Representation skills of students with different ability levels when learning using the LCMR model

Authors

  • Siti Zubaidah Department of Biology, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Negeri Malang, Indonesia
  • Any Fatmawati Department of Biology, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Negeri Malang, Indonesia. Department of Biology Education, Universitas Pendidikan Mandalika https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3417-2436
  • Susriyati Mahanal Department of Biology, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Negeri Malang, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5764-2184
  • Sutopo Sutopo Department of Physics Education, Universitas Negeri Malang, Jl. Semarang No. 5 Kota Malang Jawa Timur 65145, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6513-4072

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47750/pegegog.13.01.20

Keywords:

academic ability, LCMR, representation skills

Abstract

The current study aimed to assess the representation skills of biology students with varying degrees of academic ability when they learn using the Learning Cycle Multiple Representation (LCMR) model. The study employed a quasi-experimental design with a pretest-posttest control group, at March to August 2020 at Universitas Pendidikan Mandalika and Universitas Nahdlatul Wathan in Mataram, Indonesia. The study involved 62 sixth-semester students from the Department of Biology Education. The data were collected using eleven essay questions on Plant Physiology. Before administration, the essay questions were subjected to a validity and reliability check. ANCOVA was used to analyze the data at a 5% significance level. The analysis results showed that: a) there was a significant difference in representation skills between students learning using LCMR and those engaged in Learning Cycle (LC); b) students with high ability levels performed better than students with low ability levels in terms of representation skills; c) the interaction between learning model and academic ability levels affected students’ representation skills, where the highest score of representation skills was reported by LCMR students with high academic ability, followed by LCMR students with low academic ability, LC students with high academic ability, and LC students with low academic ability. These findings imply that adding MR to the LC teaching model can improve the representation skills of students with varying degrees of academic ability compared with the LC teaching model alone.

 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abdurrahman, Liliasari, Rusli, A., & Waldrip, B. (2011). Implementasi pembelajaran berbasis multi representasi untuk peningkatan penguasaan konsep fisika kuantum. Cakrawala Pendidikan, 1, 30–45.

Açisli, S., Yalçn, A. S., & Turgut, Ü. (2011). Effects of the 5E learning model on students ’ academic achievements in movement and force issues. 15, 2459–2462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.128.

Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers and Education, 33(2–3), 131–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0360-1315(99)00029-9.

Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 183–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.03.001.

Ainsworth, S. (2008a). The Educational Value of Multiple-representations when Learning Complex Scientific Concepts. Visualization: Theory and Practice in Science Education, 191–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5267-5_9.

Ainsworth, S. (2008b). The Educational Value of Multiple-Representations when Learning Complex Scientific Concepts Shaaron Ainsworth School of Psychology and Learning Sciences Research Institute University of Nottingham Abstract Figure 1 . SMV Chem Figure 2 . Connected Chemistr. In J. K. Gilbert, M. Reiner, & M. Nakhleh (Eds.), Visualization: Theory and practice in science education (pp. 191–208). Sringer.

Ainsworth, S. E. (2018). Multi-modal, multi-source reading: A multi-representational reader’s perspective. Learning and Instruction, 57(January), 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.01.014.

Akunne, L. I., & Anyanmene, A. N. (2021). Relationship among Locus of Control, Academic Interest and Secondary School Students Academic Achievement in Anambra State, Nigeria. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 2021, 9–15. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajess/2021/v16i130390.

Al-Samarraie, H., Teo, T., & Abbas, M. (2013). Can structured representation enhance students’ thinking skills for better understanding of E-learning content? Computers and Education, 69, 463–473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.038.

Anderson, T. R., Schönborn, K. J., du Plessis, L., Gupthar, A. S., & Hull, T. L. (2013). Identifying and Developing Students’ Ability to Reason with Concepts and Representations in Biology. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4192-8_2.

Anderson, T. R., Schonborn, K. J., Plessis, L., Gupthar, A. S., & Hull, T. L. (2013). Multiple Representations in Biological Education. Multiple Representations in Biological Education, Series: Models and Modeling in Science Education, 7(December), 19–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4192-8.

Belapurkar, A. M. (2017). Effectiveness of 5E Learning Instructional Model on Academic Achievement of Science Students. Scholarly Research Journal for Humanity Science & English Language, 4(19), 4334–4339.

Bell, C. V., & Odom, A. L. (2012). Reflections on Discourse Practices During Professional Development on the Learning Cycle. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(6), 601–620. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-012-9307-y.

Bevevino, M. M., Dengel, J., & Adams, K. (1999). Constructivist Theory in the Classroom Internalizing: Concepts through Inquiry Learning. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 72(5), 275–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098659909599406.

Bıyıklı, C., & Yagcı, E. (2015). The effect of learning experiences designed according to 5e learning model on level of learning an attitude. Abant İzzet Baysal University Journal of Education Faculty, 15(1), 302–325.

Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Van Scotter, P., Powell, J. C., Westbrook, A., & Landes, N. (2006). The basic 5E instructional model: origins and effectiveness. Office of Science Education National Institutes of Health. http://science.education.nih.gov/houseofreps.nsf/.

Campbell, M. (2006). The effects of the 5Es learning cycle model on students’ understanding of force and motion concets. 62(1), 27–40.

Carolan, J., Prain, V., & Waldrip, B. (2008). Using representations for teaching and learning in science. Teaching Science, 54(1), 18–23.

Carroll, J. B. (2015). The Factorial Representation of Mental Ability and Academic Achievement. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 3(1), 307–331. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.1177/001316444300300127.

Clément, P., & Castéra, J. (2013). Multiple representations of human genetics in biology textbooks. In D.F. Treagust & C.-Y. Tsui (Eds.), Multiple Representations in Biological Education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4192-8_9.

Duran, L., & Duran, E. (2004). The 5E Instructional Model: A Learning Cycle Approach for Inquiry-Based Science Teaching. Science Education Review, 3(2), 49–58.

Eilam, B., Poyas, Y., & Hashimshoni, R. (2014). Science teachers’ use of visual representations (B. Eilam & J. . Gilbert (eds.)). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06526-7_3.

Faizin, Jupri, A. W., & Jamaluddin. (2018). 5E Learning Cycle Model To Improve Students’ Scientific Attitude. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education, 8(3 ver), 3. https://doi.org/10.9790/7388-0803010103.

Farida, I. (2009). The Importance Of Development Of Representational Competence In Chemical Problem Solving Using Interactive Multimedia. Science Education, September.http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/31933516/makalah_seminar_intr.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJ56TQJRTWSMTNPEA&Expires=1473248224&Signature=hvhFuiq2HQOiNmeo0yBMxrUS2uk%3D&response-content-disposition=inline%3B filename%3DThe_Importance_of_Developmen.

Farida, I., Liliasari, L., Widyantoro, D. H., & Sopandi, W. (2010). Representational Competence’s Profile of Pre-Service Chemistry Teachers in Chemical Problem Solving. 4th International Seminar of Science Education, Bandung, 30.

Fatmaryanti, S. D., Suparmi, Sarwanto, Ashadi, & Nugraha, D. A. (2019). Using multiple representations model to enhance student’s understanding in magnetic field direction concepts. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1153(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1153/1/012147.

Hopkins, W. G., & Hüner, N. P. A. (2008). Introduction to plant physiology 4th ed. (K. Witt, J. Foxman, & L. Muriello (eds.); 4th ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. www.wiley.com/go/permissions.

Husni, M., Jamaluddiin, J., & Sedijani, P. (2019). Effect of Inductive Thinking Learning Model towards the Understanding of Science Concept , Science Process Skills , and Critical Thinking Ability of Junior High Schools. International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding, 6(6), 234–242.

Hwang, W. Y., Chen, N. S., Dung, J. J., & Yang, Y. L. (2007). Multiple representation skills and creativity effects on mathematical problem solving using a multimedia whiteboard system. Educational Technology and Society, 10(2), 191–212.

Ismirawati, N., Corebima, A. D., Zubaidah, S., & Syamsuri, I. (2018). Ercore learning model potential for enhancing student retention among different academic ability. Egitim Arastirmalari - Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 2018(77), 19–34. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2018.77.2.

Jaber, L. Z., & BouJaoude, S. (2012). A Macro-Micro-Symbolic Teaching to Promote Relational Understanding of Chemical Reactions. International Journal of Science Education, 34(7), 973–998. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.569959.

Jong, T. de, & Meij, J. van der. (2012). Learning with multiple representations. Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning, 2026–2029. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_4743.

Kozma, R. (2003). The material features of multiple representations and their cognitive and social affordances for science understanding. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 205-226.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-47520200021-X.

Kozma, Robert, & Russell, J. (2005). Students Becoming Chemists : Developing Representational Competence. Visualization in Science Education, 121–145. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3613-2_8.

Laura, M. S. (2021). The ability trap: reductionist theorising about academic ability and the ramifications for education policy and school-based practice. Cambridge Journal of Education, 51(1), 85–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2020.1782351.

Leasa, M., & Corebima, A. D. (2016). The effect of numbered heads together (NHT) cooperative learning model on the cognitive achievement of students with different academic ability. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 755(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/755/1/011001.

Lee, C., Ng, M., & Phang, R. (2002). Effects of Cooperative Learning on Elementary School Children in Singapore. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 22(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/0218879020220102.

Lengkana, D., Surbakti, A., & Amala, D. (2020). The Effect of Mind Mapping and Learning Style on Concepts Mastery and Students’ Representation Skills. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.200323.101.

Mahanal, S., Zubaidah, S., Sumiati, I. D., Sari, T. M., & Ismirawati, N. (2019). RICOSRE: A learning model to develop critical thinking skills for students with different academic abilities. International Journal of Instruction, 12(2), 417–434. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12227a.

Maharani, N., Suratno, S., & Sudarti. (2020). The analysis of creative thinking skills of junior high school students in learning natural science on environmental pollution materials with different academic skills. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1465(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1465/1/012032.

Namgyel, T., & Bharaphan, K. (2017). The Development of Simulation and Game in 5E Learning Cycle to Teach Photoelectric Effect for Grade 12 Students. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 18(2), 1–30.

Nitz, S., Ainsworth, S. E., Nerdel, C., & Prechtl, H. (2014). Do student perceptions of teaching predict the development ofrepresentational competence and biological knowledge? Learning and Instruction, 31, 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.12.003.

Noviyanti, I. N., Mukti, R. W., Yuliskurniawati, D. I., Mahanal, S., & Zubaidah, S. (2019). Students’ scientific argumentation skills based on differences in academic ability. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1241(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1241/1/012034.

Ong, E. T., Govindasay, A., Salleh, S. M., Tajuddin, N. M., Rahman, N. A., & Borhan, M. T. (2018). 5E Inquiry Learning Model: Its Effect on Science Achievement among Malaysian Year 5 Indian Students. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 8(12), 348–360. https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v8-i12/5017.

Opfermann, M., Schmeck, A., & Fischer, H. E. (2017). Multiple Representations in Physics and Science Education – Why Should We Use Them? 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58914-5_1.

Özbek, G., Çelik, H., Ulukök, Ş., & Sarı, U. (2012). 5E AND 7E INSTRUCTIONAL MODELS EFFECT ON SCIENCE LITERACY. 190–201.

Prain, V., & Tytler, R. (2012). Learning Through Constructing Representations in Science: A framework of representational construction affordances. International Journal of Science Education, 34(17), 2751–2773. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.626462.

Prain, V., Tytler, R., & Peterson, S. (2009). Multiple representation in learning about evaporation. International Journal of Science Education, 31(6), 787–808. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701824249.

Prayitno, B. A., Corebima, D., Susilo, H., Zubaidah, S., & Ramli, M. (2015). Issn 1648-3898 Issn 2538-7138 Closing the Science Process Skills Gap Between Students With High and Low Level. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 16, 266–277.

Rahmat, I., & Chanunan, S. (2018). Open inquiry in facilitating metacognitive skills on high school biology learning: An inquiry on low and high academic ability. International Journal of Instruction, 11(4), 593–606. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11437a.

Rau, M. A. (2017). How do Students Learn to See Concepts in Visualizations? Social Learning Mechanisms with Physical and Virtual Representations. Journal of Learning Analytics, 4(2), 240–263. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2017.42.16.

Sari, N. M., Setyarini, M., Lengkana, D., & Jalmo, T. (2021). The Use of Vertical Representation in Students’ Science Book on Matter Particles Topic and Its Impact on Students’ HOTS and Visual Literacy. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.16-10-2020.2305237.

Sarwar, M., Bashir, M., Khan, M. N., & Khan, M. S. (2009). Study-Orientation of High and Low Academic Achievers at Secondary Level in Pakistan. Educational Research and Reviews, 4(4), 204–207.

Schnotz, W. (2014). Towards an Integrated View of Learning From Text and Visual Displays. Educational Psychology Review, 14(1), 101–120. https://doi.org/10.2307/23363491.

Schönborn, K. J., & Bögeholz, S. (2009). Knowledge transfer in biology and translation across external representations: Experts’ views and challenges for learning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7(5), 931–955. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-009-9153-3.

Semerci, Ç., & Batdi, V. (2015). A Meta-Analysis of Constructivist Learning Approach on Learners’ Academic Achievements, Retention and Attitudes. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v3i2.644.

Sen, S., & Oskay, O. O. (2016). The Effects of 5E Inquiry Learning Activities on Achievement and Attitude toward Chemistry. Journal of Education and Learning, 6(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v6n1p1.

Seven, S., Tiryaki, S., & Ceylan, H. (2017). The Effect of the 5E Learning Cycle Model and Cooperative Learning Method in the Constructivist Approach on Academic Success and Students’ Attitude towards Subject of “Sound.” Journal of Education, Society and Behavioural Science, 21(4), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.9734/jesbs/2017/35152.

Sikumbang, D., Lengkana, D., & Foorantika, R. (2020). the Effect of Practicum Method on Representation Ability and Cognitive Learning Outcomes. Jurnal Pena Sains, 7(1), 25–31. https://doi.org/10.21107/jps.v7i1.6730.

Snajdr, E. (2011). Using the 5E Learning Cycle of Science Education to Teach Information Skills. Indiana Libraries, 30(2), 21–24.

Sumarno, Ibrahim, M., & Supardi, Z. A. I. (2018). The effect of multiple external representations (MERs) worksheets toward complex system reasoning achievement. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 983(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/983/1/012202.

Sumarno, S., Ibrahim, M., & Supardi, Z. I. (2016). Validity Validity of Multiple Representation Supported Argumentation (MRSA) Learning Model to Treat Complex System Reasoning Ability. 2016(Icmse), 7.

Sunyono, S., & Meristin, A. (2018). The effect of multiple representation-based learning (MRL) to increase students’ understanding of chemical bonding concepts. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 7(4), 399–406. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v7i4.16219.

Sunyono, Yuanita, L., & Ibrahim, M. (2015). Supporting Students in Learning with Multiple Representation to Improve Student Mental Models on Atomic Structure Concepts. 26(2), 104–125.

Sutopo, Hidayah, N., Wisodo, H., & Haryoto, D. (2020). Improving students’ understanding of kinematics concepts through multi-representational learning. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2215(April). https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0004063.

Taíz, E., & Zeiger, L. (2010). Plant Physiology 5th ed. In SInauer Associates Inc. (5th ed.).

Tajudin, N. M., & Chinnappan, M. (2016). The link between higher order thinking skills, representation and concepts in enhancing TIMSS tasks. International Journal of Instruction, 9(2), 199–214. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2016.9214a.

Tang, K. S., Delgado, C., & Moje, E. B. (2014). An integrative framework for the analysis of multiple and multimodal representations for meaning-making in science education. Science Education, 98(2), 305–326. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21099.

Tindani, T., Lengkana, D., Setyarini, M., & Jalmo, T. (2021). The Use of Horizontal Representation in Students’ Science Book on Energy Subject Matter and its Impact on Students’ Critical Thinking Skills and Visual Literacy. International Conference on Progressive Education. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.16-10-2020.2305236.

Treagust, D. F., & Tsui, C.-Y. (2013). Models and Modeling in Science Education : Multiple Representations in Biological Education. In Paper Knowledge . Toward a Media History of Documents. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4192-8.

Tsui, C.-Y., & Treagust, D. F. (2013). Multiple Representations in Biological Education. Multiple Representations in Biological Education, Series: Models and Modeling in Science Education, 7, 19–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4192-8.

Ulaş, A. H., Sevim, O., & Tan, E. (2012). The effect of worksheets based upon 5e learning cycle model on student success in teaching of adjectives as grammatical components. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31(2011), 391–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.12.072.

Utami, C. T. P., Mardiyana, & Triyanto. (2019). Profile of students’ mathematical representation ability in solving geometry problems. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 243(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/243/1/012123.

Verhoeff, R. P., Boersma, K. T., & Waarlo, A. J. (2013). Multiple Representations in Biological Education. Multiple Representations in Modeling Strategies for the Development of Systems Thinking in Biology Education, Multiple Representations in Biological Education, Series: Models and Modeling in Science Education, 7, 19–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4192-8.

Visser, L., Korthagen, F. A. J., Schoonenboom, J., & Loeffler, S. N. (2018). Differences in Learning Characteristics Between Students With High , Average , and Low Levels of Academic Procrastination : Students ’ Views on Factors Influencing Their Learning. 9(May), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00808.

Wafirah, M., Waluya, S. B., & Suyitno, A. (2016). The Effectiveness of Learning Cycle 5e Based on Brainstorming to Increase Mathematical Communication and Self Confidence on Quadrilateral. 2016(Icmse).

Waldrip, B., Prain, V., & Carolan, J. (2010). Using multi-modal representations

to improve learning in junior secondary science. Research in Science Education, 40(1), 65–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11165-009-9157-6.

Wong, W.-K., Yin, S.-K., Yang, H.-H., & Cheng, Y.-H. (2011). Using Computer-Assisted Multiple Representations in Learning Geometry Proofs. Educational Technology & Society, 14(3), 43–54. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ963223.

Downloads

Published

2022-11-16

How to Cite

Siti Zubaidah, Any Fatmawati, Susriyati Mahanal, & Sutopo Sutopo. (2022). Representation skills of students with different ability levels when learning using the LCMR model. Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction, 13(1), 177–192. https://doi.org/10.47750/pegegog.13.01.20

Issue

Section

Article