing a plugged-in class observation protocol in high-school blended STEM classes: Student engagement, teacher behaviors and student-teacher interaction patterns. Computers & Education, 178, 104403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104403.
Hwang, G. J., Chang, C. C., & Chien, S. Y. (2022). A motivational model‐based virtual reality approach to prompting learners’ sense of presence, learning achievements, and higher‐order thinking in professional safety training. British Journal of Educational Technology. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13196.
Jacques, L. A., Cian, H., Herro, D. C., & Quigley, C. (2020). The impact of questioning techniques on STEAM instruction. Action in Teacher Education, 42(3), 290–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2019.1638848.
Jimerson, S., Carlson, E., Rotert, M., Egeland, B., & Sroufe, L. A. (1997). A prospective, longitudinal study of the correlates and consequences of early grade retention. Journal of School Psychology, 35(1), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4405(96)00033-7.
Kärner, T. (2017). A mixed-methods study of physiological reactivity to domain-specific problem solving: Methodological perspectives for process-accompanying research in VET. Empirical Research in Vocational Education and Training, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40461-017-0054-3.
Kibirige, I., & Teffo, W. L. (2014). Actual and Ideal Assessment Practices in South African Natural Sciences Classrooms. International Journal of Educational Sciences, 6(3), 509–519. https://doi.org/10.31901/24566322.2014/06.03.1.
Kumandaş, B., Ateskan, A., & Lane, J. (2018). Misconceptions in biology: a meta-synthesis study of research. Journal of Biological Education, 2000–20014. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2018.1490798.
Lenz, C., Gebauer, B., Hladschik, P., Rus, C., & Valianatos, A. (2022). Reference framework of competences for democratic culture: Teacher reflection tool. Council of Europe Publishing.
Madadizadeh, F. (2022). A tutorial on Quasi-experimental designs. Journal of Community Health Research, 11(1), 3–4. https://iranjournals.nlai.ir/bitstream/handle/123456789/916068/B056CA7D2AA0554C0E7FEFF379D08F6C.pdf?sequence=-1.
Maeng, J. L., & Gonczi, A. (2019). Do Plants Breathe? The Science Teacher, 86(7), 28–34. https://doi.org/10.2307/26899144.
Manfra, M. M. (2019). Action research and systematic, intentional change in teaching practice. Review of Research in Education, 43(1), 163–196. https://doi.org/10.3102 /0091732X18821132.
Marshall, J. C., Smart, J. B., & Alston, D. M. (2017). Inquiry-based instruction: a possible solution to improving student learning of both science concepts and scientific practices. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 1(15), 777–796. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9718-x.
Nardo, J. E., Chapman, N. C., Shi, E. Y., Wieman, C., & Salehi, S. (2022). Perspectives on Active Learning: Challenges for Equitable Active Learning Implementation. Journal of Chemical Education, 99(4), 1691–1699. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c01233.
Nunaki, J. H., Damopolii, I., Kandowangko, N. Y., & Nusantari, E. (2019). The effectiveness of inquiry-based learning to train the students’ metacognitive skills based on gender differences. International Journal of Instruction, 12(2). https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12232a.
Payu, C. S., Mursalin, M., Abbas, N., Umar, M. K., Yusuf, F. M., & Odja, A. H. (2022). Development of Guided Inquiry Learning Model Based on Critical Questions to Improve Critical Thinking on the Concept of Temperature and Heat. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Studies, 4(2), 174–180. https://doi.org/10.32996/jhsss.2022. 4.2.21.
Piotrowska, I., Cichoń, M., Sypniewski, J., & Abramowicz, D. (2022). Application of Inquiry-Based Science Education, Anticipatory Learning Strategy, and Project-Based Learning Strategies. In Didactic Strategies and Resources for Innovative Geography Teaching, 23–50. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-9598-5.ch002.
Prodjosantoso, A. K., & Hertina, A. M. (2019). The Misconception Diagnosis on Ionic and Covalent Bonds Concepts with Three Tier Diagnostic Test. International Journal of Instruction, 12(2), 1477–1488. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1201190.
Rands, V. F., S., H., Gerrits, R., & Jensen, M. (2021). Implementing Guided Inquiry Active Learning in an Online Synchronous Classroom and its Impact on Test Question Performance. HAPS Educator, 25(2), 6–12. https://doi.org/10.21692/haps.2021.015.
Reidelbach, M., Zimmer, C., Meunier, B., Rich, P. R., & Sharma, V. (2021). Electron Transfer Coupled to Conformational Dynamics in Cell Respiration. Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences, 8, 711436. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmolb.2021.711436.
Saat, R. M., Fadzil, H. M., Aziz, N. A. A., Haron, K., Rashid, K. A., & Shamsuar, N. R. (2016). Development of an online three-tier diagnostic test to assess pre-university students’ understanding of cellular respiration. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 15(4), 532. https://search.proquest.com/openview/3bc0f381fa7e5fd087e3bda79f093ee0/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=4477238.
Schippers, M. P., Ramirez, O., Arana, M., & McClelland, G. B. (2021). Increased Reliance on Carbohydrates for Aerobic Exercise in Highland Andean Leaf-Eared Mice, but Not in Highland Lima Leaf-Eared Mice. Metabolites, 11(11), 750. https://doi.org/10.3390/metabo11110750.
Schlegel, E. C., Tate, J. A., Pickler, R. H., & Smith, L. H. (2021). Practical strategies for qualitative inquiry in a virtual world. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 77(10), 4035–4044. https://doi.org/10.29173/iasl7898.
Solikah, M., & Novita, D. (2022). The effectiveness of the guided inquiries learning model on the critical thinking ability of students. Jurnal Pijar Mipa, 17(2), 184–191. https://doi.org/10.29303/jpm.v17i2.3276.
Strømme, T. A., & Mork, S. M. (2021). Students’ conceptual sense-making of animations and static visualizations of protein synthesis: a sociocultural hypothesis explaining why animations may be beneficial for student learning. Research in Science Education, 51(4), 1013–1038. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-020-09920-2.
Suebsing, S., & Nuangchalerm, P. (2021). Understanding and satisfaction towards stem education of primary school teachers through professional development program. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 10(2), 171–177. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v10i2.25369.
Taufan, M. Y. (2022). Professional Development of Teachers, Competencies, Educational Facilities and Infrastructure on Teacher Performance and Learning Achievement of High School Students in Makassar City. Golden Ratio of Social Science and Education, 2(1), 24–38. https://doi.org/10.52970/grsse.v2i1.168.
Tytler, R., & Prain, V. (2022). Interdisciplinary mathematics and science - a guided inquiry approach to enhance student learning. Teaching Science, 68(1), 31–43. https://doi.org/10.3316/informit.362070229925660.
Ugwu, O. (2019). How students of different backgrounds use strategies to strengthen college enrolment applications. Science Daily Journal, 16(7), 22–67. http://sjifactor.com/passport.php?id=21363.
Uhl, J. D., Sripathi, K. N., Meir, E., Merrill, J., Urban-Lurain, M., & Haudek, K. C. (2021). Automated writing assessments measure undergraduate learning after completion of a computer-based cellular respiration tutorial. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 20(3), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.20-06-0122.
von Kotzebue, L. (2022). Two is better than one—examining biology-specific TPACK and its T-dimensions from two angles. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2022.2030268.
Weiss, K. A., McDermott, M. A., & Hand, B. (2022). Characterising immersive argument-based inquiry learning environments in school-based education: A systematic literature review. Studies in Science Education, 58(1), 15–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267 .2021.1897931.
Williams, U. J., & Dries, D. R. (2022). Supporting Fledgling Scientists: The Importance of Autonomy in a Guided-Inquiry Laboratory Course. Journal of Chemical Education, 99(2), 701–707. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00835.
Yu, J., Kreijkes, P., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2022). Students’ growth mindset: Relation to teacher beliefs, teaching practices, and school climate. Learning and Instruction, 80, 101616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2022.101616.
Yuliana, N., Purwati, N., & Hanapi, H. (2022). Improving student’s logical thinking abilities and learning outcomes through guided inquiry model. Prisma Sains : Jurnal Pengkajian Ilmu Dan Pembelajaran Matematika Dan IPA IKIP MataramJurnal Pengkajian Ilmu Dan Pembelajaran Matematika Dan IPA IKIP Mataram, 10(2), 345–351. https://doi.org/10.33394/j-ps.v10i2.4822.
Zimmerman, J. (2020). Coronavirus and the great Online-Learning experiment. Chronicle of Higher Education.
Unduhan
Diterbitkan
Cara Mengutip
Terbitan
Bagian
Lisensi
Hak Cipta (c) 2022 Israel Kibirige
Artikel ini berlisensiCreative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with the Journal of Education Technology agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) 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)
