THE IMPLEMENTATION OF MULTIPLE REPRESENTATION-BASED INSTRUCTION AND ITS IMPACT TOWARDS STUDENTS CONCEPTUAL MASTERY IN LIGHT REFLECTION CONCEPT.

(1)

Nurul Aisyah, 2014

THE IMPLEMENTATION OF MULTIPLE REPRESENTATION-BASED INSTRUCTION AND ITS IMPACT TOWARDS STUDENTS CONCEPTUAL MASTERY IN LIGHT REFLECTION CONCEPT

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu

THE IMPLEMENTATION OF MULTIPLE REPRESENTATION-BASED INSTRUCTION AND ITS IMPACT TOWARDS STUDENTS

CONCEPTUAL MASTERY IN LIGHT REFLECTION CONCEPT

Nurul Aisyah1

1

International Program on Science Education, Indonesia University of Education

ABSTRACT

This research aims to investigate the implementation of Multiple Representation basd Instrutction and discovering its impact towards students conceptual mastery in light reflection concept, the Multiple Representation (MR) based instruction in this studies emphasize MR model based on Investigative Science Learning Environment Curriculum (ISLE Curriculum). The method taken in this research is pre-experimental group with One-Group Pretest-Posttest Design. The sample was taken in one of public school in Bandung which implemented Indonesian Curriculum (n=34). The quantitative data of this research was obtained through objective test, while supporting data were obtained through multiple representation skill rubric, scientific communication rubric, experiment and data analysing rubric, and also students engagement survey which gained through

Likert-Scale.This research explored how multiple representation instruction

influenced conceptual mastery for student. Students conceptual mastery is measured in accordance to Revised Bloom Taxonomy Theory in cognitive domain through objective test. Hypothesis testing was done by using normalized gain and One Sample T-test, the result shows that there is medium improvement of students conceptual mastery and the result also shows that the multiple representation instruction give impact in improving students conceptual mastery.

(2)

THE IMPLEMENTATION OF MULTIPLE REPRESENTATION-BASED INSTRUCTION AND ITS IMPACT TOWARDS STUDENTS CONCEPTUAL MASTERY IN LIGHT REFLECTION CONCEPT

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 3.1 Research Design: One Group of Pre-test Post-test Design...……...

Table 3.2 Blue Print of Objective Test Items....………...……….

Table 3.3 Blueprint of Objective Test after Instrument Analysis...…….….

Table 3.4 Rubric for Measuring Multiple Representation Skill...…...

Table 3.5 Rubric for Measuring Multiple Representation Skill

(Representation that Students can make)...

Table 3.6 Students Engagement Survey... ...

Table 3.7 Recapitulation of Pretest and Posttest... ... 29

32

33

34

35

37

38 Concept...

2. The Improvement of Students Conceptual Mastery

trough Multiple Representation Based Instruction in

Light Reflection Concept...

3. The Influence of Multiple Representation based

Instruction towards Students Conceptual

Mastery...

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

A. Conclusions…….………..…...

B. Recommendation ……...………...……….

REFERENCES...………..………....

APPENDIX…...………...………. 64

72

76

79

80

81

(5)

Table 3.8 Validity Interpretation...

Table 3.9 Realibility Value of Question... ... ...

Table 3.10 Criteria of Difficulty Level...………

Table 3.11 Criteria of Test Item Discriminating Power...………...…....

Table 3.12 Recapitulation of Validation Test Instrument...………..

Table 3.13 Category of Students Understanding ... ...

Table 3.14 Criteria of N-Gain Improvement... ... ...

Table 3.15 Calculation for Rubric ...………

Table 3.16 Scoring Guideline of Likert Scale...…...

Table 4.1 Time and Teaching Material of Each Meeting ... ... ...

Table 4.2 Statistical Result of One Sample Statistic ...

Table 4.3 One Sample T-Test ………..

Table 4.4 One Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test ………...

Table 4.5 Recapitulation of Pretest and Posttest Score in Cognitive Aspect...

Table 4.6 Recapitulation Students Conceptual Mastery Based on

Revised-Bloom’s Taxonomy.…... ………...

Table 4.7 Students Profile of Ability to Communicate Scientific Ideas... ...

Table 4.6 Students Profile of Ability to Collect and Analyze Experimental

Data.…... ………...…... 40

41

42

43

44

45

47

52

53

54

55

56

61

62

(6)

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

Figure 2.1 Sequence of Multiple Representation Based Instruction...

Figure 2.2 The angle of reflection and incident measured with respect to the

normal line...

Figure 2.3 The Image formed by two Mirrors which Formed angle 45o ....

Figure 2.4 The Parts of Concave Mirror...

Figure 2.5 The Ray Comes Parallel to Main Axis...

Figure 2.6 The Ray Comes Through Focal Point (F)...

Figure 2.7 The Ray Comes Parallel to Main Axis...

Figure 2.8 The Ray Comes With Any Direction...…..…...

Figure 2.9 The Parts of Convex Mirror... …..…....…..…....…...

Figure 2.10 The Ray Comes Parallel to Main Axis in Convex Mirror...

Figure 2.11 The Ray Comes to the Focal Point ………...…

Figure 2.12 The Ray Comes Towards the Center of Curvature...…...…

Figure 2.13 The Ray Comes Towards the Center of Curvature...…………

Figure 2.14 Optical Image Formed in Convex Mirror ………

Figure 3.1 Research Scheme ………....………...

Figure 4.1 Profile of Students’ Multiple Representation Skill ………..…….

Figure 4.2 Profile of Students’ Cognitive Engagement……....………..…….

Figure 4.3 Profile of Students Behavioral Engagement ………...………..… 11

Appendix A.2 Group’ Worksheet ………...

84

(7)

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu B. RESEARCH INSTRUMENT

Appendix B.1 Objective Test .. ………...

Appendix B.2 Student Engagement Survey ………...

Appendix B.3 Multiple Representation Rubric………...

Appendix B.4 Scientific Communication Rubric………..

Appendix B.5 Instrument of Students’ Impression………..

C. INSTRUMENT ANALYSIS

Appendix C.1 Instrument Analysis of Objective Test ………...

Appendix C.2 Judgment Result ………...

D. DATA CALCULATION

Appendix D.1 Pretest and Posttest Result...………...

Appendix D.2 Normalized Gain Result...………...

Appendix D.3 Multiple Representation Result...…...

Appendix D.3 Students Engagement Result...…... ... ...

Appendix D.3 Judgement of Objective Test Result...…...

E. RESEARCH ADMINISTRATION

Appendix F.1 Research Administration ...…...

F. DOCUMENTATION ...…... ...…......

G. AUTOBIOGRAPHY...…... ...…......

128

135

136

137

138

139

144

151

154

155

156

160

170

180

(8)

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

A. Conclusion

According to research finding of Implementation of Multiple

Representation Based Instruction and discovering its impact to student’s

conceptual mastery, it can be concluded as follow:

Multiple Representation based Instruction consists of severalsteps the first

is observation of selected phenomena, finding a pattern, devising explanation

and rule using different types of reasoninge, representing penomena in

multiple ways, making prediction and designing testing experiment,

conducting testing experiment

Multiple Representation representation has a role in improving students’

conceptual mastery this can be seen that the result of Normalized gain is

0.482 which means it has medium level of effectiveness, while acccording to

the result of each taxonomy value of normalized gain for C1 the value is 1

which is considered as high, while C2 is 0.492 is medium, C3 is 0.599 which

is medium and C4 is considered as 0.313 which is medium thus it can be

concluded that multiple representation has role in improving higher order

thinking.

Multiple Representation Instruction gives influence in improving

students conceptual mastery it is proven by One Score t-test that null

hypothesis is retained considering that ttable (-2.034) is less than tcalculated

(0.047) which means students average score is above minimal standard of

(9)

80

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu B. Recommendation

Considering that the research still needed to be developed and improved,

there are some recommendations that researcher suggest for further research:

1. Multiple representation is learning model which can be implemented in

science learning especially for concept which involve abstract subject in

science.

2. In order to avoid missconception and confussion among students, it will

be better for teacher to guide and put attention on students in every step

that students do.

3. In data collection, it will be better for observer to take two types of video

tapping, the first is large classroom session tapping and each group video

tapping.

4. In the implementation of multiple representation, it will be better to apply

all ability rurics such as ability to represent physical processes in multiple

ways, to devise and test a qualitative explanation or quantitative

relationship, to modify a qualitative explanation or quantitative

relationship, to design an experimental investigation, to collect and

analyse data, to evaluate experimental predictions and outcomes,

conceptual claims, problem solutions, and models, and to communicate

scientific idea in the multiple ways, so that students are devised by

(10)

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu REFERENCES

Abdurrahman, Liliasari, A. Rusli, Dan Bruce Waldrip. 2011. “Implementasi Pembelajaran Berbasis Multi Representasi Untuk Peningkatan Penguasaan Konsep Fisika Kuantum”. Cakrawala Pendidikan, Februari 2011, Th. XXX, No. 1

Ainsworth, S. 1999. “The Functions of Multiple Representations”. Computers & Education, 33, 131-152.

Angell,C,o. Guttersrud, dan E.K. Henriksen. 2007 “Multiple representations as a

framework for a modelling approach to physics education”

Carolan, J., Prain, V. & Waldrip, B. (2008). “Using representations for teaching and learning in science”. Teaching Science, 54 (1), 18-23.

College Board. 2008. “Multiple Representations of Knowledge: Mechanics and Energy.” online: www.collegeboard.com (Accessed on August 15, 2013)

Creswell, J.W & Clark, V.P. 2007. “Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research”. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, JW. 2012. “Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research”. Boston: Pearson

Dilworth, John. 2004. „Internal versus External Representation. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Critism” 62:1 Winter 2004

Etkina, Eugenia & Alan Van Heuvelen. 2004. “Investigative Science Learning Environment.”Published in Forum on Education of the American of the American Physical Society, 2004, spring issue, 12-14

Gilbert, John K & David Treagust. 2009. “Models and Modeling in Science Education: Multiple Representations in Chemical Education.” United Kingdom: Springer

Hake, R. Richard., 1997. “Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses”. Am. J. Phys., Vol. 66, No. 1, January 1

Hubber, Peter. 2013. “Engaging students in new technologies using a representation construction pedagogy.” Proceeding ofHETL Conference, Orlando Florida, USA, Jan 13-15, 2013

Kohl, P.B., Rosengrant, D., & Finkelstein, N.D . 2007. “Strongly and Weakly Directed Approaches to Teaching Multiple Representation Use in

Physics”. Physical Review Special Topiks-Physics Education Research, 3,

010108

(11)

83

Peirce, C. (1931-58). “Logic as Semiotic: The Theory of Signs. In Justus Buchler (Ed.) Philosophical Writings of Peirce (1893-1910)”; reprint, New York: Dover, 1955), pp. 98-119.

Prain, V., & Waldrip, B. 2006. “An Explanatory Study of Teachers‟ and Students‟ Use of Multi-modal Representations of Concepts in Primary Science.” International Journal of Science Education Vol. 28, No. 15, 15 December 2006, pp. 1843-1866

Prain,V., Tytler, R., & Peterson, S. 2009. “Multiple Representation in Learning About Representation. International Journal of Science Education”. Vol. 31, No. 6, 1 April 2009, pp. 787-808 DUE 0241078, DUE 0336713

Salkind, J.Neil. 2010. “Encyclopedia of Research Design”. Online ISBN:

9781412961288 available

onhttp://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412961288[accessed on August 31, 2014]

Schnotz, Wolfgang & Richard Lowe., 2003. “Introduction External and internal representations in multimedia learning”. Learning and Instruction Journal 13 .2003. 117-123. www.elsevier.com/locate/learninstruc [Accessed September 1, 2014]

Tytler, Russel, Vaughan Prain, Petter Hubber and Bruce Waldrip. 2013.

“Constructing Representation to Learn in Science”. Australia: Sence Publisher

Van Heuvelen, A. & Zou, X.L. 2000. “Multiple Representations of Work

-Energy Processes”. American Journal of Physics, 69 (2), 184.

Waldrip, B. & Prain, V. 2006. “Changing representations to learn primary science concepts”. Teaching Science, 54(4), 17-21.

Waldrip, B, Prain, V & Carolan, J. 2006. “Learning Junior Secondary

Science through MultiModal Representations”. Electronic Journal of

Science Education, 11 (1), 86-105.

Waldrip, B. 2008. “Improving learning through use of representations in science”. Proceeding The 2nd International Seminar on Science Education. Science Education Program. Bandung: Graduate School Indonesia University of Education.

Waldrip, B., Prain, V., & Carolan, J. 2010. “Using Multi-Modal

(12)

83

Waldrip, B.G., Prain, V. & Sellings, P. 2012. “Explaining Newton‟s laws of Motion: Using student reasoning Through representations to develop conceptual understanding Instructional Science”. DOI: 10.1007/s11251-012-9223-8

.

Waldrip, B., Cox, P., Deed, C., Dorman, J., Edwards, D.,Farrelly, C., Keefe, M., Lovejoy, V, Mow, L., Prain, V., Sellings, P., &Yager, Z. (2012, in press).“Student Perceptions of personalised Learning: Validation and Development of Questionnaire with regional secondary students. Learning Environments Research”.

Weil, Marsha., & Bruce Joyce., “Social Models of Teaching: Expanding Your Teaching Repretoire”. 1978. New Jersey: Pretice-Hall, Inc.

THE IMPLEMENTATION OF MULTIPLE REPRESENTATION-BASED INSTRUCTION AND ITS IMPACT TOWARDS STUDENTS CONCEPTUAL MASTERY IN LIGHT REFLECTION CONCEPT.

CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES

LIST OF FIGURES