Sumo 2022 J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2392 012007

(1)

Journal of Physics: Conference Series

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS

Development of Physics Learning Instrument using Guided Inquiry Model as Effort to Increase Student Learning Result on Dynamic Fluid

Learning Material at Senior High School

To cite this article: M Sumo et al 2022 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 2392 012007

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

Development of Physics Learning Instrument using Guided Inquiry Model as Effort to Increase Student Learning Result on Dynamic Fluid Learning Material at Senior High School

M Sumo^1,2,*, B Jatmiko², Z A I Supardi², S Arifin¹,Nasrullah¹,and A Mukit¹

1Sekolah Tinggi Agama Islam Darul Ulum Banyuanyar, Indonesia

2Pascasarjana Universitas Negeri Surabaya, Indonesia

*E-mail: maimonshadiyanto@gmail.com

Abstract. This study intends to generate a valid, practical and effective guided inquiry model of Physics learning instruments to increase the results of senior high school students. The learning material was developed based on Kemp with steps: 1) topic and goal, 2) student characteristics, 3) study goals, 4) content, 5) preliminary research, 6) source of learning activities, 7) support service, 8) evaluation. The instrument was tested to eleven grades eleven in the second semester with a pre-experimental one- group pretest-posttest design. Study data was collected through observation, tests and questionnaires. The study revealed that revised learning instruments were valid.

Practicability level of learning instrument based on lesson plan practicability were in good category and fulfill the guided inquiry model syntax. Instrument effectiveness could be seen from an Increase in student ability in concept understanding, as shown by N-gain with a high category in 0.81 value; Positive students respond to learning instrument and learning activity, in which 96% responded positively, and 4%

responded negatively. Based on the study finding, it was concluded that student learning results shown by student concept comprehension, psychomotor skill, and character that consist of discipline and responsibility increased upon the implementation of learning instrument developed by the guided inquiry model on dynamic fluid learning material. This research implies that the development of physics learning tools will have a positive impact on increasing students' abilities in learning physics on dynamic fluid topics.

1. Introduction

The 2013 Curriculum emphasizes learning in three aspects; attitude, knowledge and skills. These three aspects could be attained using a scientific approach to teaching and learning [1]. The scientific approach in the 2013 Curriculum learning process uses five stages: observing, asking, trying, reasoning, and presenting. These learning processes centre on a student, making them demand to be active to attain learning objectives [2].

Learning process at school within 2013 Curriculum according to the minister of education and culture regulation, number 65, the Year 2013 concerning Elementary and Secondary Education Process. The education standard should be interactively, inspiringly, fun, challenging, and motivating.

To make students participate actively to develop creativity and autonomy according to student potential, interest, physical development and psychological aspect [3]. In this 2013 curriculum, teachers were challenged to design effective and efficient learning to attain the national education objective, to create excellent Indonesian people in their knowledge, skill, and attitude [4]. One of the

(3)

2

excellent student indicators in those three aspects attained if the student has achieved their study completion criteria 5.

Natural Science learning comprises three main elements: knowledge, attitude and skill or process [6]. These elements mean that Natural Science learning would generate those three elements as a whole. Natural Science learning should be carried out by applying learning strategy, method, and model that could lead to the scientific approach. This method follows the process standard requirement in 2013 curriculum, which states that the learning process is carried out with a scientific approach in the learning process and certainly remains the priority of student attitude as the learning process progresses [7]. Students in the Natural Science learning process demanded to be active in making direct investigations toward certain issues to discover its solution independently 8.

Physics is one of the natural sciences or part of sciences conducted to develop the ability to understand concepts in solving issues related to the surrounding incident, either qualitatively or quantitatively. Practically, the Physics learning process occurs in secondary schools not following Physics subject learning function and objective yet, specifically Physics learning should be implemented actively, creatively, and in fun [9]. This notion is a source from a Researcher interview with State Senior High School 4 Pamekasan Physics teacher. There was an issue of student study results in Physics subject in class elevent that were categorized low compared with student learning result in other subjects. Based on this result, a performance improvement is necessary for the entire education element actively participating in the teaching and learning process. From discussion results between a researcher with school Physics teachers showed that students' low Physics scores are caused by the following factors amongst them: 1) Students consider that Physics is a subject that difficult to understand; 2) Conventional Physics learning methods that make the student have low motivation and interest in learning Physics; and 3) Physics learning in school remain centred in teacher (teacher- centred learning), that provides less space for a student to actively involved in the learning process.

Student learning results in Physics were categorized as low, with 73% scoring under the subject's Minimum Completion Criteria at school, set at 75. This result is not only affected by the student's inability to absorb the subject delivered by the teacher but also by the teacher's ability to manage the teaching and learning activity process. Additionally, learning instruments that might be less proper and sufficient also determine success in teaching and learning. In this context, a teacher is one of the crucial elements in the education field and science teaching at school. Hakim et al. [10] stated that teachers are responsible for adjusting the entire learning situation with student interest, background and maturity. Therefore, the material delivery method used by the teacher highly affects the objective learning achievement of student achievement [11].

The teacher could utilize several learning models in delivering certain subject material, one of them using the Guided Inquiry model [12]. According to Vanags et al. [13], the inquiry learning model is oriented on process and expertise to conduct research. Srirahayu and Arty [14] stated that guided inquiry could assist the student to practice within a team, developing competency in research, knowledge, motivation, writing ability, cooperative learning, and social skill. Through guided inquiry, students are expected to discover certain new concepts or knowledge through hands-on-activity process.

Guided inquiry learning models used in Physics teaching and the learning process at school are widely applied, certainly with excellent results. Hakim et al. [10] stated that learning with the inquiry model could assist students in developing higher mental skills, increasing their attitude, facilitating learning to improve the concept, and increasing their achievement. As learning achievement increases, student learning results would increase as well, as supported by Hakim et al. research [10] which stated that student learning results increased after using the guided inquiry model on its learning.

Additionally, using a guided inquiry learning model, student retention of particular material could go even longer [10]. Based on the above background, the researcher intended to deepen the guided inquiry learning model effect by observing its impact on student learning. This research is titled

“guided Inquiry Model Physics learning instrument development to increase student learning result on

(4)

Analysis of objectives

Student Analysis and indicator formulation

Designing learning Instrument

Review Learning Tools and Validation of Instruments

Learning Device trial

Revision

Report

dynamic fluid topics at Senior High School”. The learning instrument developed includes Learning Implementation Plan, Student Teaching Book, Student Worksheet, and Evaluation Instrument.

2. Methods

This research is development research, namely developing guided inquiry learning instruments to improve high school students learning outcomes on dynamic fluid topics. The data used is derived from the results of the development of physics learning instruments. The Model of Development of Physics Learning Devices was adopted by Marrison et al. [15].

Figure 1. Flowchart in research methods

This research design used one group pretest-posttest design. In this research, the instrument would be tested for third-grade replication. The sample used in this research was a State Senior High School grade eleven student in the 2021/2022 academic year. Data collection methods in this research were observation, test, documentation, and student response questionnaire. Instruments developed by the researcher were the instrument validation sheet, Learning Implementation Plans observation sheet, skill observation sheet, attitude observation sheet, student response questionnaire sheet, and obstacle observation sheet faced during the learning process. The descriptive quantitative technique is used as a data analysis technique. The researcher described collected data quantitatively to be able to conduct statistical analysis.

3. Results and Discussion

The initial results of this development research are learning tools that include lesson plans, student worksheets, handouts, attitude observation sheets, knowledge observation sheets, and performance

(5)

4

observation sheets. Once designed, then validated by experts. The validation results from the experts were then analyzed to determine the level of validity. The results of the validation of learning tools are shown in Table 1, Table 2, and Table 3.

3.1 Learning instrument validity

Experts validate guided inquiry-based physics learning tools developed after being validated and then analyzed to determine the level of validity of each component of the learning device. The results of the validation of learning devices are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Learning instrument validation result

Learning instrument name Average Score Test type Description

Lesson Plans 3.75 Highly Valid

Student Worksheets 3.5 Highly Valid

Handouts 3.5 Highly Valid

Knowledge Observation Sheet 3.5 pretest Highly Valid

3.5 posttest Highly Valid

Skill Observation Sheet 3.75 Highly Valid

Attitude Observation Sheet 3.75 Highly Valid

Table 1 shows that the learning instrument development result developed by the researcher was feasible to use in learning. Learning instrument feasibility could be seen from instrument validation results with the Highly Valid category.

This research is conducted on the results of Srirahayu and Arty [14] regarding the development of physics tools with guided inquiry models, which show that the learning tools developed using the guided inquiry model are in the Highly Valid category according to the criteria of content validity and construct validity. Content validity shows that the learning tools developed are based on the curriculum. Construct validity shows the consistency between the components of the learning device [16].

3.2 Learning Implementation Plans Result

The implementation of the lesson plan is carried out three times or replicated three times. This lesson is done to obtain high-reliability data. The results of learning replication are shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Learning Implementation Plans Result

Class Average per meeting

1st Meeting 2nd Meeting Average Reliability

1st Replication 3.75 4.0 3.82 96.87%

2nd Replication 3.5 3.75 3.63 93.56%

3rd Replication 3.75 4.0 3.82 96.87%

Table 2 shows that the first and second meeting average at 1st class replication achieved very good category with 96.87% reliability, second replication class with a very good category and 93.56%

reliability and third replication class with 96.87% reliability and very good reliability..

3.3 Student learning result

Student learning results are divided into three domains: specific knowledge, skill and attitude. The following is a description of each aspect.

(6)

3.3.1 Knowledge aspect of learning result

Table 3. Knowledge aspect of learning outcomes

Test Class

A B C

Pretest 26 30 20

Posttest 89 90 88

N-gain 0,87 0,86 0,86

According to Table 3, it could be seen that learning with a guided inquiry model could increase student learning results in the cognitive aspect, represented by student N-gain scores that exceed 70%

or 0.7. This finding is also supported by Hakim et al. [10] and Diawati et al. [17]. This research also used the Anova test to discover that students' understanding increases consistency between one class and another on dynamic fluid material. From the Anova test result, it could be obtained that first, second, and third replication classes increased consistently.

3.3.2 Skill aspect of learning result

Table 4. Skill aspect learning outcomes Class Average Score Category

Class A 87 Good

Class B 86 Good

Class C 88 Good

According to Table 4, the guided inquiry learning model implementation of the entire student was complete. This indicates that the student had mastered the psychomotor competency taught. Student psychomotor aspect average in each class was similar in that every meeting yielded a good increase.

This research finding is supported by Asri and Hatmiko [18], Hakim et al. [10], and Faradilla et al.

[19] findings which stated that the guided inquiry learning model not only increased student cognitive ability but also increased student psychomotor as well.

3.3.3 Attitude aspect of learning result

Table 5. Attitude aspect learning outcomes Class Average Score Category

Class A 89 Good

Class B 91 Good

Class C 90 Good

According to Table 5, it could be revealed that through learning with the guided inquiry model, student character developed every meeting. It follows the learning concept described by Skinner, stating that learning is a behavior. In behavior theory, repetition and exercise use could impact individual behavior, so the desired behavior could become a habit (entrenched). The entire student learning result shown in Table 3, Table 4, and Table 5 reached a score above 75 with complete criteria. In guided inquiry learning model instrument implementation, 96% of students responded very well, and 4% responded poorly. Student responses can be seen in Figure 2.

(7)

6

96%

4%

Students positif respons

Students

negative respons 3.3.4 Student responses

Figure 2. Student respond toward learning

According to Figure 2, it could be said that students who responded were in a very good category or positively responded upon implementing the guided inquiry learning model. This finding is consistent with Bakke and Igharo [6], Hakim et al. [10], and Asri and Jatmiko 18].

The final objective of this result was to generate a feasible learning instrument to increase student learning results on the dynamic fluid in 11^th class Natural Science of Senior High School Instrument feasibility could be seen from learning instrument validation. Learning instruments could be seen in Learning Implementation Plans, and obstacles occur during learning. Learning instrument effectiveness could be seen from student learning results and student responses.

4. Conclusion

Based on the research result and discussion, findings are explained in the previous subchapter. It could be concluded that Physics learning instruments with a guided inquiry model is feasible to increase student learning result represented by student concept understanding, student psychomotor skill, and student attitude during the learning process.

Guided inquiry model Physics learning instrument development could entirely increase student learning results. So, it is expected for future research to use this instrument for other Physics material and more interesting media to simplify students in visualizing abstract Physics concepts.

References

[1] Subali B, Kumaidi, Aminah N S, and Sumintono B 2019 J. Pend. IPA Indones. 8 39.

[2] Supeno, Astutik S, and Lesmono A D 2020 IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 485 012033.

[3] Ministry of Education and Culture 2013 Educational and Cultural Regulations Number 65 of 2013 concerning Process Standards (Jakarta: Ministry of Education and Culture).

[4] Gunawan I 2017 Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. Educ. Train. (Paris: Atlantis Press).

[5] Putra B K B, Prayitno B A, and Maridi M 2018 J. Pendidik. IPA Indones. 7 476.

[6] Bakke M M and Igharo O K 2013 Int. Res. J. 2 134.

[7] Machin A 2014 J. Pendidik. IPA Indones. 3 28.

[8] Wahyuni S, Kosim, Gunawan, Husein S 2019 J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1233 012034.

[9] Haryani E, Coben W W, Pleasants B S-A, and Fetters M K 2021 J. Pendidik. IPA Indones.

10 92.

[10] Hakim M L, Prabowo, and Yuanita Y 2015 J. Penelit. Pendidik. Sains 5 2089.

[11] Nasution M K 2017 Studia Didak. J. Ilm. Bid. Pendidik. 11 1978.

[12] Hong J-C, Ye J-H, Ho Y-J, and Ho H-Y 2020 J. Baltic Sci. Educ. 19 908.

[13] Vanags T, Pammer K, and Brinker J 2013 Adv. Physiol. Educ. 37 233.

[14] Srirahayu Y RR and Arty I S 2019 J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1233 012075.

Students positive response

Students negative response

(8)

[15] Marisson G R, Ross S M, and Kemp J E 2004 Designing Effective Instruction 4th Edition.

(New York: Wiley).

[16] Gunawan G, Harjono A, Sahidu H, and Herayanti L 2017 J. Pendidik. IPA Indones. 6 257.

[17] Diawati S M, Kardi S, and Supardi Z A I 2016 J. Penelit. Pendidik. Sains 6 1130.

[18] Asri T P and Jatmiko B 2013 Inov. Pendidik. Fis. 2 121.

[19] Faradilla M, Hasan M, and Sulastri 2018 J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1088 012106.