Retention-Based Learning: An Approach to Maximizing Student Learning Outcomes in High School Plant Anatomy Lesson

Adi Rahmat; Muhamad Wafda Jamil

doi:10.32890/mjli2024.21.2.3

Authors

Adi Rahmat Biology Education Study Program, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Indonesia
Muhamad Wafda Jamil Biology Education Study Program, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2024.21.2.3

Keywords:

learning approach, cognitive load, plant anatomy, information retention

Abstract

Purpose – Many students perceive plant anatomy as difficult due to the complexity of the material. Additionally, conventional teaching techniques often neglect the importance of information retention in the learning process. Therefore, this study examines the effects of Retention-Based Learning on students’ learning outcomes compared to conventional learning without Retention-Based Learning.

Methodology – A multiple-group time series research design was used to measure the effectiveness of Retention-Based Learning on students’ learning outcomes including information retention, cognitive load, and learning achievement. Retention interventions in the Retention- Based Learning class included watching videos, identifying images and answering questions. The participants in this study were seventyeight 10th-grade public high school students in Bandung, West Java, Indonesia, divided into two research groups.

Findings – This study found that students in the experimental group had better information retention in each lesson and a significantly higher ability to process information with less mental effort and lower cognitive load than the control group. Additionally, the experimental group showed significantly higher learning achievement than the control group. These findings demonstrate the importance of maintaining information retention to maximize learning outcomes in plant anatomy lessons.

Significance – This study indicates that maintaining retention can be a simple and powerful learning approach to help high school teachers teach complex material. The study highlights the significance of maintaining student retention to improve learning performance.

References

Achurra, A. (2022). Plant blindness: A focus on its biological basis. Frontiers in Education, 7, 963448. https://doi.org/10.3389/ feduc.2022.963448

Agarwal, P. K., Roediger, H. L., McDaniel, M. A., & McDermott, K. B. (2020). How to use retrieval practice to improve learning. http://pdf.retrievalpractice.org/RetrievalPracticeGuide.pdf

Alloway, T. P., Gathercole, S. E., Kirkwood, H., & Elliott, J. (2009). The cognitive and behavioral characteristics of children with low working memory. Child Development, 80(2), 606–621. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01282.x

Allred, S. R., Crawford, L. E., Duffy, S., & Smith, J. (2016). Working memory and spatial judgments: Cognitive load increases the central tendency bias. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(6), 1825–1831. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-016-1039-0

Anderson, J. R. (2015). Cognitive psychology and its implications (8th ed.). Worth Publishers.

Anmarkrud, Ø., Andresen, A., & Bråten, I. (2019). Cognitive load and working memory in multimedia learning: Conceptual and measurement issues. Educational Psychologist, 54(2), 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2018.1554484

Aslan, A., & John, T. (2016). The development of adaptive memory: Young children show enhanced retention of animacy-related information. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 152, 343–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2016.07.007

Azman, A. N., & Johari, M. (2022). Investigating the effectiveness of videos designed using cognitive load theory on biology students’ academic achievement. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 11(3), 461–468. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii. v11i3.37324

Bakar, F., Avan, Ç., Şeker, F., & Aydinli, B. (2020). Plant and animal awareness in nature education perspectives: Where is blindness? International Electronic Journal of Environmental Education, 10(2), 122–136.

Brady, T. F., Störmer, V. S., & Alvarez, G. A. (2016). Working memory is not fixed-capacity: More active storage capacity for real-world objects than for simple stimuli. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(27), 7459–7464. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1520027113

Brame, C. J. (2016). Effective educational videos: Principles and guidelines for maximizing student learning from video content. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 15(4), es6. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-03-0125

Brünken, R., Plass, J. L., & Moreno, R. (2010). Current issues and open questions in cognitive load research. In Cognitive Load Theory. Cambridge University Press.

Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8(4), 293–332. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0804_2

Chen, H., Ning, X., Wang, L., & Yang, J. (2018). Acquiring new factual information: Effect of prior knowledge. Frontiers in Psychology, 9.

Chen, O., Castro-Alonso, J. C., Paas, F., & Sweller, J. (2018). Extending cognitive load theory to incorporate working memory resource depletion: Evidence from the spacing effect. Educational Psychology Review, 30(2), 483–501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9426-2

de Jong, T. (2010). Cognitive load theory, educational research, and instructional design: Some food for thought. Instructional Science, 38(2), 105–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-009-9110-0

Driscoll, M. P. (2013). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Pearson Education.

Faulconer, E. K., Bolch, C., & Wood, B. (2022). Cognitive load in asynchronous discussions of an online undergraduate STEM course. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-02-2022-0010

Foster, J. L., Shipstead, Z., Harrison, T. L., Hicks, K. L., Redick, T. S., & Engle, R. W. (2014). Shortened complex span tasks can reliably measure working memory capacity. Memory & Cognition, 43(2), 226–236. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-014-0461-7

Kalyuga, S. (2011). Informing: A cognitive load perspective. Informing Science: The International Journal of an Emerging Transdiscipline, 14, 033–045. https://doi.org/10.28945/1349

Kensinger, E. A., & Corkin, S. (2003). Memory enhancement for emotional words: Are emotional words more vividly remembered than neutral words? Memory & Cognition, 31(8), 1169–1180. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195800

Kester, L., Paas, F., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2010). Instructional control of cognitive load in the design of complex learning environments. In J. L. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken, Cognitive Load Theory. Cambridge University Press.

Kirschner, F., Paas, F., & Kirschner, P. A. (2009). A cognitive load approach to collaborative learning: United brains for complex tasks. Educational Psychology Review, 21(1), 31–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-008-9095-2

Lavy, I., & Shriki, A. (2022). Cognitive load and question asking – The case of prospective mathematics teachers coping with historical texts. Education and New Developments 2022, I, 427–431. https://doi.org/10.36315/2022v1end097

Marzano, R. J., & Kendall, J. S. (2007). The new taxonomy of educational objectives (Second). Corwin Press.

Marzano, R. J., & Kendall, J. S. (2008). Designing & assessing educational objectives: Applying the new taxonomy. Corwin Press.

Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & McTighe, J. (1993). Assessing student outcomes: Performance assessment using the dimensions of learning model. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Maslova, A., Koval, O., Kotliarova, V., Tkach, M., & Nadolska, Y. (2022). On the way to successful learning and teaching: Constructive feedback. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 22(6). https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v22i6.5233

Mayer, R. E., Fiorella, L., & Stull, A. (2020). Five ways to increase the effectiveness of instructional video. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(3), 837–852. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09749-6

Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43–52. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_6

Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2010). Techniques that reduce extraneous cognitive load and manage intrinsic cognitive load during multimedia learning. In J. L. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken (Eds.), Cognitive Load Theory (pp. 131–152). Cambridge University Press.

Moreno, R., & Park, B. (2010). Historical development and relation to other theories. In J. L. Plass, R. Brünken, & R. Moreno, Cognitive Load Theory. Cambridge University Press.

Nayak, S., Rao, M., Sundarshan, S., Naveen, K., Rao, S., & Aithal, A. (2017). “Question of the day”: Impact on learning and retention. Kathmandu University Medical Journal, 13(3), 204–211. https://doi.org/10.3126/kumj.v13i3.16801

Nuraeni, E., Redjeki, S., & Rahmat, A. (2015). Perkembangan literasi kuantitatif mahasiswa biologi dalam perkuliahan anatomi tumbuhan berbasis dimensi belajar. Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, 21(2), 127–135. https://doi.org/10.17977/jip.v21i2.5836

O’Day, D. H. (2007). The value of animations in biology teaching: A study of long-term memory retention. 6. Örün, Ö., & Akbulut, Y. (2019). Effect of multitasking, physical environment and electroencephalography use on cognitive load and retention. Computers in Human Behavior.

Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_1

Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H., & Van Gerven, P. W. M. (2003). Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 63–71. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_8

Paul, J. W., & Cicek, J. S. (2021). The cognitive science of powerpoint part II: The power of attention. Proceedings of Canadian Engineering Education Association, 19–22. https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15834

Rahmat, A., Soesilawaty, S. A., Nuraeni, E., & Hidayat, T. (2017). Controlling cognitive load of high school student in biology class control de la carga cognitiva de estudiantes de bachillerato en la clase de biología. Journal of Science Education, 18(2), 105–108.

Renkl, A., & Scheiter, K. (2017). Studying visual displays: How to instructionally support learning. Educational Psychology Review, 29(3), 599–621. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9340-4

Rich, J. D., Colon, A. N., Mines, D., & Jivers, K. L. (2014). Creating learner-centered assessment strategies for promoting greater student retention and class participation. Frontiers in Psychology, 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00595

Rose, D. H., & Strangman, N. (2007). Universal design for learning: Meeting the challenge of individual learning differences through a neurocognitive perspective. Universal Access in the Information Society, 5(4), 381–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10209-006-0062-8

Sarabi, M. K., & Gafoor, A. (2018). Student perception on nature of subjects: Impact on difficulties in learning high school physics, chemistry, and biology. Innovation and Researches in Education, 8(1), 42–55.

Schnotz, W., & Kürschner, C. (2007). A reconsideration of cognitive load theory. Educational Psychology Review, 19(4), 469–508. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-007-9053-4

Schüler, A., Scheiter, K., & Gerjets, P. (2013). Is spoken text always better? Investigating the modality and redundancy effect with longer text presentation. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(4), 1590–1601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.01.047

Sobrinho, N. D., & Souza, A. S. (2023). The interplay of long-term memory and working memory: When does object-color prior knowledge affect color visual working memory? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 49(2), 236–262. https://doi.org/10.1037/ xhp0001071

Sternberg, R. J., & Sternberg, K. (2011). Cognitive psychology (6th ed.). Wadsworth Publishing.

Stockwell, B. R., Stockwell, M. S., Cennamo, M., & Jiang, E. (2015). Blended learning improves science education. Cell, 162(5), 933–936. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2015.08.009

Susiyawati, E., & Treagust, D. F. (2021). Students’ visual literacy: A study from plant anatomy learning. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1747(1), 012021. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1747/1/012021

Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4(4), 295–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(94)90003-5

Sweller, J. (2010). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 22(2), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9128-5

Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory. Springer New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8126-4

Sweller, J., van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251–296. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022193728205

Tannert, S., Eitel, A., Marder, J., Seidel, T., Renkl, A., & Glogger-Frey, I. (2023). How can signaling in authentic classroom videos support reasoning on how to induce learning strategies? Frontiers in Education, 8, 974696. https://doi.org/10.3389/ feduc.2023.974696

Van Kesteren, M. T. R., Krabbendam, L., & Meeter, M. (2018). Integrating educational knowledge: Reactivation of prior knowledge during educational learning enhances memory integration. Npj Science of Learning, 3(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-018-0027-8

Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., Kester, L., & Paas, F. (2006). Teaching complex rather than simple tasks: Balancing intrinsic and germane load to enhance transfer of learning. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20(3), 343–352. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1250

Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17(2), 147–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-005-3951-0

van Riesen, S. A. N., Gijlers, H., Anjewierden, A. A., & de Jong, T. (2022). The influence of prior knowledge on the effectiveness of guided experiment design. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(1), 17–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1631193

Wiersma, W. (1995). Research methods in education: An introduction (6th ed.). Allyn and Bacon.

Wynn, A. N., Pan, I. L., Rueschhoff, E. E., Herman, M. A. B., & Archer, E. K. (2017). Student misconceptions about plants – A first step in building a teaching resource. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 18(1), 18.1.40. https://doi.org/10.1128/ jmbe.v18i1.1253

Xie, H., Wang, F., Hao, Y., Chen, J., An, J., Wang, Y., & Liu, H. (2017). The more total cognitive load is reduced by cues, the better retention and transfer of multimedia learning: A meta-analysis and two meta-regression analyses. PLOS One, 12(8), e0183884. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0183884

Zaid, S. N. L. B., & Iksan, Z. (2022). Systematic studies: Students’ attitudes toward plants and plant science learning. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 11(2), 188-198. https://doi.org/10.6007/ IJARPED/v11-i2/12317

Zhu, J., Yuan, H., Zhang, Q., Huang, P.-H., Wang, Y., Duan, S., Lei, M., Lim, E. G., & Song, P. (2022). The impact of short videos on student performance in an online-flipped college engineering course. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 9(1), 327. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01355-6