Analysis of students' cognitive physics learning outcomes on the material of substances and their forms using think-pair-share
DOI:
10.29303/jossed.v5i2.9711Published:
2024-10-31Issue:
Vol. 5 No. 2 (2024): OctoberKeywords:
Student learning outcomes, Physics learning, Think-pair-shareArticles
Downloads
How to Cite
Downloads
Abstract
In the last decade, many studies of physics learning at the junior high school level seem to show that student-centered interactions have a greater effect than teacher-centered interactions in improving physics learning outcomes. Based on this premise,Think-pair-share (TPS) which is one type of cooperative learning model developed by Frank Lyman and his colleagues from the University of Maryland (1981) is a teaching strategy that promotes active and collaborative learning; however, its effectiveness and application are very good in physics learning. The purpose of this study is to analyze student learning outcomes using the TPS type cooperative model on the material of substances and their forms. This study uses a descriptive model with 24 students as subjects divided into four groups. The implementation of the study on SMP Xaverius Passo. Data were collected through tests, namely pretest and posttest and observations using student worksheets and affective and psychomotor assessments of students. The results showed that there was a significant increase in student learning outcomes after the implementation of the TPS model, both from cognitive, affective, and psychomotor aspects. This study recommends the use of the TPS cooperative learning model as a solution to improve the quality of physics learning in schools
References
Abtokhi, A., Jatmiko, B., & Wasis, W. (2021). Evaluation of self-regulated learning on problem-solving skills in online basic physics learning during the covid-19 pandemic. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 11(2), 541–555. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.1205
Achor, E. E., Danjuma, I. M., & Orji, A. B. C. (2019). Classroom interaction practices and students’ learning outcomes in physics: Implication for teaching-skill development for physics teachers. Journal of Education and E-Learning Research, 6(3), 96–106. https://doi.org/10.20448/journal.509.2019.63.96.106
Adom, D., Mensah, J. A., & Dake, D. A. (2020). Test, measurement, and evaluation: Understanding and use of the concepts in education. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 9(1), 109–119. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v9i1.20457
Anderson, H. M., Moore, D. L., Anaya, G., & Bird, E. (2005). Student learning outcomes assessment: a component of program assessment. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 69(2), 256–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9459(24)08730-8
Areljung, S., Bäckström, L., & Grenemark, E. (2023). Young children’s learning in physics: a (dis-)trustful play with gravity, friction and counterforces? European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 31(4), 660–672. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2023.2177320
Barthelemy, M. (2019). The statistical physics of cities. Nature Reviews Physics, 1(6), 406–415. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42254-019-0054-2
Batlolona. (2023). Mental Models And Creative Thinking Skills In Students’ Physics Learning. Creativity Studies, 16(2), 433–447.
Batlolona, J. R., Jamaludin, J., P. Dulhasyim, A. B., & Silahooy, S. (2024). Misconceptions of physics students on the concept of equilibrium of rigid bodies: a case study of keku culture. Jurnal Pendidikan MIPA, 25(1), 87–102. https://doi.org/10.23960/jpmipa/v25i1.pp87-102
Carpenter, P. B., Poliak, A., Wang, L., Ownby, A. R., & Hsieh, P. (2020). Improved performance in and preference for using think-pair-share in a flipped classroom. Medical Education, 54(5), 449–450. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14085
Cooper, F. (2018). A modification of think pair share to make it more learner-centered by using student-generated questions. College Teaching, 66(1), 34. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2017.1390438
Cooper, K. M., Schinske, J. N., & Tanner, K. D. (2021). Reconsidering the share of a think–pair– share: Emerging limitations, alternatives, and opportunities for research. CBE Life Sciences Education, 20(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.20-08-0200
Daniel Mollel, A., Minani, E., Mbwile, B., & Robert, W. (2022). Student’s attitudes and perceptions toward learning physics in arusha city secondary schools, Tanzania. Journal of Research Innovation and Implications in Education, 6(2), 1–6. www.jriiejournal.com
Dhar, D. (2010). States of matter. Resonance, 15(6), 514–525. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12045-010-0058-9
Dikli, S. (2003). Assessment at a distance : Traditional vs . Alternative Assessments. The Turkish Online Journal of Education Technology, 2(3), 13–19. http://www.tojet.net/articles/v2i3/232.pdf
Dwiwansyah Musa, L. A., Hardianto, H., & Firdaus Nur, M. (2022). Improving student learning outcomes through the application of a cooperative learning model with a shopping window setting. Eduvest - Journal of Universal Studies, 2(11), 2368–2378. https://doi.org/10.59188/eduvest.v2i11.653
Erikson, M. G., & Erikson, M. (2019). Learning outcomes and critical thinking–good intentions in conflict. Studies in Higher Education, 44(12), 2293–2303. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018.1486813
Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2005). Understanding student differences. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 57–72. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00829.x
Fitzgerald, D. (2013). Employing think-pair-share in associate degree nursing curriculum. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 8(3), 88–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2013.01.006
Furió, C., Azcona, R., Ratcliffe, M., & Guisasola, J. (2000). Difficulties in teaching the concepts of ‘amount of substance’ and ‘mole.’ International Journal of Science Education, 22(12), 1285–1304. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006900750036262
Ganatra, S., Doblanko, T., Rasmussen, K., Green, J., Kebbe, M., Amin, M., & Perez, A. (2021). Perceived effectiveness and applicability of think-pair-share including storytelling (TPS-S) to enhance clinical learning. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 33(2), 184–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2020.1811094
Hernando, M. J., Reponte-Sereño, R. R., Cuevas, G. C., & Pacaldo, J. (2023). Think-pair-share: a strategy for effective student-engaged literature classes. International Journal of English Language Studies, 5(4), 32–44. https://doi.org/10.32996/ijels.2023.5.4.4
Jamaludin, J., & Batlolona, J. R. (2021). Analysis of students’ conceptual understanding of physics on the topic of static fluids. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 7, 6–13. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v7ispecialissue.845
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 365–379. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09339057
Kaddoura, M. (2007). Think pair share: a teaching learning strategy to enhance students’ critical thinking. Educational Research Quarterly, 34(4), 1–24.
Kihwele, J. E. (2014). Students’ perception of science subjects and their attitude in Tanzanian secondary schools. World Journal of Educational Research, 1(1), 1–8. www.wjer.org
Korur, F., & Eryilmaz, A. (2019). Interaction between students’ motivation and physics teachers’ characteristics: Multiple case study. Qualitative Report, 23(12), 2511–2528. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2018.3178
Lange, C., Costley, J., & Han, S. L. (2016). Informal cooperative learning in small groups: The effect of scaffolding on participation. Issues in Educational Research, 26(2), 260–279.
Liao, P. A., Chang, H. H., Wang, J. H., & Horng, T. H. (2013). Do rural students really perform worse than urban students do? empirical evidence from a university entrance program in Taiwan. Rural Sociology, 78(1), 109–131. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1549-0831.2012.00096.x
Lock, R. M., Castillo, J., Hazari, Z., & Potvin, G. (2015). Determining strategies that predict physics identity: Emphasizing recognition and interest. Conference: 2015 Physics Education Research Conference, 199–202. https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2015.pr.045
Mabula, N. (2012). Promoting science subjects choices for secondary school students in Tanzania: Challenges and Opportunities. Academic Research International, 3(3), 234–245. www.savap.org.pk
Mundelsee, L., & Jurkowski, S. (2021). Think and pair before share: Effects of collaboration on students’ in-class participation. Learning and Individual Differences, 88(May 2020), 102015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2021.102015
Ogegbo, A. A., & Ramnarain, U. (2022). Teaching and learning Physics using interactive simulation: A guided inquiry practice. South African Journal of Education, 42(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v42n1a1997
Pluta, W. J., Richards, B. F., & Mutnick, A. (2013). PBL and beyond: trends in collaborative learning. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 25(1), 9–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2013.842917
Prahl, K. (2017). Best practices for the think-pair-share active-learning technique best practices for the think-pair- share active-learning Technique Active-learning teaching methods increase student performance in science and health-. The American Biology Teacher, 79(1), 3–8.
Ramesh, A., Case, A., Stockstill, L., & Dragan, I. (2021). Applying “think-pair-share” for virtual curriculum retreat. Journal of Dental Education, 85(S3), 1966–1968. https://doi.org/10.1002/jdd.12542
Ramnarain, U., & Hlatswayo, M. (2018). Teacher beliefs and attitudes about inquiry-based learning in a rural school district in South Africa. South African Journal of Education, 38(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v38n1a1431
Sahin, M. (2010). The impact of problem-based learning on engineering students’ beliefs about physics and conceptual understanding of energy and momentum. European Journal of Engineering Education, 35(5), 519–537. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2010.487149
Shih, Y. C., & Reynolds, B. L. (2015). Teaching Adolescents EFL by Integrating Think-Pair-Share and Reading Strategy Instruction: A Quasi-Experimental Study. RELC Journal, 46(3), 221–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688215589886
Tanner, K. D. (2009). Talking to learn: Why biology students should be talking in classrooms and how to make it happen. CBE Life Sciences Education, 8(2), 89–94. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.09-03-0021
Williams, C., Stanisstreet, M., Spall, K., Boyes, E., & Dickson, D. (2014). Why aren ’ t secondary students interested in physics ? P HYSICS E DUCATION, 38(4), 324–329. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9120/38/4/306
Author Biographies
Jony Taihuttu, Pattimura University
John Rafafy Batlolona, Pattimura University
Herman Semuel Wattimena, Pattimura University
Jamaludin, Pattimura University
Stevi Silahooy, Pattimura University
Frandy Akyuwen, Pattimura University
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Jony Taihuttu, John Rafafy Batlolona, Herman Semuel Wattimena, Jamaludin, Stevi Silahooy, Frandy Akyuwen
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with Journal of Science and Science Education, agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). This license allows authors to use all articles, data sets, graphics and appendices in data mining applications, search engines, web sites, blogs, and other platforms by providing an appropriate reference. The journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions and will retain publishing rights without restrictions.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in Journal of Science and Science Education.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).