Integrating Design Thinking and Blended Learning in Science Education: Development and Expert Validation of the Inno-BlenDT Module
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37134/perspektif.vol17.sp.1.2025Keywords:
Design Thinking, Blended Learning, Validation, Module DevelopmentAbstract
Innovation in science education is critical for addressing persistent challenges in student achievement, interest, and metacognition, particularly in abstract topics such as electricity and magnetism. This study responds by developing and validating the Inno-BlenDT module, which integrates design thinking and blended learning as complementary pedagogical strategies. The module was systematically designed using the ADDIE model and validated through expert review to ensure credibility and effectiveness. Eight experts in science education, STEM, and educational technology evaluated the module using the Content Validity Index (CVI), covering constructs of objectives, content, language and format, presentation, and usability. Results demonstrated unanimous agreement, with I-CVI and S-CVI/Ave values reaching 1.00 across all constructs, exceeding recommended thresholds (I-CVI ≥ 0.78; S-CVI/Ave ≥ 0.90). These findings affirm the module’s strong alignment with pedagogical standards and its potential to enhance students’ learning outcomes. The validation process underscores the scholarly importance of expert review in ensuring the reliability of educational innovations before implementation in classroom practice.
Downloads
References
Abdullah, N., Baskaran, V. L., Mustafa, Z., Ali, S. R., & Zaini, S. H. (2022). Augmented Reality: The Effect in Students’ Achievement, Satisfaction and Interest in Science Education. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 21(5), 326–350. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.21.5.17
Azahar, S., & Cheng, C. (2024). Understanding Malaysia’s decline in PISA scores: causes and consequences Policy brief. https://www.isis.org.my/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Understanding-Malaysias-decline-in-PISA-scores.pdf
Bahru, J., Sok Yee, L., & Abdul Manap, Y. (2018). Attitude Towards Science Among Lower Secondary Students in (Vol. 5, Issue 2). https://ejournal.upsi.edu.my/journal/EDSC
Bender-Salazar, R. (2023). Design thinking as an effective method for problem-setting and needfinding for entrepreneurial teams addressing wicked problems. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-023-00291-2
Berg, T. B., Achiam, M., Poulsen, K. M., Sanderhoff, L. B., & Tøttrup, A. P. (2021). The Role and Value of Out-of-School Environments in Science Education for 21st Century Skills. Frontiers in Education, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.674541
Boateng, S., & Mushayikwa, E. (2022). Teaching Electricity and Magnetism to High School Physical Science Learners: The Effectiveness of Learning Style-Based Instructions. PONTE International Scientific Researchs Journal, 78(3). https://doi.org/10.21506/j.ponte.2022.3.1
Brakhage, H., Gröschner, A., Gläser-Zikuda, M., & Hagenauer, G. (2023). Fostering Students’ Situational Interest in Physics: Results from a Classroom-Based Intervention Study. Research in Science Education, 53(5), 993–1008. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-023-10120-x
Branch, R. M. (2010). Instructional design: The ADDIE approach. In Instructional Design: The ADDIE Approach. Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09506-6
Brown, T. (2008). Design Thinking. www.hbr.org
Buhl-Wiggers, J., Kjærgaard, A., & Munk, K. (2023). A scoping review of experimental evidence on face-to-face components of blended learning in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 48(1), 151–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2022.2123911
Burde, J.-P., Sean Weatherby, T., & Kronenberger, A. (2021). An analogical simulation for teaching electric circuits: a rationale for use in lower secondary school (Vol. 56). www.marblemodel.com.
Davis, K. A. (1992). Validity and Reliability in Qualitative Research on Second Language Acquisition and Teaching: Another Researcher Comments: Vol. 26: 3 (pp. 605–608). JSTOR.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and Cognitive Monitoring A New Area of Cognitive-Developmental Inquiry A Model of Cognitive Monitoring. American Psychological, 34, 906–911.
Ghaedi, B., Gholtash, A., Hashemi, S. A., & Mashinchi, A. A. (2020). The Educational Model of Social Constructivism and Its Impact on Academic Achievement and Critical Thinking. Journal of Education Experiences, 3(2), 79–102.
Grabau, L. J. (2022). Engaging Students in Sustainable Science Education. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14(10). https://doi.org/10.3390/su14106127
Haleem, A., Javaid, M., Qadri, M. A., & Suman, R. (2022). Understanding the role of digital technologies in education: A review. Sustainable Operations and Computers, 3, 275–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susoc.2022.05.004
Hartini, A., & Faridah, S. (2022). Factors Causing Low Interest in Learning Science in Elementary Schools. Journal of Sustainable Development Science, 4(2), 37–41. http://ejournal.undwi.ac.id/index.php/jsds
Hermawati, T. (2022). Analysing science teachers’ difficulties in teaching the concept of electricity in junior high school. Research in Phyiscs Education, 1(1), 33–44. https://doi.org/10.31980/ripe.v1i1.22
Ilma, S., Al-Muhdhar, M. H. I., Rohman, F., & Sari, M. S. (2022). Promoting students’ metacognitive awareness and cognitive learning outcomes in science education. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 11(1), 20–30. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v11i1.22083
Kaur, M., & Kaur, P. (2023). Effect of Blended Learning Strategy on Learning Outocmes in Science among Secondary School Students. Indonesian Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Science and Technology, 1(11), 1001–1006. https://doi.org/10.55927/marcopolo.v1i11.7157
Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. (2013). Pelan Pembangunan Pendidikan malaysia 2013-2025 (Pendidikan Prasekolah hingga lePas Menengah). www.moe.gov.my
Koca, N. O., Saqri, N. A. A., Hamrashdi, H. A., & Kindi, N. A. (2025). Physics Education Evaluating the students’ learning on the electricity and magnetism using a conceptual survey BEMA. Phys. Educ, 60, 15022–15033. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6552/ad94c4
Komathy, V., Balamuralithara, B., Muhd Ibrahim Muhamad Damanhuri, & Kumaran, G. (2021). Design Thinking for Creative Teaching of Chemistry. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 11(3), 670–687. https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v11-i3/8979
Krismadinata, Verawardina, U., Jalinus, N., Rizal, F., Sukardi, Sudira, P., Ramadhani, D., Lubis, A. L., Friadi, J., Arifin, A. S. R., & Novaliendry, D. (2020). Blended learning as instructional model in vocational education: Literature review. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(11B), 5801–5815. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.082214
Kubiatko, M. (2023). How To Stop The Disinterest of Students Toward School Subjects? Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 81(5), 570–571. https://doi.org/10.33225/pec/23.81.570
Ladachart, L., Radchanet, V., & Phothong, W. (2022). Design Thinking Mindsets Facilitating Students’ Learning of Scientific Concepts in Design-Based Activities. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 19(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2021.106
Lalima, Dr., & Dangwal, K. L. (2017). Blended Learning: An Innovative Approach. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(1), 129–136. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.050116
Laukaityte, I., Rolfsman, E., & Wiberg, M. (2024). TIMSS vs. PISA: what can they tell us about student success?—a comparison of Swedish and Norwegian TIMSS and PISA 2015 results with a focus on school factors. Frontiers in Education, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1323687
Levitt, G., Grubaugh, S., & Deever, D. (2023). Teacher-centered or Student-centered Teaching Methods and Stu-dent Outcomes in Secondary Schools: Lecture/Discussion and Pro-ject-based Learning/Inquiry Pros and Cons. EIKI Journal of Effective Teaching Methods, 1(2), 36–38. https://doi.org/10.59652/jetm.v1i2.16
Lew, S., & Krishnasamy, L. (2023). Information Technology Capability (ITC) Framework to Improve Learning Experience and Academic Achievement of Mathematics in Malaysia. The Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 21(1), 36–51. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.21.1.2169
Lynn, M. R. (1986). Determination and Quantification Of Content Validity. Nursing Research, 382–386.
Mastura Mustapha, & Azi Azeyanty Jamaludin. (2021). Analysis of Interest Towards Science Subject and Its Relation with 21st Century Skills. Journal of Science and Mathematics Letters, 9(2), 103–116. https://doi.org/10.37134/jsml.vol9.2.10.2021
Mbonyiryivuze, A., Yadav, L. L., & Amadalo, M. M. (2019). Students’ conceptual understanding of electricity and magnetism and its implications: A review. African Journal of Educational Studies in Mathematics and Sciences, 15(2), 55–67. https://doi.org/10.4314/ajesms.v15i2.5
Mishra, N. R. (2023). Constructivist Approach to Learning: An Analysis of Pedagogical Models of Social Constructivist Learning Theory. Journal of Research and Development, 6(01), 22–29. https://doi.org/10.3126/jrdn.v6i01.55227
Mollel, A. D., Minani, E., Munezero, V., & Ngayinteranya, J. (2022). Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning and Students Electricity Concepts: A Case of Secondary Schools in Arusha, Tanzania. EAST AFRICAN JOURNAL OF EDUCATION AND SOCIAL SCIENCES, 3(2), 139–145. https://doi.org/10.46606/eajess2022v03i02.0168
Moodley, K., & Gaigher, E. (2019). Teaching Electric Circuits: Teachers’ Perceptions and Learners’ Misconceptions. Research in Science Education, 49(1), 73–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9615-5
Muhamad Zakwan Hamizan Ramli, & Lee, T. T. (2023). Keberkesanan permainan Salt-UNO Card terhadap Pencapaian Konsep Garam dan Minat Pelajar dalam Pembelajaran Kimia. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains Dan Matemaitk Malaysia, 13(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.37134/jpsmm.vol13.2.1.2023
Mulenga, R., & Shilongo, H. (2024). Hybrid and Blended Learning Models: Innovations, Challenges, and Future Directions in Education. Acta Pedagogia Asiana, 4(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.53623/apga.v4i1.495
Noh, S. C., & Karim, A. M. A. (2021). Design thinking mindset to enhance education 4.0 competitiveness in Malaysia. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 10(2), 494–501. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v10i2.20988
Nur Hafizah Razali, Nik Nurasyikin Nik Ali, Siti Khatizah Safiyuddin, & Fariza Khalid. (2022). Design Thinking Approaches in Education and Their Challenges: A Systematic Literature Review. Creative Education, 13(07), 2289–2299. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2022.137145
Olatunde-Aiyedun, T. G., & Adams, S. O. (2022). Effect of Blended Learning Models on Students’ Academic Achievement and Retention in Science Education. Eurasian Journal of Science and Environmental Education, 2(2), 35–42. https://doi.org/10.30935/ejsee/12613
Ong, E. T., Govindasamy, D., Singh, C. K. S., Ibrahim, M. N., Wahab, N. A., Borhan, M. T., & Tho, S. W. (2021). The 5E inquiry learning model: Its effect on the learning of electricity among malaysian students. Cakrawala Pendidikan, 40(1), 170–182. https://doi.org/10.21831/cp.v40i1.33415
Phang, F. A., Khamis, N., Nawi, N. D., & Pusppanathan, J. (2020). TIMSS 2019 Science Grade 8: Where is Malaysia standing? ASEAN Journal of Engineering Education, 4(2), 37–43. https://doi.org/10.11113/ajee2020.4n2.10
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 and Health, 29(5), 489–497. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20147
Rauth, I., Köppen, E., Jobst, B., & Meinel, C. (2010). Design Thinking: An Educational Model towards Creative Confidence. In ICDC.
Razzouk, R., & Shute, V. (2012). What Is Design Thinking and Why Is It Important? Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 330–348. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312457429
Rendon, J. D. L., Doloretos, N. L., Capilitan, L. B., Dumaan, D. L., Mamada, M. J. D., & Mercado, J. C. (2022). Alternative Teaching Methods in Electricity and Magnetism. International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research, 3(8), 1600–1606. https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.03.08.23
Rusmann, A., & Ejsing-Duun, S. (2022). When design thinking goes to school: A literature review of design competences for the K-12 level. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 32(4), 2063–2091. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-021-09692-4
Sadera, J. R. N., Torres, R. Y. S., & Rogayan. Jr., D. V. (2020). Challenges Encountered by Junior High School Students in Learning Science: Basis for Action Plan. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(12A), 7405–7414. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.082524
Shé, C. N., Farrell, O., Brunton, J., & Costello, E. (2022). Integrating design thinking into instructional design: The #OpenTeach case study. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 2022(1), 33–52. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.6667
Sidek Mohd Noah, & Jamaludin Ahmad. (2005). SIDEK & JAMALUDDIN. Universiti Putra Malaysia.
Simeon, M. I., Samsudin, M. A., & Yakob, N. (2022). Effect of design thinking approach on students’ achievement in some selected physics concepts in the context of STEM learning. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 32(1), 185–212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09601-1
Vavasis, G. G., Kapotis, E. C., & Tombras, G. S. (2022). High School Students’ Difficulties and their Causes due to the Electromotive Force, in the Study of Direct Current Simple Electric Circuits. International Journal of Recent Contributions from Engineering, Science & IT (IJES), 10(03), 4–18. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijes.v10i03.34375
Wirzal, M. D. H., Halim, N. S. A., Md Nordin, N. A. H., & Bustam, M. A. (2022). Metacognition in Science Learning: Bibliometric Analysis of Last Two Decades. Jurnal Penelitian Dan Pengkajian Ilmu Pendidikan: E-Saintika, 6(1), 43–60. https://doi.org/10.36312/esaintika.v6i1.665
Yasir, M., Fikriyah, A., Qomaria, N., & Al Haq, A. T. (2020). Metacognitive skill on students of science education study program: Evaluation from answering biological questions. JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), 6(1), 157–164. https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v6i1.10081
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Muhammad Salehuddin Ahmad, Nurul Ashikin Izhar, Zuhailah Hashim
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
