Evaluation of Differentiated Learning in Chemistry by Using the CIPP Evaluation Model
DOI:
10.29303/jppipa.v10i2.5985Published:
2024-02-28Issue:
Vol. 10 No. 2 (2024): FebruaryKeywords:
Chemical material, CIPP evaluation model, Differentiated learning, Independent curriculumResearch Articles
Downloads
How to Cite
Downloads
Metrics
Abstract
Differentiated learning is important in the world of education, because of the diversity of students’ learning methods and students’ different knowledge backgrounds. The aim of this research is that differentiated learning in chemistry material and the teaching and learning process can run effectively and efficiently. Differentiated learning can eliminate students’ fear of material they don’t like, especially chemistry. This research is qualitative research, to see the effectiveness of differentiated learning, the CIPP research model is used. This CIPP model includes context, input, process and product, so it is said to be more comprehensive than other evaluation models. The research data sources are Chemistry Teachers, curriculum representatives, and students at three high schools in Jakarta. Primary data was collected using observation instruments while secondary data was obtained through questionnaires and interviews. The research results show that what happens in the field is that not all teachers apply differentiated learning during the teaching and learning process in the classroom. Through differentiated learning, students tend to be more active and enthusiastic about learning because classroom learning is carried out according to each student’s interests, readiness, and learning style. So, learning activities with a differentiation system are stated to be quite effective
References
Aslanci, S., & Bayrak, A. (2023). Bibliometric Analysis of The Articles Published on Augmented Reality Between The Years of 2010-2021. Journal of Educational Technology and Instruction, 2(1), 15–29. Retrieved from https://ijeti-edu.org/index.php/ijeti/article/view/37%0Ahttps://ijeti-edu.org/index.php/ijeti/article/download/37/12
Barker, V., & Millar, R. (2000). Students’ reasoning about basic chemical thermodynamics and chemical bonding: what changes occur during a context-based post-16 chemistry course? International Journal of Science Education, 22(11), 1171–1200. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690050166742
Bennett, J., Gräsel, C., Parchmann, I., & Waddington, D. (2005). RESEARCH REPORT. International Journal of Science Education, 27(13), 1521–1547. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500153808
Bigge, M., & Shermis, S. (2004). Learning theories for teachers (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Brown, A. H. (2015). The Essentials of Instructional Design. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315757438
Carter, T. L. (2009). Millennial expectations, constructivist theory, and changes in teachers preparation course. SRATE Journal, 18(1), 25–31. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ948666.pdf
Checkley, K. (1997). The First Seven and the Eighth: A Conversation with Howard Gardner (Teaching for Multiple Intelligences). Educational Leadership, 55(1), 8–13. Retrieved from https://rb.gy/p1851c
Cook, D. A., Gelula, M. H., Dupras, D. M., & Schwartz, A. (2007). Instructional methods and cognitive and learning styles in web-based learning: report of two randomised trials. Medical Education, 41(9), 897–905. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02822.x
Demircioğlu, H., Demircioğlu, G., & Çalik, M. (2009). Investigating the effectiveness of storylines embedded within a context-based approach: the case for the Periodic Table. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 10(3), 241. https://doi.org/10.1039/b914505m
Ellis, A. (2010). Teaching and learning elementary social studies. New York: Pearson.
Fine, D. (2003). A sense of learning style. Principal Leadership, 4(2), 55–60.
Gagne, R. M., Wager, W. W., Golas, K. C., Keller, J. M., & Russell, J. D. (2005). Principles of instructional design, 5th edition. Performance Improvement, 44(2), 44–46. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.4140440211
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Gilbert, J. K. (2006). On the Nature of “Context†in Chemical Education. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 957–976. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600702470
Gonzales, G. H. A., Despe, K. B., Iway, L. J., Genon, R. J. S., Intano, J. O., & Sanchez, J. M. P. (2023). Online Collaborative Learning Platforms in Science : Their Influence on Attitude, Achievement, and Experiences. Journal of Educational Technology and Instruction, 2(2), 1–16. Retrieved from https://ijeti-edu.org/index.php/ijeti/article/view/55
Green, F. E. (1999). Brain and learning research: Implications for meeting the needs of diverse learners. Education-Indianapolis-, 119(4), 682–687. Retrieved from http://files.rgassman.webnode.com/200000020-2476525702/brain and learning A1.pdf
Grimes, K. J., & Stevens, D. D. (2009). Glass, Bug, Mud. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(9), 677–680. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170909000914
Guild, P. B. (2001). Diversity, Learning Style and Culture. New Horizons for Learning.
Hicks, S. D. (2011). Technology in Today’s Classroom: Are You a Tech-Savvy Teacher? The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 84(5), 188–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2011.557406
Hsieh, P. H., & Dwyer, F. (2009). The instructional effect of online reading strategies and learning styles on student academic achievement. Educational Technology and Society, 12(2), 36–50. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ836290
Kapusnick, R. A., & Hauslein, C. M. (2001). The “silver cup†of differentiated instruction. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 37(4), 156–9. Retrieved from https://www.ccgedu.net/uploads/8/5/6/8/85683126/thesilvercupofdifferentiation_1_.pdf
Keefe, J. W. (2007). What is Personalization? Phi Delta Kappan, 89(3), 217–223. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170708900312
LeDune, C., & Chametzky, B. (2023). An instrumental exploratory case study on educators’ perceptions of professional development for 1:1 technology use. Journal of Educational Technology and Instruction, 3(1), 14–28. Retrieved from https://ijeti-edu.org/index.php/ijeti/article/view/72
Madaus, G. F., Stufflebeam, D., & Scriven, M. S. (1983). Program Evaluation. In G. Madaus, M. Scriven, & D. Stufflebeam (Eds.), Evaluation Models (pp. 3–22). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-6669-7_1
Nicholson, T. (2014). Using the GPP model to evaluate reading instruction. J. of Reading, 32(4), 312–318. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/40029929
Nordlund, M. (2003). Differentiated instruction: Meeting the educational needs of all students in your classroom. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
Orlich, D., Harder, R., Callahan, R., Trevisan, M., & Brown, A. (2004). Teaching strategies: A guide to effective instruction (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and Evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.0103
Pilot, A., & Bulte, A. M. W. (2006a). The Use of “Contexts†as a Challenge for the Chemistry Curriculum: Its successes and the need for further development and understanding. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 1087–1112. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600730737
Pilot, A., & Bulte, A. M. W. (2006b). Why Do You “Need to Knowâ€? Contextâ€based education. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 953–956. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600702462
Potter, N. M., & Overton, T. L. (2006). Chemistry in sport: context-based e-learning in chemistry. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 7(3), 195–202. https://doi.org/10.1039/B6RP90008A
Powell, K. C., & Kalina, C. J. (2009). Cognitive and Social Constructivism: Developing Tools for an I Effective Classroom. Education, 130(2), 241–250. Retrieved from https://rb.gy/sq2173
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816
Schoop, T. (2000). Motion and emotion. American Journal of Dance Therapy, 22(2), 91–101. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026530307794
Schwartz, A. T. (2006). Contextualized Chemistry Education: The American experience. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 977–998. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600702488
Silver, H. F., Strong, R. W., & Perini, M. J. (2000). So each may learn: Integrating learning styles and multiple intelligences. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Stolk, M. J., Bulte, A. M. W., de Jong, O., & Pilot, A. (2009a). Strategies for a professional development programme: empowering teachers for context-based chemistry education. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 10(2), 154–163. https://doi.org/10.1039/B908252M
Stolk, M. J., Bulte, A. M. W., de Jong, O., & Pilot, A. (2009b). Towards a framework for a professional development programme: empowering teachers for context-based chemistry education. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 10(2), 164–175. https://doi.org/10.1039/B908255G
Tobin, R., & McInnes, A. (2008). Accommodating differences: variations in differentiated literacy instruction in Grade 2/3 classrooms. Literacy, 42(1), 3–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9345.2008.00470.x
Tomlinson, C. (1999). Differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2010). One kid at a time. Educational Leadership, 67(5), 12–16.
Vygotsky, L. S. (19787). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Warju, W. (2016). Educational Program Evaluation using CIPP Model. Innovation of Vocational Technology Education, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.17509/invotec.v12i1.4502
Wilson, S. (2009). Differentiated instruction: How are design, essential questions in learning, assessment, and instruction part of it? New England Reading Association Journal, 44(2), 68–75. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/docview/206037551?sourcetype=Scholarly Journals
Author Biographies
Sukro Muhab, Department of Chemistry Education, Universitas Negeri Jakarta, Jakarta
Tatik Dian Setyo Rini, Department of Chemistry Education, Universitas Negeri Jakarta, Jakarta
Erdawati, Department of Chemistry Education, Universitas Negeri Jakarta, Jakarta
Irwanto Irwanto, Department of Chemistry Education, Universitas Negeri Jakarta, Jakarta
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Sukro Muhab, Tatik Dian Setyo Rini, Erdawati Erdawati, Irwanto Irwanto
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY License). 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 Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA.
- 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).