STUDENTS’ CONCEPTUAL CHANGE AND SCIENCE PROCESS SKILLS ACQUISITION ON SEPARATION OF MIXTURE CONCEPT THROUGH PREDICT-DISCUSS-EXPLAIN-OBSERVE-DISCUSS-EXPLAIN (PDEODE) METHOD.

(1)

Ineu Gustiani , 2013

Students’ Conceptual Change And Science Process Skills Acquisition On Separation Of Mixture Concept Through Predict-Discuss-Explain-Observe-Discuss-Explain (Pdeode) Method

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu

STUDENTS’ CONCEPTUAL CHANGE AND SCIENCE PROCESS

SKILLS ACQUISITION ON SEPARATION OF MIXTURE CONCEPT

THROUGH

PREDICT-DISCUSS-EXPLAIN-OBSERVE-DISCUSS-EXPLAIN (PDEODE) METHOD

RESEARCH PAPER

Submitted as requirement to obtain degree of Sarjana Pendidikan in International

Program on Science Education study program

Arranged by

Ineu Gustiani

0902108

INTERNATIONAL PROGRAM ON SCIENCE EDUCATION FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE EDUCATION

(2)

APPROVAL FORM OF RESEARCH PAPER

INEU GUSTIANI

0902108

STUDENTS’ CONCEPTUAL CHANGE AND SCIENCE PROCESS

SKILLS ACQUISITION ON SEPARATION OF MIXTURE CONCEPT

THROUGH

PREDICT-DISCUSS-EXPLAIN-OBSERVE-DISCUSS-EXPLAIN (PDEODE) METHOD

APPROVED AND AUTHORIZED BY:

Supervisor I

H. Hayat Sholihin, M.Sc, Ph.D

NIP: 1957112319840310001

Supervisor II

Dr. Phil. H. Ari Widodo, M.Ed.

NIP: 196705271992031001

Head of Study Program of

International Program on Science Education

(3)

(4)

(5)

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu Lembar Hak Cipta

STUDENTS’ CONCEPTUAL CHANGE AND

SCIENCE PROCESS SKILLS ACQUISITION ON

SEPARATION OF MIXTURE CONCEPT THROUGH

PREDICT-DISCUSS-EXPLAIN-OBSERVE-DISCUSS-EXPLAIN (PDEODE) METHOD

Oleh: Ineu Gustiani

©Ineu Gustiani 2013

Sebuah skripsi yang diajukan untuk memenuhi salah satu syarat memperoleh gelar Sarjana pada Fakultas Pendidikan Matematika dan Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam

(6)

STUDENTS’ CONCEPTUAL CHANGE AND SCIENCE PROCESS SKILLS ACQUISITION ON SEPARATION OF MIXTURE CONCEPT THROUGH PREDICT-DISCUSS-EXPLAIN-OBSERVE-DISCUSS-EXPLAIN (PDEODE)

METHOD

Ineu Gustiani

0902108

ABSTRACT

This study intended to examine the effectiveness of PDEODE

(Predict-Discuss-Explain-Observe-Discuss-Explain) method benefits students learning on the degree to which students accept scientific concepts and use them to generate conceptual change and improve their science process skills. This study used a descriptive design and

quantitative data collection method to investigate students’ conceptual change and

acquisition of science process skills on separation of mixture concept. The sample consists of 23 eight grade students in a bilingual secondary school. Students’ conceptual change was evaluated by administering conception sheet contains open-ended question related to the separation of mixture concept, meanwhile students’ acquisition of science process skills was evaluated through observation. After classroom intervention using PDEODE method was conducted, it revealed that the implementations of PDEODE method help students change their negative conception into positive conception about separation of mixture concept and there are two kinds of conceptual change patterns found on magnetic attraction concept, three kinds of conceptual change patterns found on decantation concept and two kinds of conceptual change patterns found on filtration and evaporation concept. PDEODE method influences the acquisition of science process skills on separation of mixture concept through hands on experiment. The highest acquisition is in conducting investigation skill, followed by followed by communicating skill, observing skill, predicting skill, inferring skill, applying concept skill, classifying skill, formulating hypotheses skill and the lowest percentage is questioning skill. Analysis of results indicates that

PDEODE method can be effectively implemented to help students generate conceptual change and give information about students’ acquisition of science process skills.

(7)

PERUBAHAN KONSEPTUAL DAN AKUISISI KETERAMPILAN PROSES SAINS SISWA PADA KONSEP PEMISAHAN CAMPURAN MELALUI METODE PREDICT-DISCUSS-EXPLAIN-OBSERVE-DISCUSS-EXPLAIN (PDEODE)

Ineu Gustiani

0902108

ABSTRAK

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menguji keefektifan metode PDEODE

(Predict-Discuss-Explain-Observe-Discuss-Explain) pada pembelajaran siswa dalam tingkat siswa menerima konsep ilmiah dan menggunakannya untuk menghasilkan perubahan konseptual meningkatkan keterampilan proses sains. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode pengumpulan data kuantitatif dengan desain deskriptif untuk meneliti perubahan konseptual dan akuisisi keterampilan proses sains siswa pada konsep pemisahan campuran. Sampel penelitian ini tediri dari 23 siswa kelas delapan di sebuah sekolah menengah bilingual. Perubahan konseptual siswa dievaluasi melalui lembar konsepsi siswa yang mengandung pertanyaan open-ended berkaitan dengan konsep pemisahan campuran, sementara akuisisi keterampilan proses sains siswa dievaluasi melalui observasi. Setelah pembelajaran di kelas dengan menggunakan metode PDEODE dilakukan, terungkap bahwa penerapan metode PDEODE membantu siswa merubah konsepsi negatif pada konsep pemisahan campuran menjadi konsepsi positif dan ada dua jenis perubahan konseptual yang ditemukan pada konsep pemisahan campuran melalui daya tarik magnet, tiga jenis perubahan konseptual yang ditemukan pada konsep pemisahan campuran melalui penuangan dan dua jenis perubahan konseptual yang ditemukan pada konsep pemisahan campuran melalui penyaringan dan penguapan. Metode PDEODE mempengaruhi akuisisi keterampillan proses sains siswa melalui kegiatan eksperimen. Akuisisi tertinggi ditemukan pada kemampuan melaksanakan penelitian, kemampuan mengkomunikasikan, kemampuan mengamati, kemampuan memprediksi, kemampuan menarik keimpulan, kemampuan mengaplikasikan konsep, kemampuan mengklasifikasi, dan kemampuan merumuskan hipotesis, sementara akuisisi terendah ditemukan pada kemmpuan mengajukan pertanyaan. Analisis hasil penelitian mengindikasikan bahwa metode PDEODE dapat diterapkan secara efektif untuk membantu siswa menghsilkan perubahan konseptual dan memberikan informasi mengenai akuisisi keterampilan proses sains siswa.

(8)

(9)

Students’ Conceptual Change And Science Process Skills Acquisition On Separation Of Mixture Concept Through Predict-Discuss-Explain-Observe-Discuss-Explain (Pdeode) Method

TABLE OF CONTENT

Page

APPROVAL FORM

DECLARATION

PREFACE………i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT……….ii

ABSTRACT.………..iv

TABLE OF CONTENT……….v

TABLE LIST………vii

FIGURE LIST……….viii

APPENDIX LIST ……….ix

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A. Background………...1

B. Statement of Problem …...5

C. Aim of the Study………...6

D. Benefits of the Study ………...6

E. Research Paper Structure...7

CHAPTER II CONCEPTUAL CHANGE, SCIENCE PROCESS SKILLS, PDEODE (PREDICT-DISCUSS-EXPLAIN-OBSERVE-DISCUSS-EXPLAIN) METHOD, AND SEPARATION OF MIXTURE CONCEPT A. Conceptual Change ...8

B. Science Process Skills...10

C. PDEODE (Predict-Discuss-Explain-Observe-Discuss-Explain) Method………..………...16

(10)

CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY

A. Participant of the Study…….……...29

B. Time and Location...29

C. Method and Design of Research………...29

D. Operational Definition ………...33

E. Research Instrument ………...34

F. Data Processing Techniques ……….………......39

CHAPTER IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION A. PDEODE and Students’ Conceptual Change……….48

B. PDEODE and Students’ Acquisition of Science Process Skills……70

C. Discussion………..76

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION A. Conclusion ……….80

B. Recommendation ………...81

REFERENCES…………..…..82

(11)

TABLE LIST

2.1. Science Process Skills Aspects………..11

2.2. Indicator of Science Process Skills………12

2.3. Methods of Separation Mixtures………22

3.1. Blueprint of Students’ Conception Sheet………...34

3.2. Identification of Science Process Skills Aspects………36

3.3. Students’ Conception of Magnetic Attraction Experiment (Separating Staples from Sand)………..……40

3.4. Students’ Conception of Decantation Experiment (separating oil from water)….41 3.5. Students’ Conception of Filtration and Evaporation Experiment (separating salt from sand)………...42

3.6. Code of Students’ Conception on Magnetic Attraction Experiment………..44

3.7. Code of Students’ Conception on Decantation Experiment………...45

3.8. Code of Students’ Conception on Filtration and Evaporation Experiment………45

4.1. Students’ Conception of Magnetic Attraction Experiment (Separating Staples from Sand)………...50

4.2. Students’ Conceptual Change Pattern of Magnetic Attraction Experiment (Separating Staples from Sand)………...55

4.3. Students’ Conception of Decantation Experiment (separating oil from water)…57 4.4. Students’ Conceptual Change Pattern of Decantation Experiment.………..61

4.5. Students’ Conception of Filtration and Evaporation Experiment (separating salt from sand)………..63

(12)

FIGURE LIST

2.1. Decantation process………..………24

2.2. Magnetic Attraction Process………...………...25

2.3. Filtration Process………...27

2.4. Evaporation Process………...………28

4.1. Students’ Conception of Magnetic Attraction Experiment on First Session...51

4.2. Students’ Conception of Magnetic Attraction Experiment on Second Session………...52

4.3. Students’ Conception of Magnetic Attraction Experiment on Third Session...52

4.4. Students’ Conceptual Change Pattern of Magnetic Attraction Experiment..…55

4.5. Students’ Conception of Decantation Experiment on First Session …...58

4.6. Students’ Conception of Decantation Experiment on Second Session …...58

4.7. Students’ Conception of Decantation Experiment on Third Session…………59

4.8. Students’ Conceptual Change Pattern of Decantation Experiment.…………..62

4.9. Students’ Conception of Filtration and Evaporation Experiment on First Session………...65

4.10. Students’ Conception of Filtration and Evaporation Experiment on Second Session………...66

4.11. Students’ Conception of Filtration and Evaporation Experiment on Third Session………...66

4.12. Students’ Conceptual Change Pattern of Filtration and Evaporation Experiment………..69

(13)

APPENDICES LIST

A.1. Lesson Plan ………86

A.2. Students’ Module A.2.1. Individual Module………..94

A.2.2. Group Module...………..97

A.3. Students’ Worksheet A.3.1 Individual Worksheet.………...102

A.3.2 Group Worksheet………..104

B.1. Identification of Science Process Skills Aspects………..106

B.2. Science Process Skills Observation Sheet………110

C.1. Recapitulation of Students’ Answers on Students’ Conception Sheet C.1.1. Students’ answer on Magnetic Attraction Experiment……….118

C.1.2. Students’ answer on Decantation Experiment………..124

C.1.3. Students’ answer on Filtration and Evaporation Experiment………...130

C.2. Recapitulation of Students’ Conception Code C.2.1. Conception’s Code of Students Answer on Magnetic Attraction Experiment ………...141

C.2.2. Conception’s Code of Students Answer on Decantation Experiment………142

C.2.3. Conception’s Code of Students Answer on Filtration and Evaporation Experiment………143

C.3. Check List of Science Process Skills Observation Sheet……….144

(14)

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

A. Background

The scenario of the world in the 21st century saw rapid progress in science and

technology. Knowledge is increasing rapidly as the effects of testing new ideas in the

world either by research institutions or others. In today's information age, the main

goal of the educational system should be to provide students with information

acquisition skills instead of directly providing them with the information they need.

As it is known education desires to change the behavior that aims to acquire

individuals the ability to define problems around them, to observe, to analyze, to

hypothesize, to experiment, to conclude, to generalize, to solve their existing

problems and living in accord with their environment (Karsli, Yaman & Ayas,

2010). Science subjects are crucial to accomplish these aims. Mastery of relevant

concepts and phenomena generates a necessary base for the acquisition of knowledge

and understanding in science subject.

One of the important findings of science education research is that students come to

science classes with a wide range of preconceptions. Students come into classroom

with their own knowledge and they reformulate their existing knowledge, either valid

or invalid or incomplete, only if new information is connected to knowledge in their

mind. The experiences gained by the individual form the basis of these self

constructed conceptions (Baser, 2006). The persistence of preconceptions, preformed

ideas and theories about how the natural world works, theories that students bring

with them to the science class and stand as an obstacle to what students are expected

to learn becomes a difficulties for students to construct conceptual understanding of

science concept (Kapartzianis, 2012). Thus, teaching students can not be understood

as merely providing new material to mix with what students already know.

(15)

Science may require a challenging process of dealing with the prior concepts that

guide students’ thinking. Students who are exposed to scientific concepts would

hardly give up their prior understanding completely. They will try to change their

previous conception when they are confronted with the new idea but still they might

integrate both to build a new framework. Simply presenting a new concept or telling

the students that their views are inaccurate will not result in conceptual change,

because students have relied on their preconceptions to understand and function in

their world (Kapartzianis, 2012). Instructional process with an exposing event is

needed to elicit students’ conception. Students can use a variety of ways to expose their ideas, it can be through discussion, small group work, journal writing, and

pencil and paper quizzes. Regardless of the method, the goal of this step is to help

students recognize and begin to clarify their own ideas and understandings. Once

students' conceptions are made explicit, teachers can use them as the basis for further

instruction (Kapartzianis, 2012). There is also an argument about constructivist view

on learning in which students’ alternative conceptions derived from their everyday -life experiences before the formal instructions has been seen as a starting point in

teaching (Baser, 2006).

One basic constructivist principle of learning is that learners build connections

between their existing knowledge and new experiences. From the perspective of

conceptual change, teaching requires an active approach in which children must be

engaged in building explanations that challenge concepts and beliefs that they

previously held (Thagard, 2003). Students should be given opportunity to be actively

involved in the learning process. This has therefore, created room for further search

for other instructional strategies that could possess enough cure and appeal to the

learners and that would help to achieve the objectives of science education. All these

call for constructivist-based teaching strategy in science. Students are able to learn

and retain knowledge better by actively participating rather than learning passively.

Science instruction that emphasizes science process skills (SPS) will be able to help

(16)

thinking and decision making. Science process skills include observing qualities,

measuring quantities, classifying, inferring, predicting, experimenting, and

communicating. Hence, it is necessary to teach students how to acquire this

knowledge and not just teach all the knowledge. In the science education system,

science process skills are competencies that enable students to acquire knowledge as

well as understand the knowledge obtained (Harlen, 1999; Karsli, Yaman, & Ayas,

2010).

Science process skills are beneficial in that students can realize by participating in

instructional activity. Science process skills are special skills that simplify learning

science, activate students, develop students’ sense of responsibility in their own

learning, increase the permanency of learning, as well as teach them the research

methods (Karamustafaoğlu, 2011). Besides, they are the thinking skills that we use to

get information, think on the problems and formulate the results. They are also the

skills that scientists use in their studies. Science process skills are not inseparable in

practice from the conceptual understanding that is involved in learning and applying

science. Classroom studies have centered on the basic and integrated science process

skills over the past three decades, many researchers have focused their attention on

these skills (Harlen, 1999). Basic science process skills are (BSPS): Observing,

classifying, measuring, and predicting. These skills provide the intellectual

groundwork in science, such as the ability to order and describe natural objects and

events. Integrated Science Process Skills (ISPS): identifying and defining variables,

collecting and transforming data, constructing tables of data and graphs, describing

relationships between variables, interpreting data, manipulating materials, and

recording data, formulating hypotheses, designing investigations, drawing

conclusions and generalizing.

Improve students’ achievement in science courses has always been targeted as the

goal of science education. Along with this aim, it is desired to let them gain some

(17)

investigate, interrogate, experience, discover and solve, who adapt their prior

understanding into new conditions, improving their skills, who have the ability to

come up with creative ideas and to develop integration activities with other sciences.

Among the science concepts, separation of mixture concept is one of the topics that

can promote the acquisition of students’ science process skill and conceptual change.

Separation of mixture concept is explicitly addressed in assessed curriculum of

TIMSS (Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study) in chemistry

domain of eight grades. Test items that addressed separation of mixture topic are test

item in TIMSS 1999 with ID S02219, TIMSS 2003 with ID S032562 and TIMSS

2007 with ID S042083. The context of question is attributed to reasoning and

analysis about separation of salt, sand and iron fillings mixture. At the eighth grade,

students should be able to classify substances on the basis of characteristic physical

properties and recognize that substances can be grouped according to similar

chemical and physical properties (Yung, 2006). Rustaman et al. (2009) found that the

result of Indonesia students’ achievement on test item that covered separation of

mixture topic in TIMSS 1999, TIMSS 2003 and TIMSS 2007 are below the

international average. Indonesia students are not used to response the form of TIMSS

test items, most of test items on separation of mixture topic which are applied on

general examination and national examination in Indonesia are still knowledge

oriented and not applicable for junior high school students, meanwhile TIMSS test

items have essay and multiple choice form which tend to provide data or information

in table-graph-diagram, examine students’ ability to analyze based on observation or

experiment and problem solving which is provided hierarchically.

The use of Predict-Discuss-Explain-Observe-Discuss-Explain (PDEODE) method is

introduced in which the activity consists of focusing on peer interaction, having the

students take responsibility for making their own research plans, doing hands on

activity and analysis, producing a report and presenting the results in a class, were all

(18)

aimed to understand how conceptual change of students is generated and how science

process skill of junior high school students can be improved through PDEODE

method in separation of mixture lesson.

B. Statement of Problems

How can PDEODE method help students to generate conceptual change and science

process skills’ acquisition?

1.2.1 Research questions

In the light of the problem above, this study will be guided and structured

around the following research questions:

1. Are there any effects of PDEODE method on students’ conceptual change

on the degree to which students generate conceptual change on separation of

mixture concept?

2. How does students’ acquisition of science process skills on separation of

mixture concept through PDEODE method?

C. Limitations of the Study

Limitations of the study are examined in order to define the research. This study will

be defined based on the following limitation:

1. Students’ conceptual change which is examine in this research is limited on the

change of students’ conception code from first session until third session during instruction process through PDEODE

(Predict-Discuss-Explain-Observe-Discuss-Explain) method by considering the result of students’ conception sheet

2. Students’ acquisition of science process skills is examined through SPS (Science

Process Skills) observation sheet, students can be said acquire science process

skills aspect if students conduct learning activity based on indicator of scence

process skills.

3. The concept which is examined in this study is separation of mixture. The

concept is limited into magnetic attraction, decantation, filtration, and

(19)

D. Assumption of the Study

Students often express a wish to have theoretical and practical issues well integrated

in the other hand, students who are exposed to scientific concepts would hardly give

up their prior understanding completely. Using pre-lecture assignments, focusing on

peer interaction and cooperating in small groups, having the students take

responsibility for making their own research plans, taking advantage of the PDEODE

method, doing fieldwork and laboratory analysis, and summing up results in a report

and presenting them in a class discussion, were all tools which help to achieve an

excellent learning outcome (Kolari, 2005).

E. Aim of the Study

In view of the above, the aim of this study are to examine the effectiveness of

PDEODE method benefits students learning on the degree to which students accept

scientific concepts and use them to generate conceptual change and improve their

science process skills, to improve learning results in science education by

pedagogical means and to suggest approach of teaching that may promote conceptual

change.

F. Benefits of the Study

This study is expected to give contributions for researcher, teachers, students and

readers as follow:

1. This research is expected to give information about the implementation of

PDEODE method on separation of mixture concept in secondary school

2. This research is expected to give information about the effectiveness of

PDEODE method to help secondary school students to generate conceptual

change and improve science process skills

3. Through the implementation of PDEODE method, it is expected that student

will be able to improve their science process skill and be able to generate

(20)

4. This research can be an alternative method to conduct instructional process in a

classroom

5. As the reference for the other researcher in doing research with same focus of

study

G. Organizational Structure

This research paper comprises five chapters that is started with introductory chapter

which describes the background and statement of the problem, limitation of the

study, assumption of the study, aims of the study and finally the benefits of the study.

It starts by focusing on students' preconceptions which although they have proven by

a series of observations and empirical research to stand as an obstacle to what

students are expected to learn and the importance of science process skills that

enable students to acquire knowledge, develop sense of responsibility in their own

learning and increase the permanency of learning. The researcher in order to help

students overcome this obstacle, determined the objectives of the study, and

subsequently formulated the research questions. The second chapter provides

literature review of the study, the chapter started by focusing on theory of conceptual

change and science process skills. Finally the PDEODE method used in this study for

the teaching and learning of chemistry more specifically separation of mixture

concept was discussed along with an attempt by the researcher to justify the research.

The third chapter examines research methodology. The chapter begun by detailing

the participant of the study and the time and location under which the various stages

of research were carried out. Next, it dealt with the method and design of research,

operational definition and data collection instruments. The fourth chapter presented

data analysis and interpretation. Descriptive and inferential statistics such as

frequencies, tables and percentages were used in the data analysis and summaries.

The results of both qualitative and quantitative data were presented by using tables

and graph. The last chapter presented conclusion that was taken from the research

(21)

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

A. Participant of the study

1. Population of the Study

Population of this study comprises of 8th grade of secondary school students at

Bilingual School located in Bandung, Indonesia.

2. Sample of the Study

One of the two classes was chosen as sample of this study, it consisted of 23 female

students enrolled in even semester of a bilingual school located in Bandung,

Indonesia.

B. Time and Location

1. Time

Research was conducted from February 2013 until June 2013. Preparation stage

was conducted from February 2013 until April 2013, implementation stage was

conducted in May 2013 and final stage was conducted in June 2013.

2. Location

Research was conducted in one of bilingual secondary school in Bandung,

Indonesia.

C. Method and Design of Research

1. Research Method

Quantitative method was used n this research. Quantitative research method is

explaining phenomena by collecting numerical data that are analysed using

mathematically based methods (Aliaga and Gunderson, 2000). Non experimental

study was chosen in this study consider that the researcher observing the

phenomenon and attempting to establish what caused it. This research investigate

the current state of a variable or the relationships, other than causal, between

(22)

2. Research Design

In this research, non experimental study descriptive design was conducted. This

study classified as descriptive design consider the characteristics of this design that

makes careful descriptions of the current situation or status of variable of interest,

attempt to describe systematically a situation, problem, phenomena, service or

program, or provides information about living conditions of a community or

describe attitude towards an issue (Kumar, 2005).

3. Procedure of the Research

This research was conducted through 3 stages which are defined below:

a) Preparation Stage

Activities that were conducted in this stage consist of:

1) Preliminary study and need analysis that consists of an extensive literature

study on the subject of implementation as well as appropriate literature

related to science process skills, analyzing science curriculum which is used

at school and analyzing annual plan and science lesson material for 8th

grader of secondary school.

2) Determining lesson material that will be used in this research

3) Designing learning scenario

4) Designing research instrument

5) Revising instrument

6) Preparing research license

7) Determining research subject

b) Implementation Stage

1) Conducting instructional process through PDEODE method according to

the steps that has been planned.

2) Observation of students’ science process skills was conducted during the

instructional process.

(23)

c) Final Stage

1) Processing data

2) Analyzing data and taking conclusion

3) Arrange research paper

4) Presenting research paper

(24)

4. Scheme of Research

Preliminary study/need analysis

Literature study of science process skills and conceptual

change Literature study of

PDEODE method Analyzing science content

standard of secondary school

Analyzing Indicator of science process skills and

conceptual change Analyzing Indicator of

separation of mixture lesson

Designing lesson plan based on PDEODE method

Making research instrument (students’ conception sheet, science process skill

observation sheet)

Revision

Instrument validation

Preparation

Learning separation of mixture concept through PDEODE method (1st meeting)

Instructional process observation Learning separation of mixture concept

through PDEODE method (2nd meeting) _{Implementation}

Data Processing

Analyzing data

(25)

D. Operational Definition

To avoid misinterpretation of some terms that is used in this research, hence the

explanation of some terms is needed in order to make it more effective and operational.

The terms are as follow:

a. The term conceptual change in this research refers to the outcome of a complex

cognitive as well as social process whereby rational beings may alter or abandon

existing conceptions for ones that are widely supported by empirical evidence (Chi,

2008) Students’ conceptual change were evaluated during instruction process

through PDEODE (Predict-Discuss-Explain-Observe-Discuss-Explain) method by

considering the result of students’ conception sheet.

b. Science process skills (SPS) are the thinking skills that scientists use to construct

knowledge in order to solve problems and formulate results (Ozgelen, 2012). In

this study, science process skill that will be examined is based on Rustaman (2003)

which consists of observing, classifying, inferring, predicting, questioning,

formulating hypotheses, conducting investigation and collecting data, applying

concept and communicating which is evaluated by SPS (Science Process Skills)

observation sheet.

c. PDEODE (Predict-Discuss-Explain-Observe-Discuss-Explain) Method initially is

suggested by Savander-Ranne & Kolari (2003). The PDEODE method consists of

six steps. In the first step (P: Prediction), teacher presented a phenomenon to

students so as to predict the outcome of the phenomenon individually and to justify

their prediction. In the second step (D: Discuss/Discuss I), it is wanted the students

to discuss in a group to share their ideas in own group and to ponder together. In

the third step (E: Explain/Explain I), students in each group are asked to reach a

mutual solution about phenomenon and to give their result to other groups through

whole-class discussions. Afterwards, the students worked in groups perform

hands-on experiment and record individually their observatihands-ons what happened. In this

step (O: Observe), the students observe changes in the phenomenon and teacher

(26)

fifth step (D: Discuss/Discuss II), the students are asked to reconcile their

predictions with their actual observations made in the early step. Here the students

were asked to analyze, compare, contrast and criticize their classmates in the

groups. In the last step (E: Explain/Explain II), the student confronts all

discrepancies between observations and predictions.

E. Research Instrument

Instruments that were used on this study consist of individual worksheet (student’s

conception sheet) and Science Process Skill Observation sheet. The data were taken

using these instruments as follow:

1. Individual Worksheet (student’s conception sheet)

This instrument was prepared by researcher to identify students’ conception in

separation of mixture concept and to analyze the pattern of students’ conceptual

change during instructional process.

The instrument was prepared in form of prediction questions. Students were asked

to predict the outcome of phenomenon related to separation of mixture concept.

This instrument consists of three open-ended questions that cover method of

separation of mixture concept which can be seen in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1 Blueprint of Students’ Conception Sheet

No. Concept Experiment Question

1. Magnetic plastic near them? Why do you think it happens? 2. Decantation Separating oil

(27)

This instrument was given in three sessions in order to analyze students’

conception in each session. First session is in predict step when teacher presented a

phenomenon to students so as to predict the outcome of the phenomenon

individually, instrument that was given in first session aimed to know students

preconception. Second session is in discuss I step when students discuss in their

own group to share their ideas and to ponder together, after they discuss in group,

they filled students’ conception sheet individually. Instrument that was given in

second session aimed to know students’ conception when students become aware that there are points of view different from their own, they have to re-examine their

own points of view and reassess their validity due to group discussion. Third

session is in Explain II step after students observe changes in the phenomenon and

asked to reconcile their predictions with their actual observations made in the early

step, after they conduct observation and discussion in group, they filled the last

conception sheet individually, it is aimed for students to replace their possible

ineffective conceptions with new ones.

2. Science Process Skill Observation Sheet

This instrument was prepared to assess students’ acquisition of science process skill

during instructional process through PDEODE method. This instrument was

constructed by referring to science process skills aspects developed by Rustaman

(2003). Those aspects are observing, classifying, inferring, predicting, questioning,

formulating hypotheses, conducting investigation and collecting data, applying

concept and communicating.Each aspect consists of some sub skills that might be

(28)

Table 3.2 Identification of Science Process Skills Aspect

SKILLS & problem (even it is not derived from evidence

f) Suggests how to test

(29)

d) Suggest how to test

a) Determine apparatus √ b) Knowing the reason of

using apparatus √ √

(30)

h) Data is well organized

and accurate √

i) use time effectively √

Maximum Score 2 8

b) Able to explain basis

for inferences √

b) using concept which is generated from

c) Use effective time to discuss and report the result

√ √

d) Written report : based on observation and

(31)

of objects and events g) Picture/diagram :

completed with labels √ √

Maximum Score 1 6 7

conclusion, findings and generalization. Data processing techniques require the

following steps:

1. Categorization of students’ answer

Students’ answers in each session were categorized into two categories, they are

negative conception and positive conception. Students’ answer is categorized into

negative conception if the answer did not fit with the actual outcome of

phenomenon, meanwhile students’ answer is categorized into positive conception if the answer fits with the actual outcome of the phenomenon. To make the

categorization more explicit, each category is divided into some sub-categories.

(32)

appears on students’ answer. The categorization of students’ conception of each

concept can be seen in Table 3.3, Table 3.4 and Table 3.5.

Table 3.3 Students’ Conception of Magnetic Attraction Experiment

(Separating staples from sand)

Students’ Conception

because it is made of iron

-plastic can’t block

magnetic attraction

-There is magnetic

attraction that attract

-staples is magnetic object

because it is made of iron

-plastic can’t block

magnetic attraction but

make staples easier to be

(33)

Table 3.4 Student’s Conception of Decantation Experiment

(separating oil from water)

Students’ Conception

1st session 2nd session 3rd session

Percentage

(%)

Percentage

(%)

Percentage

(%)

Water and

oil can’t be

separated

No reason

Water and

oil can be

separated

No reason

-water and oil are never

mixed because they form

heterogeneous mixture

-water and oil is

-water and oil has different

density

-water and oil is

-water and oil has different

density, oil has lower

density than water (oil is

(34)

Table 3.5 Student’s Conception of Filtration and Evaporation Experiment

(separating salt from sand)

substance becomes dry

without separating it.

filter paper and funnel, but the

sand will be stuck on the filter

paper.

(phenomenon)

Evaporation process :

-the mixture of salt and water

will form solid salt.

(35)

Filtration process :

-Salt will dissolve in water,

but the sand won’t dissolve in water.

paper. (phenomenon)

- sand particle has bigger size

than pores in filter paper, so

the mixture of salt & water

(mixed) will pass through the

paper

(36)

-the water evaporates and

solid salt is formed

(phenomenon & reason)

The percentage of students answer for each concept in each session were calculated

by equation:

Percentage (%) =

x 100%

2. Categorization of Students’ Conceptual Change Pattern

Students’ conception from first session until third session in each experiment was coded to analyze students’ conceptual change pattern. Coding of students’

conception on each experiment can be seen on Table 3.6, Table 3.7 and Table 3.8

below.

Table 3.6 Code of Students’ Conception on Magnetic Attraction Experiment

Students’ Conception Pattern

Magnet is blocked by plastic 1b

Staples can

be separated

from sand

-There is magnetic attraction

-plastic can’t block magnetic attraction

2a

-There is magnetic attraction

-staples is magnetic object because it is made of iron

-plastic can’t block magnetic attraction

2b

-There is magnetic attraction that attract staples

-staples is magnetic object because it is made of iron

-plastic can’t block magnetic attraction but make staples

(37)

easier to be removed from magnet

Table 3.7 Code of Students’ Conception on Decantation Experiment

Code Water and oil can’t be

separated

No reason 1a

Water and oil can be

separated

No reason 2a

-water and oil are never mixed because they form

2b

-water and oil is heterogeneous mixture

-water and oil has different density

2c

-water and oil is heterogeneous mixture

-water and oil has different density, oil has lower

density than water (oil is always on the top layer)

2d

Table 3.8 Code of Students’ Conception on Filtration and Evaporation Experiment

Code

Salt and sand can’t be

separated

-salt and sand will be mixed with water and can’t

be filtered

-evaporation process make all substance becomes

dry without separating it

1a

(38)

separated Filtration process :

-Salt will mix with water, but the sand won’t mix

with water

-The mixture of salt+water (mixed) will pass

through the filter paper and funnel, but the sand

will be stuck on the filter paper

(phenomenon)

-the mixture of salt and water will form solid salt

(phenomenon)

2b

-Salt will mix with water, but the sand won’t mix

with water

-The mixture of salt+water (mixed) will pass

through the filter paper and funnel, but the sand

will be stuck on the filter paper

(phenomenon)

-the water evaporates and solid salt is formed

2c

- salt is soluble in water and form a homogeneous

mixture, but the sand won’t mix with water

- sand particle has bigger size than pores in filter

paper, so the mixture of salt+water (mixed) will

pass through the filter paper and funnel, but the

sand will be stuck on the filter paper

-the water evaporates and solid salt is formed

(39)

3. Scoring Students’ Acquisition of Science Process Skills Aspects

Students’ acquisition of science process skill aspects during instructional process through PDEODE method were scored based on categorization of science process

skills aspect on Table 3.2 which was obtained through observation. The percentage

of skill that appeared on each step of PDEODE method was obtained from the

amount of sub skills that posses by students and calculated by the equation below:

Percentage (%) =

(40)

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

A. Conclusion

This research give information about how the PDEODE

(Predict-Discuss-Explain-Observe-Discuss-Explain) method can be effectively implemented to help students

generate conceptual change and give information about students’ acquisition of science

process skills. In this research, students were asked to predict the outcome of

phenomenon about separation of mixture topic through conducting hands on activity

that consist of magnetic attraction experiment (separating staples from sand),

decantation experiment (separating oil from water), filtration and evaporation

experiment (separating salt from sand).

PDEODE method gives effects on students’ conceptual change on the degree to which

students generate conceptual change on separation of mixture concept. The

implementations of PDEODE method help students change their negative conception

into positive conception about separation of mixture concept, through the

implementation of PDEODE method, there are two kinds of conceptual change

patterns found on magnetic attraction concept, three kinds of conceptual change

patterns found on decantation concept and two kinds of conceptual change patterns

found on filtration and evaporation concept.

PDEODE method influences the acquisition of science process skills on separation of

mixture concept through hands on experiment. There are nine kinds of skills that were

acquired by students, it consist of observing, classifying, inferring, predicting,

questioning, formulating hypotheses, conducting investigation and collecting data,

applying concept and communicating. The percentage of students’ acquisition of

predicting skill, classifying skill, observing skill, conducting investigation skill,

inferring skill and communicating skill obtained the percentage above the average,

(41)

below the average, with the highest acquisition is in conducting investigation skill,

followed by followed by communicating skill, observing skill, predicting skill,

inferring skill, applying concept skill, classifying skill, formulating hypotheses skill

and the lowest percentage is questioning skill.

B. Recommendation

Regarding of the research that has been conducted, researcher arrange recommendation

as follow:

1. For the teacher and teaching practice students, PDEODE method can be

implemented as one of alternative in separation of mixture instructional activity and

another science instructional activity. This method can be conducted to facilitate

conceptual change and acquisition of science process skills of students.

2. For another researcher, PDEODE method has been implemented on scientific

concept in chemistry, physics and biology. In chemistry concept, this strategy can

be implemented to facilitate conceptual change in condensation concept, physical

and chemical changes concept or chemical reaction concept.

3. For further research, use Science Process Skills (SPS) test items and

(42)

REFERENCES

Ackermann, E. K. (2004). Constructing Knowledege and Transforming The World. IOS Press, 2004. Part 1. Chapt 2. pp. 15-37.

Applefield, J. M., Huber, R., Moallem, M. (2000). Constructivism in Theory and Practice: Toward a Better Understanding. High School Journal. 84(2), 35-53.

Arikunto, S. (2010). Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Baser, M. (2006). Effect of Conceptual Change Oriented Instruction on Students’ Understanding of Heat and Temperature Concepts. Journal of Maltese

Education Research. 4(1), 64-79.

Bredekamp, S., & Copple, C. (1997). Developmentally Appropriate Practice in

Early Childhood Programs . Washington, DC: National Association for the

Education of Young Children.

Cakir, M. (2008). Constructivist Approaches to Learning in Science and Their Implications for Science Pedagogy: A Literature Review. International

Journal of Environmental & Science Education. 3(4), 193-206.

Chi, M.T.H. (2008). Three Types of Conceptual Change: Belief Revision, Mental

Model Transformation, and CategoricalSshift. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.),

Handbook of Research on Conceptual Change (pp. 61-82). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cooperstein, S. E., & Weidinger, E. K. (2004). Beyond Active Learning: A

Constructivist Approach to Learning. USA: Emerald Group Publishing

Limited.

Costu, B. (2008). Learning Science through the PDEODE Teaching Strategy: Helping students make sense of everyday situations. Eurasia Journal of

Mathematics, Science and Technology Education. 4(1), 3-9.

Farmer, A. W., & Farrel, A. M. (1980). Systematic Instruction in Science for the

Middle and High School Years. New York: Addison-Wesley Publishing

Company.

(43)

Harlen, W. (1999). Purposes and Procedures for Assessing Science Process Skills.

Assessment in Education. 6(1), 129-145.

Hewson, P. W. (1992). Conceptual Change in Science Teaching and Teacher

Education. National Center for Educational Research, Documentation, and

Assessment. Madrid: Spain.

Karsli, F., Yaman, F. & Ayas, A. 2010. Prospective Chemistry Teachers’ Competency of Evaluation of Chemical Experiments in Terms of Science Process Skills. Procedia Social and Behavioral Science. 2(1), 778–781.

Kapartzianis, S. A. (2012). Designing Conceptual Change Activities for The

Physics Curriculum: The Cyprus Paradigm. Unpublished master’s

dissertation, University of South Africa. Cyprus: South Africa.

Karamustafaoğlu, S. (2003). Improving the Science Process Skills Ability of Science Student Teachers Using I Diagrams. Eurasian Journal of Physics

and Chemistry Education. 3(1):26-38.

Kolari, S., Viskari, E-L and Savander-Ranne, C. (2005). Improving Student Learning in an Environmental Engineering Program with a Research Study Project. International Journal of Engineering Education. 21(4), 702-711.

Lawson, A.E. (1995). Science Teaching and the Development of Thinking. California: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Mei, Y.T. (2007). Promoting Science Process Skills and the Relevance of Science

through Science Alive. Proceedings of the Redesigning Pedagogy: Culture,

Knowledge and Understanding Conference Programme. Singapore.

Mkandawire, M. (2009). Physical Science Activities and Skills Development in the

School Curriculum of Namibia. Unpublished master’s dissertation, University of South Africa. Namibia: South Africa.

Musasia, M.A. (2012). Effect of Practical Work in Physics on Girls’ Performance, Attitude Change and Skills Acquisition in the Form Two-form Three Secondary Schools’ Transition in Kenya. International Journal of

Humanities and Social Science. 2(23), 151-166.

Myers, E. (2006). A Personal Study of Science Process Skills in a General Physics

Classroom. Unpublished master’s dissertation, Hamline University. Saint Paul: Minnesota.

(44)

Ozgelen, S. (2012). Students’ Science Process Skills within a Cognitive Domain Framework. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology

Education. 8(4), 283-292.

Padilla, M. J. (1990). The Science Process Skills. Research Matter to the Science

Teacher, No. 9004, 2012.

Pardhan, H. (2000). Science Activities and Ideas Experiencing Science Process

Skills. Canada: CMASTE Publisher.

Pfundt, H. dan Duit, R. (2000). Student Alternative Frameworks and Science

Education. Germany. Leibniz-Institute for science education. [Online].

Available: http://www.eric.ed.gov/pdfs/ed342643.pdf [7 November 2010].

Richardson, V. (2003). Constructivist Pedagogy. Teachers College Record. 105(9), 1623-1640.

Rustaman, N. (2003). Kemampuan Proses Ilmiah dalam Pembelajaran Sains. Bandung: Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.

Rustaman, N., Kaniawati, I., Widhiyanti, T., Solihat, R., & Effendi, R. (2009).

Analisis Konten dan Capaian Sains Siswa Indonesia dalam TIMSS (Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study) Tahun 1999, 2003, dan 2007. Program “Better Educational through Reformed Management

Universal and Teacher Upgrading”(BERMUTU). Pusat Penilaian Pendidikan Badan Penelitian dan Pengembangan Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.

Savander-Ranne, C., & Kolari, S. (2003). Promoting the Conceptual Understanding of Engineering Students Through Visualization. Global Journal of

Engineering Education. 7(2), 189-199.

Sjoberg, S. (2007). Constructivism and Learning. International Encyclopaedia of Education 3rd Edition. Oxford: Elsevier.

Stepans, J. (1994). Targeting Students' Science Misconceptions: Physical Science

Activities Using the Conceptual Change Model. Riverview, FL: Idea

Factory Inc.

Taber, K. S. (2011). Constructivism as Educational Theory: Contingency in

Learning, and Optimally Guided Instruction. In J. Hassaskhah

(Ed.), Educational Theory. New York: Nova, 39-61.

(45)

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society. London: Harvard University Press.

Yandila, C. D., Komane, S. (2004). Acquisition of Scientific Process Skills in Botswana General Certificate Secondary Education Science. Science

Education International. 16(4), 333-344.

Yung, B. H. W. (2006). Learning from TIMSS: Implications for Teaching and

Learning Science at the Junior Secondary Level. Hongkong: TIMSS HK