Effectiveness of Learning Modules for Topics Linear Motion Graph Fourth Form Physics
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37134/jsml.vol11.sp.10.2023Keywords:
ASSURE model, Linear Motion GraphAbstract
The study aimed to determine the effectiveness of the Linear Motion Graph learning module (PGeL) among Form Four students. The design of this study is the developmental research which involves the development of the PGeL learning module based on the ASSURE instructional design model. The module was developed by applying chunking elements, mnemonic, interactive simulations, POE approach (predict, observe and explain) and graphics techniques. The effectiveness of the PGeL module was investigated using the quasi-experimental design. A total of 94 secondary school students in Kuala Lumpur zone were selected as respondents using the cluster random sampling technique and consist of two groups; the treatment group and the control group. The effectiveness of the PGeL learning module was determined using pre-test and post-test question sets. Data analysis was carried out using the Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS) software. The findings showed that the developed PGeL learning module had high face validity and content validity of 97.1% and 95.3%, respectively. The pre-test and post-test questions were used to collect information on student achievement in the Linear Motion Graph topic. Analysis of student responses in context found that the treatment group showed a better improvement in achievement compared to the control group, with the best improvement being in problem-solving contexts. Independent samples t-test analysis showed that there was no significant difference in the pre-test score between the treatment group and the control group [t (92, p = 0.824) = -0.223, p>0.05]. Independent samples t-test analysis also showed that there was a significant difference in the post-test score between the treatment group and the control group [t (92, p = 0.000) = 10.919, p<0.05]. Furthermore, independent samples t-test analysis showed that there was a significant difference in achievement between the treatment group and the control group [t (92, p = 0.000) = 12.622, p<0.05]. In conclusion, the developed PGeL learning module is effective in improving the achievement of form four students in the Linear Motion Graph topic. The implication of this study is that the PGeL learning module is suitable for use as a learning aid for the Linear Motion Graph topic.
Downloads
References
Amin BD, Sahib EP, Harianto YI, Patandean AJ, Herman, Sujiono EH. (2020). The interpreting ability on science kinematics graphs of senior high school students in South Sulawesi, Indonesia. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 9(2), 179-186.
Antwi V, Savelsbergh E, Eijkelhof H. (2018). Understanding kinematics graphs using MBL tools, simulations and graph samples in an interactive engagement context in a Ghanaian university. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1076(1), 012002.
Arsy HI, Priyono A, Prasetyo B, Subali B. (2019). Predict-Observe-Explain strategy with group investigation effect on students’ critical thinking skills and learning achievement. Journal of Primary Education, 8(4), 75-83.
Baity Bujeng. (2019). Pembangunan dan kesan modul Multimedia Interaktif Membuat Pakaian (MIMP) terhadap pencapaian, ketekalan ingatan dan motivasi. Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris.
Baran M, Yasar Ş. (2020). The effect of activities based Oon Predict-Observe-Explain (POE) method assisted with games on 10th grade students’ physics achievement. Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, April.
Bellezza FS, Basile JM, Hohmann NC. (1986). Mnemonic-device instruction: The promise and the problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(5), 424-434.
Boncoddo RA, Phillips BC, Williams RS, Gomez LM. (2019). Chunking as a cognitive strategy for science problem solving. Learning and Instruction, 63, 101195.
Bujeng B, Kamis A, Hussain MAM, Rahim MB, Soenarto S. (2019). Validity and reliability of multimedia interactive making clothes (MIMP) module for home science subjects. International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering, 8(8S), 593-596.
Ceuppens S, Bollen L, Deprez J, Dehaene W, De Cock M. (2019). 9th grade students’ understanding and strategies when solving x (t) problems in 1D kinematics and y (x) problems in mathematics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 15(1), 10101.
Cheng YM, Chen YH, Lin CH. (2015). The Effects of Chunking and Prior Knowledge on Learning Physics Concepts. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18(3), 95-105.
Chu WW, Ong ET, Ayop SK, Mohd Azmi MS, Abdullah AS, Abd Karim NS, Tho SW. (2021). The innovative use of smartphone for sound STEM practical kit: A pilot implementation for secondary classroom. Research in Science and Technological Education, 41(3), 1008-1030.
Creswell JW, Creswell JD. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (fifth). Sage publications.
Dunleavy S, Kestin G, Callaghan K, McCarty L, Deslauriers L. (2022). Increased learning in a college physics course with timely use of short multimedia summaries. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 18(1), 10110.
Echevarría R, Cárdenas H, Flores P, Cueva C, Juscamaita P, Isabel J. (2020). Assessment of the influence and impact of video analysis on students’ understanding of graphs in kinematics: A low-cost and easy-to-implement alternative.
Fiorini S, Lindström P, Bernhard J. (2017). Using scaffolding to teach problem-solving in introductory physics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13(1), 010111.
Fitriani A, Zubaidah S, Susilo H, Al Muhdhar MHI. (2020). The effects of integrated problem-based learning, predict, observe, explain on problem-solving skills and self-efficacy. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 85, 45-64.
Ghazali Darusalam, Sufean Hussin. (2021). Methodology penyelidikan dalam pendidikan: Amalan dan analisis kajian (third). Penerbit Universiti Malaya.
Gyedu AA, Owusu-Darko I, Ofosu EK. (2020). Effect of Geometer’s Sketchpad on senior high school students’ performance in quadratic graphing. European Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 1(1), 1-10.
Hernández CA, Núñez RP, Gamboa AA. (2021). Gains in active learning of physics: A measurement applying the test of understanding graphs of kinematics. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2073(1), 012003.
Klein P, Küchemann S, Brückner S, Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia O, Kuhn J. (2019). Student understanding of graph slope and area under a curve: A replication study comparing first-year physics and economics students. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 15(2), 20116.
Klein P, Lichtenberger A, Küchemann S, Becker S, Kekule M, Viiri J, Baadte C, Vaterlaus A, Kuhn J. (2020). Visual attention while solving the test of understanding graphs in kinematics: An eye-tracking analysis. European Journal of Physics, 41(2), 025701.
Krejcie VR, Morgan WD. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, 607-610.
Kuo YC, Lee CY, Lin CH. (2015). Effect of teaching method on students' mnemonic instruction preferences, and recall ability. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 53(3), 335-354
Malik AA, Sheikh AM, Elhaj FA. (2019). The Advantages and Disadvantages of Computer Simulation. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1234(1), 012013.
Mayer RE. (2020). Designing multimedia instruction in anatomy: An evidence-based approach. Clinical Anatomy, 33(1), 2-11.
Mayer RE, Moreno R. (2002). Aids to computer-based multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 107-119.
Mazlena Murshed. (2020). The reliability analysis for force concept inventory. International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, 24(5), 143-151.
Mufit F, Asrizal A, Puspitasari R. (2020). Meta-analysis of the effect of cognitive conflict on physics learning. Jurnal Penelitian & Pengembangan Pendidikan Fisika, 6(2), 267-278.
Nia R, Ekaningsih N. (2020). The effectiveness of chunking strategy in developing student’s ability in story retelling. Prominent, 3(2), 276-286.
Norbaizura Nordin. (2019). The study of student’s difficulties in learning Physics 1. International Journal of Modern Education, 1-16.
Norbaizura Nordin, Rozidawati Awang. (2021). Pencapaian akademik kursus fizik I pelajar diploma di UTHM. Multidisciplinary Applied Research and Innovation, 3(2), 295-307.
Norezan Ibrahim, Zakiang MAA, Siti Maftuhah Damio. (2019). Attitude in learning physics among form four students, 16(2), 21-42.
Norris D, Kalm K. (2021). Chunking and redintegration in verbal short-term memory. Cognition, 208(5), 872-893.
Núñez RP, Suárez AAG, Castro WRA. (2022a). Difficulties in the interpretation of kinematics graphs in secondary basic education students. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2159(1), 012019.
Núñez RP, Suárez AAG, Castro WRA. (2022b). Interpreting the slope of a straight line in kinematics graphs with school students. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2163(1), 012011.
Nurul Huda Kasim. (2019). Pembangunan modul Pro-STEM bagi topik biodiversiti dan ekosistem serta kesannya terhadap KBAT dan kemahiran abad ke-21. Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris.
Othman Talib. (2013). Asas penulisan tesis. Universita Putra Malaysia.
Özcan H, Çetin G, Koştur İH. (2020). The effect of PhET simulation-based Instruction on 6th Grade Students’ Achievement Regarding the Concept of Greenhouse Gas, 31(4), 348-355.
Park J, Brannon EM. (2014). Improving arithmetic performance with number sense training: An investigation of underlying mechanism. Cognition, 133(1), 188-200.
Phage I. (2018). Investigating first year university physics students’ ability to integrate algebraic and kinematics graphs. International Journal of Physics and Chemistry Education, 10(1), 1-25.
Punia Turiman, Kamisah Osman, Tengku Siti Meriam Tengku Wook. (2019). Development of ChemDataLog module and determination of its content validity and reliability. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 8(12), 2265-2277.
Ramadhani R, Fitri Y. (2020). A project-based learning into flipped classroom for ePUB3 electronic mathematics learning module (eMLM)-based on course design and implementation. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(7), 3119-3135.
Rasdi SS, Masnan AH, Hamzah M, Ghazali M. (2021). Development and usability of a teaching module based on board game in the learning of numeric operation among preschoolers National Child Development Research Centre. Jurnal Pendidikan Awal Kanak-Kanak Kebangsaan, 10(2), 71-84.
Rehman N, Zhang W, Mahmood A, Alam F. (2021). Teaching physics with interactive computer simulation at secondary level. Cadernos de Educação Tecnologia e Sociedade, 14(1), 127.
Richter J, Scheiter K, Eitel A. (2018). Signaling text–picture relations in multimedia learning: The influence of prior knowledge. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110(4), 544-560.
Rumack AM. (2021). Chunking the reading: Solving" wordy problems". Mathematics Teacher: Learning and Teaching, 114(4), 312-317.
Saprudin S, Liliasari S, Prihatmanto AS, Setiawan A. (2019). Profile of pre-service physics teachers’ creative thinking skills on wave and optics course. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1157(3), 6-10.
Sarkity D, Azhar A, Sundari P. (2021). Students’ ability to identify the types of motion of objects through kinematics graphs. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Maritime Education, 1-8.
Setyadi IMA, Sudiarta IGP, Mertasari NMS. (2019). The effect of predict-observe-explain ( POE ) learning model using open- ended problem (OEP) towards students ’ mathematical problem solving skill. Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Pengajaran, 52(3), 133-144.
Skrabankova J, Popelka S, Beitlova M. (2020). Ability to work with graphs in physics studies related to three typical student group. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 19(2), 298-316.
Suppawittaya P, Yasri P. (2021). The comparison of chunking methods to enhance the cognitive capacity of short-term memory to retain textual information among high school students. International Journal on Research in STEM Education, 3(1), 27-35.
Tuyboevna KS. (2021). About the use of interactive method and phet electronic resource in educational process. Middle European Scientific Bulletin, 2(1), 49-54.
Vaara RL, Sasaki DGG. (2019). Teaching kinematic graphs in an undergraduate course using an active methodology mediated by video analysis. Lumat, 7(1), 1-26.
Yunzal JC, Casinillo RD. (2020). Computer Simulation: Advantages and Disadvantages. International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering, 10(11), 328-332.
Zajkov O, Gegovska-Zajkova S. (2020). First year university students’ graph understanding. Inovacije U Modernom Obrazovanju, 1-4.
Zavala G, Tejeda S, Barniol P, Beichner RJ. (2017). Modifying the test of understanding graphs in kinematics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13(2), 1-16.
Zhang D, Indyk A, Greenstein S. (2021). Effects of schematic chunking on enhancing geometry performance in students with math difficulties and students at risk of math failure. Learning Disability Quarterly, 44(2), 82-95.
Zulaikha DF, Pujianto P, Wiyatmo Y. (2021). Learning activities in physics using students worksheet based on Predict-Observe-Explain (POE). Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan Fisika, 6(3), 208.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Norul Naim Makhtar, Siti Nursaila Alias, Anis Nazihah Mat Daud, Norlia Mat Nor
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
