Supporting Secondary School Students’ Learning of Physics: Exploring the Effects of PhET Simulation and MoPSIF Module
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32890/pr2022.4.5Kata kunci:
Physics, PhET, Interactive Simulation, Simulation Learning, Conventional Learning, Learning Module, PandemicAbstrak
Mastery of the Physics concept and the ability to apply this knowledge in everyday life can contribute to the development of the country. However, the skills of secondary school students in physics subject are less impressive. The fact is that learning experience in the classroom, also known as conventional learning, leaves a meaningful impression on students. Thus, a study on the topic of Forces and Motion – Forces in Equilibrium was conducted on Form Four students at a secondary school in the Northern Peninsular Malaysia. Qualitative data through in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted on four students from the experimental group. The main purpose of the study was to explore students’ opinion on learning physics by using conventional method as opposed to learn physics using PhET Simulation supported by MoPSIF Module. Thematic analysis from the interview found that the characteristics of students who learned physics via conventional method were lack of interest, boredom, not actively engaging in group activities, less friendly teacher-student interactions, and limited to reference books and textbooks for self-learning. On the other hand, learning physics using PhET Simulation and MoPSIF Module had a positive impact on students’ interest and motivation, the pleasure of studying as a group or self-learning, help to study for exams, and suitable as a method of learning physics for home-based teaching and learning. It is recommended that PhET Simulation supported by MoPSIF Module be used to enhance students’ learning in physics subject especially during pandemic.
Rujukan
Ajredini, F., Zajkov, O., & Mahmudi, N. (2012). Case study on the influence of simulations and real experiments on higher order skills. Macedonian Physics Teacher, 48, 29-34.
Ang, K.C., Afzal, F., & Crawford, L. H. (2021). Transitioning from passive to active learning: Preparing future project leaders. Project Leadership and Society, 2, 100016.
Behmanesh, F., Bakouei, F., Nikpour, M., Parvaneh, M. (2020). Comparing the effects of traditional teaching and flipped classroom methods on midwifery students’ practical learning: The embedded mixed method. Technology, Knowledge and Learning. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-02009478-y
Bogdan, R. C. & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction of theories and methods (5th ed.). United States of America: Pearson. Practitioner Research, 4, July 2022 pp: 71-
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77-101.
Bunyamin, M. A. H. & Finley, F. (2016). STEM Education in Malaysia: Reviewing the Current Physics Curriculum.
Cambridge Assessment International Education (2019). Active learning [PDF images]. Retrieved from https://www. cambridgeinternational.org/Images/271174-active-learning.pdf
Chen, Y. –L., Pan, P. –R., Sung, Y. –T. & Chang, K. –E. (2013). Correcting misconceptions on electronics: Effects of a simulation-based learning environment backed by a conceptual change model. Educational Technology & Society, 16(2), 212227.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Steps in conducting a scholarly mixed methods study.
Creswell, J. (2014). Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Essex, England: Pearson.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.
Elangovan, T., & Zurida Ismail. (2013). The effect of realistic simulation and non-realistic simulation on Biology students’ achievement. Scientific & Academic Publishing, 3(4), 231-241. doi:10.5923/j.edu.20130304.03
Fisher, R., LaFerriere, R., & Rixon, A. (2020). Flipped learning: An effective pedagogy with an Achilles’ heel. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 57(5), 543–554.
Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2000). How to design and evaluate research in education New York: McGraw-Hill.
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2019). How to design and evaluate research in education (10th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (1993). How to design and evaluate research in education (Vol. 7). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Ferguson, C., Hickey, R., Ferns, S., & Savelle, R., (2019). International collaborations: Inspiring active learning in higher education. International Journal for Cross-Disciplinary in Education, 10(3), 4120-4126.
Ferguson, K. J. (2010). Facilitating student learning, in an introduction to medical learning. In W. B. Jeffries & K. N. Hugget (Eds.), (pp. 1-10). New York: Springer. Practitioner Research, 4, July 2022 pp: 71-
Fuziah, S., Ruzlan, M. A., & Nor Azimah, C. A. (2018). Understandings of the safety in school concept among secondary school teachers. The Journal of Social Sciences Research, 6, 271–276.
Halim, A., Soewarno, Elmi, Zainuddin, Huda, I., & Irwandi (2020). The impact of the e-learning module on remediation of misconceptions in modern Physics courses. Jurnal Penelitian dan Pengembangan Pendidikan Fisika, 6(2), 203-2015. doi:doi. org/10.21009/1.06207
Haryadi, R., & Pujiastuti, H. (2019). PhET simulation softwarebased learning to improve science process skills. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1521(2020). doi:10.1088/17426596/1521/2/022017
Ibtesam Al-Mashaqbeh (2014). Computer simulation instruction: Carrying out chemical experiments. I.J. Modern Education and Computer Science, 5, 1-7. doi:10.5815/ijmecs.2014.05.01
Kolcak, D. Y., Mogol, S., Unsal, Y. (2014). A comparison of the effects of laboratory method and computer simulations to avoid misconceptions in Physics education. Education and Science, 39(175), 154-171. doi:10.15390/EB.2014.2052
Liu, M., Horton, L., Omalson, J., & Toprac, P. (2011). A study of learning and motivation in a new media enriched environment for middle school science. Educational Technology Research & Development, 59, 249-265. doi: 10.1007/s11423-011-9192-7
Liu, Y.C., Kuo, R.L., & Shih, S. R. (2020). COVID-19: The first documented coronavirus pandemic in history. Biomedical Journal, 43, 328-333. Retrieved from www.elsevier/locate/bj
McCarthy, J. P., & Anderson, L. (2000). Active learning techniques versus traditional teaching styles: Two experiments from history and political science. Innovative Higher Education, 24(4), 279-294. Mhamed Ben Ouahi, Mohamed Ait Hou, Abdesselam Bliya, Taoufik
Hassouni & El Mehdi Al Ibrahmi (2021). The effect of using computer simulation on students’ performance in teaching and learning Physics: Are there any gender and area gaps?. Educational Research International, 2021. doi: https//doi. org/10.1155/2021/6646017
Ministry of Education. (2020). Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) Pencegahan Penularan Jangkitan Penyakit Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) Di Sekolah KPM. Malaysia Government. https://www.moe.gov.my/covid-19/garis-panduan/garisanpanduancovid-19 Practitioner Research, 4, July 2022 pp: 71-
Ministry of Health. (2020). Garis Panduan Pengurusan COVID-19 di Malaysia No.5/2020. Malaysia Government. https://covid-19. moh.gov.my/garis-panduan/garis-panduan-kkm
Najib, M. N. M., Md-Ali, R. & Yaacob, A. (2022). Effects of PhET interactive simulation activities on secondary school students’ Physics achievement. South Asian Journal of Social Science and Humanities, 3(2), 73-88. doi: https://doi.org/10.48165/ sajssh.2022.3204
Nalevska, G. P., & Kuzmanovska (2020). Teaching methods as a factor of students’ learning motivation. Journal of Educational Research, 2(3-4), 40-50.
Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E. & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16, 1-13. doi:10.1177/1609406917733847
Ogunleye, A.O. (2010). Evaluating an online learning programme from students perspectives. Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 7(1), 79-89. doi: 10.19030/tlc.v7i1.82.
Rosmiati, R., Rahmawati, E. & Suswati, L. (2017). Development of learning module based on physical simulation in improving understanding of Physics concept of students [Paper presentation]. Seminar Nasional Fisika (SNF) 2017, Surabaya, Indonesia.
Salmiza Saleh (2014). Malaysian students’ motivation towards Physics learning. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(4), 223-232.
Sopiah Abdullah & Adilah Shariff (2008). The effects of inquiry-based computer simulation with cooperative learning on scientific thinking and conceptual understanding of Gas Laws. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 4(4), 387-398.
Tien, E. C., & Hamid, H. (2020). Use of technology in active learning teaching practices to enhance lecturers’ self-efficacy in technical university environment. International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology, 9(6), 436-443. ISSN: 2278-0181
Ulen, S., Cagran, B., Slavinec, M., & Gerlic, I. (2014). Designing and evaluating the effectiveness of Physlet-based learning materials in supporting conceptual learning in secondary school Physics. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(5), 658-667. doi:101007/s10956-014-9492-x Practitioner Research, 4, July 2022 pp: 71-
Utusan Malaysia. (2009). “Dasar 40:60 pelajar sastera sains belum tercapai.”
Yap, W. L. (2016). Transforming conventional teaching classroom to learner-centred teaching classroom using multimedia-mediated learning module. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 6(2), 105-112. ISSN 2010-3689
Yunzal, A. N., Jr., & Casinillo, L. F. (2020). Effect of Physics education technology (PhET) simulations: Evidence from STEM students’ performance. Journal of Educational Research and Evaluation, 4(3), 221-226. Retrieved from https://ejournal. undiksha.ac.id/index.php/JERE
Zulfah, H., & Aznam, N. (2018). Development of natural sciences module with reflective learning journal to enhance student’s reporting-interpretive skills. Journal of Biology & Biology Education, 10(2), 362-368. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.15294/ biosaintifika.v10i2.14319
