Email this article Distributed Scaffolding Influences in Inquiry Learning on High Order Thinking Skills
Abstract
Abstract: The study aims to investigate the effect of distributed scaffolding in inquiry learning to higher order thinking skills (HOTS) of students, especially on optical geometry subject. This study used a quasi-experimental design with pretest and posttest control group design. The study used 10 multiple choices with open-ended questions. The data were analyzed using ANCOVA. The results showed that higher order thinking skills of students learned by inquiry learning with distributed scaffolding better than the control class. Every inquiry stage which integration with scaffolding train student to organize prior knowledge with new knowledge. Further research can deepen qualitatively about the thinking process of students in learning Physics with distributed scaffolding.
Key Words: higher order thinking skills (HOTS), distributed scaffolding, inquiry
Abstrak: Tujuan penelitian ini adalah mengkaji pengaruh scaffolding terdistribusi dalam pembelajaran inkuiri terhadap keterampilan berpikir tingkat tinggi (HOTS) siswa, pada pokok bahasan optik geometri. Jenis penelitian ini adalah kuasi eksperimen dengan rancangan pretest and posttest control group design. Instrumen penelitian untuk mengukur HOTS berbentuk pilihan ganda beralasan sebanyak 10 soal. Data penelitian dianalisis dengan menggunakan Ancova. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan keterampilan berpikir tingkat tinggi siswa yang belajar dengan pembelajaran inkuiri disertai scaffolding terdistribusi lebih baik dari pada kelas kontrol. Setiap tahapan inkuiri yang terintegarasi bersama scaffolding melatih siswa untuk berpikir pemecahan masalah yang komplek. Penelitian lanjutan dapat memperdalam secara kualitatif tentang proses berpikir siswa dalam pembelajaran Fisika dengan scaffolding terdistribusi.
Kata kunci: keterampilan berpikir tingkat tinggi, scaffolding terdistribusi, inkuiri
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Anderson, L.W. & Krathwohl, D.R. (2011). Kerangka landasan untuk pembelajaran, pengajaran, dan asesmen. Terjemahan Agung Prihantoro. 2010. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Belajar
Adorno, D. P. & Pizzolato, N. (2015). An inquiry-based approach to the Franck-Hertz experiment. Il Nuovo Cimento, (38 C). 109, 1-9.
Belland, B.R., Walker, A.E., Olsen, M. W., & Leary, H. 2015. A Pilot Meta-Analysis of Computer-Based Scaffolding in STEAM Education. Educational Technology & Society,18(1), 183-197.
Creswell, J.W. (2012). Educational research: Planning conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research fourth edition. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc
Ding, L., Reay, N., Lee, A., & Bao, L. (2011). Exploring the role of conceptual scaffolding in solving synthesis problems. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 7(2), 020109.
Etkina, E., Karelina, A., Ruibal-Villasenor, M., Rosengrant, D., Jordan, R., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2010). Design and reflection help students develop scientific abilities: Learning in introductory physics laboratories. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(1), 54-98.
Galili, I. (1993). The effects of prior knowledge and instruction on understanding image formation. Journal Of Research In Science Teaching. 30(3), 271-301
Galili,I. (1996). Students' conceptual change in geometrical optics. International Journal of Science Education.18(7), 847-868
Hannafin, M.J, Land, S., & Oliver, K. (1999). Open learning environments: Foundation, method, and model. In C. Reigeluth (Ed), Intructional-design theories and models Volume II. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hsu, Y.S., Lai, T.L., & Hsu, W.H. (2014). A design model of distributed scaffoldingfor inquiry-based learning. Springer ScienceBusiness Media Dordrecht.
Hussain, A., Azeem, M., & Shakoor, A. (2011). Physics teaching methods: Scientific vs traditional lecture. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science,1(19), 269-276
Jo An, Y. (2014). Examining the effects of metacognitive scaffolding on students' design problem solving and metacognitive skills in an online environment. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(04), 552-568
Karlsson, G., Ivarsson, J., &Lindstrom, B. (2013). Agreed discoveries: Students’ negotiations in a virtual laboratory experiment. Instructional Science, 41(3), 455-480.
Krajcik, J., McNeill, K. L., & Reiser, B. J. (2009). Learning-goals-driven design model: Developing curriculum materials that align with national standards and incorporate project-based pedagogy. Science Education, 92(1), 1–32.
Kuhlthau, C.C. (2010). Guided inquiry: School libraries in the 21st century. School Libraries Worldwide,16(1), 1-12.
Koes H, S. (2013). Pengaruh strategi scaffolding-kooperatif dan pengetahuan awal terhadap prestasi belajar dan sikap pada matakuliah fisika dasar. Jurnal Pendidikan Humaniora, 1(1), 70-80
Linn, M. C., Lee, H. S., Tinker, R., Husic, F., & Chiu, J. L. (2006). Teaching and assessing knowledge integration in science. Science, 313(5790), 1049-1050..
Liu, H. C., Andre, T., & Greenbowe, T. (2008). The impact of learner’s prior knowledge on their use of chemistry computer simulations: A case study. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(5), 466-482..
Madhuri, G. V., Kantamreddi, V. S. S. N., & Goteti, L. N. S. P. (2012). Promoting higher order thinking skills using inquiry-based learning. European Journal of Engineering Education, 37(2), 177-123
Molenaar, I., van Boxtel, C. A., & Sleegers, P. J. (2011). Metacognitive scaffolding in an innovative learning arrangement. Instructional Science, 39(6), 785-803.
Outtara, F. & Boudaone, B. (2012). Teaching and learning in geometrical optics in burkina faso third form classes: Presentation and analysis of class observations data and students' performance. British Journal of Science, 5(1), 83-103
Puntambekar, S., & Hubscher, R. (2005). Tools for scaffolding students in a complex learning environment: what have we gained and what have we missed. Educational Psychologist, 40(1), 1–12.
Quintana, C., Reiser, B. J.,Davis, E.A.,Krajcik, J., Fretz, E. B., Duncan, R. G., et al. (2004). A scaffoldingdesign framework for software to support science inquiry. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 337–386.
Reiser, B. J. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: the mechanisms of structuring and problematizing studentwork. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 273–304.
Resnick, L. (1987). Education and learning to think. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
Roll, I., Holmes, N. G., Day, J., & Bonn, D. (2012). Evaluating metacognitive scaffolding in guided invention activities. Instructional science, 40(4), 691-710.
Rutten, N., van der Veen, J. T., & van Joolingen, W. R. (2015). Inquiry-based whole-class teaching with computer simulations in physics. International journal of science education, 37(8), 1225-1245.
Sandoval, W. A., & Reiser, B. J. (2004). Explanation-driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemicscaffolds for scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88(3), 345–372.
Saido, G. A. M., Siraj, S., Nordin, A. B. (2015). Teaching strategies for promoting higher order thinking skills: A case of secondary science teachers. Malaysian Online Journal Of Educational Management (Mojem), 3(4), 16-30
Smagorinsky, P., Clayton, C. M., & Johnson, L. L. (2015). Distributed scaffolding in a service-learning course. Theory Into Practice, 54(1), 71-78.
Tan, S. C., Turgeon, A. J., & Jonassen, D. H. (2001). Develop critical thinking in group problem solving through computer-supported collaborative argumentation: A case study. Journal of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Education, 30(97-103).
Tekos, G., & Solomonidou, C. (2009). Constructivist learning and teaching of optics concepts using ICT tools in Greek primary school: A pilot study. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(5), 415-428.
Tural, G. (2015, June). Active learning environment with lenses in geometric optics. In Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching (Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 1-18). The Education University of Hong Kong, Department of Science and Environmental Studies.
Wallace, P. R. (1992). A proposed reconciliation of conservative and liberal approaches to instructional design. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 8(1), 13-26
Wijayanti, P. I., & Hindarto, N. (2010). Eksplorasi kesulitan belajar siswa pada pokok bahasan cahaya dan upaya peningkatan hasil belajar melalui pembelajaran inkuiri terbimbing. Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika Indonesia, 6(1), 1-5.
Yilmaz, S., Eryilmaz, A., & Geban, O. (2006). Assessing the impact of bridging analogies in mechanics. School Science and Mathematics, 106(6), 220-230.
Zohar, A., & Dori, Y. J. (2003). Higher order thinking skills and low-achieving students: Are they mutually exclusive?. The journal of the learning sciences, 12(2), 145-181.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17977/jps.v6i4.11806
Jurnal Pendidikan Sains Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Vocational Education Graduate School Of Universitas Negeri Malang
|
