Next generation science standards assessment for Java coastal students
0 likes17 views
This study examines the achievement levels of junior high school students in the coastal regions of Java, Indonesia, using Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS). It found significant differences in academic performance among students from Tegal, Pekalongan, Pati, and Demak, with students from lower economic backgrounds performing better than those from higher economic backgrounds (p=0.012). The results indicate that socio-economic factors and parental support significantly influence students' academic achievements in science education.
![Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn)
Vol. 17, No. 3, August 2023, pp. 425~430
ISSN: 2089-9823 DOI: 10.11591/edulearn.v17i3.20872 425
Journal homepage: http://edulearn.intelektual.org
Next generation science standards assessment for Java
coastal students
Sarwi Sarwi1
, Sigit Saptono2
, Siti Fathonah3
, Winarto Winarto4
1
Department of Physics Education, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Semarang, Indonesia
2
Department of Biology Education, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Semarang, Indonesia
3
Department of Culinary Education, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Semarang, Indonesia
4
Department of Science Education, Faculty of Mathematic and Natural Science, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Article Info ABSTRACT
Article history:
Received Mar 21, 2023
Revised Apr 28, 2023
Accepted Jun 05, 2023
In the 21st-century, we need a generation who can read and face the
challenges of the times. The research aimed to master patterns of science
with the next generation science standards (NGSS) standards of junior high
school students in north coastal areas of Java Island. The research method is
quantitative expose-facto and subjects were 228 students determined by
purposive sampling. The students who come from Tegal, Pekalongan, Pati
and Demak Regencies north coastal Java Island, Indonesia. The results
showed a significant difference between the achievement of students in
Tegal, Pekalongan, Pati, and Demak Regencies (p=0.012; ∝=0.05). Based
on the analysis of variance (ANOVA) test, there was a significant difference
between the groups of students’ achievements in mastery of science oriented
NGSS. It can be concluded that the achievement among students from four
different regions is quite significant. Students from families with middle and
upper economic levels have low achievement but students with low
economic levels have high academic achievement.
Keywords:
Achievement
Coastal students
Economic background
Future science standard
Science assessment
This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA license.
Corresponding Author:
Winarto Winarto
Department of Science Education, Faculty of Mathematic and Natural Science
Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta
Colombo Street No. 1, Karang Malang, Caturtunggal, Depok, Sleman, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Email: wiwin16@gmail.com
1. INTRODUCTION
The era of disruption is part of the 21st-century, which is marked by rapid changes in all areas of
life. The core of the assessment uses the next generation science standards (NGSS) framework to measure
students’ critical thinking, reasoning, argumentative, and creative thinking skills. Measuring the quality of
Indonesian students’ needs to be improved through research, especially in the aspect of using international
standard test instruments because Indonesian students are still in the middle to lower position in participating
in the trends in international mathematics and science study (TIMSS) and programme for international
student assessment (PISA) science literacy competitions.
The 2013 curriculum development launched by the government has emphasized four improvements,
namely the process, content, graduate competency standards, and an evaluation system for primary and
secondary education levels. NGSS is a science learning framework in America as a pedagogical direction and
a road map to build coherence of science principles and understanding of the nature of science [1], [2]. The
component of content assessment and multi-representation regarding learning achievement in schools still
needs improvement to realize authentic assessment [3], [4]. The research findings provide information that
the science assessment needs to improve the form of display of scientific problems and content.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/20872-231026071501-af182e34/85/Next-generation-science-standards-assessment-for-Java-coastal-students-1-320.jpg)
![ ISSN: 2089-9823
J Edu & Learn, Vol. 17, No. 3, August 2023: 425-430
426
The development of assessments that reveal 21st-century skills including NGSS at the junior high
school level needs to be improved. The research results concluded that the combined NGSS and education
teacher performance assessment (EdTPA) assessment program was effective for preparing prospective
teachers and learning designs that actively involve high school-level students [5]. In addition, research on the
nature of science in NGSS succeeded in 78% of science content according to NGSS standards. Science
learning is programmed to be implemented in an integrated manner between conceptual and practice
science [6]. The lowest student achievement in science is seen as an indicator of the low quality of science
education in schools. The results of the study show that the understanding of energy literacy depends on
gender and energy-saving behavior [7]. Less challenging material causes students to be lazy, so that learning
outcomes are less effective. Students’ intentions to pursue a science-related study or career and their
enjoyment of science were the most central indicators for all three science courses [8].
In 2011, the average score in science level 8 (junior high school age) from the participation of
TIMSS, Indonesia’s achievement was 406 in the order of 45 from 50 countries [9]. Although, the two
analyses were validated across 20 countries show that attribute specifications can differ from expert
opinions [10]. Analysis of the test material tested by TIMSS found that science material about creatures and
ecosystems and natural phenomena was not well mastered. The results of the competition show that the
performance of Indonesian students is still far below the international average.
According to Kyllonen [11] formulated an assessment focused on three main topic groups that
support 21st-century literacy for future generation science standards, namely: i) Ways of thinking (creativity
and innovation, critical thinking, problem solving, and decision making; metacognition); and ii) How to work
(communication, collaboration, and teamwork). NGSS emphasizes the importance of science work practice
and is actively involved, which is a vehicle for teaching the science process [12]. Each standard in the NGSS
is a combination of three dimensions [13]. The three dimensions are: i) Scientific practice and engineering
skills, namely the skills and behaviors used by individuals in carrying out scientific investigations and
engineering designs; ii) The concept of crosscutting, namely a science theme that provides an important
organizational scheme for connecting domains together, making connections between various scientific
concepts to create a coherent and knowledge-based holistic view of the environment; and iii) Disciplinary
core ideas (DCIs) are the key ideas in science that have broad importance within or across multiple science or
engineering disciplines. These core ideas build on each other as students progress through grade levels and
are grouped into the four domains (physical science, life science, earth and space science, and engineering).
According to Drew and Thomas [14] it is emphasized that professional educators carry out science
practices that are directed by NGSS guidelines in science learning. Science learning that is carried out by
teachers in general has not used varied learning sources and has not used assessment instruments that refer to
international standards (PISA and TIMSS). The results of the study stated learning resources were limited to
teacher books and student books as well as student worksheets and assessment instruments had not yet
developed higher-order cognitive measures of thinking [15]. The results of other studies have revealed the
problem of how to activate students and the tensions faced by elementary school teachers in teaching science.
These two problems are overcome through research-based operational steps towards quality science learning
and teaching practices [16].
Equitable education carried out in various regions of Indonesia has various obstacles in
implementing it. The problem is caused by remote rural areas and far from urban areas in accessing services
education is still not evenly distributed [17]. Diversity of the place environment stay will grow a different
experience, which then form knowledge different beginnings [18]. Initial knowledge (prior knowledge) is a
collection of knowledge and experience individuals obtained in daily life and capital to gain learning
experience new one [19]. The low quality of education on the coast, namely, there is a problem in science
education on the coast is like a gap scientific progress with the world of education, achievement our
education is lagging and global issues of education [20]. Science learning has not been taught anywhere
should be. The main factor for the occurrence of the condition. This is due to the low quality of teachers
teaching science in schools. This teacher factor is not the only problem in science education but such as
government policies, the performance of leaders in this case principals and supervisors, community support,
student interest in learning in schools in coastal areas.
The results of research on the ability of scientific literacy students in coastal areas of 38.76 with very
low criteria [21]. Students’ scientific literacy ability based on scientific literacy has an average score
percentage of content aspect (55.9%), process aspect (54.70%), and context aspect (57.4%). When viewed as
a whole, from the results of the translation of the average percentage value, it shows that students’ scientific
literacy skills are still in the low category [22]. Based on the results of the average percentage of marine
literacy tests of 29%, it can be concluded that the marine literacy ability of junior high school students in the
is categorized as low [23]. Research on student learning outcomes in coastal areas measures cognitive
learning outcomes, measures high-level thinking skills, and measures scientific literacy, and motivation.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/20872-231026071501-af182e34/85/Next-generation-science-standards-assessment-for-Java-coastal-students-2-320.jpg)
![J Edu & Learn ISSN: 2089-9823
Next generation science standards assessment for Java coastal students (Sarwi Sarwi)
427
What level is the achievement of the NGSS for Java coastal students. Research measuring sustainable
development goals (SDGs)-oriented student learning outcomes has not been conducted. Therefore, the
purpose of this study is to determine the level of achievement of SDGs-oriented learning outcomes for
students in coastal areas.
2. RESEARCH METHOD
The research was carried out using ex post facto quantitative methods with assessment innovations
containing competencies from a combination of national and international NGSS standards. Research is
characterized by the disclosure of the variables that become the research problem using reliable instruments,
so that quantitative and qualitative data are obtaine [24]. The research subjects consist of Tegal, Pekalongan,
Pati and Demak Regencies in Central Java, Indonesia. The research sample was determined by purposive
sampling by considering the characteristics of all regencies. The number of respondents was 228 students
who come from north coastal Java Island. The data collection technique of this research employed a
multiples choice test and essays. The instrument has met the validity as a good measuring tool. The sampling
technique of this research is purposive sampling. Purposive sampling is a sampling technique with certain
considerations in [25]. These data were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) test analysis among
regional groups, quantitative and qualitative analysis.
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
NGSS-oriented science mastery was collected using test instruments in the form of choice and
essays. The results of the study can be reported that as many as 228 students have filled in personal data and
carried out online tests that were supervised by the science teacher at the school. Based on the three
sub-fields of science subjects, consist of physics, integrated science, and biology are presented in Table 1.
Based on the results of data that the extreme differences in the physics, integrated science and biology with
lowest scores of 26, 21, and 24 with highest scores of 84, 84, and 87 respectively (scales 0-100) have been
obtained. This study compares individual and collaborative approaches to teaching the critical thinking “why
how (WH) questions” show that the individual groups used more “what questions,” whereas students in the
collaborative group used more “why and how questions” [26]. the results of the ANOVA test for differences
in learning achievement in the four regions are presented in Table 2.
The information is also interesting for the biology with the highest scores among the three science
concept scores that students have achieved of 87 (scales 0-100). The results showed a significant difference
between the achievement of students all regencies (p=0.012; ∝=0.05). The supporting research that
pupillometry has been applied in the world laboratories to assess how listening effort of cognitive processing
during listening [26]. The research find suggestive evidence in some models that time on science instruction
is related to science achievement but little evidence that the number of science skills covered are related to
greater science achievement [27]. Research in line with [28], [29] that showed there is some evidence
indicating that compared with female students, male students’ perceptions of science utility are higher in
relation to more inquiry-based instruction in both their science and mathematics classrooms. Moreover, by
using ethnoscience learning, students’ scientific literacy skills also increased so that they could apply their
knowledge [15].
Table 1. Results of the NGSS of students’tests score
Three categories Min score Max score Average score
Physics 26 84 56
Integrated science 21 84 55
Biology 24 87 67
Table 2. Results of ANOVA Analysis
Sum of squares Df Mean square F Sig.
Between groups 1559.354 4 311.871 3.34 .012
Within groups 3853.832 224 20.720
Total 5413.186 228
Based on the ANOVA test, there was a significant difference between the four groups of students’
achievements in mastery of science oriented NGSS with F=3.37, p=0.019, df=3 and ∝=0.05. The research
showed the results indicate that variable selection inspired by social science methodologies how various early](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/20872-231026071501-af182e34/85/Next-generation-science-standards-assessment-for-Java-coastal-students-3-320.jpg)
![ ISSN: 2089-9823
J Edu & Learn, Vol. 17, No. 3, August 2023: 425-430
428
childhood variables predict the long-term outcomes of children [30]. It can be concluded that the
achievements among students who came from four different regencies were quite significant. Those the
subjects with middle and high economic backgrounds tend to have low achievement but students with low
economic levels have high academic achievement. The difference in scores obtained by students from four
regions is caused by several factors, namely regional characteristics (agriculture, religion, trade, and
industry), education and socioeconomic level of parents, and student association groups.
Quality of education in coastal areas is not optimal. The education of fishermen’s children in the
coastal areas of Indonesia is still relatively low. It is worrying, only about 1-1.3% of fishermen’s children
have graduated from education bachelor’s degree, the remaining around 3% are high school graduates, 6%
are junior high school graduates, and the remaining 85% only elementary school education. On the other
hand, the issue of the education of fishermen’s children is not despite the poverty that complements their
lives, coastal communities Indonesians who live below the poverty line are 32.14% [31], [32] state that
young people in coastal areas in general prefer to help parents go to sea than go to school. Furthermore, the
strength of the mind and parents’ views on children so that they can can help the economy of parents become
triggers cannot be separated from the way of thinking traditional and conservative. Learning outcomes are
influenced by factors within the individual and external. The factors that exist within students of physical and
psychological. While the factors outside the students include factors family, school and community. Quality
of education in coastal areas not optimal [33]. Economic conditions also have a positive and significant
influence on the level of education of their children. Economic conditions related to ability to cover basic
living expenses in advance such as everyday life [34]. This is of course related to the amount of income and
amount of expenditure for daily needs. The level of income that is low if it is balanced with high expenditure
needs, so it will lower the level of economic conditions.
The results of this study concluded that students who come from high economic families end to get
low scores and parents with low economics get high scores. Revealing that there is an influence
significant/positive from socio-economic on learning achievement stated that the financial capability
differently will have influence on student learning achievement [35]. This matter means that the socio-
economic parents have important role in height low student achievement. The higher the level of the
economy socio-economic parents of students, then greater expectations for achievement. The influence of
parents’ socioeconomic status not only determinant in direct child learning achievement but also indirectly
can affect it. Parents with high income possible can meet children’s learning facilities [36].
The high-test scores for students who come from a low economy are thought to have high
motivation from themselves. Students in coastal areas divide their time to work and studies are accustomed to
dividing their time, facing problems and taking responsibility for assignments at home and at school. The
situation is different if high economic students are equipped with learning facilities, more time and do not
find many problems so that their motivation tends to be less developed. Learning outcomes can be influenced
by factors of parents’ economic ability, learning facilities, and learning motivation [37]. The family
environmental factors with high or low. The socioeconomic status of parents plays an important role because
it is related to the fulfillment of needs which includes primary, secondary, and tertiary needs in which there is
fulfillment of the need for education for their children [33]. The results of this study, motivation is a major
factor in achieving student achievement in coastal areas. Students with high family economy who fulfill
learning facilities, high parental attention and support are suspected of having low learning motivation so that
the learning outcomes obtained are low.he essence of motivation is encouragement internal and external to
students who is learning to hold changes in behavior, in general with several indicators or supporting
elements [23]. With respect to This motivation that learning motivation gives contribution to learning
achievement. The tendency of students who have high learning motivation will have high interest and
enthusiasm will learn happily and voluntarily [38]. On the other hand, motivated students low learning will
have low interest and enthusiasm in study, lazy to join the process learning. According to Descals-Tomás
et al. [39] that there is a partial effect between learning motivation and learning achievement.
4. CONCLUSION
The results showed a significant difference between the achievement of students in Tegal,
Pekalongan, Pati, and Demak Regencies (p=0.012; ∝=0.05). Based on ANOVA test, there was a significant
difference between the groups of students’ achievements in mastery of science oriented NGSS. Based on the
ANOVA test, there was a significant difference between the four groups of students’ achievements. Students
from families with middle and upper economic levels have low achievement but students with low economic
levels have high academic achievement. Based on research results, motivation is very important for students
in achieving learning achievement.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/20872-231026071501-af182e34/85/Next-generation-science-standards-assessment-for-Java-coastal-students-4-320.jpg)
![J Edu & Learn ISSN: 2089-9823
Next generation science standards assessment for Java coastal students (Sarwi Sarwi)
429
REFERENCES
[1] R. W. Bybee, “NGSS and the next generation of science teachers,” Journal of Science Teacher Education, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 211–
221, Apr. 2014, doi: 10.1007/s10972-014-9381-4.
[2] J. M. Calmer, “Teaching physics within a next generation science standards perspective,” Pedagogical Research, vol. 4, no. 4, pp.
1–6, Aug. 2019, doi: 10.29333/pr/5868.
[3] I. G. W. S. Antara, I. K. Sudarma, and I. K. Dibia, “The assessment instrument of mathematics learning outcomes based on HOTS
toward two-dimensional geometry topic,” Indonesian Journal Of Educational Research and Review, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 19–24, Jun.
2020, doi: 10.23887/ijerr.v3i2.25869.
[4] K. Khoiriah, T. Jalmo, and A. Abdurrahman, “Implementation of assessment for learning based on higher order thinking skills to
foster reading interest (in Indonesian),” Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan IPA, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 176–183, Oct. 2020, doi:
10.21831/jipi.v6i2.22817.
[5] E. M. Brownstein and L. Horvath, “Next generation science standards and edTPA: evidence of science and engineering
practices,” The Electronic Journal for Research in Science & Mathematics Education, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 44–62, 2016.
[6] W. F. McComas, M. P. Clough, and N. Nouri, “Nature of science and classroom practice: a review of the literature with
implications for effective NOS instruction,” in Nature of science in science instruction: rationales and strategies, Cham: Springer
International Publishing, 2020, pp. 67–111, doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-57239-6_4.
[7] Y. Akitsu, K. Ishihara, H. Okumura, and E. Yamasue, “Investigating energy literacy and its structural model for lower secondary
students in Japan,” International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 1067–1095, 2017.
[8] M. S. M. Sachisthal, B. R. J. Jansen, J. Dalege, and M. E. J. Raijmakers, “Relating teenagers’ science interest network
characteristics to later science course enrolment: an analysis of Australian PISA 2006 and longitudinal surveys of Australian
Youth data,” Australian Journal of Education, vol. 64, no. 3, pp. 264–281, Nov. 2020, doi: 10.1177/0004944120957477.
[9] L. Hewi and M. Shaleh, “Reflection on PISA (the programme for international student assessment) results: improvement efforts
rest on early childhood education (in Indonesian),” Jurnal Golden Age, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 30–41, Jun. 2020, doi:
10.29408/jga.v4i01.2018.
[10] R. Terzi and S. Sen, “A nondiagnostic assessment for diagnostic purposes: Q-matrix validation and item-based model fit
evaluation for the TIMSS 2011 assessment,” SAGE Open, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 1–11, Jan. 2019, doi: 10.1177/2158244019832684.
[11] P. C. Kyllonen, “Measurement of 21st century skills within the common core state standards,” in Invitational Research
Symposium on Technology Enhanced Assessments, 2012, pp. 1–24.
[12] J. Krajcik and J. Merritt, “Engaging students in scientific practices: what does constructing and revising models look like in the
science classroom?,” The Science Teacher, vol. 79, no. 3, pp. 38–41, 2012.
[13] C. Tomovic, S. Mckinney, and C. Berube, “Scientific literacy matters: using literature to meet next generation science standards
and 21st century skills,” K-12 STEM Education, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 179–191, 2017.
[14] S. V. Drew and J. Thomas, “Secondary science teachers’ implementation of CCSS and NGSS literacy practices: a survey study,”
Reading and Writing, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 267–291, Feb. 2018, doi: 10.1007/s11145-017-9784-7.
[15] Zulfiani, I. P. Suwarna, and M. F. Sumantri, “Science adaptive assessment tool: Kolb’s learning style profile and student’s higher
order thinking skill level,” Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 194–207, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.15294/jpii.v9i2.23840.
[16] A. Fitzgerald and K. Smith, “Science that matters: exploring science learning and teaching in primary schools,” Australian
Journal of Teacher Education, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 64–78, Apr. 2016, doi: 10.14221/ajte.2016v41n4.4.
[17] X. Chen et al., “Differences in rural and urban health information access and use,” The Journal of Rural Health, vol. 35, no. 3, pp.
405–417, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.1111/jrh.12335.
[18] M. D. P. Berlyana and Y. Purwaningsih, “Experimentation of STAD and Jigsaw learning models on learning achievements in
terms of learning motivation,” International Journal of Educational Research Review, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 517–524, Oct. 2019, doi:
10.24331/ijere.628311.
[19] B. Odell, M. Gierl, and M. Cutumisu, “Testing measurement invariance of PISA 2015 mathematics, science, and ICT scales using
the alignment method,” Studies in Educational Evaluation, vol. 68, pp. 1–9, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100965.
[20] E. Pérez-Navío, Ó. Gavín-Chocano, L. Checa-Domene, and M. G.-V. Prieto, “Relationship between learning strategies and
motivation of University students,” Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 1–12, Feb. 2023, doi: 10.3390/su15043497.
[21] Tulaiya and Wasis, “Analysis of science literacy skills of high school students in Sumenep district (in Indonesian),” IPF: Inovasi
Pendidikan Fisika, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 417–427, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.26740/ipf.v9n3.p417-427.
[22] M. Sukaryawan, K. Madang, K. Wiyono, Y. Anwar, Hapizah, and Y. Chusiri, “Analysis of scientific literacy abilities of junior
high school students in Palembang,” in Proceedings of the 4th Sriwijaya University Learning and Education International
Conference (SULE-IC 2020), 2020, pp. 798–803, doi: 10.2991/assehr.k.201230.200.
[23] A. Kristanto, Suharno, and Gunarhadi, “Promoting local wisdom in international primary curriculum aims to develop learners’
problem solving skills,” International Journal of Educational Research Review, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 439–447, Jul. 2019, doi:
10.24331/ijere.573947.
[24] J. R. Fraenkel and N. E. Wallen, How to design and evaluate research in education, 6th ed. New York: McGrawHill, 2017.
[25] J. W. Creswell and V. L. P. Clark, Designing and conducting mixed methods research, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE
Publications, 2018.
[26] E. Zandvakili, E. Washington, E. W. Gordon, C. Wells, and M. Mangaliso, “Teaching patterns of critical thinking: the 3CA
model—concept maps, critical thinking, collaboration, and assessment,” SAGE Open, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 1–15, Jul. 2019, doi:
10.1177/2158244019885142.
[27] G. Naylor, T. Koelewijn, A. A. Zekveld, and S. E. Kramer, “The application of pupillometry in hearing science to assess listening
effort,” Trends in Hearing, vol. 22, pp. 1–3, Jan. 2018, doi: 10.1177/2331216518799437.
[28] F. C. Curran and J. Kitchin, “Early elementary science instruction: does more time on science or science topics/skills predict
science achievement in the early grades?,” AERA Open, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 1–18, Jul. 2019, doi: 10.1177/2332858419861081.
[29] C. Riegle-Crumb, K. Morton, U. Nguyen, and N. Dasgupta, “Inquiry-based instruction in science and mathematics in middle
school classrooms: Examining its association with students’ attitudes by gender and race/ethnicity,” AERA Open, vol. 5, no. 3, pp.
1–17, 2019, doi: 10.1177/2332858419867653.
[30] C. V. Roberts, “Friend request pending: a comparative assessment of engineering-and social science–inspired approaches to
analyzing complex birth cohort survey data,” Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World, vol. 5, pp. 1–8, Jan. 2019, doi:
10.1177/2378023118820431.
[31] J.-C. Tu and K.-H. Chu, “Analyzing the relevance of peer relationship, learning motivation, and learning effectiveness-design
students as an example,” Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 10, pp. 1–26, May 2020, doi: 10.3390/su12104061.
[32] J. Liu, P. Peng, and L. Luo, “The relation between family socioeconomic status and academic achievement in China: a meta-](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/20872-231026071501-af182e34/85/Next-generation-science-standards-assessment-for-Java-coastal-students-5-320.jpg)
![ ISSN: 2089-9823
J Edu & Learn, Vol. 17, No. 3, August 2023: 425-430
430
analysis,” Educational Psychology Review, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 49–76, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s10648-019-09494-0.
[33] J. C. Moneva, R. F. L. Pestano, and R. M. Vertulfo, “Parental financial support and students motivation in learning,” Macrothink
Institute of Social Science, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 9–20, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.5296/iss.v8i1.16908.
[34] T. Susanti, Damris, Maison, and Tanti, “Learning environment and motivation in junior high school,” Universal Journal of
Educational Research, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 2047–2056, May 2020, doi: 10.13189/ujer.2020.080542.
[35] Maison, Syahrial, Syamsurizal, and Tanti, “Learning environment, students’ beliefs, and self-regulation in learning physics:
structural equation modeling,” Journal of Baltic Science Education, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 389–403, Jun. 2019, doi:
10.33225/jbse/19.18.389.
[36] D. K. K. B. Nugroho, T. J. Raharjo, and U. Utomo, “The relationship between parents’ learning motivation and socio-economic
status with science learning achievement,” Journal of Primary Education, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 518–526, Dec. 2020, doi:
10.15294/jpe.v9i5.43239.
[37] N. H. C. M. Ghazali, Z. Suppian, and S. H. Zaini, “Factors influencing students’ motivation towards learning,” Jurnal Cakrawala
Pendidikan, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 259–270, Feb. 2022, doi: 10.21831/cp.v41i1.45883.
[38] D. Selvia, “Student motivation in physics learning (in Indonesian),” Science, and Physics Education Journal (SPEJ), vol. 4, no. 2,
pp. 47–55, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.31539/spej.v4i2.1899.
[39] A. Descals-Tomás, E. Rocabert-Beut, L. Abellán-Roselló, A. Gómez-Artiga, and F. Doménech-Betoret, “Influence of teacher and
family support on university student motivation and engagement,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public
Health, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 1–21, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.3390/ijerph18052606.
BIOGRAPHIES OF AUTHORS
Sarwi is professor in the physics/science education study program Faculty of
Mathematics and Natural Sciences and Science Education Study Program (S2, S3)
Postgraduate Universitas Negeri Semarang. He is also the board editor for the nationally
accredited Indonesian Physics Education Journal (Sinta 2) and a peer reviewer for the
international journals of F1000Research, IJESE, and IJESDC Journal. In addition, he is active
in research projects in the field of physics/science learning innovation in STEM education and
professional development. He can be contacted at email: sarwi_dosen@mail.unnes.ac.id.
Sigit Saptono is the head lector in the biology of Faculty of Mathematics and
Natural Sciences and Science Education Study Program (S2, S3) Postgraduate Program,
Universitas Negeri Semarang. He is active in research projects in the field of science learning
innovation and teacher professional development training. He can be contacted at email:
sigit_biounnes@mail.unnes.ac.id.
Siti Fathonah is a civil servant lecturer with the position of head lector. She
teaches the main course of applied nutrition and food preservation. She can be contacted at
email: fathonah@mail.unnes.ac.id.
Winarto is lecturer of Science Education Studies, Mathematic and Natual
Science Faculty at Yogyakarta State University. He is active in research projects in the field of
science and ethnoscience learning innovation. He can be contacted at email:
wiwin16@gmail.com.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/20872-231026071501-af182e34/85/Next-generation-science-standards-assessment-for-Java-coastal-students-6-320.jpg)
Next generation science standards assessment for Java coastal students
- 1. Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn) Vol. 17, No. 3, August 2023, pp. 425~430 ISSN: 2089-9823 DOI: 10.11591/edulearn.v17i3.20872 425 Journal homepage: http://edulearn.intelektual.org Next generation science standards assessment for Java coastal students Sarwi Sarwi1 , Sigit Saptono2 , Siti Fathonah3 , Winarto Winarto4 1 Department of Physics Education, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Semarang, Indonesia 2 Department of Biology Education, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Semarang, Indonesia 3 Department of Culinary Education, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Semarang, Indonesia 4 Department of Science Education, Faculty of Mathematic and Natural Science, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Yogyakarta, Indonesia Article Info ABSTRACT Article history: Received Mar 21, 2023 Revised Apr 28, 2023 Accepted Jun 05, 2023 In the 21st-century, we need a generation who can read and face the challenges of the times. The research aimed to master patterns of science with the next generation science standards (NGSS) standards of junior high school students in north coastal areas of Java Island. The research method is quantitative expose-facto and subjects were 228 students determined by purposive sampling. The students who come from Tegal, Pekalongan, Pati and Demak Regencies north coastal Java Island, Indonesia. The results showed a significant difference between the achievement of students in Tegal, Pekalongan, Pati, and Demak Regencies (p=0.012; ∝=0.05). Based on the analysis of variance (ANOVA) test, there was a significant difference between the groups of students’ achievements in mastery of science oriented NGSS. It can be concluded that the achievement among students from four different regions is quite significant. Students from families with middle and upper economic levels have low achievement but students with low economic levels have high academic achievement. Keywords: Achievement Coastal students Economic background Future science standard Science assessment This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA license. Corresponding Author: Winarto Winarto Department of Science Education, Faculty of Mathematic and Natural Science Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta Colombo Street No. 1, Karang Malang, Caturtunggal, Depok, Sleman, Yogyakarta, Indonesia Email: wiwin16@gmail.com 1. INTRODUCTION The era of disruption is part of the 21st-century, which is marked by rapid changes in all areas of life. The core of the assessment uses the next generation science standards (NGSS) framework to measure students’ critical thinking, reasoning, argumentative, and creative thinking skills. Measuring the quality of Indonesian students’ needs to be improved through research, especially in the aspect of using international standard test instruments because Indonesian students are still in the middle to lower position in participating in the trends in international mathematics and science study (TIMSS) and programme for international student assessment (PISA) science literacy competitions. The 2013 curriculum development launched by the government has emphasized four improvements, namely the process, content, graduate competency standards, and an evaluation system for primary and secondary education levels. NGSS is a science learning framework in America as a pedagogical direction and a road map to build coherence of science principles and understanding of the nature of science [1], [2]. The component of content assessment and multi-representation regarding learning achievement in schools still needs improvement to realize authentic assessment [3], [4]. The research findings provide information that the science assessment needs to improve the form of display of scientific problems and content.
- 2. ISSN: 2089-9823 J Edu & Learn, Vol. 17, No. 3, August 2023: 425-430 426 The development of assessments that reveal 21st-century skills including NGSS at the junior high school level needs to be improved. The research results concluded that the combined NGSS and education teacher performance assessment (EdTPA) assessment program was effective for preparing prospective teachers and learning designs that actively involve high school-level students [5]. In addition, research on the nature of science in NGSS succeeded in 78% of science content according to NGSS standards. Science learning is programmed to be implemented in an integrated manner between conceptual and practice science [6]. The lowest student achievement in science is seen as an indicator of the low quality of science education in schools. The results of the study show that the understanding of energy literacy depends on gender and energy-saving behavior [7]. Less challenging material causes students to be lazy, so that learning outcomes are less effective. Students’ intentions to pursue a science-related study or career and their enjoyment of science were the most central indicators for all three science courses [8]. In 2011, the average score in science level 8 (junior high school age) from the participation of TIMSS, Indonesia’s achievement was 406 in the order of 45 from 50 countries [9]. Although, the two analyses were validated across 20 countries show that attribute specifications can differ from expert opinions [10]. Analysis of the test material tested by TIMSS found that science material about creatures and ecosystems and natural phenomena was not well mastered. The results of the competition show that the performance of Indonesian students is still far below the international average. According to Kyllonen [11] formulated an assessment focused on three main topic groups that support 21st-century literacy for future generation science standards, namely: i) Ways of thinking (creativity and innovation, critical thinking, problem solving, and decision making; metacognition); and ii) How to work (communication, collaboration, and teamwork). NGSS emphasizes the importance of science work practice and is actively involved, which is a vehicle for teaching the science process [12]. Each standard in the NGSS is a combination of three dimensions [13]. The three dimensions are: i) Scientific practice and engineering skills, namely the skills and behaviors used by individuals in carrying out scientific investigations and engineering designs; ii) The concept of crosscutting, namely a science theme that provides an important organizational scheme for connecting domains together, making connections between various scientific concepts to create a coherent and knowledge-based holistic view of the environment; and iii) Disciplinary core ideas (DCIs) are the key ideas in science that have broad importance within or across multiple science or engineering disciplines. These core ideas build on each other as students progress through grade levels and are grouped into the four domains (physical science, life science, earth and space science, and engineering). According to Drew and Thomas [14] it is emphasized that professional educators carry out science practices that are directed by NGSS guidelines in science learning. Science learning that is carried out by teachers in general has not used varied learning sources and has not used assessment instruments that refer to international standards (PISA and TIMSS). The results of the study stated learning resources were limited to teacher books and student books as well as student worksheets and assessment instruments had not yet developed higher-order cognitive measures of thinking [15]. The results of other studies have revealed the problem of how to activate students and the tensions faced by elementary school teachers in teaching science. These two problems are overcome through research-based operational steps towards quality science learning and teaching practices [16]. Equitable education carried out in various regions of Indonesia has various obstacles in implementing it. The problem is caused by remote rural areas and far from urban areas in accessing services education is still not evenly distributed [17]. Diversity of the place environment stay will grow a different experience, which then form knowledge different beginnings [18]. Initial knowledge (prior knowledge) is a collection of knowledge and experience individuals obtained in daily life and capital to gain learning experience new one [19]. The low quality of education on the coast, namely, there is a problem in science education on the coast is like a gap scientific progress with the world of education, achievement our education is lagging and global issues of education [20]. Science learning has not been taught anywhere should be. The main factor for the occurrence of the condition. This is due to the low quality of teachers teaching science in schools. This teacher factor is not the only problem in science education but such as government policies, the performance of leaders in this case principals and supervisors, community support, student interest in learning in schools in coastal areas. The results of research on the ability of scientific literacy students in coastal areas of 38.76 with very low criteria [21]. Students’ scientific literacy ability based on scientific literacy has an average score percentage of content aspect (55.9%), process aspect (54.70%), and context aspect (57.4%). When viewed as a whole, from the results of the translation of the average percentage value, it shows that students’ scientific literacy skills are still in the low category [22]. Based on the results of the average percentage of marine literacy tests of 29%, it can be concluded that the marine literacy ability of junior high school students in the is categorized as low [23]. Research on student learning outcomes in coastal areas measures cognitive learning outcomes, measures high-level thinking skills, and measures scientific literacy, and motivation.
- 3. J Edu & Learn ISSN: 2089-9823 Next generation science standards assessment for Java coastal students (Sarwi Sarwi) 427 What level is the achievement of the NGSS for Java coastal students. Research measuring sustainable development goals (SDGs)-oriented student learning outcomes has not been conducted. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to determine the level of achievement of SDGs-oriented learning outcomes for students in coastal areas. 2. RESEARCH METHOD The research was carried out using ex post facto quantitative methods with assessment innovations containing competencies from a combination of national and international NGSS standards. Research is characterized by the disclosure of the variables that become the research problem using reliable instruments, so that quantitative and qualitative data are obtaine [24]. The research subjects consist of Tegal, Pekalongan, Pati and Demak Regencies in Central Java, Indonesia. The research sample was determined by purposive sampling by considering the characteristics of all regencies. The number of respondents was 228 students who come from north coastal Java Island. The data collection technique of this research employed a multiples choice test and essays. The instrument has met the validity as a good measuring tool. The sampling technique of this research is purposive sampling. Purposive sampling is a sampling technique with certain considerations in [25]. These data were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) test analysis among regional groups, quantitative and qualitative analysis. 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION NGSS-oriented science mastery was collected using test instruments in the form of choice and essays. The results of the study can be reported that as many as 228 students have filled in personal data and carried out online tests that were supervised by the science teacher at the school. Based on the three sub-fields of science subjects, consist of physics, integrated science, and biology are presented in Table 1. Based on the results of data that the extreme differences in the physics, integrated science and biology with lowest scores of 26, 21, and 24 with highest scores of 84, 84, and 87 respectively (scales 0-100) have been obtained. This study compares individual and collaborative approaches to teaching the critical thinking “why how (WH) questions” show that the individual groups used more “what questions,” whereas students in the collaborative group used more “why and how questions” [26]. the results of the ANOVA test for differences in learning achievement in the four regions are presented in Table 2. The information is also interesting for the biology with the highest scores among the three science concept scores that students have achieved of 87 (scales 0-100). The results showed a significant difference between the achievement of students all regencies (p=0.012; ∝=0.05). The supporting research that pupillometry has been applied in the world laboratories to assess how listening effort of cognitive processing during listening [26]. The research find suggestive evidence in some models that time on science instruction is related to science achievement but little evidence that the number of science skills covered are related to greater science achievement [27]. Research in line with [28], [29] that showed there is some evidence indicating that compared with female students, male students’ perceptions of science utility are higher in relation to more inquiry-based instruction in both their science and mathematics classrooms. Moreover, by using ethnoscience learning, students’ scientific literacy skills also increased so that they could apply their knowledge [15]. Table 1. Results of the NGSS of students’tests score Three categories Min score Max score Average score Physics 26 84 56 Integrated science 21 84 55 Biology 24 87 67 Table 2. Results of ANOVA Analysis Sum of squares Df Mean square F Sig. Between groups 1559.354 4 311.871 3.34 .012 Within groups 3853.832 224 20.720 Total 5413.186 228 Based on the ANOVA test, there was a significant difference between the four groups of students’ achievements in mastery of science oriented NGSS with F=3.37, p=0.019, df=3 and ∝=0.05. The research showed the results indicate that variable selection inspired by social science methodologies how various early
- 4. ISSN: 2089-9823 J Edu & Learn, Vol. 17, No. 3, August 2023: 425-430 428 childhood variables predict the long-term outcomes of children [30]. It can be concluded that the achievements among students who came from four different regencies were quite significant. Those the subjects with middle and high economic backgrounds tend to have low achievement but students with low economic levels have high academic achievement. The difference in scores obtained by students from four regions is caused by several factors, namely regional characteristics (agriculture, religion, trade, and industry), education and socioeconomic level of parents, and student association groups. Quality of education in coastal areas is not optimal. The education of fishermen’s children in the coastal areas of Indonesia is still relatively low. It is worrying, only about 1-1.3% of fishermen’s children have graduated from education bachelor’s degree, the remaining around 3% are high school graduates, 6% are junior high school graduates, and the remaining 85% only elementary school education. On the other hand, the issue of the education of fishermen’s children is not despite the poverty that complements their lives, coastal communities Indonesians who live below the poverty line are 32.14% [31], [32] state that young people in coastal areas in general prefer to help parents go to sea than go to school. Furthermore, the strength of the mind and parents’ views on children so that they can can help the economy of parents become triggers cannot be separated from the way of thinking traditional and conservative. Learning outcomes are influenced by factors within the individual and external. The factors that exist within students of physical and psychological. While the factors outside the students include factors family, school and community. Quality of education in coastal areas not optimal [33]. Economic conditions also have a positive and significant influence on the level of education of their children. Economic conditions related to ability to cover basic living expenses in advance such as everyday life [34]. This is of course related to the amount of income and amount of expenditure for daily needs. The level of income that is low if it is balanced with high expenditure needs, so it will lower the level of economic conditions. The results of this study concluded that students who come from high economic families end to get low scores and parents with low economics get high scores. Revealing that there is an influence significant/positive from socio-economic on learning achievement stated that the financial capability differently will have influence on student learning achievement [35]. This matter means that the socio- economic parents have important role in height low student achievement. The higher the level of the economy socio-economic parents of students, then greater expectations for achievement. The influence of parents’ socioeconomic status not only determinant in direct child learning achievement but also indirectly can affect it. Parents with high income possible can meet children’s learning facilities [36]. The high-test scores for students who come from a low economy are thought to have high motivation from themselves. Students in coastal areas divide their time to work and studies are accustomed to dividing their time, facing problems and taking responsibility for assignments at home and at school. The situation is different if high economic students are equipped with learning facilities, more time and do not find many problems so that their motivation tends to be less developed. Learning outcomes can be influenced by factors of parents’ economic ability, learning facilities, and learning motivation [37]. The family environmental factors with high or low. The socioeconomic status of parents plays an important role because it is related to the fulfillment of needs which includes primary, secondary, and tertiary needs in which there is fulfillment of the need for education for their children [33]. The results of this study, motivation is a major factor in achieving student achievement in coastal areas. Students with high family economy who fulfill learning facilities, high parental attention and support are suspected of having low learning motivation so that the learning outcomes obtained are low.he essence of motivation is encouragement internal and external to students who is learning to hold changes in behavior, in general with several indicators or supporting elements [23]. With respect to This motivation that learning motivation gives contribution to learning achievement. The tendency of students who have high learning motivation will have high interest and enthusiasm will learn happily and voluntarily [38]. On the other hand, motivated students low learning will have low interest and enthusiasm in study, lazy to join the process learning. According to Descals-Tomás et al. [39] that there is a partial effect between learning motivation and learning achievement. 4. CONCLUSION The results showed a significant difference between the achievement of students in Tegal, Pekalongan, Pati, and Demak Regencies (p=0.012; ∝=0.05). Based on ANOVA test, there was a significant difference between the groups of students’ achievements in mastery of science oriented NGSS. Based on the ANOVA test, there was a significant difference between the four groups of students’ achievements. Students from families with middle and upper economic levels have low achievement but students with low economic levels have high academic achievement. Based on research results, motivation is very important for students in achieving learning achievement.
- 5. J Edu & Learn ISSN: 2089-9823 Next generation science standards assessment for Java coastal students (Sarwi Sarwi) 429 REFERENCES [1] R. W. Bybee, “NGSS and the next generation of science teachers,” Journal of Science Teacher Education, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 211– 221, Apr. 2014, doi: 10.1007/s10972-014-9381-4. [2] J. M. Calmer, “Teaching physics within a next generation science standards perspective,” Pedagogical Research, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 1–6, Aug. 2019, doi: 10.29333/pr/5868. [3] I. G. W. S. Antara, I. K. Sudarma, and I. K. Dibia, “The assessment instrument of mathematics learning outcomes based on HOTS toward two-dimensional geometry topic,” Indonesian Journal Of Educational Research and Review, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 19–24, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.23887/ijerr.v3i2.25869. [4] K. Khoiriah, T. Jalmo, and A. Abdurrahman, “Implementation of assessment for learning based on higher order thinking skills to foster reading interest (in Indonesian),” Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan IPA, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 176–183, Oct. 2020, doi: 10.21831/jipi.v6i2.22817. [5] E. M. Brownstein and L. Horvath, “Next generation science standards and edTPA: evidence of science and engineering practices,” The Electronic Journal for Research in Science & Mathematics Education, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 44–62, 2016. [6] W. F. McComas, M. P. Clough, and N. Nouri, “Nature of science and classroom practice: a review of the literature with implications for effective NOS instruction,” in Nature of science in science instruction: rationales and strategies, Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2020, pp. 67–111, doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-57239-6_4. [7] Y. Akitsu, K. Ishihara, H. Okumura, and E. Yamasue, “Investigating energy literacy and its structural model for lower secondary students in Japan,” International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 1067–1095, 2017. [8] M. S. M. Sachisthal, B. R. J. Jansen, J. Dalege, and M. E. J. Raijmakers, “Relating teenagers’ science interest network characteristics to later science course enrolment: an analysis of Australian PISA 2006 and longitudinal surveys of Australian Youth data,” Australian Journal of Education, vol. 64, no. 3, pp. 264–281, Nov. 2020, doi: 10.1177/0004944120957477. [9] L. Hewi and M. Shaleh, “Reflection on PISA (the programme for international student assessment) results: improvement efforts rest on early childhood education (in Indonesian),” Jurnal Golden Age, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 30–41, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.29408/jga.v4i01.2018. [10] R. Terzi and S. Sen, “A nondiagnostic assessment for diagnostic purposes: Q-matrix validation and item-based model fit evaluation for the TIMSS 2011 assessment,” SAGE Open, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 1–11, Jan. 2019, doi: 10.1177/2158244019832684. [11] P. C. Kyllonen, “Measurement of 21st century skills within the common core state standards,” in Invitational Research Symposium on Technology Enhanced Assessments, 2012, pp. 1–24. [12] J. Krajcik and J. Merritt, “Engaging students in scientific practices: what does constructing and revising models look like in the science classroom?,” The Science Teacher, vol. 79, no. 3, pp. 38–41, 2012. [13] C. Tomovic, S. Mckinney, and C. Berube, “Scientific literacy matters: using literature to meet next generation science standards and 21st century skills,” K-12 STEM Education, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 179–191, 2017. [14] S. V. Drew and J. Thomas, “Secondary science teachers’ implementation of CCSS and NGSS literacy practices: a survey study,” Reading and Writing, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 267–291, Feb. 2018, doi: 10.1007/s11145-017-9784-7. [15] Zulfiani, I. P. Suwarna, and M. F. Sumantri, “Science adaptive assessment tool: Kolb’s learning style profile and student’s higher order thinking skill level,” Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 194–207, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.15294/jpii.v9i2.23840. [16] A. Fitzgerald and K. Smith, “Science that matters: exploring science learning and teaching in primary schools,” Australian Journal of Teacher Education, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 64–78, Apr. 2016, doi: 10.14221/ajte.2016v41n4.4. [17] X. Chen et al., “Differences in rural and urban health information access and use,” The Journal of Rural Health, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 405–417, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.1111/jrh.12335. [18] M. D. P. Berlyana and Y. Purwaningsih, “Experimentation of STAD and Jigsaw learning models on learning achievements in terms of learning motivation,” International Journal of Educational Research Review, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 517–524, Oct. 2019, doi: 10.24331/ijere.628311. [19] B. Odell, M. Gierl, and M. Cutumisu, “Testing measurement invariance of PISA 2015 mathematics, science, and ICT scales using the alignment method,” Studies in Educational Evaluation, vol. 68, pp. 1–9, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100965. [20] E. Pérez-Navío, Ó. Gavín-Chocano, L. Checa-Domene, and M. G.-V. Prieto, “Relationship between learning strategies and motivation of University students,” Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 1–12, Feb. 2023, doi: 10.3390/su15043497. [21] Tulaiya and Wasis, “Analysis of science literacy skills of high school students in Sumenep district (in Indonesian),” IPF: Inovasi Pendidikan Fisika, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 417–427, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.26740/ipf.v9n3.p417-427. [22] M. Sukaryawan, K. Madang, K. Wiyono, Y. Anwar, Hapizah, and Y. Chusiri, “Analysis of scientific literacy abilities of junior high school students in Palembang,” in Proceedings of the 4th Sriwijaya University Learning and Education International Conference (SULE-IC 2020), 2020, pp. 798–803, doi: 10.2991/assehr.k.201230.200. [23] A. Kristanto, Suharno, and Gunarhadi, “Promoting local wisdom in international primary curriculum aims to develop learners’ problem solving skills,” International Journal of Educational Research Review, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 439–447, Jul. 2019, doi: 10.24331/ijere.573947. [24] J. R. Fraenkel and N. E. Wallen, How to design and evaluate research in education, 6th ed. New York: McGrawHill, 2017. [25] J. W. Creswell and V. L. P. Clark, Designing and conducting mixed methods research, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, 2018. [26] E. Zandvakili, E. Washington, E. W. Gordon, C. Wells, and M. Mangaliso, “Teaching patterns of critical thinking: the 3CA model—concept maps, critical thinking, collaboration, and assessment,” SAGE Open, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 1–15, Jul. 2019, doi: 10.1177/2158244019885142. [27] G. Naylor, T. Koelewijn, A. A. Zekveld, and S. E. Kramer, “The application of pupillometry in hearing science to assess listening effort,” Trends in Hearing, vol. 22, pp. 1–3, Jan. 2018, doi: 10.1177/2331216518799437. [28] F. C. Curran and J. Kitchin, “Early elementary science instruction: does more time on science or science topics/skills predict science achievement in the early grades?,” AERA Open, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 1–18, Jul. 2019, doi: 10.1177/2332858419861081. [29] C. Riegle-Crumb, K. Morton, U. Nguyen, and N. Dasgupta, “Inquiry-based instruction in science and mathematics in middle school classrooms: Examining its association with students’ attitudes by gender and race/ethnicity,” AERA Open, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 1–17, 2019, doi: 10.1177/2332858419867653. [30] C. V. Roberts, “Friend request pending: a comparative assessment of engineering-and social science–inspired approaches to analyzing complex birth cohort survey data,” Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World, vol. 5, pp. 1–8, Jan. 2019, doi: 10.1177/2378023118820431. [31] J.-C. Tu and K.-H. Chu, “Analyzing the relevance of peer relationship, learning motivation, and learning effectiveness-design students as an example,” Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 10, pp. 1–26, May 2020, doi: 10.3390/su12104061. [32] J. Liu, P. Peng, and L. Luo, “The relation between family socioeconomic status and academic achievement in China: a meta-
- 6. ISSN: 2089-9823 J Edu & Learn, Vol. 17, No. 3, August 2023: 425-430 430 analysis,” Educational Psychology Review, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 49–76, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s10648-019-09494-0. [33] J. C. Moneva, R. F. L. Pestano, and R. M. Vertulfo, “Parental financial support and students motivation in learning,” Macrothink Institute of Social Science, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 9–20, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.5296/iss.v8i1.16908. [34] T. Susanti, Damris, Maison, and Tanti, “Learning environment and motivation in junior high school,” Universal Journal of Educational Research, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 2047–2056, May 2020, doi: 10.13189/ujer.2020.080542. [35] Maison, Syahrial, Syamsurizal, and Tanti, “Learning environment, students’ beliefs, and self-regulation in learning physics: structural equation modeling,” Journal of Baltic Science Education, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 389–403, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.33225/jbse/19.18.389. [36] D. K. K. B. Nugroho, T. J. Raharjo, and U. Utomo, “The relationship between parents’ learning motivation and socio-economic status with science learning achievement,” Journal of Primary Education, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 518–526, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.15294/jpe.v9i5.43239. [37] N. H. C. M. Ghazali, Z. Suppian, and S. H. Zaini, “Factors influencing students’ motivation towards learning,” Jurnal Cakrawala Pendidikan, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 259–270, Feb. 2022, doi: 10.21831/cp.v41i1.45883. [38] D. Selvia, “Student motivation in physics learning (in Indonesian),” Science, and Physics Education Journal (SPEJ), vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 47–55, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.31539/spej.v4i2.1899. [39] A. Descals-Tomás, E. Rocabert-Beut, L. Abellán-Roselló, A. Gómez-Artiga, and F. Doménech-Betoret, “Influence of teacher and family support on university student motivation and engagement,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 1–21, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.3390/ijerph18052606. BIOGRAPHIES OF AUTHORS Sarwi is professor in the physics/science education study program Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences and Science Education Study Program (S2, S3) Postgraduate Universitas Negeri Semarang. He is also the board editor for the nationally accredited Indonesian Physics Education Journal (Sinta 2) and a peer reviewer for the international journals of F1000Research, IJESE, and IJESDC Journal. In addition, he is active in research projects in the field of physics/science learning innovation in STEM education and professional development. He can be contacted at email: sarwi_dosen@mail.unnes.ac.id. Sigit Saptono is the head lector in the biology of Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences and Science Education Study Program (S2, S3) Postgraduate Program, Universitas Negeri Semarang. He is active in research projects in the field of science learning innovation and teacher professional development training. He can be contacted at email: sigit_biounnes@mail.unnes.ac.id. Siti Fathonah is a civil servant lecturer with the position of head lector. She teaches the main course of applied nutrition and food preservation. She can be contacted at email: fathonah@mail.unnes.ac.id. Winarto is lecturer of Science Education Studies, Mathematic and Natual Science Faculty at Yogyakarta State University. He is active in research projects in the field of science and ethnoscience learning innovation. He can be contacted at email: wiwin16@gmail.com.