Article Sidebar

Submitted
February 3, 2022
Published
March 31, 2023
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 220 Download : 169

Main Article Content

Abstract

ABSTRAK


 


Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mendeskripsikan keterampilan proses sains (KPS) mahasiswa setelah mengikuti pembelajaran praktikum fisika dasar I menggunakan modul elektronik petunjuk praktikum berbasis pendekatan saintifik. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah one shot case study. Sebanyak 20 mahasiswa menggunakan modul elektronik untuk 4 kali praktikum dan selanjutnya diberikan tes KPS. KPS yang diujikan terdiri dari 9 indikator. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa nilai rata-rata indikator mengajukan pertanyaan terkait hipotesis percobaan adalah 8,25, indikator menentukan alat dan bahan yang digunakan serta fungsinya 5,95, indikator menentukan langkah kerja 8,25, indikator menggambar grafik dan menyusun tabel adalah 8,80, indikator untuk menginterpretasikan variabel yang digunakan berpengaruh dalam percobaan adalah 9,00, indikator untuk menghubungkan hasil percobaan dengan teori adalah 6,60, indikator untuk membuat kesimpulan dari percobaan yang dilakukan adalah 10,00, indikator untuk mengungkapkan pengamatan yang mungkin terjadi jika variabel yang berubah adalah 9,50, dan indikator untuk menggunakan konsep yang benar untuk menjelaskan hal-hal yang terjadi adalah 9,20. Berdasarkan hasil tersebut, nilai rata-rata keterampilan proses sains adalah 83,94 dengan kategori ‘Terampil’.


 


Kata Kunci: Keterampilan Proses Sains, Praktikum Fisika Dasar I, Modul Elektronik, Pendekatan Saintifik


 


ABSTRACT


 


This study aims to describe students' science skills after using the e-module of first basic physics practicum guide based on a scientific approach. This research method was one shot case study. A total of 20 students used the e-module for 4 practicums and then their science process skills were tested. The Science Process Skills tested consist of 9 indikators. The results showed that the average value of the indikator for asking questions related to the experimental hypothesis was 8.25, the indikator for determining the tools and materials used and their functions was 5.95, the indikator for determining the work steps was 8.25, the indikator for drawing graphs and compiling tables was 8.80, the indikator for interpreting the variables used influential in an experiment was 9.00, indikator for connecting experimental results with theory was 6.60, indikator for making conclusions from experiments carried out was 10.00, indikator for expressing observations that might occur if the variable changed was 9.50, and indikator for using the correct concept to explain things what happened was 9.20. Based on these results, the average value of science process skills was 83.94 in the category of ‘Skilled’


 


Keywords: Science Process Skill, First Basic Physics, E-Module, Scientific Approach

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2023 Nadzipa Safhira

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish in this journal agree with the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
  4. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

• Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (CC BY-SA)

Creative Commons License

AMPLITUDO: Jurnal Ilmu dan Pembelajaran Fisika is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

 

References

  1. Arikunto, S. (2011). Prosedur penelitian suatu pendekatan praktik (Ed. Rev. V). Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.
  2. Chiappetta, E. L., & Fillman, D. A. (2007). Analysis of five high school biology textbooks used in the United States for inclusion of the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 29(15), 1847–1868. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690601159407.
  3. Chiappetta, E. L., Sethna, G. H., & Fillman, D. A. (1993). Do middle school life science textbooks provide a balance of scientific literacy themes?. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(7), 787–797. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660300714.
  4. Collette, A. T., & Chiappetta, E. L. (1994). Science Instruction in the Middle and Secondary Schools. The CV Mosby, 11830 Westline Industrial Drive, St. Louis, MO 63146. 514.
  5. Davis, E. A, & Krajcik, J. S. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Research, 34(April), 3–14.
  6. Firman, H. (2007). Laporan analisis literasi sains berdasarkan hasil PISA nasional tahun 2006. Jakarta: Pusat Penilaian Balitbang Depdiknas.
  7. Garcia, T. D. (1985). An analysis of earth science textbooks for presentation of aspects of scientific literacy. International. 300.
  8. Huda N. Analisis buku ajar biologi kelas x SMA berdasarkan literasi sains. 2017;93(I):259.
  9. Kanginan, Marthen. (2006). Fisika SMA untuk kelas X. Jakarta: Erlangga.
  10. Keeble, D., & Wilkinson, F. (1999). Collective learning and knowledge development in the evolution of regional clusters of high technology SMEs in Europe. Regional Studies, 33(4), 295–303. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343409950081167.
  11. Lederman, N. G., Lederman, J. S., & Antink, A. (2013). Nature of science and scientific inquiry as contexts for the learning of science and achievement of scientific literacy. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology (IJEMST), 1(3), 138–147.
  12. Lumpe, A. T., & Beck, J. (1996). A profile of high school biology textbooks using scientific literacy recommendations. The American Biology Teacher, 58(3), 147–153.
  13. Mochamad Irsyan S, Setiawan A, Rusnayati H. Analisis buku ajar fisika SMA kelas X di kota Bandung berdasarkan komponen literasi sains. Prosidings Semin Nas Fis 2013. 2013;94–102.
  14. OECD. (2019). Programme for international student assessment (PISA) results from PISA 2018. Oecd, 1–10.
  15. Putra, M. I. S., Widodo, W., & Jatmiko, B. (2016). The development of guided inquiry science learning materials to improve science literacy skill of prospective mi teachers. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 5(1), 83–93. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v5i1.5794.
  16. Ruwanto, Bambang. (2016). Fisika SMA kelas X. Jakarta: Yudistira.
  17. T. E. Yuliyanti, A. R. (2014). Analisis buku ajar fisika sma kelas xi berdasarkan muatan literasi sains di Kabupaten Tegal. Unnes Physics Education Journal, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.15294/upej.v3i2.3597.
  18. Tarigan, H. G., & Tarigan, D. (1986). Telaah buku teks Bahasa Indonesia. Angkasa. 154.