Application of Crossword Puzzle Multimedia to Improve the Science Education Learning Process and Outcomes at Junior High Schools
Keywords:Crossword Puzzle Multimedia, Learning Outcomes, Learning Process
This study aims to improve the teaching and learning process and outcomes, improve the implementation process of instruction, and improve student learning outcomes by combining cooperative learning models with natural science educational crossword puzzle multimedia on the digestive system instructional material. The form of research used is Lesson study, which is designed in 2 cycles, each cycle having 1 meeting. At each meeting, students learnt in groups using the natural science educational crossword puzzle multimedia. The results showed that the application of educational crossword puzzle multimedia was carried out well in each cycle (100%) with very strong criteria. Study results also described that the average activeness of students was 100% with very strong criteria. Based on the analysis of student achievement in the cycle I with an average score of 80.29, mastery of 82.61%, and in the second Cycle 83.48 with mastery of 91.30%, it can be concluded that thr application of natural science educational crossword puzzle multimedia supports the learning process for the better and improves student learning outcomes, especially in the material of digestive system.
Aaron, L., & Haynes, K. (2005). Critical Thinking: A Method for Program Evaluation. Radiologic Science & Education, 10(2), 5–11.
Anderson, P., & Morgan, G. (2008). Developing Tests and Questionnaires for a National Assessment of Educational Achievement (Vol. 2). World Bank. https://www.academia.edu/27761840/Developing_tests_and_questionnaires_for_a_national_assessment_of_educational_achievement.
Arifianto, P. N. (2014). Use of Media Crossword Game Against Deaf Children Learning Outcomes In SLB-AB Kemala Bhayangkari 2 Gresik. Surabaya State University.
Braun, H. (2004). Reconsidering the impact of high-stakes testing. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v12n1.2004.
Cerini, B., Murray, I., & Reiss, M. (2003). Student Review of The Science Curriculum: Major Findings. Publication Science.
Chiappetta, E., & Koballa, T. R. (2009). Science instruction in the middle and secondary schools: Developing fundamental knowledge and skills, 7th edn. Pearson Education Inc.
Chinapah, V. (1997). Handbook On Monitoring Learning Achievement Towrds Capacity Building. UNESCO.
Claire, E. (2010). Easy English Crossword Puzzles Easy Songs for English Language Learners. Eardley Publication Saddle Brook.
Clivaz, S. (2018). Lesson Study As a Fundamental Situation for The Knowledge of Teaching. International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies, 7(3), 172–183. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLLS-03-2018-0015.
Davis, T., Shepherd, B., & Zwiefelhofer, T. (2009). Reviewing for Exams: Do Crossword Puzzles Help in the Success of Student Learning? Journal of Effective Teaching, 9(3), 4–10. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1092108.
De Brabander, C. J., & Glastra, F. J. (2018). Testing a unified model of task-specific motivation: How teachers appraise three professional development activities. Frontline Learning Research, 6(1), 54–76. https://doi.org/10.14786/flr.v6i1.342.
Dimyati, & Mudjiono. (1999). Belajar dan Pembelajaran.
Donovan, M., & Bransford, J. (2005). How Student Learn Science In The Classroom. National Academies Press.
Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing The Norms Of Scientific Argumentation In Classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1098-237x(200005)84:3<287::aid-sce1>3.3.co;2-1.
Ennis, R. H. (1993). Critical Thinking Assessment. Theory Into Practice, 32(3), 179–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849309543594.
Facione, P. A., Blohm, S. W., Hoeward, K. &, & Giancarlo, C. A. (1998). The California Critical Thinking in Nursing. Holistic Nursing Pactice, 10(3), 41–53.
Fathonah, R. (2013). Study Comparative Use of Media Puzzle with Card On Chemistry Learning Through Contextual Te aching and Learning Approach To Student Achievement in SMP N 2 Ngadirojo. Chemical Education Journal, 2(3).
Frank, S. (2003). Reel Reality: Science Consultants In Hollywood. Science as Culture, 12(4), 427–469. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950543032000150319.
Frankham, G. J., Hinds, M. C., & Johnson, R. N. (2015). Development of 16 forensically informative microsatellite loci to detect the illegal trade of broad headed snakes (Hoplocephalus bungaroides). Conservation Genetics Resources, 7(2), 533–535. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12686-014-0414-2.
Hodgson, C., & Pyle, K. (2010). A Literature Review Of Assessment For Learning In Science. National Foundation for Education Research.
Huang, R., Fang, Y., & Chen, X. (2017). Chinese Lesson Study: A Deliberate Practice, A Research Methodology, And An Improvement Science. International Journal for Lesson & Learning Studies, 6(4), 270–282. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLLS-08-2017-0037.
Istikomayanti, Y., & Mitasari, Z. (2017). Student’s Misconception of Digestive System Materials in MTs Eight Grade of Malang City and the Role of Teacher’s Pedadogic Competency in MTs. Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia, 3(2), 103. https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v3i2.4326.
Jr, D. V. R., & Bautista, J. R. (2019). Filipino Students ’ Preferred Motivational Strategies in Science : A Cross-Sectional Survey. International Journal on Social and Education Sciences, 3(2), 358–372. https://online-journal.unja.ac.id/irje/article/view/6828.
Kellaghan, T. (2003). Local, national, and international levels of system evaluation: Introduction. In T. Kellaghan & D. L. Stufflebeam (Eds.), International handbook of educational evaluation. Kluwer Academic.
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R, E. (2006). Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111-127,. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102.
Lueddeke, G. R. (2003). Professionalising Teaching Practice In Higher Education: A Study of Disciplinary Variation And “Teaching-Scholarship.” Studies in Higher Education, 28(2), 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/0307507032000058082.
Manurung, Y. L. (2013). Pendidikan Karakter di Sekolah Membangun Karakter dan Kepribadian Anak. Journal Pshycology, Personality and Social Psychology, 10(2).
Marlina, R., Puspaningrum, H., & Hamdani. (2017). Differentiation of test items between the high school biology olimpiad in north kayong and the national science olimpiad. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 6(2), 245–251. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v6i2.10679.
Mayrhofer, E. (2019). Lesson study and teachers’ beliefs: How a Bourdieuian perspective could make a difference. International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies, 8(1), 19–33. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLLS-11-2018-0091.
Orawiwatnakul, W. (2013). Crossword Puzzles As a Learning Tool For Vocabulary Development. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 11(2), 413–428. https://doi.org/10.14204/ejrep.30.12186.
Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How College Affects Students: Findings and Insights from Twenty Years of Research. Jossey-Bass.
Perkins, D. (1992). Smart Schools: Better Thinking and Learning for Every Child. The Free Press.
Posner, G. J., Strike, K. a., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. a. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211–227. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730660207.
Rahayu, M. (2020). Development of Cyberlink Power Director Based Learning Media in the Material of Human Digestive System. 3(1), 13–17. https://jurnal.untidar.ac.id/index.php/ijobe/article/view/2294.
Sardiman, A. M. (2018). Interaksi dan Motivasi Belajar Mengajar. Rajawali Press.
Sarmiento, C. Q. (2010). Teaching Strategies To Enhance Science Learning Among Diverse And Multicultural Learners. JPAIR Multidisciplinary Research Journal, 4(1). https://www.ejournals.ph/article.php?id=7432.
Schraw, G. J., & Robinson, D. . (2011). Assessment of Higher Order Thinking Skills. Information Age Publishing.
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.
Silberman, M. (2009). Active Learning. Intan Mandiri.
Slameto. (2010). Belajar dan Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhinya. Rineka Cipta.
Suryosubroto, B. (2009). Proses Belajar Mengajar di Sekolah. Rineka Cipta.
Syamsuri, I., & Ibrohim. (2008). Lesson Study. FMIPA UM.
Taniredja, T. et al. (2011). Model-model Pembelajaran Inovatif. Alfabeta.
Trianto. (2007). Model-model Pembelajaran Inovatif Berorientasi Kontruktivistik (1st ed.). Prestasi Pustaka.
Trianto. (2011). Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovatif-Progresiv. Kencana Prenada Media.
Tuan, H. L., Chin, C. C., & Shieh, S. H. (2005). The Development Of a Questionnaire To Measure Students’ Motivation Towards Science Learning. International Journal of Science Education, 27(6), 639–654. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069042000323737.
Utsumi, Y., & Ando, T. (2019). Teacher Needs and Relevant Factors for Teaching Jiritsu-Katsudo in Special Needs Schools for Children with Physical Disabilities. Journal of Special Education Research, 7(2), 79–88. https://doi.org/10.6033/specialeducation.7.79.
Authors who publish with the Jurnal Pendidikan Indnesia 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)