Validity and Reliability of The e-ReSP-AR Module for Inquiry-Based Biology Learning on Cellular Respiration
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37134/jpsmm.vol16.1.6.2026Keywords:
Module Validity, Module Reliability, Biology Education , Cellular Respiration , Inquiry-Based Science Education, Augmented RealityAbstract
This study aims to evaluate the validity and reliability of the e-ReSP-AR Module developed using the six-step ASSURE Model. The content validity of the module was assessed by nine experts, including lecturers from public universities and specialist teachers with expertise in language, module content, pedagogy, and curriculum. Meanwhile, the module's reliability was obtained from 46 form four students taking Biology. The Cronbach's Alpha score obtained for the module's content validity was 0.89, while for reliability, it was 0.91. Positive feedback was received from respondents regarding the module's reliability, achieving a high reliability value. Overall, the e-ReSP-AR Module demonstrates good content validity and excellent reliability. The Content Validity Index calculation shows that the sessions and activities in e-ReSP-AR are very appropriate and can be used in the study. These findings clearly indicate that the e-ReSP-AR Module has been well developed according to the complete module development procedures and is appropriate for use.
Downloads
References
Adeosun, G., Oladejo, A. I., & Okebukola, P. A. (2022, March). Exploring the role of culture on students’ learning of difficult concepts in biology: CTCA in action. In Proceedings of the 95th Annual Conference of NARST, Vancouver, BC, Canada (pp. 27-30).
Ahmad, J. (2002). Kesahan, kebolehpercayaan dan keberkesanan modul program maju diri ke atas motivasi pencapaian di kalangan pelajar sekolah menengah negeri Selangor (Doctoral dissertation, Universiti Putra Malaysia).
Benyon, D. (2014). Designing interactive systems: A comprehensive guide to HCI, UX and interaction design (3rd ed.). Pearson.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). Routledge.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(14), 1111–1132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb00945.x
Fajarniangtyas, D.A., & Jefri, N.H. (2020). Pengembangan petunjuk praktikum berorientasi pemecahan masalah sebagai sarana berlatih keterampilan proses dan hasil belajar mahasiswa IPA Universitas Wiraraja. Jurnal pendidikan sains Indonesia, 8(2): 2338-4379.
Harun, M. T., & Yaacob, M. I. H. (2021). Penilaian kualiti Modul FZ-STEM: Aspek kesahan dan kebolehpercayaan. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains dan Matematik Malaysia, 11(Special Issue), 107–117. https://doi.org/10.37134/jpsmm.vol11.sp.10.2021
Hasnawati, H. (2023). Pelaksanaan Projek Stem Dalam Proses Pengajaran Dan Pembelajaran Sains Dan Matematik Kanak-Kanak Prasekolah Di Aceh Tengah. Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Keguruan, 1(10), 2979-2989.
Jamaluddin, F., Abdul Razak, A. Z., & Abdul Rahim, S. S. (2025). Navigating the challenges and future pathways of STEM education in Asia-Pacific region: A comprehensive scoping review. STEM Education, 5(1), 53–88. https://doi.org/10.3934/steme.2025004
Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2018). Biology form 4 and form 5 curriculum and assessment standard document (DSKP). Curriculum Development Division, Ministry of Education Malaysia.
Muhammad, S., & Ibrahim, N. N. (2021). Kesediaan guru STEM melaksanakan pendidikan STEM di sekolah pesisir pantai. International Journal of Education, Islamic Studies and Social Sciences Research, 6(1), 1-15.
Noah, S. M., & Ahmad, J. (2005). Pembinaan dan pengesahan instrumen bagi penyelidikan pendidikan. Universiti Putra Malaysia Press.
Obikezie, M. C., Okpala, C. C., & Amobi, U. V. (2022). Biology Teachers Level of Utilization and Awareness of Innovative Teaching Strategies in The teaching and learning of Biology in Secondary Schools. Journal Plus Education/Educaţia Plus, 30(1).
Patro, T. (2008). Teaching aerobic cell respiration using the 5Es. The American Biology Teacher, 70(2), 85–87. https://doi.org/10.1662/0002-7685(2008)70[85:TACRUT]2.0.CO;2
Pérgola, M., & Pérez, G. (2025). Epistemological obstacles in teaching and learning cellular respiration. Foundations of Chemistry, 27, 319–338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10698-025-09538-0
Purwaningsih, W. I., & Supriyono, S. (2020). Analisis kemampuan berpikir kreatif siswa dalam menyelesaikan masalah matematika. Jurnal Pendidikan Surya Edukasi, 6(2), 157-167.
Putri, S., & Tambunan, E. P. (2023). The effect of self-efficacy and self-regulated learning on students’ creativity in biology practicum. Jurnal Pembelajaran dan Biologi Nukleus, 9(3), 707-716.
Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2006). The content validity index: Are you sure you know what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 29(5), 489–497. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20147
Polit, D. F., Beck, C. T., & Owen, S. V. (2007). Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 30(4), 459–467. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20199
Ratamun, M., & Osman, K. (2018). The effectiveness comparison of virtual laboratory and physical laboratory in nurturing students’ attitude towards chemistry. Creative Education, 9, 1411–1425. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2018.99105
Rice, S. C. (2013). Tips and tools: Using interactive animations to enhance teaching, learning and retention of respiration pathway concepts in face-to-face instruction. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 14(1), 113–115. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v14i1.450
Rosa, J. P. O. D., & Vital, R. A. D. (2016). The use of Facebook in argumentative writing: towards an instructional design model. AsTEN Journal of Teacher Education, 1(2).
Rosli, R., & Ishak, N. A. (2024). Integration of virtual labs in science education: A systematic literature review. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains dan Matematik Malaysia, 14(1), 81–103. https://doi.org/10.37134/jpsmm.vol14.1.8.2024
Russell, C. H. (1974). The measurement of content validity (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Northern Colorado.
Schmidthaler E., Anđic B., Schmollmüller M., Sabitzer B., & Lavicza, Z. (2023) Mobile augmented reality in biological education: Perceptions of Austrian secondary school teachers. Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, 16(2), 113-127
Shuai Y (2024) Unraveling the Mysteries of Cellular Respiration: A Comprehensive Overview. Cell Mol Biol, 70: 328.
Smaldino, S. E., Lowther, D. L., & Russell, J. D. (2015). Instructional technology and media for learning (11th ed.). Pearson.
Stanič, K., & Špernjak, A. (2025). Augmented Reality in Biology Education: A Literature Review. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 9(12), 117. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti9120117
Zaibon, S. B. (2011). Mobile game-based learning (mGBL) engineering model (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Universiti Utara Malaysia.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Bazilah Arshad, Nor Asniza Ishak, Rozniza Zaharudin
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
