Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 17, No. 1, 2018

Vol.17, No.
1, 2018
ISSN 1648-3898 /Print/
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
The International Journal of the Scientia Socialis Ltd., & SMC “Scientia Educologica”
Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 17, No. 1, 2018
Editorial Board
ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/
Editor-in-Chief ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Prof., Dr. Vincentas Lamanauskas Siauliai University, Lithuania
Deputy Editor-in-Chief
Prof., Dr. Andris Broks University of Latvia, Latvia
Deputy Editor-in-Chief
Prof., Dr. Miia Rannikmäe University of Tartu, Estonia
Executive Secretary
Dr. Laima Railienė SMC “Scientia Educologica”, Lithuania
Editors:
Prof., Dr. Boris Aberšek University of Maribor, Slovenia
Prof., Dr. Agnaldo Arroio University of Sao Paulo, Brazil
Prof., Dr. Martin Bilek Charles University, Czech Republic
Dr. Paolo Bussotti University of Udine, Italy
Prof., Dr. Bulent Cavas Dokuz Eylul University, Turkey
Prof., Dr. Hana Čtrnáctová Charles University, Czech Republic
Dr. Peter Demkanin Comenius University, Slovakia
Dr. André du Plessis Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, South Africa
Prof., Dr. Peter Heering University of Flensburg, Germany
Prof., Dr. Jack Holbrook University of Tartu, Estonia
Prof., Dr. Ryszard M. Janiuk Maria Curie Sklodowska University, Poland
Dr. Milan Kubiatko University of Zilina, Slovakia
Dr. Todar Lakhvich Belarusian State Medical University, Republic of Belarus
Prof., Dr. Jari Lavonen University of Helsinki, Finland
Prof., Dr. Rita Makarskaitė-Petkevičienė Lithuanian University of Educational Sciences, Lithuania
Prof., Dr. Aadu Ott Göteborg University, Sweden
Prof., Dr. Paul Pace Malta University, Malta
Prof., Dr. Valfrids Paškevičs Daugavpils University, Latvia
Prof., Dr. Jongwon Park Chonnam National University, Korea
Prof., Dr. Raffaele Pisano Lille 3 University, France
Dr. Pavol Prokop Trnava University, Slovakia
Prof., Dr. Konstantinos Ravanis University of Patras, Greece
Dr. Alona Rauckienė-Michaelsson Klaipėda University, Lithuania
Prof., Dr. Heimo Saarikko Helsinki University, Finland
Dr. Hae-Ae Seo Pusan National University, Korea
Dr. Uladzimir K. Slabin University of Oregon, USA
Prof., Dr. Borislav V. Toshev Sofia University, Bulgaria
Dr. Georgios Tsaparlis University of Ioannina, Greece
Dr. Muhammet Usak Science and Medical Education Research Center, Turkey
A scientific journal JBSE issued by the Scientia Socialis Ltd., in cooperation with SMC Scientia Educologica, Lithuania,
emphasizes theoretical, experimental and methodical studies in the field of science education. JBSE is an international
academic journal. In order to maintain the high standards appropriate to such a journal, all contributions received are
submitted for anonymous review by two experts, additionally to review by the Editor. The decision of the Editor on
the acceptance of articles is final and no correspondence can be entered into on reasons for rejection of a submitted
contribution.
Published since 2002 Address:

The journal is published bimonthly. Scientia Socialis, Ltd.
IF: 0.479 (2016) Donelaičio Street 29, LT-78115 Siauliai, Lithuania
H Index: 10 (2016) E-mail: mail.jbse@gmail.com
SJR: 0.302 (2016) Phone: +370 687 95668
ICDS: 10.7 (2017) Home page: http://www.scientiasocialis.lt/jbse/
ICV: 143.26 (2015)
ISSN 1648–3898 (Print) © Scientia Socialis Ltd., Lithuania, 2018
ISSN 2538–7138 (Online)

The articles appearing in this journal are indexed/abstracted in British Education Index
(http://www.leeds.ac.uk/bei/bei.htm), Copernicus Index (http://journals.indexcopernicus.com), The Asian
Education Index (http://www.asian-education-index.com/sciences_index.php), EBSCO: Academic Search Premier
2 (http://search.ebscohost.com), Social Scisearch (Thomson Reuters) (http://science.thomsonreuters.com/index.html),
Journal Citation Reports / Social Sciences Edition (Thomson Reuters)
(http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/scientific/Journal_Citation_Reports),
and SCOPUS (http://www.scopus.com)
ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ CONTENTS
CONTENTS
Editorial
CONCEPT FORMATION: PHYSICS TEACHER AND HIS KNOW-HOW AND KNOW-WHY

Peter Demkanin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Articles
DESIGNING INFOGRAPHICS FOR THE EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY COURSE:

PERSPECTIVES OF PRE-SERVICE SCIENCE TEACHERS
Hidayah Mohd Fadzil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS’ COGNITIVE STRUCTURES CONCERNING PROTEIN SYNTHESIS

AND THEIR DEGREE OF UNDERSTANDING
Cem Gerçek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
INTEREST OF LATVIAN AND LITHUANIAN STUDENTS IN SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS

Dagnija Cēdere, Inese Jurgena, Vilija Targamadze . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
EFFECTS OF TECHNOLOGY-ENHANCED METACOGNITIVE LEARNING PLATFORM

ON STUDENTS’ MONITORING ACCURACY AND UNDERSTANDING OF ELECTRICITY
Eylem Yıldız Feyzioğlu, Ercan Akpinar, Nilgün Tatar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
EFFECTS OF LEARNING CYCLE MODELS ON SCIENCE SUCCESS: A META-ANALYSIS

Süleyman Yaman, Şadiye Karaşah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
WRITING VERSUS TYPING DURING SCIENCE TEACHING: CASE STUDY IN SLOVENIA

Metka Kordigel Aberšek, Boris Aberšek , Andrej Flogie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
IN-DEPTH TEACHING AS ORIENTED-RESEARCH ABOUT SEASONS AND THE

SUN/EARTH MODEL: EFFECTS ON CONTENT KNOWLEDGE ATTAINED BY
PRE-SERVICE PRIMARY TEACHERS
Joaquín Martínez-Torregrosa, Ruben Limiñana, Asunción Menargues, Rafael Colomer . . . . . . . . . . . 97
TEACHERS’ DIFFICULTIES AND STRATEGIES IN PHYSICS TEACHING AND LEARNING THAT

APPLYING MATHEMATICS
Heri Retnawati, Janu Arlinwibowo, Nidya F. Wulandari, Rian G. Pradani . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
EFFECTIVENESS OF CREATIVE RESPONSIBILITY BASED TEACHING (CRBT) MODEL

ON BASIC PHYSICS LEARNING TO INCREASE STUDENT’S SCIENTIFIC CREATIVITY
AND RESPONSIBILITY
Suyidno, Mohamad Nur, Leny Yuanita, Binar Kurnia Prahani, Budi Jatmiko . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
DIVERSIFICATION OF REASONING SCIENCE TEST ITEMS OF TIMSS GRADE 8 BASED

ON HIGHER ORDER THINKING SKILLS: A CASE STUDY OF INDONESIAN STUDENTS
Anjar Putro Utomo, Erlia Narulita, Kinya Shimizu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
DETERMINATION OF EDUCATIONAL EFFICIENCY AND STUDENTS’ INVOLVEMENT

IN THE FLIPPED BIOLOGY CLASSROOM IN PRIMARY SCHOOL
Vera S. Županec, Branka N. Radulović, Tijana Z. Pribićević,
Tomka G. Miljanović, Vujadin G. Zdravković . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
Information
INFORMATION FOR CONTRIBUTORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
PROBLEMS OF PSYCHOLOGY IN THE 21ST CENTURY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
QUALITY ISSUES AND INSIGHTS IN THE 21ST CENTURY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `179
3
CONCEPT FORMATION: PHYSICS TEACHER AND HIS KNOW-HOW AND KNOW-WHY
Peter Demkanin
Comenius University in Bratislava, Slovakia
Physics education is an easy job, making people happy. It is an easy job for all, including teachers and learners.
Do you agree? I do, but probably it is good to try to discuss these words somehow in details.
Quite often we see, even in our Journal, research results proving that Physics is not so popular. Physics courses
require thinking, using correct words, not making too much algebra and calculation mistakes, using arguments.
Really, a reasonable portion of pupils does not find Physics lessons as a source of happiness. What to do with
these pupils, their teachers and the content they are taught? Neuroscientists, like M. Lieberman, are converging
to interesting ideas: “Teachers are losing the education war because our adolescents are distracted by the social
world. Naturally, the students don’t see it that way. It wasn’t their choice to get endless instruction on topics that
don’t seem relevant to them. They desperately want to learn, but what they want to learn about is their social
world - how it works and how they can secure a place in it that will maximize their social rewards and minimize
the social pain they feel. Their brains are built to feel these strong social motivations and to use the mentalizing
system to help them along. Evolutionarily, the social interest of adolescents is no distraction. Rather, it is the most
important thing they can learn well.” (Lieberman 2013, p.282)
The idea, that a teacher-beginner is teaching his students as he has been taught is generally well accepted.
It is not easy to rebuild the knowledge system of a teacher, to engraft evidence-based perspective on the Physics
education, to train him for conscious using of up-to-date best practices. A teacher, to be successful, must be trained
in each of the basic dimensions -knowledge, abilities, and relationships. These dimensions are mutually interwoven
in the process of teaching. Every day, at every lesson, they are applied jointly. Let us take, as an example, the Archi-
medes principle and a teacher facilitating the learning of the Archimedes principle at a lower secondary school.
The teacher is, at the same time, using, e.g. his knowledge of the forces, pressure, relevant pupil`s representations;
his abilities to aim the attention of the group of pupils, to manipulate equipment and focus pupil’s attention to
important issues of the experiment used. Also, he enters into interrelationships with pupils and this should not
be regarded as something odd. Each Physics teacher is a teacher of learners and a teacher of content. A teacher is
fulfilled, happy, if he is well educated and trained, if he has well developed all three dimensions - knowledge, abili-
ties, and relationships, if there is an order in his ideas and attitudes. Research results can help in making such order.
During the previous months, I was finishing a university textbook for Physics teachers, a sort of textbook try-
ing to scaffold users, especially future Physics teachers, to see their future pupils as living people, as children and
teenagers living in a society, living on Earth. It was quite a long-term endeavour to find a system to help physics
teachers to arrange the physics content to be taught. The result is presented on the next lines and schemes. Later
in this article, I will mention also a well usable personality model, to balance the idea that a teacher is a teacher of
content as well as a teacher of learners.
4
Let us look back at a Physics teacher facilitating the learning of the Archimedes principle. The process of
teaching physics content is quite often regarded as a process from a naive representation towards the normative
knowledge, via instructions (Figure 1). We prefer not to talk about instructions itself but about pupils’ thinking
and info processing. The information involved in these thinking processes is often gathered empirically (Figure
2). It seems profitable to study the substructure of an event of learning deeply. Some results of such deep study
are presented in Sawyer (2015) and diSessa (2014). In Figure 2 we also highlighted methods of Physics Education
- Tutoring, Mentoring, Coaching, and Scaffolding, which well leads to fulfilling the goals of Science education.
Figure 1: Teacher-centred view of teaching.
Figure 2: The learner-centred view of teaching with highlighted one event of learning.
To make the Physics education easier, more predictable for pupils as well as for teachers, we have prepared
an easy-to-use scheme of the substructure of an event of learning, applicable for concept formation. In Figure 3
(Velanova, 2015), as well as in real Physics lessons, we use mutually linked teaching-learning sequences. Concepts
can be regarded as gestalts and within the perception approach the main motto is “meaning first”. Concepts are
assimilated in the mind as new structural elements and become elements for further perception.
Units of Physics education consist of “activities”, Teaching-Learning sequences. Most of the T-L sequences
are set to a well-chosen context, the attention of pupils is intentionally aimed to relevant previous knowledge,
howbeit naive. The T-L sequence is fertilized by a discussion with peers and adults. The ideas gathered via the T-L
sequence are summarised with the help of the teacher managing the teaching-learning processes. Science itself
is a never-ending story, so, even if the school education has its time limits, we always, even carefully, doubt, open
a dispute or add some complementarities. We go to a next T-L sequence set to a different context, or we go to the
final, normative state of a concept, fostering the relevance of the taught curriculum, by application of the new
knowledge. Teaching-learning sequences are mutually connected by main, leading idea. In our scheme, we use
the term Big Ideas similarly as it is used by W. Harlen (2015). Some of the contexts used should be selected having
in mind the idea “pupils must do what they want (at least sometimes)”. The context of an inquiry or the context of
technology innovation must not be omitted in Physics education. The small section of the scheme, Other goals of
Science Education are also important. We fulfil many other goals apart from the content including goals connected
to creativity and critical thinking (e.g. Velmovská & Bartošovič, 2016). Our work with teachers and pupils prove, that
this scheme helps in bringing order to the process of teaching-learning, lowering the cognitive demands laid on
teachers, making the process of Physics education more predictable for pupils and their parents, so it contributes
to psychological safety and happiness of all involved.
5
Figure 3: The scheme of concept formation.
To give also another impetus for future research, I would like to mention a great work of R.C.Cloninger, psy-
chologist, who improved the model of personality in a way useful for understanding some of the processes of Sci-
ence education. Our students are taught, usually by our colleagues, university psychology teachers, many ideas of
personality, usually based on the work of S.Freud, A. Freud, K. Joung, H.Suliven, S.Peck or E.Fromm (Demkaninová,
2015). Yes, their work has many reasonable implications for physics teachers today, but psychology itself has made
a great step over the last 50 years. R.C.Cloninger, as M. Lieberman who is already mentioned in this article, uses
research-based knowledge on neuroscience and, in a not so extensive article, What Makes People Healthy, Happy,
and Fulfilled In The Face Of Current World Challenges? (Cloninger, 2013), gives an impetus for the future work on
education. The process of facilitating learning of, say, the Archimedes principle, is also about working with student’s
personality (Demkanin & Gergeľová, 2017). Having this idea in mind, together with a well-sequenced content set to
well-chosen contexts, a teacher, knowing how and knowing why, can make lessons enjoyable, based on research-
based, evidence-based attitudes to science education, based on the results of research presented also in this Journal.
6
Acknowledgements
The author is grateful to support from the Slovak Research and Development Agency under the contract
APVV-14-0070.
References
Cloninger, R. C. (2013). What makes people healthy, happy, and fulfilled in the face of current world challenges? Mens Sana
Monographs, 11 (1), 16-24. doi: 10.4103/0973-1229.109288.
Demkanin, P. (2013). Preparation of new physics teachers from various perspectives. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 12 (1), 4-5.
Demkanin, P., & Gergeľová, B. (2017). Development of aptitude for team work via physics education. In: AIP Conference Proceed-
ings, Volume 1804. American Institute of Physics Inc. doi: 10.1063/1.4974380.
Demkanin, P., & Velanová, M. (2016). Kľúčové tézy obsahu prírodovedného vzdelávania ako kritérium výberu obsahu pre príro-
dovedné kurikulum [Key theoretical thesis of the content of science education as a criterion for choosing content for the
science curriculum]. In Held, Ľ. Východiská prípravy prírodovedného kurikula pre základnú školu 2020 II (pp. 21-44). Trnava:
Typi Universitatis Tyrnaviensis.
Demkaninová, D. (2015). Osobnosť v kontexte ADHD [Personality in the context of ADHD]. In Herényiová, G. ADHD v bio-psycho-
sociálnom kontexte. Bratislava: Psychoprof.
diSessa, A. (2014). The construction of causal schemes: Learning mechanisms at the knowledge level. Cognitive Science, 38 (5),
795-850. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12131.
Harlen, W. (2015). Working with big ideas of science education. Trieste: Science Education Programme of IAP.
Lieberman, M. (2013). Social: Why our brains are wired to connect. Crown.
Sawyer, R. (2015). The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. Cambridge University Press.
Velanová, M. (2015). Zavádzanie fyzikálnych pojmov v gymnaziálnom vzdelávaní [Introduction of physical concepts in gymnasium
education]. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Comenius University, Bratislava
Velmovská, K., & Bartošovič, L. (2016). Developing critical thinking skills in physics classes. In Critical thinking: Theories, methods
and challenges (pp. 21-43). New York: Nova Science Publishers.
Received: January 03, 2018 Accepted: February 05, 2018
Peter Demkanin PhD. in Theory of Physics Education, Associate Professor of Physics

Education, Head of Department of Physics Education, Faculty of
Mathematics, Physics and Informatics, Comenius University in
Bratislava, Mlynská dolina F1, 84248 Bratislava, Slovakia.
E-mail: demkanin@fmph.uniba.sk
Website: https://fmph.uniba.sk/en
7
DESIGNING INFOGRAPHICS
FOR THE EDUCATIONAL
TECHNOLOGY COURSE:
ISSN 2538-7138 /Online/
PERSPECTIVES OF PRE-
SERVICE SCIENCE TEACHERS
Abstract. Despite the existing research on Hidayah Mohd Fadzil

technology use in tertiary education, there
is limited scholarly literature on the use of
infographics in education or on the effec-
tive design of infographics specifically for
Introduction

educational settings. By employing qualita-
Today’s technologies are revolutionising the way people communicate
tive research, the researcher attempts to and learn. In the epoch of globalisation, technology appears to be at the
explore the learners’ perception of the use forefront of the educational field. The rapid change from teacher-centred to
of infographics. This research involved the learner-centred instruction in the classroom has contributed to the widen-
researcher working independently on an ing use of technology to enhance teaching and learning in higher learning
in-class research project with 40 third-year
institutions. The integration of technology equips new generations of learners
with meaningful skills to succeed in the 21st century where technology is
undergraduate students. The pre-service
construed as an important resource. According to Dias and Atkinson (2001),
science teachers were required to individu- technological integration in tertiary education encompasses the entire con-
ally create an infographic related to the tinuum of self-directed teaching and learning practice, interactive learning
upper secondary school science curriculum. software, online assessment, accessibility to online information, communica-
The findings indicated that the pre-service tion and publication. Akinde (2016) suggests that the integration of technol-
teachers expressed positive viewpoints
ogy is driven predominantly by the current educational technology trends
in the educational settings. The significance of the technology-rich learning
about the infographics assignment. When
environment in a higher learning institution has become a required strategy
the pre-service teachers were engaged in in educational development, as the conventional, teacher-centred instruc-
the learning process, they had a sense of tions are not able to muddle through with the high demands of the digital
agency and responsibility for their learning. natives. The concurrent combination of technology, pedagogy and content
The findings also indicated that this re- knowledge in teaching and learning have a great impact on understanding
search created a meaningful experience for
the challenges and opportunities in the teaching and learning in tertiary
education (Lye, 2013). In the case of Malaysia, “Malaysia e-learning Policy 2.0”
the pre-service teachers in engaging tech-
was introduced by the Ministry of Higher Education in 2011 to specifically
nology. This research essentially promoted support the Higher Education Strategic Plan which requires the e-Learning
innovations in teaching and learning of the framework that aims to develop quality world-class human capital through
course that encouraged student engage- the utilisation of information and communications technology (ICT). Hence,
ment with technology. higher education should meet the growing demands for knowledge and
Keywords: educational technology,
skills through the implementation of innovative pedagogical tools and
methods.
infographic, pre-service science teachers,
science education. Focus of the Research
The use of innovative technology-enhanced media as a pedagogical

tool has been the subject of great interest in education and has remained
Hidayah Mohd Fadzil
University of Malaya, Malaysia
a prevalent approach in the last few years (Dabbagh & Kitsantas, 2012; Fer-
reira, Baptista & Arroio, 2013; Potter & Banaji, 2012). Many educators have
reported success in attempts to integrate tools such as blogs, wikis, and social
8
ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ DESIGNING INFOGRAPHICS FOR THE EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY COURSE: PERSPECTIVES
OF PRE-SERVICE SCIENCE TEACHERS
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 8-18)
networks into their instructional and assignment design (Ferreira, Baptista & Arroio, 2013; McLoughlin, 2011; Wolf,
Beckem & Matias, 2011). In line with the current development, the use of visualisations has increased significantly.
Moreno et al. (2001) describe visualizations as the non-verbal mode of representing content knowledge, which
includes photos, illustrations, graphics, drawings, maps, animations, simulations, and video. The infographics are
part of data visualisation that can present complex information quickly and clearly. Infographics are considered as
an effective tool for communication and transfer of information (Ferreira, Baptista & Arroio, 2013; Lamb, Polman,
Newman, & Smith, 2014; Lazard & Atkinson, 2015; Smiciklas, 2012). Due to this attribute, infographics have emerged
as a popular visual approach to efficiently deliver abstract and complex instructional content to support students’
learning (Lamb, Polman, Newman & Smith, 2014; Smiciklas, 2012; Vanichvasin, 2013).
Krum (2014) defines infographics as graphic design that combines data visualizations, illustrations, text, and
images together into a format that tells a comprehensive description. This definition is close to the definitions
presented by Toth (2013) and Lamb and Jhonson (2014). Toth (2013) defines infographics as materials created as a
combination of visuals and texts that are prepared in order to provide easy and understandable information about
a subject to their readers. Lamb and Jhonson (2014) describe infographics as a visual presentation of information,
which is prepared for readers to visualize the information that is normally difficult to understand. Infographics pro-
vide information to be a part of a certain flow (Krum, 2013). This way, information can be efficiently presented with
a minimum explanation, and at the same time, the relationships of the content can be provided, as mentioned by
Lester (2011). In other words, infographics offer new ways of engaging a logical sequence in order to present the
content in an interesting way (Abilock & Williams, 2014; Lamb & Jhonson, 2014; Yildirim, 2017). Since infographics
can easily present extensive information, they can be used to serve other purposes such as reminding the available
information, showing the relationship between concepts, transfer of processes and events, presentation of course
content and summarizing the information obtained (Meeusah & Tangkijviwat, 2013; Yildirim, 2017). Lamb et al.,
(2014) and Smiciklas (2012) explain that infographics should encapsulate sufficient details in one visual while still
being clear and precise. Davidson (2014) and Lamb and Jhonson (2014) propose the basic features of infographics
including infographics should be simple, be able to present complex information quickly and clearly, integrating
visuals and texts for the presentation of information, self-explanatory and attractive for readers. Therefore, in order
to create an engaging infographic, students may develop critical thinking, analysis and synthesis skills of designers
and it can lead the students to acquire innovative instructional design skills (Hart, 2013; Yildirim, 2017).
In view of the fact that infographics are widely accepted and used as a device for efficiently delivering con-
tent, it needs to be precise, and clear in delivering an abstract, complex, and dense instructional content (Dunlap
& Lowenthal, 2016; Siricharoen & Siricharoen, 2015). Despite all the existing research on new technological use in
the higher education classroom, the literature on using infographics in teaching remains limited at best. Studies on
the best practices in teaching that make use of infographics either as an information-sharing tool or as a method
of evaluating students’ work are difficult to find (Dunlap & Lowenthal, 2016; Siricharoen & Siricharoen, 2015). It
is important for educators to understand how students process the information contained in infographics since
infographics can provide a way to reach students with varied learning styles, particularly visual learners (Lankow et
al., 2012; Smiciklas, 2012). Furthermore, Davis and Quinn (2013) suggest that effective and well-prepared infograph-
ics can work as useful learning materials to support the development of students. Similarly, Lazard and Atkinson
(2015) state that infographics consisting of text and visuals have a positive effect on the growth of the readers.
The purpose of the present research is, therefore, to explore the pre-service science teachers’ perceptions about
creating infographics for the teaching and learning of an educational technology course. This research focuses on
the following research question: What are the pre-service science teachers’ perception about creating infographics
for the teaching and learning of an educational technology course?
Methodology of the Research
General Background
By employing the qualitative methodology, the researcher attempted to illuminate how incorporating a
graphic design assignment into the coursework encouraged and challenged the students’ scientific content and
technological literacies. The research was designed to be used in an educational technology course associated with
the Bachelor of Science with Education at a public research university in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
9
DESIGNING INFOGRAPHICS FOR THE EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY COURSE: PERSPECTIVES
(P. 8-18) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Participants
This research involved researchers working independently on an in-class research project with 40 third-year
undergraduate students (17 male, 23 female) for one semester (14 weeks). The students ranged in age from 21 to
22 years old. The course, Technology in Science Education focuses on assisting these pre-service science teachers in
integrating existing and new expanding technologies into science education which are based on learning theories.
At the end of this course, the pre-service teachers should be able to create hypermedia learning environments that
will be able to incorporate stimulating and interactive lessons in the teaching and learning of science in school.
Procedures and Data Collection Technique
This research involved pre-service science teachers working individually in creating an infographic by utiliz-
ing various tools for creating infographics that were available online. They had the autonomy to create a content-
rich infographic on a topic of their choice. The topics, however, must be related to the scientific content from the
secondary school science subjects (Biology, Physics or Chemistry). The pre-service teachers must be able to dem-
onstrate the subject-specific knowledge about the topic. This task was used as part of their continuous assessment
with a weightage score of 25 percent.
There are a number of free infographic makers that can be employed to create infographics; some are more
user-friendly than others. The pre-service teachers were introduced to tools such as Canva, Piktochart, Venngage
and Infograms at the beginning of the course, but they were required to explore it further and choose the most
suitable tool to use in creating their individual infographics. Hence, some students went on to explore, use and
combine other tools such as Adobe Photoshop to generate their infographics. Their willingness to explore further
related tools supported Saat et al. (2016) and Grieve, Padgett, and Moffitt’s (2016) arguments that current students
no longer hold negative perceptions about using technology in teaching and learning. To facilitate the students,
all the information regarding the tasks was posted to the course e-learning portal (refer Figure 1).
Figure 1: Snapshot of the e-learning platform for the Technology in Science Education course.
The nine-step process in creating the content specific infographic Krauss (2012) was employed to guide the
pre-service teachers during the research (refer Figure 2). The researcher observed and facilitated the pre-service
teachers during the duration of the course. The pre-service teachers were instructed to share their infographics
10
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 8-18)
through a gallery walk activity at week 7 which marked the course’s mid-semester break. At the end of this task,
they were required to submit their reflection pertaining to their experience in creating an infographic and uploaded
it at the course e-learning portal.
Figure 2: Nine-step process in creating infographic (adapted from Krauss, 2012).
Data Analysis
The students’ infographics were analysed using an infographic rubric that assessed the suitability of the
chosen topic, content, objects, data visualization, fonts, organization of information and citation of sources used
in the infographics. The reflections of the pre-service science teachers were analysed using constant comparative
data analysis technique (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). This data analysis technique was utilized to answer the research
questions posed by this research. It involved the process of coding, categorizing and developing themes from
the information that emerged from the collected data, which can best describe the phenomenon under research.
This is in line with the view that refining the thematic framework of the research involves a logical and intuitive
thinking in making sure that the research objectives are being addressed appropriately (Ritchie & Spencer, 1994).
The researcher observation notes during the gallery walk activity and throughout this research were also used as
a triangulation method to support the findings of this research.
Validity and Reliability
While designing a qualitative research, validity, and reliability are two issues that a researcher should be
concerned about (Golafshani, 2003; Patton, 2002). Qualitative researchers need to ensure the rigor without sac-
rificing the relevance of the qualitative data. In this research, the themes identified during the data analysis were
evaluated through the peer review process. Peer review is regarded as one of the techniques used to enhance the
credibility and trustworthiness of qualitative research through the use of external peers. The process of peer review
in this research involved two experts from the field of educational technology and qualitative research in science
education. The experts were asked to independently review the emerging themes from the findings and provide
constructive comments and feedbacks. Another approach implemented in this research was triangulation. Trian-
gulation is one of the strategies for improving and enhancing the internal validity of research in order to control
bias. According to Bryman (2006), triangulation refers to the use of more than one approach to the investigation
of a research question in order to develop confidence in the ensuing findings. Triangulation should support the
findings by showing corroboration or a confidence interval, as claimed by Greene, Caracelli and Graham (1989).
11
(P. 8-18) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Engaging multiple methods such as observation, the use of reflection notes, and analysis of infographics will lead
us to more reliable, accurate and trustworthy findings and they may reduce the uncertainty of the interpretation.
Ethical Considerations
Prior to commencing the research, ethical clearance was sought from the pre-service science teachers. All the
participants volunteered to take part in the research and were assured of their confidentiality and privacy. They
were also required to fill an online informed consent form as a proof of their acceptance.
Results of Research
The findings illustrated that most of the pre-service science teachers in this research were able to indepen-
dently produce an informative, well-structured and visually appealing infographic (for example refer Figure 3 and
4). Three themes also emerged from the analysis of the pre-service science teachers’ reflections and the researcher’s
observation notes. The themes were: (i) the infographic assignment created a meaningful experience for the pre-
service science teachers, (ii) the infographic enhanced the pre-service science teachers’ conceptual knowledge and
(iii) the attributes of a good infographic should be accredited to the pre-service teachers.
Meaningful Experience in Creating the Infographic
This theme was concerned with the manner in which the pre-service teachers described how their participa-
tions in the innovative assignment had created a meaningful experience for them. The finding shows that when
the students were engaged in the learning process, they experienced a sense of agency and responsibility for their
learning efforts. They generally expressed positive feelings towards the infographic assignment even though all
of the pre-service teachers admitted that this was the first time they were introduced to the infographic maker
tools. Student 14 described developing infographic as “the most exciting and interesting activity, compared to the
common report-based assessment and classroom presentation”.
The pre-service science teachers explored different tools in creating an infographic and decide on the info-
graphic-maker of their choice. For instance, one of the pre-service teachers explained that she tried using Canva
and Piktochart to compare both tools and decided to use Canva as it was user-friendly and had many choices of
free templates. Student 4, on the other hand, admitted that he learned how to use Canva by viewing YouTube tuto-
rial videos and even tried other tools such as Piktochart and Venngage but found that after comparing the three,
Canva was the easiest to use and navigate. Therefore, based on the pre-service teachers’ feedbacks on creating an
infographic, it was verified that this assignment might promote independent learning through multiple resources
such as YouTube videos, tutorial videos on the particular infographic website and blogs.
The integration of technology-based assignment in creating the infographics has also contributed positively
to pre-service science teachers’ attitudes about technology. As a result, these teachers became more exposed to
technological use and innovations. The following excerpt, for instance, illustrates Student 39’s reflection regarding
the integration of technology in this research:
I got the chance to familiarize myself with the infographic maker that was available online to make my teaching and
learning stimulating. I realized that technology could be very beneficial to us especially in the educational field (Student 39)
The pre-service teachers also shared their interest to transfer the skills in creating infographics in their future
career as science teachers, as mentioned by Student 7 in the following excerpt:
This knowledge of creating infographics was beneficial as it works as alternative approaches to teach the scientific concepts
to my digital natives’ students. I can integrate the skills in creating infographics and scientific knowledge to come out with
interesting infographics for the science subject that I have to teach in the future (Student 7)
12
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 8-18)
Figure 3: Student 13 infographic.
Figure 4: Student 25 infographic.
13
(P. 8-18) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Infographic Enhance Understanding of Conceptual Knowledge
The second theme that emerged from the findings was concerned with the manner in which the pre-service
teachers explicated that this innovative assignment enhanced their understanding of conceptual knowledge in
science. The infographic exposed the pre-service teachers to scientific concepts that were not related to their major
courses. The pre-service science teachers in this course were majoring in Physics, Biology or Chemistry. However,
they needed to teach the general science subject later in school. Thus, these pre-service teachers were expected
to comprehend general scientific concept and theories that would enable them to teach science in secondary
school. Student 36 explained that, “I have gained much knowledge from Biology infographics. I did not take Biology
subject during my secondary school thus I have a limited knowledge of this subject”. Student 34 who was a Biology
major also shared his interest in learning Newton’s law and the application of the law from his friend’s infographics
during the gallery walk activity.
The pre-service teachers also agreed that the infographics can enhance their understanding of scientific con-
cepts and that the process of creating an infographic was “especially great for displaying unexciting or complex data in
a way that is more visually engaging and easy to understand” (Student 12). Infographics provided a way in explaining
the scientific concept in an interesting manner. Student 4 explained that “the infographics incorporated pictures and
diagrams related to the scientific concepts, which makes the topic easy to understand especially for secondary school
students and visual learners”. Another student commented that, “in order to deliver the basic concept of science and
technology, I realised that infographics create a platform that improvise a concrete conceptual scientific content into a
graphic representation that describe the complex information efficiently with minimum explanation” (Student 3). The
pre-service teachers also reflected on the need to highlight some information over others.
Attributes of a Good Infographic
The third theme that emerged in this research explicated the attributes of good infographics based on the
perspective of pre-service science teachers. An engaging infographic should not only be graphically stimulating,
but it should also include appropriate structure, accurate content and appropriate depth of information. In this
particular research, Student 5 explained that “I had seen a variety of infographics presented by my course mates. I
realized that when constructing an infographic, the most important thing that we must consider is how to get the in-
formation across effectively. The visual elements used in the infographic should also be able to support the information
given”. Student 9 also “realized that good infographics should convey the right message”.
Student 14 described that the information in an infographic should be well-arranged and systematically
presented in order to ease the reader’s understanding of the topic. Another student opined that an infographic
needed the creator to exercise creativity so that it is easy to understand and aesthetically pleasing. At the same time,
it should be able to provide graphical contents and useful information (Student 9). Almost all of the pre-service
science teachers expressed their appreciation of the opportunity to observe their course mates’ efforts and creativ-
ity in creating the infographics during the gallery walk activity. The following excerpts illustrated the pre-service
science teachers’ responses regarding their course mates’ efforts in creating the infographics;
I got the chance to observe my friends’ efforts and creativity. I believed this is the first time for everyone (in creating info-
graphics). (Student 12)
I observed how my friends interpreted their idea creatively and reflected it graphically in their work. (Student 16)
I got so much information from my friends, and I realised how creative my friends were. (Student 40)
I am amazed by my course mates’ creativity in developing infographics. (Student 25)
Challenges in Creating Infographics
The fourth theme was concerned with the manner in which the pre-service teachers described the chal-
lenges in creating their infographics. Most of the pre-service teachers explained that creating the infographics
was time-consuming. Student 19 explained that “I managed to come out with a good infographic even though it
was time-consuming, and I am proud of my product”. Student 23 described her experience as challenging and
time-consuming since she was not digitally savvy but she “felt very pleased, and this was a great experience for me”.
Some of the pre-service teachers admitted that this assignment was quite challenging as they were required to
14
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 8-18)
explore the infographic-maker first before they can decide which tool suited their needs. Then they were required
to master the skills of using the infographic maker, in order to create their own infographics. They completed all
these through online tutorials, as previously explained. The following excerpt explained Student 26’s challenging
experience in creating his infographic;
I decided to use Canva. At first, I did not realize that we can put shapes or lines on top of the text and that we can insert
frame at the images, so I just did basic things like insert background, text and upload images. When I saw my friend edited
his work in Canva, I asked him to teach me the new skills. So, I need to adjust and modify the background, the content ar-
rangement, font and colours, which took me more than 4 hours. The most challenging part was to make the word or text
appear clear. I needed to re-adjust the font and colour of the text and background (Student 26)
The third challenge was the limitation of the free infographic maker itself. Most of the free infographic makers
had limited features. For example, Student 27 explained that “I used Piktochart as the tool to design my masterpiece.
Pikochart is a very useful software but the limitation of this tool is that you cannot save your work as a PDF document.
You have to pay a certain amount of money to be able to use that feature.”
Discussion
This research explored pre-service science teachers’ perceptions about creating infographics in the teach-
ing and learning of educational technology course. Infographics have become one of the new trends in today’s
learning approach since they included visualization of information which enables knowledge to be presented in
different visual forms (Ferreira, Baptista & Arroio, 2013; Lamb, Polman, Newman, & Smith, 2014; Lazard & Atkinson,
2015; Smiciklas, 2012). The research indicated that technology-based projects were believed to have a positive
influence on the pre-service teachers’ active learning and allowed them to independently create infographics as
products of their learning. Meyer, Haywood, Sachdev and Faraday (2008) suggested that the key to their concept
of independent learning was the shift of responsibility for the learning process from the instructor to the learner.
These required the learners to acquire an understanding of their learning process, to be motivated to learn and to
collaborate with instructors to structure their learning environment. This finding is also in line with the research
by Artun (2016).
In this research, the pre-service teachers were enthusiastic about the opportunity to take complex scientific
concepts and displayed them in a visual form. They described how their participation in the innovative assignment
had created a meaningful experience for them. As they engaged in this activity, they were developing skills related
to the critical processing of key content from the scientific concepts that they had selected. They identified their
intended audience and decided on the best information that should be included in their infographics. The skills
in the filtering of information are considered as one of the important digital literacy skills (Artun, 2016). Thus, the
infographic assignment permitted the pre-service science teachers to apply vital skills necessary for the educational
technology course, such as content curation and content production.
Content curation is the process of sorting through vast amounts of content on the web and communicating
it in a meaningful and systematic way (Artun, 2016). The work involved scrutinizing, organizing and arrangement
of information around a specific issue. It can thus be deduced that the infographic assignment required the pre-
service science teachers to acquire a variety of skills which included cognitive skills, technical skills, digital skills,
skills related to the communication of information and innovative instructional design skills, as suggested by pre-
vious studies (e.g. Artun, 2016; Hart, 2013; Yildirim, 2017). This research has demonstrated how a graphic design
assignment could be incorporated as part of the challenges that the students had to overcome to complete the
assignment and subsequently encouraged their visual digital literacies. The findings exhibited that the infographics
assignment contributed positively to the pre-service science teachers’ viewpoints about technology. These find-
ings were in agreement with those obtained by Reed (2007), Chan Lin (2008) and Sasova (2011). As a result, the
pre-service science teachers admitted that they had become more open to technological use and innovations in
the teaching and learning of science.
The second theme that emerged from the findings was concerned with the manner in which the pre-service
teachers explicated that the infographics enhanced their understanding of the conceptual knowledge in science.
Thus, it will be beneficial for pre-service teachers to acquire the skills to create engaging infographics to facilitate
students’ understanding of science. Based on the research conducted by Sacopla and Yangco (2016), teachers
15
(P. 8-18) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
should be encouraged to equip themselves with the skills in designing infographics so that they will be able to
address the needs of visual learners to facilitate recall and retention and thus improve the coding skills that lead to
conceptual understanding. The findings of the research seemed to be consistent with other research which found
visual representations to be one of the most effective tools in the communication of scientific concepts (Cook,
2011; Ferreira, Baptista & Arroio, 2013; Lamb, Polman, Newman, & Smith, 2014; Lazard & Atkinson, 2015; Smiciklas,
2012). Sacopla and Yangco (2016) and Cook (2011) argued that science would be very challenging without the
support of graphic representation for some topics that involved concepts that were too small (e.g. cells, enzymes),
too large (e.g. solar system, continental drift), too slow (e.g. decomposition), too fast (e.g. chemical reactions), to
see with the unaided eye. Infographics were also used to represent processes that were difficult to describe, such
as photosynthesis and cellular respiration (Cook, 2012). Therefore, these findings were in line with those of the
previous studies which indicated that the use of infographics in teaching and learning of scientific concepts were
more effective in improving learners’ conceptual understanding as compared to the use of the didactic approach
(Cook, 2011; Ferreira, Baptista & Arroio, 2013; Lamb, Polman, Newman, & Smith, 2014; Lazard & Atkinson, 2015;
Smiciklas, 2012). This result may be explained by the fact that the content curation processes aided in decongesting
the scientific content and eliminating irrelevant information that made the concepts more organized and connected
to prior knowledge. The pre-service teachers had critically analysed, explored, evaluated and reflected their work
on the chosen scientific topic. Therefore, the results of this research promoted the use of infographics to enhance
the conceptual understanding, especially in teaching scientific subjects with complex topics.
The third theme that emerged from this research explicated the attributes of good infographics based on
the perspective of the pre-service science teachers. The pre-service science teachers clarified that the infographic
should not only be graphically stimulating but it should also include appropriate structure, accurate content
and appropriate depth of information. This is in line with Ware (2012) who asserted that an effective infographic
communicates the essence or fundamentals of a message without requiring someone to read the associated text
thoroughly. In other words, the reader should be able to determine the subject of an infographic at a glance. The
infographic creators must think about the logical sequence in order to present the content in an interesting way,
whether the decoration is required, or what type of infographic would be appropriate for presenting the main
idea (Abilock & Williams, 2014; Lamb et al., 2014; Yildirim, 2017). If a decoration can be an obstacle for the readers
to understand the main idea of the infographic, possibly certain objects may need to be removed. The pre-service
teachers explained that good infographics should be able to present complex information effectively by integrating
visuals and texts for the presentation of information. These findings were in accord with recent studies indicating
that infographics should encapsulate sufficient details in one visual while still being clear and precise (Davidson,
2014; Lamb et al., 2014; Smiciklas, 2012; Yildirim, 2017). Even though the pre-service teachers admitted that creat-
ing infographics was time consuming as this was their first experience creating the infographics and utilizing an
infographic maker, all of them agreed that this assignment served as an excellent experience for them. Kos and Sims
(2014) in their research also encountered problems in terms of the limitations of the free online software. Another
noticeable learning curve was also detected among less technologically savvy students. Some of the pre-service
science teachers took a considerable amount of time to learn how to use the software before they could start cre-
ating infographics. These findings matched those observed in earlier studies (Kos and Sims, 2014; Yildirim, 2017).
Conclusion and Implications of the Research
In the light of these findings, it can be concluded that developing infographics promotes innovations in teach-
ing and learning of the course that encourage student engagement in using technology. The research identifies
emerging findings from the experience gained through the infographics assignment, and from the pre-service
teachers’ feedbacks. It can be deduced that infographics can be recognized as an appropriate tool that can enhance
the understanding of conceptual knowledge by providing an interesting way to explain scientific concepts. How-
ever, it is essential that the pre-service science teachers realized that science cannot be captured or understood
through ‘key concepts’ alone. Producing infographics requires considerable thoughts, and it forces the creator to
think about their audience and how best to communicate the key concepts to them. The research also suggested
that this kind of creative assignment required the students to practice technological competencies required to
participate in an increasingly visual digital culture. The pre-service teachers may in future incorporate infograph-
ics in developing instructional materials to reinforce the learning of the science subject to produce scientifically
and visually literate students. Despite the inherent limitation of this research due to its small scale and the lack
16
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 8-18)
of generalizability (which is not the underlying aim of this research), the findings of this research, to an extent,
indicate the need for an alternative and complementary practice in the educational technology course for the pre-
service teachers. To date, there are limited studies conducted to explore the effectiveness of using infographics in
teachers’ education, particularly for science education. While creating infographics may be considered as a useful
approach in educational technology, further investigation is needed in order to determine how infographics should
be objectively assessed as it undoubtedly involves some aesthetic elements which are an unfamiliar territory for
academics in field of science education.
References
Akinde, T. A. (2016). Theoretical modelling to explain lecturers’ use of educational support systems for teaching in university based
library schools in Nigeria: Extending the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Library Philosophy and Practice, 1416, 1-24.
Abilock, D., & Williams, C. (2014). Recipe for an Infographic. Knowledge Quest, 43 (2), 46-55.
Artun, H. (2016). Examining the influence of projects carried out with technological tools on pre-service teachers’ levels of en-
vironmental literacy. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 15 (2), 173-184.
Bryman, A. (2006). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done? Qualitative Research, 6 (1), 97-113.
ChanLin, L.J. (2008). Technology integration applied to project-based learning in science. Innovations in Education and Teaching
International, 45 (1), 55–65.
Cook, M. (2011). Teachers’ use of visual representations in the science classroom. Science Education International, 22 (3), 175-184.
Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2012). Personal Learning Environments, social media, and self-regulated learning: A natural formula
for connecting formal and informal learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 15 (1), 3-8.
Davidson, R. (2014). Using infographics in the science classroom. The Science Teacher, 81 (3), 34.
Davis, M., & Quinn, D. (2013). Visualizing text: The new literacy of infographics. Reading Today, 31 (3), 16-18.
Dias, L. B., & Atkinson, S. (2001). Technology integration: Best practices–where do teachers stand? IEJLL: International Electronic
Journal for Leadership in Learning, 5 (11), 1-14.
Dunlap, J. C., & Lowenthal, P. R. (2016). Getting graphic about infographics: Design lessons learned from popular infograph-
ics. Journal of Visual Literacy, 35 (1), 42-59.
Ferreira, C., Baptista, M., & Arroio, A. (2013). Teachers’ pedagogical strategies for integrating multimedia tools in science teach-
ing. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 12 (4), 509-524.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine.
Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 8 (4), 597-607.
Grieve, R., Padgett, C. R., & Moffitt, R. L. (2016). Assignments 2.0: The role of social presence and computer attitudes in student
preferences for online versus offline marking. The Internet and Higher Education, 28 (2), 8-16.
Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Edu-
cational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11 (2), 255-274.
Joss, M. (2013). Infographics: The power of visual story telling. The Seybold Report, 13 (3), 8-12.
Kos, B. A., & Sims, E. (2014). Infographics: The new 5-paragraph essay. Proceedings of the 2014 Rocky Mountain Celebration of
Women in Computing. Laramie, WY, USA: University of Colorado. Retrieved from http://scholar.colorado.edu/cgi/viewcon-
tent.cgi?article=1001&context=atlas_gradpapers.
Krauss, J. (2012). Infographics: More than words can say. Learning & Leading with Technology, 39 (5), 10-14.
Krum, R. (2014). Cool infographics: Effective communication with data visualization and design. San Francisco, California: John
Willey & Sons.
Lamb, G. R., Polman, J. L., Newman, A., & Smith, C. G. (2014). Science news infographics: Teaching students to gather, interpret,
and present information graphically. The Science Teacher, 81 (3), 25-30.
Lamb, A. & Jhonson, L. (2014). Infographics part 1: Invitations to inquiry. Teacher Librarian, 41 (4), 54-58.
Lankow, J., Ritchie, J., & Crooks, R. (2012). Infographics: The power of visual storytelling. San Francisco, California: John Wiley & Sons.
Lazard, A., & Atkinson, L. (2015). Putting environmental infographics center stage: The role of visuals at the elaboration likelihood
model’s critical point of persuasion. Science Communication, 37 (1), 6-33.
Lye, L. T. (2013). Opportunities and challenges faced by private higher education institution using the TPACK model in Malay-
sia. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 91, 294-305.
Matrix, S., & Hodson, J. (2014). Teaching with infographics: Practicing new digital competencies and visual literacies. Journal of
Pedagogic Development, 4 (2), 17-27.
McLoughlin, C. (2011). What ICT-related skills and capabilities should be considered central to the definition of digital literacy?
Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications, 12 (1), 471-475.
Meeusah, N., & Tangkijviwat, U. (2013). Effect of data set and hue on a content understanding of infographic. Proceeding of the Th-
anyaburi: Blooming Color for Life, 272-275. Retrieved from http://www.repository.rmutt.ac.th/xmlui/handle/123456789/1263.
Meyer, B., Haywood, N., Sachdev, D., & Faraday, S. (2008). What is independent learning and what are the benefits for students (Report
No. 51). London: Department for Children Schools and Families. Retrieved from https://goo.gl/9LpZS9.
Moreno, R., Mayer, R., Spires, H., & Lester, J. (2001). The case for social agency in computer-based teaching: Do students learn
more deeply when they interact with animated pedagogical agents? Cognition and Instruction, 19 (2), 177-213.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (3rd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
17
(P. 8-18) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Potter, J., & Banaji, S. (2012). Social media and self-curatorship: Reflections on identity and pedagogy through blogging on a
master’s module. Comunicar, 19 (38), 83-91.
Reed, P. A. (2007). The journey towards technological literacy for all in the United States: Are we there yet? The Technology
Teacher, 12 (3), 15-22.
Ritchie, J., & Spencer, E. (1994). Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In A. Bryman & R. G. Burgess (Eds.), Analyzing
qualitative data. London, UK: Routledge.
Saat, R. M., Fadzil, H. M., Aziz, A., Azlina, N., 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), 532-546.
Sacopla, M. C. M., & Yangco, R. T. (2016). Infographics: Effects on student coding skills and conceptual understanding in Biology.
Proceeding of The Philippines, The Asian Conference on Education 2016, 123-133.
Sasova, I. A. (2011). Technological education or labor training? Russian Education and Society, 53 (6), 49–65.
Siricharoen, W. V., & Siricharoen, N. (2015). How infographic should be evaluated? Proceedings of the 7th International Conference
on Information Technology (ICIT 2015), (pp. 558-564). Retrieved from https://goo.gl/5QUWHT.
Smiciklas, M. (2012). The power of infographics: Using pictures to communicate and connect with your audiences. Canada: Que
Publishing.
Toth, C. (2013). Revisiting a genre: Teaching infographics in business and professional communication courses. Business Com-
munication Quarterly, 76 (4), 446-457.
Vanichvasin, P. (2013). Enhancing the quality of learning through the use of infographics as visual communication tool and
learning tool. Paper presented at the International Conference on QA Culture: Cooperation or Competition (pp. 135-142).
Bangkok: The Office for National Education Standards and Quality Assessment. Retrieved from https://goo.gl/hRwmmu.
Ware, C. (2012). Information visualization: perception for design. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.
Wolf, D., Beckem, J. & Matias, A. (2011). Interactive technologies: Enhancing academic learning and stimulated student engage-
ment with social media. In T. Bastiaens & M. Ebner (Eds.), Proceedings of EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media
and Technology 2011 (pp. 2639-2644). Waynesville, NC: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
Yildirim, S. (2017). Approaches of designers in the developed educational purposes of infographics’ design processes. European
Journal of Education Studies, 3 (1), 249-284.
Received: June 07, 2017 Accepted: January 06, 2018
Hidayah Mohd Fadzil B.Sc.Ed (UM), University of Malaya, PhD (Science Education), University
of Malaya, Senior Lecturer, Department of Mathematics and Science
Education, University of Malaya, 50603, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
E-mail: hidayahfadzil@um.edu.my
18
PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS’
COGNITIVE STRUCTURES
CONCERNING PROTEIN ISSN 1648-3898 /Print/
SYNTHESIS AND THEIR DEGREE ISSN 2538-7138 /Online/
OF UNDERSTANDING
Abstract. The purpose of education is to

Cem Gerçek actualise meaningful learning. Therefore,
researching the issues on how students
process information and how they configure
it is important for meaningful learning. The
issue of protein synthesis contains a number
of abstract topics and concepts. Hence,
it is important in biology teaching to be
informed of students’ cognitive structures
Introduction concerning protein synthesis. This research
aims to analyse prospective teachers’ cogni-
Physics, chemistry and biology contain abstract concepts. Therefore, tive structures about protein synthesis and
research into how students process information and how they configure it their degree of understanding the subject.
is considered important for meaningful learning (Abraham, Gryzybowski, The research group was composed of 17
Renner, & Marek, 1992; Brumby, 1984). Failure to fulfil meaningful learning volunteering prospective teachers who had
been chosen through purposeful sampling.
can stem from a number of factors such as students, teachers, teaching
The data were collected via semi-structured
materials, school conditions, inadequacy of curricula, wrong teaching strate-
interviews. Flow maps and content analysis
gies, and ignoring misconceptions (Pines & West, 1986; Sadler, Coyle, Cook
were used in analysing the data. The results
Smith, Miller, Mintzes, Tanner, & Murray, 2013; Snow, 1989; Tsai, 2000). Besides,
demonstrated that prospective teachers had
students’ inability to associate conceptual structures in their mind, their
too many misconceptions about protein
inadequate levels of readiness, and their efforts to configure subjects with synthesis and that their knowledge extent
incorrect knowledge also influence their learning in negative ways (Ausubel, and rich connection are inadequate. The
1968; Daskolia, Dimos & Kampylis, 2012; Waheed & Lucas, 1992). According prospective teachers’ degree of understand-
to Kinchin (2011) and Chi (2001), meaningful learning does not occur due ing protein synthesis was divided into three
to such reasons as students’ failure to notice concepts and the associations categories. The results obtained in this
between those concepts in science classes, their tendency to memorise, and research suggested that teachers should
the inefficacy of education in presenting the concepts and the associations be careful in teaching the subject of protein
between the concepts. synthesis. Students’ prior knowledge and
According to constructivist approach, learning means forming associa- their misconceptions should be determined
tions between previous knowledge and new knowledge rather than adding and content or contexts to facilitate them
continuously new knowledge into the mind (Anderson, 1992; Olitsky & Milne, to learn an abstract subject such as protein
2012). In other words, it means re-constructing the correct and incorrect synthesis should be presented.
schemata in students’ mind with scientific knowledge, re-processing the Keywords: cognitive structure, degree of
knowledge and it is also the process of students’ internalising the situation. understanding, flow map, meaningful learn-
Cognitive development- that is to say, individuals’ ability to think and to un- ing, protein synthesis
derstand- improves through constructivist approach. One of the problems
encountered in researching cognitive structure is how to use qualitative
concepts as definitions and how to shape cognitive structure in visual format.
Cem Gerçek
Anderson and Demetrius (1993) presented verbal statements in a visually- Hacettepe University, Turkey
that is to say, in flow maps. In this research, flow maps are used as an analytic
instrument effective in exhibiting individuals’ cognitive structures (Tsai, 2001;
Wu & Tsai, 2005). Flow maps are also used in determining misconceptions.
19
PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS’ COGNITIVE STRUCTURES CONCERNING PROTEIN SYNTHESIS AND
THEIR DEGREE OF UNDERSTANDING
(P. 19-30) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
The number of incorrect concepts shown in flow maps can also be used as indicators that conceptual frameworks
are correct. Analysing students’ cognitive structures in the format of flow maps is important for science educators
in terms of presenting the cognitive structure quantitatively and in terms of content analysis of the important
concepts recalled and information processing strategies (Temel & Özcan, 2016; Tsai, 2001). Bischoff and Anderson
(2001) determined high school students’ cognitive structures with flow maps and content analysis. The researchers
interviewed the 9th and 10th graders and presented their results about the students’ development in the issue. As
a result, they indicated that information on students’ cognitive structures could be obtained through three-week
training. Tsai and Huang (2001) conducted a three-week research with the 5th graders about reproduction. They
determined the development of students’ cognitive structures in the subject of reproduction in three weeks. Af-
ter two months, the researchers analysed the data which they collected in interviews with the students by using
flow maps. They analysed students’ cognitive structures on the basis of the formation, extension and regulation
of knowledge.
Concept teaching is important in making sense of knowledge. If students can transfer knowledge into new
situations they encounter, they are considered to have grasped or learnt it (Colley, 2006; Taber, 2000; Wilson, Ander-
son, Heidemann, Merrill, Merritt, Richmond, 2006). For this reason, it is very important to learn concepts correctly in
biology. Students’ failure to configure the knowledge presented to them results in having misconceptions (Bahar,
2003; Treagust, 1988). Because concept maps, word association, semantic network and flow maps are used in
exhibiting cognitive structure (Acar & Tarhan, 2008; Aufschnaiter & Aufschnaiter 2003; Bischoff & Anderson, 1998;
Cremer, Dingshoff, de Beer, & Schoonen, 2011; Hovardas & Korfiatis, 2006; Kinchin, 2001; Kostova & Radoynovska,
2010; Novak, 1990). According to Eylon and Linn (1988), there are 4 categories in exhibiting the cognitive structure
in science teaching. Accordingly, the categories are conceptual learning, development, differentiation and problem
solving. Tsai and Huang (2002) determined cognitive structure and exhibited students’ previous knowledge and
pre-conceptions. The researchers contend that exhibiting cognitive structure enables teachers to be informed of
their students’ previous knowledge and of how scientific the knowledge is.
It is apparent that protein synthesis and related subjects are included in science and biology curricula in
secondary school and high school programmes (see Table 1). The fact that the topic also involves such compre-
hensive subjects as cells (structure and organelles), organic compounds, nucleic acids (DNA and RNA), proteins,
chemical digestion, and enzymes and that it is connected with a discipline like chemistry shows its importance.
As in all other subjects of biology, researching students’ cognitive structures in protein synthesis- which is an
interdisciplinary subject- is important. It was found in studies related with biology that students had learnt the
subjects of cells (Deysfus & Jungwirth, 1988), enzymes (Francis & Sellers, 1994; Lazarowitz & Naim, 2013), genetics
(Cavello & Schafer, 1994; Stewart, Hafner & Dala, 1990), amino acids (Fisher, 1985) and biotechnology (Dawson,
2007) incorrectly and insufficiently.
Table 1. Protein synthesis and related subjects in science and biology curricula in secondary school and high
school programmes in Turkey.
School and grade level Course Subject
Food and its properties (general information on proteins)
Secondary school Cells, their structure and organelles (nucleus, ribosome)

Science
5th, 6th, 7th and 8th grades Digestive system (chemical digestion, digestion of proteins)
DNA and genetic code (from chromosomes to nucleotides, DNA’s matching itself)
High school Biology Basic components of living organisms (proteins, enzymes, nucleic acids)
9th,11th, 12th grades
Digestive system (chemical digestion of food, digestion of proteins)
From genes to proteins (discovery and importance of nucleic acids: genetic code, protein
synthesis and associations between them)
The fact that there are almost no studies exhibiting prospective teachers’ cognitive structures about protein
synthesis by means of flow maps and that this research analyses the degree to which students understand the
20
ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS’ COGNITIVE STRUCTURES CONCERNING PROTEIN SYNTHESIS AND
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 19-30)
subject of protein synthesis as well as their misconceptions indicates the significance of this research. Besides,
it is also believed that determining prospective teachers’ cognitive structures about protein synthesis with flow
maps, and analysing the statements on the maps one by one in terms of the degree of understanding them will
contribute significantly to the literature. In addition to that, this research also contains important results to show
the scope and richness of prospective teachers’ cognitive structures.
Problem of the Research
Protein synthesis is difficult to learn meaningfully because it is connected with several subjects. It was found
in evaluations that prospective teachers had problems in understanding protein synthesis. Thus, it is important to
demonstrate prospective teachers’ cognitive structure about protein synthesis-which is a complex subject- and
the degree to which they understand it. This research aims to analyse prospective biology teachers’ degree of
understanding protein synthesis and their cognitive structures about protein synthesis. For this purpose, the fol-
lowing questions were formulated:
1. What is prospective biology teachers’ degree of understanding the subject of protein synthesis accord-
ing to Marek’s (1986) classification?
2. What are prospective teachers’ cognitive structure outcomes through flow maps in relation to protein
synthesis?
Methodology of Research
This is a qualitative research aiming to analyse prospective teachers’ cognitive structure about protein synthesis
and the degree to which they understand the subject. In line with this purpose, case study was employed -one of
the types of qualitative research. Case study is a specific research design in which a phenomenon or an event is
studied in depth based on the reasons for the details (Yin, 1984). This research was conducted with the third-year
students at Hacettepe University in the Fall Semester of 2016-2017 academic year. Flow maps and content analysis
were used in the analysis of semi-structured interviews which were conducted so as to exhibit prospective teachers’
cognitive structure about protein synthesis and the degree to which they understand the subject in accordance
with the purpose of the research.
Sample of Research
The research group was composed of 17 prospective biology teachers who had taken General Biology and Ge-
netics courses. Every year, 20 students from various high schools are accepted into the Biology Education programme
according to the results of the transition to higher education examination. Four of the participants were male while
13 of them were female students- who were in the 20-22 age range. Purposeful sampling method was employed
in forming the research group. Purposeful sampling method is a method which enables one to explain better the
problems focussed in cases where there is a demand to research the problems in depth (Şimşek & Yıldırım, 2013).
All of the participants had taken General Biology and Genetics courses. Almost 22 students take these courses
every semester. Because the aim is to demonstrate cognitive structures in detail, the research group was restricted
to 17 prospective teachers. It may be said that this number is representative of the number of students in the
classroom. The research group was formed on the basis of volunteering inclusion.
Description of Course Content
Students learn protein synthesis under such subjects as Proteins, Genetic Code, Cells and Nucleic Acids in Sci-
ence and Biology courses at secondary school and high school. In addition to that, prospective biology teachers are
offered knowledge about protein synthesis in more details through such courses as General Biology and Genetics.
General Biology course is offered in two semesters in their first year and it is offered only in the fall semester in the
third year. No lab applications are available in neither of these courses in relation to protein synthesis. Teacher-
centred instruction, question and answer, and demonstration techniques are available in both courses.
21
(P. 19-30) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Data Collection Tools

1. Semi-structured interviews
Interview questions were prepared based on various course books of General Biology (Keeton, Gould &
Gould, 1993; Reece, Urry, Cain, Wasserman, Minorsky & Jackson, 2011) and Genetics (Fletcher & Hickey, 2012; Klug,
Cummings & Spencer, 2006) since the aim was to analyse prospective teachers’ cognitive structures about protein
synthesis. By considering the observations made, insufficient knowledge in protein synthesis and the learning dif-
ficulties; the ones suiting to the purpose of the research were chosen. Then, a time table was prepared for interviews
with the research group and then semi-structured interviews were conducted with the participants. In order to
avoid loss of data, the interviews were audio recorded. Interviewing is a method used both in assessing whether
concepts are understood (Gilbert & Watts, 1983; Vance, Miller & Hand, 1995) and in identifying misconceptions
(Osborne & Gilbert, 1980; Tsai & Huang, 2002).
2. Flow map
The prospective teachers participating in the research were asked the following questions in relation to
protein synthesis:
1. What is protein synthesis? Why does a cell perform protein synthesis? What can you say about this?
2. How is protein synthesised in a eukaryotic cell? What can you say about the process of synthesis?
Interviews in which the abovementioned questions were asked lasted for approximately 5 minutes. The data
coming from the interviews were then transcribed, and a flow map was prepared for each prospective teacher.
While the sequential flow of prospective biology teachers’ views about the subject are represented in linear ar-
rows, connections between the ideas are shown in recurred arrows. The recurred arrows were used for the views
prospective teachers stated before. Misconceptions informing us of the accuracy of the cognitive structure are
also shown in flow maps.
Ethics, Validity and Reliability Analyses
Because the concept of ethics is important in studies, prospective teachers were offered information on this
issue prior to the research. The voluntary participants were assured that they could give up being a participant
whenever they wished. It was also pointed out to them that the results to be obtained would be used for scientific
purposes and that their names would be kept confidential.
Required validity and reliability analyses were also conducted and member checking was obtained for internal
validity (Şimşek & Yıldırım, 2013). External validity was increased by explaining each stage of the research in details.
Great care was taken to determine the participants and the environment in which the research was conducted, to
collect the data required and to do the analyses in increasing external reliability.
A second independent researcher was used for the reliability of the flow maps. The second researcher changed
prospective teachers’ narrations into diagrams. Intercoder agreement for sequential statements was found to be
.88, whereas it was found to be 0.85 for recurrent linkages in this research.
Data Analysis
Quantitative variables determined by Tsai (2001) were used for flow maps in representing each prospective
biology teacher’s cognitive structure. The qualitative variables used for data analysis are shown below.
•• Extent: Extent is the quantitative variable represented as the total number of ideas (the number of
linear linkages) in the flow maps.
•• Misconception: It is represented as the number of misconceptions in the flow maps.
•• Richness (recurrent linkages): Richness is represented as the number of recurrent linkages in the flow
maps.
•• Integration: The number of recurrent linkages in the flow maps/ (total number of ideas + the number
of recurrent linkages) were calculated as integration (Tsai, 2001).
Secondly, the linkages in the flow maps were analysed according to degree of understanding based on Marek’s
(1986) classification. The classification was made as in the following:
22
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 19-30)
•• No Response (NR): The subject is unknown to the students, explanation is not comprehensible.
•• Specific Misunderstanding (SM): Explanation has illogical, irrelevant and incorrect information.
•• Partial Understanding (PU): Explanation is correct but inadequate.
•• Sound Understanding (SU): Correct and complete explanation (Marek, 1986).
Results of Research
Prospective teachers’ degree of understanding the subject of protein synthesis was determined with the first
research problem. Figure 1 shows the results.
Figure 1: Prospective teachers’ degree of understanding protein synthesis.
It is clear from Figure 1, prospective teachers’ degree of understanding the subject of protein synthesis is
clustered in 3 (NR, SM and PU) out of 4 categories. Accordingly, 56 (46%) statements are in the category of NR,
53 (44%) are in the category of SM, and 12 (10%) are in the category of PU. Thus, there are no statements in the
category of SU.
Prospective teachers were asked two questions during the semi-structured interviews in accordance with the
first research problem so as to determine their degree of understanding. On analysing the prospective teachers’
degree of understanding on the basis of the first research question having two parts formulated as “What is protein
synthesis? Why does a cell perform protein synthesis?” the answers were found to cluster in the categories of NR,
SM and PU. Accordingly, the participants gave the following answers in the category of NR:
•• Protein synthesis is performed in order to transfer the information in DNA and to regulate the hormones.
It is important for life.
•• I can say that protein synthesis means amino acids coming together and forming a polymer structure.
•• Protein synthesis is done to meet the needs of living things.
23
(P. 19-30) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
•• I think that living things have to perform protein synthesis because proteins are the building blocks.
Living things need energy.
•• The following responses were in the category of SM:
•• Firstly, DNA replicates itself in the cytoplasm in a cell.
•• Protein synthesis is composed of DNA.
•• The necessary energy in a cell and it does that for ATP, and protein is synthesised.
•• When someone says protein synthesis, recombinant DNA is formed in my mind.
•• When someone says protein synthesis, ribosome comes into my mind and then protein comes into my
mind. In other words, protein synthesis is performed in order to meet the protein needs of our body.
•• The following responses were in the category of PU:
•• Protein synthesis occurs when DNA replicates itself, and then RNA is formed (transcription), and transla-
tion and protein are formed. It performs protein synthesis to synthesise the proteins necessary for our
body and to meet the structural and enzymatic needs of a cell.
•• DNA synchronizes itself and thus protein synthesis occurs. First transcription occurs and then rRNA
occurs for this. Then, translation occurs, and protein synthesis occurs. As a result, it is a vital process
with multiple functions.
•• For example, enzymes are also proteins and we need proteins to be able to regulate life functions. Our
cells need proteins (for building blocks). Therefore, proteins are created.
•• Protein synthesis is an important and necessary activity in order for living organisms to sustain vital
activities.
It was also found that the participants’ answers to the second research question “How is protein synthesised
in a eukaryotic cell? What can you say about the process of synthesis?” clustered in the categories of NR, SM and
PU. Accordingly, the following answers were in the category of NR:
•• If I am not mistaken, it is synthesised from 5’ to 3’ or from 3’ to 5’.
•• Translation occurs in the chloroplast. I confuse it. If I can remember correctly, it is in stomas, mitochon-
drion is in the matrix, in the ribosomes, in the chloroplast stoma.
•• There is something called DNA sequencing. Primase enzyme has a duty there.
•• Such as, ribosomes are created in ribosomal RNA.
•• It happens at the top and bottom of ribosomes; I cannot remember it very well.
•• I cannot remember it very well, was it transcription?
•• Some of the proteins in the cytoplasm come into the nucleus. And was it rDNA? It combines with pro-
teins there and the sub-units of ribosome are formed in the nucleus. Then they pass into cytoplasm.
•• There is an enzyme. I cannot remember its name now. I know it, but I cannot say it now exactly.
•• As far as I know, this reading action called translation occurs in ribosomes – if I do not confuse it with
something else.
•• I might have forgotten, or I may confuse it with something else.
•• When I mix it up, I cannot remember what replication is.
•• I do not know the process exactly.
The following answers were in the category of SM:
•• It starts in the DNA. It comes to RNA. RNA is called transcription, and performing protein synthesis from
RNA is called translation.
•• Helicase enzymes cause replication fork to loosen.
•• Topoisomerase enzymes first straighten the spiral thing of DNA. Then, primase DNA works, and it
enables DNA to read RNA.
•• The reason for recombinant DNA is formed is that we have a genetic structure. It is shaped in a certain
way thanks to codes and codons in the DNA chain.
•• First proteins such as helicase work in the DNA.
•• There are more curls in the other branch of the DNA spiral. Topoisomerase protein works to eliminate
this. This enzyme breaks the spiral, rotates it and loosens it, and then it ties it again.
•• Replicated DNA pieces go through transcription and turn into RNA.
•• Translation is the transfer of information in mRNA into tRNA.
•• Replication is the synchronisation of a cell.
24
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 19-30)
•• Transcription occurs with rRNA in the process of protein synthesis. Apart from that, other RNAs also
work but rRNA is used most in protein synthesis.
•• Replication occurs thanks to certain hormones.
The following answers to the second question were in the category of PU:
•• It is the structure making it possible to carry amino acids here while mRNA is read on the tRNA ribosome.
•• mRNA information is brought to ribosome and polypeptides are formed after replication occurs.
Figure 2: Prospective teachers’ cognitive structure outcomes.
Prospective teachers’ cognitive structures and the outcomes for the structures were analysed in the flow
maps technique in accordance with the second research question. Flow maps were prepared for each of the 17
prospective teachers included in the research. The most and least detailed ones of the flow maps are shown in the
Appendix. (see the Appendix). Figure 2 shows the outcomes for prospective teachers’ cognitive structures. Accord-
ingly, the extent of prospective teachers’ knowledge of protein synthesis (sequential linkages) is between 4 and
13. The number of misconceptions is 6 at the maximum, and richness variable is between 1 and 7. The integration
variable is between 0.12 and 0.37.
Discussion
Prospective teachers’ degree of understanding and the sample statements for the degree were obtained
based on the first research problem. It was found according to the participants’ answers to the two questions that
their degree of understanding fell into the categories of NR, SM and PU from the most to the least. Thus, the fact
that the prospective teachers explained protein synthesis in such responses as “transferring the information in
25
(P. 19-30) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
the DNA”, “meeting the needs”, “generating energy”, “I am confusing”, “I cannot remember”, “if I am not mistaken”,
“I cannot say exactly” (in the category of NR) indicated that they had not understood the subject. Francis (1994)
points out that proteins have enzymatic, structural and very complex roles in cells and organisms and that it
was difficult to learn them. Lazarowitz and Penso (1992) describe the subjects which are difficult for teachers
to teach and for students to learn. The researchers – who include protein synthesis, the structure and functions
of enzymes in the list of difficult subjects- state that there are basically two reasons for why those subjects
are difficult. First, integrity cannot be attained at the level of biological organisation, and the second reason is
that some of the subjects are abstract. A review of the biology curriculum makes it clear that some preliminary
knowledge on cells, proteins and DNA is offered at secondary school and high school (MONE, 2013a; 2013b).
The fact that the prospective teachers could not answer the questions with self-confidence may be attributed
to the fact that they could not understand or that they inadequately understood the subject.
The prospective teachers gave such responses as “for proteins, energy and ATP”, “protein synthesis occurring
from RNA is called translation”, “loosening of the fork (branches of DNA)”, “topoisomerase enzyme straightens the
branches of DNA”, “ firstly proteins such as helicase work in DNA (in replication)”, “transfer of the information in
mRNA into tRNA”, “replication is the synchronisation of a cell”, “replication happens thanks to certain hormones”,
“ the reason for recombinant DNA formation”, and “topoisomerase protein works” in the category of SM. Studies
available also demonstrate that there are misconceptions about genetics (Cavello & Schafer, 1994; Fisher, 1985;
Kargbo, Hobbs & Erickson, 1980). Dreyfus and Jungwirth (1988) state that misconceptions in the field of biology
are mostly in such abstract subjects as cells.
The students stated that they could not eliminate their misconception even after they had taken a biology
course, and that it was mainly because their misconceptions were too strong to change (Brumby, 1984; Marek,
Cowan & Cavallo, 1994; Westbrook & Marek, 1991). Such misconceptions were found in all age groups at the levels
of primary school, secondary school, high school and university (Flories, 2003; Gelbart & Yarden, 2006; Kellert
1985, Özcan, 2013; Trowbridge & Mintzes, 1988; Yip, 1998). Protein synthesis is connected with many concepts
and topics. For instance, if the fact that replication is not necessary for protein synthesis is not emphasised; the
subject is confused with segmentation and it may result in misconceptions. It may be said that misconceptions
stem from languages. For example, prospective teachers were found to confuse such concepts as polymer, pri-
mary and polypeptide. Results demonstrate that prospective teachers confuse different topics (segmentation,
hormones, protein synthesis, biotechnology) and that they had difficulty in setting up horizontal and vertical
associations between them. Additionally, it was also found that prospective teachers tried to explain their
answers to questions with knowledge fragments (such as generating energy, segmentation, hormones, recom-
binant, DNA) they remember from their past experiences. That is to say they made explanations by setting up
connections between knowledge fragments that they thought to be related with protein synthesis.
The participants gave such responses as “protein synthesis is DNA’s replication”, “transcription and translation
stages (formation of RNA)” and “protein synthesis is performed to meet the vital needs of a living organism and
the structural needs and enzymatic needs of a cell” in the category of PU. Complex, abstract and disorganised
knowledge causes students’ failure to configure knowledge or to configure it inadequately (Bischoff & Anderson,
2001; Fisher, 1985). Results show that some of the prospective teachers have little knowledge about the issue
but that their knowledge is inadequate and lacking. Especially the fact that the answers to the questions were
superficial and that they contained only basic concepts (such as replication, transcription, RNA) is supportive
of this view.
In connection with the second research problem, prospective teachers’ degree of understanding protein
synthesis and their cognitive structures were analysed in the technique of flow maps. For this purpose, flow
maps were prepared for each participant and analyses were done. Four extent variables, misconceptions, rich-
ness and integration suggested by Tsai (2001) were taken into consideration in preparing the flow maps. It was
found that prospective teachers had 6 misconceptions at the maximum in terms of protein synthesis, that the
quantitative variable of knowledge extent was between 4 and 13, that the variable of richness was between
1 and 7, and that the variable of integration was between 0.12 and 0.37. These results show that prospective
teachers have plenty of misconceptions about protein synthesis and that their knowledge extent and rich con-
nection are inadequate. The fact that the subject of protein synthesis is at microscopic level and that there are
too many concepts and related subjects might have caused the students to have difficulty in learning and to
memorise. This in turn might have resulted in misconceptions. Chi (2001) lists the causes of misconceptions as
26
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 19-30)
lacking or incorrect prior knowledge and as unsuitable educational setting in the teaching of concepts. The
flow maps showing the broadest and the narrowest cognitive structures in terms of extent are included in the
Appendix (see Figure 1).
Conclusions
The results obtained in this research showed that prospective teachers included in the research had not under-
stood the subject of protein synthesis and that they had misconceptions about the subject. Thus, teachers should
be careful in teaching protein synthesis. Students’ prior knowledge about protein synthesis and relevant topics at
the level of high school and their misconceptions should be determined. Students should be offered content and
contexts in relation to protein synthesis- which is an abstract subject- to facilitate meaningful learning. Students’
attention should be called to relevant concepts and the connections between the concepts. Advance organisers
such as concept maps in addition to such methods as semantic networks, semantic feature analysis and conceptual
change texts should be used so that students can form contexts/connections between concepts. In this way, richer
integrated conceptual frameworks can be developed. This will help students to understand the relevant scientific
knowledge and to develop complex organised knowledge.
This research is restricted to interviews with prospective teachers and to flow map method. Further applied
research should be done by using different methods and techniques with different age groups so as to obtain
detailed information on the issue.
References
Abraham, M. R., Gryzybowski, E. B., Renner, J. W., & Marek, A. E. (1992). Understanding and misunderstanding of eighth
graders of five chemistry concepts found in textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29 (2), 105-120.
Acar, B., & Tarhan, L. (2008). Effects of cooperative learning on students’ understanding of metallic bonding. Research in
Science Education, 38, 401–420.
Anderson, O. R. (1992). Some interrelationships between constructivist models of learning and current neurobiological
theory, with implications for science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 1037- 1058.
Anderson, O. R., & Demetrius. O. J. (1993). A flow-map method of representing cognitive structure based on respondents’
narrative using science content. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30 (8), 953-969.
Aufschnaiter, C., & Aufschnaiter, S. (2003). Theoretical framework and empirical evidence of students’ cognitive processes
in three dimensions of content, complexity, and time. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40 (7), 616-648.
Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Bahar, M. (2003). Misconceptions in biology education and conceptual change strategies. Educational Sciences: Theory &
Practice, 3 (1), 55-64.
Bischoff, P. J., & Anderson, O. R. (1998). A case study analysis of the development of knowledge schema, ideational networks,
and higher cognitive operations among high school students who studied ecology. School Science and Mathematics,
54, 228–237.
Bischoff, P. J., & Anderson, O. R. (2001). Development of knowledge frameworks and higher order cognitive operations
among secondary school students who studied a unit on ecology. Journal of Biological Education, 35 (2), 81-88.
Brumby, M., (1984). Misconceptions about the concept of natural selection. Science Education, 68 (4), 493-503. doi:10.1002/
sce.3730680412.
Cavello, A. M. L., & Schafer, L. E. (1994). Relationship between student’s meaningful learning orientation and their under-
standing of genetic topics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 393-418.
Chi, M. (2001, April 10–14). Why do students fail to understand complex dynamic concepts? Paper delivered to American
Education Research Association, Seattle.
Colley, K. E. (2006). Understanding ecology content knowledge and acquiring science process skills through project-based
science instruction. Science Activities: Classroom Projects and Curriculum Ideas, 43 (1), 26–33.
Cremer, M., Dingshoff, D., de Beer, M., & Schoonen, R. (2011). Do word associations assess word knowledge? A comparison
of L1 and L2, child and adult word associations. International Journal of Bilingualism, 15 (2), 187–204.
Daskolia, M., Dimos, A., & Kampylis, P. G. (2012). Secondary teachers’ conceptions of creative thinking within the context
of environmental education. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 7 (2), 269–290.
Dawson, V. (2007). An exploration of high school (12-17 year old) students’ understanding of and attitudes towards bio-
technology processes. Research in Science Education, 37 (1), 59-73.
Dreyfus, A., & Jungwirth, E., (1988). The cell concept of 10th graders: curricular expectations and reality. International
Journal of Science Education, 10, 221-229.
27
(P. 19-30) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Eylon, B., & Linn, M. C. (1988). Learning and instruction: An examination of four research perspectives in science education.
Rewiev of Educational Research, 58 (3), 251-301.
Fisher, K. (1985). A misconception in biology: Amino acids and translation. Journal of Biology Education, 22, 53-62.
Fletcher, H., & Hickey, I. (2012). Bios instant notes in genetics, (4th Ed.). London, UK: Taylor & Francis.
Francis, J.W., & Sellers, J.A. (1994). Studying amino acid sequence using word processing programs. American Biology
Teacher, 56 (8), 484-87.
Gelbart, H., & Yarden, A. (2006). Learning genetics through an authentic research simulation in bioinformatics. Journal of
Biological Education, 40 (3), 107-111.
Gilbert, J.K., & Watts, D.M. (1983). Concepts, misconceptions and alternative conceptions: Changing perspectives in science
education. Studies in Science Education, 10, 61-98.
Flories, F. (2003). Representation of cell and its processes in high school students: an integrated view. International Journal
of Science Education, 25 (2), 269-286.
Hovardas, T., & Korfiatis, K. J. (2006). Word associations as a tool for assessing conceptual change in science education.
Learning and Instruction, 16, 416-432.
Lazarowitz, R., & Penso, S. (1992). High school student’s difficulties in learning biology concepts. Journal of Biological
Education, 26 (3), 215-223.
Lazarowitz, R., & Naim, R. (2013). Learning the cell structures with three-dimensional models, students’ achievement by
methods, type of school and questions’ cognitive level. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22 (4), 500-508.
Kargbo, D. B., Hobbs, E. D. & Erickson, G. L. (1980). Children’ s beliefs about inherited characteristics. Journal of Biological
Education, 14, 137-146.
Keeton, W. T., Gould, J. L., & Gould, C. G. (1993). Biological Science, (5th Ed.). New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company Inc.
Kinchin, I. M. (2001). If concept mapping is so helpful to learning biology, why aren’t we all doing it? International Journal
of Science Education, 23 (12), 1257-1269. doi: 10.1080/09500690010025058.
Kinchin, I. M. (2011). Visualising knowledge structures in biology: Discipline, curriculum and student understanding. Journal
of Biological Education, 45 (4), 183–189.
Klug, W. S., Cummings, M. R., & Spencer, C. A. (2006). Concepts of genetics, (8th Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Kostova Z., & Radoynovska B. (2010). Motivating students’ learning using word association test and concept maps. Bulgar-
ian Journal of Science and Education Policy, 4 (1), 62-98.
Marek, E. A., Cowan, C. C., & Cavallio, A. M. L. (1994). Students’ misconceptions about diffusion: How can they be eliminated.
The American Biology Teacher, 56, 74-77.
Marek, E. A. (1986). Understandings and misunderstandings of biological concepts. The American Biology Teacher, 48, 37-40.
Ministry of National Education of Turkey [MONE] (2013a). Fen Bilimleri Dersi (3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ve 8. Sınıflar) Öğretim Programı
[Elementary School Science Curriculum (Grades 3th–8th)]. Retrieved from http://ttkb.meb.gov.tr/program2.aspx.
Ministry of National Education of Turkey [MONE] (2013b). Biyoloji Dersi (9, 10, 11 ve 12. Sınıflar) Öğretim Programı [Second-
ary Education, Curriculum of Biology Course (Grades 9th-12th)]. Retrieved from http://ttkb.meb.gov.tr/program2.aspx.
Novak, J. D. (1990). Concept mapping: A useful tool for science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27 (10),
937-949.
Olitsky, S., & Milne C. (2012). Understanding engagement in science education: The Psychological and the Social. In Fraser
B. J., Tobin K. G., & McRobbie, C. J. (Eds.). Second international handbook of science education (pp. 19-20). Dordrecht,
The Netherlands: Springer.
Osborne, R. J., & Gilbert J. K. (1980). A technique for exploring students’ views of the world. Physics Education, 15, 376-379.
Özcan, Ö. (2013). Investigation of mental models of Turkish pre-service physics students for the concept of “spin”. Eurasian
Journal of Educational Research, 52, 21-36.
Pines, A. L., & West, L. H. T. (1986). Conceptual understanding and science learning: a sources of knowledge framework.
Science Education, 70, 583- 604.
Reece, J. B., Urry, L. A., Cain, M. L., Wasserman, S. A., Minorsky, P. V. & Jackson, R. B. (2011). Campbell biology, (9th Ed.). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Sadler, P. M., Coyle, H., Cook Smith, N., Miller, J., Mintzes, J., Tanner, K. & Murray, J. (2013). Assessing the life science knowledge
of students and teachers represented by the k–8 national science standards. CBE Life Sciences Education, 12, 553–575.
Snow, R. E. (1989). Toward assessment of cognitive and conative structures in learning. Educational Research, 18 (9), 8-14.
Stewart, J., Hafner, B., & Dala, M. (1990). High school students understanding of chromosome /gene behavior during
meiosis. Science Education, 73, 501-521.
Şimşek, H., & Yıldırım, A. (2013). Soysal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in social sciences].
Ankara, Turkey: Seckin.
Taber, K. S. (2000), Multiple frameworks? Evidence of manifold conceptions in individual cognitive structure. International
Journal of Science Education, 22 (4), 399–417.
Temel, S., & Özcan, Ö. (2016). The analysis of prospective chemistry teachers’ cognitive structure: The subject of cova-
lent and ionic. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12 (8), 1953-1969. doi: 10.12973 /
eurasia.2016.1273a.
28
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 19-30)
Treagust, D. F. (1988). Development and use of diagnostic tests to evaluate students’ misconceptions in science. Interna-
tional Journal of Science Education, 10, 159-169.
Trowbridge, J. E., & Mintzes, J. (1988). Alternative conceptions in animal classification: a croo-age study. Journal of Research
in Science Teaching, 25, 547-571.
Tsai, C. C., (2000). The effects of STS-oriented instruction on female tenth graders’ cognitive structure outcomes and the
role of student scientific epistemological beliefs. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 1099–1115.
Tsai, C. C., & Huang, C. M. (2001). Development of cognitive structures and information processing strategies of elementary
school students learning about biological reproduction. Journal of Biological Education, 36, 21–26.
Tsai, C. C. (2001). Probing students’ cognitive structures in science: the use of a flow map method coupled with a meta-
listening technique. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 27, 257-268.
Tsai, C. C., & Huang, C. M. (2002). Exploring students’ cognitive structure in learning science: a review of relevant methods.
Journal of Biological Education, 36, 163-169.
Vance, K., Miller, K., & Hand, B. (1995). Two examples of using constructivist approaches to teach ecology at the middle
school level. The American Biology Teacher, 37 (4), 244-249.
Waheed, T., & Lucas, A. M., (1992). Understanding interrelated topics: photosynthesis at age 14+n. Journal of Biological
Education. 26 (3), 193-199.
Westbrook, S. L., & Marek, E. A. (1991). A cross-age study of student understanding of the concept of diffusion. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 28, 649-660.
Wilson, C. D., Anderson, C. W., Heidemann, M., Merrill, J. E., Merritt, B. W., Richmond, G. (2006). Assessing students’ ability
to trace matter in dynamic systems in cell biology. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 5 (4), 323–331.
Wu, Y. T., & Tsai, C. C. (2005). Effects of constructivist oriented instruction on elementary school students’ cognitive struc-
tures. Journal of Biological Education, 39 (3), 113-119.
Yin, R. K. (1984). Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Yip, D.Y. (1998). Teachers’ misconceptions of the circulatory system. Journal of Biological Education, 32 (3), 207-215.
APPENDIX 1. The flow map of PT11
29
(P. 19-30) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
APPENDIX 2. The flow map of PT17
Received: September 08, 2017 Accepted: January 10, 2018
Cem Gerçek PhD, Associate Professor, Hacettepe University, Faculty of

Education, Department of Mathematics and Science Education,
06800, Beytepe, Ankara, Turkey.
E-mail: cgercek@hacettepe.edu.tr
30
INTEREST OF LATVIAN AND
LITHUANIAN STUDENTS IN
SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS ISSN 1648-3898 /Print/
Abstract. Interest is one of the most impor-

Dagnija Cēdere, tant components for a successful teaching/
Inese Jurgena, learning process; unfortunately, nowadays
Vilija Targamadze students’ interest in science and mathemat-
ics is decreasing. The aim of the research is
to explore the cognitive interest of 15-year-
old students in science and mathematics.
Students in Latvia and Lithuania partici-
pated in the survey; the data show that
students’ cognitive interest in this area
in both countries is mediocre. The factor
Introduction analysis was used to single out four main
dimensions of the cognitive interest – inter-
The science and technology education is closely connected with the est in the context, interest in mathematics,
society’s development; however, many international and national studies inquiry interest and enthusiasm. Students’
reveal the contradiction between the increasing societal needs and the interest is higher in issues connected with
insufficient level of young people’s education in this field (Birzina, Cedere, practical life, the solution of real problems,
2017; OECD, 2016). but much lower if the problem to be solved
Interest is one of the components of intrinsic motivation and one of the needs effort, if they have to use mathemati-
reasons why students may enjoy learning. What distinguishes it from other
cal tools. Enthusiasm is not characteristic
sources of enjoyment is that interest is always directed towards an object,
for students. Only few respondents are will-
activity, a field of knowledge or goal (OECD, 2016). Interest is a strong mo-
ing to engage in science and mathematics
tivator, the emotional stress which helps indirectly the memory processes
and makes the learning considerably easier. Interest is caused both by what in their leisure time. Latvian and Lithuanian
has been recognized in the experience and the new, what does not yet exist students show slight differences in their
in the newly developed experience. Thus, the source of interest is both the interests. There are more Lithuanian stu-
surrounding environment and the learner’s own experience (Žogla, 2001, p. dents, who like mathematics and who are
179). Student’s interest in learning or the cognitive interest is one of the most not afraid of difficulties. Latvian students, in
important creators of the learning motivation that influences students’ en- their turn, show greater enthusiasm.
gagement and achievement in learning (Schiefele, 1991). Interest-triggered Keywords: cognitive interest, science and
learning activities lead to a higher degree of deep learning (Krapp, Prenzel, mathematics, teaching/learning process.
2011; Osborne, Simon, & Collins, 2003; Uitto, Juuti, Lavonen, & Meisalo, 2008).
The cognitive interest plays a key role in influencing the students’ learning
behaviour and their intention to participate in building their future. It is
Dagnija Cēdere, Inese Jurgena
characterized by their learning motive (why students learn) and the teach- University of Latvia, Latvia
ing/learning strategy (how they learn). It represents a specific relationship Vilija Targamadze
between the developing personality and some content of his/her life-space Vilnius University, Lithuania
(Aikenhead, 2005).
31
(P. 31-42)
Problem of Research
The degree to which students’ interest in science and mathematics has been roused at school exerts the
most direct impact on their further studies in the higher education institution. Despite the teachers’ attempts to
increase the young people’s interest, the science and technology studies, unfortunately, lack the popularity (Birzina
& Cedere, 2017; Osborne, Simon, & Collins, 2003).
The lack of interest in science is an old issue and it still exists (Cedere, Gedrovics, Bilek, & Mozeika, 2014; Potvin &
Hasni, 2014). As mentioned by J. Osborne (2014), science education often fails to attain the intended goals because
students lack interest in the science subjects. The interest in mathematics has been comparatively less studied;
however, the close connection between the science teaching/learning process and mathematics indicates a similar
trend, which is proved also by PISA (The Programme for International Student Assessment) studies (PISA, 2015).
The research findings emphasize that the formation of interest is a complex process; it can change depend-
ing on students’ age and the teaching/learning environment. Usually the interest in basic school is higher and it
gradually decreases in the secondary school. Although the cognitive interest is one of the most significant learn-
ing incentives, the relation between the student’s cognitive interest and the learning progress cannot be valued
unambiguously (Osborne 2014; Krapp & Prenzel, 2011).
Research Focus
Nowadays the strategy of science and mathematics education envisages a close unity between the theory
and practice, trying to ensure students’ active and meaningful participation in the teaching/learning process. The
conceptual solutions meant for improving the quality of education are mainly grounded on the context-based
learning (Broman, Bernholt, & Parchmann, 2015), the inquiry-based learning approach (Graeber, 2012), argumen-
tation and decision-making skills (Osborne, 2014; Mörk, 2005). If sciences are taught so that students understand
the immediate connection of knowledge with the real life situations in which they are personally interested, then
there is a hope that their interest in sciences will remain stable or even will increase (Pilot, Taconis, & den Brok,
2016). The teaching/learning strategies in mathematics have a similar orientation (France, 2010).
The concept of interest is used in different ways in the literature on science education. The concepts of situ-
ational interest and individual interest (stable interest), which are frequently used in pedagogical studies (Krapp &
Prenzel, 2011; Elster, 2007) are used to assess the depth and stability of the interest. Besides, in science interest is
treated in accordance with the guidelines and aim of the learning process. A model to explore the students’ interests
in physics is developed according to this principle (Haeussler & Hoffmann, 2000). This model distinguishes three
dimensions of the interest: 1) interest in the concrete topic of physics (content); 2) interest in the concrete context
in which the topic of physics is presented; and 3) interest in the concrete activity in which the student can engage
in relation to this topic. The bi-dimensional interest model, which singles out two areas of interest – interest in the
content and interest in the context (Elster, 2007), is also used in science.
Students’ learning activity and learning motivation has become the determinative guiding motive in educa-
tion in Latvia and Lithuania during the last 15 years. The main school subjects of the STEM area that the 15-year
old students of Latvia and Lithuania acquire are the science subjects – biology, chemistry and physics as well as
mathematics.
Seeing the essence and values of science subjects and mathematics for the future life promotes the context-
based and inquiry-based approach in learning. Both approaches help students to gain a deeper and broader
understanding about what we know and how we know it. The inquiry-based learning provides a more authentic
idea about what sciences are and how they function (Kalnina, 2008; Lamanauskas, 2012).
However, the research shows that students not always achieve the desired outcome in the science subjects
and mathematics. It was found out in the comparative research of Latvian and Lithuanian students that was per-
formed more than ten years ago (Lamanauskas, Gedrovics, & Raipulis, 2004) that students’ science knowledge in
the countries worsened. The youth perceive nature mainly in a utilitarian way giving preference to such science
issues that demand less effort. Students’ activities in nature are mainly connected with recreation, including sports,
fishing, hiking but students’ various observations in nature are less popular. According to OECD PISA 2015 data in
Latvia and Lithuania in comparison with mean indicator of the OECD participant countries, there is approximately a
twice smaller number of those students whose achievement corresponds to a high achievement level (PISA 2015).
Another study performed at the same time in Latvia obtained a similar result in relation to the cognitive interest,
32
ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ INTEREST OF LATVIAN AND LITHUANIAN STUDENTS IN SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS
(P. 31-42)
namely, only the fifth part of Grade 9 (15-years old) students showed a high level of cognitive interest in science
subjects and mathematics (Cedere, Jurgena, Helmane, Tiltiņa-Kapele, & Praulīte, 2015). These facts indicate that
achievement in learning is closely connected with the cognitive interest.
Our intention in this research was to find out how 15-year old students in Latvia and Lithuania evaluate their
interest in science. As the education strategies regarding the science subjects in the countries actually do not dif-
fer (Science Education in Europe, 2011), the results are comparable. Additionally, the authors wanted to single out
the main fields of interest in order to gain a better understanding about the mutual correspondence between the
teaching/learning process and students’ interests.
The following research questions were put forward:
•• Do 15-year-old students learn science subjects (biology, chemistry, and physics) and mathematics with
interest in Latvia and Lithuania?
•• Which are the main features that characterize students’ cognitive interest about science subjects and
mathematics?
•• Is there a difference between the 15-year-old students’ cognitive interest in science and mathematics
in Latvia and Lithuania?
General Characteristics
This research was carried out in the period from 2015 to 2017 in Latvia (LV) and Lithuania (LT). A students’
survey that describes their cognitive interest in science and mathematics was used in the research. Students par-
ticipated in the survey based on volunteering principle. Data were collected from different basic and secondary
schools in different regions of Latvia and Lithuania.
The key guidelines of science (biology, chemistry and physics) and mathematics education and strategies for
solving the problems do not differ significantly in Latvia and Lithuania (Mathematics Education in Europe, 2011;
Science Education in Europe, 2011). Mathematics in both countries as a separate subject is taught already from
Grade 1 (4-6 lessons a week), biology, chemistry and physics as separate subjects – from Grade 7 or 8 (each subject
is taught 2 lessons a week). These subjects as compulsory are included in the national curricula of both countries
(BUP 2015 2017 keitimas; Izvērsta informācija par izglītības programmām).
Sample
The total number of students involved in the research was 990, of them – 536 (54%) were from Latvia and 454
(46%) from Lithuania. Students of the same age from both countries who learn in Grade 9 in both countries) or
the first year at the gymnasium (only in Lithuania) participated in the survey. The average age of the respondents
was 15.1 years (SD = 0.59). The distribution of respondents by gender – 572 (58%) girls and 418 (42%) boys. The
distribution per country - distribution by gender in Latvia – 328 (61%) girls and 208 (39%) boys; in Lithuania – 244
(54%) girls and 210 (46%) boys.
Instrument and Procedures
The survey used the questionnaire which included questions, how students evaluate their cognitive interest
in science and mathematics (Part A, 14 items), which the main themes of interest are (Part B, 16 items) and what
is the attitude to science and mathematics lessons (Part C, 4 items). Content-wise the questionnaire corresponds
to the skills and attitudes that are mastered at school in biology, chemistry, physics and mathematics. The survey
focussed on students’ awareness of the importance of knowledge and skills in science and mathematics in the real
life and their readiness to act. The questionnaire comprised questions where the answer options corresponded to
the four-value Likert scale: 1 – no, 4 – yes (Schreiner, Sjøberg, 2004).
The questionnaire that had been applied previously in the research of the cognitive interest of a small students’
sample in Latvia (Cedere, Jurgena, Helmane, Tiltiņa-Kapele, & Praulīte, 2015). The participation of the students from
two neighbouring countries has broadened the range of respondents in this research. It opens the possibility
for a more profound study of the students’ cognitive interest gaining more general and substantiated indicators
33
(P. 31-42)
showing the tendency of the cognitive interest. The questionnaire was prepared on the internet using the Google
disc; students answered questions online. A link was announced to teachers who had agreed to participate in the
organization of the study.
The reliability (inter-item consistency) of the questionnaire according to Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.91.
Data Analysis
The mean values of answers M (1 ≤ M ≤ 4) and standard deviations (SD) were used to describe the respon-
dents’ opinions. In order to assess the credibility of the differences of mean values in two reciprocally independent
groups, the t test analysis of the independent samples was used. To describe the differences of the distribution of
respondents’ answers in two different groups, Pearson Chi Square test was applied. Cohen’s d was calculated for
estimating the effect size for the difference between two means.
The factor analysis allowed grouping the information from a large number of features into a few factors, thus
obtaining a more obvious information about the students’ interests. Principal component analysis (PCA) with vari-
max rotation was applied. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy tests and Bartlett’s tests
for sphericity were used in order to find if the PCA was appropriate for these data sets. In order to determine the
correct number of factors that had to be preserved in the PCA analysis, the parallel analysis was applied (Hayton,
Allen, Scarpello, 2004; Watson, 2017).
Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were calculated for stating the reliability of the questionnaire and the reliability
of extracted principal components.
One sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was applied to determine if the distribution showed a normal distribu-
tion before the analysis. It was determined that all the distributions showed normal distribution (p < .001).
The data analysis was performed using the statistical software SPSS 23 program.
Results of the Research

Students’ Attitude to Science and Mathematics Lessons
Students’ answers to the question Do you think with pleasure about the biology/ chemistry/ physics/ mathemat-
ics lessons? provided a general idea about the Latvian and Lithuanian 15-year old students’ attitude to science and
mathematics. The mean values of the answers M (1 ≤ M ≤ 4) are only just a little above the average quantity of the
scale 2.5 that indicates an average liking to these subjects (Table 1).
Table 1. Students’ liking in learning biology, chemistry, physics and mathematics.
Items N M SE SD
Biology (C1) 925 2.82 .032 0.962

Mathematics (C4) 935 2.73 .035 1.078
Chemistry (C2) 933 2.51 .034 1.038
Physics (C3) 932 2.47 .034 1.041
The questions were answered positively (yes and rather yes) about biology by 29% and 35%, about chemistry
by 22% and 26%, about physics by 20% and 29%, about mathematics by 31% and 30% of respondents.
Principal Component Analysis
The factor analysis was applied to find out the most important features of the science interest. This was the
way to search for reciprocally non-correlating items, reducing the number of factors characterising respondents’
cognitive interest. Questionnaires Part A and Part B were used for factor analysis.
First, the appropriateness of data for performing the factor analysis was found out. The KMO and Bartlett’s
tests helped to prove that the data were meaningful and compatible to perform the factor analysis. The KMO
measure of sampling adequacy was 0.91 and Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant (c2(496)=4637.10, p < .001).
34
(P. 31-42)
The principal component analysis (PCA) was performed using the extraction method with the succeeding
rotation of varimax with Kaiser normalization. Items with the factor loading no less than 0.40 were subjected to
the analysis. A critical decision in exploratory factor analysis is to determine how many principal components to
retain. The parallel analysis (PA) was used for this purpose (Figure 1). As seen in Figure 1, four of the eigenvalues of
the real data are greater than the average eigenvalues of the PA mean.
Figure 1: Plot of real data (PCA) and randomly generated eigenvalues (PA).
The parallel analysis indicates that four components or factors should be retained which explain 47% of the
variance and do not correlate reciprocally. The findings obtained in the PCA are summarized in Table 2; it includes
the 17 most important items with the factor loading values above 0.60. Thus, the factor analysis allowed reducing
the initial number of quantities describing the students’ interest from 30 to 17 (excluded items see in Appendix).
The established factors describe four main dimensions of students’ interest and their distribution does not overlap
in two or more factors.
Table 2. Results of the principal component analysis with a varimax rotation of items.
Rotated factor load values

Items M SD
Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4
B9. Warming of the water in the glass container 2.89 1.17 .72
B2. Features of the air after the thunderstorm 3.05 1.12 .72
B8. Features of the soap solution 2.30 1.16 .71
B3. Growing and reproduction of plants 2.34 1.12 .68
B10. Purification of the drinking water 2.90 1.15 .68
B13. The use of maths in solving practical problems 2.23 1.14 .74
35
(P. 31-42)

Items M SD
B14. Composition of maths equations 2.52 1.21 .72

B11. Exploration of maths relations of real problems 2.25 1.15 .71
A11. Maths tasks in lessons 2.99 .95 .67
A4. Explanation of natural phenomena 3.00 .81 .76
A5. Finding out the causes of natural phenomena 2.88 .77 .73
A7. Solution of problems related to natural resources 2.41 .92 0.66
A6. Analysis of problems connected with the real life 2.83 .85 .64
A2. Suggestions made in lessons 1.80 .95 .70
A3. Cooperation with the teacher 2.11 1.03 .65
A8. Exploration of nature outside the school 1.87 .99 .63
A14. Devoting the leisure time to science exploration 1.84 .91 .60
% of variance explained 16 11 10 10
Eigenvalues 4.76 3.29 3.09 3.01
Cronbach’s alpha .81 .78 .76 .66
Cronbach’s alpha for the items listed in the table: α = .85
Total variance explained: 47%
Factor 1 combines the interest related to the nature and practical life, items connected with the solution of
complicated tasks and the application of mathematics correspond to factor 2, factor 3 describes the interest to
explore and solve real problems and factor 4 reflects students’ self-initiative and enthusiasm. The interest dimensions
corresponding to obtained factors describe the respondents’ interest from the point of view of the teaching/learning
content and the process. Thus, the cognitive interest is described by four main features or the dimensions of interest.
Dimensions of the Cognitive Interest
First dimension. Interest in the context
Items loading on the dimension, which eigenvalue is 4.76 and Cronbach’s α = 0.81, explained 16% of vari-
ance. This dimension combines the features that characterize students’ interest about the everyday life topics, the
interest about the structure, features and processes of the surrounding environment /the material world. The items
included in this dimension show how important it is to connect the topic of learning to the practical application.
Second dimension. Interest in mathematics
ance. This dimension shows that students like to compose and solve mathematical tasks in order to solve some
real problem in nature or everyday life. They are interested in complex chemistry and physics tasks. They are not
afraid of difficulties.
Third dimension. Inquiry interest
Items loading on the dimension, which eigenvalue is 3.09 and Cronbach’s α = 0.76, explained 10% of variance.
Students have the interest to solve problems, to analyse and explain the processes in nature and everyday
life, to find out their causes. At the same time, this factor includes also students’ research skills that students have
acquired and are able to apply.
36
(P. 31-42)
Fourth dimension. Enthusiasm
ance. The feature of interest that describes perseverance, the willingness to engage in science also outside the
school, the willingness to delve into the process under the exploration and to complete the task. It characterises
the depth of the interest.

Comparing the mean values of answers (M) it is seen that students have relatively the highest interest about
the contexts (dimension 1) and about the research activity (dimension 3) (Table 2). The mean values of several
items in both dimensions are close to the rather agree. The interest about mathematical tasks is much lower (di-
mension 2). The lowest mean values of answers correspond to the dimension 4, which describes enthusiasm,
perseverance, willingness to explore some object or phenomenon outside the school and continue doing until
the work is completed.
According to the previously developed scale of the levels of cognitive interest in science and mathematics
(Cedere, Jurgena, Helmane, Tiltiņa-Kapele, & Praulīte, 2015) the interest dimensions 1 - 3 correspond to the average
level but the dimension 4 corresponds to a low level.
Comparison of the Cognitive Interest of Latvian and Lithuanian Students
In order to find out whether there were differences between the interests of Latvian and Lithuanian students,
items in each dimension were summed and the t test was performed to compare both independent sets (Table 3).
To evaluate the effect size of the dimension, Cohen’s d was used.
The obtained results show that dimension 2 and dimension 4 have statistically significant interest differences,
effect size (d = 0.32 - 0.46) for both dimensions can be assessed as medium effect (Becker, 2000), which serves as an
evidence for the differences in the cognitive interest of students of both countries. Lithuanian students are more
interested in mathematics and they compose and solve complex tasks willingly; Latvian students, however, are
more enthusiastic and they cooperate more with the teacher. Similar statistically significant interest differences
can be seen between girls from both countries and boys in both countries, therefore these differences are not
gender-specific (Table 3).
Table 3. Latvian and Lithuanian students’ interest in science and mathematics.
No Dimension Respondents Country M SE SD t df p d
LV 26.84 0.38 7.55

Total -1.56 738 .12 .11
LT 27.69 0.39 7.24
Interest in the LV 27.36 0.46 7.25
1 Girls -2.20 431 .03 .21
context LT 28.89 0.54 7.04
LV 26.01 0.65 7.95
Boys -0.26 305 .80 .01
LT 26.23 0.58 7.22
LV 16.86 0.28 5.40
Total -4.37 677 < .001 .34
LT 18.65 0.29 5.20
Interest in LV 16.32 0.36 5.29
2 Girls -3.10 385 .002 .32
mathematics LT 17.99 0.40 5.24
LV 17.67 0.45 5.47
Boys -2.82 290 .005 .33
LT 19.41 0.42 5.07
LV 13.84 0.16 3.15
Total -1.97 689 .06 .15
LT 14.31 0.17 3.00
LV 13.52 0.21 3.12
3 Inquiry interest Girls -2.21 431 .03 .19
LT 14.07 0.21 2.73
LV 14.30 0.25 3.13
Boys -0.76 295 .45 .09
LT 14.59 0.27 3.29
37
(P. 31-42)
No Dimension Respondents Country M SE SD t df p d
LV 13.47 0.19 3.84

Total 5.92 765 < .001 .43
LT 11.86 0.19 3.64
LV 13.47 0.24 3.81
4 Enthusiasm Girls 4.73 433 < .001 .46
LT 11.74 0.27 3.71
LV 13.47 0.31 3.90
Boys 3.60 330 < .001 .40
LT 11.99 0.27 3.56
The distribution of respondents’ answers gives a more complete idea about the differences between the stu-
dents’ interests in these countries, therefore the Chi Square test was performed for the selected items. Items with
the highest mean factor loading were chosen as examples from dimensions 2 and 4 (Table 4).
Table 4. Differences between the students’ interests.
Distribution of respondents’ answers, %

Item Country χ2 df p
Rather Rather
No Yes
no yes
The use of mathematics in solving practi- LV 40.7 24.5 17.4 17.4

12.05 3 .007
cal problems (B13) LT 30.4 25.4 21.3 23.0
LV 40.2 36.6 14.3 8.9
Suggestions made in lessons (A2) 28.36 3 < .001
LT 57.1 26.6 8.5 7.8
There is a significant difference between the students’ interest in the two countries. The sharpest difference is
between the negative answers given by the students. Approximately 40% of Latvia’s students and approx. 30% of
Lithuanian students do not like mathematics at all. In percentage, Lithuanian students have given more affirmative
answers. There are also significant differences regarding the enthusiasm and active participation in lessons. In this
case, the number of negative answers is similar in both countries but in Latvia there are relatively more students
who have answered by rather yes and yes.
Discussion
A student is motivated to learn if the learning content is connected with the student’s interests, his/her ex-
perience and if he/she sees that learning prepares him/her for the real life. The present research proves that the
interest of the 15-year-old students in science and mathematics on the whole is mediocre although the level of
respondents’ interest is rather different. The relatively low interest about science that students of this age group
have in Latvia and Lithuania has been observed also before (Cedere, Jurgena, Helmane, Tiltiņa-Kapele, & Praulīte,
2015; Lamanauskas, Gedrovics, & Raipulis, 2004).
Evaluating the obtained data on how students assess their interest about learning biology, chemistry, phys-
ics and mathematics allows concluding that these school subjects, except biology, do not provoke interest (M =
2.32 – 2.77). Students of both countries like learning biology the most (Table 1).
The factor analysis helped to group the quantities characterizing students’ interest and single out four fea-
tures or dimensions of the interest: 1) interest in the context, 2) interest in mathematics, 3) inquiry interest and 4)
enthusiasm. The first and third dimensions correspond to the main focusses in the strategy of teaching/learning the
sciences; the mathematical aspect appears as a separate dimension (2nd dimension) which comprises also the solu-
tion of complicated tasks in chemistry and physics; the fourth dimension, in its turn, combines students’ willingness
to find out more, to do more and to explore things with enthusiasm. The evaluation of students’ interests according
to the dimensions provides valuable information needed for the adjustment of the teaching/learning process.
Interest in the context as a vitally important dimension of interest in science has been applied before (Elster,
2007; Haeussler & Hoffmann, 2000). The respondents’ contextual interest is relatively high in our research (Table
2), besides, there are no significant differences among both countries (Table 3). Thus, it is possible to consider that
students are able to see the connection of the teaching/learning content with the real life; furthermore, a poten-
38
(P. 31-42)
tial cognitive activity is expected. However, having a closer look at the 4th dimension it is clear that this cognitive
interest refers only to the compulsory school classes.
The second significant feature of the science interest – inquiry interest relates to an analogous dimension of
the interest that has been used in exploring the interest in physics (Haeussler & Hoffmann, 2000) although the range
of interest included in it is a bit different. This dimension of the interest, too, excels with a relatively high mean
value. This serves as an evidence that students have the willingness to research different natural phenomena and
they want to engage in the exploration of things that are important in the practical life. If students like exploring,
then students are aware of and they are able to apply this type of cognition characteristic to sciences. The inquiry
interest is equally high in both countries.
Students’ interest in mathematics in the context of the performed survey describes their ability to use math-
ematics in solving different practical problems, including also calculation tasks in chemistry and physics. This
dimension of the interest at the same time characterizes also the formation of connected knowledge and the
integration of the school subjects, which is topical in the science acquisition process (Osborne, 2014). The math-
ematical dimension has not gained great respondents’ responsiveness. Respondents assess their interest about
the use of mathematics in solving practical problems rather negatively, M = 2.23 (Table 2). More than a third of
respondents have a negative attitude (the answer no) to the solution of real problems if they have to make math-
ematical equations (Table 4). This allows concluding that many 15-year- old students do not yet fully understand
what sciences are and how they function because sciences cannot do without mathematics. Lithuanian students’
interest in mathematics, though, is significantly higher than that of the Latvian students (Table 3).
The fourth dimension of the interest is enthusiasm, which in the respondents’ assessment takes the lowest
place, indicates the lack of enthusiasm and self-initiative. The mean values of answers show that students are
unwilling to devote their free time to science or mathematics, M =1.84; they are not interested in the exploration
of nature if that is not a compulsory school requirement, M =1.87 (Table 2). Approximately 80% of students have
a poorly expressed self-initiative (answers no and rather no) (Table 4). The enthusiasm dimension also includes the
willingness to participate in different interest groups and projects that are advisable measures for the formation
of the individual science interest (Uitto, Juuti, Lavonen, & Meisalo, 2006). A low indicator of enthusiasm is charac-
teristic of the respondents in both countries although the mean value of the enthusiasm dimension in Latvia is
statistically significantly higher than in Lithuania (Table 3). Enthusiasm is also used in other researches to describe
the cognitive interest (Purēns, 2015).
Students’ rather high interest in the practical issues and their readiness to engage in their solution can be
considered a certain achievement of the education system in Latvia and Lithuania because students have a positive
attitude to science and the majority of them have a true understanding of the role of science and mathematics in
the real life. However, the present research does not allow stating that students’ interest is stable. The negative at-
titude expressed by any respondents about constructing mathematical equations if the solution of a real problem
demands this (Table 4), is indicative of their unwillingness to make an effort. Such a connection has been stated
before (Cedere, Jurgena, Helmane, Tiltiņa-Kapele, & Praulīte, 2015): the interest is higher if the task is formulated
simply, it is lower if the formulation of the task requires probing into it. Evasion from overcoming the difficulties
as well as the lack of perseverance is a characteristic feature of the modern youth that has also been observed in
other subjects (Purēns, 2015).
The comparison of the data from Table 1 and Table 2 (factors 1 and 3) reveals another significant connec-
tion – students have interest about science phenomena in the real life, they are interested in acting and exploring
themselves, but they quite do not like learning biology, chemistry and physics at school. Thus, students’ willingness
to explore is greater than the teacher’s ability/possibilities to satisfy this willingness. It is possible that one of the
reasons is the incongruity between the teaching/learning content and the student.
The student has changed. The 21st century student who is born and lives in the digitalized world is purposeful,
but he lacks the patience, the ability to delve in the issue and to keep the attention for a longer period of time that
is characteristic of the 20th century student. The breadth and accessibility of the information space has increased
the range of cognition and at the same time has changed the way of perception and thinking. Today’s generation
is oriented towards fast living in today, towards immediate experience. The world is perceived fragmentarily (the so
called “clip” thinking), the attention has a short concentration span (Davidova, Sokolova, & Zariņa, 2014). The lack of
understanding the connections leads to the situation that today’s students do not ask questions about the causes
and consequences; they learn that things should be simply accepted without trying to understand their essence
(Rowlands, Nicholas, Williams, Huntington, Fieldhouse, Gunter, Withey, Jamali, Dobrowolski, & Tenopir, 2008). The
39
(P. 31-42)
transformed thinking of the youth is connected with the specifics of learning. It would be useful to remember the
theory of J. Dewey that emphasizes – one should never forget that human development is promoted only by what
he himself has created and developed. A student really gains the necessary experience only when he is engaged
in things that he is able to understand and improve. In order to learn something, to widen one’s own intellectual
outlook students should be able to put the new experience in the context, to be able to add the new impressions
to the existing ones (Dewey, 2011).
Transformations are needed in the teaching/learning process so that it corresponds to the modern needs
(Hodson, 2014). For the today’s students to have a greater interest in learning the science and mathematics, it is
necessary to change the approach of teaching, to use the digital technologies more, to apply the corresponding
strategies and to strengthen the mutual cooperation with students (Fullan & Langworthy, 2014). The teaching
strategies in science must be focused on understanding the connections and the student’s personal experience.
The formation of each student’s personal interest should be promoted, teaching every student to base his/her sci-
ence experience not on mutually unrelated, fragmentary knowledge but on analytical, value-judgment thinking.
Conclusions
The gained findings reflect the attitude of today’s youth to science and mathematics. Students who partici-
pated in the research on the whole have a mediocre interest about the science subjects and mathematics; besides,
there are slight differences between the interests of the Latvian and Lithuanian students.
Students’ cognitive interest in science and mathematics is described in the frame of the present research using
four dimensions – interest in the context, interest in the mathematics, inquiry interest ad enthusiasm. Students have
a relatively high interest about science in the context with the real life and processes in the surrounding environ-
ment. Students’ inquiry interest is equally high, and it is expressed as making the experiments, analysis, evaluation,
finding out the causes, the solution of real life problems. The interest in mathematics that includes also the solution
of complicated tasks in chemistry and physics, is relatively low. Approximately a half of the respondents dislike
mathematics and they are unwilling to do anything that requires effort. The majority of students lack enthusiasm
and perseverance in learning, they have no desire to engage in science or mathematics outside the school.
The most important aspect of the teacher’s competence is to find a way how to ensure that students learned
with interest and were able to see the usefulness of science and mathematics in their future life. The teaching/
learning process is productive if the student accepts learning as personally meaningful and needed for satisfying
one’s cognitive interest, for widening one’s knowledge, that is useful in interaction with others. As the four found
manifesting dimensions of the cognitive interest explain only a half of the total variance, it is possible to conclude
that there is a number of other factors that influence the students’ interest of learning. The obtained results encourage
exploring the distribution of students’ answers more closely, thus finding out the reasons for the radically different
opinions. This would help teachers find a more suitable approach for the concreate teaching/learning situation.
Acknowledgements
The authors are greatly thankful to Dr. paed. Ineta Helmane for the participation in the research. The authors
also thank all the teachers who were responsive and participated in the organization of the survey.
References
Aikenhead, G. S. (2005). Research into STS science education. Educación Química, 16 (3), 384-397.
Becker, L. A. (2000). Effect size. Retrieved September 02, 2017, from https://www.uv.es/~friasnav/EffectSizeBecker.pdf.
Birzina, R., & Cedere, D. (2017). The first year students’ perceptions of higher studies: a case of University of Latvia. In V. Dislere (Ed.),
Rural environment, education, personality (pp. 40-49). Jelgava: Latvia University of Agriculture. Retrieved September 02, 2017,
from http://llufb.llu.lv/conference/REEP/2017/Latvia-Univ-Agricult-REEP-2017_proceedings.pdf.
Broman, K., Bernholt, S., & Parchmann, I. (2015). Analysing task design and students’ responses to context-based problems through
different analytical frameworks. Research in Science & Technological Education, 33 (2), 143-161. Retrieved December 2, 2017,
from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/168317/.
BUP 2015 2017 keitimas.docx - Švietimo ir mokslo ministerija [BUP 2015 2017 Changing.docx - Ministry of Education and Science].
Retrieved November 02, 2017, from http://www.smm.lt/uploads/documents/svietimas/BUP%202015%202017%20keitimas.
pdf. (In Lithuanian).
40
(P. 31-42)
Cedere, D., Gedrovics, J., Bilek, M., & Mozeika, D. (2014). Changes of 15 years old students’ interest in science in Latvia: 2003-2013. In
M. Bilek (Ed.), Science and technology education for the 21st century (pp. 103-112). Hradec Králové: Gaudeamus.
Cedere, D., Jurgena, I., Helmane I., Tiltiņa-Kapele, I., & Praulīte, G. (2015). Cognitive interest: problems and solutions in the acquisition
of science and mathematics in schools of Latvia. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 14 (4), 424–434.
Davidova, J., Sokolova, I., & Zariņa, S. (2014). Peculiarities of personality’s self-education in a postmodern society. In E. Aciene (Ed.),
Changing education in a changing society (pp. 147–153). Klaipeda: Klaipedos universitetas.
Dewey, J. (2011). Democracy and education. Milton Keynes: Simon and Brown.
Elster, D. (2007). In welchen Kontexten sind naturwissenschaftliche Inhalte für Jugendliche interessant? Plus Lucis, 3, 2-8. Retrieved
September 02, 2017, from https://www.univie.ac.at/pluslucis/PlusLucis/073/s2_8.pdf.
France, I. (2010). The research skills in mathematics content for grades 7 to 12, their Implementation into Practice. In Society, Integra-
tion, Education (pp. 207-214). Rezekne: Rezekne Higher Education Institution.
Fullan, M., & Langworthy, M. (2014). A rich seam: How new pedagogies find deep learning. London: Pearson.
Graeber, W. (2012). Reflections on inquiry-based science education in Europe and outlook. In C. Bolte, J. Holbrook, & F. Rauch (Eds.),
Inquiry-based science education in Europe: reflections from the PROFILES project (pp. 221-225). Berlin: Freie Universitat Berlin.
Retrieved September 02, 2017, from https://ius.uni-klu.ac.at/misc/profiles/files/Profiles%20Book%202012_10.pdf.
Haeussler, P., & Hoffmann, L. (2000). A curricular frame for physics education: Development, comparison with students’ interests,
and impact on students’ achievement and self-concept. Science Education, 84, 689–705.
Hayton, J. C., Allen, D. G., & Scarpello, V. (2004). Factor retention decisions in exploratory factor analysis: A tutorial on parallel analysis.
Organizational Research Methods, 7 (2), 191-205.
Hodson, D. (2014). Learning science, learning about science, doing science: different goals demand different learning methods.
International Journal of Science Education, 36 (15), 2534-2553.
Izvērsta informācija par izglītības programmām [Extended information about educational programs]. Retrieved November 02, 2017,
from http://ndv.lv/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Izglitibas_programmas.pdf. (In Latvian).
Kalnina, R. (2008). System for the organization of multilevel independent work aimed at modern mastering of chemistry in vocational
education. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 7 (2), 103-121.
Krapp, A., & Prenzel, M. (2011). Research on interest in science: Theories, methods, and findings. International Journal of Science
Education, 33 (1), 27–50. Retrieved September 02, 2017, from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.518645.
Lamanauskas, V. (2012). Development of scientific research activity as the basic component of science education. Journal of Baltic
Science Education, 11 (3), 200-202.
Lamanauskas, V., Gedrovics, J., & Raipulis, J. (2004). Senior pupils’ views and approach to natural science education in Lithuania and
Latvia. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 1 (1), 13-23.
Mathematics Education in Europe (2011). Retrieved November 02, 2017, from eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice/documents/
thematic_reports/132EN.pdf.
Mörk, S., M. (2005). Argumentation in science lessons: Focusing on the teacher’s role. NorDiNa, 1, 17-30.
OECD (2016). PISA 2015 Results (Volume I): Excellence and Equity in Education. Paris: PISA, OECD Publishing. Retrieved September
02, 2017, from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264266490-en.
Osborne, J. (2014). Teaching Scientific Practices: Meeting the Challenge of Change. International Journal of Science Education, 25
(2), 177-196.
Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal
of Science Education, 25 (9), 1049-1079. Retrieved September 02, 2017, from https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000032199.
Pilot, A., Taconis, R., & den Brok, P. J. (2016). Concluding reflections on context-based learning environments in science. In R. Taconis,
P. J. den Brok, A. Pilot (Eds.), Teachers creating context-based learning environments in science (pp. 225-242). Rotterdam: Sense
Publishers. Retrieved September 02, 2017, from https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-6300-684-2_13.
PISA 2015. Results in Focus. Retrieved September 02, 2017, from http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisa-2015-results-in-focus.pdf.
Potvin, P., & Hasni, A. (2014). Interest, motivation and attitude towards science and technology at K-12 levels: a systematic review
of 12 years of educational research. Studies in Science Education, 50 (1), 85-129.
Purēns, V. (2015). Pusaudžu izziņas intereses veidošanās dialoģiskajā vēstures mācību procesā. Doktora disertācija [Development
of adolescent cognitional interest in dialogical history studies. Doctoral Thesis]. (In Latvian)
Rowlands, I., Nicholas, D., Williams, P., Huntington, P., Fieldhouse, M., Gunter, B., Withey, R., Jamali, H., Dobrowolski, T., & Tenopir, C.
(2008). The Google generation: the information behaviour of the researcher of the future. Aslib Proceedings, 60 (4), 290-310.
Retrieved September 02, 2017, from https://doi.org/10.1108/00012530810887953.
Schiefele, U. (1991). Interest, learning, and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 299-323.
Schreiner, C., Sjøberg, S. (2004). Sowing the seeds of ROSE. Background, rationale, questionnaire development and data collection
for ROSE (The Relevance of Science Education) - A comparative study of students’ views of science and science education.
Acta Didactica, 4, 1-20.
Science Education in Europe: National Policies, Practices and Research (2011). Brussels: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive
Agency, P9 Eurydice.
Uitto, A., Juuti, K., Lavonen, J., & Meisalo, V. (2006). Students’ Interest in Biology and Their Out-of-School Experiences. Journal of
Biological Education, 40 (3), 124–129.
Watson, J. C. (2017). Establishing evidence for internal structure using exploratory factor analysis, 232-238. Retrieved November 02,
2017, from https://doi.org/10.1080/07481756.2017.1336931.
Žogla, I. (2001). Didaktikas teorētiskie pamati [Theoretical basis of didactics]. Rīga: Raka, 46. (In Latvian)
41
(P. 31-42)
Appendix
Factor analysis excluded items

(load values from 0.40 to 0.60)

Items M SD
B4 3.13 1.00 .56

B7 2.20 1.12 .55
B1 2.40 1.24 .51
B6 2.66 1.15 .51
B12 2.56 1.13 .50
B15 3.03 1.06 .40
A12 2.54 1.09 .48
B5 2.75 1.13 .42
A13 2.83 .87 .59
A9 2.31 1.04 .54
A10 2.79 .98 .47
Received: October 16, 2017 Accepted: January 15, 2018
Dagnija Cēdere Dr.chem., Associate Professor, University of Latvia, Jelgavas street

(Corresponding author) 1, LV-1004, Riga, Latvia.
E-mail: dagnija.cedere@lu.lv
Inese Jurgena Dr.paed., Professor, University of Latvia, Imantas linija 7/1, LV-
1083, Riga, Latvia.
E-mail: inese.jurgena@lu.lv
Vilija Targamadze Dr.phil., Prof. habil., Vilnius University, Universiteto street 9/1, LT-
01513, Vilnius, Lithuania.
E-mail: vilija.targamadze@gmail.com
42
EFFECTS OF TECHNOLOGY-
ENHANCED METACOGNITIVE
LEARNING PLATFORM ON ISSN 1648-3898 /Print/
STUDENTS’ MONITORING ISSN 2538-7138 /Online/
ACCURACY AND
UNDERSTANDING OF
ELECTRICITY
Abstract. The aim of this research was to
explore the effect of a Technology-enhanced
Metacognitive Learning Platform (TeMLP) on
student’s monitoring accuracy and under-
Eylem Yıldız Feyzioğlu, standing of electricity. An interactive TeMLP
Ercan Akpinar, was prepared on the electricity unit covering
Nilgün Tatar the topics of static and current electricity
for 7th graders; the platform contained
computer animations, science experiments,
e-diaries, and metacognitive prompts. In this
research, pre-test/post-test control group
semi-experimental model was used. The
Introduction Metacognition Scale and Essay Questions
on Static and Current Electricity were used as
Technology-enhanced Learning (TEL), devised through the opportu- data collection tools in this research. In ad-
nities provided by the effective and productive use of today’s Internet and dition, Essay Questions on the Learning Plat-
computer facilities, provides a learning environment which can help students form and the self-explanations of students
to learn scientific concepts meaningfully. In the light of the interest students in the learning platform database were also
demonstrate toward technological devices, it is inevitable that such tools used in the experimental group. The pre-test
should be used in the classroom as instruments of learning. This is because and post-test comparisons regarding the
a technology-enhanced setting gives students the opportunity to design Metacognition Scale for the group showed
and implement experiments, explore the relationships between variables that the students in the experimental group
and thus learn scientific concepts (Beishuizen, Wilhelm & Schimmel, 2004). had significantly higher post-test scores
It is however important what role students will assume when they are using compared to control group students in terms
technological applications. For example, it has been shown that learners’ of the control and monitoring subscales. The
perception of satisfaction with the degree of control in TEL is related to their results of the essay questions on static and
interest in the learning task and the enjoyment they derive from it (Vande- current electricity revealed an important
waetere & Clarebout, 2011). For this reason, researchers offer formats with difference between the groups favoring
which students may create their own material as an active learner, become learning platform. The views of the students
about the software support these results.
aware of their misconceptions and realize that they can use their newly
The conclusions drawn by the research led to
learned knowledge in different learning situations. For instance, students can
recommendations for researchers about the
actively pursue predict-observe-explain strategy to attain conceptual change
metacognitive prompts to be employed in
in physics topics (Zacharia & Anderson, 2003). Individually-constructed and
technology-enhanced learning platforms.
collaboratively-constructed concept mapping in TEL can be used to support
Keywords: metacognition prompt, science
students in their science concept learning and knowledge construction teaching, technology-enhanced learning.
(Chang, Sung & Chen, 2001; Kao, Lin & Sun, 2008; Kwon & Cifuentes, 2009;
Liu, 2011). Computer-animated conceptual change texts supported by verbal
explanations can be effective in helping students to eliminate alternative Eylem Yıldız Feyzioğlu
Adnan Menderes University, Turkey
concepts in their minds (Özmen, Demircioglu & Demircioglu, 2009; Özmen, Ercan Akpinar
2011). Adaptive dual-situated learning models can aid students in attaining Dokuz Eylul University, Turkey
conceptual change and also provide them with the opportunity to develop Nilgün Tatar
Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Turkey
their scientific reasoning skills (She & Lee, 2008).
43
EFFECTS OF TECHNOLOGY-ENHANCED METACOGNITIVE LEARNING PLATFORM ON
STUDENTS’ MONITORING ACCURACY AND UNDERSTANDING OF ELECTRICITY
(P. 43-64) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
On the other hand, the diversity of students in the same learning environment also leads to a diversity of prior
knowledge and learning strategies in TEL (Veermans & Järvelä, 2004). As prior knowledge is a characteristic of all
learners (Winters, Greene & Costich, 2008), it may be used as a bridge between the learner’s existing knowledge
and the new knowledge introduced through the medium of technology-enhanced learning (Azevedo, 2005). A
low level of prior knowledge about a subject, however, challenges the student to interpret the new knowledge
and make more of an effort to comprehend it (ChanLin, 2001). For this reason, a learner who has limited prior
knowledge must activate this cognitive knowledge at regular intervals (Azevedo, 2005). Kapa’s research (2001)
in a computerized setting reported that if learners with a low level of prior knowledge were to be asked guiding
questions at an early step of the learning process, they could be helped to complete the task at hand using their
knowledge of rules or procedures and to make less error.
In learning environments, students need to determine their learning goals, map out their learning strategies
and assess how effective these strategies are (Azevedo, Cromley & Seibert, 2004). Novice learners however may
find it difficult to understand content since they will be more likely to choose the first strategy to come to mind
instead of determining a strategy on the basis of what has to be learned (Schoenfeld, 1983). On the other hand,
more experienced learners will use strategies that will help them to set forth and construct their own ideas and
thus they will be able to learn the new knowledge because they have activated their prior knowledge in this way
(Liu, 2011). According to Azevedo, Guthrie and Seibert (2004), expert learners are also able to take the scope and
context of their prior knowledge into consideration to strategically determine what learning tools they will use,
setting up a plan to serve this purpose. It has therefore been asserted that students will set up their own mode
of working, that is, their plan concerning what they want to learn, and decide on how to learn this subject, and
in this context, it is important that a learning environment provides them with the means to decide on whether
they have understood the material and when they should make their learning plans and how to change their
strategies (Kramarski & Michalsky, 2008; Schraw 1998). Murphy (2008) states that the effectiveness of TEL depends
upon whether or not the learner can activate metacognitive processes. Thus, to understand how individual learn-
ers adapt and regulate their learning in contexts of technology, the issue must be approached from a theoretical
perspective of metacognition (Salovaara, 2005).
Theoretical Foundation: Technology-enhanced Metacognitive Learning
The metacognition aids learning in many ways but one of the most important of these is the manner in
which it helps learners to use the resources needed for the task effectively, process knowledge at a deeper level,
and monitor performance more accurately (Schraw, Wise & Roos, 2000). Metacognition has two components:
knowledge about cognition and regulation of cognition (Nietfeld, Cao & Osborne, 2005). Knowledge of cognition
comprises the elements of what learners know about their own cognition (Schraw & Moshman, 1995). The regu-
lation of cognition relates to how learners plan their own cognitive processes and how they monitor and assess
them (Jacobs & Paris, 1987; Pintrich, 2002). The analysis of planning and learning (Zimmerman, Bonner & Kovach,
1996) requires decisions on what the specific outcome of the learning should be, what kind of performance will
serve the purpose (Zimmerman, 2000) and on activating prior knowledge on the subject (Veenman, 2011; Winters
et al., 2008). If learners think in depth about the tasks they must complete and set up goals based upon the com-
plexity of these tasks, they can then develop an appropriate plan for learning (Stahl, Pieschl & Bromme, 2006). For
example, in a research by Herscovitz, Kaberman, Saar and Dori (2012), a planning tool was used that was suited to
understanding chemistry and to thinking levels and thus students were ultimately able to produce more complex
and in-depth questions about the topic than the questions they had posed at the outset.
Monitoring is defined as the learner’s thinking about the learning process, checking to see whether the process
serves the goal, ensuring the accuracy of the process and deciding about the time and mental effort the task will
need (Halpern, 1999). When individuals set out to reach a goal, it is likely that they will compare the goal with their
performance (Schunk, 2003). In this case, the learner is able to differentiate between what has been learned from the
task and what has not, thus finding the opportunity to focus more efficiently on the task and on cognitive resources
(Tobias & Everson, 2002). This metacognitive ability helps the learner to avoid making the same mistake twice and
to use more reliable sources of evidence as well as time and resources more efficiently (Yeung & Summerfield,
2012). For this reason, monitoring accuracy is an even more important indicator of learning than prior knowledge
of the content to be learned (Tobias & Everson, 2002). Meanwhile, van Loon, Bruin, Gog and Merriënboera (2013)
report that incorrect prior knowledge has a negative impact on the student’s metacognitive judgments because
44
ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ EFFECTS OF TECHNOLOGY-ENHANCED METACOGNITIVE LEARNING PLATFORM ON
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 43-64)
the student may not be able to accurately monitor the quality of the knowledge in the individual’s accessible
memory. This may be associated with the learner’s belief that existing prior knowledge is accurate and complete
and may lead to the learner’s feeling overconfident and to a premature termination of the task (van Loon, 2014).
Ultimately, the learner who cannot decide upon the accuracy of existing prior knowledge may also not be able to
decide upon the quality of the performance or the product when the task is finished (Dunning, Johnson, Ehrlinger,
& Kruger, 2003). In short, because learners at a higher metacognitive level are able to decide upon the accuracy of
their prior knowledge, use their monitoring skills and evaluate their performance when the task is finished, their
monitoring accuracy may prove to be more effective.
TEL may serve to develop the learner’s metacognition by offering different methods of developing a strategy
to formulate a plan for monitoring and regulating a task (Quintana, Zhang & Krajcik, 2005). It has been shown that
TEL designed for the purpose of instructing and supporting students in using their metacognition has a positive
impact on students’ cognitive outcomes. For example, using self-explanation as an metacognitive strategy (Aleven
& Koedinger, 2002), e-learning supported with improved self-metacognitive questioning (Kramarski & Gutman,
2006), regulative tool support (Manlove, Lazonder & De Jong, 2007), metacognitive support devices in both com-
puter and paper-based prompts (Bannert, Hildebrand & Mengelkamp, 2009) and dynamically scaffolding social
regulation (Molenaar, Roda, van Boxtel & Sleegers, 2012) not only aid the student to progress but also develop
the student’s planning, monitoring and evaluation skills, thereby enhancing learning (Schraw, 2007). Research has
also reported that TEL is effective in supporting and fostering metacognitive, motivational and affective regulatory
processes (Greene, Moos & Azevedo, 2011; Lee, 1997; Raes, Schellens, de Wever & Vanderhoven, 2012; Ross, 1999;
Vovides, 2005). For instance, Kramarski and Michalsky (2010) studied Computer-based Learning (CBL) with meta-
cognitive instruction (CBL+META) as opposed to CBL without this instruction. They reported that being exposed
to metacognitive instruction by means of self-questioning may improve pre-service teachers’ ability to reflect on
the learning process.
Cognitive, Metacognitive and Technology-Enhanced Learning Aspects of Learning Electricity
Students’ understanding of concepts such as force, light, heat and electricity is a frequently studied subject
and it is known that student understanding is considerably different from conventional scientific views (Engelhardt
& Beichner, 2004; Slotta & Chi, 2006). Students’ misunderstandings are important learning issues that prevent them
from learning the concepts introduced to them during instruction and lead them to misinterpreting phenomena
that they encounter in daily life (Akgün & Deryakulu, 2007). For this reason, many studies have been conducted
on exploring how students understand concepts related to static and current electricity, particularly to discover
which topics they have difficulty learning. Guruswamy, Somars & Hussey (1997) report that students make mistakes
in describing charge transfers between two conductors placed in contact with each other. Park, Kim, Kim and Lee
(2001) have reported that many students find it difficult to explain the job of an electroscope and cannot identify
materials as conductors or non-conductors. Students also have many conceptual misunderstandings about concepts
of charge, electrons and neutral objects. These misunderstandings have been reported by Bilal and Erol (2009) and
Siegel & Lee (2001) as, a body with a larger charge exerts a bigger force, a charged body contains either electrons or
protons, an electron is a purely negative charge with no mass, neutral objects have no charge, a charged body has only
one type of charge, static electricity is caused by friction.
Other researchers too have noted that students have misunderstandings regarding current electricity. Mc-
Dermott & Shaffer (1992) have grouped the topics on current electricity that students have difficulty with in three
categories: their inability to transfer the concepts they know about electricity into the topic of electrical circuits,
their inability to draw and interpret an electrical circuit, their inability to explain the behavior of an electrical circuit.
Eylon & Ganiel (1990) have asserted that students cannot form an association between an electrical circuit at the
macro level with electrical charges on the micro level (cited in Gutwill, Frederiksen & White, 1999). Students are also
challenged in understanding the properties of energy, current, voltage and resistance. Students think that voltage
and resistance are only present when there is a current (Engelhardt & Beichner, 2004). Liégeois, Chasseigne, Papin
and Mullet (2003) report that when students are asked to use their knowledge about resistance and current to find
voltage, many of them use their knowledge about currents but not what they know about resistance, or else they
ignore the matter of resistance altogether. It is said that students have a hard time structuring their knowledge
because of the abstractness of concepts about electricity and due to the fact that they are unable to construct
models of microscopic processes (Jaakkola, Nurmi & Veermans, 2010; Thacker, Ganiel & Boys, 1999). Beyond this,
45
(P. 43-64) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
when students try to learn these abstract concepts with traditional teaching methods based on equations and
mathematical formulas, they will continue to be unable to construct developed mental models (Thacker et al., 1999).
For this reason, demonstrations, models, real-time graphs and videos may serve to allow students to build mental
models related to electrical concepts and thereby understand the material (Escalada & Zollman, 1997). Because of
its potential impact on student’s conceptual understanding, many researchers have looked into the effect TEL has
on students’ understanding of electricity (Akpınar & Ergin, 2007; Başer & Durmuş, 2010: Jaakkola & Nurmi, 2008;
Jaakkola et al., 2010; Zacharia, 2003). In Sengupta and Wilensky’s (2009) research, a group of students who were
taught with NetLogo Investigations in Electromagnetism (NIELS) showed evidence of macro-micro complementarity
in charges (negative-positive), voltage, battery and electricity, whereas only a few of the students in the non-NIELS
group could demonstrate macro-micro complementarity. Kong, Yeung and Wub (2009) developed open-source
software called LabVNC that used a remote-controlled source to experiment with electrical circuits. This software
was tested on students and their pretest/posttest results showed that the equipment had helped the students
understand the electrical concepts. Thus, it was understood that the LabVNC-based system had the potential to
provide an appropriate environment for students to comprehend a target topic by learning through observation.
Ultimately, successful learning relies predominantly on metacognitive activities that are performed and
monitored during the learning process. A great deal of research on metacognition exists in the literature but stud-
ies on TEL in the primary school setting and students’ monitoring accuracy are few. Those that do exist are largely
about high school or university students (Zion, Michalsky & Mevarech, 2005). It may therefore be suggested that
learners’ cognitive and metacognitive control in technology-enhanced learning may be improved through guid-
ance and support (Lee, Lim & Grabowski, 2010). This is particularly true and important when abstract subjects like
electricity are the topics to be taught. As has been discussed in the previous section about electricity, from primary
school to the university, it is known that students at every level have difficulty with learning topics of electricity.
Technology enhanced learning environments can be effective in eliminating the students’ misconceptions or help
them learn difficult topics more easily. Furthermore, students engaging metacognitive skills can monitor their
misconceptions more easily than novice students. As a result, successful learning is mainly based on metacogni-
tive activities which have to be performed and constantly monitored during learning. For meaningful learning
thanks to electronic learning environment, students should use and develop their metacognitive skills (Bannert,
Hildebrand & Mengelkamp, 2009).
Problem of the Research
The main problem of this research is “what is the effects of a Technology-enhanced Metacognitive Learning
Platform (TeMLP) on student’s monitoring accuracy and understanding of the electricity?”
It consists of three sub-problems. They are stated below:
•• How does the TeMLP affect students’ monitoring accuracy?
•• What are the students’ reasons for their monitoring status?
•• How does the TeMLP affect students’ understanding of electricity?
This research is a part of a wide project (Preparing educational software integrated with metacognitive prompts
in primary school and investigating its efficacy) applied in four classes in two primary schools in different cities in
Turkey. A pre-test/post-test and control group research design was used in the project to conduct research on the
effects of the TeMLP. The students in experimental group used a learning platform that integrated metacognitive
prompts within the scope of the “Electricity in Our Lives” unit of the Science and Technology course. The students
in the control group took the same courses according to the teaching methods recommended by the science cur-
riculum program. The same teacher taught the topics in both experiment and control groups. The effect of TeMLP
on students was examined both quantitatively and qualitatively. In the quantitative analysis, students’ monitoring
accuracy, and understanding of electricity were measured by means of pretest and posttests. For the qualitative
analysis, the self-explanations of students in the learning platform database were used in the experimental group.
Once the experimental and control groups were defined, the participants were informed about the research process
and its scope. Both groups were administered the Metacognition Scale and Essay Questions on Static and Current
Electricity as pre-test at the beginning of the research. Throughout the instructional process, the experimental
46
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 43-64)
group practiced the platform, whereas the control group practiced a normal teaching approach. At the end of the
instruction, both groups were administered the Metacognition Scale and Essay Questions on Static and Current
Electricity as post-test. About three months later, the same Metacognition Scale was administered again with the
purpose of assessing the retention level of the students in the experimental and control group. The research was
completed in four years and conducted in the same school throughout the research. In the first year, instruments
and learning materials were prepared. In the second year, a pilot study was conducted to determine the effects of
the TeMLP, and to evaluate usefulness of it, to identify potential errors and weaknesses in the TeMLP. In the third
year, the final version of the TeMLP was conducted to both experimental and control groups. Finally, the effects
of the platform were assessed.
Participants
The participants in this research were 53 (25 in experimental group, 28 in control group) students from a
seventh grade (11-12 age) classroom at a public school in Turkey. Two of the 7th classes were assigned randomly as
experimental and control groups at the beginning of the research, because the Turkish Ministry of National Educa-
tion does not allow changes in the classes after the school term has begun. Both groups were generally taught
by the same primary school teachers until 5th grade. In 5th grade, they were allotted to their classes according to
their achievement levels in various subjects such as science, mathematics, Turkish language etc. Up to 7th grade,
students have had similar teaching about electricity topic in school. Therefore, the students in both groups had
similar backgrounds about electricity.
Design of Research
First of all, the aim of the research was introduced by the science teacher. The software was introduced by the
science teacher and she used the software a few times and attained the necessary knowledge and skills to work
with it. In addition, the teacher used the software in the pilot run of the research. The researcher of this research
informed the teacher about teaching methods and other procedures which were used in experimental and control
group. So, the effects of the teacher on the results of the research have been controlled.
Since there were not enough of computers in the laboratory, the students worked either individually or in
couples in the computer laboratory. Each group was assigned to use the computer lab twice a week for 2 hours
to use the learning platform during the Science and Technology course. The learning platform was set up for 16
course hours, enabling the instruction to be completed within 4 weeks. The control group used instruction rec-
ommended in the class by the curriculum of the Ministry of National Education and the instruction used by the
teacher in all semesters.
The Technology-enhanced Metacognitive Learning Platform
The Technology-enhanced Metacognitive Learning Platform (TeMLP) was developed for seventh grade
students within the scope of the project. The TeMPL dealt with concepts in static electricity-natural and charged
objects, charging by friction, induction, conduction, charge interactions, the electroscope, thunder and lightning,
grounding and lightning conductors. Also, the TeMPL dealt with concepts in current electricity-electric current,
resistance, Ohm’s Law, series and parallel circuits, and shortcut concepts. The researchers created interactive activi-
ties, interactive experiments and analogies. A predict-observe-explain strategy was used in the activities to create
cognitive conflict. Students were expected to use their science process skills while conducting the experiments.
The TeMLP included three main metacognitive prompts: planning, monitoring, and evaluating. At the planning
stage, students were engaged in activities to activate their prior knowledge and to determine their learning goals.
This stage encouraged students to remember what they learned previously and to define what their goals were as
they started on the new topic, asking them what it was that they wished to learn. In all the processes, the informa-
tion offered by the students was recorded in text boxes in the database or with radio buttons. At the monitoring
stage, the student was urged to monitor the learning process while the learning was occurring to make sure that
the goal was being reached and the activity was being understood. Thus, the student had the opportunity to focus
on reaching his/her goals or changing the cognitive strategies that were being used.
The learning platform made recommendations to the student. In the evaluating stage, students were asked
47
(P. 43-64) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
to assess whether the multiple-choice questions taught them the concepts they needed to learn. The platform
allowed the students to predict what they would score on the test prior to the answering of the questions. The
students then completed the test and compared their predictions with their actual scores. The TeMLP has the learn-
ing environment in such a way that students’ misconceptions about the subject of electricity could be identified
and repaired. The flow chart of the learning platform can be observed in Figure 1.
Figure
Figure 1: 1:
TheThe
flowflow
chartchart
of theoflearning
the learning platform.
platform.
48
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 43-64)
Instruments
1. Metacognition Scale (MS)
MS was developed by Yıldız, Akpınar, Tatar and Ergin (2009) and contains 30 items to which participants re-
spond on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from “Always” to “Never.” The two main components of MS are knowledge
of cognition and knowledge of regulation. There are many dimensions under these two components. Component
knowledge of cognition comprises declarative knowledge, procedural knowledge and conditional knowledge. The
knowledge of regulation component, however, includes the factors of planning, self-control, cognitive strategies,
self-evaluation and self-monitoring. The internal consistency of the MS is .96.
2. Essay Questions on Static and Current Electricity
With the essay questions, the students were required to answer the question and this response was expected
to show the level of understanding the student had about the concept queried (Becker & Johnston, 1999). In re-
sponding in the form of an essay, the student must generate an answer, and therefore has the potential to show
originality and a deeper understanding of the subject (Becker & Johnston, 1999). The questions were used to
determine how students constructed concepts of electricity in their minds and degree for understanding they
displayed. For this reason, the question was worded, explain what made you give this answer and why? Also, care
was shown to ensure that the questions reflected situations that the students encountered in their everyday lives.
Related literature was reviewed (e.g. Peşman, 2005) and the questions were adopted, and researchers developed
new questions for the aim of the research. Five questions that included the topics of static electricity, lightning and
thunderbolts, charges (positive, negative and neutral), charging by Friction, charging by Induction, charging by
conduction and electrical current were analyzed for this research. Students were asked to write sentences or draw
figures to explain their answers to the questions. The opinions of experts and teachers were enlisted to determine
if the questions were comprehensible, readable and appropriate for what was being taught in the seventh-grade
science class. To determine the reliability of the encoders, the same questions were administered to 30 seventh-
grade students.
3. Essay Questions on the Learning Platform
When the session was over, the students in the research group were asked to write an essay about the learning
platform. The questions were about the ways they found the learning platform helpful in their planning, monitoring
and self-control in the learning process. The students were additionally asked to elaborate on their reasons and
explanations (Mason & Shriner, 2008). The students worked on their essays for 25 minutes. The essay questions
were more useful for the research because the researchers were able to learn the students’ opinions about the
metacognitive prompts offered in the learning platform. While analyzing essay questions on the learning platform,
the researchers reviewed the students’ opinions and grouped together the general ideas and themes expressed
in their explanations (Cavallo, McNeely & Marek, 2003).
Data Analysis
MS scale was used as a pre-measurement, post-measurement and retention measurement tool in the research.
An independent t-test was used to determine the differences between the MS mean scores of students on the
pre-test, post-test and retention test in the experimental and control group. However, only the scale’s monitoring
and control factor scores were analyzed, and other factors are out of this analysis because the students use only
their monitoring and control skills when they decide their monitoring accuracy).
While analyzing the students’ self-explanations about essay questions on static and current electricity, three
researchers reviewed the students’ answers and categories assigned according to the accuracy of the responses. In
drawing up these categories, inspiration was gathered from the adaptation of Çimen (1995)’s version of Westbrook
and Marek’s (1991) Concept Evaluation Scheme. To analyze the students’ answers, five different levels of categories
were set up. These categories were: Completely right, partially right, A little right, less right and No answer. These
categories were scored as 4, 3, 2, 1 and 0 respectively. The details on how each category in the research was defined
49
(P. 43-64) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
and how the analysis applied to the students’ responses is shown in Table 1. The students’ responses were encoded
separately by each of the three researchers. The reliability of the coding categories was calculated according to the
agreement / (agreement + disagreement) formula of Miles & Huberman (1994). The level of agreement between
the researchers for the independent assessment was .87.
Table 1. Criteria for scoring.
Degree of understanding Criteria for scoring
0-No answer Concept missing or Completely irrelevant (almost no right answers or no answer)
1-Less right Completely the opposite or a misunderstanding (a little right, many conflicting wrongs)
2-A little right The concept was partially learned, wrongs are more than rights (there are rights but there are also wrongs)
3- Partially right The concept was partially learned, wrongs are less than rights (rights are more, but they’re not enough)
All parts of the concept are there, and the answer can be accepted as scientific (right and with nothing
4-Completely right
missing)
The students’ self-explanations on the learning platform were analyzed using qualitative content analysis (Chi,
1997). The explanations were collected under Monitoring Accuracy headings. In the analysis of students’ monitor-
ing accuracy status, we applied Tobias and Everson (2009)’s knowledge monitoring framework. This framework
includes students’ scores for each item/task presented to the students; subsequent scores were represented in a
student response matrix. The 2 x 2 matrix of four scores for each item/task is produced to indicate the number of
items/tasks estimated as known and then scored as correct on the test (+, +), estimated as unknown yet scored as
correct (-, +), estimated as known and scored as incorrect (+, -), and estimated as unknown and scored as incor-
rect (-, -). Using this as their starting point, the researchers developed a new matrix. Before starting on each task,
the student was asked to make an estimate. After the activities in the software were completed, depending upon
the results of the experiment, the student was required to decide whether his/her estimate had been true or false
and write this decision down in the text box. The researchers decided whether the student’s decision about the
estimate was correct and then revised the student response matrix. The columns of the matrix were marked (+, T)
if the student’s estimate was true and (-, F) if it was false; (+, T) if the decision was true and (-, F) if it was false. Ac-
cordingly, the student’s estimate was examined to see whether there were mistakes in the estimate and to decide
whether it was right or wrong. If the student had made no mistake and had indicated this, the response was on the
(+, +, TT) level of accuracy. If the student’s estimate was true but he/she had decided it was false, the response was
at the (+, -, TF) level. If the student had made a mistake in the estimate and was aware of this, then the response
was (-, +, FT) but if the student made the wrong decision without realizing the mistake, the response was (-, -, FF).
Table 2 pertains to the students’ monitoring status.
Table 2. Students’ monitoring status.
Accuracy of Monitoring
True (+) False (-)

Accuracy of Estimate
True (+) + + (TT) + - (TF)
False (-) - + (FT) - - (FF)
Note. (TT): Prediction is true, monitoring is true, (TF): prediction is true, monitoring is false, (FT): prediction is false, monitoring is true,
(FF): prediction is false, monitoring is false.
For example, before charging by friction, the students were asked to predict the charge status of two objects.
Later, when the student rubbed a balloon and a piece of woolen cloth against each other, he/she was able to observe
the exchange of charges between the objects. At this stage, the student was asked to compare his/her prediction
before the experiment and what was observed afterwards. If the student marked the charge of the balloon as
50
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 43-64)
neutral before the experiment and then responded afterwards that the balloon’s charge had more of a negative
charge, in this case, the response was (TT). If the student’s prediction was true, but the status of the charge in the
balloon was marked false, the response was (TF). If the student made the wrong prediction about the charge of
the balloon before the experiment but then gave the right answer about the charge after the experiment, then
the response was (FT). If the student both predicted the charge of the balloon incorrectly before and also made a
mistake in the charge of the balloon after the experiment despite the observation, this was considered to be in the
(FF) category. Figure 2 shows the monitoring accuracy prompt that was presented to the student for this experiment.
Figure 2: Sample screen from the TeMLP prompt for monitoring accuracy.
Two raters analyzed a random sample of five students’ monitoring accuracy based on the criteria outlined
in the framework. The raters achieved a reliability of .95 for the students’ status and an examination was made of
the final sample, which included seventeen problem predictions and decisions compiled in the learning platform.
Results of Research
Changes in Students’ Monitoring Accuracy during the Technology-enhanced Metacognitive Learning
It can be seen that the students’ monitoring accuracy status in the topics of both static and current electricity
was at different levels in each activity (Figure 4). In non-consecutive activities, for example from SE#1 to SE#2.1,
from SE#4 to SE#6.1 and from CE#7 to CE#8.1, it was found that there were not changes of status. In other words,
when the students compared their predictions with the experiment results after non-consecutive activities, because
they were not aware that they had made a mistake, their status was (FF). On the other hand, in consecutive activi-
ties, while their monitoring status was (FF) in the first activity (for example, SE#2.1-2.1; 3-4; CE#8.1-8.2-8.3; 9.1-9.2),
their status changed to (FT) or (TT) in the next activity. In other words, the student took into consideration his/her
prediction about the problem and was able to decide after the experiment that the prediction had been wrong
or right. For this reason, as the activities continued, they were able to accept their mistakes, if any, and arrived at
a point where they could explain these mistakes.
51
(P. 43-64) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
The Percentage of Students' 1,00

Monitoring Srtatus (%) 0,90
0,80
0,70
0,60
0,50
FF
0,40
0,30 FT
0,20
TT
0,10
0,00
CE#1
CE#4
CE#6
CE#7
SE#1
SE#3
SE#4
CE#8.1
CE#8.2
CE#8.3
CE#9.1
CE#9.2
SE#2.1
SE#2.2
SE#6.1
SE#6.2
The Number of Activities
Figure 3: Students’ monitoring accuracy status in the topics of both static and current electricity.
Accordingly, Table 3 shows that the students in the experimental group showed a significant increase in their
control scores in the posttest and retention test compared to the control group’ posttest and retention test scores
(t (51) = 3.161, p = .003, t (51) = 2.421, p = .019 respectively) but there was no significant difference between the
experimental and control group’s control scores in the pretest (t (51) = .175, p = .683). In the retention test, this
finding showed that the instruction which was used in the experimental group affected the students’ control skills
in positive way. In addition, according to the pretest results of the monitoring scale, there was no statistically sig-
nificant difference between the experimental and control groups. However, when the posttest and retention test
results of the groups were compared, there was a significant difference between the arithmetical averages of the
groups in favor of the experimental group (t (51) = 2.533, p = .014, t (51) = 2.964, p = .005 respectively). In other
words, the arithmetical average of the experimental group is statistically higher than that of the control group.
Table 3. The independent t-test results of the monitoring and control scores of the experimental and control
groups on MS.
Pre-Post-Retention
Factors Groups N Mean SD
Tests
Experimental 25 8.36 2.03

Pre-Test
Control 28 8.46 2.26
Self-Control Post-Test
Control 28 8.60 2.42
Retention-test
Control 28 8.46 2.39
Pre-Test
Control 28 5.17 1.76
Post-Test
Self-Monitoring Control 28 5.50 1.42
Retention-test
Control 28 4.75 1.95
52
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 43-64)
Students’ Reasons for Their Monitoring Status
According to the self-explanations of the students with an FT status, there were two reasons for the mistakes
they made in their predictions about the first activity. (a) Two of the students stated that their predictions were
wrong because this was the first time they had come across this particular subject (I had no previous knowledge
of the subject). In other words, if a student has no prior knowledge about a problem, the student’s predictions
may turn out to be wrong. (b) The students were mistaken in their prior knowledge. In other words, students’
misunderstandings may hinder them from monitoring their knowledge accurately. The students’ mistakes in their
knowledge about static and current electricity are presented below (Table 4).
Table 4. Types of misunderstandings revealed by students in their open-ended responses.
Misunderstandings Sample Student
In the final charging of objects electrified I had said ‘neutral’ after the ebonite rod had been electrified. S1, S7, S8, S12, S15, S16, S17
by friction
In objects that became electrified by I thought that positive charges were in motion and would (S3, S19)
contact be transmitted as positive charges. But they were negative
charges.
About the type of charges in the ball of I gave the wrong answer, I said that the head of the elec- (S10, S21)
the electroscope and its leaves troscope would be negatively charged but the leaves of the
electroscope opened.
About the final charged state of I said that the negatives would increase in the iron rod, but (S6, S7, S10)
grounded objects they repelled each other.
The confusion of the direction of move- My mistake was that I reversed the process and gave a wrong (S1, S20)
ment of electrons and the direction of answer.
electrical current
About which light bulb will light up when We were mistaken about the light bulbs turning on and off in (S1, S4, S6, S7, S8, S10, S11, S12,
there is a short circuit a short circuit. S16, S21)
The brightness of parallel connected I thought the same current would pass through the circuit and (S8, S12, S14, S17, S19)
light bulbs is different that’s why I made the mistake.
Light bulbs that light up according to (S3, S4, S7, S8, S10, S11, S12, S14,
whether the switch is on or off in series S15, S21).
and parallel circuits
Thus, the students’ misunderstanding can have an impact on their monitoring accuracy status. If the student
has a misunderstanding, he/she may make a prediction without being aware of the mistake. However, with the
continuation of the activities in the platform, the student soon realizes that he/she has a misunderstanding and
may be able to explain this misunderstanding. The point that must be underlined here is that the student becomes
able to accurately monitor the mistakes in his/her pre-knowledge. This is because the student that realizes his/her
mistakes is helped by the activities in the platform to change his misunderstandings and make an effort to learn
the correct scientific information. Or, the student that does not realize his/her mistake is able to enhance his/her
pre-knowledge by participating in the new activities.
Changes in Students’ Understanding of Electricity

during the Technology-enhanced Metacognitive Learning
The finding of the essay questions on static and current electricity indicated at the end of the research that
the posttest scores of the experimental group had increased in terms of students’ understanding of electricity as
53
(P. 43-64) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
compared to the scores of the control group. This finding shows that the TeMLP improved the students’ understand-
ing about electricity. This finding is also obviously depicted that there is a greater loss in retention by the normal
teaching method than the Technology-enhanced Metacognitive Learning Platform (TeMLP). The detail findings
of the questions were given below.
It seems that approximately 75% of students in the experimental and control groups did not answer rubbing
a plastic rod with woolen cloth question (see Appendix question 1, Table 5) or completely gave irrelevant answers.
In addition, six students in the experimental group and four students in control group had misunderstandings.
Some misconceptions or false pre-knowledge in the students on this question; “Positively charged aluminum
sphere”, “both (aluminum sphere and ebonite rod) charged positive”, “both are neutral. After instruction, 60% of
students in the experimental group and 28% of students in control gave the correct answer to this question in the
partially right or completely right level. However, some students in both group had some misconceptions after
the instruction. These misconceptions were observed in 8% of the experiment group students, whereas they were
observed in 14 % of the control group students.
Table 5. Comparison of students’degree of understanding of the first question in the control and experimental
groups.
Degree of understanding
n
0 1 2 3 4
Frequency 19 6 0 0 0 25
Experimental
Pre-Test % 76 24 0 0 0 100
Frequency 21 4 0 3 0 28
Control
% 75 14 0 11 0 100
Frequency 4 2 4 4 11 25
Experimental
% 16 8 16 16 44 100
Post-Test
Frequency 6 4 10 4 4 28
Control
% 21 14 36 14 14 100
In Table 6, pre-test findings of second rubbing a plastic rod with woolen cloth question open-ended ques-
tions showed that two groups were nearly equivalent on this question (see Appendix question 2). Accordingly, it
was concluded that students in both groups had similar knowledge about this question before the instruction.
When the post-test finding of this question was examined, 92% of the students in experimental group, 61% of the
students in the control group answered this question in the partially right or completely right level. At the end of
the instruction, two students in the experimental group and five students in the control group have misconcep-
tion about this subject. However, 46% of students in the control group and 16% of students in experimental group
have given no response to this question or have misconceptions. Consequently, the students in the experimental
group gave more correct responses to this question than the students in the control group.
Table 6. Comparison of students’ degree of understanding of the second question in the control and experi-
mental groups.
n
0 1 2 3 4
Frequency 15 10 0 0 0 25
Experimental
Pre-Test % 60 40 0 0 0 100
Frequency 17 9 2 0 0 28
Control
% 61 32 7 0 0 100
54
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 43-64)
n
0 1 2 3 4
Frequency 0 2 0 4 19 25
Experimental
% 0 8 0 16 76 100
Post-Test
Frequency 0 5 6 4 13 28
Control
% 0 18 21 14 47 100
The findings of pre-test revealed that 16% of the students in the experimental group and 25% of the students
in the control group did not know that the brightness of identical light bulbs connected in series are the same
and they also had the idea that the nearer the battery, the brighter the light bulbs and also some students in both
groups believed that the amount of the electric current in the point 3 was more than the one in the point 1 in Table
7 (see Appendix, question 3). Because they think that the point 3 was nearer the battery than the point 1. The find-
ings of post-test revealed that 72 % of the students in the experimental group and 53% of students in the control
group knew that brightness of identical light bulbs connected in series are the same and explained their reason
for this question in scientifically acceptable way. But 8% of the students in the experimental group and 21% of the
students in the control group still had misconceptions about the brightness of bulbs and the amount of electric
current in the different points in a series circuit. Some students in both groups had also the idea that brightness
of the light bulb was inverse proportional to a distance between the bulb and the battery.
When the findings of pre-test analyses were examined in the Table 8, it seems that most students in both
groups didn’t give response to the amount of electric current in a circuit questions or gave response in less right
level (see Appendix, question 4). Moreover, 12 of the 25 students (48 %) in the experimental group and 9 of the 28
students (32 %) in the control group had misconceptions about the amount of the electric current in the points 1,
2, 3 and 4. In general, these misconceptions are “points 2 have more electric current than the other points, “electric
current in all points is the same”, and points 1 and 3 have the same amount of electric current. Only two students
in the control group gave response to this question in partially right (3) or completely right level (4). After instruc-
tion, the findings of the post-test revealed that 16 of the 25 students (64 %) in the experimental group and 12 of
the 28 students (43 %) in the control group gave their responses to this question in completely right level (4) and
provided correct and scientific support what they think.
Table 7. Comparison of students’ degree of understanding of the third question in the control and experi-
mental groups.
n
0 1 2 3 4
Frequency 21 4 0 0 0 25
Experimental
Pre-Test % 84 16 0 0 0 100
Frequency 18 7 1 0 2 28
Control
% 64 25 3 0 7 100
Frequency 2 2 3 0 18 25
Experimental
% 8 8 12 0 72 100
Post-Test
Frequency 1 6 6 0 15 28
Control
% 4 21 22 0 53 100
In addition, five students in experimental group and seven students in the control group had still misconcep-
tions which were mentioned above.
55
(P. 43-64) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Table 8. Comparison of students’ degree of understanding of the fourth question in the control and experi-
mental groups.
n
0 1 2 3 4
Frequency 13 12 0 0 0 25
Experimental
Pre-Test % 52 48 0 0 0 100
Frequency 17 9 0 1 1 28
Control
% 61 32 0 4 4 100
Frequency 3 5 0 1 16 25
Experimental
% 12 20 0 4 64 100
Post-Test
Frequency 4 7 3 2 12 28
Control
% 14 25 11 7 43 100
The findings of pre-test revealed that almost most students in both groups didn’t respond to this question (see
Appendix, question 5) or give answer in level 1 (Table 9). Moreover, 8 of the 25 students (32 %) in the experimental
group and 9 of the 28 students (32 %) in the control group had misconceptions about the brightness of the bulb
A in the circuit 1 with bulb B in the circuit 2. Some misconception is “the bulb A in the circuit 1 is brighter than
the bulb B in the circuit 2 because the circuit 1 has one bulb and other has two and it didn’t share its energy with
other bulb”, “the bulb B in the circuit 2 is brighter than the bulb A in the circuit 1”, “they are the same brightness
because the circuits 1 and 2 have the same battery and bulb. In addition, one student in experimental group and
three students in the control group gave response to this question in completely right level (4). These students
could have taken a private course or attended a private science lesson support center. Because the students did
not take any course about this subject before the unit in the school.
When the findings of post-test were examined in the Table 9, it seems that only one student in the control
group didn’t give response to this question. Moreover, 2 of the 25 students (8 %) in the experimental group and 9
of the 28 students (31 %) in the control group had still misconceptions mentioned above about the brightness of
the bulb in the circuits after the instruction. 22 of the 25 students (88 %) in the experimental group and 16 of the
28 students (57 %) in the control group gave responses to this question in completely right level (4). The percent-
age of the students in both groups who gave responses to this question in partially right (3) were almost equal.
Consequently, the percentage of completely right level (4) given to this question in the experimental group was
higher than the control group.
Table 9. Comparison of students’degree of understanding of the fifth question in the control and experimental
groups.
n
0 1 2 3 4
Pre-Test Experimental Frequency 15 8 1 0 1 25

% 60 32 4 0 4 100
Control Frequency 13 9 1 2 3 28
% 46 32 4 7 11 100
Post-Test Experimental Frequency 0 2 0 1 22 25
% 0 8 0 4 88 100
Control Frequency 1 9 1 1 16 28
% 4 31 4 4 57 100
56
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 43-64)
In conclusion, students who used this skill correctly saw the incompatibilities, if any, between their previous
knowledge and the new knowledge gained and thus adjusted their previous knowledge or enhanced it to improve
their monitoring accuracy status. The answers the students gave regarding the software support this finding. All
of the students stated that the metacognitive prompts in the software helped them to monitor what they had
learned. Students’ statements explaining this are presented below:
I was able to correct my mistakes through the knowledge I gained from what it said to us. (S#3)
When it asked us to relate everything we knew about the subject, it recorded what I wrote. Then after the subject was
explained, it compared that knowledge to what I had said. This way, I was able to learn what I already knew about
the subject and what I didn’t know. (S#12)
I used to think I knew some of the topics very well. But it turns out I didn’t. I’ve learned it now. (S#16)
I learned to really understand what I read and monitor myself to see whether it’s wrong. (S#17)
Discussion
This research determined the effects of the metacognitive prompts on students’ monitoring accuracy and
understanding about electricity using the educational software TeMLP developed for the Electricity in Our Lives
unit. According to the results, students’ monitoring accuracy and understanding of electricity improved with TeMLP.
These results are consistent with previous researches. It was found that using interactive computer animation
accompanied with real-time science experiments, it was more effective in achieving students’ understanding of
static electricity compared to the sole use of real-time science experiments (Akpınar & Ergin, 2007; Akpınar, 2014).
The Web-based Inquiry Science Environment program (Shen & Linn, 2011) and learning by dynamic computer
simulation with the Dual Situated Learning Model were successful in students’ conceptual understanding of static
electricity concepts (Senthilkumar, Vimala & Al-Ruqeishi, 2014). Furthermore, the responses the students in the
research group gave to the questions about the magnitude and intensity of an electrical current at different points
on an electrical circuit (parallel and series) were more successful and retentive. Previous researches indicate that
students can predict, test and explore their predictions by exploring scientific model outcomes by using the com-
putational model NetLogo Investigations in current electricity concepts (Sengupta & Wilensky, 2009). Technology
enhanced learning also challenged students’ intuitive conceptions and helped them to understand the theoretical
principles of electricity (Jaakkola & Nurmi, 2008). This result indicates that students in the research group were
able to carry out the same experiment with the TeMLP with more ease than the students in the control group, and
that thanks to the repetitions they were able to implement and their interaction with the metacognitive prompts,
they succeeded in providing one-on-one feedback on their learning (Zacharia, 2007).
It can be seen that prior knowledge has an impact on students’ monitoring accuracy since prior knowledge
offers a cognitive foundation, on the basis of which the individual may evaluate his/her own performance (Nietfeld
& Schraw, 2002). If there is misunderstanding in the student’s prior knowledge, the individual may make the wrong
prediction about the problem at hand. At this point, the critical point is whether the student, after completing
the activity, can recognize that there was a mistake in his/her prior knowledge. If the student can make a decision
about whether the prior knowledge was wrong or right, then the individual will be able to become aware of the
particular mistake that was made. This is because it is not only the gaining of new knowledge but the metacogni-
tive monitoring that makes it possible to enhance prior knowledge (Koriat, 2012). Another matter that must be
pointed out is that the students clearly did not accept that they had made mistakes in using their prior knowledge
in the first activity. The platform encouraged the students to activate all prior knowledge but in this, the student
may have activated the wrong information. The incorrectness of the prior knowledge may have caused the student
to make the wrong decision and to construct an incorrect piece of knowledge in place of the target concept. The
responses to the platform showed that the students either were not aware of the mistakes in their prior knowledge
or that the decisions they made about their learning were incorrect. On the other hand, as the students used the
platform, they came to realize that certain parts of their prior knowledge were wrong and thus achieved a point
where they were able to decide about what they knew or did not know about the concept (Zhou, 2013). The cor-
rective feedback the software provided the students about monitoring accuracy therefore helped them in curbing
their overconfidence and setting a balance (Efklides, 2014).
In addition, students at different levels of prior knowledge need more support and guidance if they are to be
57
(P. 43-64) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
expected to use the features of technology-enhanced learning environments (Mitchell, Chen & Macredie, 2005).
Learners with lower levels of prior knowledge about a subject will not activate this knowledge and therefore have
difficulty in understanding the associations between concepts and more important, they will not be able to recog-
nize how much they know or do not know about the topic to be learned (Gurlitt & Renkl, 2008). Since this research
has considered the importance of students’ prior knowledge, the activities chosen were designed to accommodate
students with limited prior knowledge about the content. The platform presents students with examples from
daily life in the process of determining goals and includes animations that make the topic interesting. Thus, TeMLP
helps students to determine their goals regarding abstract concepts such as electricity before actually starting
to research the material. Offering students this prerequisite before starting a new activity is effective in helping
students become aware of their prior knowledge and form associations between that knowledge and the new
knowledge to be learned. In addition, the activities provided to help students determine the level of their prior
knowledge and to have offered the students feedback on their knowledge with the progress of the process. Thus,
guiding the students to the gaps in their knowledge so that they can complete the exercise and also complete
the missing knowledge in their minds.
Conclusions
In comparison to the normal instruction given in the control group, the TeMLP used in the experimental group
increased students’ monitoring accuracy and understanding of electricity. This result is also obviously depicted that
there is a greater loss in retention by the normal teaching method than the TeMLP after the three months of the
instruction. Regarding the reasons behind the loss in retention in the control group, it can be explicated that the
normal science classroom which used normal or traditional teaching methods and approaches does not focus on the
learners’ prior knowledge, other skills and especially metacognitive skills. One of the striking points of this research
is that the activities used in the software are more effective in learning abstract concepts compared to their being
taught by traditional instruction. This is because the prompts offered in the TeMLP help students become aware of
their previous knowledge of abstract concepts. In the case of abstract concepts such as electricity, students tend
to continue to retain the incorrect information they have about neutral, positively or negatively charged objects
when the materials are taught using the traditional techniques of lecturing or questions and answers. It is for this
reason that a TeMLP that is prepared in a manner that will actively uncover the knowledge that has already been
learned becomes more effective in ensuring learning and retention of knowledge.
Recommendations
The results of this research may provide educators and educational software designers with some recom-
mendations. The most striking result gleaned from the research was related to prior knowledge students had about
the topics. Students’ prior knowledge may directly impact status of their monitoring accuracy. It is for this reason
that educators must be sensitive to the issue of determining the state of students’ prior knowledge. Students
with complete and correct prior knowledge have increased curiosity about a topic, their willingness to learn is
enhanced and intrinsic goals come to the fore. In this case, when they compare their predictions with the results
they attain, they are able to arrive at meaningful conclusions. Their academic achievement is thus also enhanced.
Since inaccurate knowledge is a barrier to learning, corrective measures should be given priority. It is when mis-
understandings and deficiencies are corrected that learning becomes meaningful. It is then that a student may
make more of an effort to learn and the learning process is facilitated. Teachers must employ alternative methods
and techniques to monitor students’ prior knowledge and encourage them to confront the problems and circum-
stances they have difficulty with in their daily lives. Different materials, examples, analogies, models can be used
to help the teacher in this task.
Recommendations for researchers who will be designing educational software include the guidance that
students should be provided with not only programs that focus on their cognitive skills but also on developing
metacognitive skills. Planning, monitoring and evaluating the learning process are of great importance. This will
provide learners with the opportunity to monitor the effectiveness of the learning process.
58
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 43-64)
Limitations of the Research
This research has several limitations. The changes observed in the students in the research may have been
caused not only by the effects of the educational software, but also by factors that include individual (computer
self-sufficiency, confidence in learning, maturity) or environmental (lessons in the computer laboratory, the role of
the teacher, peer interaction) influences. To eliminate these limitations, the researchers evaluated the scores of the
students on the metacognitive scale, their academic test scores and their statements on the learning platform. The
diversity employed here was focused on being able to interpret the data in more detail. Another limitation of the
research was that it was confined to the unit on electricity. It is not known how students provide their monitoring
accuracy changes with respect to other topics. Researches to be conducted in the future may contribute to the
field by providing more detailed research on the results of educational software using metacognitive prompts in
other subjects.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the projects from the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey
(TÜBİTAK) (Project number #106K268). The authors would like to thank Prof. Ömer Ergin, Yusuf Yılmaz and Abdulkadir
Karadeniz for their valuable feedback and assistance throughout various phases of this research.

References
Akgün, Ö. E., & Deryakulu, D. (2007). The effects of refutational text and predict-observe-explain strategies on students’ levels of
cognitive conflict and conceptual change. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 40 (1), 17-40.
Akpınar, E., & Ergin, O. (2007). The effect of interactive computer animations accompanied with experiments on 6th grade stu-
dents’ achievements and attitudes toward science. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 2 (2), 36-41.
Akpınar, E. (2014). Akpinar, E. (2013). The use of interactive computer animations based on POE as a presentation tool in primary
science teaching. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23, 27–537.
Aleven, V. A., & Koedinger, K. R. (2002). An effective metacognitive strategy: Learning by doing and explaining with a computer-
based cognitive tutor. Cognitive Science, 26 (2), 147-179.
Azevedo, R. (2005). Using hypermedia as a metacognitive tool for enhancing student learning? The role of self-regulated learn-
ing. Educational Psychologist, 40 (4), 199-209.
Azevedo, R., Cromley, J.G., & Seibert, D. (2004). Does adaptive scaffolding facilitate students’ ability to regulate their learning
with hypermedia? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 344-370.
Azevedo, R., Guthrie, J.T., & Seibert, D. (2004). The role of self-regulated learning in fostering students’ conceptual understanding
of complex systems with hypermedia. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 30, 87-111.
Bannert, M., Hildebrand, M., & Mengelkamp C. (2009). Effects of a metacognitive support device in learning environments.
Computers in Human Behavior, 25 (4), 829-835.
Başer, M., & Durmuş, S. (2010). The effectiveness of computer supported versus real laboratory inquiry learning environments
on the understanding of direct current electricity among pre-service elementary school teachers. Eurasia Journal of Math-
ematics, Science & Technology Education, 6 (1), 47-61.
Becker, W., & Johnston, C. (1999). The relationship between multiple choice and essay response questions in assessing economics
understanding. Economic Record, 75, 348-357.
Beishuizen, J. J., Wilhelm, P., & Schimmel, M. (2004). Computer-supported inquiry learning: Effects of Training and Practice.
Computers & Education, 42 (4), 389-402.
Bilal, E., & Erol, M. (2009). Investigating students’ conceptions of some electricity concepts. Latin-American Journal of Physics
Education, 3 (2), 193-201.
Cavallo, A. M. L., McNeely, J. C., & Marek, E. A. (2003). Eliciting students’ understandings of chemical reactions using two forms of
essay questions during a learning cycle. International Journal of Science Education, 25 (5), 583-603.
Chang, K. E., Sung, Y. T., & Chen, S. F. (2001). Learning through computer-based concept mapping with scaffolding aid. Journal
of Computer Assisted Learning, 17 (1), 21-33.
ChanLin, L. (2001). Formats and prior knowledge on learning in a computer-based lesson. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,
17 (4), 409-419.
Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6 (3),
271-315.
Çimen, S. (1995). Ortaöğretim öğrencilerinin (12-17 yaş) fen ve biyoloji derslerinde öğrendikleri canli- enerji ilişkisi ile ilgili kavramlarin
doğruluk, zamanlama ve bağlantililik açisindan incelenmesi.[ Examination of concepts related to living-energy relationships
of secondary school students (ages 12-17) in science and biology courses in terms of accuracy, timing and connectivity].
(Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Marmara University, İstanbul, Turkey).
59
(P. 43-64) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Dunning, D., Johnson, K., Ehrlinger, J., & Kruger, J. (2003). Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Current Direc-
tions in Psychological Science, 12 (3), 83-87.
Efklides, A. (2014). How does metacognition contribute to the regulation of learning? An integrative approach. Psychological
Topics, 23 (1), 1-30.
Engelhardt, P., & Beichner, R. (2004). Students understanding of direct current resistive electrical forces. American Journal of
Physics, 72 (1), 98-115.
Escalada, L.T., & Zollman, D. (1997). An investigation on the effects of using interactive digital video in a physics classroom on
student learning and attitudes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 5 (34), 467 - 489.
Greene, J. A., Moos, D. C., & Azevedo, R. (2011). Self-regulation of learning with computer-based learning environments. New
Directions for Teaching and Learning, 126, 107-115.
Gurlitt, J., & Renkl, A. (2008). Are high-coherent concept maps better for prior knowledge activation? Differential effects of concept
mapping tasks on high school vs. university students. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24, 407-419.
Guruswamy, C., Somers, M., & Hussey, R. (1997). Students’ understanding of the transfer of charge between conductors. Physics
Education, 32 (2), 91-96.
Gutwill, J. P., Frederiksen, J. R., & White, B. Y. (1999). Making their own connections: Students’ understanding of multiple repre-
sentations and mechanisms in basic electricity. Cognition and Instruction, 17 (3), 249-282.
Halpern, D. F. (1999). Teaching for critical thinking: Helping college students develop skills and dispositions of a critical thinker.
New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 80, 69-74.
Herscovitz, O., Kaberman, Z., Saar, L., & Dori, Y.J. (2012). The relationship between metacognition and the ability to pose ques-
tions in chemical education. In A. Zohar and Y.J. Dori (Eds.) Metacognition in Science Education: Trends in Current Research
(pp. 165-195). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer-Verlag.
Jaakkola, T., & Nurmi, S. (2008). Fostering elementary school students’ understanding of simple electricity by combining simula-
tion and laboratory activities. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24, 271-283.
Jaakkola, T., Nurmi, S., & Veermans, K. (2010). A comparison of students’ conceptual understanding of electric circuits in simula-
tion only and simulation-laboratory contexts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 71-93.
Jacobs, J. E., & Paris, S. G. (1987). Children’s metacognition about reading: Issues in definition, measurement, and instruction.
Educational Psychologist, 22, 255-278.
Kao, G. Y. -M., Lin, S. S. J., & Sun, C. T. (2008). Breaking concept boundaries to enhance creative potential: using integrated concept
maps for conceptual self-awareness. Computers & Education, 51 (4), 1718-1728.
Kapa, E. (2001). A metacognitive support during the process of problem solving in a computerized environment. Educational
Studies in Mathematics, 47 (3), 31 7–336.
Kong, S. C., Yeung, Y. Y., & Wub, X. Q. (2009). An experience of teaching for learning by observation: Remote-controlled experi-
ments on electrical circuits. Computers & Education, 52 (3), 702-717.
Koriat, A. (2012). The relationships between monitoring, regulation and performance. Learning and Instruction, 22, 296-298.
Kramarski, B., & Gutman, M. (2006). How can self-regulated learning be supported in mathematical E-learning environments?
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22 (1), 24-33.
Kramarski, B., & Michalsky, T. (2010). Preparing preservice teachers for self-regulated learning in the context of technological
pedagogical content knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 20 (5), 434-447.
Kwon, S. Y., & Cifuentes, L. (2009). The comparative effect of individually-constructed vs. collaboratively-constructed computer-
based concept maps. Computers & Education, 52 (2), 365-375.
Lee, H. W., Lim, K. Y., & Grabowski, B. L. (2010). Improving self-regulation, learning strategy use, and achievement with metacogni-
tive feedback. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58 (6), 629-648.
Lee, P. L. H. (1997). Integrating concept mapping and metacognitive methods in a hypermedia environment for learning science.
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Purdue University.
Liégeois, L., Chasseigne, G., Papin, S., & Mullet, E. (2003). Improving high school students’ understanding of potential difference
in simple electric circuits. International Journal of Science Education, 25 (9), 1129-1145.
Liu, P. L. (2011). A study on the use of computerized concept mapping to assist ESL learners’ writing. Computers & Education, 57,
2548–2558.
Manlove, S., Lazonder, A. W., & Jong de, T. (2009). Trends and issues of regulative support use during inquiry learning: Patterns
from three studies. Computers in Human Behavior, 25 (4), 795-803.
Mason, L. H., & Shriner, J. (2008). Self-regulated strategy development instruction for writing an opinion essay: Effects for six
students with emotional/behavioral disorders. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 21, 71-93.
McDermott, L., & Shaffer, P. (1992). Research as guide for curriculum development: An example from introductory electricity.
Part I: Investigation of students understanding. American Journal of Physics, 60 (11), 994-1003.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mitchell, T. J. F., Chen, S. Y., & Macredie, R. D. (2005). Hypermedia learning and prior knowledge: domain expertise vs. systems
expertise. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21 (1), 53–64.
Molenaar I., Roda C., van Boxtel C., & Sleegers P. (2012). Dynamic scaffolding of socially regulated learning in a computer-based
learning environment. Computers & Education, 59, 515-523.
Murphy, E. (2008). A framework for identifying and promoting metacognitive knowledge and control in online discussants.
Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 34 (2), 1-18.
60
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 43-64)
Nietfeld, J. L., & Schraw, G. (2002). The effect of knowledge and strategy explanation on monitoring accuracy. Journal of Educa-
tional Research, 95, 131-142.
Nietfeld, J. L., Cao, L., & Osborne, J. W. (2005). Metacognitive monitoring accuracy and student performance in the classroom.
Journal of Experimental Education, 74 (1), 7-28.
Özmen, H. (2011). Effect of animation enhanced conceptual change texts on 6th grade students’ understanding of the particulate
nature of matter and transformation during phase changes. Computers & Education, 57, 1114-1126.
Özmen, H., Demircioğlu, H., & Demircioğlu, G. (2009). The effects of conceptual change texts accompanied with animations
on overcoming 11th grade students’ alternative conceptions of chemical bonding. Computers & Education, 52, 681-695.
Park, J., Kim, I., Kim, M., & Lee, M. (2001). Analysis of students’ processes of confirmation and falsification of their prior ideas about
electrostatics. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 1219-1236.
Peşman, H. (2005). Development of a three-tier to assess ninth grade students’ misconceptions about simple electric circuits. (Unpub-
lished master of science dissertation). Middle East Technical University. Ankara, Turkey.
Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessment. Theory into Practice, 41 (4), 219-25.
Quintana, C., Zhang, M., & Krajcik, J. (2005). A framework for supporting metacognitive aspects of online inquiry through software-
based scaffolding. Educational Psychologist, 40, 235-244.
Raes, A., Schellens, T., De Wever, B., & Vanderhoven, E. (2012). Scaffolding information problem solving in web-based collabora-
tive inquiry learning. Computers & Education, 59 (1), 82-94.
Ross, J. D. (1999). Regulating hypermedia: Self-regulation learning strategies in a hypermedia environment. (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Blacksburg, Virginia.
Salovaara, H. (2005). An exploration of students’ strategy use in inquiry-based computer-supported collaborative learning.
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 39-52.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1983). Beyond the purely cognitive: Beliefs systems, social cognitions, and metacognitions as driving forces
in intellectual performance, Cognitive Science, 7, 329-363.
Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science, 26 (1-2), 113-125.
Schraw, G. (2007). The use of computer-based environments for understanding and improving self-regulation. Metacognition
and Learning, 2, 169-176.
Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7 (4), 351-371.
Schraw, G., Wise, S. L., & Roos, L. L. (2000). Metacognition and computer-based testing. In G. Schraw (Ed.) Issues in the measure-
ment of metacognition. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
Schunk, D. H. (2003). Self-efficacy for reading and writing: Influence of modeling, goal setting, and self-evaluation. Reading and
Writing Quarterly, 19, 159-172.
Sengupta, P., & Wilensky, U. (2009). Learning electricity with NIELS: Thinking with electrons and thinking in levels. International
Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 14 (1), 21-50.
Senthilkumar, R. D., Vimala, E., & Al-Ruqeishi, E. (2014 April). Use of ICT with Dual Situated Learning Model in Physics Education.
Paper presented at The 2nd International Conference on Applied Information and Communications Technology, Oman.
Elsevier Publications.
She, H. C., & Lee, C. Q. (2008). SCCR digital learning system for scientific conceptual change and scientific reasoning. Computers
& Education, 51, 724-742.
Shen, J., & Linn, M. (2010). A technology-enhanced unit of modeling static electricity: Integrating scientific explanations and
everyday observations. International Journal of Science Education, 33, 1-27
Siegel, M., & Lee, J. A. C. (2001, March) “But electricity isn’t static:” Science discussion, identification of learning issues, and use
of resources in a problem-based learning education course. Paper session presented at the annual meeting of National
Association for Research Science Teaching. St. Louis, Missouri.
Slotta, J. D., & Chi, M. T. H. (2006). Helping students understand challenging topics in science through ontology training. Cogni-
tion and Instruction, 24, 261-289.
Stahl, E., Pieschl, S., & Bromme, R. (2006). Task complexity, epistemological beliefs and metacognitive calibration: An exploratory
study. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35 (4), 319-338.
Thacker, B. A., Ganiel, U., & Boys, D. (1999). Macroscopic phenomena and microscopic processes: Student understanding of
transients in direct current electric circuits. American Journal of Physics, 67 (7), 25-S31.
Tobias, S., & Everson, H. (2002). Knowing what you know and what you don’t: Further research on metacognitive knowledge monitor-
ing. College Board Report No. 2002-3. College Board, NY.
Tobias, S., & Everson, H. T. (2009). The importance of knowing what you know: A knowledge monitoring framework for studying
metacognition in education. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education
(pp. 107-128). New York, NYNY: Routledge.
Van Loon, M. (2014). Fostering monitoring and regulation of learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Maastricht: Maastricht
University.
Van Loon, M., De Bruin, A. B. H., Van Gog, T., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2013). Activation of inaccurate prior knowledge affects
primary-school students’ metacognitive judgments and calibration. Learning and Instruction, 24, 15-25.
Vandewaetere, M., & Clarebout, G. (2011). Can instruction as such affect learning? The case of learner control. Computers &
Education, 57 (4), 2322-2332.
Veenman, M. V. J. (2011). Learning to self-monitor and self-regulate. In R. Mayer & P. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of research on
learning and instruction (pp. 197–218). New York: Routledge.
61
(P. 43-64) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Veermans, M., & Järvelä, S. (2004). Generalized achievement goals and situational coping in inquiry learning. Instructional Sci-
ence, 32, 269-291.
Vovides, Y. (2007). Investigating learning from hypermedia via the implementation of a computer-based metacognition training
regimen and a hypermedia program. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Iowa.
Westbrook, S. L., & Marek, E. A. (1991). A cross-age study of student understanding of the concept of diffusion, Journal of Research
in Science Teaching, 28 (8), 649-660.
Winters, F., Greene, J. A., & Costich, C. M. (2008). Self-regulation of learning within computer-based learning environments: A
critical analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 20 (4), 429-444.
Yeung, N., & Summerfield, C. (2012). Metacognition in human decision-making: confidence and error monitoring. Philosophical
Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 367 (1594), 1310-1321.
Yıldız, E., Akpınar, E., Tatar, N., & Ergin, Ö. (2009). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the metacognition scale for
primary school students. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 9 (3), 1591-1604.
Zacharia, Z. C. (2003). Beliefs, Attitudes, and Intentions of Science Teachers Regarding the Educational Use of Computer Simula-
tions and Inquiry-based Experiments in Physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40 (8), 792-823.
Zacharia, Z. C. (2007). Comparing and combining real and virtual experimentation: An effort to enhance students’ conceptual
understanding of electric circuits. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 120- 132.
Zacharia, Z. C., & Anderson, R. (2003). The effects of an interactive computer-based simulation prior to performing a laboratory
inquiry-based experiment on students’ conceptual understanding of physics. American Journal of Physics, 71 (6), 618-629.
Zhou, M. (2013). University student’s goal profiles and metacomprehension accuracy, Educational Psychology: An International
Journal of Experimental Educational Psychology, 33 (1), 1-13.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25 (1), 82-91.
Zimmerman, B. J., Bonner, S., & Kovach, R. (1996). Developing self-regulated learners; Beyond achievement to self-efficacy.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Zion, M., Michalsky, T., & Mevarech, Z. R. (2005). The effects of metacognitive instruction embedded within an asynchronous
learning network on scientific inquiry skills. International Journal of Science Education, 27 (8), 957-983.
Appendix
62
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 43-64)
63
(P. 43-64) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Received: September 09, 2017 Accepted: January 18, 2018
Ercan Akpınar PhD, Professor, Faculty of Education, Dokuz Eylul University, 35160,
Buca-İzmir, Turkey.
E-mail: ercanakpinar@gmail.com
Website: http://www.akpinarercan.com
Eylem Yıldız Feyzioğlu PhD, Associate Professor, Faculty of Education, Adnan Menderes
University, Aydın, Turkey.
E-mail: eylem1797@gmail.com
Nilgün Tatar PhD, Associate Professor, Department of Elementary Education,
Faculty of Education, Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Antalya,
Turkey.
E-mail: nilguntatar@gmail.com
64
EFFECTS OF LEARNING
CYCLE MODELS ON SCIENCE
SUCCESS: A META-ANALYSIS ISSN 1648-3898 /Print/
Süleyman Yaman, Abstract. This meta-analysis has two

Şadiye Karaşah objectives: (a) to address the main effects of
learning cycle models on students’ success
in science; and (b) to address potential
moderators of the effect of LC models. This
Introduction
meta-analysis was conducted by calculat-
Many studies on education focus on determining how students learn ing the effect size of 75 studies, including
and on setting out more effective educational approaches, models, methods, theses and journal papers associated with
and techniques. This may be due to the lack of certain knowledge about the implementation of LC models published
how the learning is formed, the excessiveness of the variables involved, and
in Turkey. The studies were selected accord-
the fact that research findings have different results. Researches on learning
might give different results because of people being influenced by many char- ing to the following criteria: experimental
acteristics of themselves and because all kinds of external factors influence studies on LC models in science courses at
those (Riding & Rayner, 2013). A student can have different levels of learning different educational levels. The studies,
for different subjects or even for different subjects within a course (Felder &
which were included within this scope, were
Brent, 2005). In addition, due to the increase in knowledge by time and the
fact that the technology has a great deal of influence on daily life, there may carried out between the years of 2004-2016.
occur differences between research results. Additionally, the effect of teaching As possible moderators of LC models; ef-
on learning is one of the least debated topics. This is because researchers are fects, type of publication, educational level,
almost certain that learning would be very limited and incomplete without
period, sample size and the year of con-
teaching (Schunk, 2013).
Today, a variety of educational models have been developed and imple- struction were investigated. This moderator
mented at different levels of teaching in order to transfer the increasing fund analysis indicates that there are significant
of knowledge to the students in the most effective way (Bayram, Patlı, and differences among the effect sizes of the
Savcı, 1998). The influence of the theories of cognitive development theo-
research. Nevertheless, the values of the
rists on the educational sciences increased and they were adopted all over
the world in the 1950s. Thus, the focus was on studies aimed at increasing general effect size of the researches provide
the effect of teaching and learning. The competition for space research was a positive outlook to increase the students’
influential in this process, interest in science increased and research-based science success of the LC models. Consider-
learning and teaching approaches were adopted. One of the most important
ing the effects of LC model on the students’
of these approaches is the learning cycle (LC) (Ayas, 1994). LC was developed
by Robert Karplus. In 1977, on the basis of the theory of mental development science success, this research could be help-
introduced by the famous educator and psychologist Piaget (Karamustafao- ful to both researchers and practitioners in
glu & Yaman, 2006). LC models were particularly important in the program the field of science education.
which was developed by Karplus and his colleagues within the scope of the
Keywords: meta-analysis, learning cycle
Science Improvement Study. This program is a research-based approach
that centers on student-centered learning (Abraham, 2005). One of the most models, science success, effect size.
applied models of LC is the research-based learning, also known as 5E. This
model, which is quite popular in the constructivist approach, consists of five
steps (Carin & Bass, 2005; Özsevgeç, Çepni, & Bayri, 2007). Based on the 5E Süleyman Yaman, Şadiye Karaşah
model, alternative models such as 3E, 4E and 7E have been developed and Ondokuz Mayıs University, Turkey
used at every stage of science education (Eisenkraft, 2003). The steps for
these models are displayed in the table below:
65
(P. 65-83)
Table 1. Steps of learning cycle models.
3E 4E 5E 7E
Engage Elicit
Explore Engage
Explore Engage
Explore Explain Explore
Explain Explain
Explain Elaborate Elaborate
Evaluate
Evaluate Evaluate Evaluate Extend
All of those models emphasize that the learning should be done according to constructivist understanding. The
constructivist learning is a student-centered theory that examines the nature of knowledge and how information
is acquired. In this theory, individuals form their own concepts and adapt them to new situations by utilizing their
previous experience and prior knowledge (Açışlı, 2010). The LC models can be addressed in the constructivist theory.
Constructivism is based on the fact that the learner constructs his own knowledge rather than reproducing the
knowledge of another (Moussiaux & Norman, 2003). The 5E model is an important part of the constructor tradition
because it involves rational learning (Tinker, 1997). The 5E model allows students to be more curious and get more
familiar with the real world, and helps them to develop problem-solving skills. It also allows them to reflect upon basic
information and to develop the skills necessary to learn, analyze and synthesize this knowledge (Yoon & Onchwari
2006). This model allows students to learn in real life, by letting them take their own learning responsibilities, learn
by experience and transfer information (Bıyıklı & Yağcı, 2015).
In the very step of 5E learning model, in “elicit” step, it is attempted to get the students’ attention and reveal the
preliminary information and the teachers get the opportunity to understand the current concepts of the students. What
is important in this step is not to let students find the right answer, but to encourage them to put forward different ideas
and to improve their ability to ask questions. Asking interesting questions to students, reading an attention-grabbing
story, showing a video or experiment can be done in this step (Ekici, 2007; Newby, 2004). Unanswered questions in
the previous step are resolved in the explore step. In this step, the student activity is at its highest. Students reach
out to some information on their own by researching, using various sources, experimenting or discussing (Kabapınar,
Sapmaz, & Bıkmaz, 2003; Özmen, 2002). “Explain” is the step where the teacher helps students combine the results
of their experiences, explain the results that they’ve found and created new concepts by making explanations at the
basic knowledge level. Students describe the concepts they understand, use their own abilities and explain the events
by expressing their own approach (Ekici, 2007). The deepening step allows students to apply their new definitions,
explanations and skills to new but similar situations and encompasses the experimental inquiry, investigation projects,
problem solving and decision-making activities. “Evaluate” is the step that students are expected to demonstrate their
understanding, the change in their behavior, how much of the new concepts and skills have been learned, and that
they evaluate their own self-development (Linn & Miller, 2005; Özmen, 2002).
The 3E model was developed on the 5E model based on Piaget’s theory of mental development. This model is
based on explore, explain and evaluate. Explore corresponds to the step of entering and discovering, explain cor-
responds to the explaining and expanding, evaluate corresponds to the evaluating step on the 5E model. The 4E
model consists of four consecutive stages of engage, explore, explain and evaluate. This model helps teachers who
use the constructivist learning approach in their lessons (Bybee, 1997). The first step of the 4E LC model which is the
engage step is the step where the mental assimilation and explain in the 3E LC model occur. In this step, students
collect data on the concept or subject they will learn using scientific process skills such as observation, interpretation,
and prediction. Explore step is where the connection happens. In this step, the students organize the information
obtained with the help of the advisor, present it to the class and discuss it together. Explain step is the step that the
structure in Piaget’s model is performed. In this step, the counselor helps the students to extend the meaning of the
concept and to apply this concept to their daily life by allowing the concept to be implemented in various places
(Marek & Cavallo, 1997). In the final step which is evaluate, students are subjected to performance evaluation rather
than traditional evaluation.
The 4E model is a very effective way to implement the constructivist theory easily within the classroom (Bybee,
1997). Students find this model fun and interesting. This model enhances the motivation of students and encourages
high-level thinking skills, encourages them to think about the subject, and enables them to learn by experimenting
66
ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ EFFECTS OF LEARNING CYCLE MODELS ON SCIENCE SUCCESS: A META-ANALYSIS
(P. 65-83)
(Yılmaz & Huyugüzel Çavaş, 2006). The 7E model is the reinterpreted version of the 5E model developed separately
by Bybee (2003) and Eisenkraft (2003). Studies on the 7E learning model show that it contributes to the develop-
ment of critical thinking in students (Mecit, 2006) and shows that students develop scientific process skills. At the
same time, it gives more successful results in the lessons carried out in the laboratory (Kanlı, 2007) compared to the
teacher-centered (TC) models.
When the national and international literature is examined, it is stated that LC models can be used to improve
many skills of students. According to the traditional teaching methods (no constructivist approach), these models
improve academic success (Ceylan & Geban, 2009; Chen, 2008; Kunduz & Seçken, 2013), metacognition (Feyzioğlu
& Ergin, 2012), attitude (Aktaş, 2013; Mecit, 2006) and high-level cognitive skills (Aydın & Yılmaz, 2010). The purpose
of this research is to determine the effect size of LC models by comparing students’ science success with LC models
(3E, 4E, 5E, and 7E) and TC models.
Two sets of research questions guided this meta-analysis. Firstly, the main effects of LC models on outcomes
including success in science were addressed. Secondly, potential moderators of the effect of LC models were indi-
cated. A first category of moderators include the LC model used in the research. In the second category of modera-
tors, whether the effect of LC models differs across the study types (journal paper, master’ theses, dissertations) was
examined. Thirdly, the effect of the level of school, where the research was conducted (primary school/middle school/
high school/ undergraduate), was examined. In the fourth category of moderators, the effect of LC models according
to sample sizes (0-50/51-75/76-100/101 and above) was investigated. Lastly, the effect of LC models based on the
time of the research (2005 and before/2006-2010/2011 and later) was examined.
General Background
The research is a meta-analysis study. Meta-analysis is a quantitative technique that integrates the results of a
number of different primary studies to analyze and synthesize them into a coherent product (Schroeder, Scott, Tol-
son, Huang, & Lee, 2007). Although meta-analysis is not a primary research study, it shares common traits in terms of
formulating a problem, collecting data, coding the data, analysis, and interpretation (Cooper & Hedges, 1994). Meta-
analysis is a method of screening literature in scientific research. This method is described as the synthesis of existing
research on a particular research hypothesis (Jupp, 2006). Meta-analysis is a method that quantifies the generalizations
obtained from different researches and suggests new emphasis for future researches by exploring the deficiencies
in existing researches. It is also accepted as an analysis of the analysis of other studies (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison,
2007). The studies in this research included theses and dissertations about the LC models applied in 2004-2016 years
and the articles of the refereed journals in Turkey available during research. In the analysis, the random effects model
was used, and the effect sizes were recalculated using the free-effects model.
Collection of the Data
The studies examined in the research include the published theses and dissertations about the LC models between
2004-2016 years and the articles published in the refereed journals in Turkey. The reason for choosing 2004 as a start-
ing year is that very few studies have been done before and the data of these studies are not available. The reason for
ending with 2016 year is that it is the time when data analysis has begun. In order to reach the theses, keywords were
used to make research on the website of the Council of Higher Education’s (YÖK) National Thesis Screening Center.
39 master theses and 37 dissertations were found in this way. The full text of the three works with restriction is not
accessible; the authors were contacted and requested for research data for analysis. One study was reached in this
way. Two of the theses were not reached despite all attempt. It was examined the suitability of data obtained from
75 theses accessed for meta-analysis and it was found out that the data of 18 do not have a data format that can be
analyzed. Thus, 57 studies were included in the scope of the studies to conduct a meta-analysis.
Between October 2016 and January 2017, Ondokuz Mayıs University Library Database, Google Academic and
Turkish Academic Network and Information Center (ULAKBİM) Social Sciences Database were used to access the
journal papers published in national and international journals. 24 papers were reached at the end of this review;
but since 2 publications were included in the study as theses, 4 papers were excluded from the analysis because they
do not have the data format that can be analyzed. At the end of this examination, a total of 18 papers published in
the journals were included in the meta-analysis study. One of these papers examines the animation technique, while
67
(P. 65-83)
another examines the effect of peer learning on science success. However, these applications were based on the 5E
learning model and since this situation is stated in the research, they are included in the study. As a result, analysis
was made with 75 studies from theses, dissertations, and journal papers that included the learning-cycle approach
and appropriate data for meta-analysis.
Analysis Inclusion Criteria
The criteria used for inclusion into meta-analysis study are given below in detail:
a) The research must be conducted in Turkey between 2004 and 2016
b) It must be an article published in master’ these/dissertations or scientific refereed journal which is written
in Turkish or English language.
c) It must consider science success as one of the dependent variables in studies,
d) The studies must be designed according to true or quasi-experimental design,
e) One of the LC models to the experimental group and the TC models to the control group or the applica-
tions stated in the current curriculum must be applied. Applications (model, technique, method, strategy,
or approach) used for the control groups were generally not well-defined in most studies, but TC models
meant more teacher-dominated instruction with passive student participation.
f) Mean and standard deviations of the science success scores of experimental and control groups must
be given in the findings
g) The simple size in the experimental and control groups must be given.
h) Assessment tools used in studies must have adequate levels of validity and reliability.
Coding of Data
Rater reliability is an important criterion in coding data analyzed in meta-analysis studies. For this purpose, it
is expected that the coding of at least two different raters in the studies and the percentage of correspondence be-
tween these coding is expected to be high (Açıkel, 2009; Akçil & Karaağaoğlu, 2001). For this purpose, a coding form
(Appendix2) has been developed. This form consists of three parts. First part; the name of the work, the name of the
author(s), the publication year, and the type of work (thesis or article). In the second part entitled “study content”, the
subject area (physics, chemistry, biology) in which the LC models are applied, as well as the level of learning and ex-
perimental work are included. The third part is the “study data” which refers to the mean, standard deviation obtained
from experimental and control groups and the size of the study group.
The data were entered simultaneously onto the coding form by two different researchers. One of these research-
ers is continuing his graduate education in science education and the other researcher is a lecturer in the related field.
The Miles and Huberman (2002) formula was used to determine the percentage of consensus on data that researchers
independently code. The consistency level of the researchers’ codes was found to be 96%. For incompatible encod-
ings, the data were analyzed together, and coding of the data was maintained until a consensus was reached. Three
data that could not be agreed on, were removed from the coding form. It was decided that the reliability level of the
coded data was sufficient since it was taken into consideration that 70% or more of the correspondences were suf-
ficient in such coding (Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2011).
Variables
Dependent Variable: The dependent variable examined in the research is the science success score from which
the effect of the LC models is researched.
Independent Variables: The basic independent variable of the research is the different model of the LC models. The
3E, 4E, 5E and 7E LC models applied within this approach were addressed separately. Since only 1 study is available
for 3E, this research is not included in the study. In addition, TC models that are influenced by the control group are
another independent variable. The moderator variables discussed in this research are; the number of students in the
study groups, the duration of the experimental work, and the field of the applied courses (physics, chemistry, biology
or science). In these areas, studies conducted in primary and middle schools within the scope of science lessons are
coded as physics, chemistry or biology according to the subjects of the research. Since there is more than one field
related to three different studies, random assignment of each field is performed in the coding. The mesh-terms or key
words used in the search were LC models, constructivist approach, Karplus’ learning model, science success, science
68
(P. 65-83)
course, science teaching, science learning.
Validity
The validity level of the data obtained from the sources studied in the meta-analysis studies is related to the
ability of the data collection tools used in these studies to measure what they are trying to measure (Petitti, 2000).
For this reason, it has appeared that assessment tools used in studies have high levels of validity which is a common
criterion for acceptance of publications and thesis in Turkey.
Data Analysis
The researches that satisfied the criteria stipulated were then uploaded into the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis
(CMA) software program, and analysis was performed with this program (Hunter & Schmidt, 2004). The standard unit
of measurement in the meta-analysis is the effect size. The effect size increases as the difference between the mean
scores of the variables examined in the experimental and control groups increases and as the standard deviation
decreases (Aron & Aron, 1997). Developed by Glass, this method is especially preferred in psychology, social sciences
and educational studies. Standardized magnitude of impacts, defined as Hedges’ g or Cohen’s, can be used to deter-
mine the effect size of the independent variables discussed in the research. In this research, Cohen’s values, which are
calculated by dividing the difference between the science success scores of the experimental and control groups by
the combined standard deviation, are taken into account (Schulze, 2004). This formula makes it possible to translate
the data obtained from independent studies into a standard system and to compare the effect sizes obtained in a
meaningful way. The significance level of the statistics used in the research was chosen as .05. Cohen’s effect size
classification is as follows: “.00 ≤ d ≤ .20 weak; .21 ≤ d ≤ .50 small; .51 ≤ d ≤ 1.00 moderate; 1.01 ≤ d strong” (Cohen,
1988). For graphics, Hedges’ g value given by CMA program was preferred.
Chi-square homogeneity test (Q statistic) was used to test for accurate heterogeneity among the studies included
in the research. This test tests the null hypothesis that is assert that it has same effect on any study that includes the
independent variable effect (Higgins, Tompson, Deeks, & Altman, 2003). The combination of meta-analysis and studies
with different effect sizes has a significant effect on the selected model. There are two types of models in meta-analysis:
Fixed and random effects model. “n” the constant-effect model (SEM), the parameters of the universe are taken into
account. In this model, the standard deviation value for universe magnitude is assumed to be zero. In addition, the
fixed effect model is based on the assumption that each study has only one actual effect size (Borenstein, Hedges,
Higgins, & Rothstein, 2009 as cited in Üstün & Eryılmaz, 2014). In the random effects model (REM), it is accepted that
the effect sizes of the universe get different values in different studies.
While deciding which model was going to be preferred in the analysis of the studies, it was checked whether
the effect size values were homogeneous or heterogeneous. When the data shows heterogeneous distribution, it is
suggested to be used a random effects model and when it has a homogeneous distribution, it is suggested that the
fixed effect model should be preferred (Ellis, 2010). It is found out that the factors affecting the study differ in each
of the studies examined in this research. It is also claimed that the basic assumption of the fixed effect model, which
predicts only one true effect size for all studies in the meta-analysis, is not realistic for many situations (Borenstein et
al., 2009 as cited in Üstün and Eryılmaz, 2014). Finally, intra-group, inter-group and total heterogeneity values -which
were obtained when the fixed effect model was applied in the meta-analysis method- were higher than the critical
value. Because of these differences, it was decided to use the random effects model in this research. The effect sizes
were recalculated using the free-effects model.
Results of Research
Findings of General Effect Size
In order to be able to calculate the magnitude of the effects of the studies on which the LC models are ap-
plied, the meta-analysis model to be used first has to be determined. For this purpose, the homogeneity of the LC
models with the fixed and random effects models and the homogeneity of the studies and the overall effect size
are given in Table 2.
69
(P. 65-83)
Table 2. Findings about the effect size of the meta-analysis in accordance with the fixed effect model and the
random effect model.
Effect Size (ES)

Effect Size Homogeneity Standard Error
Model SD Z I2
(ES) Level (Q) (Se)
Lowest Highest
FEM 1.12 74 784.25 37.48 .03 90.56 1.06 1.18

REM 1.22 12.39 .10 1.03 1.42
According to the fixed effects model, the average effect size is calculated to be 1.12. The homogeneity test
resultant Q statistical value for examining the homogeneity of the effect sizes of the studies included in the research
was found to be 784.25. According to this result, the effect sizes of the studies within the scope of the research are
heterogeneous. This effect size has been regarded as “the effect at a strong level” according to the Cohen’s (1988)
classification.
As a result of analysis made according to the random effects model; the upper limit at 95% confidence inter-
val is 1.42, the lower limit is 1.03 and the average effect size is 1.22. According to this result, the effect sizes of the
studies included in the research are homogeneous according to the random effects model. This effect size that
was calculated, has been regarded as “the effect at a strong level” according to Cohen’s classification. The graph
below shows the distribution of the effect sizes of the studies studied in the research.
Study name
Subgroup within study Statistics for each study Std diff in means and 95% CI
Std diffStandard LowerUpper
in means error Variance limit limit Z-Value
p-Value
3,000 4,000 1,852 0,378 0,143 1,111 2,592 4,899 0,000
10,000 4,000 1,755 0,265 0,070 1,236 2,274 6,627 0,000
17,000 4,000 0,610 0,296 0,087 0,031 1,189 2,064 0,039
41,000 4,000 0,965 0,268 0,072 0,439 1,491 3,596 0,000
42,000 4,000 1,755 0,265 0,070 1,236 2,274 6,627 0,000
1,000 5,000 1,634 0,252 0,064 1,139 2,128 6,477 0,000
2,000 5,000 0,909 0,170 0,029 0,576 1,242 5,351 0,000
5,000 5,000 1,255 0,262 0,068 0,742 1,767 4,797 0,000
7,000 5,000 1,306 0,337 0,113 0,646 1,966 3,880 0,000
8,000 5,000 1,312 0,285 0,081 0,754 1,870 4,609 0,000
9,000 5,000 1,025 0,251 0,063 0,534 1,517 4,087 0,000
11,000 5,000 1,111 0,305 0,093 0,514 1,708 3,646 0,000
12,000 5,000 0,944 0,301 0,091 0,353 1,534 3,132 0,002
13,000 5,000 -0,167 0,334 0,112-0,822 0,487 -0,502 0,616
14,000 5,000 1,857 0,358 0,128 1,155 2,559 5,184 0,000
15,000 5,000 0,942 0,167 0,028 0,615 1,269 5,653 0,000
18,000 5,000 2,878 0,368 0,136 2,156 3,600 7,814 0,000
19,000 5,000 0,799 0,210 0,044 0,387 1,210 3,803 0,000
20,000 5,000 0,797 0,164 0,027 0,475 1,119 4,849 0,000
21,000 5,000 1,693 0,259 0,067 1,185 2,200 6,533 0,000
22,000 5,000 1,521 0,379 0,143 0,779 2,263 4,017 0,000
23,000 5,000 2,346 0,330 0,109 1,699 2,993 7,107 0,000
25,000 5,000 0,085 0,133 0,018-0,174 0,345 0,643 0,520
26,000 5,000 1,093 0,243 0,059 0,617 1,569 4,500 0,000
27,000 5,000 1,882 0,292 0,085 1,309 2,454 6,442 0,000
29,000 5,000 2,326 0,286 0,082 1,765 2,886 8,134 0,000
30,000 5,000 3,708 0,389 0,151 2,946 4,469 9,541 0,000
31,000 5,000 0,782 0,164 0,027 0,460 1,103 4,766 0,000
32,000 5,000 2,878 0,368 0,136 2,156 3,600 7,814 0,000
33,000 5,000 0,818 0,237 0,056 0,353 1,284 3,446 0,001
34,000 5,000 0,892 0,332 0,110 0,242 1,541 2,689 0,007
35,000 5,000 1,119 0,285 0,081 0,560 1,678 3,923 0,000
36,000 5,000 2,184 0,276 0,076 1,643 2,725 7,916 0,000
37,000 5,000 1,406 0,316 0,100 0,787 2,026 4,449 0,000
38,000 5,000 1,217 0,318 0,101 0,595 1,840 3,832 0,000
39,000 5,000 0,818 0,237 0,056 0,353 1,284 3,446 0,001
40,000 5,000 -0,333 0,274 0,075-0,870 0,203 -1,217 0,224
43,000 5,000 0,997 0,253 0,064 0,501 1,494 3,935 0,000
44,000 5,000 2,673 0,252 0,064 2,178 3,16710,596 0,000
47,000 5,000 0,620 0,324 0,105-0,015 1,254 1,914 0,056
48,000 5,000 0,921 0,317 0,101 0,300 1,543 2,905 0,004
51,000 5,000 1,012 0,306 0,094 0,413 1,612 3,308 0,001
52,000 5,000 -0,916 0,292 0,085-1,488-0,345 -3,141 0,002
53,000 5,000 0,742 0,267 0,071 0,219 1,265 2,780 0,005
54,000 5,000 1,095 0,331 0,110 0,446 1,743 3,308 0,001
55,000 5,000 1,493 0,333 0,111 0,840 2,147 4,478 0,000
56,000 5,000 0,630 0,309 0,095 0,025 1,235 2,040 0,041
57,000 5,000 1,381 0,213 0,045 0,963 1,799 6,476 0,000
59,000 5,000 1,554 0,356 0,127 0,856 2,253 4,360 0,000
60,000 5,000 2,009 0,320 0,102 1,383 2,636 6,285 0,000
61,000 5,000 2,032 0,142 0,020 1,753 2,31014,291 0,000
62,000 5,000 1,860 0,261 0,068 1,348 2,372 7,121 0,000
63,000 5,000 0,164 0,275 0,076-0,376 0,703 0,596 0,552
65,000 5,000 1,824 0,303 0,092 1,230 2,417 6,025 0,000
67,000 5,000 0,807 0,279 0,078 0,261 1,353 2,896 0,004
68,000 5,000 0,070 0,252 0,064-0,425 0,564 0,277 0,782
69,000 5,000 3,712 0,292 0,085 3,140 4,28412,726 0,000
70,000 5,000 1,475 0,291 0,085 0,904 2,045 5,064 0,000
71,000 5,000 0,289 0,318 0,101-0,334 0,913 0,911 0,362
73,000 5,000 1,369 0,266 0,071 0,849 1,890 5,156 0,000
74,000 5,000 1,554 0,357 0,128 0,854 2,254 4,351 0,000
75,000 5,000 0,577 0,276 0,076 0,036 1,117 2,092 0,036
76,000 5,000 0,879 0,260 0,067 0,370 1,388 3,384 0,001
4,000 7,000 4,024 0,519 0,269 3,007 5,040 7,755 0,000
6,000 7,000 0,794 0,195 0,038 0,410 1,177 4,060 0,000
16,000 7,000 -2,493 0,350 0,123-3,179-1,807 -7,122 0,000
24,000 7,000 1,791 0,233 0,054 1,334 2,248 7,678 0,000
28,000 7,000 0,595 0,217 0,047 0,170 1,020 2,747 0,006
45,000 7,000 2,228 0,321 0,103 1,599 2,857 6,946 0,000
46,000 7,000 0,627 0,269 0,072 0,100 1,155 2,333 0,020
49,000 7,000 0,320 0,395 0,156-0,454 1,093 0,810 0,418
58,000 7,000 1,121 0,263 0,069 0,606 1,637 4,266 0,000
64,000 7,000 0,356 0,224 0,050-0,084 0,796 1,586 0,113
66,000 7,000 0,648 0,211 0,044 0,235 1,061 3,073 0,002
72,000 7,000 1,995 0,306 0,094 1,396 2,595 6,522 0,000
1,120 0,030 0,001 1,062 1,17937,480 0,000
-4,00 -2,00 0,00 2,00 4,00
Figure1: A Forest Plot showing science success with the use of the learning cycle models.
70 Meta Analysis
(P. 65-83)
The graph below shows the distribution showing the slope of the effect levels of the studies covered by the
research.
Funnel Plot of Standard Error by Hedges's g
0,0
0,1
0,2
0,3
Standard Error
0,4
0,5
0,6
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
Hedges's g
Figure 2: Funnel Plot showing publication bias.
Funnel graphic of the researches that have been included in the analysis can be seen in Figure 3. According
to the graphic, the researches are seen on a symmetrical basis, in other words, they concentrate on one single side.
It can be said that there is not any publication bias in the research because when publication bias exists, a skew
and asymmetric range is observed in the graphic.
Findings about Effect Size of Independent Variables
Table 4 shows the findings regarding whether effect sizes differ depending on different fields of science.
Table 4. Findings about effect levels of learning models.
ES
Q p ES n Se
LC models Lowest Highest
1.02 .599
4E 1.38 5 .25 .89 1.87

5E 1.26 58 .11 1.05 1.47
7E .97 12 .32 .35 1.60
The results of the analysis have shown that 4E learning model has the highest impact value with 1.38, and the
7E learning model has the lowest impact value with .97. According to the chi-square distribution, the critical value
at the 95% significance level has been found to be 5.99. The homogeneity value (Q) between the groups formed in
the LC models used is 1.02. The homogeneity value between groups is smaller than the critical value. For this reason,
there was no statistically significant difference in terms of science success between groups formed according to
the LC models applied in the experimental study. In terms of impact sizes, the greatest difference was found in the
7E model applications (range 1.25) while the lowest difference was found in the 5E model applications (range .42).
71
(P. 65-83)
Table 5. Findings about the effect size in different types of publications.
ES
Q p ES n Se
Type of publication Lowest Highest
2.39 .302
Journal paper 1.11 18 .20 .72 1.50

Master theses 1.09 29 .14 .83 1.36
Dissertations 1.44 28 .19 1.07 1.80
As seen in Table 5, when the percentage values are examined according to the LC models and the publica-
tion type of the study, the highest rate belongs to the master’s theses with 39.47% followed by dissertations with
36.84%. The journal papers have the lowest rate with 23.68%. When the effect value is considered, the disserta-
tions have the highest effect value with 1.44%. In the chi-square distribution, the critical value was found to be
5.99. The homogeneity value (Q) between the groups formed according to the publication types of the studies
was found to be 2.39. Because the homogeneity value between the groups is smaller than the critical value, it has
been determined that there is no significant difference in science success according to the publication types. When
lower and upper effect size values are examined, it is determined that dissertations varied less than other studies.
Table 6. Findings about the effect size in different subjects.
ES
Q p ES n Se
The subject of the
Lowest Highest
course
.50 .781
Physics 1.28 38 .17 .96 1.60

Biology 1.23 16 .14 .95 1.50
Chemistry 1.11 21 .18 .77 1.46
When the distributions of subject areas of the studies were examined, it was determined that the most studied
subject was physics (51%), then. chemistry (28%); and biology (21%). According to the results of the research, it was
determined that the highest effect value is 1.28 and the lowest effect value is 1.13. The critical value according to
chi-square distribution is 5.99. The homogeneity value (Q) between the groups is 0.50. There was found no statisti-
cally significant difference between the groups in terms of the homogeneity value of the group and the science
success scores of the group. Moreover, it was determined that the most homogeneous effect sizes are in subject
of Biology and the most heterogeneous effect sizes are in subject of Chemistry according to the range values.
Table 7. Findings about the effect size at different educational levels.
ES
Q p ES n Se
Educational level Lowest Highest
0.92 0.821
Primary School 1.49 7 0.09 0.89 2.08

Middle School 1.18 29 0.03 0.86 1.50
High School 1.21 29 0.03 0.86 1.56
Undergraduate 1.17 10 0.04 0.80 1.54
72
(P. 65-83)
According to the data in Table 7, the LC models were applied at the middle and high school levels at most. It
was also determined that it was applied at the primary school level at least. The findings reveal that the highest
impact value was at primary school level with 1.49 and the lowest impact value at middle school level with 1.18.
The critical value for chi-square distribution was determined to be 7.814. The homogeneity value (Q) between the
groups formed according to the learning model used is 0.92. Since the homogeneity value between the groups was
smaller than the critical value, there was found no statistically significant difference between the groups formed
according to the topic studied in terms of science success.
Table 8. Findings about the effect size depending on the study implementation period.
ES
Q p ES n Se
Period Lowest Highest
3.77 .287
3-5 week 1.15 25 .14 .87 1.43

6-8 week 1.42 27 .20 1.02 1.82
9 vet + week 1.26 10 .29 .69 1.83
Unspecified .91 13 .17 .58 1.25
As a result of analysis, it was determined that studies which took more than 9 weeks to apply have the least
proportion. It was also determined that researches which took more than 9 weeks to apply have the least propor-
tion. It was found out that the highest impact level (1.42) among these studies belongs to those that cover a period
of 6-8 weeks while the lowest impact level (.91) belongs to those whose periods of applications were not specified.
The critical value according to the chi-square distribution is 7.81. It was determined that the homogeneity value (Q)
between the groups formed according to the length of the experimental work done was 3.77. It was determined
that there was found no statistically significant difference between the groups because the homogeneity value
between the groups was smaller than the critical value. In addition, it was determined that according to the range
values, the studies with the most variable impact size were those that lasted 9 weeks or longer while those that
showed the least difference in terms of impact size are those which took 3 to 5 weeks to apply.
Table 9. Findings about effect size of the sample size of studies.
ES
Sample size Q p ES n Se
Lowest Highest
1.13 .769
0- 50 1.15 21 .15 .86 1.44

51-75 1.15 29 .20 .77 1.53
76-100 1.29 14 .17 .96 1.62
101- + 1.43 11 .27 .89 1.96
According to the table, the maximum number of students who applied the LC models is 50-75. This is followed
by 21 studies involving between 0 and 50 students. The studies in which 101 or more students participated have
the least proportion. The results of the analysis show that the studies in which 101 and more students participated
have the highest impact value with 1.43 while the studies in which between 0 and 50 students participated have
the lowest impact value with 1.15. The critical value in the chi-square distribution is 7.81 and the homogeneity
value (Q) between the groups is 1.13. Since this value was smaller than the critical value, it was determined that
the sample size did not make any significant difference in terms of science success. When the range values of the
studies are examined, it was determined that, in terms of impact sizes, the studies which involved 101 and more
students had the highest variability while the lowest variability belonged to those which involved 0- 50 students.
73
(P. 65-83)
Table 10. Findings about effect size of the years in which the research.
ES
Year Q p ES n Se
Lowest Highest
.99 .607
……-2005 .86 3 .47 -.07 1.78

2006-2010 1.30 34 .14 1.03 1.57
2011-…… 1.18 38 .15 .90 1.47
As a result of analysis, it is determined that LC models have been mostly applied since 2011. It was also found
that the studies carried out before 2005 have the lowest rates. According to the meta-analysis results, the highest
impact value (1.30) was found in the studies carried out between 2006 and 2010 while the lowest impact value
(.86) was found in the studies carried out in and before 2005. The critical value according to chi-square distribution
was found to be 5.99. The homogeneity value (Q) between the groups is .99. The homogeneity value between the
groups is less than the critical value. This means that there was no statistically significant difference between the
groups according to the years when the study was carried out. Besides, the ranges of the impact size values in the
studies reveal that the studies carried out before 2005 had the highest variability while those carried out between
2006 and 2010 had the lowest variability.
Discussion
In the research, an analysis was made by using the experimental study results in order to determine the ef-
fect of LC models (4E, 5E and 7E) used in different subject areas of science education in Turkey on science success
of students. Since the data obtained by reviewing the databases and libraries were heterogeneously distributed,
the random effects model was used. 3E model with an insufficient number of data and the studies with missing
data were not included in the survey. In these studies, which were analyzed according to the statistical data of 75
researchers, LC models were used in the experimental group and TC models were used in the control group. The
reason that there is a large number of studies on LC models can be the effect of the student-centered curriculum
in the science class started in 2000 (Bozdoğan & Altunçekic, 2007). The aim of this research is to analyze the effect
level of these models which have a specific sub-structure and application culture in Turkey according to different
variables and determine the general effect level. Similarly, Ural, & Bumen (2016) analyzed the studies regarding the
constructivist approach to science education. The researchers analyzed three studies of the LC model and found
that they were effective in increasing science success. Apart from this work, Balta & Saraç (2016) analyzed the 7E LC
model; Saraç (2017) analyzed the 5E model and they stated that the effect on science success is significant. Unlike
these studies, the effect of all LC models on science success was examined in this research.
In the majority of the studies included in the research, the effect size of the LC models (ES=1.23) was found
to be significantly higher than the TC models. A total of 75 studies were carried out. In 71 (the LC models) of the
studies showed higher science success compared to the other 4 studies (TC models). TC models were proved to
be more effective than 3 studies of 5E and 1 study of 7E. According to this finding, it can be asserted that the LC
models have a higher effect on the science success of the students than the TC models in the field of science. This
result was interpreted as 5E models give less variable results than other models (4E and 7E). It can be argued that
this was due to the fact that the vast majority of examinations were made regarding the 5E model. The increase in
the number of samples of the past few days provides a certain amount of contribution to the level of homogeneity
(Privitera, 2012). As this model is widely-known and experienced by the researchers compared to the 7E and 4E
models, the change ratio in the results may be lower. This result shows that LC models have a strong effect on the
science success levels of students according to the Cohen (1988) effect size classification.
It was found that the highest effect size from the three learning models belongs to 4E with 1.38, and the low-
est impact value belongs to 7E with 0.97. In the study of the effect, it was determined that the overall effect size of
the science success level of 7E model was found to be 1.2 in national and international studies by Balta and Saraç
(2016). When the Q values o f this research were examined, it was determined that the difference between the effect
sizes of these three models did not make a significant difference in science success levels of the students. In other
74
(P. 65-83)
words, it was found that in the case of giving a content related to the sciences, it is not a matter whether which of
these three models are used and it is also found that all three models have similar effect levels. When the range
values of effect sizes are compared, it can be said that the most heterogeneous studies belong to 7E and the most
homogeneous studies belong to 5E model.
It was found that dissertations have a higher effect size than both the journal papers and master’ theses,
depending on the effect sizes of the works. In addition, it was found that the effect sizes of papers and theses are
close to each other. Besides, it was found that the effect size of dissertations gave more heterogeneous results
compared to the theses and papers. This can be due to the fact that the number of dependent variables handled
in dissertations is higher than in other types of studies. In addition, the high effect of studies on doctoral level
LC models may be due to the fact that researchers have better control over the process. In the study conducted
by Saraç (2017) on the meta-analysis of the 5E model, it was seen that the effect size of dissertations was slightly
greater than that of master’ theses.
The results obtained for the other moderator variables addressed in the research are as follows: The subject
with the highest effect level of the LC models is physics, and the subject with the lowest is chemistry. Unlike the
results of this research, Saraç (2017) suggested that the highest effect size in the subject fields of the 5E model is
biology and the lowest effect size is in the field of chemistry.
According to education levels, the effect sizes of studies done at primary school level were higher than the
other education levels. It was found that the lowest effect value emerged at the university level. Similarly, Saraç
(2017) also proved that 5E model is more effective at the primary school level; while it is less effective at the uni-
versity level as the decrease in the number of studies may alter the data (Privitera, 2012).
It was determined that the lowest effect value according to the effect sizes of the working periods belongs
to the studies carried out for three to five weeks, and the highest effect value belongs to the studies for 6-8 weeks.
From these results, it can be said that the change between the length of the experimental period and the effect
size values is not directly proportional. However, according to Hsieh, Acee, Chung, Hsieh, Kim et al. (2005), an in-
crease in the duration of the application in an experimental study contributes to an increase in the effect level of
the study. It can be said that the opinions of the authors are partly confirmed as the works of which the duration
is not specified are not taken into account.
It was pointed out that the increase in the sample size in the studies examined and the effect size values of
the LC models tend to increase. Particularly, the effect size of the participants with 101 or more participants was
found to be significantly higher than in the smaller number of participants. Hedges (1994) noted that the increase
in sample size is an important variable on effect size. In experimental studies, if the number of students does not
increase as much as in the screening studies, it may stabilize the effect value and possibly decrease it after a certain
point. It is thought that the effect of the number of students can be more clearly demonstrated by carrying out a
larger experimental study.
When the effect sizes are examined according to years of the studies, it is seen that the studies between 2006
and 2010 have higher effect sizes. Another point that is noteworthy in the findings is the level of change in the
effect size related to the studies in 2005 and before. In applications during these years, it is seen that the value of
the effect size is larger than the others. Toraman and Demir (2016) stated that the constructivist approach’s effect
on attitude is higher than the value of the effect size in the studies after 2010. It can be said that this situation is
caused by the fact that student-centered models entered our curricula after 2005 and that researchers did not
have enough experience in this area.
Conclusions
The major contribution of this analysis is to combine 75 outcomes of the fields of science education about
LC models. Also, this research aids in identifying different variables that need further attention in the literature on
LC models in science education. The results demonstrate clear distinction between LC models and TC models on
science success in science education. The results of the research show that LC models have a strong effect on the
science success levels of students. The average effect, although slightly favoring LC models, was heterogeneous
and should be interpreted cautiously. The results obtained from this study consist of significant information that
can be used to increase the homogeneity levels of the effect sizes of LC models in the field of science education.
Although the findings of the study suggest that the 4E model has a greater impact on increasing success level
in science education, they also indicate that the 5E model, which has a great deal of accumulation of knowledge
75
(P. 65-83)
which is more experienced in Turkey, has clearer standards. Based on the standard error values, the error difference
between the effect sizes which occur in the 5E model is smaller than that in other models. This situation makes the
5E model more preferable in the field of science education to a significant extent.
Another result of the study is that journal papers and master’s theses display a smaller effect size than the
dissertations do. In Turkey, the process of dissertations is examined by thesis monitoring committees, which consist
of three scholars, for at least three times and evaluated by juries that consist of five scholars (YÖK, 2016). Journal
papers are published according to blind reviewing process, whereas; master’s theses are carried out under the
control of an advisor and are only evaluated by a thesis defense jury for once. This allows for dissertations to be
more controlled and for researchers to make changes throughout the process. Thereby, it becomes possible for
the studies conducted to have a greater impact on the success level in the field of science.
According to the moderator of the study field, the reason why the greatest effect size is in the field of physics
is because there are more studies carried out in this field. The researchers have planned their experimental studies
in a better manner and controlled the process in a stricter way by examining the previous examples. This result
also supports the finding that the decrease in the number of standard errors in a certain field of study is due to
the increase in the number of studies in that certain field.
According to the education level, which is another moderator, it is observed that the LC model implementations
in the elementary schools, where seven - the least number of studies were conducted, have a greater impact than
the studies conducted at other education levels. Considering the fact that the range value of the effect size of the
studies carried out in the elementary schools is the highest one, this situation needs to be examined individually.
According to the duration moderator, it is observed that the studies, which take about 6-8 weeks, have a greater
impact than the studies carried out for a longer or shorter period of time. It is believed that this situation results
from usually planning the studies in the duration of a unit. The reason why short-duration studies have a smaller
effect size may be because the students need a certain amount of time in order to adapt to a new implementation.
According to the moderator of number of students, the studies with the greatest effect size are those whose
student number is higher than 101. This result suggests that the increase in the number of samples in experimen-
tal studies positively affects the effect size. Even though effect size analyses are used to eliminate the problems
resulting from the number of samples, the results of this meta-analysis indicate the significance of these variables.
Also, the results of this research demonstrate that the LC models are more effective than widely used in science
education in Turkey. The most important conclusion resulting from the analysis of this research seems to be the
positive effect of LC models on science success, if the quality of the research is categorized as simple size, period
of research, subject etc. Educators use LC models throughout many other parts of the world. This combination of
theory and practice makes LC models one of the most distinguished of all educational practices. This meta-analysis
study first supplied similar results about the general effect of LC models on science success. Then this meta-analysis
went further by analyzing potential moderators of the main effects.
Recommendations
Meta-analyses studies are useful tools for characterizing the evidence base for educational practices objectively,
but they have some limitations. Also, the fact that meta-analysis cannot be conducted due to some experimental
risks such as controlling sample sizes, missing value, and outlier data. Small samples lead to the sensitivity of data
analysis. Additionally, it is impossible for any meta-analysis to evaluate (and code) the quality of experimental
design (intervention of LC models in this research) used in studies.
When the results of the research are examined, it can be claimed that the effect of the experimental studies
carried out with the LC models, over the 6-8-week time period, will contribute to the increase in the effectiveness
of the results. For this reason, it is suggested that researchers should not keep the experimental period of study
very short. Considering that the most effective models for increasing science success are 4E, 5E, and 7E respectively,
it can be argued that the application of models with fewer steps would be beneficial for researchers compared
to the less effective multi-grade models. It can be stated that these models give more effective results in large
student groups than small groups. It can be said that this situation is due to the increase in interaction and sharing
between the students. LC models give more effective results in physics subjects than biology and chemistry. It also
helps give explanations to why the studies at high school level are higher than other levels.
There are a lot of studies that examine the effects of LC models on the science success aimed at the science
teaching. These studies need to consider the variable not mentioned in the research and in terms of variables that
76
(P. 65-83)
are not discussed in the research and the effect sizes should be examined with new criteria. Dependent variables
of LC models outside of science success in this research such as motivation, self-efficacy, scientific process skills,
problem solving can also be examined in the research. The studies analyzed in this research include the research
carried out in Turkey. It may be possible to increase the global validity level of the research by including in inter-
national studies.
It has been pointed out that some of the studies examined during the data collection process for this research
have missing or inadequate information. Considering the positivist nature of the sciences, the variables and the
process must be well monitored in such studies and also the data must be presented completely. Such incomplete
and incorrect data lead to the loss of the validity of the studies. For this reason, researchers must fulfill the require-
ments of experimental studies and they must be careful with their design and presentation of their findings. More
studies that take into account the specific characteristics of LC models are needed. Because, the results of this
meta-analysis clearly show that there is a need for research on this topic in science education settings.
Acknowledgements
A limited part of this research was presented at the X. European Conference on Social and Behavioral Science,
19-22 May 2016, Sarajevo.
References
Abraham, M. R. (2005). Inquiry and the learning cycle approach. N. J. Pienta, M. M. Cooper, & T. J. Greenbowe (Eds.), Chemists’
guide to effective teaching (pp. 41-52), New Jersey. Upper Saddle River Pearson Prentice Hall, 2005.
Açıkel, C. (2009). Meta-analysis and evidence-based place. Bulletin of Psychiatry and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 19 (2), 164-172.
Akçil, M., & Karaağaoğlu, E. (2001). Meta-analysis of the envy. Hacettepe Medical Journal, 32 (2), 184-190.
Ayas, A. (1994). Assessing two new approaches used in the development and implementation of science curriculum programs.
I. Educational Sciences Congress, April 28-29, Cukurova University, Adana.
Aydın, N., & Yılmaz, A. (2010). The effect of constructivist approach in chemistry education on students’ higher order cognitive
skills. Hacettepe University Journal of Education Faculty, 39, 57-68.
Balta, N., & Saraç, H. (2016). The effect of 7E learning cycle on learning in science teaching: A meta-analysis study. European
Journal of Educational Research, 5 (2), 61-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.5.2.61
Bayram, H., Patlı, H., & Savcı, H. (1998). Learning ring model in science teaching. Atatürk Education Journal of Educational Sciences,
10, 31-40.
Bethel, E. C., & Bernard, R. M. (2010). Developments and trends in synthesizing diverse forms of evidence: Beyond comparisons
between distance education and classroom instruction. Distance Education, 31 (3), 231-256.
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L.V., Higgins, J.P.T., & Rothstein, H.R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. United Kingdom: John Wiley
and Sons, Ltd. Publication.
Bozdoğan, A. E., & Altunçekiç, A. (2007). Opinions of prospective science teachers about the availability of the 5E teaching model.
Kastamonu Education Journal, 15 (2), 579-590.
Bulut, H. (2012). Sexual reproduction and meiosis 7E model for the investigation of the effect of success. Master’s Thesis, Atatürk
University, Erzurum
Bybee, R. W. (2003). Why the seven E’s. Retrieved 20 February 2010, from http://www.miamisci.org/ph/lpintro7e.html.
Carin, A., & Bass, J. (2005). Teaching science as inquiry. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Ceylan, E., & Geban, Ö. (2009). Facilitating conceptual change in understanding state of matter and solubility concepts by using
5E learning cycle model. Hacettepe University Journal of Education Faculty, 36, 41-50.
Chen, J. H. (2008). Research of elementary school student’s learning achievements with the implementation of 5E learning cycle
based on nanotechnology curriculum. Master’s Thesis, National Pingtung University of Education, Taiwan.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. New York: Academic Press.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th Ed.). New York: Routledge.
Cooper, H., & Hedges, L. (1994). Research synthesis as a scientific enterprise. In H. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), the handbook of
research synthesis (pp. 3-14). New York: Russell Sage.
Eisenkraft, A. (2003). Expanding the 5E model: A proposed 7E model emphasizes ‘‘transfer of learning and the importance of
eliciting prior understanding. The Science Teacher, 70 (6), 56–59.
Ellis, P. (2010). The essentials of effect sizes. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2005). Understanding student differences. Journal of Engineering Education, 94 (1), 57-72.
Feyzioğlu, E. Y., & Ergin, Ö. (2012). The effect of 5E learning model instruction on seventh grade students’ metacognitive process.
Turkish Journal of Science Education, 9 (3), 78-86.
Gök, G. (2014). The effect of 7E learning cycle instruction on 6th grade students’ conceptual understanding of human body
systems, self-regulation, scientific epistemological beliefs, and science process skills. Dissertation, Middle East Technical
University, Ankara, Turkey.
77
(P. 65-83)
Hedges, L. V. (1994). Statistical considerations. In H. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), the handbook of research synthesis (pp. 29-39).
New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Higgins, J. P., Tompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003). Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. British Medical Journal,
2, 557-560.
Hsieh, P., Acee, T., Chung, W. H., Hsieh, Y. P., Kim, H., Thomas, G. D., ... & Robinson, D. H. (2005). Is educational intervention research
on the decline? Journal of Educational Psychology, 97 (4), 523-529.
Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (2004). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings (2nd Ed.). California:
Sage Publication.
Jupp, V. (2006). The Sage dictionary of social research methods. London: Sage Publication.
Kabapınar, F. M., Sapmaz, N. A., & Bıkmaz, F. H. (2003). Active learning and teacher methods, teaching science. Ankara University
Educational Sciences Faculty Education Research and Application Center (EAUM) Publications.
Kunduz, N., & Seçken, N. (2013). Development and application of 7E learning model based computer-assisted teaching materials
on precipitation titrations. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 12 (6), 784-792.
Linn, R. L., & Miller, D. M. (2005). Measurement and assessment in teaching (9th Ed.). Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Marek, E. A., & Cavallo, A. M. L. (1997). The learning cycle: Elementary school science and beyond. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Mecit, Ö. (2006). The effect of 7E learning cycle model on the improvement of fifth grade students’ critical thinking skills. Dis-
sertation, Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage
Publication.
Moussiaux, S. J., & Norman, J. T. (2003). Constructivist teaching practices: Perceptions of teachers and students. Retrieved from www.
ed.psu.edu, 11.07.2017.
Newby, D. E. (2004). Using inquiry to connect young learners to science, national charter schools institute. Retrieved 20 April 2008,
from http://www.nationalcharterschools.org/uploads/p df/resource_20040617125804_ Using%20Inquiry.pdf.
Özmen, H., (2002). Developing and implementing guide materials for chemistry teachers for the chemical reaction unit. Dis-
sertation, Karadeniz Teknik University, Trabzon.
Özsevgeç, T., Çepni, S., & Bayri, N. (2007). The effectiveness of the 5E model on retentive conceptual learning. Edu7, 2 (4), 1-17.
Petitti, D. B. (2000). Meta-analysis, decision analysis, and cost-effectiveness analysis (2nd Ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Privitera, G. J. (2012). Statistics for the behavioral sciences. California: Sage Publications, Inc.
Riding, R., & Rayner, S. (2012). Cognitive styles and learning strategies: Understanding style differences in learning and behavior.
New York: Routledge.
Sağlam, M. (2006). An investigation of guide material development and its effectiveness according to 5E model for the sound
and light unit. Dissertation, KTÜ, Trabzon.
Saraç, H. (2017). The effect of 5E learning model usage on students’ learning outcomes: Meta-analysis study. The Journal of Limit-
less Education and Research, 2 (2), 16-49.
Schroeder, C. M., Scott, T. P., Tolson, H., Huang, T. Y., & Lee, Y. H. (2007). A meta-analysis of national research: Effects of teaching
strategies on student achievement in science in the United States. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44 (10), 1436-1460.
Smith, M. L., & Glass, G. V. (1977). Meta-analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies. American Psychologist, 32(9), 752-760.
Schunk, D. H. (2013). Learning theories: An educational perspective (6th Ed). Boston: Pearson Education.
Schulze, R. (2004). Meta-analysis a comparison of approaches. Göttingen: Hogrefe and Huber Publishers
Tinker, I. (1997). Street foods: Urban food and employment in developing countries. Oxford University Press.
Toraman, C., & Demir, E. (2016). The effect of constructivism on attitudes towards lessons: A meta-analysis study. Eurasian Journal
of Educational Research, 62, 115-142. http://dx.doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2016.62.8
Ural, G., & Bümen, N. (2016). A meta-analysis on instructional applications of constructivism in science and technology teaching:
A sample of Turkey. Education and Science, 41 (185), 51-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.15390/EB.2016.4289
Üstün, U., & Eryılmaz, A. (2014). A research methodology to conduct effective research syntheses: Meta-analysis. Education and
Science, 39 (174), 1-32. http://dx.doi.org/100.15390/EB.2014.3379.
Yaman, S., & Karamustafaoğlu, S. (2006). Investigation of logical thinking skills and attitudes scale towards chemistry of prospec-
tive teachers. Journal of Education Faculty, 8 (1), 91-106.
Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Qualitative research methods in the social sciences. Ankara: Seçkin Publishing.
YÖK (Yüksek Öğretim Kurulu-Council of Higher Education). (2016). Post-graduate education and training regulations. Re-
trieved 05 January 2017, from http://www.yok.gov.tr/documents/18755141/21995093/10_lisansustu_egitim_ve_
ogretim_y%C3%B6netmeligi.pdf.
78
(P. 65-83)
Appendix1: Studies Investigated in Meta-analysis
Açışlı, S. (2010). The examination of the influence of the materials generated in compliance with 5E learning model on physics
laboratory applications. Dissertations, Atatürk University, Erzurum.
Açışlı, S. (2014). General physics laboratory applications in the materials developed by the 5E learning model to examine the
effects on students’ academic achievement and the science process skills. Ondokuz Mayıs University Journal of Education
Faculty, 33 (2), 628-641.
Ağgül Yalçın, F., & Bayrakçeken, S. (2010). The effect of 5E learning model on pre-service science teachers’ achievement of acids-
bases subject. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 2 (2), 508-531.
Aksoy, G., & Gürbüz, F. (2013). An Example for the effect of 5E model on the academic achievement of students: In the unit of
“force and motion. İnonu University Journal of Education Faculty, 14 (2), 1-16.
Aktaş, M. (2013). The effect of the 5E learning model and cooperative learning method on attitude toward biology lesson. Gazi
University Journal of Education Faculty, 33(1), 109-128.
Altınay, Ö. (2009). The effects of the teaching method based on the 5e model on eighth grade students’ understanding of the
concepts of related to genetics, DNA, gene, and chromosome. Master’ Thesis, Balıkesir University, Balıkesir.
Andaç, K. (2007). The effect of 5E model of constructivist learning approach supported by reviewing strategy on student’s
achievement, the permanence of knowledge and attitude in pressure issue. Master’ Thesis, Dicle University, Diyarbakır.
Arslan, H.Ö. (2014). The effect of 5E learning cycle instruction on 10th grade students’ understanding of cell division and repro-
duction concepts, Dissertation, Gazi University, Ankara.
Avcıoğlu, O. (2008). Investigation of the effects of 7E model on success, in the subject of Newton laws of second grade high
school students’ physics classes. Master’ Thesis, Gazi University, Ankara.
Aydemir, N. (2012). Effectiveness of 5E learning cycle model on high school students understanding of solubility equilibrium
concept. Dissertation, Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
Aydin, N. (2009). The effect of constructivist approach on students’ higher order cognitive skills. Master’ Thesis, Hacettepe Uni-
versity, Ankara.
Aydoğmuş, E. (2008). The effects of 5E model on success of the students during the instruction of work-energy chapter at physics
course of tenth grade. Master’ Thesis, Selçuk University, Konya.
Ayvacı, H. Ş., & Yıldız, M. (2013). The evaluation of the effectiveness of the teaching process conducted through a laboratory
material designed in accordance with 5E model: The refraction of light. Journal of Bayburt Education Faculty, 8 (1), 1-20.
Bal, E. (2012). The effect of 5E Model based laboratory approach on the attitudes and successes of prospective science teachers
in physics laboratory course. Master’ Thesis, Kastamonu University, Kastamonu.
Balcı, A. S. (2007). Effect of applying constructivism in science teaching. Dissertation, Selçuk University, Konya.
Bilgin, İ., Yusuf, A. Y., & Coşkun, H. (2013). The effects of 5E model on the 4th grade Students’ success about substance and their
opinions on the model. Kastamonu Education Journal, 21 (4), 1449-1470.
Bıyıklı, C. (2013). The effect of 5E learning model designed according to learning experiences on the science process skills, level
of learning and attitude. Dissertation, Hacettepe University, Ankara.
Bıyıklı, C., & Yağcı, E. (2015). The effect of learning experiences designed according to 5E learning model on level of learning and
attitude. Abant Izzet Baysal University Journal of Faculty of Education, 15(1), 302-325.
Ceylan, E. (2008). Effects of 5E learning cycle model on understanding of state of matter and solubility concepts. Dissertation,
Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
Coşkun, H. (2011). The effect of 5E learning model on achievement, attitude, critical thinking and intellectual structure of 4th
grade students in the “let’s learn about substance” unit. Master’ Thesis, Mustafa Kemal University, Hatay.
Çekiç Toroslu, S. (2011). Effect of 7E learning model integrated with real-life context based instruction on students’ conceptual
achievement, misconceptions and science process skills about ‘energy’. Dissertation, Gazi University Ankara.
Çekilmez, S. (2014). The effect of 7E model on success and attitude of the students during the instruction of electric chapter at
physics course of second level of high school. Master’ Thesis, Necmettin Erbakan University, Konya.
Çepni, S., & Çoruhlu, T. Ş. (2014). Investigation the effects of learning environment enriched with 5E model on students’ achieve-
ment. Uludağ University Journal of the Education Faculty, 27(2), 349-369. http://dx.doi.org/10.19171/uuefd.45874
Demirci, N. (2015). The effect of metacognitive inquiry based learning on 4th grade students’ academic achievement, scientific
process skills, and metacognitive processes in science course. Master’ Thesis, Adnan Menderes University, Aydın.
Demirezen, S. (2010). The effect of 7E model to student’s achievement, development of scientific process skills, conceptual
achievement and retention levels in electrical circuit’s subject. Dissertation, Gazi University, Ankara.
Demirezen, S., & Yağbasan, R. (2013). The effect of 7E model on misconceptions about simple electrical circuits. Hacettepe Uni-
versity Journal of Education Faculty, 28(2), 132-151.
Dindar, A. Ç. (2012). The effect of 5E learning cycle model on eleventh grade students’ conceptual understanding of acids and
bases concepts and motivation to learn chemistry. Dissertation, Gazi University, Ankara.
Ekici, F. (2007). The effect of instructional material designed according to 5E learning cycle which is based on constructivist ap-
proach on 11th grade students’ understanding of redox reactions and electrochemistry. Dissertation, Gazi University, Ankara.
Ercan, S. (2009). The effect of constructivist approach 5E learning model on teaching material cycle. Master’ Thesis, Gazi Univer-
sity, Ankara.
Erdoğdu, S. (2011). The effect of teaching electricity subjects according to 5E model on students’ success and attitudes. Disserta-
tion, Selçuk University, Konya.
79
(P. 65-83)
Ergin, İ. (2009). The effect of the 5E model on the academic achievement and recall of students: An example of a slanting motion.
Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Education, 18, 11-26.
Ergin, İ., Ünsal, Y., & Tan, M. (2006). The effect of 5E model on students’ academic achievement and attitude levels: Horizontal
shot motion example. Ahi Evran University Education of Journal, 7(2), 1-15.
Ersoy, İ. (2011). Handling of the topic of electrical and magnetism, 5E deepening stage model for evaluation of effects on student
achievement of the materials developed. Dissertation, Selçuk University, Konya.
Ersoy, İ., Sarikoç, A., & Cerit Berber, N. (2013). Effectiveness of materials prepared on electric magnetism subject considering
elaboration stage of 5E model. Buca Education Faculty Journal, 35, 144-154.
Ezberci, E. (2014). The effect of 5E learning cycle model supported with teaching activities that activate metaconceptual processes
on 7th grade students’ conceptual understanding of moon phases. Master’s Thesis, Gazi University, Ankara.
Gönen, S., & Andaç, K. (2009). The influence of the constructivist learning approach supported by the review strategy on the
students’ access to the pressure and the permanence of their knowledge. Dicle University Ziya Gökalp Education journal,
12, 28-40.
Gül, S. (2011). The effect of course software based on 5E model on students’ achievements, attitudes and remedy of misconcep-
tions. Dissertation. Atatürk University, Erzurum.
Gürbüz, F. (2012). The effect 7E model on academic achievement and retention of knowledge in the unit of “electricity in our
life” in 6th grade science and technology. Master’ Thesis, Atatürk University, Erzurum.
Hırça, N. (2008). An investigation of effects on conceptual change of developed materials based on 5E model in unit “work, power
and energy”. Dissertation, Atatürk University, Erzurum.
Huyugüzel Çavaş, P. (2004). Teaching the unit ‘electricity which directs our life’ in the science lessons of primary school within
the approach of learning cycle. Dissertation, Ege University, İzmir.
İstanbuloğlu, B. (2014). The effects of students’ success of computer based 5E learning cycle model. Master’s Thesis, Kırıkkale
University, Kırıkkale.
Kanlı, U. (2007). The effects of a laboratory based on the 7E model with verification laboratory approach on students’ develop-
ment of science process skills and conceptual achievement. Dissertation, Gazi University, Ankara.
Kaynar, D. (2005). The effect of 5E learning cycle approach on sixth grade students understanding of cell concept, attitude toward
science and scientific epistemological beliefs. Master’s Thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
Kaynar, D., Tekkaya, C., & Çakiroğlu, J. (2009). Effectiveness of 5E learning cycle instruction on students’ achievement in cell concept
and scientific epistemological beliefs. Hacettepe University Journal of Education Faculty, 37, 96-105.
Keskin, V. (2008). Effectiveness of constructivist 5E learning cycle model on high school students’ learning of simple pendulum
concepts and attitudes. Master’ Thesis, Marmara University, Istanbul.
Kolomuç, A. (2009). Animation aidet instruction on “rate of chemical reactions” unit in grade 11 in regard to 5E model. Disserta-
tion, Atatürk University, Erzurum.
Köseoğlu, F., & Tümay, H. (2010). The effects of learning cycle method in general chemistry laboratory on students’ conceptual
change, attitude and perception. Ahi Evran University Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty, 11 (1), 279-295.
Kunduz, N. (2013). The effect of teaching with animations and educational games on academic achievement in subject of pre-
cipitation titration. Master’s Thesis, Hacettepe University, Ankara.
Küçük, Z. (2011). Effect of enriched 5E model on grade 7 students’ conceptual change: A case for electric current. Master’s Thesis,
Karadeniz Teknik University, Trabzon.
Meşeci, B., & Karamustafaoğlu, S. (2015). The effect of the activities supported by 4E model which is aimed at granular nature of
matter on academic success. Karaelmas Journal of Educational Sciences, 3 (1) 1-12.
Meydan, A. M. (2015). The effect of the 7E learning method implemented in the subject of the structure of atom on the academic
achievement and attitude of students. Master’ Thesis, İbrahim Çeçen University, Ağrı.
Nas, S. E., Çepni, S., Yıldırım, N., & Şenel, T. (2007). Effect of worksheets on student achievement: Acid base sample. Yeditepe
University Journal of Education Faculty, 2, 1-17.
Önder, E. (2011). The effect of constructivist 5E learning strategy used in the unit ‘reproduction, growth and development in liv-
ing beings’ in science and technology course on the success of 6th grade students. Dissertation, Selçuk University, Konya.
Özbayrak, Ö. (2013). Misconceptions in chemistry education: Compounds. Dissertation, Dokuz Eylül University, İzmir.
Özsevgeç, T. (2007). Determining effectiveness of guided materials about force and motion unit based on the 5E model for
elementary students. Dissertation, Karadeniz Teknik University, Trabzon.
Öztürk, N. (2013). The effect of activities based on 5E learning model in the unit titled light and sound at the sixth-grade science
and technology lesson on learning outcomes. Dissertation, Gazi University, Ankara.
Pabuçcu, A. (2008). Improving 11th grade students’ understanding of acid-base concepts by using 5E learning cycle model.
Dissertation, Gazi University, Ankara.
Saka, A. (2006). The effect of 5E model on removing science student teachers’ misconceptions about genetics. Dissertation,
Karadeniz Teknik University, Trabzon.
Saygın, Ö., Atılboz, N. G., & Salman, S. (2006). Effects of constructivist approach on the success of the teaching the biology: The
basic unit of viability cell. Journal of Gazi Education Faculty, 26(1), 51-64.
Saraç, H. (2015). The Effect of multimedia supported applications designed according to 7E model on students’ learning products
at fi̇fth grade sci̇ence course ‘changi̇ng states of matter’ uni̇t. Dissertation, Dumlupınar University, Kütahya.
Temiz, B. (2010). The effect of 5E model supported with case study on 6th grade students’ academic success in the unit ‘the
systems of body structures’ and attitude towards science. Master’ Thesis, Gazi University, Ankara.
80
(P. 65-83)
Toprak, F. (2011). The effects of 3E and 5E teaching models practiced in general chemistry laboratory of science education on
students’ academic success scientific process skills and their attitude to the course. Master’ Thesis, Ondokuz Mayıs Univer-
sity, Samsun.
Ural Keleş, P. (2009). Determining effectiveness of guided materials based on the 5E model enriched with conceptual change texts,
games and drama students: A sample of classification of living things. Dissertation, Karadeniz Teknik University, Trabzon.
Ültay, N. (2012). Designing, implementing and comparing ‘acids and bases’ instructional tasks based on REACT strategy and 5E
model. Dissertation, Karadeniz Teknik University, Trabzon.
Yalçın, E. (2010). The effect of ‘the teaching method of 5E on the life of 8th class students on understanding the electric subject
and attitudes to science. Master’ Thesis, Sakarya University, Sakarya.
Yazman, İ. (2013). The effect of Jigsaw technique which is a cooperative learning method and 5E model to the academic achieve-
ments and permanency on the let’s get to know coils with working and energy subject of grade seventh students who
educate science and technology course. Master’ Thesis, Kafkas University, Kars.
Yerdelen-Damar, S. (2013). The effect of the instruction based on the epistemologically and metacognitively improved 7E learn-
ing cycle on tenth grade students’ achievement and epistemological understandings in physics. Dissertation, Kastamonu
University, Kastamonu.
Yıldız, E. (2008). The effects of metacognition during the instruction based on conceptual change used with 5E model: An ap-
plication regarding the force and motion subject in the 7th grade. Dissertation, Dokuz Eylül University, Izmir.
Yenice, E. (2014). Researching the effect of 7E learning model of constructivist approach on students’ academic success on the
topic of ‘mitosis and meiosis division’’ at 8th grade science and technology class. Master’ Thesis, Kafkas University, Kars.
Yılmaz, H., & Huyugüzel, Çavaş, P. (2006). Method of 4E learning cycle student’s electricity understanding the effect of the subject.
Journal of Turkish Science Education, 3 (1), 2-18.
Yörük, Z. N. (2008). Effects of science, technology, society and environment (STSE) approach teaching chemistry with using the
5E learning model. Master’s Thesis, Hacettepe University, Ankara.
Yurt, Y. (2012). Effect of model 5E on 6th grade elementary students’ achievement and attitude in science and technology course.
Master’s Thesis, Mehmet Akif University, Burdur.
Ziyafet, E. (2008). The effect of 5e methods on student achievement and attitude for teaching periodic table in science lesson.
Master’s Thesis, Gazi University, Ankara.
Appendix2: List of included studies, codes applied, and effect sizes
Model N
Study Level Subject field Period Effect size
Treatment Control Treatment Control
Açışlı (2010) 5E TC U P 6-8 week 41 41 2.30

Açışlı (2014) 5E TC U P 6-8 week 30 30 1.29
Ağgül Yalçın et al. (2010) 5E TC U C 3-5 week 20 23 1.28
Aksoy & Gürbüz (2013) 5E TC M P 3-5 week 27 30 1.10
Aktaş (2013) 5E TC U B 6-8 week 32 30 2.31
Altınay (2009) 5E TC M B 3-5 week 42 42 1.84
Andaç (2007) 5E TC M P 6-8 week 37 40 0.80
Arslan (2014) 5E TC H B 3-5 Week 114 114 0.08
Avcıoğlu (2008) 5E TC H P 3-5 week 18 18 -0.16
Aydemir (2012) 5E TC H C 6-8 week 53 56 1.37
Aydin (2009) 5E TC M C 9 + week 150 150 2.02
Aydoğmuş (2008) 5E TC H P 3-5 week 35 35 1.35
Ayvacı et al. (2013) 5E TC U P Unspecified 48 50 0.79
Bal (2012) 5E TC U P 6-8 week 30 30 1.45
Balcı (2007) 4E TC M B 6-8 week 31 31 0.95
Bilgin, et al. (2013) 5E TC P C Unspecified 79 81 0.79
Bıyıklı (2013) 5E TC P S 9+ week 30 30 2.84
Bıyıklı et al. (2015) 5E TC P S 9+ week 30 30 2.84
81
(P. 65-83)
Model N
Bulut (2012) 7E TC H B 3-5 Week 58 55 0.78

Coşkun (2011) 5E TC P C 9+ week 79 81 0.77
Ceylan (2008) 5E TC H C 6-8 week 59 60 2.65
Çekiç Toroslu (2011) 7E TC H P 9+ week 50 45 0.64
Çekilmez (2014) 7E TC H P 6-8 week 34 33 1.10
Çepni et al. (2014) 5E TC M P Unspecified 35 37 1.01
Demirci (2015) 5E TC P S 3-5 Week 35 35 0.98
Demirezen (2010) 7E TC H P 6-8 week 29 29 0.61
Demirezen et al. (2013) 7E TC H P 6-8 week 29 29 -2.45
Dindar (2012) 5E TC H C 6-8 week 40 38 1.08
Ekici (2007) 5E TC H C 6-8 week 24 25 0.92
Ercan (2009) 5E TC H B 3-5 Week 27 23 1.09
Erdoğdu (2011) 5E TC H P 3-5 Week 29 33 1.80
Ergin (2009) 5E TC H P 3-5 Week 44 40 2.16
Ergin et al. (2006) 5E TC H P Unspecified 44 40 1.61
Ersoy (2011) 5E TC M P 9+ week 20 20 0.60
Ersoy et al. (2013) 5E TC M P Unspecified 20 20 0.87
Ezberci (2014) 5E TC M P 3-5 Week 27 26 0.16
Gönen et al. (2009) 5E TC M P Unspecified 37 40 0.80
Gül (2011) 5E TC H B 6-8 Week 20 21 1.52
Gürbüz (2012) 7E TC M P 3-5 week 24 21 3.95
Hırça (2008) 5E TC H P 6-8 week 21 21 1.07
Huyugüzel Çavaş (2004) 4E TC M P 3-5 week 40 39 1.73
İstanbuloğlu (2014) 5E TC M P 3-5 week 30 26 0.79
Kanlı (2007) 7E TC U P 6-8 week 43 38 0.35
Kaynar (2007) 5E TC M B 3-5 week 80 80 0.93
Kaynar et al. (2009) 5E TC M B 3-5 week 77 76 0.90
Keskin (2008) 7E TC H P 6-8 week 31 32 2.20
Kolomuç (2009) 5E TC H C 6-8 week 36 36 3.66
Köseoğlu et al. (2010) 4E TC U C Unspecified 20 20 1.81
Kunduz (2013) 7E TC H C Unspecified 44 45 0.58
Küçük (2011) 5E TC M P 3-5 week 23 23 1.46
Meşeci et al. (2015) 4E TC M C Unspecified 25 23 0.59
Meydan (2015) 7E TC M C 6-8 week 13 13 0.30
Nas et al. (2007) 5E TC M C Unspecified 26 24 1.38
Önder (2011) 5E TC M B 9+ week 22 22 0.90
Özbayrak (2013) 5E TC H C Unspecified 30 30 0.73
Özsevgeç (2007) 5E TC P P 3-5 week 37 31 1.86
Öztürk (2013) 5E TC M P 6-8 week 25 17 1.52
Pabuçcu (2008) 5E TC H C 6-8 week 42 39 1.67
Saka (2006) 5E TC U B 3-5 week 22 22 0.61
82
(P. 65-83)
Model N
Saygın et al. (2006) 5E TC U B 6-8 week 24 23 1.19

Saraç (2015) 7E TC P C 9+ week 48 50 0.79
Temiz (2010) 5E TC M B 6-8 week 20 20 0.28
Toprak (2011) 5E TC U C 9+ week 20 30 1.55
Ural Keleş (2009) 5E TC P B 6-8 week 26 29 0.56
Ültay (2012) 5E TC U C 3-5 week 32 33 0.86
Yalçın (2010) 5E TC M P 3-5 week 35 35 1.24
Yazman (2013) 5E TC M P 3-5 week 24 31 -0.32
Yerdelen-Damar (2013) 7E TC H C 3-5 week 52 51 1.77
Yıldız (2008) 5E TC M P Unspecified 25 27 -0.90
Yenice (2014) 7E TC M B 3-5 week 32 32 1.97
Yılmaz et al. (2006) 4E TC M P Unspecified 40 39 1.73
Yörük (2008) 5E TC H C 3-5 week 33 30 0.06
Yurt (2012) 5E TC M P 6-8 week 64 64 3.68
Ziyafet (2008) 5E TC M C 3-5 week 25 20 1.82
Model: TC-Teacher-centered models
Level: P-Primary; M-Middle; H-High; U- Undergraduate School
Subject field: B- Biology; C- Chemistry; P- Physics; S- Science
Received: November 15, 2017 Accepted: January 25, 2018
Süleyman Yaman PhD., Associate Professor, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Faculty of

(Corresponding author) Education, Department of SSME, Science Education, Atakum,
Samsun, Turkey.
E-mail: syaman@omu.edu.tr
Website: https://personel.omu.edu.tr/en/syaman
Şadiye Karaşah Master’ Student, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Faculty of Education,
Department of SSME, Science Education, Atakum, Samsun,
Turkey.
E-mail: karasah08sados@gmail.com
83
WRITING VERSUS TYPING
DURING SCIENCE TEACHING:
CASE STUDY IN SLOVENIA
Abstract. In a case study conducted in a Metka Kordigel Aberšek,

biology class in Slovenia, six grade students Boris Aberšek,
participated in a biology project Writing
Andrej Flogie
Versus Typing in a Biology Class. The final
task in this project was to write a chapter
for a biology textbook with the title Urtica
dioica. The task was performed twice:
firstly, the text was written by the hand
and secondly it was typed on the computer Introduction
keyboard. Handwritten and keyboard
typed scientific texts, textbook chapters, There is no doubt that in present-day society, including the media,
were compared with the special focus on politics and education science, digital immigrants (i.e. teachers) have to
the lexical, syntactic, and semantic level of adopt their teaching paradigm, the learning environment and curricula to
the Generation Z, called also digital natives. An international consensus on
the text. The purpose of this research was
this matter was confirmed within the document: Policy Brief Digital Natives:
to find out the effect of replacing handwrit-
How do they learn How to teach them, published by the UNESCO Institute
ing with typing in the process of teaching/
for Information Technologies in Education (Cornu, 2011). According to this
learning science subjects, where the under- concept, the school has to move from ‘paper pedagogies’ to ‘digital pedago-
standing of texts is of crucial importance. A gies’, because ‘paper pedagogies’ cannot adopt to digital tools (Cornu, 2011).
closer look at the students’ text products in One of the first pedagogical changes in this direction was the demand
the typing modality reveals that students, for a shift from an offline reading to an online reading curriculum. According
while typing, seem to be cognitively to early reading research theories, the so-called “old literacies” are useless in
overloaded. One of the consequences of e-learning environments, especially for learning from the World Wide Web
this is a lower level of cognitive achieve- (Spiro, 2004). Later research rejected this theory. Reading online was confirmed
ment in their typed text: students show less as an active, constructive, and meaning-making process, in which readers ac-
knowledge, less terminological accuracy, tively construct meaning. According to the theory of new literacies of online
research and comprehension, the online reading competence is structured
and, above all, a lesser understanding of
(Leu, Forzani, Burlingame, Kulikowich, Sedransk, Coiro, & Kennedy, 2013). It
the interconnection between the items of
contains in the frame of each structural element skills, very similar to those
information provided.
particularly useful in the process of linear reading, and additional complexi-
Keywords: biology science class; em- ties needed for internet reading comprehension (Kordigel Aberšek, Dolenc,
bodied cognition, handwriting, keyboard Flogie & Koritnik, 2015).
writing. The situation in writing research seems to be very similar to the situa-
tion of where reading research was two decades ago: the public opinion (the
media) advocates abandoning handwriting from curricula, and replacing it
with keyboard typing. On the other hand, theoretical scientists and empirical
Metka Kordigel Aberšek, researchers are warning against mindless curriculum changes. As A. Mangen
Boris Aberšek, Andrej Flogie
University of Maribor, Slovenia
says, “The marginalization of handwriting invites a number of reflections
concerning practical and pedagogical as well as cognitive aspects of writing”
(Mangen, Anda, Oxborough, & Brønnick, 2015, p. 228).
84
ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ WRITING VERSUS TYPING DURING SCIENCE TEACHING: CASE STUDY IN SLOVENIA
(P. 84-96)
The Cognitive Aspect of Marginalization of Handwriting in the Curriculum
Replacing handwriting with typing is, according to contemporary cognitive science, not only an act of adjust-
ing the writing curriculum to new, predominantly technical devices. It will have, with high probability, implica-
tions for high-level cognitive processes of the Generation Z (Kiefer & Trump, 2012). Cognition, namely, does not
take place only in our brain, but also in our perceptual and motor systems (Calvo & Gomila, 2008). According to
the embodied cognition theory, the processes of perception (visual, audio, tactile), motor action and cognition are
strongly and reciprocally connected (Gibbs, 2005; Shapiro, 2010). Embodied cognition is an active, sensory probing
of the lifeworld surrounding humans. According to the embodied cognition theory, cognitive development is not
exclusively brain activity. Learning and cognitive development are processes, in which we develop representations
by – haptically – interacting with the environment, by exploring our surroundings with all our sensory modalities.
In other words, theoretical and empirical knowledge about cognition and the human brain points out the neces-
sity of acknowledging that hands have a role to play in teaching and learning (Goldin-Meadow, 2003) – not only
in gestures and non-verbal communication, but also, and more specifically, in the haptic interaction with different
technologies (Mangen & Velay, 2010).
The connection of cognitive processes with external (perception) and internal (proprioception, emotion and
introspection) as well as bodily actions that produce simulations of previous experiences, takes place also in the
process of writing acquisition (Kiefer & Trump, 2012). Although alphabetic characters are not physical objects, we
can assume that motor-perceptual links contribute to their representation, since they are associated with specific
handwriting movements. These movements entail producing graphic forms as close as possible to the correspond-
ing visual model. Handwriting movements are thus associated with consistent spatial information about the letter.
In short: we apply knowledge about the implicit motor rules involved in writing by hand, during the perception of
handwritten traces. (Mangen et al., 2015).
The Sensorimotor Aspect of Writing
Writing is by definition the production of some kind of text onto some kind of surface, by employing some kind
of technical device. Changing the technologies of writing has significant implications, because different technologies
are materially configured in different ways. That is, different writing technologies set up radically different spatial,
tactile, visual, and even temporal relations between the writer’s material body and his or her text. In the process
of writing, the body is the mechanism by which the mediation of the mental and the material occurs (Haas, 1996).
The act of writing is a complex cognitive process relying on intricate perceptual sensorimotor combinations.
Writing is the process of externalizing the content of our thinking, what we know, what we think, what we feel…
Writing always involves the skilful handling of some mechanical/technical device, and necessarily results in a visu-
ographic representation – some kind of readable text in the form of letters or symbols (Mangen & Velay, 2010).
As neuroscientific research points out, writing is a process that requires the integration of visual, proprioceptive
(haptic/kinaesthetic), and tactile information in order to be accomplished (Fogassi & Gallese, 2004).
The acquisition of writing skills in previous generations involved a perceptual component, learning the shape
of the letter, and a graphomotor component, learning the trajectory producing the letter’s shape (Van Galen, 1991).
This is a process, which is probably going to change with Generation Z. Today, most of that is written with the help
of some kind of digital device, a laptop, tablet or smart phone. Computers and keyboards are replacing pen and
paper and children are increasingly encouraged to type instead of writing by hand. With the emergence of new
technologies, hands play a different role for the new generation. They click and scroll using a computer mouse,
and tap keys on keyboards and screens, instead of putting pen or pencil to paper. This switch from pen and paper
to mouse, keyboard, and screen entails, according to Mangen and Velay (2010), major differences in the haptics
of writing at several levels. When writing by hand, we use only one hand, whereas typewriting typically involves
both hands. Handwriting is commonly experienced as a slower and more tiresome process than writing with a
keyboard. Writing by hand requires the writer to shape each letter, whereas in typewriting, obviously, there is no
such graphomotor component involved. Moreover, a child’s visual attention is commonly restricted to precisely the
point where the pencil hits the paper during handwriting, while during typewriting there is a distinct spatiotemporal
decoupling between the visual attention and the haptic input. And finally: word processing software provides a
number of features, which might radically change the process of writing, from autocorrect and spell-check options
to large-scale genre templates (Mangen & Velay, 2010).
85
(P. 84-96)
The Pedagogical Aspect
The pedagogical aspect of the dilemma of typing versus writing should be considered from two aspects. The
first one is the aspect of writing acquisition (learning to write) and the second one is the aspect of writing to learn.
This writing to learn has a significant role in the process of learning (Lund, 2014). It has to be seen as an important
tool in the process of constructing new knowledge, understanding, and skills. It can be used to reproduce and
to reflect the facts, to reformulate issues, and help to develop and organize one’s thinking (Langer & Applebee,
1987). In combination with reading, writing can be used to take notes for later use in the function of extended
memory, to interpret sources and perspectives, to organize materials, to structure new knowledge, and to share
this knowledge with others.
For the pedagogical aspect of the dilemma of typing versus writing, it is an important assumption, derived
from embodied cognition theory (Calvo, & Gomila, 2012; Gibbs, 2005) that the two processes of learning to write
and writing to learn are connected and interdependent. Empirical research on this question is still scarce, but the
existing results of experimental studies seem to confirm the connection. Research related to the dilemma of typ-
ing versus writing in connection to learning, can be divided into three groups, according to the linguistic level
on which cognitive results have been measured. Some studies measured the influence of typing and writing on
letter acquisition (phonological, or grapheme level), others focused on word recall (morphological level), and still
others on the connection between writing/typing and the quantity and quality of knowledge (semantic level).
Phonological Level
Longcamp, Anton, Roth, & Velay (2005) studied how children memorized letters. In the experiment, one group
learned letters by using the pen and the other by using the keyboard. The results of children who learned letters
by handwriting showed better memorization and recognition when compared to the results of the children using
a keyboard. Three years later (2008), Longcamp conducted the same experiment using neuroimaging methods
(functional magnetic resonance image – fMRI). The fMRI data showed that processing the orientation of handwrit-
ten and typed characters/graphemes did not rely on the same brain areas. In the case of handwriting, the activity
of the brain was more pronounced in several regions known to be involved in the imagination, observation and
execution of actions (Broca’s area and bilateral inferior parietal lobules). These results confirm Griffin’s assumption
(1998) that the sensorimotor movements in writing by hand contribute to the memorization of the shape and/or
orientation of characters, facilitating later perception and categorization, which seem to be an important predic-
tor of later reading skills.
A recent experiment by Li and James (2016) confirmed the important role of handwriting in contributing to
children’s symbol categorization (Mangen & Balsvik, 2016). In the experiment, five-year-olds were taught the names
of Greek symbols – in six learning conditions. Three of them involved motor production (copying symbols, trac-
ing typed symbols, and tracing handwritten symbols), the other three involved only visual and auditory practice.
Subsequently, the children’s categorization performance was tested. Results showed that children who studied
multiple instances of the symbols performed better than the children who studied only a single prototypical
example of the symbol.
Morphological Level
Smoker’s research (2009) examined potential associations between writing modalities and memory on the
word level. In the research, he compared the recall and recognition of words on a sample of 61 adults, in two writing
modalities, pen on paper, and keyboard. The recall task asked participants to remember, in a period of five minutes,
as many as possible of the words that were presented to them by writing them on a blank sheet of paper, while
the recognition task presented a mixed list of 36 words consisting of stimuli words and new words. Participants
were asked to indicate which words were stimuli words. In the second test, they performed the same task, but
with the use of a keyboard. Results showed that memory on the recall task approached significance in favour of
the handwritten words, while writing was significant in the recognition task. The number of errors in the recall task
was significantly higher for the typing condition (Smoker, Murphy & Rockwell, 2009). According to the authors of
the research “these findings support our hypothesis that the increased kinaesthetic information from handwriting
creates a more complex memory trace than created by typing” (Smoker et. al, 2009, p. 1746).
86
(P. 84-96)
Mangen, Anda, Oxborough and Brønnick (2015) performed a similar but extended experiment: they addressed
the question of whether people (sample: 36 college students) remember words written as parts of lists better
when they are written by hand than when they are typed using a virtual touch keyboard, or a mechanical laptop
keyboard. In order to measure the effect of the writing modality on a central cognitive outcome, the research team
used a word list paradigm, used in cognitive psychology to measure episodic verbal memory (Tulving & Thomson,
1973). The results show there is a statistical difference free recall, which was better in the handwriting condition
than in both the keyboard, and the iPad typing condition. The authors of the research thus summed up the results:
handwriting is associated with better free recall of hand-written material as compared to material written using
conventional keyboards on PC’s and virtual keyboards such as those in iPads (Mangen et al., 2015).
Semantic Level
Interdependence between the modality of the writing process and the learning result (semantic level) has rarely
been the topic of scientific research. Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014) presented the results of such research in a
paper with a straightforward title: The Pen Is Mightier than the Keyboard: Advantages of Longhand over Laptop Note
Taking. They conducted some experiments to investigate whether taking notes on laptops versus writing longhand
affects academic performance. Participants of their research were 67 students from Princeton University. In the first
research, students listened to a fifteen minutes long lecture. They were instructed to take notes in the way they usually
do (handwriting or laptop). A qualitative content analysis of their notes showed several differences: laptop notes were
longer, students used more words, recorded more information. On the other hand, a closer analysis revealed that the
notes taken by laptops contained an average of 14.6 % verbatim overlap with the lecture, whereas longhand notes
averaged only 8.8 %. Later research showed that these results are a significant predictor of academic performance.
Authors of the research interpret these results as a consequence of less cognitive effort in the process of note taking
(they speak of ’mindlessness’). They conclude this part of the experiment with the following statement: “although
taking more notes, and thereby having more information, is beneficial, mindless transcription seems to offset the
benefit of the increased content” (Mueller & Oppenheimer, 2014, p. 4). This assumption was confirmed in a subse-
quent research conducted by the team. Again, students were free to choose the modality of their note-taking, and
again, a qualitative analysis of notes showed the same results. After a week, the students’ academic performance
was tested. Students were divided into two groups. The first group answered a set of 40 questions, which accessed
recall and understanding of lecture content, a lecture the students attended a week ago. The second group had the
opportunity to study their notes before answering the same set of questions. In both groups, there were students
who took notes by laptop, and those who took notes by handwriting. Results showed that participants who took
longhand notes and were able to study them, performed significantly better (z-score M =0.19) than the participants
of any other group (z-score Ms= ˗˗0.10, ˗˗ 0.02, 0.08). The authors conclude that, when participants had the oppor-
tunity to study, longhand notes led to superior performance. In this context, it is important to point out the results
of those students, who took notes on their laptops. They performed worse on conceptual questions than students
who took longhand notes. This is suggestive evidence that longhand notes may have a superior external storage,
as well as superior encoding functions, despite the fact that the quantity of notes was a strong positive predictor of
performance. To sum up, Mueller and Oppeheimer’s research suggests that even when laptops are used solely to take
notes, they may still be impairing learning because their use results in shallower processing.
Results from the studies by Lund, Longcamp et. al, Smoker et al., Mangen et al., and Mueller and Oppeheimer,
showed that there is an interdependence between the mode of writing and cognitive performance, i.e. the out-
comes of the learning process. In all experiments, the participants who used handwriting, and in this way received
additional kinaesthetic information, achieved significantly better learning results, which can be explained only at
the account of a higher quality of cognitive processes.
The research in the field of interdependence between writing modality and cognitive achievement has been
performed mainly with a focus on performance on the morphological and lexical levels, while the impact on per-
formance on the semantic level has been investigated mostly among adults. The present research was designed
with the motivation to explore the interdependence between writing modality and achievements on the lexical,
syntactical, but also on the semantic level – the level of constructing and recording knowledge. Unlike Mueller and
Oppenheimer, we did not use a questionnaire, which would investigate the quantity of the knowledge gained, and
the quality of that knowledge (questions on a different level). To determine the interdependence between writing
modality and cognitive achievement, we decided to observe texts created by students following a learning process
87
(P. 84-96)
during biology class. The observed text was a text defined as a chapter in the biology textbook. The task was to write
a non-fictional text, a description of a plant, which should be structured according to the rules previously learned in
the students’ mother tongue and biology classes. In such a text, the writer should explain the facts learned about
the plant, he should put these facts in logical order, and he should use the correct terminological vocabulary. Un-
like in literary texts, no imagination could be used, and metaphorical language could be used only if standardized.
General Background
A qualitative and quantitative research approaches were adopted, since the main aim of the research was
rather exploratory, due to a lack of extensive data, which is the consequence of the effort to exclude the influence of
other factors than writing modality on the quality and quantity of the written text. A text analysis was undertaken
according to categories defined in the focus of research questions. The research was performed on a sample from
the younger population (5th grade of a primary school), since it was noticed that the majority of existing research
was performed on samples from the adult population (university students).
Following research questions were addressed:
1. How does the written text differ from the typed text? Are the differences equally noticeable on the
quantitative as well as on the qualitative level?
2. Are the differences between the written and the typed text interdependent with the level of acquired
basic computer skills?
According to theoretical background and previous research, quantitatively and qualitatively better results in
the writing modality than in the typing modality were assumed:
1. students would write more words and more different words than later in the typing situation, and that
they would write more terms (and more correct terms) than in the typed text.
2. On the syntax level, there was assumed that students would write more sentences, that the sentences
would contain more words; and also that the written text would have a more advanced syntax structure
than the typed text.
3. A better performance on the level of coherence of the text was also assumed. In the writing modality
a more consistent use of the features of text structure.
4. In the written texts, better performance in the use of cohesive means to create coherence was expected.
5. The greatest differences between the written and typed texts were expected on the semantic level. In
the written texts were expected more knowledge and a deeper understanding of knowledge than in
the typed ones. The research was performed in April 2017.
Participants and Context
In the pilot research, the participants were 26 children, aged between 10 years 9 months, and 11 years 9
months. The sample is rather small. The purpose for choosing a small sample, students’ of one class, was a deliberate
decision made to narrow the influence of other factors, which could have had an influence on research results. All
children were students of the same class (5th grade of primary school). This was important to guarantee the same
educational context for the entire research: all children had the same computer education (delivered by the same
computer skills teacher). All students had the same number of hours spent on the computer device, which they
used for typing their text in the present research; all children participated in the same biology research project
and had the opportunity to construct the same amount of knowledge about Urtica dioica.
At the beginning of the research, a pre-test (TICA Basic Skills Checklist (Leu et al., 2008)) of the students’ basic
computer skills was performed. Students evaluated their own basic computer skills. They were told the results of
the survey will be kept anonymous, so instead of signing their name, they should mark them with a special (self-
invented) code. The pre-test consisted of a list of 21 basic computer sub-skills, and on the list the students were
asked to mark whether they know, they do know but sometimes need the help of the teacher, or they do not know
yet. Following the triangulation approach, the computer skills teacher was asked to re-evaluate the students’ self-
evaluation. According to these results, students were divided into three groups, considering whether their basic
computer skills were good, modest, or poor.
88
(P. 84-96)
Research Procedure
All 26 students participated in the biology project – they were divided into groups according to their own
choice. After being informed they are going to perform a research project about the plant stinging nettle (Lat.
Urtica dioica), they were asked to use a KWL scaffolding method (what I already know, what do I want to learn
about it, what did I learn) (Sadler, 2011). According to this learning strategy, they first produced a list of what do
they already know about the plant, followed by the second one where they wrote down what do they want to learn
about it. In the next stage, the groups began to collect information and knowledge about the Urtica dioica using a
research-based learning approach. They gathered information and knowledge in the school library, home libraries,
and on the World Wide Web. Every second day they began their schoolwork with a biology class. They shared the
newly gained knowledge with schoolmates from their group. Together it was decided whether the information
was correct and important and how it should be recorded on the graphic organizer they designed together (Fisher
et al., 2009). After a week, each group presented their findings about Urtica dioica to all the other groups.
Data Collection
After studying their own graphic organizers, after 24 hours, the students were asked to write a textbook chapter
for their future colleagues, who will attend the same biology class next year and learn about Urtica dioica. Together
with the textbook chapter, a text sample was defined in terms of correctness of information, terminological ac-
curacy, and structure of the text: description of the plant (the students already knew this from their mother tongue
class, and also from previous uses of this type of text structure in their biology class).
After another day, the students had a computer science class in the computer classroom. They studied their
graphic organizers once again. The next step was turning on their computers and writing the biology textbook
chapter about Urtica dioica again. When they finished, each student saved and printed his text and marked it with
a special (self-invented) code, the same one he had used for coding his written text and his basic computer skills
evaluation sheet.
Two instruments were used in the process of this research: a pre-test with a Computer Basic Skills List (CBSL)
for each student, and a final test for evaluating the impact of the writing modality (IWM) on the lexical, syntactical,
and semantic features (quantitative and qualitative knowledge about Urtica dioica). The students’ basic computer
skills were measured by means of an adopted TICA Basic Skills Checklist (Leu et al., 2008), a checklist consisting of 21
items related to basic computer skills. These skills were divided into three groups: computer basics, web-searching
basics, and general navigation basics.
The quality of the written and typed “textbook chapters” on the subject of Urtica dioica was measured with the
use of the Impact of Writing Modality (IWM) test that was developed by a research team (Kamiloff, & Kamiloff Smith,
2001) and focused on the linguistic and thematic achievement level of such student texts. IWM was developed to
precisely observe which type of knowledge students demonstrate in the text, and how they understand that knowl-
edge, by observing the language they use for expressing it, since texts are always a means of externalizing human
thought. IWM consisted of five sets of criteria and evaluated the text on the lexical, syntactical, and semantic level.
1. On the lexical level, the number of used words and the number of different words was counted accord-
ing to the supposition that typing, as the more demanding writing modality, will cause more lexical
repetitions (i.e. less different words in the text). Further, a terminological accuracy was observed on the
lexical level: the number of used terms and the number of correct terms were counted and compared.
2. For evaluating the syntax level, sentences and the syntactic structure of sentences was observed.
These criteria gave us an insight into the students’ quantitative, but also their cognitive achievement.
Compound sentences were assumed as a cognitively more demanding text feature than simple sen-
tences. An even deeper insight into the students’ cognitive achievement provides a comparison of
the number of coordinate and subordinate clauses used to construct complex sentences. Including
complex sentences with subordinate clauses points to a cognitively more advanced level of narrative.
3. Criterion, included in the test was coherence of the text. According to Kamiloff and Kamiloff Smith
(2001), coherence and cohesion are the key criteria for evaluating storytelling, and consequently the
explicatory text in the biology textbook. The coherence of a text refers to the meaningful connections
that readers perceive in a written (or oral) text.
4. Cohesion within a text was the 4th criterion. Cohesion is the process of linking and connecting sentences
89
(P. 84-96)
together through a variety of linguistic and semantic ties, which can be broken into three types of se-
mantic relationships: immediate, mediated, and remote ties. In writing, the author can choose among
several devices for creating cohesion, called cohesive clues. In the IWM survey, we defined three groups
of cohesive clues: repetition, pronouns and synonyms, and hypernyms and homonyms in the function
of transitional expressions.
5. The 5th criterion measured the knowledge about Urtica dioica, which the students have constructed
during the biology project and which they expressed in their written or typed textbook chapter. The
number of correct thematic items and the number of incorrect thematic items were observed and
compared. Finally, the survey focused on the students’ understanding of the interconnectedness of
thematic items. Understanding the interconnectedness of thematic items and including this under-
standing into the text in such a way that the reader can understand the logical relationship between
the information, demands from the student a high level of cognitive involvement – which would not
be possible if the student would struggle at the same time with his basic computer skills.
Data Analysis
Typed and handwritten texts were studied and evaluated according to verbal, syntactic, and semantic ele-
ments with the help of the IWM survey, developed for this purpose. Data obtained from the written text of each
student was compared to the data obtained from their typed texts, and all results were observed and evaluated
from the perspective of the students’ basic computer skills list. Quantitative data in the research groups were
collected, reviewed, and evaluated by a group of experts from the field of educational science. Quantitative data
collected in the research groups was statistically analysed to get better insight in research problems according to
the following phases: encoding, defining, and organizing the data, and interpreting the results with SSSP program.
Research Results
To evaluate the quantity and quality of the written and typed non-fictional texts about Urtica dioica from
the perspective of students’ basic computer skills, the sample was devided according to the number of collected
points in the students’ Computer Basic Skills List CBSL. Three groups were formed: students with good computer
basic skills (21–18 skills), students with moderate computer basic skills (17–14 skills), and students with poor basic
computer skills (13 and less skills).
Results in Tables 1–5 show differences between two writing modalities in the amount of knowledge gained
in biology classes during the research project Urtica dioica, and in the level of understanding that knowledge, and
differences in achievements regarding the basic computer skills.
Table 1. Lexical level: number of words and number of terms.
Basic computer
Good Moderate Poor
skills
Writing modality Writing Typing Writing Typing Writing Typing
M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD
1.1 Number of used

152.5 29.67 166 36.2 132.4 49.7 146,2 49.4 103.6 31.6 107.3 40.1
words
1.2 Number of different
143.5 33.85 159 31.97 121 46.0 134.2 48.0 102.6 34.7 98.3 36.6
words
1.3 Number of used
15.7 3.3 14.1 3.92 13.2 2.1 11.7 2.5 9.2 3.5 7.3 3.2
terms
1.4 Number of correct
14.3 3.86 13.7 4.79 11.3 3.1 10.4 3.1 8.3 2.3 6.2 2.6
terms
90
(P. 84-96)
The results in Table 1 show that even younger students can type faster than they can write, which could be a
consequence of the differences in the haptics of writing and typing. Students with good and students with moder-
ate basic computer skills used more words in their texts about Urtica dioica, and also used more different words.
Only the group with poor basic computer skills used fewer words and less different words in the typing modality.
Counting the number of terms and the number of correct terms gives different results: all groups of students used
less terms in the typing modality than in the writing modality. And all groups made more mistakes in the process
of using correct words to explain their knowledge – when the typing process was not only a question of fluency,
but also a question of recalling new words for signing the newly-learned topic (for example: hollow stinging hairs,
called trichomes). A slower writing process seemed to be of advantage.
Table 2. Syntax level.
Basic computer
Good Moderate Poor
skills
2.1. Number of
23.2 5.7 26.5 5.4 20.4 5.9 19.2 5.2 18.3 3.2 17.2 6.6
clauses
2.2. Number of
clauses per 2.33 0.65 1.74 0.4 1.9 0.1 1.65 0.03 1.48 0.2 1.13 0.2
sentence
2.3. Number of coor-
1.25 0.5 4.25 3.5 2.1 0.6 2.3 1.7 2.3 2.5 2.5 2.5
dinate clauses
2.4. Number of subor-
4.75 1.22 3.25 1.53 3.7 1.6 3.1 1.53 3.0 0.0 1.43 0.6
dinate clauses
The results in Table 2 on the syntax level point to similar conclusions as the results on the lexical level. More
clauses in typed texts, written by students skilled in the use of the computer were observed. There was almost no
impact of the writing modality on the number of clauses in texts by students with moderate computer skills, and
there was a slightly smaller number of clauses in texts by students with poor basic computer skills.
A closer look at the quality of the written and typed clauses on a syntactic level provides a different picture:
observing the compound sentences, we calculated the number of clauses per sentence, and found out that
sentences in texts written in the typing modality have a simpler structure. All groups of students used a type of
narrative with a lower number of clauses per sentence.
Even more persuasive is the result of observing the number of coordinate and subordinate clauses. In English
grammar, a coordinate clause is a clause belonging to a series of two or more clauses which are not syntactically
dependent and are introduced by one of the coordinate conjunctions – most commonly ’and’, ’but’, or ’or’. A sub-
ordinate clause or a dependent clause is a clause that cannot stand alone as a complete sentence. It is always used
together with the so-called main clause and is introduced by a subordinating conjunction, such as ’because’, ’when’,
’unless’… A subordinating conjunction is a grammatical means, which links constructions by making one of them
a constituent of another. The subordinating conjunction typically marks the incorporated constituent. Most com-
mon subordinating conjunctions are adverbializers, which indicates, that the subordinate clause they introduce
has an adverbial relation to the main clause, indicating purpose, condition, time, or location.
In the typing modality the number of coordinate clauses in texts written by all three groups of students in-
creased, while the number of subordinate clauses decreased. This can be understood as a consequence of a lower
cognitive involvement in text production, since we know from grammar that complex sentences consisting of
subordinate clauses express some kind of logical interdependence between two facts, items, or events.
91
(P. 84-96)
Table 3. Text coherence.
Basic computer skills Good Moderate Poor
3.1 Narrative without

0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
structure
3.2 Narrative partly
uses features of text 0 0.0 0 0.0 1,33 0.6 3 1.0 3 1.0 5 2.0
structure
3.3 Narrative consistently
uses features of text 9 1.7 9 2.0 9 1.7 7 3.5 4 1.0 2 1.6
structure
Coherence (see Table 3) increases directly with the amount of guidance a writer provides to the reader, either
through context clues or through direct use of transitional phrases to direct the reader through an argument or
narrative. Coherence is mainly the result of adequate paragraph structuring. The students in our survey have already
learned previously about the adequate text structure for a description of a plant, which includes parts of scientific
classification (family), description, distribution, usage, and interesting facts.
Results concerned with text coherence clearly show that none of the students had submitted a text without
any kind of text structure. The narrative structure, which partly uses general features of text structure, was more
frequently observed in texts written in the typing modality. These skills, which naturally employ features of text
structure, were more frequently observed in texts written by students with a good level of basic computer skills,
regardless of the writing modality.
Table 4. Cohesion.
4.1 Thematic distribution

4.1.1. Leap of thought 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 0.5 5 1.2 6 1.2 7 1.8
4.1.2. No leap of thought 9 1.2 9 1.8 8 1.1 5 2.2 1 0.5 0 0.0
4.2 Cohesive clues
4.2.1. Repetition 4.2 1.2 6.3 1.4 4.9 1.2 7.0 2.1 5.7 1.0 7.8 1.0
4.2.2. Pronouns 15.7 4.4 13.2 3.8 14.2 1.5 12.1 3.8 10.2 1.7 8.4 2.9
4.2.3. Synonyms, hypernyms 1.25 0.5 0.25 0.5 0.7 0.2 0.6 0.9 0 0.0
Results regarding the thematic distribution of knowledge, learned in biology class, in the frame of each para-
graph show a lower level of achievement in typed texts, written by students with moderate or poor basic computer
skills. Because of a cognitive overload in the typing modality, the student forgets to put down everything he had
learned about Urtica dioica, and has to be written on that subject in that particular paragraph. Students proceed
to the next paragraph and then he/she remembers what he/she should have written in the previous one. However,
student does not return to that particular paragraph (even though the word processor makes it possible), but rather
adds the forgotten information to the paragraph he is currently writing.
Cognitive processes involved in the two modalities, typing and writing, were also observed through the
perspective of the students’ choice of cohesive clues. A writer creates cohesion by choosing from a variety of the
so-called cohesive clues: he can for instance use repetition, pronouns, transitional expressions, or other devices to
92
(P. 84-96)
guide readers and show how parts of text relate to one another. In the IWM we counted the number of repetitions
(as the simplest cohesive means), the number of pronouns, and the number of synonyms and hypernyms (as a
highly cohesive means). Results show a great impact of the writing modality on the choice of cohesive means:
students in all three groups used, in the typing modality, a greater number of repetitions, a slightly smaller number
of pronouns, and a considerably smaller number of synonyms or hypernyms.
Table 5. Semantic level (thematic items and understanding the interconnectedness among them).
5.1 Number of correct

42.7 6.6 40.5 7.3 30.6 14.2 26.3 10.1 15.3 2.1 12.6 1.2
thematic items
5.2 Number of incorrect
1.25 0.5 2.5 0.5 2.6 1.5 2.9 2.3 2.6 1.5 4.1 1.5
thematic items
5.3 Understanding intercon-
nectedness of thematic 2.5 1.3 1.0 0.5 1.6 0.6 1.0 1.0 1.3 1.0 0 0.0
items
The results of texts produced in different writing modalities were compared on the semantic level (see Table
5), which is closely connected to cognitive processes that are involved in the verbalization of knowledge. Results
show consequences of cognitive load and cognitive overload in all three groups of the sample. In all three groups,
the number of correct thematic items presented in the text was lower when students used a keyboard. In the typing
modality, students also listed a greater number of incorrect thematic items. However, the most meaningful observa-
tion regarding the cognitive level of achieved knowledge on the level of syntax is the difference in understanding
the interconnectedness of thematic items expressed in the text. (For example: “Stinging hairs are very fragile. This
is why when touching them, they transform into needles that can inject several different types of chemicals into
the skin. These chemicals cause a burning, painful stinging on the skin. This is the reason why the common name
for Urtica dioica is a stinging or burning nettle.”) Using these criteria for the typed and written texts, we established
the greatest difference between the two writing modalities. The number of expressed understanding of intercon-
nectedness between information in the typing modality was meaningfully lower also among students with good
basic computer skills, while such understanding was entirely absent (i.e. the number was zero) from the typed texts
produced by students with poor basic computer skills.
Discussion
The obtained results only partly confirmed research assumptions. More precisely, the results on the lexical
and partly on the syntax level showed a different picture than was initially expected. The writing modality seemed
to have no influence on the number of words used, on the number of different words used, nor on the number of
sentences. On the contrary, some students wrote more words and more sentences in the typing modality. How-
ever, the typing modality does seem to have an influence on cognitive achievement: in comparison to the typed
texts, the syntactic structures of written texts show a more elementary use of sentence structure. In addition, on
the semantic level more knowledge and a deeper understanding of knowledge were detected in the written texts
than in the typed texts.
Evidently, students were able to express new scientific knowledge about Urtica dioica better in the handwrit-
ing than in the typing modality. In the handwriting modality, they also expressed a higher level of understanding
of this knowledge – which is the most important curriculum goal of science education.
Finally, a stronger influence of the writing modality on the quantity and quality of texts by students with a
lower level of basic computer skills was observed. Results of the present research thus partly confirm the expecta-
tions based on theoretical background, i.e. embodied cognition and neuroscience. According to the embodied
cognition theory, as already mentioned, cognitive development is not only an activity of the brain: when we learn,
93
(P. 84-96)
we develop representations in the process of interacting with the environment, through experiencing our sur-
roundings with all our sensory modalities. Goldin-Meadow (2003) points out in this context: “hands simply have an
important role in the processes of teaching and learning.” According to Haas (1996), writing is a complex cognitive
process of externalizing the content of our thinking, which requires the integration of visual, proprioceptive and
tactile information in order to be accomplished (Fogassi & Gallese, 2004). Based on neuroscientific research, we
can assume that such a change in the visual, proprioceptive, and tactile stimuli, which occurs with the switch from
pencil and paper to keyboard, influences, with high probability, the writers’ thinking processes, and consequently
their learning achievements and cognitive development. The results of presented research confirm this assump-
tion: in the typing modality, the number of coordinate clauses increased and the number of subordinate clauses
decreased – a consequence of lower cognitive involvement while using the keyboard.
The results of research also confirm expectations derived from previous experimental research: Longcamp
et al. (2005) compared the memorization of letters by children. Her results confirm a better learning outcome in
children who used the pencil in their learning process. Smoker (2009), and Mangen et al. (2015), also proved the
same influences of the writing modality on learning results. The results of research thus correspond with results
discovered by Longcamp, Smoker and Mangen. Students wrote more terms and terms that are more correct in
the paper writing modality than in the typing modality. They used a greater number of correct thematic items
and a smaller number of incorrect thematic items while using paper and pencil, and they were more often able to
express their understanding of the interconnectedness between thematic items.
The present research also corresponds with the results presented in Mueller and Oppenheimer’s research
(2014). Similarly, to their survey, our students also wrote more words (also students with poor basic computer skills)
and more different words (the exception were students with poor basic computer skills). Although this should be a
strong predictor of higher learning outcomes, this is not the case. In both their studies, Mueller and Oppenheimer’s
students learned less when using the keyboard: in presented research, they not only wrote down a smaller number
of thematic items and a greater number of incorrect thematic items, while using the keyboard, they also failed to
express their understanding of the fact that particular aspects of knowledge are interdependent – logically con-
nected. A similar cognitive result was observed in Mueller and Oppenheimer’s research, which underlined lower
results in the category of answering conceptual questions. Typing obviously impairs the learning process, because
its use results in shallower processing.
In addition, the results regarding the interdependence between the level of basic computer skills and its in-
fluence on the lexical, syntax and semantic levels of the typed text are in correspondence with previous research.
DeStefano and LeFevre (2009) conducted research concerned with the idea of cognitive overload in the process of
reading texts from the screen. They assumed that reading hypertext would cause a cognitive overload in students
with a low working memory, and that they would have substantially more problems with this type of reasoning
than those who have a high capacity of working memory. Their results show that students with a large working
memory have the mental energy required for the metacognitive processing of learning/reading, i.e. the processing
and thinking about what they understand. On the other hand, students with a small working memory, it seems,
do not possess this mental energy. The situation with cognitive overload seems to occur with students with poor
basic computer skills. They use a great amount of mental energy for the technical part of text production on the
computer. Consequently, they do not have enough energy left for coding (writing) their knowledge. They do not
remember the thematic items, they do not remember how these thematic items are logically connected or inter-
dependent, they do not have the mental energy to remember and follow the text structure, and their typed texts
evidently demonstrate leap of thought.
Conclusions
The results of presented research can be interpreted as confirming the expectations based on theoretical
background (embodied cognition), as well as expectations based on previous research concerned with the inter-
connection between writing modality and cognitive achievement. Generation Z evidently uses the keyboard with
greater ease than the pencil, and they are able to type a greater number of words on the computer in the same
period as they are able to write them with a pencil. A closer look at their text products, however, shows a different
picture: in the typing modality, they seem to be cognitively overloaded. In addition, one of the consequences of
this is a lower level of academic achievement in their typed texts: they show less knowledge, less terminological
accuracy, and, above all, less understanding of the interconnection between listed information. This can be seen
94
(P. 84-96)
as important information related to the processes of learning and cognitive development. According to various
theories, writing to learn has a significant role in the processes of constructing new knowledge, understanding,
and skills. It is used to reproduce and reflect facts, to reformulate issues and help to develop and organize one’s
thinking. Consequently, the school system has to slow down in its readiness to abandon handwriting and substitute
it with keyboard writing. Teachers have to consider the influence of this kind of shift on the students’ cognitive
development and knowledge construction, as well as the influence it has on the outcomes of educational goals,
concerning the curricula of their natural science classes. Presented case research conducted in a biology class,
confirms such considerations: replacing handwriting with keyboard writing has, as proven by presented research,
implications for high-level cognitive processes of the future generation.
Acknowledgements
The research leading to these results received funding from the following project: Innovative Pedagogy 1:1 in
the Light of the 21st Century under Grant Agreement Number C 3330-13-319003 (published: Aberšek, Flogie, Aber-
šek Kordigel, Šverc, 2017). We would like to thank the Slovenian Ministry of Education, Science and Sports and ESS.
References
Calvo, P., & Gomila, A. (Eds.) (2012). Handbook of cognitive science: An embodied approach. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Cornu, B. (2011). Digital Natives: How do they learn? How to teach them? Moscow: UNESCO Institute for Information Technologies.
DeStefano, D., & Le Fevre, J. A. (2007). Cognitive load in hypertext reading: A review. Computers in Human Behaviour, 23 (3),
1616-1641.
Fisher, D, Frey, N., & Lapp, D. (2009). In a reading state of mind. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Fogassi, L., & Gallese, V. (2004). Action as a binding key to multisensory integration. In G. A. Calvert, C. Spence & B. E. Stein (Eds.).
The handbook of multisensory process (425-441). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Gibbs, R. W. (2005). Embodiment and cognitive science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Goldin-Meadow, S. (2003). Hearing gesture: How our hands help us think. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Griffin, P., Burns, M. S., & Snow, C. E. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, D.C.: National Academic
Press.
Haas, C. (1996). Writing technology: Studies on the materiality of literacy. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Kamiloff, K., & Kamiloff Smith, A. (2001). Pathways to language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kiefer, M., & Trump, N. M. (2012). Embodiment theory and education: The foundations of cognition in perception and action.
Trends in Neuroscience in Education, 1 (1), 15-20.
Kordigel Aberšek, M., Dolenc, K., Flogie, A., & Koritnik, A (2015). The new literacies of online research and comprehension: to
teach or not to teach. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 14 (4), 460-473.
Langer, J. A., & Applebee, A. N. (1987). How writing shapes thinking: A study of teaching and learning. Urbana, III: National Council
of Teacher of English.
Leu, D. J., Jr., Coiro, J., Castek, J., Hartman, D. K., Henry, L. A., & Reinking, D. (2008). Research on instruction and assessment of the
new literacies of online reading comprehension. In C. C. Block, S. Parris, & P. Afflerbach, (Eds.), Comprehension instruction:
Research-based best practices. New York: Guilford Press.
Leu, D. J., Forzani, E., Burlingame, C., Kulikowich, J. M., Sedransk, N., Coiro, J., & Kennedy, C. (2013). The new literacies of online
research and comprehension: Assessing and preparing students for the 21st century with Common Core State Standards.
In Neuman, B.S. & Gambrell, L.B. (Eds.), Quality reading instruction in the age of Common Core Standards (219–236). Newark,
DE: International Reading Association.
Li, J. X., & James, H. K. (2016). Handwriting generates variable visual output to facilitate symbol learning. Journal of Experimental
Psychology: General, 145 (3), 298-313.
Longcamp, M., Anton, J. L., Roth, M., & Velay, J. L. (2005). Premotor activations in response to visually presented single letters
depend on the hand used to write: A study in left-handlers. Neuropsychologia, 43 (12), 1801-1809.
Longcamp, M., Boucard, C., Gilhodes, J.-C., Anton, J.-L., Roth, M., Nazarian, B., & Velay, J.-L. (2008). Learning through hand- or
typewriting influences visual recognition of new graphics shapes: Behavioural and functional imaging evidence. Journal
of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20 (5), 802-815.
Lund, R. A. (2014). Writing in EFL teachers’ education. Acta Didacta Norge, 8, (1), 1-18.
Mangen, A., Velay, J.-L. (2010). Digitalizing literacy: Reflections on the haptics of writing. In M. H. Zadeh (Ed.), Advances in Haptics
(385-402). Vienna: IN-TECH web.
Mangen, A., Anda, L.-G., Oxenborough, G., & Brønnick, K. (2015). Handwriting versus typewriting: Effect on word recall. Journal
of Writing Research, 7 (2), 227-247.
Mangen, A., Balswik, L. (2016). Pen or keyboard in beginning writing instruction? Some perspectives from embodied cognition.
Trends in Neuroscience Education, 5 (3), 99-106.
Mangen, A. (2016). What hands may tell us about reading and writing. Educational Theory, 66 (6), 457-477.
95
(P. 84-96)
Mangen, A., Anda, L.G., Oxborough, G. & Brønnick, K. (2015). Handwriting versus typewriting: Effect on word recall. Journal of
Writing Research, 7 (2), 227-247.
Mueller, P. A., Oppenheimer, D.M. (2014). The pen is mightier than the keyboard: Advantages of longhand over laptop note tak-
ing. Psychological Science, 25 (6), 1159-1168.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9 (5), 1-6.
Shapiro, L. A. (2010). Embodied cognition. New York: Routledge.
Sadler, C. R. (2011). Comprehension strategies for middle grade learners: A handbook for content area teachers (2nd Ed.). Newark,
DE: International Reading Association.
Smoker, T. J., Murphy & Rockwell, A., K. (2009). Comparing memory for handwriting versus typing. Proceedings of the Human
Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 53 (22), 1744-1747.
Spiro, R. J. (2004). Principled pluralism for adaptive flexibility in teaching and learning. In Ruddel, R. B. & Unrau, n. (Eds.), Theoreti-
cal models and processes of reading (5th Ed., 654-659). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Tulving, E. & Thomson, D. M. (1973). Encoding specificity and retrieval process in episodic memory. Psychological review, 80 (5),
352-365.
Van Galen, G. P. (1991). Handwriting: Issues for a psychomotor theory. Human Movement Science, 10 (2), 165-191.
Received: August 29, 2017 Accepted: January 12, 2018
Metka Kordigel Aberšek PhD, Professor, University of Maribor, Faculty of Education, Koroška
160, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia.
E-mail: metka.kordigel@um.si
Boris Aberšek PhD, Professor, University of Maribor, Faculty of Natural Science and
Mathematics, Koroška 160, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia.
E-mail: boris.abersek@um.si
Andrej Flogie PhD, Assistant Professor, Faculty of Natural Science and Mathematics,
Koroška 160, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia.
Institute Anton Martin Slomšek, Vrbanska 30, Maribor, Slovenia.
E-mail: andrej.flogie@slomskov-zavod.si
96
IN-DEPTH TEACHING AS
ORIENTED-RESEARCH ABOUT
SEASONS AND THE SUN/EARTH ISSN 1648-3898 /Print/
MODEL: EFFECTS ON CONTENT ISSN 2538-7138 /Online/
KNOWLEDGE ATTAINED BY PRE-

SERVICE PRIMARY TEACHERS
Joaquín Martínez-Torregrosa, Abstract. Pre-service primary teachers

Ruben Limiñana, mostly have negative attitudes towards
science teaching and learning, and their
Asunción Menargues, science background is usually low. This
Rafael Colomer usually results in them feeling unable or
unconfident to teach science at school. A
previous step to improve their willingness
to teach science to children is that they
feel they can learn in-depth any science
core idea. To do that, a course conducted
as oriented-research about a core science
problem was developed and used to evalu-
ate the influence of their previous science
Introduction background and initial attitudes towards
science teaching and learning on content
knowledge attainment. The chosen science
In the Spanish primary education system, teachers are generalist teach-
idea was about diurnal astronomy (Sun
ers and so, they have to teach all curriculum areas when they are in-service.
movements and the Sun/Earth model).
However, pre-service teachers, mainly as the result of their previous academic
Content knowledge attainment was as-
history, usually have negative attitudes towards science teaching and learn-
sessed using learning indicators, which
ing at the beginning of their instruction period at the university, as well as
represent what pre-service teachers should
a low content knowledge on science topics. In that sense, their education “know” and “know how” on this science
period at the university should be regarded as an opportunity for them to core idea. Overall, pre-service teachers
gain content knowledge on some science topics and to develop more posi- achieved high learning levels on this topic,
tive attitudes towards science, as both are required to instruct their pupils in and no significant differences in content
the future. Therefore, assessing whether their initial situation has an effect in knowledge attained by students according
attaining the necessary content knowledge on a core idea of science to be to both initial attitudes and science back-
used functionally is an important research question. ground were found. This suggests that this
Currently, there is a general interest in instructing future primary teach- teaching methodology could be useful for
ers in a way that enables them to be able to teach science in accordance pre-service teachers to achieve a thorough
with scientific practices (e.g. Lawson, 2004; National Research Council, 2012). knowledge on science core ideas, which
This has been widely recognized and encouraged by organizations such is considered to be an important step to
as the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Research Council improve their willingness to teach science
(NRC), the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), at the primary school.
the European Commission and the Inter Academies Panel. In doing so, they Keywords: astronomy education, science
should be taught not only the necessary methodology to do that, but also content knowledge, teacher education.
some of the necessary science content knowledge to reach that aim, as these
are not separated aspects of the learning-teaching process (e.g. Plummer
& Ozcelik, 2015). Therefore, though this is what should be expected during Joaquín Martínez-Torregrosa,
Ruben Limiñana,
the pre-service teacher education at the university, this seems not to be an Asunción Menargues, Rafael Colomer
easy task to be accomplished given that there are several reasons that may University of Alicante, Spain
preclude reaching that aim, such as:
97
IN-DEPTH TEACHING AS ORIENTED-RESEARCH ABOUT SEASONS AND THE SUN/EARTH
MODEL: EFFECTS ON CONTENT KNOWLEDGE ATTAINED BY PRE-SERVICE PRIMARY
TEACHERS ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
(P. 97-119)
1. Most of pre-service primary teachers entering the university have not studied science subjects at the
secondary high school; for example, 80% of pre-service teachers in the Faculty of Education of the
University of Alicante (Spain) had a main pre-university education on humanities.
2. Pre-service primary teachers who had prior scientific education have been taught through a direct trans-
mission of the scientific knowledge in its final state (i.e., without tackling the problems that lead to that
scientific knowledge or concept), which is quite far away from the methodology currently encouraged.
3. Most of pre-service primary teachers, independently of their previous academic background at the
high school (science or humanities), show alternative frameworks about core science ideas, with most
of these prevailing during the years (e.g. Shtulman & Valcarcel, 2012).
4. Most of these pre-service primary teachers have negative attitudes towards science teaching and
learning when enrolling the university (see Aalderen-Smeets, Walma van der Molen, & Asma, 2012 for
a review), which are mostly the result of their “academic history” in science subjects (Jarret, 1999; Mul-
holland & Wallace, 1996; Palmer, 2001; Tosun, 2000; Young & Kellogg, 1993). Moreover, these negative
attitudes are one of the most important reasons for future primary teachers feeling unable to understand
science and even transmit the interest in science to children (Osborne, Simon, & Collins, 2003; Tosun,
2000; Van Driel, Veijaard, & Verloop, 2001; Weinburgh, 2007).
Under this scenario, it seems difficult that, in the future, pre-service primary teachers could generate appropri-
ate classroom situations and transmit the necessary emotion to involve their students in the (re)construction of
scientific knowledge. Hence, it is not surprising that most in-service primary teachers teach science by following
textbooks step by step, removing from their lessons activities that are in accordance with scientific practices (as
they feel unable to understand and give sense to most of these) and evaluating their students with exams that
promote repetitive learning (i.e., to give the expected answers to closed questions). In fact, most of pre-service
primary teachers at the University of Alicante report that, during their practicum at primary schools, this behavior
(the “traditional” science teaching) is the commonest one amongst in-service primary teachers.
Therefore, changing this kind of well-established science teaching methodology amongst primary teachers
is not an easy task. Future teachers are being instructed as “generalist teachers”, and time devoted to science in-
struction during their education at the university is quite limited. Within this general framework, in some Faculties
of Education, most professors choose to instruct pre-service primary teachers with a miscellaneous and general
view of science education that includes both a superficial (broad) view of important concepts or ideas of science
and some practical (hands-on) activities, which are helpful to show students “how things are”, thus laying on an
empiricist view of science learning; moreover, in most cases, these activities are expected to be reproduced as
such in the future with children. In some other cases, professors completely refuse the idea of teaching scientific
concepts or ideas to pre-service teachers, and only show them sequences of activities for primary science educa-
tion, so they can understand and analyze these sequences for them being able to repeat those activities in their
lessons when being in-service. However, those views seem not to be satisfactory for pre-service teachers to attain
some content knowledge to be used as a basis to teach science according to scientific practices. When instructed
about too much topics, it is very improbable that teacher students attain the necessary content knowledge level
simultaneously with (and by) scientific practices and, when instructed about sequences of activities for primary
children, students consider that the instructional methodology is only restricted to the children level but when
“serious” learning of science is necessary the only way to do it is “traditional” teaching. Another point of view is
possible, which is different to those mentioned above: attitudinal change and confidence to teach science using
an inquiry-based science education (IBSE) methodology require that pre-service primary teachers have had op-
portunities during their formation for a “true learning” of any of the core or “big ideas” of science in a coherent
manner with that expected they follow in the future to teach their pupils (National Research Council, 2012). This
period of instruction must be followed by another one about science teaching sequences for children.
It is of paramount importance that pre-service teachers overcome their initial low self-efficacy beliefs to learn
and teach science (Brígido, Borrachero, Bermejo, & Mellado, 2013; Cakiroglu, Capa-Aydin, & Woolfolh Hoy, 2012),
which can be accomplished after showing them that they can learn in-depth any scientific core idea, and this might
be expected to be achieved, regardless of their initial science background and their attitudes to science teaching
and learning. According to this, the instruction process of pre-service primary teachers should not be regarded only
as a process of acquiring new content knowledge, but also as a simultaneous process of evolution and change of
their attitudes and thinking about science teaching and learning. The constructivist approach of teaching based in
98
ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ IN-DEPTH TEACHING AS ORIENTED-RESEARCH ABOUT SEASONS AND THE SUN/EARTH
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ TEACHERS
(P. 97-119)
the (re)construction of knowledge by children and teachers when confronting questions and problems of scientific
interest, demands teachers that can guide, know what is essential and nonessential, ask adequate questions, guess
and challenge the ideas of their pupils and scaffold them, passionately, through a previously planned sequence of
activities to move them forward (Gil-Pérez & Carrascosa, 1994). To do so, future primary teachers need to experi-
ence in person they are able to master some of the core or “big ideas” of science (i.e., understand it, being able to
justify their thoughts based in evidence and scientific reasoning, and use it to explain and predict new situations
in order to make sense to natural phenomena occurring around them; National Research Council, 1996). They can
reach this aim whether they are instructed about core ideas in a coherent manner with scientific practices, i. e. by
oriented-research within a problematized structure (Becerra, Gras, & Martínez-Torregrosa, 2012; Gaigher, Leder-
man, & Lederman, 2014). Here, “oriented-research” refers to the methodology described by Gil-Pérez & Carrascosa
(1994); generally speaking, this is a problem-solving approach where teacher is the “expert researcher” that guides
and orientates the students (who represent a group of novel researchers) in their work to solve a fundamental
problem of interest. When doing this, they can achieve both scientific content knowledge and skills related to sci-
entific practices. Hence, under this scenario, one of the commitments on science teaching to pre-service primary
teachers during their training period at the university should be to teach science as oriented-research about core
ideas, favoring an in-depth teaching of a single (or very few) science fundamental idea rather than a superficial
breadth teaching of several ones.
Nonetheless, this position is not risk-free. As it has been previously stated, there are reasons that may preclude
that pre-service teachers attain high levels of knowledge when taught in-depth on a core science idea according
to scientific practices. Are these pre-service teachers that have not a scientific background attaining the expected
learning outcomes about a science core idea? Are there significant differences in content knowledge attained
between students with a previous education on science or humanities? Is this teaching methodology useful for
students with initial negative attitudes to attain high content knowledge levels? Summarizing: do this in-depth
teaching support the common belief that most pre-service teachers have not the “capacity” to learn difficult topics
like science ones? These are the research questions addressed in the present study.
Fortunately, these are questions that can be tested. To do so, a course (four hours per week during fifteen
weeks) divided in two parts was designed and carried out. First part (ca. 20 hours) is addressed for students to
express their initial attitudes about science teaching and learning, for them to become aware of the possible
causes of their attitudes (amongst others, conventional teaching), and to realize about their willingness and con-
fidence for teaching science at the primary school. This part of the course is also devoted to elaborate and justify
a plausible model for teaching science in accordance with the scientific practices (as far as possible and desirable
at scholar level, and characterized as a problem-solving and tentative activity). The second part of the course (ca.
40 hours) is devoted to teach them one of the core ideas of science (Harlen, 2010) following the proposed model
(i.e., teaching as oriented-research about core problems and questions of science). These core ideas (see below
the chosen idea) are included in the primary curriculums worldwide and represent the scientific ideas that adult
and scientifically literate people should have grasped at the end of their compulsory education (see also Gaigher,
Lederman, & Lederman, 2014). As stated before, it is expected that teaching them in-depth this topic would repre-
sent an improvement in students’ content knowledge, which could lead to an improvement of their skills to teach
science in the future as guided inquiry.
To instruct pre-service teachers on a fundamental problem of science, the topic of Sun and Earth movement
was chosen, which is usually treated as “Seasons” and as “Earth movements” in primary school curricula. Within
this topic, two sub-problems were set up: a first more empirical sub-problem (about cycles and symmetries in
Sun’s movement as observed from a given place on Earth: “Are there regularities in the movement of the Sun?
Can we organize time and space with them?”), followed by a second more deductive (modeling) sub-problem
aimed at explaining empirical data observed when developing the first sub-problem (about a Sun/Earth model
that can explain the observed cycles and symmetries in Sun movement: “How do the Sun and the Earth move for
the existing cycles and symmetries to occur?”). It has been recently shown that the connection between Earth-
based observations of the Sun and the movements of the Earth in space is one of the major challenges that limit
student progress in this topic (Plummer & Maynard, 2014), which strengthen the idea of developing these two
topics together: first observational data on Sun movement and then finding possible explanations for those data
recorded as Earth-based observers.
There are several studies reporting attitudinal improvements towards science teaching and learning after
teaching scientific topics as oriented-research (as acknowledged by Viennot, 2010). However, studies showing that a
99
(P. 97-119)
thorough content knowledge on a given topic can be attained after instruction using problem-solving approaches
are still scarce. Moreover, there is little research on how to improve content knowledge of pre-service teachers
(Diamond, Maerten-Rivera, Rohrer, & Lee, 2014; Fleer, 2009; Heller, Daeler, Wong, Shinohara, & Miratrix, 2012). In
this work, data on content knowledge attainment level (CKAL) by pre-service primary teachers after instruction
as oriented-research on the core idea of science mentioned above is presented. CKAL is measured according to
learning indicators (see below for further details on these indicators), which were elaborated by experts in the
topic and represent what a person should know and “know how” about a given fundamental science idea if he/
she has fully understood it. To that end, this research is arranged as follows: (1) the hypothesis that guides this
research is presented and justified, (2) then, classroom environment and the characteristics of the course where
instruction as oriented-research is carried out are described, giving some examples, (3) the experimental design
followed to test our hypothesis is described, and (4) finally, data on CKAL in pre-service primary teachers are re-
ported, analyzed and discussed.
Hypothesis and Justification
It can be affirmed that pre-service primary teachers instructed in-depth by an oriented-research about core
ideas of science (in this case, the movements of Sun and Earth) can achieve high content knowledge on the topic.
Operatively, this implies to test that (i.e., the research hypothesis is):
H1. Most of the students achieve the learning indicators, as defined by experts, on the topic; and these out-
comes are, a) independent of their initial attitude towards science teaching and learning, and b) independent of
their previous science background (science vs. humanities).
Why is this expected to happen? According to inquiry-based methodologies and the oriented-research ap-
proach mentioned above, there are some situations that are present in the classroom during the course. Hence, what
is outlined in the abovementioned hypothesis is occurring as these following situations are promoting real learning:
1) Teaching science starting with a fundamental problem or question of interest allows a working environ-
ment where there are repeated and systematic opportunities to ask questions, doubt, share, discuss
and test ideas (both their own ideas and ideas that other people have). In doing so, students propose
their own ideas (predictions, hypotheses, models, explanations…) tentatively and then, they look for
evidences and arguments to make advancements to solve the initial problem of interest. To this end,
the professors’ team had designed a sequence of activities that are proposed to pre-service teachers
(which are organized in small groups in the classroom). This sequence has a structure that generates a
tentative environment (see Appendix 1) and serves to orientate and guide the students in the process
of investigating about the problem of interest. In this environment, pre-service primary teachers and
the professor talk about what they have done in each activity, expressing their ideas about the problem
that was set at the beginning, as well as their views and thoughts to every question in the sequence. For
some activities, the professor provides empirical data (or reliable sources for students to find data) to
help in doing the activities properly. Then, they assess, based on evidence and reasoning, if the ideas that
have arisen as the result of responding the activities in the sequence made a step forward to advance
in the initial problem. When the professor explains some of the aspects or concepts is because it has
been created the need of his/her intervention, not just because it should be explained. This open and
investigative atmosphere of early stage researchers, guided by an expert (the professor), generates a
climate that encourages the emotional involvement of pre-service teachers (Gil-Pérez & Carrascosa,
1994). If students’ ideas change, it is not because teaching has been planned to go against their initial
ideas but because students take possession of explicit and scientific criteria to accept any idea, which
can (or not) be different to “spontaneous knowledge”.
2) When teaching science as oriented-research, the plan to solve the initial problem of interest represents
the index of the issue (see Appendix 1): the sequence of sections, steps and activities is not arbitrary
(for students) but it follows a logic structure (i.e., if this is the problem, what plan could we follow to
make any advance towards its resolution?). Both students and professor should draw this plan (for
students to be oriented during the research and for they to feel responsible of the plan). However,
100
(P. 97-119)
whether students cannot propose the entire plan and it must be completed by the professor, the
plan proposal must be introduced as a tentative strategy and discussed with pre-service teachers for
making it comprehensible and shared by them (the complete sequences of activities are available at:
http://rua.ua.es/dspace/handle/10045/71774; see the beginning of each sub-problem as examples
of a plan proposal). This means that, from the beginning, it exists both a goal and a guiding thread,
favoring recapitulations throughout the course (What was our problem? What have we done to make
advancements on it? How much have we advanced and what still remains to be done?). Therefore,
pre-service teachers progressively take possession of the problem and they feel they have played their
part in the plan (Wong, Wong, & Chau, 2001). It has been shown that this structure promotes guidance
and involvement of high school students in science topics (e.g. Verdú & Martínez-Torregosa, 2005). In
this context of problem resolution, both students and professors introduce concepts and models in
a tentative way, as inventions or well-founded hypotheses which are needed to make advancements
to solve the initial problem. Therefore, activities, practical work and problem solving are integrated in
a coherent manner, together with introduction of concepts and their relationship, inside the research
structure (Gil-Pérez et al., 1999).
For example, the concept of “cardinal points” is introduced when students are asked whether there are
changes in the sunrise and/or sunset position and whether these changes occur regularly. Then, pre-
service primary teachers need taking a reference point in the horizon circumference to indicate the
position of the Sun when it is on the horizon and, at the same time, this point must be universal (they
cannot use local references like mountains, buildings, trees, etc. if they need to communicate data to
other people). Although students recall the compass and some of them explain why it allows to obtain
a reference point on the horizon to measure the Sun’s position from this point, the professor points
out that before the compass was invented, there were accurate measurements of sunrise and sunset
positions: the shortest shadow of a vertical stick (gnomon) occurs every day on the same straight line
on the ground (i.e., the Meridian line). This allows organizing the horizon from the point where this
line (in the sense opposite to Sun) “intersects” with the horizon. In places where Sun moves from left to
right (looking at noon), the intersection point on the horizon is called “north” (the reference point, 0º)
and 360º of the horizon circumference are measured clockwise starting from the north. The position of
Sun on the horizon can be given by measuring the angle between the straight line that links observer
eyes with the north and the straight line that link observer eyes with the center of the Sun globe (when
it rises or sets). This angle is called sunrise/sunset azimuth. More detailed examples about how other
concepts or models are introduced, after students have worked on the corresponding activities of the
sequences, can be also observed in the sequence of activities, such as the introduction of the concept
of latitude, or the step between how the Sun and Earth are in a solstice day compared to how they are
in an equinox day (being the latter the simplest situation).
3) The assessment system in oriented-research teaching is designed as a tool to enhance learning and
improve teaching. It is an instrument to be aware of achievements, obstacles to overcome and to make
sure of the strength of the achievements (in every student). This assessment system was elaborated by
the team of professors/experts, at the same time that the sequence of activities was designed, follow-
ing a protocol to make problematized teaching/learning sequences (e.g. Osuna, Martínez-Torregrosa,
Carrascosa, & Verdú, 2007; Verdú & Martínez-Torregrosa, 2005), and improved several years before
this research began. After a historical and epistemological study about the topic to be taught and
educational research about it, professors have to identify a “guiding target”, important steps or more
specific goals which must be achieved to try to reach this target and obstacles to overcome (as scien-
tific misconceptions) in each of these steps (see Appendix 2). Thus, there is a teaching plan (a plan to
progress in the initial problem) and a learning itinerary (and their related obstacles) to help students
to attain the expected knowledge (the important things identified within the core science idea). And,
in this scenario, assessment is carried out at three different temporal scales, each of which occurs in a
different “classroom climate” (Hickey et al., 2006; Ruiz-Primo, Shavelson, Hamilton, & Klein, 2002). The
assessment at the immediate scale is done during discussion of activities that have been done by the
small groups of students; it takes place in an open and informal atmosphere, and both students and
the professor assess the work made and point out possible mistakes or difficulties that they have found
101
(P. 97-119)
during the task. The assessment at the close scale is done once every two weeks (at least) and it is carried
out in writing, making this a more formal assessment, but it is only aimed at making students aware
of the strength of their progress in the plan being followed; it takes 20 minutes and it is carried out
during the lesson, or it can be an assessment done through a virtual platform about the topic that has
been discussed in classroom (after finishing the test, every student get his/her mark automatically), or
through a self-assessment questionnaire to identify which aspects they have not been able to master
yet. Finally, the assessment at the proximal scale is carried out in a strictly formal environment (exam),
in writing, at the end of each issue (in our case, two exams are done, each one after ca. 18-20 hours of
instruction; see below for more details on the exams). The grading is based on learning indicators (see
also below for further details on these learning indicators) and each student gets his/her exam back with
comments from the professor and with a mark that shows her/his level of acquisition of these learning
indicators. Students that have not attained the minimum knowledge according to these indicators (or
those who want to improve their marks) do a final exam two weeks after the end of the course, which
represents the assessment at the distal scale (results from this scale have not been taken into account in
this research). Particular attention is given to the coherence of the assessment at the different temporal
scales (guiding to the more relevant aspects, avoiding the success of repetitive learning, and highlight-
ing the importance of reasons of what is being done -including methodological aspects-). Assessment
serves as a tool to guide and encourage a successful teaching and learning and not only to give a mark
to students (i.e., it must remain at the service of the teaching/learning process).
General Background
The methodology used in this research is a design-based research, aimed at showing that the methodology
used to instruct pre-service primary teachers provides good results in content knowledge achievement repeatedly.
To do that, a course on diurnal astronomy taught as oriented-research was developed to instruct future primary
teachers during their education at the university, and it was implemented on six different groups of pre-service
teachers at the Faculty of Education of the University of Alicante (Spain).
Content knowledge attainment levels were defined according to the acquisition of learning indicators by
pre-service teachers in exams, and the percentage of students in every content knowledge attainment level was
calculated. To investigate on the hypothesis previously defined, differences in percentage of students in every
content knowledge level in relation to previous education and initial attitudes towards science teaching and
learning were explored.
Professors Involved
Taking into account that it was not possible to get other equivalent control groups (i.e., taught with other
methodologies but pursuing the same aims), this research is mostly based in showing the consistency in results
obtained by repeating the same course in different years and with different professors. That is to say, obtaining
good results in content knowledge achieved by pre-service teachers in different years and with different professors
should be considered as an indicator of success. Therefore, the same sequence of activities mentioned above was
repeated six times (i.e., with six different groups of pre-service teachers), with three different professors and during
three consecutive years (two groups per year). All the three professors (namely A, B and C) prepared, revised and
used the same sequence of activities, as well as the same assessment system described above. Professor A is an
Associate Professor, Professor B is a Full Professor and Professor C is an Assistant Professor. In the first and second
year of the research, professors that participated were A and B, whereas in the third year of the research, professors
involved were A and C. Professor A taught for the first time at the university during the first year of the research, but
he had previous experience teaching as oriented-research this core idea at the high school. In his first year at the
university, this professor enrolled when the course had already begun and hence, he only taught the second part
of the course (i.e., the part devoted to teaching the scientific content; group A1, see Table 1). Professor C taught the
course for her very first time for this research, but she had attended and analyzed the classes of Professor B during
the two previous years (i.e., when this research began). Professor B had taught the same course with the same se-
102
(P. 97-119)
quence of activities during several years prior to the beginning of this research. It was decided to introduce a new
professor in the study (professor C) to test whether a professor teaching the topic for the first time could get from
pre-service teachers the same content knowledge attainment than that achieved by more experienced professors;
if so, this might be an indication of the strength of the teaching methodology. For all the three professors, mean
intervention time during the classes (i.e., time invested to speak) was barely 50% of the total time of the classes,
and the rest of the time was devoted for students to respond and discuss the proposed activities.
Sample
Given that in the Faculty of Education at the University of Alicante was not possible to create groups of pre-
service teachers taken at random, to undertake this research, groups that had the same timetable and where
people enrolled in them in the same dates were chosen, which is equivalent to having the same mean qualifica-
tions in the prior (first) course at the university (i.e., having the same grade point average –GPA-). Therefore, the
six groups considered in this research were academically homogeneous, and these were randomly endorsed to a
given professor every year (number of students in each group is presented in Table 1).
Table 1. Composition, previous scientific background and initial attitudes towards science teaching and
learning (as percentage) of six groups of pre-service primary teachers.
Initial attitudes towards science

teaching and learning
Academic Number of Science Humanities
Group Teacher*
year students (%) (%)
Negative Neutral Positive
(%) (%) (%)
A1 A 2012-13 52 13 87 45 34 21
B1 B 2012-13 51 24 76 53 20 27
A2 A 2013-14 56 16 84 55 19 26
B2 B 2013-14 54 15 85 57 17 26
A3 A 2014-15 45 22 78 65 11 24
C3 C 2014-15 44 23 77 66 15 19
GLOBAL 302 19 81 57 19 24
* Teacher A: Associate Professor; Teacher B: Full Professor; Teacher C: Assistant Professor (see text for further details).
Instruments and Procedures
Assessing the Initial Attitudes of Pre-service Primary Teachers to Science Teaching and Learning
In the first session of the course, a questionnaire was used to obtain data on the students’ background educa-
tion (i.e., to assign to every pre-service teacher a prior education: science or humanities). Other two questions in
that questionnaire were used to assign the initial attitudes of pre-service primary teachers towards science teaching
and learning, which were classified as positive, neutral or negative. These two questions were:
1. If you were an in-service primary teacher and you could choose the contents you are teaching, what
subject would this be about? Please score the following subjects from 0 to 10 (0 = if I can, I would never
choose contents of this subject; 10 = if I can, I would much like to choose contents of this subject):
History: Geography: Language: Mathematics:

Biology: Geology: Physics: Chemistry: Others:
2. Please, indicate two subjects to which you have quite negative attitudes, and two to which you have
quite positive attitudes.
103
(P. 97-119)
In the first one, they had to score to what extent they were confident and feel able to teach contents of sev-
eral subjects when they become in-service primary teachers; from all these, the score given to Physics was used
to assess their initial attitudes given that, amongst all these, the topic that was being taught to them was mostly
related to Physics (nonetheless, they did not know which science topic was going to be taught during the course
at the time of completing this initial questionnaire). Previous research reveals that primary teachers usually have
a negative attitude towards teaching and learning Physics and Chemistry, whereas their attitudes to Biology are
usually positive (e.g. Osborne & Collins, 2001). The second question used to assess their attitudes to science was
to ask them to indicate two subjects for which they feel to have overall positive attitudes and two for which they
had overall negative attitudes.
With responses to these two questions from each student, it was considered that they had negative attitudes
to science if they scored Physics with 4 or lower, or if they specifically mentioned having overall negative attitudes
to at least one science discipline (Physics, Chemistry or Biology). If Physics was scored with 5 or 6, and they did
not mention having negative attitudes to any science subject, their attitude to science was considered neutral.
Finally, if they scored Physics with 7 or higher, or said to have positive attitudes to at least one science subject, it
was considered to have positive attitude to science teaching and learning. Responses to these two questions were
highly consistent; this is to say, if they mentioned overall positive attitudes to science, Physics was scored with 7
or higher; and the same applied to negative attitudes, scoring Physics with 4 or lower.
Assessing Learning Level of Pre-service Primary Teachers
It is important to mention here that a pre-test (with the same questions used in the exams) was not used to
evaluate the initial content knowledge that pre-service teachers had on the topic being taught, but the pre-test
used had the same learning indicators as the exams had (see below). This pre-test was a questionnaire with a set
of 15 questions about diurnal astronomy written in plain words (e.g. in which period of the year can we record the
longest and shortest daytime duration?; Could you use Sun path to accurately determine cardinal points?) that
students had to fill out before starting the course. Hence, these questions were much easier than those being asked
to them in the exams as, for sure, students were not able to answer the exam questions before instruction. Almost
all responses given to these questions by all the students involved in the research were wrong or not properly
justified and, any of the students answered correctly all those questions (authors unpublished data). Therefore,
it can be assumed that all pre-service teachers had a restricted content knowledge on the topic (at least on the
fundamental questions being taught to them). To avoid making this paper excessively long, these results are not
included here, as they only represent a repetition of results presented here. However, it was necessary making
here an indication of the initial content knowledge level of these pre-service teachers, to highlight the thorough
content knowledge they achieve after instruction.
To measure content knowledge attainment level (CKAL) on the topic by pre-service teachers after instruction,
a set of learning indicators were developed at the same time that the sequence of activities was designed. These
learning indicators were developed by experts on the subject and were modified (adapted and improved) in the
previous years before this research began (the considered learning indicators are listed in the Appendix 3); these
indicators represent what a student that has fully understood the topics being taught should have learnt (“know”
and “know how”) after instruction. And, to assess to what extent students attain these learning indicators, two
exams were used (prepared by the professors involved in the course together with an external consulter, who is
expert in the topic being taught) to be done at the end of each sub-problem (i.e., at the proximal temporal scale),
which were scored using a grading sheet based on the learning indicators. An example of the exams is shown in
Figure 1, and the criteria and procedures used to analyze and score the students’ responses (grading sheet) are
presented in Tables 2 and 3.
104
(P. 97-119)
Table 2. Criteria used to grade CKAL about first sub-problem (Are there regularities in the movement of the
Sun?) according to items on the exam (see Figure 1a).
(a) Does he/she know Sun cycles and symmetries, so he/she can use these for temporal and spatial
orientation?
(a.1) Can he/she obtain and use observational data on Sun movement for temporal and spatial location in
Alicante? (NO: 0; YES: 1 (some errors but not fundamental ones), 2 (without or very minor errors))
“Yes” to this question implies that, when students are given any value of daylight duration, Sun culmi-
nation or sunrise/sunset azimuth in Alicante, and its tendency of change, they can identify to which date (± 1
week) this value belongs to and calculate the rest values of the variables used to describe Sun movement (i.e., if
they are given sunrise azimuth in a day in a period when it is moving towards the north, they are able to calcu-
late sunset azimuth, culmination and daylight duration, as well as the date when that measure was recorded).
That is to say, they should know daily and monthly variations in these variables during the whole year in Ali-
cante (graphically and integrating them in a rational scheme).
(a.2) Does he/she know Sun cycles and symmetries anywhere? (NO: 0; YES: 1 (some errors but not funda-
mental ones), 2 (without or very minor errors))
“Yes” to this question implies that, when students are given values of the abovementioned variables de-
scribing Sun movement in a solstice day in an unknown place on Earth, they can calculate the rest of the values
of these variables of the other solstice and equinox days. Contrary to criterion (a.1), pre-service teachers should
not know daily (or monthly) variations of these variables everywhere in the world, but they should know and
understand the symmetries in Sun movement existing between solstice and equinox days.
Table 3. Criteria used to grade CKAL about second sub-problem (How do Sun and Earth move for the existing
cycles and symmetries to occur?) according to items on the exam (see Figure 1b).
(b) Does he/she understand the Sun/Earth model, so he can use it to make predictions on how the Sun path
could be seen at any part of the world during the year?
(b.1) Can he/she locate a place on Earth using observational data on Sun movement at that place (and vice versa)?
(NO: 0; YES: 1 (some errors but not fundamental ones), 2 (without or very minor errors))
“Yes” to this question implies that students can calculate the value of Sun culmination and hour of the day when
it is seen (the difference with Greenwich) in an equinox day at any place when they are given the coordinates of
that site (latitude and longitude). And, vice versa, they can also locate a place on Earth when they are given Sun
culmination and time (the difference with Greenwich) when it is seen at that place in a solstice or equinox day
(i.e., they can calculate latitude and longitude of any place using observational data on Sun culmination in any
of the solstice or equinox days at that site).
(b.2) Can he/she relate the movement of Sun in the local horizon with the position of Earth in its orbit around the Sun?
(NO: 0; YES: 1 (some errors but not fundamental ones), 2 (without or very minor errors))
“Yes” to that question implies that, when students are given the latitude of any place and the value of Sun
culmination at that site in a moment of the year when days are becoming longer or shorter, they can correctly
identify the season and make a draw of where the Earth is in its orbit around the Sun (in relation to where the
Earth is in solstice and equinox days).
105
(P. 97-119)
(b.3) Can he/she use the model to compare Sun path in different places on Earth? (NO: 0; YES: 1 (some errors but not
fundamental ones), 2 (without or very minor errors))
Students are asked here to compare values of variables describing Sun path in a solstice day (summer or winter)
between Alicante and other place on Earth (which could be in Northern or Southern Hemisphere). Hence, “Yes”
to this question means that, when students are given the coordinates of any place in the world (they must know
the coordinates of Alicante), they can make a draw of a lateral view of Earth in the indicated solstice day to rep-
resent the Sun culmination value occurring at both sites in that day; they can also draw a zenithal view of Earth
(i.e., as seen from “above” the North Pole, quite far away) to qualitative compare sunrise and sunset azimuths
(closer or further from south/north) at both sites, as well as to deduce whether daylight duration is longer in
Alicante or the other place in that solstice day.
Figure 1: An example of the exams used to assess content knowledge attainment by pre-service primary
teachers in both sub-problems.
(a) cycles and symmetries in Sun movement and (b) Sun/Earth model. For each exam, criteria used to assess the attainment level are
written in italics above each question (see Tables 2 and 3 for further details).
A three-level scale (0, 1 and 2) was used to score the level of attainment of every criterion (see Tables 2 and
3). Two independent referees reviewed the students’ answers to these questions. None of these referees were a
professor involved in this research (i.e., qualifications of exams given by professors were not used). To do this, the
two independent referees first decided how to qualify the responses given by students in the exams and then
reviewed and gave qualifications by separate to questions in five exams chosen at random; then, they brought
together their qualifications to every question and discussed any discrepancies observed. After doing this, they
reviewed 10 more exams by separate and brought together again the qualifications given, until the agreement
106
(P. 97-119)
rate was equal or higher than 90% (Hogan & Maglienti, 2001), which was successfully accomplished after the first
attempt. With this agreement in qualifications achieved, the remaining exams were split in two equal parts and
only one referee corrected each half for scoring. After all questions were scored, an overall qualification to both
exams should be given (i.e., every student had to have an overall mark for both sub-problems). To this end, it
was necessary to account for the qualifications given to each question in the exams and number of questions on
them. Hence, for each exam, the qualifications given to every question on them were taken into account to make
a reclassification into a four-level scale as follows: (0) student has not reached the expected content knowledge,
as they present fundamental errors in concepts or their reasoning; (1) student has reached the expected content
knowledge but they show some errors, although not fundamental; (2) student has reached the expected content
knowledge, showing only some minor errors in reasoning; and (3) student has fully reached the expected content
knowledge and responses are nearly perfect or perfect. The possible combinations of marks given to each ques-
tion on the exams and the global mark given to exams of every student are summarized in Table 4. Hence, every
student was given a single mark for both exams, which were used for further analyses.
Table 4. Combinations of individual marks to questions on the exams that lead to marks on both exams used
to measure content knowledge attainment level of pre-service primary teachers on the topic. The
order of marks to questions is not important for the final four-level mark to exams.
EXAM ON CYCLES AND SYMMETRIES IN SUN MOVEMENT
Four-level scale score Possible combinations of scores to individual questions
00
0
10
1 11
2 21
3 22
EXAM ON SUN/EARTH MODEL
Four-level scale score Possible combinations of scores to individual questions
000
0 001
002
011
1 210
111
220
2
211
221
3
222
Data Analysis
To assess the possible effect of both the previous education and the initial attitudes towards science teaching
and learning on CKAL, chi-squared tests in contingency tables were used to compare the percentage of students
on every content knowledge levels for both sub-problems in relation to these variables. The same analyses were
done for every group by separate, as well as for the total of students considered in the study.
107
(P. 97-119)
Results of Research
Number of students involved in the research, as well as the previous formation of students and initial attitudes
towards science teaching and learning are presented in Table 1. Overall, 81% of the pre-service teachers did not take
any science subject during their high school education, and there were no significant differences between the six
groups according to their previous education ( = 3.37; p = .644). Similarly, there were no significant differences
in percentage of students with the same attitudes between groups ( = 12.89; p = .230) and, overall, more than
50% of pre-service teachers had negative attitudes towards science teaching and learning.
The percentage of students in every content knowledge attainment level (CKAL) in both exams is presented
in Table 5. Overall, nearly 70% of pre-service teachers can spatially and temporally orientate by obtaining and using
data on Sun path (see in Table 2 the criteria used to assess students’ outcomes for the first sub-problem and exams
in Figure 1a), only using a piece of paper, a pencil and a calculator for simple calculations. Regarding the results
for the second sub-problem (Sun/Earth model), 76% of students have functionally learnt to use the Sun/Earth
model. That is to say, they can, using only a piece of paper, a pencil and drawing instruments, locate an observer
on the Earth using data on Sun path at that site; also, they can deduce how Sun path would be in an unknown site
in solstice and equinox days, only knowing the coordinates of that site (see in Table 3 the criteria used to assess
students’ outcomes for the second sub-problem and exams in Figure 1b).
Moreover, there was a steady improvement in results attained by students during the study period, reaching
a 90% of students attaining the expected content knowledge on the topic in the last year of the study. A possible
explanation for this is that the professors’ team analyzed the difficulties that students had during the first two years
of the study (for example, the use of instruments to get some data, such as the protractor, mistakes in calculations,
and difficulties to represent an observer on the Earth with a gnomon, horizontal plane and cardinal points) and
introduced specific additional activities to overcome these most-common difficulties during the last year of the
study. Finally, it is also remarkable the low percentage of students that abandoned the course (those that did the
first exam but not the second, less than 5% on average).
Table 5. Levels of attainment achieved by the six groups of primary teacher students on cycles and symmetries
of Sun’s movement and on the Sun-Earth model, after teaching structured as oriented-research.
Knowledge attainment level Year 2012-13 Year 2013-14 Year 2014-15 Global
Group Group Group

Does he/she know Sun cycles and symme- Group A2 Group B2 Group A3
A1 B1 C3 (n=302)
tries, so he can use these for temporal and (n=56) (n=54) (n=45)
(n=52) (n=51) (n=44) %
spatial orientation? % % %
% % %
0. No 60 39 34 35 9 16 33
• Yes (total) 40 61 66 65 91 84 67
1. although with some errors 20 17 23 17 16 20 19
2. with some minor errors 10 22 31 26 33 25 25
3. with no errors 10 22 12 22 42 39 23
Does he/she understand the Sun/Earth mod- Group Group Group
Group A2 Group B2 Group A3
el, so he can use it to make predictions on A1 B1 C3 (n=287)
(n=54) (n=51) (n=44)
how the Sun path could be seen at any part (n=48) (n=46) (n=44) %
% % %
of the world during the year? % % %
0. No 35 43 13 27 9 14 24
• Yes (total) 65 57 87 73 91 86 76
1. although with some errors 27 33 42 37 36 20 33
2. with some minor errors 23 9 19 22 23 23 20
3. with no errors 15 15 26 14 32 43 23
Note: Results are expressed in percentage of students achieving different levels according to learning indicators.
108
(P. 97-119)
Influence of Prior Scientific Background
One of the most important concerns that were considered at the beginning of the research was that doing
an in-depth teaching of scientific contents could generate significant differences in learning outcomes of students
according to their previous academic background (science vs. humanities). If pre-service teachers with humanities
background (which are most of the students) obtain bad results in exams, this may result in a decrease in their
confidence and willingness to learn and teach science. Results on CKAL obtained for the six groups according to
their previous education are shown in Table 6. Percentages of pre-service teachers that achieve the minimum ex-
pected content knowledge for the two sub-problems (i.e., those in level one or higher according to the correction
criteria) are also illustrated in Figure 2. However, that concerning situation has not occurred: when considering
the six groups together, there was no significant differences in percentage of students achieving every knowledge
level according to their background education for both the cycles ( = 3.31; p = .347) and the model ( = 7.17; p =
.067) exams. When comparing data within each one of the groups by separate for the cycles’ exam, only significant
marginal differences were found in the group B2 ( = 7.85; p = .049, with p > .06 for the rest of the groups; see
Table 6 and Figure 2a). Interestingly, in this group, the significant differences arose as a consequence of a higher
percentage of students with a humanities background attaining the expected content knowledge, compared to
those that had a scientific education. The same analysis revealed no significant differences in any of the six groups
for the exam on the Sun/Earth model (p > .290 in all the cases, see Table 6 and Figure 2b).
Influence of Initial Attitudes Towards Science Learning and Teaching
Table 7 shows results on CKAL of pre-service teachers according to their initial attitude towards science teach-
ing and learning. Overall, when considering data from all groups together, there were no significant differences
in content knowledge attained according to initial attitudes neither for the exam on cycles ( = 8.42; p = .209)
nor for the exam on the Sun/Earth model ( = 9.22; p = .162). The same was true within each of the six groups
in both exams (p > .241 in all cases), except for the group B2, in the model exam, where significant differences
were found in content knowledge attained in relation to their initial attitudes ( = 14.52; p = .024; see Table 7b);
in this group the percentage of students with positive initial attitude attaining the learning indicators was higher
(85%) than for the other categories (70% for students with negative initial attitude). Nevertheless, percentage of
students achieving the upper levels (i.e., attainment levels two or three) was higher in those that had negative or
neutral attitudes compared to those with positive attitudes. Figure 3 shows the percentage of students attaining
the expected content knowledge on the topic (i.e., in level one or higher) for the two sub-problems.
109
(P. 97-119)
Figure 2: Percentage of students achieving the learning indicators for the two sub-problems according to
their prior academic background.
110
(P. 97-119)
Figure 3: Percentage of students achieving the learning indicators for the two sub-problems according to
their initial attitudes towards science teaching and learning.
111
(P. 97-119)
Table 6. Content knowledge achieved by pre-service primary teachers in the two sub-problems according
to their background education (science or humanities). Results are presented as the percentage of
students achieving every knowledge level, for each of the six groups considered in the research.
(6a) Cycles and symmetries in Sun movement
A1 B1 A2 B2 A3 C3
Know.
Level Sci Human Sci Human Sci Human Sci Human Sci Human Sci Human
(n=7) (n=45) (n=12) (n=39) (n=9) (n=47) (n=8) (n=46) (n=10) (n=35) (n=10) (n=34)
0 57 60 25 44 22 36 50 33 10 9 10 17
1 14 20 25 15 0 28 0 20 20 14 20 21
2 0 13 42 15 67 23 0 30 20 37 40 21
3 29 7 8 26 11 13 50 17 50 40 30 41
(6b) Sun/Earth model
A1 B1 A2 B2 A3 C3
Know.
Level Sci Human Sci Human Sci Human Sci Human Sci Human Sci Human
(n=7) (n=41) (n=12) (n=34) (n=9) (n=45) (n=7) (n=44) (n=10) (n=34) (n=10) (n=34)
0 29 37 33 47 0 16 14 29 0 12 10 15
1 13 29 33 32 33 44 58 34 20 41 30 17
2 29 22 9 9 22 18 14 23 30 21 10 27
3 29 12 25 12 45 22 14 14 50 26 50 41
Knowledge level: (0) student has not reached the learning indicators as they present fundamental errors in concepts or their reasoning;
(1) student has reached the learning indicators but show some errors, although not fundamental; (2) student has reached the learning
indicators, showing only some minor errors in reasoning; and (3) student has fully reached the learning indicators and responses are
nearly perfect or perfect.
Table 7. Content knowledge achieved by pre-service primary teachers in the two sub-problems according to
their initial attitudes towards science teaching and learning (negative, neutral or positive). Results
are presented as the percentage of students achieving every knowledge level, for each of the six
groups considered in the research.
(7a) Cycles and symmetries in Sun movement
A1 B1 A2 B2 A3 C3
Initial attitude
Negative
Negative
Negative
Negative
Negative
Negative
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
(n=23) (n=18) (n=11) (n=27) (n=10) (n=14) (n=30) (n=11) (n=15) (n=31) (n=9) (n=14) (n=30) (n=5) (n=10) (n=30) (n=7) (n=8)
0 61 72 37 40 40 36 44 27 20 32 44 36 7 20 10 13 29 13
1 17 22 18 19 20 14 23 19 27 19 0 21 13 20 20 27 0 13
2 13 6 18 19 30 21 23 27 46 26 44 14 43 20 10 23 42 13
3 9 0 27 22 10 29 10 27 7 23 12 29 37 40 60 37 29 61
112
(P. 97-119)
(7b) Sun/Earth model
A1 B1 A2 B2 A3 C3
Initial attitude
Negative
Negative
Negative
Negative
Negative
Negative
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
Neutral
(n=21) (n=16) (n=11) (n=24) (n=10) (n=12) (n=28) (n=11) (n=15) (n=30) (n=8) (n=13) (n=30) (n=5) (n=9) (n=30) (n=7) (n=8)
0 43 31 27 42 40 50 14 18 7 30 37 15 10 20 0 13 14 13
1 29 25 27 42 30 17 39 46 46 20 37 77 40 20 33 20 29 13
2 19 31 19 12 10 0 22 9 20 33 13 0 23 40 11 30 0 13
3 9 13 27 4 20 33 25 27 27 17 13 8 27 20 56 37 57 61
Knowledge level: (0) student has not reached the learning indicators as they present fundamental errors in concepts or their reasoning;
(1) student has reached the learning indicators but show some errors, although not fundamental; (2) student has reached the learning
indicators, showing only some minor errors in reasoning; and (3) student has fully reached the learning indicators and responses are
nearly perfect or perfect.
Discussion
Here, it has been found that most of pre-service teachers achieve an in-depth knowledge on observable data
of Sun’s movement and the related Sun/Earth model that can explain the empirical data we could record from the
Earth, and that content knowledge achievement is independent of their previous academic background and their
initial attitudes, when teaching is carried out using this investigative approach.
This is an important fact because it is well known that in many developed countries there is a decrease in
numbers of young people taking up studies in science (Harlen, 2010). It is common amongst most pre-service
primary teachers at the university to believe that they are not as clever as those people that study science during
their high school education. That is the reason for most of them having taken humanity subjects at the second-
ary level, and also for most of them having overall negative attitudes towards science teaching and learning (as
they feel unable to understand and teach science). On the other hand, those pre-service teachers having studied
science at the primary and secondary levels, they feel that content knowledge acquired is not enough to respond
scientific questions when confronting the real word. Independently of their background education, they remember
these contents as to be memorized, without having a “real” understanding of what they mean, including a lot of
formulas that they feel to be completely useless. And hence, when they arrive to the university, they feel unable to
teach science when being in-service at the primary school, despite them having to do so. As stated earlier in the
introduction, the first step to increase willingness of primary teachers to teach science is to show them that they
are able to learn in-depth a core idea of science and use this content knowledge to explain natural phenomena. If
they have a full understanding of a science topic, they will feel more confident to develop inquiry-based lessons
in the future (Plummer & Ozcelik, 2015).
There are several studies that report improvements in content knowledge on diurnal astronomy of pre-service
teachers after instruction using different teaching methodologies (e.g. Lelliott & Rollnick, 2010; Plummer, Zahm, &
Rice, 2010; Trumper, 2006). The main difference of most of these studies with results presented here is that students
of the University of Alicante have reached a very in-depth and meaningful knowledge of the topic. For example,
if they are just given a value of Sun maximum height in a solstice day and time difference at which midday occurs
respect to Greenwich, in an unknown place of the world, they can deduce and properly justify where that place is
on the Earth. And this is a good functional knowledge of the topic, specially taking into account the initial overall
feeling amongst students of their inefficacy to understand science topics.
As mentioned above, these results were obtained using the same sequence of activities and the same teaching
methodology, from six different groups of pre-service teachers, taught by three different professors and during
three consecutive years. Therefore, it can be affirmed that when pre-service primary teachers are taught in-depth
on a science core idea (in this case, how should the Sun and the Earth move for us to observe the existing cycles
and symmetries in Sun movement?) using a methodology that is in accordance with scientific practices, they at-
tain a good functional learning on the topic (“know” and “know how”). Obtaining very similar results repeatedly
113
(P. 97-119)
(with different students and different professors), reinforce the idea that this teaching methodology is appropriate
for students to get a detailed and functional knowledge on a core idea of science as a previous step for them to
feel confident to teach science in the future. Similar results were obtained by Trumper (2006) when using also a
constructivist approach to teach this topic to future elementary and high school teachers.
On the other hand, it has been also found that teaching science to future primary teachers using the proposed
methodology (and using the planned problematized sequence of activities) results in a good content knowledge
achievement by pre-service teachers even when teaching is carried out by novel professors. Professor C obtained
quite good results in her group the very first time she taught the course; nonetheless, it was helpful to attend
classes of the “expert” professor (professor B in this research), to have an idea on how to behave in the classroom
and how to carry out the sequence of activities to obtain the necessary attitudinal involvement of pre-service
teachers in the course for them to attain high levels of learning on the topics. Moreover, there is also a progressive
improvement on results obtained by the same professor during consecutive years, as shown in results observed
for professor A; despite that the results obtained in the first year may be due to the fact that the professor enrolled
the course when it had already begun, there is also an improvement in content knowledge attainment by students
from their groups between the second and third year of the research.
The teaching methodology proposed here has been a very useful tool not only to get an in-depth knowledge
on that topic but also it could have a positive effect in teachers’ confidence to teach core science ideas in the way
that is expected (and desired) to teach. Data recorded in this research indicate that it is possible to overcome the
initial concerns of students on their ability to teach science. As they feel that they have achieved a very good con-
tent knowledge on a science topic, this enables the opportunity for them to develop a metacognitive awareness
of their own learning (Heywood & Parker, 2010). It is likely that this very in-depth content knowledge achievement
has occurred as they have been guided during their instruction process to overcome the obstacles that were previ-
ously identified. This teaching methodology has been also encouraged in the Next Generation Science Standards
(National Research Council, 2015; page 11), which suggests removing from lessons the traditional oversimplifica-
tion of activities for students who are perceived to be less able to do science and engineering. If they feel they
have fully understood a “complex” issue, they will be probably more confident to teach science in the future. When
pre-service teachers take inquiry-based science courses, they are better prepared to teach using this methodology
than when only traditional courses are taken (e.g. Avraamidou & Zembal-Saul, 2010; Luera, Moyer, & Everett, 2005).
Conclusions
In this research, it has been shown that pre-service primary teachers can get a very complete and detailed
knowledge on a science topic when taught using an oriented-research approach, and this knowledge level is at-
tained regardless the initial attitudes and previous education they had. This indicates that these initial traits of pre-
service teachers do not have a significant effect when these students had to get an in-depth content knowledge
on a science topic. Therefore, these initial attitudes and previous education cannot be regarded as an obstacle in
pre-service teacher education, which was one of the possible risks that can be faced when trying to teach them a
scientific topic in depth. Overcoming these initial concerns amongst pre-service teachers it is quite important in
their training period at the University, especially if it is expected them to be able to teach science to their pupils in
the future using an inquiry-based approach. Based on previous studies that stress the importance of these types
of methodologies in science teaching and learning, the good content knowledge level achieved by these students
is the result of conducting the course following an investigative approach. These results are useful for students
to overcome their initial concerns they have on their ability to learn (and teach) science topics, realizing that it is
possible to get an in-depth knowledge on a science topic despite their initial overall negative attitudes and their
previous background on science content knowledge.
Finally, there are, at least, three more issues to assess in this regard. Firstly, the attitudinal changes that may
occur in these pre-service teachers after being taught using this demanding oriented-research approach. It may
happen that the good learning outcomes obtained could be achieved at the expense of them being pushed to
learn, which may be perceived as negative for these students given that they have made a great effort to achieve
this in-depth learning; thus, it seems necessary to evaluate how students have emotionally lived this learning
process, as well as to check whether their overall attitudes towards science teaching and learning are still negative
or, on the contrary, these have been improved after the course (see also Demir et al., 2017). Secondly, it may be of
great interest to assess if the good results observed here could be achieved after using the same methodology to
114
(P. 97-119)
teach pre-service teachers a different science core idea than the one taught in the present research. And finally, it
also seems necessary to assess whether, after the course, the thought they have to teach science at the primary
level has changed from their previous thoughts before the instruction period. To get optimal results, based on
our experience, this period of instruction must be followed by another one about science teaching sequences for
primary students, as mentioned above.
References
Aalderen-Smeets, van, S. I., Walma van der Molen, J. H., & Asma, L. J. F. (2012). Primary teachers’ attitudes toward science: A new
theoretical framework. Science Education, 96, 158–182.
Avraamidou, L., & Zembal-Saul, C. (2010). In search of well-started beginning science teachers: Insights from two first-year
elementary teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 661–696.
Becerra-Labra, C., Gras-Martí, A., & Martínez-Torregrosa, J. (2012). Effects of a Problem-based Structure of Physics Contents on
Conceptual Learning and the Ability to Solve Problems. International Journal of Science Education, 34, 1235-1253.
Brígido, M., Borrachero, A. B., Bermejo, M. L., & Mellado, V. (2013). Prospective primary teachers’ self-efficacy and emotions in
science teaching, European Journal of Teacher Education, 36, 200–217.
Cakiroglu, J., Capa-Aydin, Y., & Woolfolh Hoy, A. (2012). Science teaching efficacy beliefs. In B. J. Fraser, K. G. Tobin & C. J. McRobbie
(Eds.), Second International Handbook of Science Education (pp. 449–462). New York: Springer.
Demir, N. S., Aksüt, P., Yener, D., Aydin, F., Subaşi, O., Fidan, H., & Aygün, M. (2017). Attitudes towards astronomy among the
pre-service teachers’ different cognitive styles: alternative course sample. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 16, 300–307.
Diamond, B. S., Maerten-Rivera, J., Rohrer, R. E., & Lee, O. (2014). Effectiveness of a curricular and professional development
intervention at improving elementary teachers’ science content knowledge and student achievement outcomes: year 1
results. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51, 635–658.
Fleer, M. (2009). Supporting scientific conceptual consciousness or learning in ‘a roundabout way’ in playbased contexts. Inter-
national Journal of Science Education, 31, 1069–1089.
Gaigher, E., Lederman, N., & Lederman, J. (2014). Knowledge about inquiry: a study in South African high schools. International
Journal of Science Education, 36, 3125–3147.
Gil-Pérez, D., & Carrascosa, J. (1994). Bringing pupils’ learning closer to a scientific construction of knowledge: a permanent
feature in innovations in science teaching. Science Education, 78, 301–315.
Gil-Pérez, D., Carrascosa, J., Dumas-Carré, A., Furió, C., Gallego, N., Gené, A., González, E., Guisasola, J., Martinez, J., Pessoa, A.,
Salinas, J., Tricárico, H., & Valdés, P. (1999). ¿Puede hablarse de consenso constructivista en la educación científica? [Can we
talk about constructivist consensus in science education?] Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 17, 503 – 512.
Harlen, W. (Ed.) (2010). Principles and big ideas of science education. Hatfield: ASE.
Heller, J. I., Daeler, K. R.,Wong, N., Shinohara, M., & Miratrix, L. W. (2012). Differential effects of three professional development
models on teacher knowledge and student achievement in elementary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
49, 333–362.
Heywood, D., & Parker, J. (2010). The pedagogy of physical science. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Hickey, D. T., Zuiker, S. J., Taasobshirazi, G., Schafer, N. J., & Michael, M. A. (2006). Balancing varied assessment functions to attain
systemic validity: three is the magic number. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 32, 180–201.
Hogan, K., & Maglienti, M. (2001). Comparing the epistemological underpinnings of students’ and scientists’ reasoning about
conclusions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 663–687.
Jarrett, O. S. (1999). Science interest and confidence among preservice elementary teachers. Journal of Elementary Science
Education, 11 (1), 47–57.
Lawson, A. E. (2004). Biology: An Inquiry Approach. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt Publishers.
Lelliott, A., & Rollnick, M. (2010). Big ideas: a review of astronomy education research 1974–2000. International Journal of Science
Education, 32, 1771–1799.
Luera, G. R., Moyer, R. H., & Everett, S. A. (2005). What type and level of science content knowledge of elementary education stu-
dents affect their ability to construct an inquiry-based science lesson? Journal of Elementary Science Education, 17 (1), 12–25.
Mulholland, J., & Wallace, J. (1996). Breaking the cycle: preparing elementary teachers to teach science. Journal of Elementary
Science Education, 8 (1), 17–38.
National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Wash-
ington, DC: The National Academies Press.
National Research Council. (2015). Guide to Implementing the Next Generation Science Standards. Committee on Guidance on
Implementing the Next Generation Science Standards. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social
Sciences and Education, Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Osborne, J. F., & Collins, S. (2001). Pupils’ views of the role and value of the science curriculum: a focus-group study. International
Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: a review of the literature and its implications. International
115
(P. 97-119)
Osuna, L., Martínez-Torregrosa, J., Carrascosa, J., & Verdú, R. (2007). Planificando la enseñanza problematizada: el ejemplo de
la óptica geométrica en educación secundaria [Planning problematized teaching: the example of geometric optics in
secondary education]. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 25, 277–294.
Palmer, D. H. (2001). Factors contributing to attitude exchange amongst preservice elementary teachers. Science Education, 86,
122–138.
Plummer, J. D., & Maynard, L. (2014). Building a learning progression for celestial motion: an exploration of students’ reasoning
about the seasons. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51, 902–929.
Plummer, J. D., & Ozcelik, A. T. (2015). Preservice teachers developing coherent inquiry investigations in elementary astronomy.
Science Education, 99, 932–957.
Plummer, J. D., Zahm, V. M., & Rice, R. (2010). Inquiry and astronomy: preservice teachers’ investigations of celestial motion.
Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21, 471–493.
Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Shavelson, R. J., Hamilton, L., & Klein, S. (2002). On the evaluation of systemic science education reform: Search-
ing for instructional sensitivity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 369–93.
Shtulman, A., & Valcarcel, J. (2012). Scientific knowledge suppresses but does not supplant earlier intuitions. Cognition, 124,
209–215.
Tosun, T. (2000). The beliefs of preservice elementary teachers toward science and science teaching. School Science and Math-
ematics, 100, 374–379.
Trumper, R. (2006). Teaching future teachers basic astronomy concepts—seasonal changes—at a time of reform in science
education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 879–906.
Van Driel, J. H., Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. (2001). Professional development and reform in science education: The role of teachers’
practical knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 137–158.
Verdú, R., & Martínez-Torregrosa, J. (2005). La estructura problematizada de los temas y cursos de física y química como instrumento
de mejora de su enseñanza y aprendizaje [The problematized structure of subjects and courses in physics and chemistry
as an instrument for improving teaching and learning]. València: Universitat de València. Retrieved from: http://rua.ua.es/
dspace/handle/10045/2782.
Viennot, L. (2010). The many challenges of Inquiry Based Science Education: Toward multiple learning benefits? In W. Kaminski
& M. Michelini (Eds.), Teaching and Learning Physics today: Challenges? Benefits? (pp. 43-62). Reims, France: Proceedings of
selected papers of the GIREP - ICPE-MPTL International Conference.
Weinburgh, M. (2007). The effect of Tenebrio obscurus on elementary preservice teachers’ content knowledge, attitudes, and
self-efficacy. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 801–815.
Wong, C. S., Wong, P. M., & Chau, S. L. (2001). Emotional intelligence, students’ attitudes towards life and attainment of education
goals: an exploratory study in Hong Kong. New Horizons in Education, 44, 1–11.
Young, B. J., & Kellogg, T. (1993). Science attitudes and preparation of preservice elementary teachers. Science Education, 77,
279–291.
116
(P. 97-119)
Appendix 1. (A) General structure to elaborate a sequence of activities on a science topic using an oriented-
research on core science ideas approach. (B) Problematized structure of the issue taught in the
course: “How do the Sun and the Earth move?”.
117
(P. 97-119)
Appendix 2. Guiding aim, necessary steps and associated obstacles to advance in the core problem of science
proposed to pre-service primary teachers. This structure is related to the teaching methodology
used: oriented research about a fundamental problem of science.
GUIDING AIM
The main objective of the lesson is to understand and be able to make a functional use of a Sun/Earth model that is useful to explain
the observed regularities in Sun movement and make predictions on how is the Sun path where we live as well as in other places
on the Earth.
The PROBLEM that structures the teaching and learning The SUB-PROBLEMS that structure the teaching and learning
How should the Earth and the Sun move for us to record the - Are there observable regularities or cycles in Sun movement?
changes in Sun path that we observe where we live or at any - How should the Sun and the Earth move for us to record the
other place on the Earth? observed cycles and regularities in Sun movement through-
out the year?
PARTIAL GOALS (OR NECESSARY STEPS) AND RELATED OBSTACLES
1. To be aware of the practical interest of having a detailed knowledge of the movement of heavenly bodies; also, to know the
influence of the evolution of scientific thinking on the Sun/Earth model.
The possible associated obstacles are:
- A decontextualized and linear view of what science is.
- The image transmitted by media and books, which make “evident” how the Solar System is.
2. To have a detailed knowledge of cycles and symmetries of Sun movement where they live and in other places on Earth (to make
approximate predictions on Sun path elsewhere, as well as for spatial and temporal orientation in the place where they live).
- Alternative frameworks (of social and scholar origin) about observable aspects of Sun movement. For example: believe
that Sun always rises in the East and sets in the West; believe that in Alicante, in summer, Sun is over our heads (i.e., angu-
lar elevation is 90º) at midday; assign “extreme” features to summer and winter and “intermediate” to spring and autumn
(influenced by meteorological aspects).
- Repetitive learning of some definitions, with any empirical meaning, such as: cardinal points, latitude, longitude, meridian
(north-south direction or meridian line), parallel, Equator…
- Stereotyped ideas on how the Sun moves in other latitudes (confusion between what happens in North/South Poles and
in Arctic/Antarctic Polar Circles; assuming that daylight duration is always shorter in northernmost latitudes; Sun is always
over our heads in the Equator…).
- Inexperience in using basic techniques and instruments for astronomical observations (drawing the natural horizon, ori-
entate using the compass, using a gnomon and an astrolabe, drawing the Sun path in an astronomical plastic dome…).
- Thermal analogy: associate higher and lower temperatures only with the distance from Earth to Sun. This, makes that
they do not take into account the influence of the angle at which sunlight arrives to a specific place on Earth, as well as
geographical factors to explain why temperature is higher or lower in a place in a specific date.
3. To invent and take possession of a Sun/Earth model that can explain observable cycles and symmetries of Sun movement
(day/night; daylight duration, sunrise/sunset azimuth and Sun maximum angular altitude variation throughout the year). To do
this, it is necessary to fulfill two big steps:
- To locate an observer in the spherical Earth with all the instruments needed to track Sun path (gnomon, horizontal
ground, compass…), corresponding to a local observer in the place where they live.
- To use the Sun/Earth model, both using paper and pencil and using a prototype, to determine how should the Sun and
the Earth move for that observer located on the spherical Earth to see the same Sun path (and related variations) than
the local real observer. This is to say, use the Sun/Earth model to explain Sun movement in equinox and solstice days,
as well as cycles in its movement, both in the place where they live and other sites on the Earth.
- Spatial view and visual relativity (historical obstacle: Copernicus made big efforts to try to convince people that the same
apparent Sun movement would be seen whether the Earth rotates on its axis or whether the Sun moves around the
Earth). They should transfer observations done from a sphere in motion (i.e., the Earth) to what we would see from the
Earth’s surface, and vice versa.
- Using Sun/Earth models that are deformed or show errors: scale errors; showing an elliptic orbit of Earth around the Sun
(it is almost circular); locate the Sun closer to Earth in summer in the Northern Hemisphere; and drawing sunlight arriving
to Earth divergently (sunlight arrives to Earth in parallel beams).
- Identification of observations and explanations: they assume as “facts” some aspects of the model that are inventions. For
example, they believe that the distance from Earth to Sun or the axis tilt are observable traits; they also relate the Sun alti-
tude above ground with the distance from Sun to Earth, or a longer daylight duration with the Earth being closer to Sun.
- Thermal analogy: they associate higher and lower temperatures only with the distance of Earth to Sun. This is one of the
most persistent alternative frameworks amongst students, so it requires a specific treatment for them to be able to explain
the several causes for the differences in mean temperature, without explaining it by the distance between Earth and Sun.
- Prior knowledge of some stereotyped definitions such as tilted axis, meridian, parallel, latitude and longitude, must be
changed by concepts that have an empirical meaning and that can be measured and, most important, within a process of
solving a problem (how could we know where we are in a spherical Earth if we live on its surface?).

118
(P. 97-119)
Appendix 3. Learning indicators used to evaluate content knowledge achievement on the topic by pre-service
primary teachers.
1. To be aware of the practical interest that an accurate knowledge of the movement of heavenly bodies may have, as well as on the influence
that the evolution of the knowledge on the Sun/Earth model has had on the occidental culture.
2. To accurately know (enough as to make approximate predictions) the existing cycles and symmetries in the apparent movement of the Sun
(Earth-based observations from a given place on the Earth):
a. a. Be able to arrange the local horizon to track Sun movements and graphically represent Sun path over the horizon (to
do this, they should be able to use a gnomon, a quadrant, a compass, a protractor and an astronomical plastic dome, as well as to
get data using these instruments).
b. b. Identify the “special days” or “natural marks” (i.e., solstices and equinoxes) that could be used to organize and count
time, according to their observable characteristics (daylight duration, sunrise/sunset azimuths and maximum Sun altitude).
c. c. Identify (approximately) the existing daily symmetries (in daylight duration respect to the moment at which Sun altitude
is the maximum, and in sunrise/sunset azimuths respect to south). Also, the annual cycles and symmetries respect to the values in
an equinox day (i.e., from an equinox day to a solstice day): daylight duration changes respect to 12 hours, sunrise azimuth varies
respect to east, sunset azimuth varies respect to west and Sun maximum altitude varies respect to its specific value at the equinox
day.
d. d. Know which cycles and symmetries are common to every place on the Earth and use that knowledge to calculate data
describing Sun path in different places on Earth (different to those where we live) if any data on any special day is provided.
e. e. Relate mean temperature in a given place on Earth (climatological trait) with factors that lead to this mean temperature
(geographical and astronomical traits), and also to understand the influence of Sun on this. Particularly, they should have observational
data (size of Sun disk) that demonstrate that distance from Earth to Sun has no influence (or a very small influence) in temperature
cycles.
6. To be able to place an observer on the spherical Earth corresponding to a local observer. To do this, we need to:
a. a. Know how to represent the vertical (local up/down) and the plane of the horizon with the cardinal points of an observer
on the spherical Earth.
b. b. Know how to locate an observer on the spherical Earth (i.e., know latitude and longitude), using observational data on
Sun path in the “special days” in the place where the observer lives (longitude in relation to Greenwich).
3. To be able to use, using lateral and zenithal views of the Earth, the Sun/Earth model (heliocentric) to:
a. a. Describe Sun path from the place where we live (daylight duration, sunrise/sunset azimuths and maximum Sun altitude)
in the singular days (equinoxes and solstices).
b. b. Predict and compare (sunrise/sunset azimuths should be qualitatively compared, whereas daylight duration and the Sun
maximum altitude should be quantitatively compared) Sun path in the place where we live with Sun path in other place on the Earth
(knowing its latitude and longitude) in special days.
c. c. Explain the differences in mean temperature between winter and summer, overcoming the thermal analogy (i.e., tem-
perature only depends on the distance from Earth to Sun).
Received: October 11, 2017 Accepted: January 20, 2018
Joaquín Martínez- PhD, Full Professor, Department of General and Specific Didactics, Faculty
Torregrosa of Education, University of Alicante. E-03080, Alicante, Spain.
Part-time Researcher at University Institute of Physics Applied to Sciences
and Technologies, University of Alicante, Spain.
E-mail: joaquin.martinez@ua.es
Ruben Limiñana PhD, Associate Professor, Department of General and Specific Didactics,
Faculty of Education, University of Alicante. E-03080, Alicante, Spain.
E-mail: ruben.lm@ua.es
Asunción Menargues PhD, Associate Professor, Department of General and Specific Didactics,
E-mail: a.menargues@ua.es
Rafael Colomer PhD, Assistant Professor, Department of General and Specific Didactics,
E-mail: rafa.colo@ua.es
119
TEACHERS’ DIFFICULTIES
AND STRATEGIES IN PHYSICS
TEACHING AND LEARNING THAT
Abstract. In a teaching and learning

process, the mastery of mathematics
Heri Retnawati,
would support students in learning physics. Janu Arlinwibowo,
The aim of the research is to analyse the Nidya F. Wulandari,
difficulties of physics teachers’ in conduct- Rian G. Pradani
ing teaching and learning process that
demands the requirements of mathemati-
cal concepts in senior high schools. The
research was a qualitative research using
phenomenological approach. The data
were collected through focus group discus-
Introduction
sion (FGD) that involved 15 teachers from
public and private senior high schools in
One question that usually comes to the surface is how to solve a problem
the Kudus Regency, the Province of Central without a tool. Another question might be how to solve physics problems
Java, Indonesia. The analysis was con- without using mathematics requirements. Based on the existing research,
ducted by applying the Bogdan & Biklen mathematics has ever expanded impact toward the other disciplines (Na-
model. The results of the research showed tional Research Council, 2013). The expansion has been taking place for
several findings if there had been problems several decades; however, the expansion has rapidly grown within the last
of un-synchronism in the material orders 10-120 years. As the implication, mathematics has been applied to various
of mathematics and physics that hindered fields and various efforts in solving multiple cases or incidents. The important
the teaching and learning process. The characteristic of mathematics is that mathematics encompasses other fields
strategies that physics teachers had applied (Redish & Bing, 2009; Simons, 2001; Steiner, 1998). This characteristic does
not simply mean that mathematical concepts and calculations are applied
individually are teaching mathematics
into the other fields; instead, this characteristic has a more complex meaning.
materials as prerequisite first and making
In addition, much of the nowadays science and technology has been
module collaboratively. The new arrange-
built upon the calculation and the simulation in mathematics. Technology
ment of teaching and learning materials has always been expanding and, as a consequence, human resources should
in mathematics and physics are needed to be competent in operating the technology (Chiu, 2015; Pietrocola, 2008;
cover the problems. Quale, 2011; Redish, 2006). Wigner (2060) asserted that mathematics has
Keywords: mathematics mastery, physics played an important role in physics. Physics and mathematics are interrelated
teaching, learning process, difficulties and (Pospiech et al., 2009). Then, he also explained that in the fundamental level
strategies. mathematics explains the abstract forms and models, while physics tends
to explain more about natural phenomena using mathematics concept
Heri Retnawati and connection. In addition, Steiner (1977) stated that true physics follows
Yogyakarta State University, Indonesia mathematics notation. However, Redish, and Bing (2009) explained that the
Janu Arlinwibowo
Muhammadiyah Health Sciences School of
mathematics symbols should be reinterpreted in order to follow the general
Kudus, Indonesia requirements of physics.
Nidya F. Wulandari The important role of mathematics will be understood more by students
Yogyakarta State University, Indonesia
Rian G. Pradani
as they enter higher educational degree. Mathematics is a problem-solving
SMAN 1 Gebog Kudus, Indonesia tool in physics; specifically, mathematics can predict the system in physics
120
ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ TEACHERS’ DIFFICULTIES AND STRATEGIES IN PHYSICS TEACHING AND LEARNING THAT
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 120-135)
(Chiu, 2015; Quale, 2011). However, Uhden, Karam, Pietrocola & Pospiech (2011) argued that mathematics has been
more than a problem-solving tool in physics and that the discussions on several physics materials are essentially
mathematics. Mathematics serves as prerequisite teaching and learning material for physics (Pietrocola, 2008;
Redish, 2005; Redish & Bing, 2009) and mathematics also serves as an essential element in the problem-solving
efforts for physics (Redish, 2005). Therefore, if an individual wants to study physics then he or she should under-
stand mathematics first. Pospeich (2009) also argued that it has been very important to identify the mathematics
proficiency first in modelling a problem that becomes the main objective of physics teaching and learning. Based
on these statements, the researchers would like to assert that mathematics has supported the learning process
of other lessons and this includes physics, concept mastery of physics, and also physics application and analysis.
Looking at this situation, the core of technological competence is physics and nowadays technology has been an
inseparable part of human beings’ life. Therefore, it is for granted that physics teaching and learning becomes ur-
gency in the domain of education. Unfortunately, in the practice physics has been considered as a difficult subject
in the school (Duit, Niedderer & Schecker, 2007).
Mathematics and physics are knowledge and science that have a close relationship (Gingras, 2001). This
relationship is expressed as a two-way process (mathematics is a method used in physics and physics is one of
material used in mathematics), the proximity of the study object, the historical closeness, and this closeness af-
fects the teaching and learning of the two subjects (Tzanakis, n.d.). Mathematics is used to solve problems in
physics from elementary to high school and a tool for developing theory in physics (Doran, 2017). Mathematics
has many branches, namely algebra, geometry, analysis, probability and statistics. For example, geometry is one
of the branches in mathematics, which contributes to the development of modern physics (Atiyah, n.d.). The close
relationship between mathematics and its branches with physics impacts on teaching and learning in physics.
Ideally, physics education is conducted based on the standards of the science education standards. This stan-
dard states that the learning process of science is planned and implemented in inquiry-based learning (National
Research Council, 1996). When conducting this inquiry teaching and learning, there are several steps that students
do. American Association of Physics Teachers (2015) stated that these steps are “asking questions, developing
and using models, planning and carrying out investigations, analyzing and interpreting data, using mathematics
and computational thinking, constructing explanations, engaging in argument from evidence, evaluating and
communicating information”. In almost all of these physics learning steps, mathematics including its branches
provides an important role. Math is necessary to complete these steps. The process is to construct concepts that
include patterns, causality, scale, energy and matter, structure and function, and stability and change (American
Association of Physics Teachers, 2015). The concept constructed in the science study, for physics in particular, is
expressed as a mathematical relationship.
Students’ difficulties in teaching and learning physics are related to their mathematical ability that has not
been sufficient for associating the mathematical concepts to physics knowledge (Pospeich et al., 2009). Principally,
Tasar (2010) explained that learning activities should be started from concrete matters to abstract matters, from the
known to the unknown, from the near to the far, from the easy to the complex. He also added that, for example,
students should learn the matters that they have already known in order to learn the matters that they have not
known. This statement implies that mathematical concept as the basis of physics should be taught first. If the math-
ematical concept has not been taught, while in the same the curriculum of physics demands that physics should be
taught immediately, then students will have difficulties in attending physics teaching and learning process which
demands mathematical requirements. A study by Lawrenz, Wood, Kirchhoff, Kim, & Eisenkraft (2009) found that
mathematical abilities impact students’ understanding toward physics. Students in all educational degrees and in
all ages have difficulties in teaching and learning physics not solely due to the complexity of the lesson; instead,
they also suffer from those difficulties because of their knowledge and proficiency in understanding mathematics
as the prerequisite in learning physics have not been sufficient (Basson, 2002; Linn, Tan, & Tsai, 2013; Pietrocola,
2008). Mathematics materials that will be applied as the basis in physics should be taught in the lower degrees
before students learn about physics. For instance, students learn about location, coordinate, angle, and time in the
lower degree prior to teaching and learning the concept of velocity and acceleration.
The importance of mathematics in this case can be seen from the fact that students who have mathematical
abilities do not have any guarantee of success in teaching and learning physics; in other words, students who do
not have sufficient mathematical ability, will certainly have weak physical ability (Chiu, 2015; Hudson & McIntire,
1977; Pietrocola, 2008). Without knowledge of mathematics, it is impossible to attain good knowledge of phys-
ics. However, in the reality the phenomenon is that physics teachers spend a great deal of time to teach students
121
(P. 120-135) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
about mathematics earlier and quicker since they have not mastered mathematics well, whereas mathematics is
a prerequisite in teaching and learning physics (Basson, 2002). The complaint that physics teachers convey most
of the time is that the students have not been able to apply the knowledge that they attain in the mathematics
class into the physics class (Basson, 2002). In addition, mathematics is often considered as the cause of students’
failure in teaching and learning physics; students have not understood physics well because they have weakness
in their concept of mathematics (Pietrocola, 2008). Therefore, several experts consider that the fundamental ability
in mathematics provides greater opportunity to achieve success in teaching and learning physics. This situation
then will be the one that has forced physics teachers to teach mathematics first.
Mathematics has been taught first because it is a necessary tool in teaching and learning physics. As a conse-
quence, physics teachers have greater challenges than do mathematics teachers. In addition, physics curriculum
demands physics teachers to teach several contents that have been more challenging (Chiu, 2015). Different than
mathematics curriculum, which aims to improve the thinking skills rather than the quality of the content under
study, physics curriculum has more emphasis on improving the content under study as a form of rapid scientific
development that does not negate the importance of mathematics as a tool in teaching and learning physics (Chiu,
2015). It is this heavier load that becomes the difficulty and the stress on physics teachers’ part if mathematics
curriculum does not support physics curriculum and if mathematics teachers have not taught the contents that
support physics teaching and learning process.
Chiu (2005) underlined six challenges that physics teachers encounter in implementing the physics teaching
and learning process prior to teaching the mathematics curriculum to the students, namely: (1) political challenge:
the national curriculum emphasizes the higher education policy rather than the high education policy; (2) social
challenge: there have been plenty of interventions in education; (3) scientific challenge: the borders between
the subjects and the knowledge have increased in schools; (4) teaching and learning challenge: the number of
HOTS-based learning process has still been low; (5) justice challenge: there has been inequality in the learning
opportunity; and (6) teaching challenge: the burdens of physics teachers have increased because of the urgency
to teach mathematics and of the mathematics teachers’ confusion in re-teaching the learning materials that have
been studied in physics. Therefore, physics teachers should be confirmed first that the implemented curriculum
has provided a prerequisite in the form of sufficient mathematical concepts mastery as the basis for studying
physics. In addition, physics teacher should pay attention to the curriculum sequence that has been synchronized
to the subjects that have been taught along with their prerequisite lessons. In this case, ideally the mathematical
prerequisites should be studied first prior to studying physics. If the mathematical competency is necessary for
solving the physical problems, then it will be wiser to teach mathematics first (Nahson, Anderson & Nielsen, 2009).
To be able to apply mathematical abilities in physics teaching and learning, mastery of mathematical concepts
becomes the main key. Some obstacles faced by students namely the lack of mastery of concepts in mathematics
cause students less able to connect between concepts to solve problems (Retnawati, Kartowagiran, Arlinwibowo,
& Sulistyaningsih, 2017; Sari & Wijaya, 2017). Teaching and learning that train many abilities, for example train the
mathematics ability first and then train physics abilities and skills cause teachers to work too hard, especially teach-
ers also have the task of carrying out the assessment. Teachers’ difficulties in carrying out such complex learning
require long time (Retnawati, Munadi, Arlinwibowo, Wulandari, Sulistyaningsih, 2017), and cause difficulties in
conducting assessment (Retnawati, Nugraha, & Hadi, 2016). Strategies that can be done are organizing the material
of teaching and learning in a learning trajectory (Retnawati, 2017), which considers certain prerequisite materials.
The importance of material distribution sequence and of prerequisite materials distribution has also been
based on the results of a study by Tasar (2010), which found that students’ difficulties in understanding the concept
of velocity in physics have been related to their misconception in mathematical concepts. The simple mathematical
concepts may develop into the complex ones when it comes to physics under various phenomena. If the students
still have misconceptions in the simple mathematical concepts, then they will suffer from difficulties in solving simple
physical problems (Chiu, 2015; Hudson & McIntire, 1997; Pietrocola, 2008). This is the importance of synchronizing
inter-disciplinary curriculum contents that have been interrelated. This statement is supported by the results of a
study by Aziz (1988) which found that students who attend the integrated learning process between mathemat-
ics and physics have better abilities in combining, implementing, analysing, and synthesizing categories. If the
contents are not synchronized, as it is the case in Indonesian curriculum, then there will be many problems that
may occur. The teachers in several schools do not mind such problem although it has occurred for several years.
122
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 120-135)
Research Focus
In relation to this situation, there should be a research to describe this peculiarity, especially the physics
teachers’ difficulties and strategies in conducting the learning process that demands the prerequisites in the form
of mathematical concepts in senior high schools.
The Researcher’s Role
In this research, the researchers mapped the materials in physics and mathematics, then identify the neces-
sary prerequisite materials in physics that need mathematical concepts. Researchers then describe the difficulties
and strategies of physics teachers when implementing physics teaching and learning that requires mathematical
prerequisite. In this research activity, the researchers become observers and do not participate in anything related
to the implementation of physics teaching and learning conducted by the teacher.
Design
The research was a qualitative research using phenomenological approach (Creswell & Clark, n.d.). The research
was conducted in order to attain understanding toward the difficulties that the physics teachers in senior high schools
encounter in relation to the utilization of mathematical concepts as modelling of physics concepts and analysing data
and interpreting after experiments, and in all steps of inquiry based learning. Furthermore, the researchers in the
research explored the strategies that the physics teachers implemented in dealing with these problems.
The scope of the research includes mathematics curriculum and physics curriculum for senior high schools and
also the physics teachers’ difficulties and strategies in conducting the physics teaching and learning process that
demanded the mathematical concepts. The curriculum was implemented in mapping the physics competencies
that demanded the mathematical prerequisites and their position in the teaching and learning process.
The research was conducted in January-September 2017. In January-March 2017, researchers made the map-
ping of mathematics curriculum and physics curriculum for senior high schools. The mapping was conducted by 2
mathematics education experts and 1 physics teacher of senior high school. The data regarding the physics teach-
ers’ difficulties and strategies in the teaching and learning process that demanded the prerequisites in the form of
mathematical concepts in senior high schools were gathered using focus group discussion (FGD).
The FGD was conducted in May 2017. It formed once time, caused researcher prepared the mapping of math-
ematics curriculum and physics curriculum for senior high schools and many topics about physics teachers’ difficul-
ties and strategies in the teaching and learning process. In the forum, all of topics discussed completely and clearly.
Participants
The FGD participants were 15 physics teachers (post service) for Senior High School in Kudus Regency, the
Province of Central Java, Indonesia and one mathematics education expert from a university. These participants
consisted of 10 male informants and 5 female informants. The qualification of the teachers who had been invited
into the FGD was the mathematics teachers who had been teaching physics in senior high schools with Educational
Bachelor degree in physics education study program.
Data Analysis

The mapping of mathematics and physics in senior high schools was scrutinized by the FGD participants in
order to provide their judgment toward the necessity of implementing mathematics into the physics learning
process. Afterwards, the researchers identified the physics teachers’ difficulties in implementing the physics learn-
ing process that made use of mathematics prerequisite materials and the strategies that the physics teachers had
implemented up to date. The results of the FGD then were analysed using the qualitative analysis model by Bogdan
& Biklen (1982). The stages of analysis in this research were data reduction, sub-theme identification, inter-theme
relationship establishment, and conclusion.
123
(P. 120-135) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
The Ethical Considerations
To ensure the data obtained in this research is credible, all participants are encoded. The purposes of the
research were presented to the participants clearly. The researchers assured all of participants that the research
results do not affect anything to them.
Results of Researches
Physics Teachers’ Difficulties

Mathematics including its branches, they are algebra, geometry, analysis, probabilities and statistics contrib-
ute greatly to the inquiry in physics teaching and learning process. The whole process is the stage for students to
construct the concepts in physics. The mathematical urgency to support physics learning is realized by the teacher.
The data on the reduction of mathematics role in supporting the physics teaching and learning process in senior
high schools are viewed in Table 1.
Table 1. Teachers’ perceptions about the mathematics role in supporting the physics teaching and learning
process.
Teacher Perceptions Theme Inter-Theme Association
1. Mathematics is a tool for explaining physical phe-

nomena. Multiple mathematics materials
have the role of physics prerequi-
2. Mathematics is a universal language.
site materials.
3. Mathematics is the basis of physics.
1. The teaching and learning materials sequence Nowadays the role of math-
between mathematics and physics have not been ematics as the fundamental
synchronized. knowledge in supporting physics
The supporting ability of mathemat- has been moderately low.
2. There has not been any specific review toward the
ics proficiency as a prerequisite in
sequence appropriateness.
mathematics has still been low.
3. The physics teachers scrutinize the learning materials
sequence of mathematics and physics only when they
have found problems.
Physics heavily demands mathematics because this lesson serves as the tool that manipulates information
into easily understood conclusion. Various phenomena should be explained through both calculation process and
mathematical modelling. Therefore, mathematics becomes a tool in the process of searching the physical phe-
nomena so that mathematics generates physical conclusions. Mathematics is a universal language that describes
multiple phenomena so that these phenomena might be easily understood, and this includes physics as well.
Mathematics language plays a role in describing multiple natural phenomena such as temperature, frequency,
length, speed, velocity, and alike accurately.
The role of mathematics as a tool and a language shows that in order to understand physics one should have
enough mathematical proficiency. All teachers agreed that mathematics has been the fundamental science that
students should master before they study physics. Many teaching and learning materials in mathematics are the
prerequisite in physics, such as trigonometry in mathematics supports the teaching and learning materials of vec-
tors, and geometry supports modelling in physics.
The Indonesian education has undergone several curriculum changes periodically, which has been followed
by the changes on the material contents and arrangement. In the last several years, there have been curriculum
changes from the Competence Based Curriculum to the School Unit Level Curriculum to the Curriculum 2013.
Despite these changes, the teachers do not perceive any positive impact regarding the match of teaching and
learning materials order between mathematics and physics. An analysis toward the latest regulation, namely the
Minister of Education and Culture Regulation Number 24 Year 2016 regarding the Core Competencies and the
Basic Competencies of the Lessons in the Curriculum 2013 has found multiple mismatches on the teaching and
124
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 120-135)
learning materials order between mathematics and physics and these mismatches are shown by the frequently
absent mathematics teaching and learning materials in the teaching and learning process by the time that physics
teaching and learning materials should have been taught, especially in the first semester of grade X and grade XI.
The first fact that displays the mismatches on the teaching and learning materials order between mathemat-
ics and physics is that the teaching and learning materials for statistics in mathematics are taught in the second
semester of Grade XII, whereas the statistical abilities are necessary since grade X. Physics is heavily associated
to laboratory practice; in fact, all teaching and learning materials are taught using experiments as an effort of re-
inforcing the students’ theoretical understanding. Statistics is the fundamental science for attaining the physical
concepts through the laboratory practice because in the progress the students demand the ability of processing
the data such as presenting the data (graphics and tables) along with the processing results (mean, median, and
mode) in order to conclude the results of their measurement along with its uncertainty (errors).
Several mathematics teaching and learning materials inhibit the physics teaching and learning process because
the competencies in these teaching and learning materials are necessary within the physics learning process, yet
these learning materials have not been taught. These teaching and learning materials will be taught in the next
semester and the materials are displayed in Table 2.
Table 2. The comparison of prerequisite teaching and learning materials’ order between mathematics and
physics for senior high schools.
Semester Physics Learning Materials Prerequisite Materials Grade/Semester
Basic Trigonometry X/2

Vector
Mathematics Vector X/2
Limit XI/2
Straight Movement Derivation XI/2
X/1 Integral XI/2
Function X/2
Parabola Movement
Angle Summation XI/1
Momentum and Impulse Derivation XI/2
XI/2 Derivation XI/2
Harmonious Vibration
Trigonometry Derivation XII/1
Balance of Rigid Object Space Geometry XII/1
Fluid Space Geometry XII/1
XI/1
Heat Space Geometry XII/1
Theory of Gas Kinetic Space Geometry XII/1
The other mathematics teaching and learning materials which have been the prerequisite for the physics
teaching and learning process are taught in the same semester with physics. These teaching and learning materi-
als are displayed in Table 3.
125
(P. 120-135) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Table 3. The List of mathematics and physics prerequisite teaching and learning materials.
Semester Physics Materials Prerequisite Materials Grade/Semester

Law of Newton (Movement)

Power and Energy
X/2 Mathematics Vector X/2

Momentum and Impulse
Harmonious Movement Basic Trigonometry X/2
The findings on the non-ideal material sequence have been supported by the field data which show that most
of the teachers perceive the relative low mathematical function in supporting the physics teaching and learning
process. Such problems have not been followed up by systematically, procedural, and concrete steps as part of
the problem solution. This assumption is based on the fact that the teachers rarely conduct a review toward the
match between the teaching and learning materials in mathematics and in physics within the curriculum and
disseminate the results of their review in the school’s internal discussion and in the Forum of Subject Teachers. Up
to date, the review activities have been the accidental ones when the physics teachers find certain problems and
crosscheck these problems to their students through question and answer sessions or through discussions with
the mathematics teachers in an informal situation. The findings from such review have not even been followed up
systematically, whereas the sequence in the teaching and learning materials between mathematics and physics
that has not been synchronized becomes the main cause of the low mathematical supporting ability in the physics
teaching and learning process.
The results of data reduction toward the teacher response in dealing with the situations of the students who
attend the teaching and learning process without having been equipped with the prerequisite ability can be
viewed in Table 4.
Table 4. The teachers’ response in dealing with the unsynchronized learning materials between mathematics
and physics.
The Teachers’ Response Theme Inter-Theme Association
1. The analysis toward the mathematical prerequisite analysis is

conducted through the question and answer activities in the
beginning of the lesson.
2. There has not been any in-depth analysis toward the the stu- There has not been any well-
dents’ preliminary abilities. planned, overall, and in-depth
analysis toward the students’ math-
3. The lesson planning activities are only based on the teachers’ ematical prerequisite materials. Multiple problems appear due to the
experiences. ill-synchronization on the teaching and
learning materials sequence in math-
4. The physics teachers’ response to the teaching and learning
materials’ ill-synchronization incidentally. ematics as the physics prerequisite
materials.
1. Physics is deemed difficult to understand.
2. The difficulties are found in explaining multiple concepts. The ill-synchronization on the
learning materials sequence
3. There are obstacles in achieving the curriculum targets.
between mathematics and physics
4. It is difficult to perform assessment is not ideal.
5. It is difficult to implement the HOTS based-learning process.
126
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 120-135)
Lesson planning activities are one of the most important processes that determine the fluent teaching and
learning activities in the classroom. The students’ preliminary ability and prerequisites are very important to be
identified because through their preliminary ability and prerequisites the teachers may lay their foundation in
developing the teaching and learning scenario. The elaboration of the lesson plan in a special format becomes
very important because this lesson plan will be the matter of reference so that the teachers will be more ready
and responsive in responding to the problems. However, in the practice most of the teachers do not conduct any
structured analysis and planning in dealing with the problems of mismatched teaching and learning materials
between mathematics and physics. The weak analysis and planning add the confusion in this non-ideal physics
teaching and learning process. The lack of careful analysis toward the sequence of teaching and learning ma-
terials between mathematics and physics renders the teachers unable to prepare the best alternative solution
and, in the same time, the absence of careful planning renders the teachers unable to perform preventive acts
immediately and appropriately.
The impact of mathematical ill-functionality in supporting the physics teaching and learning process is
very complex. First, physics has an impression of being a difficult lesson to learn. This has been caused by the
fact that the physics teaching and learning process contains two agendas namely explaining the mathematical
prerequisites and explaining the physics teaching and learning materials. Thus, the physics teaching and learn-
ing process becomes very heavy and complicated.
Second, physics teachers have difficulties in explaining the mathematics prerequisite learning materials.
This has been caused by the fact that physics teachers do not have the competencies of mathematics teachers.
During the explanation, most of the times physics teachers have difficulties in elaborating mathematics prereq-
uisite materials well. Time limits cause these teachers to be hesitant in explaining the prerequisite materials; as
a result, the focus will be in the domain of application, conciseness, and memorization-based. Most of physics
teachers ask their students to follow up the introduction to the prerequisite materials to mathematics teachers
so that they will gain better understanding.
Third, physics teachers deal with difficulties in achieving the curriculum targets. The minimum initial capital
of the prerequisite materials has caused the teaching and learning process to be inhibited. The facts that have
been found show that physics teachers should repeat the prerequisite materials over and over in the middle of
the teaching and learning process because the students have been inhibited in the mathematical sequence.
This situation has caused the teaching and learning process to be stuck; the preliminary materials spend most
of the times because physics teachers try to explain the prerequisite materials as good as they can. As a result,
it is no wonder that in the last month physics teachers still have plenty teaching and learning materials that
should be learned by students and they have to speed themselves up in order to complete the distribution of
these teaching and learning materials.
Fourth, the assessment model has not been ideal. Physics teachers should be accustomed to the students’
relatively minimum mathematical ability; thus, these teachers devise test items with simple numbers and even
with simple thinking process. Even in such conditions, there have been still many students who do not pass the
minimum score (most of them have been stumbled in the mathematical sequence instead of the physical one).
Due to this situation, the students should take remedies for several times.
Fifth, it had been difficult to meet the curriculum demands that emphasize the higher-order thinking skills
(HOTS)-based learning process. Students with quite good mathematical understanding usually have keen logic
so that they are able to use any concepts that they have possessed in order to solve problems that demand in-
depth analysis. These students are also able to operate the data from the observed symptoms into the formula of
the materials under study. On the other hand, the students who have low mathematical understanding (whose
number is higher) are usually able to memorize formulas only and are unable to interpret the relationship
among properties in the formulas; these students are even unable to deal with the HOTS-based learning cases.
Physics Teachers’ Strategies
Behind the problems of low mathematical supporting ability in the physics teaching and learning process
due to the ill-synchronized teaching and learning materials arrangement, physics teachers should ensure that
the teaching and learning process is accomplished and the curriculum targets might be achieved. The data
on the reduction of teachers’ initiatives in dealing with the problems of low synergy between the prerequisite
teaching and learning materials of mathematics and those of physics are provided in Table 5.
127
(P. 120-135) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Table 5. The teacher’s initiative to cover the difficulties.
The Teacher’s Initiative Theme Inter-Theme Association
6. The discussion between the physics teachers and the math-

ematics teachers is conducted informally.
The curriculum targets cause the collaboration
to be difficult to achieve.
7. It is difficult to create collaboration between the physics
teachers and the mathematics teachers.
1. The physics teachers deliver the prerequisite materials at Time limitation, authority,
the beginning the learning process. competence, and curriculum
target of each subject cause
2. The activities of teaching the prerequisite materials waste The physics teachers’ individual strategies the teachers to be difficult to
a lot of time. are teaching the prerequisite materials in find initiatives; as a result,
the beginning of the teaching and learning the physics teachers decide
3. The prerequisite materials are integrated into the teaching process, allocating special time, providing to take their own actions.
and learning process. assignments, and integrating the prerequisite
materials in the middle of the teaching and
4. The physics teachers allocate special time outside the teach- learning process.
ing and learning process.
5. The physics teachers provide a task.
In general, the teachers have an initiative of having discussions with mathematics teachers. However, the
discussions are informal. The objective of the discussions is identifying that the mathematics prerequisites have
been taught or not; thereby, physics teachers might define which mathematics contents that should be taught. In
addition, physics teachers often open the discussions with mathematics teachers in order to ask about the man-
ners of teaching mathematical prerequisites briefly, comprehensively, and accurately in order to support certain
teachings of physics materials.
For the further step, namely collaboration, physics teachers have found it difficult. Only few teachers have
performed such collaboration, namely by changing the order of the teaching and learning materials according to
the agreement; this has been done by Teacher 15. However, the change of the order has been performed on the
materials for one semester. In the condition of the latest curriculum sequence, according to the Minister of Edu-
cation and Culture Number 24 Year 2016 physics teachers are only allowed to change the teaching and learning
materials for the grade XI students because the supporting prerequisite materials of both mathematics and physics
are contained in Semester 1. For the situation in which the prerequisite materials of mathematics and physics are
in the different semester, these teachers may not change the sequence.
The data from other teachers show that such strategy has been impossible to implement in each school
because it takes common communication and planning, which has been complex, especially when the parallel
classrooms are handled with different physics and mathematics teachers. The adjustment will become more dif-
ficult because each subject has different curriculum targets. Thereby, the inter-teacher collaboration is still rare
between the physics teachers and the mathematics teachers.
The most general solution will be teaching the prerequisite materials independently. There are two strate-
gies that the teachers select: teaching the prerequisite materials in the beginning of the subject and integrating
these materials into the subject. In the first strategy, the teachers allocate around one teaching hour (45 minutes)
specifically for explaining the prerequisite materials. These materials are taught briefly and applicably according
to the needs of the materials; one of the examples is the materials of vectors and linear movement demands an
understanding toward the concept of trigonometry. The teachers will review the techniques of determining the
results of sinus, co-sinus, and tangent for special angles; then, they will apply the understanding into the concept
of linear movement vector. If it is possible, the teachers will spend another one teaching hour outside the teaching
and learning process; on the other hand, if it is fine the teachers will cut their physics teaching hours.
In the second strategy, as having been mentioned in the previous section, the teachers will integrate the
teaching and learning materials into physics. The teachers will teach the prerequisite materials when they find
that the students have confusion in the mathematical sequence during the teaching and learning process. One
128
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 120-135)
of the examples can be found in the materials of kinematics with vector analysis. Sometimes, in the test items the
students are asked to determine the momentary speed when they know the movement equation. Therefore, the
teachers will explain briefly how they should convert the position equation into the speed equation and even the
velocity equation; similar manners are also applied when they deal with differentials and integrals.
The amount of physics teaching and learning time that has been wasted due to the strategy of integrating
the prerequisite materials are similar to that of the first strategy, namely one teaching and learning period. If the
students easily understand the learning materials of differentials and integrals then the teachers will spend only one
teaching and learning hour in teaching those materials; however, if the students have difficulties in understanding
those teaching and learning materials then the teachers will take a longer time in explaining them. The teachers
will select the first or the second strategy based on their habit, their comfort, and their teaching style.
The problems of time allocation in explaining the prerequisite materials become more complicated in the
era of Curriculum 2013 because the time allocation for physics is only three teaching and learning periods. This
time is considered imbalanced compared to the material contents that should be taught first if physics teachers
should explain the mathematical prerequisite materials. The teachers argue that the time allocation in the previ-
ous curriculum has relatively been better, namely four teaching and learning periods in each week. With such
time allocation, the teachers feel that they have more flexibility in teaching the prerequisite materials both in the
beginning of the teaching and learning process and in the integration into the teaching and learning process. This
becomes a peculiar difficulty and dilemma for the teachers because it is better for them to use this time allocation
for performing remedial repetitively or for continuing the teaching and learning materials explanation rather than
teaching the mathematics teaching and learning prerequisites.
In response to the time allocation within the Curriculum 2013, the teaching and learning process which only
takes 3 teaching and learning hours per week will result in more narrowed time of prerequisite material distribu-
tion. Physics teachers consider that this situation will spend longer time on teaching the mathematical prerequisite
materials, which will be a disadvantage for them. Therefore, many physics teachers respond to the situation by
compressing the distribution time of prerequisite materials and strengthening the teaching and learning process
toward the prerequisite materials by providing tasks in the form of test items and material resumes.
The collaborative efforts can be turned into an alternative for looking for collaborative solutions. The reduc-
tion on the data regarding the efforts of physics teacher community in responding to the problems of low support
from the mathematical prerequisite materials is elaborated in Table 6.
Table 6. The collaborative efforts of physics teacher community in responding to the problems.
The Collaborative Efforts Theme Inter-Theme Association
6. The problems are discussed in an informal forum.

The problems have been realized
but they have already been lingering
7. The applicative mathematics teaching and learning because the teachers have been used
materials are inserted into the module.
to the problems and the teachers have
decided to adjust themselves to the
8. There has not been any discussion and any efforts to de- governing regulations.
liver the physics teachers’ aspiration to the government.
A special forum that link the teachers
and the government is ultimately
1. The teaching and learning materials should be reordered necessary; this forum is a decisive
in the curriculum.
factor because the teachers cannot
improvise much without any changes
2. The teaching and learning materials arrangement is The teachers expect that there will be on the curriculum.
based on the needs of the supporting materials. a coordinated mass movement that
links the teachers and the government
3. There should be a forum of science under the same and there will be a rearrangement
domain. toward the subject materials.
4. There should be access of communication to the cur-

riculum designing institutions.
129
(P. 120-135) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
The problems of sequence between mathematics and physics have been perceived by all of the related
teachers; unfortunately, these problems have not been discussed in a forum. A specific review in the Forum
of Subject Teacher Discussion Group has not been conducted as well. The teachers’ focus is on the innovation
instead of the ordering on the material sequence. There is a conclusion that the researchers might draw, namely
that these teachers have been trying to survive in the system and have been adjusting themselves as they can.
Such attitude also appears among the physics teachers; this situation is apparent from the policy in dealing with
the problems within the Forum of Subject Teacher Discussion. Although the review regarding the appropriate
sequence between mathematics and physics prerequisite materials has never specifically been discussed in
the scope of Subject Teacher Discussion; however, such discussion has been conducted informally for several
times. Luckily, the Subject Teacher Discussion of Kudus has a common product in the form of physics teaching
and learning module so that the Discussion might flexibly input the mathematics prerequisite materials in the
beginning of the topic or in addition to explaining the materials that demand the competencies of mastering
the prerequisite materials.
The absence of formal discussion that results in an in-depth review has caused the problem to stop on
the scope of Subject Teacher Discussion. The physics teachers are pessimistic on their own abilities as a physics
teacher in delivering their aspiration to the central government; whereas, all teachers do realize that without the
government’s intervention, the problems of material sequence order will never be solved. One form of govern-
ment’s intervention to cover the problems is curriculum development.
Various topics through which the physics teachers expect that the physics teaching and learning process
will be conducted better in the future are as follows. First, the curriculum should be improved in terms of ma-
terial sequence and time allocation. Multiple prerequisite materials of mathematics and physics that have not
been synchronized should be reordered so that the mathematical supportive ability toward physics will be
more optimal. In addition, the 3 teaching and learning period-time allocation per week is deemed very limited
or insufficient and is imbalanced compared to the amount of teaching and learning materials that should be
taught. These problems become worse when some students have not mastered the prerequisite materials; as a
result, the teachers should review these materials which spend some more time. Second, the role of mathemat-
ics as a foundation of science should be returned so that the stipulation and the development of the teaching
and learning materials may be adjusted to the needs of other teaching and learning materials such as phys-
ics, chemistry, biology, and even economics. Third, a forum of discussion for teachers under the same domain
should be established. This discussion group might involve the teachers whose subjects are interrelated, such
as those from the exact sciences, so that they might support from one to another. Discussion becomes highly
important because through the discussion the teachers might discuss the teaching and learning obstacles that
occur due to the fact the fundamental lessons have not been taught or due to the fact that the teaching and
learning results have not met their functions as the prerequisite teaching and learning materials. Fourth, the
government might provide a space of communication in order that the teachers might deliver their aspiration
easily. The provision of an online-based space will be helpful since it does not involve red-taped bureaucracy.
Discussion
Most physics lessons make use of mathematics foundation both in the junior high schools and the higher
degrees. However, based on the results of the study, the researchers have found that there have been several
problems within the physics teaching and learning process that demands the presence of mathematics prerequi-
site materials. The first problem, which is the beginning of all problems, is the unsynchronized material sequence
in the mathematics and the physics curriculum; this situation has caused the teaching and learning process to
be inhibited. As a result, physics deems to be a difficult lesson to study. Such impression is not caused merely by
the complexity of the physics content; instead, it has been caused by mathematics prerequisite materials that
should be taught in physics (Basson, 2002; Duit, Niedderer & Schecker, 2007; Linn, Tan, & Tsai, 2013; Pietrocola,
2008). The first problem triggers the occurrence of the second problem, namely that the physics teachers have
more workloads because they have to teach mathematics first in addition to physics. It should be conducted
this way because mathematics has several prerequisite materials that are necessary for physics. Therefore, the
teaching activities of physics entail two agendas that are explaining the mathematics prerequisite materials and
the physics teaching and learning materials. As a result, the physics teaching and learning process becomes
heavier and more complicated. This situation then becomes an additional burden for the physics teachers. In the
130
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 120-135)
same time, this situation is in accordance with the teaching challenges that the physics teachers have to deal
with in teaching physics with the mathematical prerequisite materials that have not been taught (Chiu, 2015).
Not to mention, based on the data of the study that have been gathered from the field, the physics teachers
have difficulties because they have to explain the mathematics teaching and learning materials. The reason is
that they do not master the competencies of mathematics teacher.
During the teaching learning process, the physics teachers most of the times have difficulties in explaining
the mathematical prerequisite teaching and learning materials well. In relation to the teaching challenges (Chiu
2015), the mathematics teachers are in dilemma when they have to teach again the teaching and learning mate-
rials which application and implementation have been studied in physics. The situation becomes more difficult
because the physics teachers have to speed up their performance in teaching the mathematical prerequisite
materials due to the limited time allocation; as a result, the focus of their teaching activities is in the domain of
application, conciseness, and memorization-based method.
The diminished time allocation for the physics teaching and learning process in explaining the mathemati-
cal prerequisite materials leads to the subsequent problem. The third problem is that the physics teachers have
difficulties in achieving the curriculum targets. As having been argued by Basson (2002), the physics teachers
spend most of their time for teaching mathematics in the beginning briefly; they will only teach the mathemat-
ics teaching and learning materials that will serve as the physics prerequisite materials.
The chain of problems and difficulties that the physics teachers should deal with does not stop there. Due
to the limited time allocation and the physics curriculum loads, the assessment process is not ideal since they
have been stumbled on mathematics. The physics should also explain the mathematics teaching and learning
materials while they are solving the physics problems if the students have mathematical obstacles; as a con-
sequence, the time allocation becomes less effective and wasted. In addition, if the teachers have to deal with
the students who have low mathematics proficiency, then they will design test items with simple routines and
numbers and even with simple thinking skills. Ideally, the assessment that the physics teacher should conduct
is equipped with the remedial activities for the students who have not met the passing grade and with enrich-
ment materials for the students who have mastered the lessons (Nashon, Anderson & Nielsen, 2009).
Still another problem that appears from the physics teaching and learning process that has not been pre-
ceded by the mathematics teaching and learning process is the difficulties in achieving the curriculum demand
that emphasizes on the higher order thinking skill (HOTS) based-learning process. The results of this study are
in accordance to the results of a study case by Chiu (2015); in his study, he found that one of the physics teach-
ers’ difficulties is that they have not been able to create any teaching and learning process that emphasizes
the HOTS. This matter starts from the following question: which aspect should be the priority, the thinking skill
or the content that should be improved in the physics teaching and learning process. The physics curriculum
demands the physics teachers to teach a number of physics teaching and learning contents which are complex
and demanding. Different than mathematics curriculum which aims to improve the thinking skills, the physics
curriculum emphasizes more on the improvement of the content under the study as a form of rapid scientific
development which does not negate the importance of mathematics as a tool in physics (Chiu, 2015). The stu-
dents with moderately good mathematics proficiency usually have cunning logics so they can use all concepts
in solving problems that demand in-depth analysis. They are different than the students who have poor math-
ematics proficiency and who can only memorize formulas; the students with poor mathematics proficiency have
not been able to change the scales in the formulas. This type of students has not even been able to implement
the formulas into the HOTS based-learning cases. These problems that have arisen from the ill-synchronization
between mathematics curriculum and physics curriculum render mathematics malfunctioned in supporting the
physics teaching and learning process.
The problems that have appeared are not immediately analysed and followed up by the physics teachers; as
a result, these problems cannot be minimized. Not to mention, as educators these teachers should conduct the
government’s policies in relation to education and should follow the national curriculum that has been governed,
although they have disagreement toward the policy of the content sequence and the curriculum that has been
approved (Hart, 2001). Therefore, certain strategies should be taken by the physics teachers both individually and
collaboratively. In general, the physics teachers initiate discussions with the mathematics teachers. However, a
further step, namely collaboration, is difficult to perform. Most of the mathematics teachers perceive that they
do not have to collaborate with the physics teachers (Tursucu, 2017). In addition, the mathematics teachers also
question whether it is possible or not to change the mathematics teaching and learning sequence earlier for
131
(P. 120-135) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
accommodating certain concepts that will be used in physics. Unfortunately, the mathematics sequence cannot
be changed because the mathematics teachers have their own curriculum sequence that should be followed.
Such phenomenon does not only occur in Indonesia but also in Taiwan (Chiu, 2015). In order to accomplish this,
teachers can arrange a sequence of teaching and learning materials in a learning trajectory (Retnawati, 2017),
or teachers in collaboration with the policy makers revise the current curriculum.
There are only few teachers who have performed a breakthrough by changing the materials sequence
according to their agreement. This solution used to be performed by the physics teachers in Taiwan in order to
accommodate the physics teaching and learning process that demands the mathematics prerequisites (Chiu,
2015). The physics teachers in Taiwan might change the content sequence that had already been stipulated
by the national curriculum in relation to the materials that will be taught to the students. However, it does not
mean that this solution does not bear any risk. The change on the curriculum sequence that a school performs
obviously impacts the textbook that will be referred to. This textbook should be adjusted to the nationally
governed curriculum. Chiu (2015) also asserted in his case study that physics teachers have been allowed to
teach several concepts of mathematics, but this is not a necessity. If they feel that they have not been able to
teach mathematics, then they may have collaboration with mathematics experts or teachers through the use
of modern technology (Chiu, 2015).
Then, the most general solution from the teachers is teaching the prerequisite materials independently.
There are two strategies that the teachers select: teaching the prerequisite materials in the beginning of the
learning process or integrating the prerequisite materials in the middle of the physics teaching and learn-
ing process. The research result in line with Nashon, Anderson, & Nielsen (2009), that the importance of
students’ preliminary understanding toward mathematics is the physics teaching and learning process. The
teachers teach the prerequisite materials when the students do not understand the mathematical sequence
in the middle of the teaching and learning process (Uhden, Karam, Pietrocola, & Pospiech, 2011). Pietrocola
(2008) also asserted that since mathematics becomes an important part of physics learning process one of
the learning models that might be implemented into physics is teaching mathematics by means of physics
contents and structures.
On the other hand, in response to the time allocation in Curriculum 2013, physics which has been allocated
with 3 teaching and learning periods per week certainly has limited time in delivering the prerequisite materials.
Therefore, many physics teachers cut off the time allocation for the prerequisite materials delivery and they will
strengthen the students’ mastery toward these prerequisite materials by providing assignments in the form of
tasks and material resumes. If it is possible then teachers will take one teaching and learning period out of the
physics teaching and learning period in order to strengthen the students’ mastery toward the prerequisite ma-
terials. Several physics teachers in public schools also teach mathematics materials that have been necessary as
the physics prerequisite materials; as a result, these teachers have limited time in teaching physics (Chiu, 2015).
Chiu (2015) also displayed in the results of his study, the students should attend a course outside the teach-
ing and learning period if they do not have sufficient mathematics prerequisite for studying physics in order to
strengthen the concepts of mathematics that are necessary in physics. This is due to the fact, that the teaching
and learning activities within the teaching and learning periods are maximized toward teaching the physics
contents. Based on the results of a case study toward the physics teachers in Taiwan, it is found that teaching
mathematics is not an obligation for the physics teachers because they are advancement that has been taking
place continuously. On the other hand, according to the mathematics teachers’ opinion and point of view, the
mathematics teachers should teach about how to think mathematically; as a result, it is difficult to teach various
contents before the students learn about physics (Chiu, 2015). The mathematics teachers instead view that it
should be the physics teachers who change the teaching and learning materials sequence of physics first and
the materials that should be changed are the ones that are separate from the concepts of mathematics (Uh-
den, Karam, Pietrocola, & Pospiech, 2011; Chiu, 2015). So, the physics teaching and learning process starts from
understanding the qualitative concepts first and then it proceeds to the quantitative concepts in mathematics
gradually. It should be conducted this way because the mathematics curriculum aims to improve the thinking
skills rather than the content; on the other hand, the physics curriculum aims to improve the contents that have
been studied in as a form of rapid scientific development that does not negate the importance of mathematics
as a tool in physics (Murdock, 2008; Schwartz et al., 2009; Chiu, 2015). In addition, the mathematics curriculum
emphasizes more on the improvement of in-depth content rather than the content flexibility. This is intended
to support the students’ mathematical thinking skills.
132
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 120-135)
The strategies that have been mentioned above with regards to teaching the prerequisite materials in the
beginning of the teaching and learning process, allocating special time, providing assignments, and integrating
the prerequisite materials in the middle of the teaching and learning process are the individual strategies. As
an alternative, with regards to the communal or the collaborative strategies or solutions the Subject Teachers
Discussion on Physics insert the prerequisite materials into the module that has been collaborative produced by
the members. The design of this special module or book can be an alternative solution for the physics teaching
and learning process that demands the use of mathematics prerequisite materials by means of mathematical
contents insertion and integration into the physics teaching and learning process (Boas, 2006; Nearing, 2010;
Tursucu, 2017). However, these various solutions will result in small impact and the problems will still linger as
long as the government does not take any action to change the curriculum. The cooperation in identifying and
improving multiple aspects for designing a coherent mathematics curriculum will help decrease the frustration
and the depression of the physics teachers who have taken extra time to teach the mathematics again in the
classroom (Hatch & Smith, 2004; Tursucu et al., 2017).
The absence of formal discussion that results in an in-depth review has made the discussion of this problem
to stop in the scope of Subject Teachers Discussion. This finding is in accordance to the results of a study case by
Chiu (2015); in his case study, he explained that the forum that the school teachers establish for channelling their
complaints is meaningless. This is the reason why the physics teachers are more inclined to teach the mathemat-
ics prerequisite materials. Chiu (2015) explained that the role of the principal is very important changing the
sequence of the cross-sectional curriculum content. Still based on the same case study, Chiu (2015) explained
that the principals of the schools that have been located in the village areas tend to have easier communication
in changing the sequence of the teaching schedule for certain contents. On the other hand, the principals of the
schools that have been located in the city areas are more pessimistic in terms of formally changing the teaching
and learning contents sequence. He also explained that for the schools in the city areas the only way the physics
teachers deliver the mathematics prerequisite materials is adjusting the materials to their own professionalism
or abilities. Return to the case, the appearance of various difficulties has been caused by the ill-synchronization
between the mathematics curriculum and the physics curriculum and these problems demand a solution from
the government in order that the inter-disciplinary curriculum will be more arranged and coherent.
Conclusions
There have been problems of ill-synchronization between the mathematics teaching and learning materials
sequence and the physics teaching and learning materials sequence; these problems obscure the physics teach-
ing and learning process and, as a result, the physics teaching and learning process are deemed difficult. The
physics teachers have difficulties because they have to explain the mathematics materials, they have difficulties
in achieving the curriculum targets, and they have difficulties in performing ideal HOTS based-assessment. The
weak analytical efforts and plan by the teachers have also caused these problems to not be minimized.
The individual strategies that the physics teachers implement are teaching the prerequisite materials in the
beginning of the teaching and learning process, allocating special time, providing assignments, and integrating
the prerequisite materials into the teaching and learning process. On the other hand, the communal strategy
is that the Subject Teachers Discussion on physics inserts the prerequisite materials into their module that has
been produced collaboratively by the members. However, these solutions only result in small impact and the
problems will still linger as long as the government does not take any action to change the curriculum.
References
American Association of Physics Teachers. (2015). Physics and the next generation science standards. Retrieved from https://www.
aapt.org/K12/upload/Physics-in-the-NGSS.pdf.
Aziz, N. D. (1988). Integration of mathematics and physics in secondary schools: An integrated mechanics unit for Egypt. Inter-
national Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 19 (6), 819-821.
Basson, I. (2002). Physics and mathematics as interrelated fields of thought development using acceleration as an ex-
ample. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 35(5), 679-690, https://doi.
org/10.1080/00207390210146023.
Boas, M. L. (2006). Mathematical methods in the physical sciences, 3rd ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1982). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston, MA: Allyn
and Bacon.
133
(P. 120-135) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Chiu, M. (2015). The challenge of learning physics before mathematics: a case study of curriculum change in Taiwan. Research
in Science Education, 46 (6), 767-786. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-015-9479-5.
Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. (n.d.). Principles of qualitative research: Designing a qualitative study. Retrieved from http://www.
andrews.edu/leaderpart/RoundTable/.
Doran, Y. J. (2017). The role of mathematics in physics: Building knowledge and describing the empirical world. Onomázein,
Número especial, 209-226. DOI:10.7764/onomazein.sfl.08.
Duit, R., Niedderer, H., & Schecker, H. (2007). Teaching physics. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on
Science Education (pp. 599-629). Mahwah, MA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Fiss, A. (2012). Problems of abstraction: Defining an American standard for mathematics education at the turn of the twentieth
century. Science & Education, 21 (8), 1185–1197. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-011-9413-9.
Gingras, Y. (2001). What did mathematics do to physics? History of Science, xxxix, 383-416. Retrieved from http://www.archipel.
uqam.ca/443/1/gingras-mathematics.pdf.
Hart, C. (2001). Examining relations of power in a process of curriculum change: The case of VCE physics. Research in Science
Education, 31 (4), 525-551. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013145924470.
Hatch, G. M., & Smith, D. R. (2004). Integrating physical education, math, and physics. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation &
Dance, 75 (1), 42-50. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2004.10608541.
Hudson, H. T., & McIntire, W. R. (1977). Correlation between mathematical skills and success in physics. American Journal of Phys-
ics, 45 (5), 470-471. Retrieved from http://people.physics.tamu.edu/toback/TeachingArticle/Hudson_McIntyre_AJP.pdf.
Lawrenz, F., Wood, N. B., Kirchhoff, A., Kim, N. K., & Eisenkraft, A. (2009). Variables affecting physics achievement. Journal of Research
in Science Teaching, 46 (9), 961-976. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20292.
Lin, T.-J., Tan, A. L., & Tsai, C.-C. (2013). A cross-cultural comparison of Singaporean and Taiwanese eighth graders’ science learn-
ing self-efficacy from a multi-dimensional perspective. International Journal of Science Education, 35, 1083–1109. Retrieved
from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1011935.
Murdock, J. (2008). Comparison of curricular breadth, depth, and recurrence and physics achievement of TIMSS population 3
countries. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 1135–1157.
Nashon, S. M., Anderson, D. & Nielsen, W. S. (2009). An instructional challenge through problem solving for physics teacher
candidates. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 10 (1), 1-21. Retrieved from http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/
viewcontent.cgi?article=1103&context=edupapers.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Retrieved
from http://www.nap.edu/catalog/4962.html
National Research Council. (2013). The mathematical sciences in 2025. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Doi: https://
doi.org/10.17226/15269.
Nearing, J. (2010). Mathematics tools for physics. Miami, FL: University of Miami.
Nilse, T., Angell, C., & Gronmo, L. S. (2013). Mathematical competencies and the role of mathematics in physics education: A trend
analysis of TIMSS Advanced 1995 and 2008. Acta Didactia Norge, 7 (6), 1 – 21. Retrieved from https://www.journals.uio.no/
index.php/adno/article/viewFile/1113/992.
Pospiech, G., Karam, R., Bagno, E., Redish, E.F., Bohm, U., Pietrocola, M., …, Bing., T.. (2009). Mathematization in physics lessons:
problems and perspectives. Physics Community and Cooperation, 2, 66 – 70, GIREP-EPEC & PHEC 2009 International Confer-
ence, August 17-21, University of Leicester, UK.
Pietrocola, M. (2008). Mathematics as structural language of physical thought. In M. Vicentini & E. Sassi (Eds.) Connecting Research
in Physics Education with Teacher Education, 2. International Commision on Physics Education. Retrieved from http://www.
iupap-icpe.org/publications/teach1/ConnectingResInPhysEducWithTeacherEduc_Vol_1.pdf.
Quale, A. (2011). On the role of mathematics in physics. Science & Education, 20, 359-372.
Redish, E. F. (2005). Problem solving and the use of math in physics course. Paper presented in conference World View on Physics Edu-
cation in 2005, Delhi, August 21-26, 2005. Retrieved from http://www.physics.umd.edu/perg/papers/redish/IndiaMath.pdf.
Redish, E. F. & Bing, T. J. (2009). Using math in physics: warrants and epistemological frames. Physics Community and Cooperation,
2, GIREP-EPEC & PHEC 2009 International Conference, August 17-21, University of Leicester, UK, 71-76.
Retnawati, H., Hadi, S., & Nugraha, A. C. (2016). Vocational high school teachers’ difficulties in implementing the assessment in
curriculum 2013 in Yogyakarta Province of Indonesia. International Journal of Instruction, 9 (1), 33-48. Retrieved from http://
www.e-iji.net/dosyalar/iji_2016_1_3.pdf.
Retnawati, H., Kartowagiran, B., Arlinwibowo, J., & Sulistyaningsih, E. (2017). Why are the mathematics national examination items
difficult and what is teachers’ strategy to overcome it? International Journal of Instruction, 10 (3), 257–276. Doi: https://doi.
org/10.12973/iji.2017.10317a.
Retnawati, H. (2017). Learning trajectory of item response theory course using multiple software. Olympiads in Informatics, 11,
123-142. Doi: https://doi.org/10.15388/ioi.2017.10.
Retnawati, H., Munadi, S., Arlinwibowo, J., Wulandari, N. F., Sulistyaningsih, E. (2017). Teachers’ difficulties in implementing thematic
teaching and learning in elementary schools. The New Educational Review, 48(2), 201-212. Doi: https://doi.org/10.15804/
tner.2017.48.2.16.
Sari, R., & Wijaya, A. (2017). Mathematical literacy of senior high school students in Yogyakarta. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika,
4 (1), 100-107. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.21831/jrpm.v4i1.10649.
Schwartz, M. S., Sadler, P. M., Sonnert, G., & Tai, R. H. (2009). Depth versus breadth: How content coverage in high school science
courses relates to later success in college science coursework. Science Education, 93, 798–826.
134
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 120-135)
Simons, P. (2001). Review the applicability of mathematics as a philosophical problem. British Society for the Philosophy of Sci-
ence, 52, 181-184.
Steiner, M. (1998). The applicability of mathematics as a philosophical problem. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Tasar, M. F. (2010). What part of the concept of acceleration is difficult to understand: the mathematics, the physics, or both?
ZDM Mathematics Education, 42, 469-482. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-010-0262-9.
Tursucu, S., Spandaw, J., Flipse, S., & de Vries, M. J. (2017). Teachers’ beliefs about improving transfer of algebraic skills from
mathematics into physics in senior pre-university education. International Journal of Science Education, 39 (5), 587-604.
Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1296981.
Uhden, O., Karam, R., Pietrocola, M., & Pospiech, G. (2011). Modelling Mathematical Reasoning in Physics Education. Science &
Education, 21 (4), 485-506. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-011-9396-6.
Wigner, E. P. (1960). The unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in the natural sciences. Communications on Pure and Applied
Mathematics, xiii, 001 – 14.
Tzanakis, C. (n.d.). On the relation between mathematics and physics in undergraduate teaching. Retrieved from http://users.math.
uoc.gr/~ictm2/Proceedings/pap319.pdf.
Received: November 07, 2017 Accepted: February 06, 2018
Heri Retnawati Dr, Associate Professor, Mathematics Department, Mathematics

and Science Faculty, Yogyakarta State University, Indonesia, Jl.
Kolombo Karangmalang Yogyakarta 55281 Indonesia.
E-mail: heri_retnawati@uny.ac.id
Janu Arlinwibowo M.Pd., Lecturer and Researcher, Muhammadiyah Health Sciences
School of Kudus, Indonesia., Jl. Ganesha I, Purwosari, Kudus,
Central Java 59316, Indonesia.
E-mail: januarlinwibowo@ windowslive.com
Nidya F. Wulandari M.Pd., Alumnae, Master Program in Mathematics Education,
Graduate School of Yogyakarta State University, Jl. Kolombo
Karangmalang, Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia.
E-mail: nidyaferry@gmail.com
Rian G. Pradani SMAN 1 Gebog Kudus, Central Java, Indonesia.
E-mail: riangalih.prandani@gmail.com
135
EFFECTIVENESS OF CREATIVE
RESPONSIBILITY BASED
TEACHING (CRBT) MODEL ON
BASIC PHYSICS LEARNING
TO INCREASE STUDENT’S
SCIENTIFIC CREATIVITY AND
RESPONSIBILITY
Abstract. The Creative Responsibility Based
Teaching (CRBT) model is an innova-
tive physics-teaching model designed to
enhance students’ scientific creativity and
responsibility. Therefore, this research aims Suyidno,
to analyze the effectiveness of CRBT model Mohamad Nur,
to improve scientific creativity and first year Leny Yuanita,
students’ responsibility on Basic Physics
learning in academic year 2016/2017. This
Binar Kurnia Prahani,
research used one group pre-test and post- Budi Jatmiko
test design on 144 students divided into 4
groups at University of Lambung Man-
gkurat, South Kalimantan (Indonesia). The
data collection methods were conducted by
using: scientific creativity tests emphasized
on unusual uses indicator, problem finding, Introduction
product improvement, creatively science
problem solving, creatively experiment Indonesia has abundant natural resources (SDA) and human resources
designing, and creatively product design; (HR) of 240 million people, these things are believed to be the main support-
questionnaire of responsibility emphasized ing element for this nation to be great in the future (Rohkman, Syaifudin, &
on: participatory indicator, respecting oth- Yuliati, 2013). At this point, physics education has an important contribu-
ers, cooperation, leadership, and delivering tion in preparing creative and responsible human resources as a nation
opinion; and interviews. The data analysis change agent. The Republic of Indonesia government’s policy through the
technique was done by using paired t-test / Permenristekdikti No. 44 on the National Standards of Higher Education; it
Wilcoxon test, n-gain, and ANOVA / Kruskal- states that the achievement of graduate’s competence is preferred through
Wallis test. The results showed that there was a learning process that develops scientific creativity and responsibility in
a significant increase in students’ scientific searching and finding science (Minister of Research, Technology and Higher
creativity and responsibility at α = 5%, with Education, 2015). Similarly, Jatmiko, Widodo, Martini, Budiyanto, Wicaksono,
n-gain average of moderate category, and & Pandiangan (2016) have shown that decision-based learning and problem
both were not different (consistent) for solving can improve the learning achievement of the 6th level INQF Indica-
all four groups. Thus, the CRBT model is tors. Students should be prepared as a part of modern society that would
effective for enhancing students’ scientific later require scientific creativity to solve life problems (OECD, 2014), adapt
creativity and responsibility. to new demands flexibly (Greiff et al., 2014), and technological innovation
Keywords: creative responsibility based (ADB, 2014). Students also need responsibility for improving learning quality
teaching, physics learning, responsibility at- (Saliceti, 2015, Zakar & Baykara, 2014) and directing their creative products
titude, scientific creativity, first year students. for mutual benefit (Velev, 2004; Ozdemir & Dikici, 2017; Sternberg, 2009).
Scientific creativity includes learning and innovation skills, as well as
responsibility as part of life skills and careers in the 21st century (Blascova,
Suyidno
Lambung Mangkurat University, Indonesia 2014). Students are mandated to be equipped with 21st century skills to
Mohamad Nur, Leny Yuanita, facilitate their success in their future jobs and careers (Sitti, Sooperak, & Som-
Binar Kurnia Prahani, Budi Jatmiko pong, 2013; Blascova, 2014). Based on the explanation above, development
State University of Surabaya, Indonesia
of scientific creativity and responsibility is believed to be a key factor in the
rise of powerful countries.
136
ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ EFFECTIVENESS OF CREATIVE RESPONSIBILITY BASED TEACHING (CRBT) MODEL ON BASIC
PHYSICS LEARNING TO INCREASE STUDENT’S SCIENTIFIC CREATIVITY AND RESPONSIBILITY
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 136-151)
But the reality shows the opposite situation, the results of literature studies and preliminary research indicate
that students’ scientific creativity and responsibility are still low and difficult to be improved by lecturers because
they are still considered theoretical and abstract (Bakir & Oztekin, 2014; Kadayifci, 2017; Kang, Park, & Hong, 2015;
Susantini, Isnawati, & Lisdiana, 2016; Susantini, Lisdiana, Isnawati, Al Haq, & Trimulyono, 2017; Suseno, 2010; Suyidno,
Nur, Yuanita, Sunarti, & Prahani, 2016). Scientific creativity has in common with common creativity in divergent
thinking, but rather emphasizes science experiments, finds science problems and solves creative problems of sci-
ence, and creative science activities (Siew, Chong, & Chin, 2014; Raj & Saxena, 2016). Factors that allegedly affect the
low scientific creativity is the process of physics learning in Indonesia that is generally separated from the practical
subjects, physics learning tends to be emphasized on the mastery of physics concepts and solving physics problem
mathematically. Uncreative students tend to be more confident in other people’s ideas, not their own creative ideas
(Rietzschel, Bernard, & Wolfgang, 2010). All this time, lecturers feel difficult to help students understand the physics
concepts that are considered abstract, so the development of scientific creativity tends to be ignored (Suyidno &
Nur, 2015). This is reinforced by the results of Suseno’s (2010) survey that students in Java and Sumatra Indonesia
generally find difficult to understand abstract physical materials, let alone developing scientific creativity in prob-
lem solving. In addition, the roles of student responsibilities in Basic Physics learning are also not as expected.
The fact also shows that responsibility learning has not been integrated in the process of physics learning in the
classroom (In & Thongperm, 2014). As a result, all this time students understand responsibility only as knowledge
and not yet accustomed to apply it in their own learning process (Suyidno, Nur, Yuanita, Sunarti, & Prahani, 2016).
One of the alternative solutions that are believed can improve scientific creativity and responsibility of students
in Basic Physics learning is by using CRBT model. This CRBT model is an innovation of Problem Based Learning (PBL),
Learn to Think (LTT), and Science Creative Learning (SCL)-based projects that have enhanced students’ scientific
creativity and responsibility (Minister of Research, Technology and Higher Education, 2015), but still has some disad-
vantages as follows. Some weaknesses of PBL model application in physics learning are: (1) lack of feedback so it is
also less involving the role of student responsibility in controlling the learning process itself (Gorghiu, Draghicescu,
Cristea, Patrescu, & Gorghiu, 2015); (2) scientific creativity and imagination are emphasized in the construction of
scientific knowledge, but less related to the nature of contemporary science and its application (Moutinho, Torres,
Joana, Fernandez, & Vasconcelos, 2015); (3) the instruction in exploring is less profound, thus it less training the
unusual uses, writing down student’s own research questions and seeking answers to those questions (Nariman
& Chrispeels, 2015); and (4) less involving the students’ responsibility for being successful in their own learning
process (English & Kitsantas, 2013). The weaknesses of applying LTT model to improve scientific creativity (Hu,
Wu, Jia, Yi, Duan, & Meyer, 2013) are: (1) less training unusual uses and creatively experiment designing; and (2)
developed for secondary schools so it needs to be reviewed if applied to higher education. The weaknesses of the
project-based SCL model as an innovation from PBL to enhance scientific creativity are: (1) there is no continuous
training to help students mastering creative thinking activities, (2) no further monitoring of creative thinking ac-
tivities. Students are considered to master the creative thinking activity after completing the project tasks; (3) the
instruction in exploration is still less profound as is the PBL; and (4) experimental activities are in accordance with
the procedures in the LKS, so that students are less training the unusual uses, problem finding, and creatively ex-
periment designing. CRBT model is expected to be applied for students in Department of Mathematics and Natural
Sciences, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, University of Lambung Mangkurat (ULM) in South Kalimantan
Province - Indonesia, covering Study Program: Physics, Science, Chemistry, and Biology; which have a wide range
of scientific knowledge, educational level, culture, and age. In line with Blascova’s (2014) recommendation, the
CRBT model maximizes the role of student responsibility in succeeding their scientific investigation and scientific
creativity tasks. The development of comprehensive scientific creativity and responsibility in the classroom makes
learning more effective (Zaripova & Kalatskaya, 2016). Students are familiarized in situations and conditions in
which they are able to internalize scientific creativity and responsibility in physics learning activities. This is done
because the development of scientific creativity is thought to produce new technological products that bring the
benefit or destruction of mankind, so it takes the responsibility to bring the products of creativity in a positive
direction in the various fields of information, communication and technology application (Ozdemir & Dikici, 2017;
Sternberg, 2009; Velev, 2004). Therefore, the CRBT model is designed specifically to enhance students’ scientific
creativity and responsibility in Basic Physics , which is in line with the demands of 21st century curriculum and skills
that refers to the John Dewey flow of problem solving and the scientific creativity hypothesis (Hu & Adey, 2010),
and which is supported by cutting-edge learning theories (e.g. metacognitive skills, reciprocal causation models,
constructivism, advanced organizers, scaffolding, and complex cognitive processes).
137
EFFECTIVENESS OF CREATIVE RESPONSIBILITY BASED TEACHING (CRBT) MODEL ON BASIC
(P. 136-151) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
In line with the role of PBL (Arends, 2012), the role of the CRBT model is presenting the ill-defined problem,
facilitating responsibility through scientific investigation and scientific creativity tasks, as well as student-centered
learning. Therefore: a) developed CRBT model syntax including: (1) generating creative responsibility, (2) organizing
creative learning needs, (3) guiding group investigations, (4) establishing responsibility for demonstrating scientific
creativity, and (5) evaluation and reflection (Suyidno, Dewantara, Nur, & Yuanita, 2017; Suyidno, Nur, Yuanita, &
Prahani, 2017). b) CRBT model characteristics including: (1) the existence of ill-defined problem, presented in the
form of open questions. Students are encouraged to propose as many problems as possible to be investigated,
(2) creative responsibility, each student has a responsibility to be creative and produce creative products for the
common good, (3) creative learning needs, the availability of laboratory equipment, ICT media, various reference
sources, and professionalism of lecturers in teaching, (4) group investigation, beginning with problem finding,
selecting problem formulation, creatively experiment designing, and creatively science problem solving, (5) tasks
of scientific creativity, extending the reach of students’ creativity and responsibility in exploring the various impacts
of science and technology development along with alternative solutions, and (6) producing creative products and
presenting them, the results of the creativity are not in a form of physical object, but in the form of new ideas, the
incorporation of ideas in a new way, unique problem solving. Creative products are poured in the form of test items
of scientific creativity along with alternative solutions, then the results are communicated scientifically. The indicators
of scientific creativity (Hu & Adey, 2010) and responsibility (Escarti, Wright, Pascual, & Gutierrez, 2015; Rolina, 2014).
Problem of Research
The effectiveness of the CRBT model is measured through: (1) the increase in students’ scientific creativity and
responsibility significantly at the level of significance, α = 5%; (2) the average level of students’ scientific creativity
improvement and responsibility determined by the normalized gain value (average n-gain) at least in moderate
category; and (3) the average level of students’ scientific creativity improvement and responsibility in the four
groups that are not significantly different. The value of n-gain on students’ scientific creativity and responsibil-
ity is determined by the equation: n-gain = (score post-test - score pre-test) / (maximum score - pre-test score)
(Hake, 1998). According to the following criteria: (1) if n-gain ≥ .7 (high), (2) if .3 < n-gain < .7 (moderate), and (3)
if n-gain ≤ .3 (low). Therefore, the main problem of this research is to analyze the effectiveness of the CRBT model
on improving students’ scientific creativity and responsibility on Basic Physics learning. The aim of this research is
to analyze the effectiveness of CRBT model on improving students’ scientific creativity and responsibility of study
program: physics, science, chemistry, and biology in Basic Physics teaching.
Research Focus
The focus problem in this research includes: (1) whether there is a significant (statistically) increase and re-
sponsibility before and after the CRBT model is applied; (2) how much is the level of students’ scientific creativity
enhancement and students’ responsibility before and after the applied model CRBT, (3) whether there is an aver-
age difference in level of scientific creativity improvement and responsibility after learning with CRBT model in
all four groups.
Research Methodology
General Background
This research was conducted at Lambung Mangkurat University in March 2016 - January 2017. The scope of
this research is the first-year students who took Basic Physics course in academic year 2016/2017. This research is
emphasized on the analysis of the CRBT model effectiveness by analyzing the increase of scientific creativity and
the responsibility of the students before and after following the process of physics teaching with CRBT model.
The effectiveness of the CRBT model was determined based on a statistically significant increase in pre-test and
post-test of scholarly creativity and student responsibility, as well as the mean n-gain determined by criteria: low,
medium, and high.
138
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 136-151)
Sample
The selection of samples is based on the Slovin formula, i.e. Sample = [population / (1 + e2 x population)] with
error tolerance e = 5% (Sevilla, Ochave, Punsalam, Regala, Uriarte, 1984). In this research populations were taken
from 223 students at Lambung Mangkurat University, South Kalimantan, Indonesia. The sample in this research
were 144 students at Lambung Mangkurat University, South Kalimantan, Indonesia; which are arranged in the
four groups: group-1 (students of Physics Study Program), group-2 (students of Science Study Program), group-3
(students of Chemistry Study Program), and group-4 (students of Biology Studies Program). Each group consisted
of 36 students who took Basic Physics course in academic year 2016/2017.
This research used one group pretest-posttest design, i.e. O1 X O2 (Fraenkel, Wallen, & Hyun, 2012). The learning
process begins by giving pre-test (O1). Each student is asked to work on a pre-test of scientific creativity, then after
that, the student is asked to fill out a questionnaire of student responsibility. The scientific creativity test consists
of 7 items referring to the scientific creativity indicator adapted from Hu & Adey (2010), including: unusual uses,
problem finding, product improvement, creatively science problem solving, creatively experiment designing, and
creatively product design. The Basic Physical Materials used in scientific creativity tests include electric current and
resistance, direct current electricity, magnetism, faraday law, alternating current circuits, and power on ac circuits.
Student responsibility tests (responsibility assessment sheet and questionnaire responsibility) adapted from Escarti,
Wright, Pascual, & Gutierrez (2015) are emphasized on participation, respect for others, cooperation, leadership,
and opinion. After the pre-test, the lecturers provide science skill training as the initial provision for the students
before following the physics learning process. This training uses students’ science activity (LKM) skills in the process
of science, including: formulating problems, formulating hypotheses, identifying variables, making operational
definitions of variables, designing data tables, designing experimental procedures, analyzing data, and drawing
conclusions. Lecturers apply CRBT model and SAP in each group (X). Trap unit of lectures are specifically designed
to be integrated with science process skill indicators, including: formulating problems, formulating hypotheses,
identifying variables, making operational definitions of variables, designing data tables, designing experimental
procedures, conducting experiments, analyzing data, and drawing conclusions; indicators of scientific creativity
consist of: unusual uses, problem finding, product improvement, creatively science problem solving, creatively
experiment designing, and creatively product design; and indicators of responsibility consist of: participation,
respect for others, cooperation, leadership, and convey opinions at each phase of learning. The learning process
ends with a post-test (O2). Each student is asked to do post-test of scientific creativity, then after that, the student
is asked to fill out the questionnaire of student responsibility. In addition, an in-depth interview was conducted for
several students to clarify the problems found during the basic physics learning. The interview procedure includes
the following: 1) Selecting students who have n-gain of scientific creativity and responsibility in low criteria (5 stu-
dents), moderate (5 students), and high (5 students); 2) Conducting in-depth interviews on all selected students;
3) Doing Focus Group Discussion to verify interview results; 4) Summarize the results of the interview as in Table 8.
The results of previous research by Suyidno, Nur, Yuanita, & Prahani (2017) on the validation of CRBT and trap
unit of lecture models by three physics teaching experts, showed that from the score range between 0 to 4 it was
obtained the average score for content validity: 3.41 (very valid) ; construct validity: 3.42 (very valid); syllabus: 3.95
(very valid); lesson plan: 3.95 (very valid); textbook: 3.80 (very valid); MFI-Skills Process of Science: 3.73 (very valid);
MFI-Scientific Creativity: 3.86; Scientific Creativity test: 3.81 (very valid); sheet of LP Responsibilities: 3.89 (very
valid); and responsibilities questionnaire: 3.83 (very valid). The results of this research indicate that the developed
CRBT model meets the criteria of content validity (needs and updates), construct validity (consistency between
model components), and has support systems (Syllabus, Lesson Plan, Textbook, MFI and LP) in very valid category.
The reliability of the scientific creativity assessment sheets and responsibilities were calculated using Cronbach’s
alpha, which shows the following results: a) Reliability of scientific creativity assessment sheet: .93 (high reliabil-
ity); b) Reliability of responsibility assessment sheet: .63 (moderate reliability); and c) Reliability of Questionnaire
responsibility: .63 (moderate reliability).
139
(P. 136-151) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Data Analysis

The data analysis is done as follows. Indicators of scientific creativity consist of: unusual uses, problem find-
ing, product improvement, creatively science problem solving, creatively experiment designing, and creatively
product design are number of fluency, flexibility, and originality points (Hu & Adey, 2010). In this research there
are 7 indicators of scientific creativity in basic physics courses including: (1) Unusual Uses (UU), determining the
usefulness of an object creatively for scientific purposes on basic physical materials; (2) Problem Finding (PF), level
of sensitivity to science problems. Students are encouraged to make as many problem formulations as possible
for investigation; (3) Product Improvement (PI), improving the usefulness of a product technically; (4) Scientific
Imagination (SI), scientifically imaginable. Students can provide imaginative answers that may become a reality
in the future; (5) Creatively Science Problem Solving (CSPS), students are given contextual science problems to
be solved creatively. (6) Creatively Experiment Designing (CED), designing creative experiments. Students can
formulate hypotheses, identify variables, create operational definitions of variables, design data tables, and design
experimental procedures; and (7) Creatively Product Design (CPD), designing a product creatively. Students design
a piece of equipment, and then explain the name of each section and its functions.
The smoothness points are obtained by counting all the correct answers given. The point of flexibility is ob-
tained by calculating the number of approaches on the correct answer given. The frequency and percentage of
each correct answer is calculated to get the originality points. If the probability response is less than 5%, it is given
2 points; 5-10% probability is given 1 point; for> 10%, is given 0 points. The creatively experiment designing score
is the number of flexibility and originality points. Points of flexibility were obtained by calculating each correct
function, it is given 1 points. Originality is given 1-5 points based on a holistic assessment (Hu & Adey, 2010; Siew,
Chong, & Chin, 2014). Score of students’ scientific creativity is the number of points earned, divided by the total of
maximum points, multiplied by 4. The originality is determined based on the answer probability on each class and
maximum score based on the highest post-test score of scientific creativity obtained by students in each class. Stu-
dents’ responsibility score is the number of scores obtained, divided by the total of maximum scores, multiplied by 4.
The choice of the test method relies on the fulfillment of normality assumptions for pre-test and post-test
scores of students’ scientific creativity and responsibility. Whether or not an increase in students’ scientific creativity
and responsibility is tested statistically with paired t-test (parametric) or Wilcoxon test (non-parametric), meanwhile,
the magnitude of the increase level is calculated based on n-gain. The amount of increasing consistency (no dif-
ference) level among the four groups was tested by using ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis test. This test is done with the
help of IBM SPSS 16.0 software.
Result of Research
The learning outcomes of all groups related to the scientific creativity are presented in Figures 1 and Table 1.
Gray bars represent the mean of pre-test and black bar scores represent the mean of post-test scores.
Figure 1: The average pre-test and post-test scores of scientific creativity in all groups.
Figure 1 shows the average post-test scores of scientific creativity in the Basic Physics course for all groups is
greater than the pre-test score. The average pre-test, post-test, and n-gain scores associated with scientific creativ-
ity indicators for all groups are presented in detail in Table 1.
140
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 136-151)
Table 1. The average pre-test, post-test, and n-gain scores of scientific creativity for all groups.
Scientific Creativity Indicator

Group Scores
UU PF PI SI CED SCPS CPD
1 (Physics) Pre-test 1.46 .67 1.23 1.10 .46 1.75 .71

Post-test 2.48 2.55 3.00 2.22 2.67 3.35 1.79
n-gain .40 .56 .64 .39 .62 .71 .33
2 (Science) Pre-test 1.53 .15 1.91 1.97 .72 1.15 1.40
Post-test 2.85 2.37 2.64 2.64 2.39 2.09 2.26
n-gain .53 .58 .35 .33 .51 .33 .33
3 (Chemistry) Pre-test 1.85 .16 1.56 1.65 .14 1.35 1.11
Post-test 2.95 2.66 2.43 2.86 2.73 2.19 2.07
n-gain .51 .65 .36 .52 .67 .32 .33
4 (Biology) Pre-test 1.83 .12 2.06 1.76 .20 1.33 1.21
Post-test 2.74 2.44 2.64 2.65 2.77 2.17 2.45
n-gain .42 .60 .30 .40 .68 .31 .45
Note: UU = Unusual Uses, PF = Problem Finding, PI = Product Improvement, SI = Scientific Imagination,
CED = Creatively Experiment Designing, SCPS = Science Creatively Problem Solving, CPD = Creatively Product Design.
The average pre-test and post-test scores of responsibility for all groups are presented in Figures 2 and Table 2.
Figure 2: The average pre-test and post-test scores of responsibility in all groups.
Figure 2 shows that the average post-test score of responsibility for all groups is also greater than the pre-test
score. The average pre-test, post-test, and n-gain scores associated with the responsibility indicators for all groups
are presented in detail in Table 2.
Table 2. The average score of pre-test, post-test and n-gain of responsibility in all groups.
Responsibility Indicator
Group Scores
Delivering the
Participation Respecting Cooperation Leading
Opinion
1 (Physics) Pre-test 2.61 2.81 2.91 2.40 2.26

Post-test 3.05 3.29 3.40 3.06 3.08
n-gain .32 .40 .45 .41 .47
2 (Science) Pre-test 2.60 2.76 2.92 2.42 2.37
Post-test 3.10 3.33 3.43 3.07 3.08
n-gain .36 .46 .47 .41 .43
141
(P. 136-151) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Responsibility Indicator
Group Scores
Delivering the
Participation Respecting Cooperation Leading
Opinion
3 (Chemistry) Pre-test 2.88 2.85 2.60 2.63 2.74

Post-test 3.28 3.24 3.35 3.05 3.19
n-gain .36 .34 .54 .31 .36
4 (Biology) Pre-test 2.72 2.81 2.75 2.79 2.54
Post-test 3.12 3.26 3.47 3.18 2.99
n-gain .31 .37 .58 .32 .31
The average n-gain value of scientific creativity and responsibility for all groups is presented in Figure 3.
Figure 3: The average n-gain of scientific creativity and responsibility in all groups.
Figure 3 shows the average n-gain value of scientific creativity for group-1, group-2, group-3, and group-4 is
respectively .71; .66; .69; and .67. The average n-gain value of scientific creativity for group-1 is in the high category,
while the other groups are in the medium category. On the other hand, the average n-gain value of responsibility
for the whole group is .39; .40; .38; and .38. Each group is in the medium category. The normality test of pre-test
and post-test scores for the whole group was performed with one-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z test by using
IBM SPSS 16.0 software as shown in Table 3.
Table 3. The normalized pre-test and post-test of scientific creativity and responsibility for all groups.
Scientific creativity Responsibility
Group Test N Asymp. Asymp.

Std. Normal Std. Normal
Mean sig. Mean sig.
deviation distribution deviation distribution
(2-tailed) (2-tailed)
1 Pre-test 36 1.40 .32 .06 Yes 2.60 .33 .20 Yes

Post-test 36 3.25 .24 .06 Yes 3.18 .34 .20 Yes
2 Pre-test 36 1.66 .32 .20 Yes 2.61 .35 .03 No
Post-test 36 3.18 .37 .20 Yes 3.20 .33 .20 Yes
3 Pre-test 36 1.53 .27 .20 Yes 2.74 .21 .20 Yes
Post-test 36 3.23 .40 .01 No 3.23 .28 .20 Yes
4 Pre-test 36 1.64 .24 .15 Yes 2.72 .25 .06 Yes
Post-test 36 3.21 .36 .20 Yes 3.20 .26 .20 Yes
Note: Group 1 (Physics); Group 2 (Science); Group 3 (Chemistry); Group 4 (Biology)
142
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 136-151)
Table 3 shows that pre-test and post-test scores of students’ creativity and responsibility are distributed normally
for the whole group, except group-3 which is not distributed normally in post-test scores of scientific creativity
and group 2 is not distributed normally in pre- test responsibility. Therefore, the impact of learning with the CRBT
model on improving scientific creativity and responsibility for the whole group by using paired t-test, except for
students’ creativity for group-3 and responsibility for the group 2 which are not distributed normally were analyzed
by using the Wilcoxon test. The results of paired t-test and Wilcoxon test are presented in Table 4 and Table 5.
Table 4. Paired t-test and Wilcoxon test result of scientific creativity for all groups.
Paired t-test Wilcoxon test

Group N
Mean Std. error mean t df p Z p
1 36 -1.88 .06 -28.53 35 < .001

2 36 -1.52 .06 -22.49 35 < .001
3 36 -5.23 < .001
4 36 -1.57 .05 -26.95 35 < .001
Note: Group 1 (Physics); Group 2 (Science); Group 3 (Chemistry); Group 4 (Biology); *p < .05 (2-tailed)
Table 4 shows that the average of scientific creativity for group 1, 2, and 4 is 1.88; 1.52; 1.57 and has degrees
of freedom (df ) = 35, t score gives t value = -8.53; t = -22.49; and t = -26.95 for group-1, group-2, and group-3. The
score is significant, because p < .05. Likewise, in group-3 that Z gives the value -5.23 with significance level p < .05
so it is significant. Since the results of the calculations are negatively valuable, it is clear that there is an increase in
scientific creativity after the application of learning with CRBT model for all groups.
Table 5. Paired t-test and Wilcoxon test results of responsibility for all groups.
Paired t-test Wilcoxon test

Group N
Mean Std. error mean t df p Z p
1 36 -.57 .06 -8.59 35 < .001

2 36 -5.03 < .001
3 36 -.48 .04 -9.91 35 < .001
4 36 -.48 .03 -14.83 35 < .001
Table 5 shows the average of responsibility for groups 1, 3, and 4 are .57; .48; .48 and the t score gives t value =
-8.59; t = -9.91; and t = -14.83 for degrees of freedom (df ) = 35 in groups-1, group-3, and group-4. In addition, the Z
score gives a value of -5.03 for group-2. Each score is considered significant, because p < .05. Therefore, the t result
of the calculation is negative, so it shows there is an increase in student responsibility after the application of CRBT
model for all groups. Furthermore, the consistency of the impact from CRBT model application on the improvement
of scientific creativity is analyzed by using ANOVA and the responsibility is analyzed by using Kruskal-Wallis test
after the assumption of normality and homogeneity of variance, it is shown in Table 6 and Table 7.
Table 6. Conclusions of ANOVA test of scientific creativity in all groups.
Sum of squares df Mean square F p
Between groups .06 3 .02 1.12 .34

Within groups 2.69 140 .01
Total 2.75 143

143
(P. 136-151) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Table 7. Conclusions of Kruskal-Wallis test of responsibility in all groups.
N Chi square df p
Group 1 (physics), group 2 (science),

144 .43 3 .93
group 3 (chemistry), group 4 (biology)
Table 6 shows that F arithmetic gives F = 1.121 < Ftable (3,140) = 1.67 with significance level p = .34 > .05. In
addition, Table 7 shows the significance value p = .93 > .05. This clearly indicates that there is no difference in the
increase of scientific creativity as well as the responsibility of the students after the application of Basic Physics
learning with CRBT model for all groups.
Based on the data analysis above, it can be concluded that: (1) there is a significant increase (statistically) at the
level of significance, α = 5%; (2) the level of increase determined by the normalized gain value, (n-gain) is moderate;
and (3) the average level of improvement in the four groups did not differ significantly. In the meantime, the data
of interview result with students about students’ scientific creativity and responsibility are summarized in Table 8.
Table 8. Summary of Interview Results with Students about Students’ Scientific Creativity and Responsibility
Student Scientific Creativity
“All this time, students have difficulty in recognizing variables from physics problem, theory, and symbol
in the presented physics formulas; the selection of variables is less precise; difficult in distinguishing manipu-
lation variables and response variables; difficult in connecting variables written in the formula with other
variables. Students are lack of knowledge about physics problems in real life. For example: when asked to
write down as many as possible the way to channel the source of electricity from the State-Owned Company
(PLN) to consumers who require different voltage sources. Students feel less knowledge about PLN, distribu-
tion process, equipment used, and others. Similarly, when students are asked to design a nail mining tool to
overcome the rampant of nail mines in the streets of the capital city Jakarta, and showing the names of each
section and its functions. Although students felt that they had studied magnetic electrical materials, they
felt that they are lack of sufficient knowledge of nail mines, nail mine components, how they worked, etc.”
Student’s Responsibility
“Students feel often in gaining knowledge about responsibility through socialization at the level of
study program, faculty, and university, as well as attending seminars with the theme of character-based
learning. Students feel that they understand what responsibility is, the characteristics of responsible peo-
ple, and the importance of responsibility for themselves, society, nation and state. However, the students
feel confuse and are not yet accustomed to implementing responsibility for being successful in their own
learning process. “
Table 8 shows that students find it difficult to recognize variables on physics problem, theory, and symbol
written in the formula; the selection of variables is less precise; difficult in distinguishing between manipulation
variables and response variables; and difficult in connecting variables in formulas with other variables. Students
are still confused and unaccustomed to apply responsibility for being successful in their own learning process.
Scientific investigation activities and scientific tasks are more effective when starting with asking the best ques-
tions (deserve to be targeted and focused experiments), giving rise to the responsibility for putting together
experiments and developing possible hypotheses, and ultimately responsible for getting the most accurate and
useful results. Responsibility is required to support the success of scientific investigation and scientific creativity
tasks during basic physics courses.
144
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 136-151)
Discussion
A more complete explanation concerning the effectiveness of the CRBT model for enhancing scientific
creativity and student responsibility is described as follows. The effectiveness of the CRBT model on improving
students’ scientific creativity in physics learning can be seen from: (1) an increase in pre-test and post-test scores,
(2) n-gain creativity value, and (3) (consistent), as shown in Figure 1, Table 1, and Table 4. Before the CRBT model
is applied; students less master the scientific creativity, average score of students is under the standard score
(minimum score 2.00 in score range 1-4), that is the average score of scientific creativity for group-1, group-2,
group-3, and group-4 respectively are 1.40; 1.66; 1.53; and 1.64. All this time, students are not used to solve
unusual uses, problem finding, product improvement, scientific imagination, creatively experiment designing,
creatively science problem solving, and creatively product design. The data collected through interviews with
students in Table 8 indicates that students still have difficulty in recognizing the variables of physics problems,
theory, and symbol written in the formula; choose less precise variable; difficult in distinguishing manipulation
variables and response variables; and difficult in connecting variables in formulas with other variables. The un-
derlying causes of scientific creativity are in accordance with ‘functional theory’ (Solso, Maclin, & Maclin, 2008)
that students tend to see things based on the usual usefulness and difficult in accepting new perspectives that
are actually needed in problem solving. This is supported by Mueller, Melwani, & Goncalo (2012) that someone
is born creative, but the barriers to creativity often interfere with the ability to recognize creative ideas.
Conversely, after the CRBT model was applied to the Basic Physics course, the mastery of students’ scien-
tific creativity rises above average and becomes high; the average score of scientific creativity for groups-1,
group-2, group-3, and group-4 respectively to 3.25; 3.28; 3.23; and 3.21 (well beyond the minimum score of
2.00 in the 1-4 score range). The increase in scientific creativity is allegedly influenced by the role of the stu-
dent’s responsibility to be a creative person as the scenario in phase 1 of the CRBT model: Generating creative
responsibility. The creative person is always happy in identifying problems, conveying creative ideas, trying to
overcome creativity barriers, taking logical risks, accepting differences, having self-confidence, and not being
satisfied quickly (Sternberg, 2009). In line with the findings of Voinea & Palasan (2014) that lecturers are able
to help students realize their roles and responsibilities in the learning process by becoming study partners,
involving them in scientific investigations and scientific creativity tasks, and fostering a positive attitude in
learning. The importance of this responsibility is supported by the theory of metacognitive skills (Moreno, 2010)
that the responsibility (self-awareness) as a student to monitor his own learning strategies and knowledge can
increase the transfer of what is learned into new situations. Another support from locus control theory (Slavin,
2011) that personality traits (self-awareness) determine whether students are willing to link responsibility for
their own failure or success to internal and external factors. Attempts to realize responsible behavior depend
on their self-awareness in learning (Dementiy & Grogoleva, 2016; Eliasa, 2014). Responsibility reflects the
motivation of learning on the one hand and encourages the development of scientific creativity on the other
(Blascova, 2014). Therefore, lecturers must create situations that meet the need for autonomy, competence
and sense of belonging to enhance positive motivation in physics learning (Yang & Dong, 2017). Based on the
above description, the implementation of phase 1 CRBT model can generate confidence and role of student’s
responsibility to try to be successful in learning process.
The increase of scientific creativity score in all groups was significant and did not differ (consistent) at the
5% significance level with n-gain of .71 for group-1; .65 for group-2; .69 for group-3; and .67 for group-4. This
means that there is an increase in students’ scientific creativity after the application of Basic Physics teaching
with CRBT model. Increased scientific creativity is supported by the availability of creative learning needs as sug-
gested in phase 2 of the CRBT model: Organizing creative learning needs. Lecturers have been able to facilitate
the need for scientific investigation, scientific creativity tasks, and an autonomy-based learning environment
well. These creative learning needs are presented clearly and attractively in MFIs and Textbooks to inspire
students to take on their responsibilities ranging from planning, implementation, and evaluation throughout
the learning process. Creative learning needs include the availability of quality trap unit of lectures devices,
laboratory equipment, and ICT media and their supporters. In addition, the roles of creative and accountable
lecturers are able to create an investigative-based learning environment in a free, open, democratic and posi-
tive atmosphere. This is supported by the theory of reciprocal causation model (Moreno, 2010) that students
become more creative when the environment encourages them to learn creatively and think independently.
Another theory is advanced that organizers (Slavin, 2011) directing students to the material to be learned and
145
(P. 136-151) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
helping recall related information could help to unify new information. The theory is in line with Article 13
Permenristekdikti Number 44 Year 2015 that the learning process takes place in the form of interaction between
lecturers, students, and learning resources in a particular learning environment. Based on the above explana-
tion, the success of lecturers in facilitating the teaching materials, learning environment, and social interaction
can encourage the reconstruction of knowledge, responsibility habituation, and the development of scientific
creativity well. Based on the above description, the implementation of phase 2 of the CRBT model is able to
facilitate the creative learning environment that is necessary to carry out scientific investigations and scien-
tific creativity tasks. In other words, the success of phase 2 will determine the smoothness of the next phases.
The level of scientific creativity improvement for all groups due to the application of learning with the
CRBT model is significant at 5% real level and consistent in the medium category. It is suspected because a
lecture device that has been valid supports it. In addition, the increase in scientific creativity is strongly in-
fluenced by the success of phase 3 CRBT model: Guiding group investigation as the core phase of the CRBT
model. Lecturers are able to facilitate students by presenting ill-defined problems; then guide them to make
the problem formulation as much as possible; choosing one of the problem formulas for disposal; planning
the experiment creatively (formulating hypotheses, identifying variables, making operational definitions of
variables, designing data tables, designing experimental procedures); and solve problems creatively (collect
data through self-designed experiments and review references, analyze data and draw conclusions). The
importance of group investigation according to the John Dewey flow of problem solving (Arends, 2012) that
the class should be a laboratory for investigation and solving real-life problems. Hypothesis Hu & Adey (2010)
states that scientific creativity is emphasized in creative science experiments, finding problems and solving
problems creatively, and science activities creatively. Another support is the theory of complex cognitive pro-
cesses (Eggen & Kauchak, 2013) that creativity is an essential component of solving ill-defined problems. In
addition, constructivism theory (Moreno, 2010) explains that students can construct their knowledge through
personal experience with others and the environment. The theories are reinforced by Ayas & Sak (2014) that
scientific creativity involves the interaction of hypothesis generalization, experimental design, and evaluation
of evidence. Based on the above description, the implementation of phase 3 CRBT model is able to develop
the role of student’s responsibility in the success of scientific investigation through problem finding, creatively
experiment designing, and creatively science problem solving.
The increased scientific creativity is also strongly influenced by the tasks of scientific creativity in phase 4
of the CRBT model: Establishing responsibility for demonstrating scientific creativity as well as the core phase
of the CRBT model. Students have been able to take responsibility for exploiting the various impacts of the
science and technology development, finding various alternative solutions, and communicating scientifically.
This is supported by the theory of complex cognitive processes (Moreno, 2010) that creativity is the ability to
generate new ideas, incorporate ideas in new ways, or solve problems uniquely. Complex cognitive processes
are required to use or transform prior knowledge and skills into a creative product (Eggen & Kauchak, 2013).
In addition, it is supported by the theory of communication skills (Moreno, 2010) that effective lecturers are
able to speak clearly, reward students, interpret student behavior, and solve class problems constructively.
The importance of scientific communication is supported by phase 5: evaluation and reflection. Lecturers are
able to involve students in assessing their own learning processes and outcomes, learning from the process,
and applying what they learn to improve their actions in the future. The involvement of students in planning,
implementing and evaluating the learning process contributes significantly to the achievement of responsi-
bility and learning outcomes (Yesil, 2013). This is in line with Article 11 Permenritekdikti No. 44 Year 2015 that
the achievement of higher education graduate’s competence is achieved through a learning process that
prioritizes the development of creativity and responsibility (personality, independence) in searching and find-
ing knowledge. Based on the above description, the implementation of phases 4 and 5 CRBT model is able to
establish the role of student responsibility in developing scientific creativity through decision-making process
and solving real-life problems, and scientific communication. Students are able to produce scientific creativity
products in the form of scientific creativity test items along with alternative solutions.
The Increased student responsibility due to the implementation of CRBT model can be seen from: (1)
the increase of pre-test and post-test score of student’s responsibility; (2) the value of n-gain of student’s
responsibility; and (3) the improvement of the four groups towards the consistent student’s responsibility
shown in Figure 2, Table 2, and Table 6. Before the CRBT model was applied, the average score of responsi-
bility for group-1, group-2, 3, and group-4 are respectively 2.60; 2.61; 2.74; and 2.72. This indicates that the
146
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 136-151)
students already understand about responsibility well, because the average score of responsibility for each
group exceeds the minimum criterion of 2.33 in the range of 1-4 scores. Similarly, an indicator of responsibil-
ity in terms of participating, respecting others, working together, leading, and expressing opinions are also in
good category. The factors responsible for student responsibility have been good because the development
of responsibility has become part of the mental revolution proclaimed by Mr. Joko Widodo, President of the
Republic of Indonesia in the period of 2014-2019. This is also part of the vision and mission of physics education
in Indonesia. Character-based learning socialization (including responsibility) is often done. National seminar
with the similar theme is also often done. However, unfortunately learning responsibility through socialization
or seminars without being integrated in the learning process provides opportunities for mock participation.
The mock participation theory explains the situation in which the student feels involved in the assignment
but is not involved in the learning process (Slavin, 2011). This is consistent with the result of previous research
that the learning of responsibility has not been integrated in the learning process in the classroom, so that the
student understands the responsibility only as knowledge (In & Thongperm, 2014; Suyidno, Nur, Yuanita, Sunarti,
& Prahani, 2016). This is reinforced by the results of the researcher’s interview with the students as shown in
Table 8 that the student feels and understands the sense of responsibility; the characteristics of responsible
persons; and the importance of responsibility for oneself, the community, and the state. Particular attention is
given to students in order to accustom them to internalize their responsibility role for being successful in their
own learning process. It can be seen in Figure 2 that the impact of applying CRBT model in elementary physics
course was able to increase the responsibility of the better students to be better in all groups. The increase of
responsibility scores for all groups was significant and consistent at the 5% significance level with moderate
n-gain. Reinforced by Table 5 and Table 7 that there is an impact on the implementation of the CRBT model on
improving student’s responsibility. The magnitude impact of the CRBT model on increasing responsibility for
all groups is consistently significant at a real 5% level and moderate category. Based on the above description,
the implementation of CRBT model not only increases the knowledge of student’s responsibility, but also the
application in improving the quality of the process and the learning outcomes.
The development of student’s responsibility has become the characteristic of every phase in the CRBT
model. In line with the English & Kitsantas (2013) recommendation that the CRBT model is developed as an in-
novation of the PBL, LTT, project-based SCL model involves the role of student responsibility for being success
in their learning process. The lecturer guides the students to realize their responsibilities in the learning process
by becoming a learning partner, involving in group investigation, scientific creativity tasks, and cultivating a
positive attitude in learning (Voinea & Palasan, 2014). Students are able to participate, respect others, work
together, lead, and express opinions during the learning process as well as possible (Escarti, Wright, Pascual,
& Gutierrez, 2015). This is supported by the theory of metacognitive skills (Moreno, 2010) that responsibility
(self-awareness) of an active student in monitoring his own learning strategies and knowledge can increase
the transfer of what is learned into new situations. In line with the findings of Zaripova & Kalatskaya (2016)
that shaping scientific responsibility and creativity does not mean equipping students with ready-made mo-
tives and goals. Instead, students are conditioned in situations and conditions where they can internalize the
roles of scientific responsibility and creativity in physics learning activities. This is consistent with the purpose
of physics education to create the conception of physics as an important part of human culture, where the
product of scientific creativity can be beneficial to people’s lives (Bilek, 2016). Based on the above description,
the application of CRBT model is able to facilitate students to connect the complexity between physics and
technology material on the one hand, and responsibility to society on the other.
The improved scientific creativity and responsibility are also inseparable from the support of skills training
in the science process before the application of the CRBT model. Science process skill training can facilitate
lecturers in carrying out the phases of the CRBT model especially in the early meetings. This can be seen from
group investigation activities and students’ scientific creativity tasks at meetings 1-3 that often exceed the
specified time allocated, but at 4-6 meetings, they are increasingly accustomed to develop their own scientific
creativity and responsibility. Scientific creativity includes sensitivity to problems, identifying problems, formu-
lating hypotheses, testing hypotheses, and communicating results (Torrance, 2013). Understanding the skills of
the science process makes students understand how to move science, carry out investigations, and complete
the tasks of scientific creativity well (Demenity & Grogoleva, 2016). Reinforced the results of previous research
that scientific creativity has a strong and significant correlation with the skills of the scientific process (Aktamis
& Ergin, 2008; Dhir, 2014; Ozdemir & Dikici, 2017; Farsakoglu, Sahin & Karsli, 2012; Hu & Adey, 2010; Hu, Wu, Jia,
147
(P. 136-151) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Yi, Duan, & Meyer, 2103; Mirzae, Hamidi, & Anaraki, 2009; Siew, Chong, & Chin, 2014). In addition, the skills of
the science process further could strengthen the role of student’s responsibility in their own learning process
(Karamustafaoglu, 2011; Zeidan & Jayosi, 2015). The above explanation indicates that the science process skill
makes it easier for students to carry out scientific experiments, complete the tasks of scientific creativity, and
improve their responsibility to strive for being successful in learning.
The main strength of the CRBT model is that it is trying to integrate scientific process skill, scientific creativ-
ity, and comprehensive responsibilities in physics learning. Scientific process skills are basic skills for mastering
physics (Prayitno, Corebima, Susilo, Zubaidah, & Ramli, 2017). Scientific process skill underlies the thinking
process in science activities, scientific investigations, and scientific creativity tasks. Scientific creativity produces
creative ideas and technology products to solve life’s problems. However, this scientific creativity is like a double-
edged sword, on the one hand can lead to creation, and on the other hand can lead to destruction. Therefore,
responsibility as a personality trait is needed to bring the scientific creativity toward a positive way in various
areas of life (Ozdemir & Dikici, 2017; Sternberg, 2009; Velev, 2004). Another impact of applying CRBT model in
basic physics courses is the improvement of scientific knowledge, science process skills, and student character
development. This is in accordance with the hypothesis of Hu & Adey (2010) that scientific creativity depends
on scientific knowledge and science process skills. Responsibility as a personality trait indirectly underlies the
development of other student’s characters (e.g. discipline, independence, honesty, hard work, curiosity, and
never give up). An investigative-based learning environment that utilizes laboratory equipment, ICT media,
and various reference sources indirectly equips students with ICT skills. ICT-based media investigations make
it easier for students to make decisions and solve problems effectively (Sitti, Sooperak, & Sompong, 2013).
Conclusions
The results of this research indicate that the CRBT model is effective to improve the scientific creativity
and responsibility of the students in the Study Program: Physics, Science, Chemistry and Biology based on: (1)
there is a significant increase in scientific creativity and student responsibility after using CRBT model at α = 5%;
(2) the n-gain value of scientific creativity and responsibility reside in the medium category; and (3) the n-gain
average for students’ scientific creativity and responsibility in all groups is not different (consistent). Develop-
ment of responsibility, scientific process skills, and scientific creativity through the CRBT model is expected to
facilitate students to achieve their success in the future. Students have been accustomed to creative imagina-
tion in producing unusual new ideas and thinking of unique solutions to problem solving. Students have been
facing a challenging future, understanding the world they live in, adapting to rapid society change, making
scientific discoveries and technological innovations to achieve success. The implication of this research is that
CRBT model can be used as an alternative to overcome the low students’ scientific creativity and responsibility
in basic physics course. To strengthen the result of this research, it is necessary to do further research in various
education levels and countries.
Acknowledgements
The author’s gratitude goes to the Ministry of Research, Technology and Higher Education for funding
the Research (SK Number: 024 / SP2H / LT / DRPM / II / 2016 dated 17 February 2016). Likewise, the author’s
gratitude goes to the University of Lambung Mangkurat and the State University of Surabaya that have pro-
vided research opportunities.
References
ADB. (2014). Creative productivity index: Analyzing creativity and innovation in Asia. A report by the economist intelligence
unit for the Asian Development Bank August 2014. The Economist Intelligence Unit Ltd. and Asian Development Bank.
Aktamis, H., & Ergin, O. (2008). The effect scientific process skills education on student’s scientific creativity, science at-
titudes, and academic achievement. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science learning and Teaching, 9 (1), 1-21.
Arends, R. I. (2012). Learning to teach. New York: Mc. Graw-Hill.
148
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 136-151)
Ayas, M. B., & Sak, U. (2014). Objective measure of scientific creativity: Psychometric validity of the creative scientific
ability test. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 13, 195–205.
Bakir, S., & Oztekin, E. (2014). Creative thinking levels of preservice science teachers in terms of different variables. Journal
of Baltic Science Education, 13 (2), 231-242.
Bilek, M. (2016). Question for current science education: Virtual or real? Journal of Baltic Science Education, 15 (2), 136-139.
Blascova, M. (2014). Influencing academic motivation, responsibility and creativity. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sci-
ences, 159, 415-425.
Dementiy, L. I., & Grogoleva, O. Y. (2016). The structure of responsibility of preschool and primary school age children.
Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 233 (1), 372-376.
Dhir, T. (2014). Problem solving ability and science process skills as the influential factors of scientific creativity. International
Journal of Research Pedagogy and Technology in Education Movement Sciences, 2 (4), 11-17.
Eggen, P. D., & Kauchak, D. P. (2013). Educational psychology: Windows on classrooms (9th edition). New Jersey: Pearson.
Eliasa, E. I. (2014). Increasing values of teamwork and responsibility of the students through games: Integrating education
character in lectures. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 123, 196-203.
English, M. C. & Kitsantas, A. (2013). Supporting student self-regulated learning in problem-and project-based learning.
Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem Based Learning, 7 (2), 46-54.
Escarti, A., Wright, P. M., Pascual, C., & Gutierrez, M. (2015). Tool for assessing responsibility-based education (Tare) 2.0:
Instrument revisions, inter-rater reliability, and correlations between observed teaching strategies and student be-
haviors. Universal Journal of Psychology, 3 (2), 55-63.
Farsakoglu, O. M., Sahin, C., & Karsli, F. (2012). Comparing science process skills of prospective science teachers: A cross-
sectional study. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 13 (1), 1-22.
Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen N. E. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education. Boston: Mc Graw-Hill, Higher Education.
Gorghiu, G., Draghicescu, L. M., Cristea, S., Patrescu, M., & Gorghiu, L. M. (2015). Problem-based learning: An efficient learn-
ing strategy in the science lessons context. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 1865-187.
Greiff, S., Wustenberg, S., Csapo, B., Demetriou, A., Hautamaki, A., Graesser, A. C., & Martin, R. (2014). Domain-general
problem-solving skills and education in the 21st century. Educational Research Review, 13 (1), 74-83.
Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test
data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66 (1), 64-74.
Hu, W., & Adey, P. (2010). A scientific creativity test for secondary school students. International Journal of Science Educa-
tion, 24 (4), 389-403.
Hu, W., Shi, Q. Z., Han, Q., Wang, X., & Adey, P. (2010). Creative scientific problem finding and its developmental trend.
Creativity Research Journal, 22 (1), 1-7.
Hu, W., Wu, B., Jia, X., Yi, X., Duan, C., & Meyer, W. (2013). Increasing student’s scientific creativity: The “learn to think” inter-
vention program. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 47 (1), 3-21.
In, K. N., & Thongperm, O. (2014). Teaching of science process skills in Thai contexts: Status, supports and obstacles. Procedia-
Social and Behavioral Sciences, 141 (1), 1324-1329.
Jatmiko, B., Widodo, W., Martini, Budiyanto, M., Wicaksono, I., & Pandiangan, P. (2016). Effectiveness of the INQF-based learn-
ing on a general physics for improving student’s learning outcomes. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 15 (4), 441-451.
Kadayifci, K. (2017). Barriers to students’ creative evaluation of unexpected experimental findings. Journal of Baltic Science
Education, 16 (3), 414-428.
Kang, D., Park, J., & Hong, H. (2015). Changes in the number of ideas depending on time when conducting scientific crea-
tivity activities. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 14 (4), 448-459.
Karamustafaoglu, S. (2011). Improving the science process skills ability of science student teachers using i diagrams. Eura-
sian of Journal Physics and Chemistry Education, 3 (1), 26-38.
Minister of Education and Culture. (2013). Regulation of the minister of education and culture number 73 of 2013 on the
application of higher education INQF. Jakarta: Ministry of Education and Culture.
Minister of Research, Technology and Higher Education. (2015). Regulation of the minister of research, technology and
higher education number 44, 2015 for national standards of higher education. Jakarta: Ministry of Research, Technol-
ogy and Higher Education.
Mirzae, R. A., Hamidi, F., & Anaraki, A. (2009). A study on the effect of science activities on fostering creativity in preschool
children. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 6 (3), 81-9.
Moreno, R. (2010). Educational psychology. New Mexico. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Moutinho, S., Torres, Joana, T., Fernandez, I., & Vasconcelos, C. (2015). Problem-based learning and nature of science: A
study with science teachers. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 1871-1875.
Mueller, J. S., Melwani, S., & Goncalo, J. A. (2012). The bias against creativity: Why people desire but reject creative ideas.
Psychological Science, 23 (1), 13-17.
Nariman, N., & Chrispeels, J. (2015). PBL in the era of reform standards: Challenges and benefits perceived by teachers in
one elementary school. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 10 (1), 1-16.
OECD. (2014). PISA 2012 results: Creative problem solving: Student’s skills in tackling real-life problems (Volume V), PISA. Pub-
lishing: OECD.
149
(P. 136-151) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Ozdemir, G., & Dikici, A. (2017). Relationships between scientific process skills and scientific creativity: Mediating role of
nature of science knowledge. Journal of Education in Science, Environment and Health, 3 (1), 52-68.
Park, J. (2012). Developing the format and samples of teaching materials for scientific creativity in the ordinary science cur-
riculum-Including teachers’ practice and reflection. Journal of Korean Association for Science Education, 32 (3), 446-466.
Prayitno, B. A., Corebima, D., Susilo, H., Zubaidah, S., & Ramli, M. (2017). Closing the science process skills gap between
students with high and low level academic achievement. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 16 (2), 266-277.
Raj, H., & Saxena, D. R. (2016). Scientific creativity: A review of researches. European Academic Research, 4, 1122-1138.
Rietzschel, E. F., Bernard A. N., & Wolfgang, S. (2010). The selection of creative ideas after individual idea generation: Choos-
ing between creativity and effect. British Journal of Psychology, 101 (1), 47-68.
Rohkman, Syaifudin, & Yuliati. (2014). Character education for golden generation 2045 (national character building for
Indonesian golden years). Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 141(1), 1161-1165.
Rolina, N. (2014). Developing responsibility character for university student in ECE through project method. Procedia - Social
and Behavioral Sciences, 123(1), 170-174.
Saliceti, F. (2015). Educate for creativity: New educational strategies. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 197 (1), 1174-
1178.
Sevilla, C. G., Ochave, J. A., Punsalan, T. G., Regala, B. P., & Uriarte, G. G. (1984). An introduction to research methods. Quezon
City: Rex Printing Company.
Siew, N. M., Chong, C. L., & Chin, K. O. (2014). Developing a scientific creativity test for fifth graders. Problems of Education
in the 21st Century, 62 (1), 109-123.
Sitti, S., Sooperak, S., & Sompong, N. (2013). Development of instructional model based on connectivism learning theory
to enhance problem-solving skill in ICT for daily life of higher education students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 103 (1), 315-322.
Slavin, R. E. (2011). Educational psychology, theory and practice. Boston: Pearson Education.
Solso, R. L., MacLin, O. H., & MacLin, M. K. (2008). Cognitive psychology, 8th edition. Boston: Pearson Education.
Sternberg, R. J. (2009). Academic intelligence is not enough WICS: An expanded model for effective practice in school and
in later life. Mosakowski Institute for Public Enterprise. Paper 4. Retrieved 04/07/2016, from http://commons.clarku.
edu/mosakowskiinstitute/4.
Susantini, E., Isnawati, & Lisdiana, L. (2016). Effectiveness of genetics student worksheet to improve creative thinking skills
of teacher candidate students. Journal of Science Education, 2 (17), 74-79.
Susantini, E., Lisdiana, L., Isnawati, Al Haq, A. T., & Trimulyono, G. (2017). Designing easy DNA extraction: Teaching creativity
through laboratory practice. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 45 (3), 216-225.
Suseno, N. (2010). Kendala penerapan inkuiri dalam perkuliahan listrik-magnet di LPTK [Constraints of inquiry implementa-
tion in magnet-electric course at LPTK]. Jurnal Pengajaran MIPA, 15(2), 95-102.
Suyidno & Nur, M. (2015). Pemahaman kreativitas ilmiah mahasiswa dalam pembelajaran kreatif pada matakuliah fisika
dasar [Understanding of students’ scientific creativity in creative learning at basic physics courses]. Prosiding Semi-
nar Nasional Program Studi Pendidikan Sains Pascasarjana Universitas Negeri Surabaya, 24 Januari 2015, 1361-1366.
Suyidno, Dewantara, D., Nur, M., & Yuanita, L. (2017). Maximize student’s scientific process skill within creatively product
designing: Creative responsibility based learning. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research,
100, 98-103.
Suyidno, Nur, M., & Yuanita, L. (2016). Keterlaksanaan model Scientific Creativity Learning (SCL) untuk melatihkan kreati-
vitas ilmiah mahasiswa dalam pembelajaran fisika [Accomplishment of Scientific Creativity Learning (SCL) model to
train students’ scientific creativity in physics learning]. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Masif II FMIPATI Universitas PGRI
Semarang, 3 September 2016, 263-268.
Suyidno, Nur, M., Yuanita, L., & Prahani, B. K. (2017). Validity of creative responsibility based learning: An innovative physics
learning to prepare the generation of creative and responsibility. Journal of Research & Method in Education, 7 (1), 56-61.
Suyidno, Nur, M., Yuanita, L., Sunarti, T., & Prahani, B. K. (2016). Student’s responsibilites department PMIPA of Lambung
Mangkurat University in learning physics. Jurnal Vidya Karya FKIP Universitas Lambung Mangkurat, 2, 46-59.
Torrance, E. P. (2013). Scientific views of creativity and factors affecting its growth. The MIT Press and American Academy of Arts
& Sciences are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Daedalus. Retrieved 05/07/2016,
from https://www.cc.gatech.edu/classes/AY2013/cs7601.../Torrance-Viewsofcreativity.pdf.
Velev, V. (2004). Digital creativity: Advantages, problems, responsibilities. International Journal Information Theories & Ap-
plications, 11, 60-67.
Voinea, M., & Palasan, T. (2014). Teachers’ professional identity in the 21st century Romania. Procedia-Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 128, 361–365.
Wibowo, F. C., & Suhandi, A. (2013). Penerapan model Science Creative Learning (SCL) fisika berbasis proyek untuk me-
ningkatkan hasil belajar kognitif dan keterampilan berpikir kreatif [Implementation of Science Creative Learning
(SCL) model for project-based physics to improve cognitive learning outcomes and creative thinking skills]. Jurnal
Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 2 (1), 67-75.
Yang, C. B., & Dong, M. K. (2017). A study of the correlation between teachers’ teaching styles and students’ participation
motivation in the physical education. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 16 (2), 199-206.
150
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 136-151)
Yesil, R. (2013). The evaluation of responsibility education strategies of primary school teachers. Procedia-Social and Be-
havioral Sciences, 106 (1), 2775- 2787.
Zakar, Z., & Baykara, H. (2014). Inquiry-based laboratory practices in a science teacher training program. Eurasia Journal of
Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 10 (2), 173-183.
Zaripova, A. R., & Kalatskaya, N. N. (2016). The development of teenagers’ responsible and creative attitude to learning
activity. IEJME-Mathematics Education, 11 (4), 633-645.
Zeidan, A. F., & Jayosi, M. R. (2015). Science process skills and attitudes toward science among Palestinian. World Journal
of Education, 5 (1), 13-24.
Received: October 03, 2017 Accepted: February 10, 2018
Suyidno Doctor, Researcher, Universitas Lambung Mangkurat (Lambung

Mangkurat University), Jl. Brigjend. H. Hasan Basry Kayutangi,
Banjarmasin 70124, Indonesia.
E-mail: Suyidno_pfis@unlam.ac.id
Website: http://www.unlam.ac.id
Mohamad Nur Professor, Researcher, Universitas Negeri Surabaya (State University
of Surabaya), Jl. Ketintang Surabaya 60231, Indonesia.
E-mail: psmsunesa@yahoo.co.id
Website: http://www.unesa.ac.id
Leny Yuanita Professor, Researcher, Universitas Negeri Surabaya (State University
of Surabaya), Jl. Ketintang Surabaya 60231, Indonesia.
E-mail: lenyyuanita@unesa.ac.id
Binar Kurnia Prahani Doctor, Researcher, Universitas Negeri Surabaya (State University of
Surabaya), Jl. Ketintang Surabaya 60231, Indonesia.
E-mail: binarprahani@gmail.com
Budi Jatmiko Professor, Researcher, Universitas Negeri Surabaya (State University
(Corresponding author) of Surabaya), Jl. Ketintang Surabaya 60231, Indonesia.
E-mail: budijatmiko@unesa.ac.id
151
DIVERSIFICATION OF
REASONING SCIENCE TEST
ITEMS OF TIMSS GRADE 8
BASED ON HIGHER ORDER
THINKING SKILLS: A CASE
STUDY OF INDONESIAN
STUDENTS
Abstract. The aim of this research was Anjar Putro Utomo,

to assess the classification of science test Erlia Narulita,
items of TIMSS grade 8 based on higher
Kinya Shimizu
order thinking skills (HOTS) and determine
whether those classified-science test items
can be an assessment tool in science class.
Sixteen sample test items of HOTS were
chosen from 37 reasoning items of TIMSS
1999, 2003, and 2011; which were 6 of
Introduction
analysing, 6 of evaluating, and 4 of creat-
ing. The selected items were tested to 410
Indonesian education system is immense and diverse. With over 60 mil-
ninth grade students in 14 public schools in
lion students from primary to secondary level and almost 4 million teachers
Jember, Indonesia. Data were analysed by
in some 340000 private and public schools, it is the third largest education
using point-biserial correlation to measure
system in the Asia region and the fourth largest in the world (behind only
the index of discrimination and degree of
the People’s Republic of China, India, and the United States) (Organisation
difficulty at items of each level of HOTS test.
for Economic Cooperation Development, 2015). Consequently, those condi-
The result revealed that the point-biserial
tions should give beneficiary for an education system in Indonesia becom-
index of discrimination for each item was
ing better or at least in same quality with the neighbour Asian countries
higher than 0.25. The degree of difficulty
such as Singapore, Malaysia, and Thailand. Because there are many human
of analysing, evaluating and creating test
resources who will make more chance to face global competition. In fact,
items exhibited a similar trend, which was
the results of the mean score of national examination (UN) of academic
in good range. Each test item has sig-
year 2014/2015 is 59.88 with the highest score is 100 and the lowest score
nificant validity. Whilst reliability analysis
is 2.5 (Pusat Kurikulum dan Perbukuan, 2016). While a standard of the good
showed that each test item was accept-
national examination score is 70-85 (Ministry of Education and Culture,
able and indicating a high level of internal
2015). Thus, there is a big gap between mean score and the good standard
consistency. In conclusion, the classified
score of national examination. Additionally, the range of students who got
science test items of TIMSS are good to use
the highest score and the lowest score are very far.
as assessment tools to measure HOTS of
These results show that Indonesia remains needs to improve their
students in science class.
education quality. The quality of national education one of which can be
Keywords: higher order thinking skills, seen from the output quality, the views of quality graduates recognized at
point biserial correlation, science test items. the national, regional, and international. In this context, the national educa-
tion, which has quality graduates, is a necessity because without producing
Anjar Putro Utomo, Erlia Narulita quality graduates, the education program is not seen as a human resource
University of Jember, Indonesia investment to improve the nation’s competitiveness, but it is seen as a waste
Kinya Shimizu in terms of costs, energy, and time. Especially in skills quality of Indonesia
Hiroshima University, Japan
students is higher order thinking skills. Because one of Indonesian science
educational goals is to improve student quality through developing higher
152
ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ DIVERSIFICATION OF REASONING SCIENCE TEST ITEMS OF TIMSS GRADE 8 BASED ON
HIGHER ORDER THINKING SKILLS: A CASE STUDY OF INDONESIAN STUDENTS
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 152-161)
order thinking skills (HOTS) since the early age as basic skills for daily life, apart from the academic achievement
in the schools. Higher order thinking involves a variety of thinking processes applied to complex situations and
having multiple variables (King, Goodson & Rohani, 2015); and it is important in science education to make the
relationships between evidence and explanations. It is why this issue remains to become a substantial concern
of Indonesia government till now.
One of the ways to know whether Indonesia’s learning has been directing to the formation of higher
order thinking skills, the Ministry of Education and Culture send some representation of Junior High School/
Islamic Junior High School (SMP/MTs) students of Indonesia in the international study, called TIMSS (Trends in
International Mathematics and Science Study). There are two domains that are being tested in TIMSS assess-
ments, namely content and cognitive domains. For the tested cognitive domain, it covers knowing, applying,
and reasoning (Mullis & Martin, 2013). The concerning fact is Indonesian students always got low rank and score
at TIMSS studies. TIMSS result revealed that Indonesian students performed lower than the international aver-
age benchmarking in all cognitive domains, mainly in reasoning domain. An average scale score of Indonesian
students in 2011 result is 406 while International average benchmark is 500. In this time, Indonesia was rank 40
out of 42 or third rank from the bottom. Especially in reasoning domain score was 20% while the international
average was 33% (Martin, Mullis, Foy, & Stanco, 2012).
Indonesia student’s achievement was getting a jump in 2011 result from 2007 result when comparing
with the same country especially neighbour countries such as Malaysia, Thailand, Singapore, China, and Japan.
This result showed that more than 95% Indonesia students can do up to intermediate level only, while 40% of
the other country’s students such as Singapore can reach high and advance level. It is a really alarming condi-
tion for science education in Indonesia. Almost nothing Indonesia achieved within 4 years instead Indonesia’s
achievement got a decrease. Furthermore, Indonesia has a huge gap with the neighbour countries like Malaysia,
Thailand even less Singapore (Ministry of Education and Culture, 2013). Thus, Indonesia has a heavy duty to
solve this problem and escalate student’s achievement in TIMSS.
These results provide evidence of Indonesian students’ difficulty in solving science tasks, which involve
analysing, evaluating and creating, key aspects of HOTS that include in reasoning items of TIMSS. Consider at
TIMSS assessment views, among the factors that caused the failures are the test items unfamiliar in Indonesia and
students practice HOTS test items rarely (Wasis, 2014). Assessment in Indonesia mostly measures the knowledge
dimension until level C3 (applying) especially in elementary and junior high school and non-linear with TIMSS
cognitive domain (Wasis, 2014). Whereas, assessment can be implemented to help the students on improving
their HOTS (Van den Berg, 2008). This is supported by the other argument, that HOT`s question can encourage
the students to think deeply about the lesson (Barnett & Francis, 2012). Since Indonesia uses the results of Na-
tional Examination (UN) such as school rankings, the number of unsuccessful learners, and absorption abilities
of the subjects tested in the UN, and other test results organized school (such as daily test, blocks examination,
midterm examination, final exams / summative, as well as class promotion test and school exams) only as a
teaching and learning feedback. Therefore, identification of TIMSS science test items in reasoning level become
the level of HOTS and using it as students’ HOTS assessment tool in Indonesia are a very important becoming
reflection for science teaching-learning and training student’s HOTS.
Focus and Aim of Research
Based on background above, Indonesia has just received reasoning result of TIMSS tests while Indonesia
used HOTS level by Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) as a goal of learning. Thus, classification reasoning items of
TIMSS to HOTS test items really need to give obvious improvement feedback to facing the next TIMSS test. Besides,
there has been no research yet that classified reasoning science items of TIMSS based on higher order thinking
skills mainly in Indonesia. The aim of this research was to identify science tests in TIMSS reasoning items into three
levels of HOTS which is propitious as an assessment tools to measure HOTS of Indonesian students. This research
is expected to have beneficiary for education in Indonesia especially, which are:
1. Teacher gets mapping of HOTS level in reasoning science items of TIMSS.
2. Teacher can use identified TIMSS items as assessment tool in science class.
3. Teacher gets reflection of identified TIMSS items test result of students.
153
DIVERSIFICATION OF REASONING SCIENCE TEST ITEMS OF TIMSS GRADE 8 BASED ON
(P. 152-161) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
General Background and Design
This research is a developmental research of science test items of TIMSS based on HOTS. HOTS test level of
science in reasoning cognitive domain of TIMSS was classified; and these were determined whether or not to be
used as an assessment tool as well; and then the result of this research was compared to Indonesia result and in-
ternational benchmark in TIMSS 2011. The research was conducted at the beginning of even semester of academic
year 2015-2016 over a period of approximately 4 weeks.
Sample Selection
Participants of the research were 410 ninth grade students from forty lower secondary schools in the area of
administrative of Jember, Indonesia. One class of ninth grade was selected from each of those schools. Ten schools
consisted of twenty-ninth students and four schools consisted of thirty students in each class, respectively. The
ninth- grade students were selected as participants due to them already studied eight grade science topics.
The ethical guidelines for science educational research were followed during this research. The research
proposal was submitted to the committees in each school, and the approval was obtained from the school within
a week. The aim of the testing was informed to the students before conducting the research. The collected data
were treated as confidential.
The 37 reasoning items of TIMSS 1999, 2003, and 2011 were organized; then these were classified into ana-
lysing, evaluating, and creating level of HOTS by a table of HOTS’s component term of Krathwohl (2002, Table 1).
Table 1. HOTS’s component term.
Analysing Evaluating Creating
Break material into its constituent parts and Make judgments based on criteria and stand- Put elements together to form a coherent or
determining how the parts are related to each ards. For instance: Comparing, concluding, functional whole; that is, reorganizing elements
other and to an overall structure. For example: criticizing, critiquing, describing, measuring, into a new pattern or structure. For instance:
comparing, contrasting, differentiating, sepa- assessing, explaining, interpreting, justifying, Categorizing, combining, collaborating, compil-
rating, identifying, relating, illustrating, etc. summarizing, etc. ing, designing, generating, modifying, organ-
izing, reorganizing, relating, reconstructing, etc.
After that, two items were randomly selected from each science subject (life science, physics, and chemistry)
and level of HOTS item. Total sample test items of HOTS were 16; which were 6 of analysing, 6 of evaluating, and 4
of creating, respectively. Some examples of test items were presented in Table 2. Then those items were translated
into Indonesian language. The selected items were tested to 410 of ninth grade students in 14 lower secondary
public schools in Jember, East Java-Indonesia.
154
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 152-161)
Table 2. Sample of test items used in this research.
Science Items Level of HOTS Reason
The graph shows the progress made by a beetle moving along a straight line. Evaluating Students have to meas-
ure the correct answer
base on the theory.
If the beetle keeps moving at the same speed, how long will it take to travel 10 cm?
a. 4 seconds
b. 6 seconds
c. 20 seconds
d. 25 seconds
Analysing Students have to find
what effect one part of
ecosystem to the other
part in an ecosystem
The figure above shows a community consisting of mice, snakes and wheat plants. What
would happen to this community if people killed the snakes?
Kayra and Emre are studying plants. They have learned that characteristics such as the Creating Students have to ar-
height of plants and the color of fruit are inherited. They are looking at some green and range an investigation
red peppers. process to determine
correct thing.
Kayra thinks they are different kinds of peppers, because they are different colours. Emre
thinks that they are the same type of pepper, and red peppers are red because they
have been left on the plant longer and have ripened. Describe how you could set up an
investigation to decide whether Kayra or Emre is correct.
155
(P. 152-161) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Data Analysis
Analysis of Point-Biserial Correlation
Data were got from scoring test result of 410 students. In order to analyse point biserial correlation coefficient
value, there are two kinds of category answers only that are the correct answer with score 1 and incorrect with
score 0. The scoring test result was organized and calculated that data by using the formula below in excel to know
index value of point-biserial correlation.
ρpbis=
μ+= the mean total test score for those who answered the item correctly,
μx= the mean total test score for the entire group,
σx= standard deviation,
p = the proportion of students answer correctly, and
q = (1-p)
(Crocker & Algina, 1986)
Based on Ebel & Frisbie (1991), there are several following rules of thumb for determining the quality of items
with respect to their point-biserial correlation coefficient index.
The Degree of difficulty
The formula of the degree of difficulty as follows.
p =
p = the proportion of student answered correctly

c = the number of students who selected the correct answer, and
n = the total number of respondents
(Hotiu, 2006)
The “p” in the formula of the degree of difficulty is same as “p” in the formula of point-biserial correlation. It is
strengthened by Crocker & Algina (1986) who stated when an item is dichotomously score, the mean item score
corresponds to the proportion of examinees who answer the item correctly. This proportion is usually denoted
as “p” and is called the item difficulty. It means that there is a relation between the degree of difficulty and point-
biserial correlation value. So, when point-biserial correlation value is counted, automatically the value of the degree
of difficulty can be known. The p-value is usually represented in decimal number after converted from percentage
number. There are several categories to determine the value of the degree of difficulty (Frank, 1962 in Suruchi &
Rana, 2014).
Validity
In relation with this research, content validity was measured to know the validity of HOTS’s test items. This case
also strengthened by the argument that content validity is the degree of correspondence between the contents of
the test and the logical and curricular domains intended to be measured. The analogy items have been designed
and constructed to measure knowledge, skills, and abilities considered necessary for success in graduate school
(Miller Analogies Test, 2012). Validity was analysed by using Pearson correlation coefficient in SPSS. And the value
of each item can be significant if the value is more than r-table (Crocker & Algina, 1986). N means sample in this
research was 410 students. Since the significantly used was at the .01 level, thus r-table value based on amount
sample of this research was .128. Then, the items should be significant when the Pearson correlation coefficient
value is more than .128.
156
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 152-161)
Reliability
This research measured internal consistency reliability is comparing the variance of each item to total test
variance analysed by Cronbach’s alpha in SPSS. Internal consistency reliability refers to the homogeneity of items
intended to measure the same quantity (e.g., the active/reflective preference) that is the extent to which responses
to the items are correlated. Cronbach’s coefficient alpha, an average of all possible split pair correlation, is a com-
mon metric for this form of reliability.
Then, Cronbach’s alpha analysis method in SPSS 2.0 was used in this research to analyse reliability value.
Cronbach’s alpha is the most popular method of testing for internal consistency in the behavioural sciences. Coef-
ficient alpha is useful for estimating reliability for item-specific variance in a unidimensional test and also for the
existence of a single factor or construct has been determined (Cortina, 1993) like this research that measures HOTS
skill dimension. Subsequently, the generally accepted minimum standard of reliabilities value is .65 (Ebel & Frisbie,
1991). Thus, the reliability of the test items can be claimed as reliable if the value of reliability is more than .65.
Results of Research
Classification of science tests in reasoning items of TIMSS into three levels of HOTS
For each item in Table 3, the correlation between the students’ score who answer correctly and incorrectly and
aggregate score on the set for the same domain was used as an index of discrimination (this index will be the usual
point-biserial correlation index of item discrimination). If the category is the correct answer, the point-biserial index
of discrimination should be higher than .25. The point-biserial index of discrimination for each item on analyzing,
evaluating and creating is higher than .25 and significant at the .01 levels. So, it means the category was correct.
Table 3. HOTS’s level result of point-biserial correlation.
Items Point-biserial index Validity
Analysing
1b .41 Valid
2 .81 Valid
5b .48 Valid
7 .81 Valid
12a .82 Valid
12b .43 Valid
Evaluating Valid
1a .88 Valid
4 .43 Valid
5a .35 Valid
8 .83 Valid
10 .86 Valid
11 .74 Valid
Creating Valid
3 .80 Valid
6 .54 Valid
9a .80 Valid
9b .82 Valid
Note: correlation is significant at the .01 level
157
(P. 152-161) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
The degree of difficulty of classified reasoning items of TIMSS
The degree of difficulty scale: < .20 is very difficult; .20 – .50 is good; .50 – .80 is best; and > .8 is very easy
(Frank, 1962 in Suruchi & Rana, 2014). The degrees of difficulty in Table 4 of analyzing, evaluating and creating test
items exhibited similar trend based on the p-value of each item in point-biserial correlation Table 3, which were in
the range .20 to .50 (good) of difficulty index.
Table 4. Result of degree of difficulty, reliability and validity analysis.
Items Degree of difficulty Reliability Validity
Analysing .69
1b .30 .42
2 .25 .82
5b .27 .48
7 .25 .82
12a .26 .82
12b .30 .43
Evaluating .77
1a .32 .74
4 .25 .55
5a .27 .35
8 .28 .84
10 .30 .87
11 .30 .64
Creating .73
3 .21 .82
6 .22 .49
9a .21 .59
9b .21 .82
Reliability and validity of classified reasoning items of TIMSS
Reliability analysis showed that the total of Cronbach’s alpha value of analyzing, evaluating and creating are
more than .65 which is acceptable and indicating a high level of internal consistency (Ebel & Frisbie, 1991). And
validity analysis result in Table 4 shows that Pearson correlation value in each item is more than r table value (.13).
It means that each test item has significant validity. So, the classified science test items of TIMSS are good to use
as assessment tools to measure HOTS of students.
Discussion
In order to examine item discrimination of reasoning items of TIMSS item to be levels of HOTS (analyzing,
evaluating, and creating) items, we used point biserial correlation method. The point-biserial correlation is the cor-
relation between the right/wrong scores that students receive on a given item and the total scores that the students
receive when summing up their scores across the remaining items. It is a special type of correlation between a
dichotomous variable (the multiple-choice item score which is right or wrong, 0 or 1) and a continuous variable
(the total score on the test ranging from 0 to the maximum number of multiple-choice items on the test). As in all
correlations, point-biserial values range from -1.0 to +1.0. A large positive point-biserial value indicates that students
with high scores on the overall test are also getting the item right (which we would expect) and that students with
low scores on the overall test are getting the item wrong (which we would also expect). A low point-biserial implies
158
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 152-161)
that students who get the item correct tend to do poorly on the overall test (which would indicate an anomaly) and
that students who get the item wrong tend to do well on the test (also an anomaly); (Varma, 2015). Point-biserial
correlation can exhibit how much prognostic power an item has and how the item contributes to divinations by
conjecturing the correlation between each test item and the total test score. The statistic is helpful for verifying
the relative performance of different groups or individuals on the same item (McCowan, 1999).
The result of point-biserial correlation has positive value not only on each HOTS test item of one group but also
on all of the group. The result in Table 3 shows that point biserial correlation value in each item has wide enough
range that is more than 0.25. The range within .40 to .90 that is all items of HOTS test indicating that students with
a high score on each item test are getting the item right too. That means each test item significantly correlate
to the total test score in each group, and each item in each group is significantly discriminated. This fact can be
strengthened by reason if items with higher point-biserial correlations are more highly discriminating, while those
with lower point-biserial correlations are less discriminating (Osterlund, 1998).
The p-value of an item provides the proportion of students that got the item correct and is a proxy for item
difficulty (or more precisely, item easiness). The higher the p-value, the easier the item. Problematic items (items with
a low point-biserial correlation) may show high p-values, but the high p-values should not be taken as indicative
of item quality (Varma, 2015). Difficulty value of an item may be defined as the proportion of the certain sample
of subjects who actually know the answer to an item (Freeman, 1962). This p-value (degree of difficulty) means the
proportion of student answer correctly in the formula of point-biserial correlation. Thus, the degree of difficulty
is one of the components to measure the value of point-biserial correlation. The correlation they have is inversely
proportional. Therefore, the value of the degree of difficulty in each item in this research was lower than the value
of point-biserial correlation itself as mentioned before theoretically. This can be proved by looking at the result
above while the value of point-biserial correlation indicates more than .40 in each item, whereas the degree of
difficulty value is not more than .30 in each item. The value of the degree of difficulty based on the result in Table
4 exhibited that degree of difficulty value range is ≥ .21 and ≤ .32.This result shows us that each test item has a
good value of the degree of difficulty. Thus, it means every item is neither easy nor difficult. In the other word, we
can use them to be an instrument of the test in science class.
Beside value of the degree of difficulty, reliability is very important to educational assessment to judge whether
or not good a test item. This also can be strengthened by the statement if achievement tests are one of the most
important aspects of teaching – learning process and the two most important characteristics of an achievement
test are its reliability and content validity (Suruchi & Rana, 2014). This research used reliability and validity test to
determine whether HOTS-identified science test item from TIMSS can be used as an assessment tool.
Even though, reliability and validity have no independent correlation in its application. The intercourse they
have generally appeared in a way that makes reliability the foregoing need. It is due to an assessment that does
not have high reliability and cannot have high validity; if the accuracy of assessment is biased due to the impact
of a number of different factors, accordingly the degree to which it measures what it is expected to measure must
also be biased. Nevertheless, this reason tends to bring out to attempts to add reliability which mostly means closer
and closer specification, and use of methods that have the least error. It affects in collecting and using a limited
range of evidence, heading to a decrease in validity. Besides that, if validity is added by lengthening the range of
the assessment to put outcomes, afterward reliability is possible to down, because these aspects of achievement
are not easily assessed. Yet, while this is like that, for the summative assessment, there has to be a compromise be-
tween reliability and validity. Whilst, the data are used for formative assessment, validity is foremost and reliability
is less important (Harlen, 2004). Since reliability and validity are not independent of each other – and increasing
one tends to decrease the other - it is useful in some contexts to refer to dependability as a combination of the two.
The approach to summative assessment by teachers giving the most dependable result would protect construct
validity while optimizing reliability (Harlen, 2004).
As Sadler (1989) declared that concern to the validity of decision about individual test should take privilege
rather than a concern to the reliability of scoring in any context where the tension is on diagnosis and improve-
ment. Then reliability will follow as a corollary. So, it is better to use the different assessment information for both
of them. Thus, we use both reliability and validity test to ensure dependability. The recognition of the interaction
between validity and reliability means that, while it is useful to consider each separately, what matters in practice
is the way in which they are combined (Harlen, 2004). This has led to the combination of the two in the concept of
dependability (Wiliam, 1993 in Harlen, 2004). This case can be expressed, as Reliability + Validity = Dependability
(James, 1998 in Harlen, 2004). However, there is no simple sum to be calculated here. Since, as noted above, it is not
159
(P. 152-161) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
possible to have high reliability and high validity, it is necessary to consider the balance of priorities. In deciding
the relative importance of the two components of dependability, the purpose of the assessment has to be taken
into account (Harlen, 2004). Table 4 showed that the reliability and validity value has high value. As a result, this
research has high dependability as well. Thus, one can say from this fact that this research is in balance and very
good to use as an assessment tool in the science classroom.
Conclusions
Science tests in TIMSS reasoning items can be classified into three levels of higher order thinking skills (HOTS)
with value of point-biserial index of discrimination for each item on analyzing, evaluating and creating was higher
than 0.25 and significant at the 0.01 level. The classified science test items of TIMSS were good to use as assess-
ment tools to measure HOTS of students due to significantly have high validity value (more than .128), a high level
of internal consistency (more than .65) and the difficulty index in good range (0.2 – 0.32). Based on this research
results, it is important for teachers in Indonesia to use the classified reasoning item test of TIMSS as assessment
tools in measuring higher order thinking skills of students. Furthermore, students should be trained to use such
reasoning item test of TIMSS as much as possible to minimize students’ error in answering higher order thinking
questions. Moreover, this research is also useful for science teachers globally that understanding the taxonomy of
questions and good practice strategies for classifying the questions level may help them formulate assessment
tools that not only stimulate higher order thinking skills of students but also measure their cognitive level properly.
Acknowledgement
This research was supported by Indonesia Endowment Fund For Education (LPDP). The authors would like to
thank Takuya Baba and Ayami Nakaya for some suggesstions improving the data.
References
Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K.A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., Raths, J., & Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A
taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (Complete edition).
New York: Longman.
Barnett, J. E., & Francis, A. L. (2012). Using higher order thinking questionnaire foster critical thinking: A classroom study. Educa-
tional Psychology, 2, 201-211. doi:10.1080/01443410.2011.638619.
Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is Coefficient Alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78
(1), 98-104.
Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. New York, NY: CBS College Publishing.
Ebel, R. L., & Frisbie, D. A. (1991). Essentials of educational measurement (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, lnc.
Freeman, F. S. (1962). Theory and practice of psychological testing. New Delhi, India: Oxford & Ibh Publishing.
Harlen, W. (2004). A systematic review of the evidence of reliability and validity of assessment by teachers used for summative
purposes. In Research Evidence in Education Library (issue 4, pp. 1-89). London, United Kingdom: EPPI-Centre, Social Science
Research Unit, Institute of Education.
Hotiu, A. (2006). The relationship between item difficulty and discrimination indices in multiple-choice tests in a physical science
course. Boca Raton, FL: Florida Atlantic University.
King, F. J., Goodson, L., & Rohani, F. (2015). Higher order thinking skills. Tallahassee, FL: Florida State University.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of bloom`s taxonomy: an overview. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University, College of Education.
Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Foy, P., & Stanco, G. M. (2012). TIMSS 2011 international results in science. Chesnut Hill, MA: TIMSS &
PIRLS International Study Center.
McCowan, R. J., & McCowan, S. C. (1999). Item analysis for criterion-referenced tests. New York, NY: Center for Development of
Human Services, Buffalo State College (SUNY).
Miller Analogies Test. (2012). MAT reliability and validity. San Antonio, TX: NCS Pearson, Inc.
Ministry of Education and Culture. (2013). Peraturan menteri pendidikan dan kebudayaan republik indonesia nomor 54 tahun 2013
[Regulation of Minister of Education and Culture of Republic of Indonesia No. 54, 2013]. Jakarta, Indonesia: Kementerian
Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.
Ministry of Education and Culture. (2015). Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Dan Kebudayaan Republik Indonesia Nomor 5 Tahun 2015
[Regulation of Minister of Education and Culture of Republic of Indonesia No. 5, 2015]. Jakarta, Indonesia: Kementerian
Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.
Mullis, I. V. S., & Martin, M. O (Eds.). (2013). TIMSS 2015 Assessment Frameworks. Chesnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International
Study Center, Lynch School of Education, Boston College and International Association for the Evaluation of Educational
Achievement (IEA).
160
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 152-161)
Organisation for Economic Cooperation Development. (2015). Education in Indonesia: Raising to the Challenge. Paris, French:
OECD Publishing.
Osterlund, S. J. (1998). Constructing test items: multiple-choice, constructed-response, performance, and other formats (2nd Ed.).
Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Pusat Kurikulum dan Perbukuan. (2016). Laporan Hasil Ujian Nasional 2015 [Report of national exam result]. Jakarta, Indonesia:
Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.
Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 119-144.
Suruchi & Rana, S. S. (2014). Test item analysis and relationship between difficulty level and discrimination index of test items in
an achievement test in biology. Indian Journal of Research, 3(6), 56-58.
Van den Berg, G. (2008). The use of assessment in the development of higher order thinking skills. Africa Education Review, 1(2),
279-294.
Varma, S. (2015). Preliminary Item Statistics Using Point-Biserial Correlation and p-Value. Morgan Hill, CA: Educational Data Systems.
Wasis. (2014). Analyzing physics items of UN, TIMSS, and PISA-based on higher-order thinking and scientific literacy. In Sutrisno,
H., Dwandaru, W.S.B., Krisnawan, K.P., Darmawan, D., Priyambodo, E., Yulianty, & E. Nurohmah, S. (Eds.), Proceeding of Inter-
national Conference on Research, Implementation and Education of Mathematics and Sciences 2014 (pp. 147-154). Yogyakarta,
Indonesia: Yogyakarta State University.
Received: October 05, 2017 Accepted: February 15, 2018
Anjar Putro Utomo M.Ed., Lecturer, Study Program of Science Education, University of
Jember, 68121 Indonesia.
E-mail: anjar_pu.fkip@unej.ac.id
Erlia Narulita Ph.D., Assistant Professor, University of Jember, Indonesia.

E-mail: erlia.fkip@unej.ac.id
Kinya Shimizu Ph.D., Professor, Graduate School of IDEC, Hiroshima University,
7398511 Japan.
E-mail: kinyas@hiroshima-u.ac.jp
161
DETERMINATION OF
EDUCATIONAL EFFICIENCY
AND STUDENTS’ INVOLVEMENT
IN THE FLIPPED BIOLOGY
CLASSROOM IN PRIMARY
SCHOOL
Abstract. The Flipped Classroom (FC) is a Vera S. Županec,

teaching approach in which students gain Branka N. Radulović,
the first-exposure learning with online ma-
Tijana Z. Pribićević,
terials outside the classroom, and then, in
the classroom, they focus on interactive or
Tomka G. Miljanović,
engaging exercises. Despite its considera- Vujadin G. Zdravković
ble publicity, the studies focused on the FC
in primary education are deficient. The aim
of this research is to determine efficiency
and students’ involvement in the flipped
Biology classroom in primary school,
compared to the conventional classroom
Introduction
(CC) approach. Educational efficiency
Over the last decade, the use of information and communication tech-
and students’ involvement are measured
nologies (ICT) has been rapidly spread across all segments of education,
by combining the values of the students’
becoming a priority for all educational institutions. The integration of ICT
performance and mental effort on the test.
into the teaching and learning process is a challenge for both teachers and
Each task in the test was followed by the
students at all levels of education. Under the influence of ICT, new learning
5-point Likert scale for evaluation of invest-
models are being developed in order to improve the quality of teaching ap-
ed mental effort. The total sample of this proach and learning outcomes (Županec, Miljanović, & Pribićević, 2013). The
research included 112 students, aged from increasing popularity of ICT, the time which students spend in front of the
12 to 13. The results show that the FC ap- computer, and the ease of accepting technological innovations in students,
proach contributes to the reduction of the impose a need for technology integration in a meaningful way in different
students’ mental effort and an increase in subject areas already across the primary school curriculum (Costa et al., 2013).
the students’ performance. On the basis of Developing the skill of using the ICT in primary school, students provide more
calculated efficiency and students’ involve- complete intellectual activity in learning, through more independent search
ment of applied teaching approaches, it of the contents, their basic understanding and active, creative application.
was concluded that the FC represents a With the purpose of providing a better learning environment that en-
feasible and efficient approach to Biology courages student-centric activities, the recent innovation known as a flipped
primary education. classroom (FC) has proved to become increasingly popular in recent years
Keywords: biology education, flipped (Adams, Garcia, & Traustadóttir, 2016; Bergmann & Sams, 2012; Betihavas,
classroom, educational efficiency, students’ Bridgman, Kornhaber, & Cross, 2016; Jensen, Kummer, & Godoy, 2015; McEvoy
involvement, mental effort, primary school. et al., 2016; Zhang, Dang, & Amer, 2016). The FC is active learning strategies
in which the traditional lecture and homework are replaced by pre-class
activities, typically viewing short videos, and the class time is devoted to
Vera S. Županec, Branka N. Radulović, interactive activities, problem-resolutions and discussions (Pienta, 2016). The
Tijana Z. Pribićević, FC can better assist a personalized learning, improve students’ critical thinking
Tomka G. Miljanović,
Vujadin G. Zdravković ability, encourage collaborative learning, and accommodate students’ differ-
University of Novi Sad, Serbia ent learning styles (Janz, Graetz, & Kjorlien, 2012; Rutherfoord & Rutherfoord,
2013; Szafir & Mutlu, 2013).
162
ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ DETERMINATION OF EDUCATIONAL EFFICIENCY AND STUDENTS’ INVOLVEMENT IN THE
FLIPPED BIOLOGY CLASSROOM IN PRIMARY SCHOOL
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 162-176)
Research studies on testing the application effects of the FC approach in the implementation of Biology
contents are insufficient, and they relate to higher education. In addition, the studies focusing on primary or
lower-secondary education are deficient (Hultén & Larsson, 2016). On the other hand, in the Republic of Serbia
there is an increasing number of primary school Biology teachers who accept the FC approach in their work with
enthusiasm. They create short video clips to analyse the teaching material in Biology in primary school, and make
the clips available on YouTube channels, thus providing the other teachers with materials in order to apply this
learning model in their classrooms. Although there is a growing number of video clips in Serbian language, which
have been created for the application of the FC in Biology in primary school, the effects of this teaching approach
on the achievements of primary school students in Serbia are still unknown. Also, there are few empirical researches
examining the educational efficiency of the FC, taking into account the performance of the students and their
invested mental effort in solving tasks, as well as the students’ involvement in applied teaching approaches.
With the intention to address the mentioned gaps, the aim of this research is to determine efficiency and
students’ involvement in the flipped Biology classroom, compared to the CC approach. Efficiency and students’
involvement are measured by combining the values of the students’ performance and mental effort invested in
solving tasks on the test.
A Theoretical Framework
The flipped classroom teaching approach, which is a more and more widespread present-day model of
learning and teaching in classrooms around the world, was first applied as an innovative model by two teachers,
Jonathan Bergmann and Aaron Sams, in their Chemistry classes, in 2007. By flipping Chemistry teaching, with
students watching video lectures at home and doing homework at class under their supervision, Bergman and
Sams realized that not only did the grades of the students increase, but that there was more time remained for
various types of activities which contributed to deeper understanding of the material than ever before (Bergmann
& Sams, 2009). By promoting this teaching approach at schools and Universities around the world, developers of
the FC model have inspired a great number of teachers to apply this approach in their teaching disciplines, such
as Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (Eichler & Peeples, 2016). Accordingly, this approach has
become a prevalent teaching model in the United States (Warter-Perez & Dong, 2012).
The FC approach includes two main parts: pre-class and in-class activities. The nature and design of these
activities varies among different studies, and is currently being debated (Bouwmeester, de Kleijn, Ten Cate, van
Rien, & Westerveld, 2016; Hurtubise, Hall, Sheridan, & Han, 2015; Moffett, 2015; O’Flaherty & Phillips, 2015; Sharma,
Lau, Doherty, & Harbutt, 2015). Pre-class activities involve students who view web lectures, link to scientific papers,
link to additional electronic books, perform the target reading from the textbook, solve formative test questions,
solve online reading quizzes (Bouwmeester et al., 2016; Moraros, Islam, Yu, Banow, & Schindelka, 2015; Morton &
Colbert-Getz, 2017; Prober & Heath, 2012; Roehl, Reddy, & Shannon, 2013; Wilson, 2013). According to Hamdan,
McKnight, McKnight and Arfstrom (2013), students are usually provided with the teaching content before com-
ing to class via online video or audio recordings of lectures, Internet resources, and/or slide presentations with
audio narratives. Bishop and Verleger (2013) have also pointed to the importance of using digital technology in
the teaching activities outside the classroom. In-class activities generally include the case-study teaching method
followed by a discussion based on new case studies (Bouwmeester et al., 2016; DeRuisseau, 2016), team-based
learning exercises in order to apply deep learning of the subject matter (McLaughlin et al., 2014; Moraros et al.,
2015; Strayer, 2012), Lymans’ ‘’think-pair-share’’ teaching strategy (Morton & Colbert-Getz, 2017), and quizzes as
a part of the discussion (Tune, Sturek, & Basile, 2013). In such student-centred learning environments, teachers
maximize the classroom time in order to guide students in solving problems, provide differentiated instruction,
and provide students with an environment where an abundant social interaction can occur.
The flipped classroom is a phenomenon that is spread rapidly at schools and universities around the world,
also attracting a growing body of the research. Most of the papers are focused on how to implement the FC in
higher education settings and examine the effects of using this approach in comparison to the traditional lecture
approach (Hultén & Larsson, 2016). For example, compared to the lecture classroom, Morton and Colbert-Getz
(2017) have found that the FC could help increasing the students’ performance in higher-order learning outcomes
better than in the classroom lecture. These authors point out that the FC approach may be the most beneficial in
facilitating the students’ ability to analyse the teaching material in the undergraduate medical education. Cheng, Ka
Ho Lee, Chang and Yang (2017) have found that the FC contributes to a better performance and improves histology
163
DETERMINATION OF EDUCATIONAL EFFICIENCY AND STUDENTS’ INVOLVEMENT IN THE
(P. 162-176) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
education among medical students. Strayer (2012) has concluded that the FC students are more open to coopera-
tion when compared to lecture-homework classroom students both for their preferred learning environment and
their actual classroom experience. Tune et al. (2013) have emphasized that the FC model significantly improves
the first-year graduate students’ performance in cardiovascular, respiratory, and renal physiology compared to a
traditional lecture-based model. They suggest that the use of homework and in-class quizzes is a critical motivat-
ing factor that contributes to better participation of students in the classroom discussions. The FC model provides
the instructors with significantly more class time to emphasize important concepts and/or engage students in the
problem-solving exercises, while retaining the assurance that the students have received important background
information provided by the didactic lectures (Tune et al., 2013). Comparative studies of researchers (Fautch, 2015;
Stockwell, Stockwell, Cennamo, & Jiang, 2015; Street, Gilliland, McNeil, & Royal, 2015; Wong, Ip, Lopes, & Rajagopalan,
2014) have also found positive trends in a flipped environment over a traditional environment. Although a great
number of researchers point out the FC as a good alternative to traditional classroom, there are also few studies that
have shown no difference of the students’ performance in the FC compared to the lecture classroom (McLaughlin
et al., 2013). In a study conducted by Moffett and Mill, 2014, findings suggest that students who have studied the
complete Veterinary Medicine course in a traditional classroom are significantly better in their performance on
both levels (knowledge and application) on the final test, compared to the students from the flipped classroom.
Despite considerable publicity and obvious advantages of the FC in secondary and higher education, this
approach to date has garnered a limited scholarly research in its use in primary education (Hultén & Larsson, 2016),
including the Biology teaching. Besides, most of the aforementioned researchers examine the effectiveness of the
teaching approach taking into account only one dependent variable, the students’ achievement, considering as more
effective the teaching approach that provides greater students’ achievement. However, for more valid evaluation
of the efficiency assessment of the considered teaching approach, Paas, Tuovinen, Tabbers and Van Gerven (2003),
as well as Tuovinen and Paas (2004), propose a combined approach that includes a comparative measurement of
the students’ achievement and the mental effort invested in solving tasks.
In addition to mental load and performance, the mental effort is a measurable dimension of a cognitive load.
The cognitive load is a burden imposed on the cognitive system of an individual when learning a new teaching
content, or when solving a particular problem or task (Paas & van Merriënboer, 1994; Sweller, van Merriënboer,
& Paas 1998). Mental load is exclusively related to the demands of the task and the environment. On the other
hand, the mental effort refers to the capacity size of the working memory which is dedicated to adapting to the
requirements of the task, and as such, the mental effort depends both on the characteristics of the task and the
characteristics of the educational method (Kalyuga, 2009; Plass, Moreno, & Brünken, 2010; Sweller, 1994; Sweller,
Ayres, & Kalyuga, 2011). Thus, a measurement of the mental effort can reveal important information about the
actual cognitive load of an individual (Sweller et al., 1998). By combining the values of the students’ performance
and the mental effort invested in solving tasks on a knowledge test, it is possible to estimate relative efficiency (E)
of teaching approches (Paas & van Merriënboer, 1993). In the later research, Paas, Tuovinen, Van Merriënboer and
Darabi (2005) elaborate that the combined mental effort and performance scores can be calculated and visualized
in the relative involvement (I) of students in the teaching approach.
Considering the involvement of students in different educational conditions, this can be used to compare
the efficiency of teaching approaches on the students’ motivation to learn specific contents. Motivational effects
affect the students’ decision to learn and do exercises, as well as the mental effort, which is invested in mastering
the material. If the student is not interested in the content or the task, he/she will not invest enough mental effort
to learn the teaching material, which will result in his/her low performance. When the student’s involvement is
higher in a particular educational condition, more mental effort is likely to be invested, and this is likely to result
in higher performance (Paas et al., 2005).
In order to achieve a more comprehensive insight into the efficiency of the applied teaching approach, Figure
1 shows a combined graph interpretation of the measures of educational efficiency and students’ involvement.
164
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 162-176)
Figure 1: Graph representation of educational efficiency and the students’ involvement (adapted according
to Cerniglia, 2012).
On Figure 1, the upper part of the graphic representation, which is shaded and bordered with intersecting
lines, points to the educational conditions that provide students with maximum performance efficiency in solving
complex cognitive tasks. The lower part of the graphic representation, which is bordered with intersecting lines,
points to the poor efficiency of educational conditions (Cerniglia, 2012).
Starting from the literature quotations that the number of papers on the FC in primary education is deficient,
the aim of this research is to determine efficiency and students’ involvement in the flipped Biology classroom in
primary school (within the contents ‘Urinary and Reproductive System in Humans’), compared to the CC approach.
Research Questions
In accordance with the stated aim, the following research questions were formulated:
1. Does the FC approach reduce the students’ mental effort that needs to be invested while solving prob-
lems in the field of Urinary and Reproductive System in Humans?
2. Does the FC approach increase the students’ performance in the field of Urinary and Reproductive
System in Humans?
3. Which applied teaching approach result in the higher value of educational efficiency and student’s
involvement?
General Background
Experimental approach was used in this research. According to the aim of the research, the pedagogical
experiment was conducted with parallel groups. Students from the experimental group (E) learned the contents
of the ‘Urinary System and Reproductive system in Humans’ within the Biology classes for the seventh grade by
using the FC teaching approach, while at the same time, the students of the control group (C) learned the same
165
(P. 162-176) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
contents in the conventional way. The two groups were then evaluated to identify effects of the applied teaching
approaches on the students’ performance and their assessment of invested mental effort.
Sample
The convenience sample consisted of 112 students from two primary schools in Novi Sad, Serbia, who partici-
pated in the research. In order to calculate the sample size, the application http://www.raosoft.com/samplesize.html
was used. The entire population of all seventh-grade students of primary schools from Novi Sad was around 1,700
students. For the value of margin of error between 5% and 10%, research sample of 112 students represented a
convenience sample. Also, in order to obviate a potential influence of another teacher on the results of the research,
there were selected schools where one the same teacher teaches. In total, every group (E and C) consisted of 56
students. In C group there were 25 boys (44.6%) and 31 girls (55.4%), while in E group there were 32 boys (57.1%)
and 24 girls (42.9%). The age of the seventh-grade students was from 12 to 13. Prior to the start of the research,
it was established that there was no student in the experimental group who did not have both a computer and
Internet connection at home, which enabled them to participate in the research.
Instruments and Procedures
The experiment was carried out in the school year 2015/2016, during regular Biology classes, on the contents
of the subtopic ‘Urinary system and Reproductive system in Humans’, in the second semester of the seventh grade
of primary school. The students in the E and the C groups were taught by the same Biology teacher. The overview
of the contents taught to the students in both groups during the pedagogical research is presented in Table 1.
Table 1. The contents taught to the students in the E and C groups.
Subtopic Teaching units
Urinary System in Humans 1. Overview of the diversity of the urinary system in animals; The structure and func-
tion of urinary organs; Diseases of urinary organs.
2. The structure of kidneys (dissection) - Study of the outer appearance and anatomi-
cal structure of the pig kidney.
3. Repeat the material.
Reproductive System in Humans 1. Overview of the diversity of the reproductive system in animals; The structure and
function of reproductive organs; Physiology of reproduction.
2. Inheritance of sex in humans; Hereditary diseases related to sex; Diseases of the
reproductive organs; Hygiene of genitals.
3. Repeat the material.
The work with students from both groups encompassed a total of six regular class periods, each lasting 45
minutes. Within this period, 3 classes were given to students to analyse the teaching material, 2 classes were
foreseen to repeat the contents, and 1 class was foreseen for the implementation of the exercise (Table 1).
At the beginning of the research, at the regular Biology class, prior to teaching the subtopic ‘Urinary system
and Reproductive system in Humans’, both the experimental group and the control group of students were
tested with the pre-test in order to synchronize the previous knowledge of students in both groups. Pre-test
in both groups of students was carried out the same day. The pre-test contained 18 tasks of multiple choices
type related to the following teaching subtopics: Circulatory System, Respiratory System, and Digestive System
in Humans. Every correctly solved task was scored one point, so the maximum possible achievement on the
pre-test was 18 points. After pre-testing, teaching of the subtopic ‘Urinary system and Reproductive system
in Humans’ was implemented with different teaching approaches: the FC approach in the E group and the CC
approach in the C group.
The flipped classroom approach comprised two educational components: pre-class and in-class activities.
In pre-class activities, before every class foreseen for analysing the new teaching material, the students were
obliged to view short video clips that represented a 10-15 minute comprised lesson, which understanding would
be deepened at class. Video lectures assigned to the E group students immediately prior to the experimental
research were recorded by using Screencast-O-Matic software. This software captured all the activity on the
166
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 162-176)
screen, including a PowerPoint lecture slide background, a small picture of the teacher’s face (captured while
“lecturing”), any drawing or annotation done over the lecture slide, and sound at the same time when the screen
activity was recorded. In addition to the obligation to watch the entire video clip, in the context of the pre-class
activities, every student had to perform certain tasks written on the worksheet related to the video material that
was watched. An example of the worksheet is presented in Appendix 1. The sample of the research consisted
only of students who regularly brought worksheets on all Biology classes, which were filled in on the basis of the
viewed video recordings. The worksheets differed among the students, although not essentially, with the aim
of ensuring the students autonomy in work rather than passing responses for others to use. A concise lesson
on the video clip could be watched and listened at home or in some other place unlimited number of times, ac-
cording to the individual needs of the students, in order to overcome the essence of the teaching material and
solve the instruction sheet. Within the pre-class activities, prior to the class scheduled for the implementation of
the ‘Kidney Dissection’ exercise, the students were asked to watch a video clip with the teacher’s demonstration
of the pig kidney dissection with the accompanying explanation of its morphology and anatomy, and then to
answer the questions from the Instruction sheet. In in-class activities, at classes foreseen for the analysis of the
lesson, i.e. on the lecture days, as well as on the implementation of the exercise, the teacher did not waste time
on the content analysis and demonstration of the exercise, but the emphasis was on encouraging deep under-
standing of the lecture material. At the beginning of the class, in the introductory part (ten-minute duration),
the teacher checked the students’ mastering of the given recorded content via presentations of the students’
response to the tasks from the Instruction sheet. This part of the class was also reserved for the students’ questions
regarding the assigned pre-recorded lecture material. They were allowed to ask for clarification of certain parts
of the lesson, as well as to discuss its interesting parts. After the initial period of class time, there were given 25
minutes to the students in small groups (four to five people), who had a task under the teacher’s management
to actively approach solving of the problem tasks through a joint discussion, enabling them to expand and
deepen knowledge about the content that was studied. For example, if the teaching unit was the ‘Inheritance
of Sex in Humans’, the students were asked to discuss in small groups how X and Y chromosome influenced the
development of sex in the offspring, why some diseases were transferred from fathers only to daughters and
not to sons, why the sons were more prone to some diseases (Daltonism) than their daughters, etc. Each student
group was given similar tasks on the common topic, and after a short while, each group was asked to present
their answers to the class so that everyone benefits from their efforts. In the final part of the lesson (ten-minute
duration), the teacher organized a 10-question quiz to provide a common discussion of the peers about the
realized topic of the class, deepened the discussion, and stimulated the development of conceptual abilities
of the examined topic at class. Within the in-class activities at the exercise class, the students independently
performed the dissection of kidneys, and then as at other classes, they deepened their understanding of its
functioning and relevance to the human body through problem tasks.
Conventional classroom approach in the C group included frontal lectures, discussion and intermittent ask-
ing questions by the teacher, and responding by students in the classroom. Teaching aids and devices used in
the research were the PowerPoint Slides, textbook, blackboard and chalk. On lecture days (during classes when
analysing the teaching material), while the teacher was lecturing, the students wrote the most important theses.
At class when implementing the exercise ‘Kidney Structure (dissection)’, after the teacher’s performance of the
kidney dissection, students organized in groups were repeating, drawing, and marking parts of the kidneys.
Their homework was to answer the questions given in their Biology textbook.
Upon completion of the analysis of the teaching subtopic ‘Urinary System and Reproductive system’, stu-
dents from both groups took the post-test the same day. The post-test contained 18 tasks of multiple choice
type. Each correctly solved task in the post-test was scored one point. Accordingly, the maximum possible
performance score on the test was 18 points. Within each task of the post-test, except in the content questions,
students were asked to evaluate the mental effort they invested during their solving the tasks. They evaluated
the mental effort by selecting one of the offered descriptors on the 5-point Likert scale. The descriptors were
coded in the following way: very easy (code 1), easy (code 2), neither easy nor difficult (code 3), difficult (code 4),
very difficult (code 5). Examples of several tasks from the post-test are presented in Appendix 2. Therefore, the
goal of the post-test was to measure the performance of students from E and C groups regarding the teaching
subtopics ‘Urinary System and Reproductive system in Humans’, as well as the mental effort invested by students
of both groups in solving tasks.
167
(P. 162-176) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Ethical Considerations
The consent of the school principal, Biology teacher, and the school board, was obtained for the implemen-
tation and realization of the research from each school. All students who were a constituent part of the research
sample voluntarily accepted their participation in it. They were introduced to the possibility of their own exclusion
from the research at any time of its implementation without having any consequences.
Data Analysis
The mean score and standard deviation on the pre-test, the post-test and the invested mental effort were
determined for both groups. The t test was used for testing difference in students’ scores and invested mental
effort between FC and CC groups. Additionally, a procedure described by Paas and Van Merriënboer (1993) was
followed for the calculation of efficiency of the FC and CC approaches, while the procedure described by Paas et
al. (2005) was followed for the calculation of students’ involvement in applied educational approaches. Data were
analyzed using SPSS 12.0.
Research Results
Students’ Performance on the Pre-test
Table 2 contains the descriptive statistics of the pre-test, and the corresponding t value.
Table 2. Descriptive statistics and the t value for performance on the pre-test.
Group N M SD df t p
E 56 9.41 3.01 110 -.135 p>.05

C 56 9.48 2.59
As it could be seen in Table 2, there was no statistically significant difference in the mean score of the students
in the two groups determined on the pre-test. On the basis of the performances accomplished on the pre-test,
E and C groups were equalized according to the students’ knowledge on circulatory, respiratory, and digestive
systems of humans.
Students’ Assessment of Invested Mental Effort during Solving the Post-test
Table 3 contains statistical parameters obtained for the students’ assessment of invested mental effort on
the post-test.
Table 3. Descriptive statistics and the t value for students’ invested mental effort on the post-test.
Group N M SD df t p
E 56 2.52 1.01 110 -8.55 p<.001

C 56 4.00 0.80
Looking at the results for the students’ assessment of invested mental effort (Table 3), students in E group
stated that less mental effort was needed to be invested in order to solve the test tasks than students in C group.
The obtained values (for E group: 2.52; C group: 4.00) clearly indicated that the students’ mental effort was less
when students learned Biology based on the flipped classroom approach than when learning the same content
based on the CC approach. These data pointed to the advantage of the FC in terms of a smaller take-up of space
in the students’ working memory, which facilitated the adoption of teaching materials.
168
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 162-176)
Students’ Performance on the Post-test
Table 4 contains statistical parameters obtained for performance of E and C groups.
Table 4. Descriptive statistics and the t value for performance on the post-test.
Group N M SD df t p
E 56 15.40 2.60 110 11.33 p<.001

C 56 10.07 2.36
As it could be seen in Table 4, the students in E group who invested less mental effort when solving the tasks
achieved a significantly higher mean score on the post-test (85.52%), in comparison to the students in C group
(59.23%). The obtained results indicated the advantage of the application of the teaching approach based on the
principles of the flipped classroom, in terms of better achievement of students about the urinary and reproductive
systems in humans compared to the CC approach.
Educational Efficiency and Students’ Involvement in the FC and CC Approaches
In this research, by combining the values of the students’ achievement and their assessment of mental
effort invested during the problem solving in the final knowledge test, there was calculated a relative educational
efficiency, and the students’ involvement as a motivational perspective of students for learning in the FC and the
CC approaches.
Figure 4 shows a graph of educational efficiency and the students’ involvement in the FC and CC approaches.
Figure 4: Graph of educational efficiency for the FC and CC approaches.
As shown in Figure 4, the obtained values for the educational efficiency of the FC (EE= 0.964), and the involve-
ment of the students’ E group (IE= 0.07) are found in the upper left quadrant, while the obtained negative values
169
(P. 162-176) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
for the CC approach (EC= -0.964; IC= -0.07) are found in the lower right quadrant. Using the principles outlined in
the introduction, the obtained positive value for the involvement indicates a greater interest of students in re-
solving the post-test tasks, which led to lower mental effort and resulted in their high post-test performance. On
the other hand, the obtained negative value for the students’ involvement in the CC approach indicates a lower
interest of students in resolving the post-test tasks, which induced their higher mental effort, and thus the lower
achievement in the post-test.
Discussion
In this research, there have been compared the educational efficiency and students’ involvement of the FC
with the CC approach in Biology teaching in primary school.
The first result indicated that the application of the FC approach in Biology teaching required less mental
effort of students when solving the tasks than in the CC approach. Less invested mental effort of students from
the E group on the post-test could be foreseen for several reasons. One of them applied to pre-recorded lectures
which students used in pre-class activities. The students could use pre-recorded lectures as often as possible de-
pending on their needs and individual abilities, whether for preparing class, clarifying concepts, completing their
homework, or reinforcing the concepts. Recent findings pointed to this general usefulness of the pre-recorded
lectures (Eichler & Peeples, 2016; Smith, 2013). Additionally, the students from the E group had the opportunity in
the introductory part of the class to ask questions to the teacher on the assigned lecture material in order to make
themselves clearer and understand the contents. At class, along with constant interaction of students, as well as
with the interaction between the students and the teacher, the students were encouraged and more opened to
ask questions, express their opinions about the set problems, discuss the content, which was largely missing in
the traditional learning environment. The advantage of the flipped pre-lecture learning environment in a domain
of the cognitive load theory was highlighted by Seery (2015). He stated that learning new contents in a traditional
lecture environment was limited because the delivery of the contents and extraction of information by the students
limited the capacity for learning new information (Seery, 2015). By providing the students’ access to the content
in pre-class activities at any time, at the desired location, their mastering of the content at a desired pace, extract-
ing the new information in a more favourable, free, interactive atmosphere at class (compared to the pre-survey
period) probably led to a reduction in mental effort. This research also agrees with the results of other researchers
(Ayres, 2006; Mayer, 2008) who suggest that pre-learning may be an effective means to reduce the cognitive load
for students, thus facilitating learning.
The second result indicated that students who learned Biology content using the FC approach were better at
the post-test, compared to students who taught the teaching contents in the conventional way. It was expected
that a successful mental integration of pre-class and in-class activities of the FC during learning should improve
the test performance. Students’ performance was measured by using a multiple-choice test, and the test results
showed that performance scores of the FC group were significantly higher than those of the CC group. Therefore,
it is possible to assume that students learn Biology contents better and with more understanding when they are
prepared for class, and when they approach learning concepts and skills interactively. These findings are supported
by the research findings (Alvarez, 2012 in Math, Science and Social Studies; Cheng et al., 2017 in Histology; Day &
Foley, 2006 in the computer interaction course; Tune et al., 2013 in Cardiovascular, Respiratory and Renal Physiology)
that the application of the FC in different educational fields in secondary school and higher education significantly
improve academic performance and the students’ grades.
Finally, the third result indicated that the students’ involvement and the educational efficiency in the FC group
was higher than in the CC group. The students’ involvement and the educational efficiency were assessed by the Paas
et al., (2005) and Paas and Van Merriënboer (1993) with the computational methods. The researchers applied in their
works a combination of values of mental effort and students’ performance for assessing the educational efficiency
of various innovative approaches (Mattis, 2015; Milenković, Segedinac & Hrin, 2014; Radulović & Stojanović, 2015;
Radulović, Stojanović, & Županec, 2016; Salden, Paas, Broers, & Van Merriënboer, 2004). Applying these methods,
which involved the combination of values of the intensity of mental effort invested by the students with the ob-
tained task performance, this research has shown that the FC increases the students’ involvement and educational
efficiency. Research on active learning strategies (Freeman et al., 2014; Prince, 2004) supported the effectiveness
of the FC in increasing the students’ learning and achievement. The FC approach applied in this research (as de-
scribed in the section Instruments and Procedures) provided students with greater engagement, which led to their
170
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 162-176)
greater success compared to the CC approach. At Biology classes, the teacher ensured that students spent more
than half a time at class to actively solve problems, answer questions, talk to each other about the topic studied,
creating an exciting atmosphere with the discussion that encouraged the students’ participation. The obtained
positive values of the students’ involvement in the flipped conditions indicated that they were more interested
in solving tasks. By increasing the students’ motivation for solving the tasks, there was increased their confidence
that they were capable to solve the task. Our results that indicated the positive impact of motivational effects on
the students’ achievement are in agreement with the results of other researchers (García, Rodríguez, Betts, Areces,
& González-Castro, 2016; Greene, Miller, Crowson, Duke, & Akey, 2004; Juriševič, Glažar, Pučko, & Devetak, 2008;
Steinmayr & Spinath, 2009).
The obtained positive values of the educational efficiency and the students’ involvement indicate the high ef-
ficiency of the FC teaching model in Biology in primary school, as it causes less mental load, greater motivation and
greater achievement. Nevertheless, having in mind the research results which show no difference in performance for
students in the FC, compared to the traditional classroom in related biological disciplines (Galway, Corbett, Takaro,
Tairyan, & Frank, 2014 in Public Health course on Environmental and Occupational Health; McLaughlin et al., 2013
in Pharmaceutics course; Whillier & Lystad, 2015 in Neuroanatomy course; Wong et al., 2014 in Pharmacy Cardiac
Arrhythmias course), as well as the increase in the students’ performance in a traditional intersection compared
to the FC (Moffett & Mill, 2014 in Veterinary Medicine course), it is necessary to continuously conduct research on
the effects of the FC in the Biology in primary school in order to make valid conclusions, recommendations and
strategies relevant for its implementation in the teaching process.
Conclusions
This research is significant because it provides experimental evidence that the use of FC in Biology teaching in
primary school contributes to more efficiency and students’ involvement compared to the CC approach. Students
who learned the Biology contents by using the FC approach achieved greater achievement on the knowledge test
with less invested mental effort. This is especially significant in the time of the rapid development of Biology as a
science, which inevitably leads to be a burden of the Biology curricula.
Taking into account several limitations of this research, its findings and significance, it is necessary to carefully
interpret it considering the following issues. First, a three-week intervention is a rather short period for examining
the efficiency of a teaching approach. Although the obtained research results are very encouraging, this research
lacks effects of the FC on the knowledge retention. Further limitations are reflected in the research sample and
investigated contents, since this research has included only two primary schools and contents of two organic sys-
tems (Urinary and Reproductive System) from the teaching topic ‘Structure of Human Body’ for the seventh grade
of primary school in the Republic of Serbia. Thus, future empirical research should be focused on investigating
the possibilities for implementing the FC in other Biology topics in primary school, on a larger sample, where the
duration of the intervention should be at least one semester. It would be important to examine how the FC influ-
ences higher order thinking of primary school children.
Taking into account the positive empirical evidence on the application of the FC in the Biology teaching in
primary school despite some limitations, this research suggests several implications for educators. The implemen-
tation of this teaching strategy requires from Biology teachers to upgrade their knowledge and skills in using the
modern technology. It is necessary for video lessons used by the students as a preparation for class to be easily
accessible for the students at any time. Video lessons recommended for students to be viewed in pre-class activi-
ties should be interesting, should keep the students’ attention and activate their functional knowledge and skills.
These findings confirm that by using the FC approach, the teacher should integrate the pre-delivered lessons
with as many interactive in-class activities as possible, which imply a small group discussion, problem-solving, or
performing experiments.
Acknowledgements
This research is the result of the Project “The Quality of Education System in Serbia from European Perspective”
(No. 179010), which is financially supported by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development
of the Republic of Serbia.
171
(P. 162-176) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
References
Adams, A. E., Garcia, J., & Traustadóttir, T. (2016). A quasi experiment to determine the effectiveness of a “partially flipped” versus
“fully flipped” undergraduate class in genetics and evolution. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 15 (2), 1-9.
Alvarez, B. (2012). Flipping the classroom: Homework in class, lessons at home. The Education Digest: Essential Readings Condensed
for Quick Review, 77 (8), 18-21.
Ayres, P. (2006). Using subjective measures to detect variations of intrinsic cognitive load within problems. Learning and Instruc-
tion, 16(5), 389-400.
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2009). Remixing chemistry class: two Colorado teachers make vodcasts of their lectures to free up class
time for hands-on activities. Learning & Leading with Technology, 36(4), 22-27.
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your Classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. Arlington: International Society
for Technology in Education.
Betihavas, V., Bridgman, H., Kornhaber, R., & Cross, M. (2016). The evidence for ‘flipping out’: A systematic review of the flipped
classroom in nursing education. Nurse Education Today, 38, 15-21.
Bishop, J. L., & Verleger, M. A. (2013, June). The Flipped Classroom: A survey of the research. Paper presented at the 120th American
Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, Atlanta, GA.
Bouwmeester, R. A., de Kleijn, R. A., ten Cate, O. T. J., van Rijen, H. V., & Westerveld, H. E. (2016). How do medical students prepare
for flipped classrooms? Medical Science Educator, 26 (1), 53-60.
Cerniglia, A. J. (2012). Instructional efficiency and learner involvement. Doctoral work. Retrieved 14/08/2017, from http://an-
drewcerniglia.com/?p=411#comments.
Cheng, X., Ka Ho Lee, K., Chang, E. Y., & Yang, X. (2017). The “flipped classroom” approach: Stimulating positive learning attitudes
and improving mastery of histology among medical students. Anatomical Sciences Education, 10 (4), 317-327.
Costa F. A., Bierweiler, J., Castañeda, L., Daniels, N., De Angelis, K., Gabbianelli, ... Driessche, K. V. (2013). TACCLE2 - E-Learning for
Primary Teachers: A step-by-step guide to improving teaching and learning in your classroom. Brussels GO! Internationalisering.
Day, J. A., & Foley, J. D. (2006). Evaluating a web lecture intervention in a human–computer interaction course. IEEE Transactions
on Education, 49 (4), 420-431.
DeRuisseau, L. R. (2016). The flipped classroom allows for more class time devoted to critical thinking. Advances in Physiology
Education, 40 (4), 522-528.
Eichler, J. F., & Peeples, J. (2013). Online homework put to the test: a report on the impact of two online learning systems on
student performance in general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 90 (9), 1137-1143.
Eichler, J. F., & Peeples, J. (2016). Flipped classroom modules for large enrollment general chemistry courses: a low barrier ap-
proach to increase active learning and improve student grades. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17 (1), 197-208.
Fautch, J. M. (2015). The flipped classroom for teaching organic chemistry in small classes: is it effective?. Chemistry Education
Research and Practice, 16 (1), 179-186.
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases
student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111 (23),
8410-8415.
Galway, L. P., Corbett, K. K., Takaro, T. K., Tairyan, K., & Frank, E. (2014). A novel integration of online and flipped classroom instruc-
tional models in public health higher education. BMC Medical Education, 14(1), 181.
García, T., Rodríguez, C., Betts, L., Areces, D., & González-Castro, P. (2016). How affective-motivational variables and approaches
to learning predict mathematics achievement in upper elementary levels. Learning and Individual Differences, 49, 25-31.
Greene, B. A., Miller, R. B., Crowson, H. M., Duke, B. L., & Akey, K. L. (2004). Predicting high school students’ cognitive engagement
and achievement: Contributions of classroom perceptions and motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29 (4),
462-482.
Hamdan, N., McKnight, P. E., McKnight, K., & Arfstrom, K. M. (2013). A white paper based on the literature review: A review of
flipped learning. Retrieved 10/08/2017, from http://netboardme.s3.amazonaws.com/published/1663/files/3ae28432fa9
c50c4dd1a1a02a22a1b06.pdf.
Hultén, M., & Larsson, B. (2016). The Flipped Classroom: Primary and Secondary Teachers’ Views on an Educational Movement in
Schools in Sweden Today. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 1-11.
Hurtubise, L., Hall, E., Sheridan, L., & Han, H. (2015). The flipped classroom in medical education: engaging students to build
competency. Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development, 2, 35-43.
Janz, K., Graetz, K., & Kjorlien, C. (2012). Building collaborative technology learning environments. In: Proceedings of the
40th Annual ACM SIGUCCS Conference on User services (pp. 121-126). ACM, Memphis, Tennessee, USA, 121-126.
doi:10.1145/2382456.2382484.
Jensen, J. L., Kummer, T. A., & Godoy, P. d. D. M. (2015). Improvements from a flipped classroom may simply be the fruits of active
learning. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 14 (1), 1-12.
Juriševič, M., Glažar, S. A., Pučko, C. R., & Devetak, I. (2008). Intrinsic motivation of pre-service primary school teachers for learning
chemistry in relation to their academic achievement. International Journal of Science Education, 30 (1), 87-107.
Kalyuga, S. (2009). Cognitive Load Factors in Instructional Design for Advanced Learners. New York, NY: Nova Science.
Mattis, K. V. (2015). Flipped classroom versus traditional textbook instruction: assessing accuracy and mental effort at different
levels of mathematical complexity. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 20 (2), 231-248.
172
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 162-176)
Mayer, R. E. (2008). Learning and Instruction (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.
McEvoy, C. S., Cantore, K. M., Denlinger, L. N., Schleich, M. A., Stevens, N. M., Swavely, S. C., Odom, A. A., & Novick, M. B. (2016).
Use of medical students in a flipped classroom programme in nutrition education for fourth-grade school students. Health
Education Journal, 75 (1), 38-46.
McLaughlin, J. E., Griffin, L. M., Esserman, D. A., Davidson, C. A., Glatt, D. M., Roth, M. T., Gharkholonarehe, N. and Mumper, R. J.
(2013). Pharmacy student engagement, performance, and perception in a flipped satellite classroom. American Journal of
Pharmaceutical Education, 77 (9), 1-8.
McLaughlin, J. E., Roth, M. T., Glatt, D. M., Gharkholonarehe, N., Davidson, C. A., Griffin, L. M., Esserman, D. A., & Mumper, R. J.
(2014). The flipped classroom: a course redesign to foster learning and engagement in a health professions school. Aca-
demic Medicine, 89 (2), 236-243.
Milenković, D. D., Segedinac, M. D., & Hrin, T. N. (2014). Increasing high school students’ chemistry performance and reducing
cognitive load through an instructional strategy based on the interaction of multiple levels of knowledge representation.
Journal of Chemical Education, 91 (9), 1409-1416.
Moffett, J. (2015). Twelve tips for “flipping” the classroom. Medical Teacher, 37 (4), 331-336.
Moffett, J., & Mill, A. C. (2014). Evaluation of the flipped classroom approach in a veterinary professional skills course. Advances
in Medical Education and Practice, 5, 415-425.
Moraros, J., Islam, A., Yu, S., Banow, R., & Schindelka, B. (2015). Flipping for success: evaluating the effectiveness of a novel teach-
ing approach in a graduate level setting. BMC Medical Education, 15, 1-10.
Morton, D. A., & Colbert‐Getz, J. M. (2017). Measuring the impact of the flipped anatomy classroom: The importance of catego-
rizing an assessment by Bloom’s taxonomy. Anatomical Sciences Education, 10 (2), 170-175.
O’Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. The Internet and Higher
Education, 25, 85-95.
Paas, F. G., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. (1993). The efficiency of instructional conditions: An approach to combine mental effort and
performance measures. Human Factors, 35 (4), 737-743.
Paas, F. G., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. (1994). Instructional control of cognitive load in the training of complex cognitive tasks. Edu-
cational Psychology Review, 6 (4), 351-371.
Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H., & Van Gerven, P. W. M. (2003). Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive
load theory. Educational Psychologist, 38 (1), 63-71.
Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Darabi, A. A. (2005). A motivational perspective on the relation between mental
effort and performance: Optimizing learner involvement in instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development,
53 (3), 25-34.
Pienta, N. J. (2016). A “Flipped Classroom” reality check. Journal of Chemical Education, 93 (1), 1-2.
Plass, J. L., Moreno, R., & Brünken, R. (2010). Cognitive Load Theory. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93 (3), 223-231.
Prober, C. G., & Heath, C. (2012). Lecture halls without lectures - a proposal for medical education. The New England Journal of
Medicine, 366 (18), 1657-1659.
Radulović, B., & Stojanović, M. (2015). Determination instructions efficiency of teaching methods in teaching physics in the case
of teaching unit “Viscosity. Newtonian and Stokes law”. Acta Didactica Napocensia, 8(2), 61-68.
Radulović, B., Stojanović, M., & Županec, V. (2016). The effects of laboratory inquire-based experiments and computer simulations
on high school students’ performance and cognitive load in physics teaching. Zbornik Instituta za Pedagoška Istraživanja,
48 (2), 264-283.
Roehl, A., Reddy, S. L., & Shannon, G. J. (2013). The flipped classroom: An opportunity to engage millennial students through
active learning. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 105 (2), 44-49.
Rutherfoord, R. H., & Rutherfoord, J. K. (2013, October). Flipping the classroom: Is it for you?. In Proceedings of the 14th annual
ACM SIGITE Conference on Information Technology Education (pp. 19-22). New York, NY, USA: ACM.
Salden, R. J., Paas, F., Broers, N. J., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. (2004). Mental effort and performance as determinants for the dynamic
selection of learning tasks in air traffic control training. Instructional Science, 32 (1-2), 153-172.
Seery, M. K. (2015). Flipped learning in higher education chemistry: emerging trends and potential directions. Chemistry Educa-
tion Research and Practice, 16 (4), 758-768.
Sharma, N., Lau, C. S., Doherty, I., & Harbutt, D. (2015). How we flipped the medical classroom. Medical teacher, 37 (4), 327-330.
Smith, J. D. (2013). Student attitudes toward flipping the general chemistry classroom. Chemistry Education Research and Practice,
14 (4), 607-614.
Steinmayr, R., & Spinath, B. (2009). The importance of motivation as a predictor of school achievement. Learning and Individual
Differences, 19 (1), 80-90.
Stockwell, B. R., Stockwell, M. S., Cennamo, M., & Jiang, E. (2015). Blended learning improves science education. Cell, 162 (5), 933-936.
Strayer, J. F. (2012). How learning in an inverted classroom influences cooperation, innovation and task orientation. Learning
Environments Research, 15 (2), 171-193.
Street, S. E., Gilliland, K. O., McNeil, C., & Royal, K. (2015). The flipped classroom improved medical student performance and
satisfaction in a pre-clinical physiology course. Medical Science Educator, 25 (1), 35-43.
Szafir, D., & Mutlu, B. (2013, April-May). ARTFul: adaptive review technology for flipped learning. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1001-1010). New York, NY, USA: ACM.
173
(P. 162-176) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4 (4), 295-312.
Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology
Review, 10 (3), 251-296.
Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive Load Theory. Berlin: Springer.
Tune, J. D., Sturek, M., & Basile, D. P. (2013). Flipped classroom model improves graduate student performance in cardiovascular,
respiratory, and renal physiology. Advances in Physiology Education, 37 (4), 316-320.
Tuovinen, J. E., Paas, F. (2004). Exploring multidimensional approaches to the efficiency of instructional conditions. Instructional
Science, 32, 133-152.
Zhang, Y., Dang, Y., & Amer, B. A. (2016). Large-scale blended and flipped class: class design and investigation of factors influenc-
ing students’ intention to learn. IEEE Transactions on Education, 59 (4), 263-273.
Županec, V., Miljanović, T., Pribićević, T. (2013): Effectiveness of computer assisted learning in biology teaching in primary schools
in Serbia. Zbornik Instituta za Pedagoška Istraživanja, 45 (2), 422-444.
Warter-Perez, N., & Dong, J. (2012). Flipping the classroom: How to embed inquiry and design projects into a digital engineering
lecture. In: Proceedings of the 2012 ASEE PSW Section Conference (Vol. 39). Washington, DC: American Society for Engineer-
ing Education.
Whillier, S., & Lystad, R. P. (2015). No differences in grades or level of satisfaction in a flipped classroom for neuroanatomy. Journal
of Chiropractic Education, 29 (2), 127-133.
Wilson S. G. (2013). The Flipped Class: A method to address the challenges of an undergraduate statistics course. Teaching of
Psychology, 40 (3), 193-199.
Wong, T. H., Ip, E. J., Lopes, I., & Rajagopalan, V. (2014). Pharmacy students’ performance and perceptions in a flipped teaching
pilot on cardiac arrhythmias. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 78 (10), 185.
Appendix 1. Worksheet for implementation of the teaching unit: Overview of the diversity of the urinary system
in animals; The structure and function of urinary organs; Diseases of urinary organs.
I. On the line next to the listed group of animals, write the name of the organ by which the animals remove the
harmful substances from their body.
Sponges: __________________________________________________________________
Coelenterata: _______________________________________________________________
Flatworms:_________________________________________________________________
Molluscs: __________________________________________________________________
Vertebrates: ________________________________________________________________
II. Circle the letter of the correct answer.

1. Which of the following organs does not belong 2. The structural and functional unit of the
to the urinary system? kidney is:
a) spleen a) an axon
b) ureter b) a neuron
c) kidneys c) a nephron
d) urinary bladder d) a dendrite
e) urethra
3. Primary urine of the healthy persons consists of:

a) water, hormones, uric acid, leukocytes...
b) water, blood elements, urea, glucose, vitamins...
c) water, mineral salts, ammonia, thrombocytes ...
d) water, vitamins, sugars, urea, poisons....
e) 96% uric acid and 4% nutrients, poisons, inorganic salts, vitamins
174
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (P. 162-176)
III. Write the names of the marked parts of the nephron into the blank fields in the picture.
IV. Write the letters into the blank fields so that the resulting sequence of activities describes the way of emptying
the urinary bladder when it is filled with more than 350 mL of urine.
a) nerve impulses arrive in the central nervous system
b) wall of the urinary bladder stretches
c) pressure receptors are activated in the wall of the urinary bladder
d) urine passes through the urethra
e) the wall of the urinary bladder is being contracted, releasing the circular muscle at the bottom of the
urinary bladder.
V. Circle the letters of the correct answers.

For the proper functioning of the kidneys, it is necessary to avoid entering larger amounts of:
a) salt
b) water
c) fruit
d) vegetables
e) alcohol
175
(P. 162-176) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/
Appendix 2. Examples of several tasks from the post-test
Circle the letter of a correct answer, and then assess how difficult the task was.
1. Which substances listed below contain secondary (final) urine of the healthy human?
a) sugar and water
b) proteins and fat
c) urea and water
d) vitamins and sugar
Very Neither easy nor

Easy Difficult Very difficult
easy difficult
2. Gametes of a healthy human contain:

a) 22 autosomes and one allosome
b) 22 autosomes and one allosome pair
c) 23 allosome
d) 21 autosomes and one allosome pair
Very Neither easy nor

Easy Difficult Very difficult
easy difficult
Received: August 26, 2017 Accepted: February 18, 2018
Vera S. Županec Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Department of Biology and Ecology, Faculty of
(Corresponding author) Sciences, University of Novi Sad, Dositeja Obradovića Sq.3, Novi Sad, Serbia.
E-mail: vera.zupanec@dbe.uns.ac.rs
Website: http://www.dbe.uns.ac.rs/sr
Branka N. Radulović Ph.D, Research Assistant, Department of Physics, Faculty of Sciences,
University of Novi Sad, Dositeja Obradovića Sq.3, Novi Sad, Serbia.
E-mail: branka.radulovic@df.uns.ac.rs
Website: https://www.df.uns.ac.rs/sr
Tijana Z. Pribićević MSc, Teaching Assistant, Department of Biology and Ecology, Faculty of
Sciences, University of Novi Sad, Dositeja Obradovića Sq.3, Novi Sad, Serbia.
E-mail: tijana.pribicevic@dbe.uns.ac.rs
Tomka G. Miljanović Ph.D., Full Professor and Head of the Chair of Human Biology and Teaching
Methods in Biology, Department of Biology and Ecology, Faculty of
E-mail: tomka.miljanovic@dbe.uns.ac.rs
Vujadin G. Zdravković MSc, Research Trainee, Department of Biology and Ecology, Faculty of
E-mail: vujadin.zdravkovic@dbe.uns.ac.rs
176
INFORMATION
FOR CONTRIBUTORS
EDITORIAL AND REVIEW PROCEDURES
Journal of Baltic Science Education (JBSE) publishes original scientific research articles in the field of Natural Science Education and
related areas for all educational levels in the Baltic countries. It is possible to publish special (thematic) issues of JBSE. The papers should
be submitted and will be published in English. JBSE will promote to establish contacts between researchers and practical educators
both in the Baltic countries and countries around.
The authors of the manuscripts are responsible for the scientific content and novelty of the research materials. Articles, published
before in other international journals or papers’ collections will not be accepted for publication in JBSE.
As a publication that represents a variety of cross-disciplinary interests, both theoretical and practical, the JBSE invites manuscripts on
a wide range of topics, especially in the following areas:
• Didactics of natural sciences. • Philosophical, political, economical and social aspects
• Theory and practice in natural science teacher of natural science education.
education. • The supplementary natural science education.
• Integrated natural science education. • ICT in natural science education.
• Natural science and technological literacy. • The standardisation of natural science education etc.
• General and professional natural science education.
MANUSCRIPTS GUIDELINES
The structure of the research paper presented to the Journal of Baltic Science Education should be as follows: abstract - short report of the
investigation; introduction inc. aim and subject of the research; research methodologies and methods; results of the research incl. discussion;
conclusions; list of references in APA style.
The papers should be submitted in English. If English is a second language for the author, please consider having the manuscript
proof read and edited before submitting. The preliminary text of the article can be sent as a.doc file in the attachment by e-mail: mail.
jbse@gmail.com
The text must be elaborated in Word for Windows, using 12 point Times New Roman letters. An article should not exceed 7-10 A4 pages,
included figures, tables and bibliography. Publishing of longer articles should be negotiated separately. Texts margins: top and bottom 20mm,
left - 25mm, right - 20mm. The title: capital letters, 14pt, bold; space between the title and the author’s name is one line interval. Author’s name
and surname: small letters, 12pt, bold. Under the name, institution: 11 pt, italics; space between the title and the text: 1 line interval. Abstract
– about 100-150 words - precedes the text. The text: 12pt Single or Auto spacing, in one column. Key words: no more than five words. The
language must be clear and accurate. The authors have to present the results, propositions and conclusions in a form that can suit scientists
from different countries.
Titles of the tables and figures: 11 pt, small letters. Space between figures or tables and the text: 1 line interval. Introduction, titles of
chapters and subchapters: 12pt, bold, small letters. Numbers: Arabic, subchapters numbered by two figures (1.1, 1.2, etc.). Figures, tables and
captions should be inserted within the manuscript at their appropriate locations. Diagrams and graphs should be provided as finished black
and white line artwork or electronic images. When there are a number of illustrations, the author should endeavour to reduce the amount of
text to accommodate the illustrations in the limited space available for any article.
References in the text should be presented in brackets (Knox, 1988; Martin, 1995). If necessary, the page can be indicated: (Martin,
1995, p.48). The list of references should be presented after the text. The Words List of References: 11pt, bold, small letters. The references
should be listed in full at the end of the paper in the following standard form:
For books: Saxe, G.B. (1991). Cultural and Cognitive Development: Studies in Mathematical Understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
For articles: Bekerian, D.A. (1993). In Search of the Typical Eyewitness. American Psychologist, 48, 574-576.
For chapters within books: Bjork, R.A. (1989). Retrieval Inhibition as an Adaptive Mechanism in Human Memory. In: H.L. Roediger III & F.I.M.
Craik (Eds.), Varieties of Memory & Consciousness (pp. 309-330). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
On a separate page, author - related data should be presented in English: name, surname, degree and academic title, institution, full
correspondence address in the clearest and most complete form /ordinary post and e-mail addresses /, position (to ensure anonymity in the
review process). The author (authors) should confirm in writing, that the manuscript has not been published in other journal or
handed over (transferred) to other journal for publication.
EDITORIAL AND REVIEW PROCEDURES

Manuscripts will be sent anonymously to reviewers with expertise in the appropriate area. All manuscripts will be rewieved by two
experts before JBSE’s accept them for publication. This process usually takes about two months. The journal co-editors will make minor
editorial changes; major changes will be made by the author(s) prior to publication if necessary. JBSE’s redaction will sent to author(s)
only one correcture which must be sent back within 2 weeks. JBSE will not review submissions previously published elsewhere through
print or electronic medium.
Manuscripts submitted to the JBSE cannot be returned to authors. Authors should be sure to keep a copy for themselves. Authors’
signatures should be at the end of the paper and its second checked proofs.
Manuscripts, editorial correspondence (and other correspondence for subscription and exchange), and any questions should be
sent to editor-in-chief or to regional redactors.
Journal`s requirements for the authors are available online: http://www.scientiasocialis.lt/jbse/files/JBSE_requirements_2017.pdf
177
JBSE
Problems of Psychology in the 21st

Century is an international, periodical,
peer reviewed scientific journal, issued by
the Scientia Socialis, UAB in cooperation
with SMC “Scientia Educologica”.
Editor-in-Chief
Prof. dr. Vincentas Lamanauskas, Scientific

Methodical Centre „Scientia Educologica“,
Republic of Lithuania
Problems of Psychology in the 21st Century

(ISSN 2029-8587) is abstracted and/or indexed
in:
Index Copernicus -
http://journals.indexcopernicus.com
EBSCO - http://search.ebscohost.com
Editorial Board
Dr., prof. Ferda Aysan, Dokuz Eylul University, Turkey

Dr., prof. Serhiy Boltivets, Grigory Kostyuk Psychological Institute of the Ukrainian National
Academy of Pedagogical Sciences, Ukraine
Dr., assoc. prof. Irena Gailiene, SMC "Scientia Educologica", Republic of Lithuania
Dr., prof. Irakli Imedadze, Dimitri Uznadze Georgian Psychological National Society, Georgia
Dr. Julia Lakhvich, Belarusian State University, Republic of Belarus
Dr., prof. Vladimir S. Karapetyan, Armenian State Pedagogical University named after Kh.
Abovyan, Armenia
Dr., prof. Vincentas Lamanauskas, Scientific Methodical Centre „Scientia Educologica“, Republic of
Lithuania (Editor-in-Chief)
Dr., prof. Maria Ledzińska, University of Warsaw, Poland
Dr., prof. Aleksandr Lobanov, Belarusian State Pedagogical University, Republic of Belarus
Dr., prof. Guna Svence, Riga Teacher Training and Educational Management Academy, Latvia
Website: http://www.jbse.webinfo.lt/PPC/Problems_of_Psychology.htm
178
JBSE
Quality Issues and Insights in the 21st
Century is an international, periodical,
peer reviewed scientific journal, issued by
the Scientia Socialis, UAB in cooperation
with SMC “Scientia Educologica”.
Editor-in-Chief
Prof. dr. Vincentas Lamanauskas, Scientific

Methodical Centre „Scientia Educologica“,
Republic of Lithuania
Quality Issues and Insights in the 21st Century

(ISSN 2029-9575) is abstracted and/or indexed
in:
Index Copernicus -
http://journals.indexcopernicus.com
Electronic Serials in Lithuania -

http://www.eperiodika.lt/index.php?id=moksl
Editorial Board
MSc., Renata Bilbokaitė, University of Siauliai, Republic of Lithuania (Editorial Assistant)

Dr., Andrea Bernhard, Universities Austria, Austria
Dr., Prof. John Gowland Mwangi, Egerton University, Kenya
Dr., Prof. Vincentas Lamanauskas, Scientific Methodical Centre „Scientia Educologica“, Republic of
Lithuania (Editor-in-Chief)
Dr., Prof. Liviu Moldovan, „Petru Maior” University of Tirgu Mures, Romania
Dr., Prof. Kestutis Pukelis, Vytautas Magnus University, Republic of Lithuania
Prof. Ramayah Thurasamy, University of Science Malaysia, Malaysia
Dr., Assoc. Prof. Dalius Serafinas, Vilnius University, Republic of Lithuania
Dr., Assoc. Prof. Adriana Tafrova-Grigorova, Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski, Bulgaria
Website: http://www.jbse.webinfo.lt/QIIC/Quality_Issues_Insights.htm
179
ISSN 1648-3898 /Print/, ISSN 2538-7138 /Online/
Compiled by: Vincentas Lamanauskas

Linguistic Editor: Ilona Ratkevičienė
Cover design by: Jurgina Jankauskienė
Layout design by : Linas Janonis

28 February 2018. Publishing in Quires 13. Edition 200
Publisher Scientia Socialis Ltd.,

Donelaicio Street 29, LT-78115 Siauliai, Lithuania
E-mail: scientia@scientiasocialis.lt
Phone: +370 687 95668
http://www.jbse.webinfo.lt/centras.htm
http://www.scientiasocialis.lt

Printing Šiauliai printing house
9A P. Lukšio Street
LT-76207 Šiauliai, Lithuania
Phone: +370 41 500 333.
Fax: +370 41 500 336
E-mail: info@dailu.lt

Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 17, No. 1, 2018

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 17, No. 1, 2018

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 17, No. 1, 2018

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Vol.17, No.

Published since 2002 Address:

ISSN 1648–3898 (Print) © Scientia Socialis Ltd., Lithuania, 2018

ISSN 2538–7138 (Online)

ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

CONCEPT FORMATION: PHYSICS TEACHER AND HIS KNOW-HOW AND KNOW-WHY

DESIGNING INFOGRAPHICS FOR THE EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY COURSE:

PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS’ COGNITIVE STRUCTURES CONCERNING PROTEIN SYNTHESIS

INTEREST OF LATVIAN AND LITHUANIAN STUDENTS IN SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS

EFFECTS OF TECHNOLOGY-ENHANCED METACOGNITIVE LEARNING PLATFORM

EFFECTS OF LEARNING CYCLE MODELS ON SCIENCE SUCCESS: A META-ANALYSIS

WRITING VERSUS TYPING DURING SCIENCE TEACHING: CASE STUDY IN SLOVENIA

IN-DEPTH TEACHING AS ORIENTED-RESEARCH ABOUT SEASONS AND THE

TEACHERS’ DIFFICULTIES AND STRATEGIES IN PHYSICS TEACHING AND LEARNING THAT

EFFECTIVENESS OF CREATIVE RESPONSIBILITY BASED TEACHING (CRBT) MODEL

DIVERSIFICATION OF REASONING SCIENCE TEST ITEMS OF TIMSS GRADE 8 BASED

DETERMINATION OF EDUCATIONAL EFFICIENCY AND STUDENTS’ INVOLVEMENT

INFORMATION FOR CONTRIBUTORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177

PROBLEMS OF PSYCHOLOGY IN THE 21ST CENTURY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178

QUALITY ISSUES AND INSIGHTS IN THE 21ST CENTURY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `179

CONCEPT FORMATION: PHYSICS TEACHER AND HIS KNOW-HOW AND KNOW-WHY

Figure 1: Teacher-centred view of teaching.

Figure 3: The scheme of concept formation.

Received: January 03, 2018 Accepted: February 05, 2018

Peter Demkanin PhD. in Theory of Physics Education, Associate Professor of Physics

Abstract. Despite the existing research on Hidayah Mohd Fadzil

The use of innovative technology-enhanced media as a pedagogical

Methodology of the Research

Procedures and Data Collection Technique

Figure 2: Nine-step process in creating infographic (adapted from Krauss, 2012).

Validity and Reliability

Meaningful Experience in Creating the Infographic

Figure 3: Student 13 infographic.

Figure 4: Student 25 infographic.

Infographic Enhance Understanding of Conceptual Knowledge

Attributes of a Good Infographic

Challenges in Creating Infographics

Conclusion and Implications of the Research

Received: June 07, 2017 Accepted: January 06, 2018

SYNTHESIS AND THEIR DEGREE ISSN 2538-7138 /Online/

Abstract. The purpose of education is to

School and grade level Course Subject

Food and its properties (general information on proteins)

Secondary school Cells, their structure and organelles (nucleus, ribosome)

Problem of the Research

Description of Course Content

Data Collection Tools

Ethics, Validity and Reliability Analyses

Figure 1: Prospective teachers’ degree of understanding protein synthesis.

Figure 2: Prospective teachers’ cognitive structure outcomes.

APPENDIX 1. The flow map of PT11

APPENDIX 2. The flow map of PT17

Received: September 08, 2017 Accepted: January 10, 2018

Cem Gerçek PhD, Associate Professor, Hacettepe University, Faculty of

ISSN 2538-7138 /Online/

Abstract. Interest is one of the most impor-

Instrument and Procedures

Results of the Research

Table 1. Students’ liking in learning biology, chemistry, physics and mathematics.