Research Article

What are students’ thoughts on their activities and thinking skills in learning science?

Ogi Danika Pranata 1 * , Rifyal Novalia 1
More Detail
1 IAIN Kerinci, Sungai Penuh City, Jambi, INDONESIA* Corresponding Author
International Journal of Professional Development, Learners and Learning, 7(1), January 2025, e2508, https://doi.org/10.30935/ijpdll/15806
Submitted: 24 July 2024, Published: 02 January 2025
OPEN ACCESS   209 Views   62 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

This study aimed to analyze and correlate students’ perceptions of their activities and thinking skills in learning science, as well as compare these perceptions based on school levels. Using descriptive, correlational, and comparative methods, data were collected from 127 students from senior high school and university through a questionnaire containing 52 statements. Descriptive statistics provided an overview of the data, while Pearson’s test analyzed the relationship between students’ perceptions of their activities and thinking skills. An independent sample t-test compared data based on school levels. The results indicated that students perceived their activities as active (mean value of 3.52) and their thinking skills as experienced (mean value of 3.51). A perception of learning activities was correlated with a more perception of thinking skills, although the relationship was not strong (r = 0.357, ρ = 0.000). University students generally had higher perceptions across most activities compared to high school students, suggesting that high school educators might consider adopting some university-level strategies, particularly for motor, emotional, and visual activities, to enhance student engagement and perception. However, there were no significant differences in average perceptions of thinking skills between high school and university students, except for a significant result in likelihood and uncertainty analysis, which highlights a specific area for further investigation. Understanding students’ perceptions of their thinking skills can help educators focus on specific areas for improvement and comprehend how educational transitions impact students’ views on their thinking abilities.
Keywords: activity, high school students, perception, science learning, thinking skills, university students

CITATION (APA)

Pranata, O. D., & Novalia, R. (2025). What are students’ thoughts on their activities and thinking skills in learning science?. International Journal of Professional Development, Learners and Learning, 7(1), e2508. https://doi.org/10.30935/ijpdll/15806

REFERENCES

  1. Biggs, J. (2012). What the student does: Teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research and Development, 31(1), 39–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2012.642839
  2. Biggs, J., Medland, E., & Vardi, I. (2013). Aligning teaching and assessing to course objectives. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(5), 1–16.
  3. Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. Education Resources Information Center. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED336049
  4. Cahyani, V. D., & Pranata, O. D. (2023). Studi aktivitas belajar sains siswa di SMA Negeri 7 Kerinci [Study of students’ science learning activities at SMA Negeri 7 Kerinci]. Lensa: Jurnal Pendidikan IPA, 13(2), 137–148. https://doi.org/10.24929/lensa.v13i2
  5. Chi, M. T. H. (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science 1, 1, 73–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01005.x
  6. Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
  7. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral science (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  8. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315456539
  9. Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. Jossey-Bass.
  10. Halpern, D. F. (2014). Thought and knowledge. An introduction to critical thinking. Psychology Press.
  11. 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.899722
  12. Leech, N. L., Barret, K. C., & Morgan, G. A. (2005). SPSS for intermediate statistics. Use and interpretation. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. All.
  13. Lizzio, A., Wilson, K., & Simons, R. (2002). University students’ perceptions of the learning environment and academic outcomes: Implications for theory and practice. Studies in Higher Education, 27(1), 27–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070120099359
  14. Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Pearson. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-387691-1.00003-X
  15. Morgan, G. A., Leech, N. L., Gloeckner, G. W., & Barret, K. C. (2004). SPSS for introductory statistics. Use and interpretation. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. All. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410610539
  16. Pranata, O. D. (2021). Pelatihan kompetisi sains nasional (KSN) cabang matematika tingkat SMP/MTs melalui pembelajaran berbasis puzzle [National science competition (KSN) training for junior high school/Islamic junior high school mathematics through puzzle-based learning]. Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat MIPA dan Pendidikan MIPA, 5(2), 118–124.
  17. Pranata, O. D. (2023a). Enhancing conceptual understanding and concept acquisition of gravitational force through guided inquiry utilizing PhET simulation. Saintek: Jurnal Sains dan Teknologi, 15(1), 44–52. https://doi.org/10.31958/js.v15i1.9191
  18. Pranata, O. D. (2023b). Penerapan game-based learning sebagai alternatif solusi mengajar di kelas heterogen [Penerapan game-based learning sebagai alternatif solusi mengajar di kelas heterogen]. Jurnal Pengabdian Al-Ikhlas, 8(3), 337–350. https://doi.org/10.31602/jpaiuniska.v8i3.7597
  19. Pranata, O. D. (2023c). Penerapan puzzle-based learning untuk mengajar matematika dan sains di pasantren dengan kelas heterogen [Penerapan puzzle-based learning untuk mengajar matematika dan sains di pasantren dengan kelas heterogen]. Jurnal Penelitian dan Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat UNSIQ, 10(2), 109–115. https://doi.org/10.32699/ppkm.v10i2.4269
  20. Pranata, O. D., & Seprianto, S. (2023). Pemahaman konsep siswa melalui skema blended learning menggunakan lembar kerja berbasis simulasi [Students’ conceptual understanding through a blended learning scheme using simulation-based worksheets]. Karst: Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika Dan Terapannya, 6(1), 8–17. https://doi.org/10.46918/karst.v6i1.1724
  21. Pranata, O. D., Sundari, P. D., & Sulaiman, D. (2023). Exploring project-based learning: Physics e-posters in pre-service science education. Jurnal Fisika dan Pendidikan Fisika, 8(2), 116–124. https://doi.org/10.20414/konstan.v8i02.387
  22. Pranata, O. D., Yuliati, L., & Wartono. (2017). Concept acquisition of rotational dynamics by interactive demonstration and free-body diagram. Journal of Education and Learning, 11(3), 291–298. https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v11i3.6410
  23. Putri, A. L., Pranata, O. D., & Sastria, E. (2024). Students perception of science and technology in science learning: A gender comparative study. Jurnal Pijar Mipa, 19(1), 44–50. https://doi.org/10.29303/jpm.v19i1.6153
  24. Putri, D. H., & Pranata, O. D. (2023). Eksplorasi kejenuhan siswa dalam pembelajaran sains setelah pandemi [Exploring student boredom in science learning after the pandemic]. Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan Sains, 4(2), 62–70. https://doi.org/10.37729/jips.v4i2.3367
  25. Putri, D. H., Pranata, O. D., & M, N. (2024). Analisis emosi siswa dalam lingkungan akademik: Studi deskriptif dan komparatif [Analysis of students’ emotions in academic environments: A descriptive and comparative study]. BIOSFER: Jurnal Biologi Dan Pendidikan Biologi, 9(1), 9–20. https://doi.org/10.23969/biosfer.v9i1
  26. Sardiman, A. M. (2008). Interaksi dan motivasi belajar mengajar [Interaction and motivation for teaching and learning]. Raja Grafindo Persada.
  27. Swarat, S., Ortony, A., & Revelle, W. (2012). Activity matters: Understanding student interest in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(4), 515–537. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21010
  28. Tiruneh, D. T., Weldeslassie, A. G., Kassa, A., Tefera, Z., De Cock, M., & Elen, J. (2015). Systematic design of a learning environment for domain-specific and domain-general critical thinking skills. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(3), 481–505. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-015-9417-2
  29. Utami, A. F., Pranata, O. D., & Angela, L. (2024). Analisis tingkat kejenuhan siswa sebelum, selama, dan setelah pembelajaran sains [Analysis of student saturation levels before, during, and after science learning]. PENDIPA Journal of Science Education, 8(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.33369/pendipa.8.1.1-9
  30. Wegerif, R. (2017). Literature review in thinking skills, technology and learning report 2: Futurelab series. NESTA Futurelab Series. https://telearn.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00190219