Main Article Content


This research aimed to reveal and compare students' levels of boredom before, during, and after science learning, utilizing a quantitative approach with descriptive and comparative methods. The study included a sample of 188 students from MTsN 1 Sungai Penuh City, selected through purposive sampling. Data on student boredom during science learning were collected using the Academic Emotions Questionnaire: Class Related. This questionnaire comprises 80 statements, with 23 for before, 43 for during, and 14 for after participating in science learning. Each statement offers five alternative responses, ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree. Subsequently, the collected data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and analysis of variance (ANOVA). The research findings indicate that students' overall boredom in science learning falls within the medium category—before (2.14), during learning (2.55), and after science learning (2.40). ANOVA testing revealed a significant difference in boredom levels before, during, and after science learning. Notably, the highest saturation occurred during learning, followed by after and before learning. These results emphasize the need for teachers to consider discussions for each learning condition and factors contributing to student boredom when designing learning experiences. The ultimate goal is to minimize the level of boredom in science learning.


kejenuhan pembelajaran sains siswa borendom learning science students

Article Details

Author Biographies

Ogi Danika Pranata, IAIN Kerinci

Physics Education Department

Lia Angela, IAIN Kerinci

Tadris Biologi

How to Cite
Fadillah, A., Pranata, O. D., & Angela, L. (2024). The Analysis of Student Boredom Levels Before, During, and After Science Learning. PENDIPA Journal of Science Education, 8(1), 1–9.


  1. Acee, T. W., Kim, H., Kim, H. J., Kim, J. I., Chu, H. N. R., Kim, M., Cho, Y. J., & Wicker, F. W. (2010). Academic boredom in under- and over-challenging situations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(1), 17–27.
  2. Elpidorou, A. (2014). The bright side of boredom. Frontiers in Psychology, 5(NOV), 3–6.
  3. Goetz, T., Frenzel, A. C., Hall, N. C., Nett, U. E., Pekrun, R., & Lipnevich, A. A. (2014). Types of boredom : An experience sampling approach. 401–419.
  4. Jensen, J. L., Holt, E. A., Sowards, J. B., Heath Ogden, T., & West, R. E. (2018). Investigating Strategies for Pre-Class Content Learning in a Flipped Classroom. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27(6), 523–535.
  5. Macdonald, A., & Rafferty, J. (2015). Investigating Mathematics, Science and technology in early childhood.
  6. Macklem, G. L., & Gayle, L. (2018). Boredom in the Classroom: Addressing Student Motivation, Self- Regulation, and Engagement in Learning. In Springer (SpringerBr). Springer.
  7. Morgan, G. A., Leech, N. L., Gloeckner, G. W., & Barret, K. C. (2004). SPSS for Introductory Statistics. Use and Interpretation. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. All.
  8. Özerk, G. (2020). Academic boredom: An underestimated challenge in schools. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 13(1), 117–125.
  9. Pekrun, R, Goetz, T., & Perry, R. (2005). Achievement emotions questionnaire (AEQ). User’s manual. In Unpublished manuscript, University of Munich, Munich (Issue 2002).
  10. Pekrun, Reinhard. (2006). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions, corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice. Educational Psychology Review, 18(4), 315–341.
  11. Pekrun, Reinhard, Goetz, T., Daniels, L. M., Stupnisky, R. H., & Perry, R. P. (2010). Boredom in Achievement Settings: Exploring Control-Value Antecedents and Performance Outcomes of a Neglected Emotion. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 531–549.
  12. Pekrun, Reinhard, Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students’ self-regulated learning and achievement: A program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 91–105.
  13. Pranata, O. D. (2023). Enhancing Conceptual Understanding and Concept Acquisition of Gravitational Force through Guided Inquiry Utilizing PhET Simulation. Saintek: Jurnal Sains Dan Teknologi, 15(1), 44–52.
  14. Pranata, O. D., Sastria, E., Ferry, D., & Zebua, D. R. Y. (2023). Analysis of Students’ Emotional Intelligence and Their Relationship with Academic Achievement in Science. Proceedings of the International Conference on Social Science and Education, ICoeSSE, 395–410.
  15. Pranata, O. D., Yuliati, L., & Wartono. (2017). Concept Acquisition of Rotational Dynamics by Interactive Demonstration and Free-Body Diagram. Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn), 11(3), 291–298.
  16. Putri, D. H., & Pranata, O. D. (2023). Eksplorasi Kejenuhan Siswa dalam Pembelajaran Sains Setelah Pandemi. Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan Sains (JIPS), 4(2), 62–70.
  17. Tze, V. M. C., Daniels, L. M., & Klassen, R. M. (2016). Evaluating the Relationship Between Boredom and Academic Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 28(1), 119–144.
  18. van Hooft, E. A. J., & van Hooff, M. L. M. (2018). The state of boredom: Frustrating or depressing? Motivation and Emotion, 42(6), 931–946.
  19. Wulandari, & Pranata, O. D. (2023). Analisis Kecerdasan Emosional Siswa dalam Pembelajaran Sains. Diksains: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Sains, 3(2), 124–133.
  20. Yilmaz, R. (2017). Exploring the role of e-learning readiness on student satisfaction and motivation in flipped classroom. Computers in Human Behavior, 70, 251–260.