The Profile of Students’ Competencies in Biology Learning–Scientific Literacy Oriented

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Syarofis Si'ayah ◽  
Adib Rifqi Setiawan ◽  
Wahyu Eka Saputri ◽  
Matahari
Keyword(s):  
Time Series ◽  
Secondary Schools ◽  
Effect Size ◽  
Scientific Literacy ◽  
Cohen’S D ◽  
Series Design ◽  
Time Series Design ◽  
Biology Learning ◽  
Normalized Gain ◽  
D Value

The goal of this work using time series design was to obtain the profile of students’ competencies in biology learning–scientific literacy oriented in secondary schools. It was obtained that students’ competencies increased in medium category with normalized gain value of 0.586 and learning had effectiveness in medium category with effect size Cohen's d value of 0.548.

Comparing Normalized Gain g and Effect Size Cohen’s d to Measure the Improvement of Student’s Scientific Literacy

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adib Rifqi Setiawan
Keyword(s):  
Education Research ◽  
Student Learning ◽  
Effect Size ◽  
Physics Education ◽  
Scientific Literacy ◽  
Biology Education ◽  
Physics Education Research ◽  
Cohen’S D ◽  
Cohen's D ◽  
Normalized Gain

In this work I investigate about my curiousity. My investigation focused on the implications on claims about student learning that result from choosing between one of two metrics. The metrics are normalized gain g, which is the most common method used in Physics Education Research (PER), and effect size Cohen’s d, which is broadly used in Discipline-Based Education Research (DBER) including Biology Education Research (BER). Data for the analyses came from the research about scientific literacy on Physics and Biology Education from courses at institutions across Indonesia. This work reveals that the bias in normalized gaing can harm efforts to improve student’s scientific literacy by misrepresenting the efficacy of teaching practices across populations of students and across institutions. This work, also, recommends use effect size Cohen’s d for measuring student learning, based on reliability statistical method for calculating student learning.

The Difference Between Hake’s Normalized Gain g and Effect Size Cohen’s d for Measuring the Improvement of Students’ Scientific Literacy

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adib Rifqi Setiawan
Keyword(s):  
Student Learning ◽  
Effect Size ◽  
Scientific Literacy ◽  
Cohen’S D ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Cohen's D ◽  
Normalized Gain

This work investigate the implications on claims about student learning that result from choosing between one of two metrics: Hake’s normalized gain g and effect size Cohen’s d, that is based exclusively on the preexist data about scientific literacy on physics and biology across Indonesia.

The Difference Between Normalized Gain g and Effect Size Cohen’s d for Measuring the Improvement of Student’s Scientific Literacy

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adib Rifqi Setiawan
Keyword(s):  
Education Research ◽  
Student Learning ◽  
Effect Size ◽  
Physics Education ◽  
Scientific Literacy ◽  
Biology Education ◽  
Cohen’S D ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Cohen's D ◽  
Normalized Gain

As an undergraduate from Physics Education, I began teaching of Biology at the secondary school on 22 July 2018 until 30 June 2019 when I acceded to come back at primary school, both Islamic Madrasah. Teaching at the Islamic Madrasah is a hassle because I should consider my perspective on Islam in teaching. However, teaching at the Islamic Madrasah is not and should not be considered a burden or chore that just needs to be done. It is a crucial part of moslem scholar, as we all want to do scientifically sound research and we should all strive to be effective teachers. Through teaching, we are responsible for the education of the next generation of islamic peoples, who will use their own unique ideas and skill sets to advance their society. Teaching, in general, should not be seen as a hassle in scholar, but rather as a skill to be developed and a responsibility to be taken seriously. Teaching does not have to decrease research productivity, it can greatly enhance research if we allow it to. One of my evidence about this statement is my experience and work. After a year devoted to spruce up the teaching of Biology, I produced a series of work on scientific literacy related Biology, that continues my undergraduate thesis, which was related Physics. In these works, I wrote about my experiences teaching Biology in Islamic Madrasah. Then, I became think to reconsider my method on measuring student learning. Measuring student learning is a complicated but necessary task for understanding the student’s improvement and effectiveness of instruction. I have curious about the the difference between normalized gain g and effect size Cohen’s d for measuring the improvement of student’s scientific literacy. I used normalized gain g in my undergraduate thesis nor my first work on Biology Education, then used effect size Cohen’s d on my latest work on scientific literacy in teaching of Biology. I see need reasons for using one or both of them, to be explained in any writings on educational research. So, in this work I investigate about my curiousity. My investigation focused on the implications on claims about student learning that result from choosing between one of two metrics. The metrics are normalized gain g, which is the most common method used in Physics Education Research (PER), and effect size Cohen’s d, which is broadly used in Discipline-Based Education Research (DBER) including Biology Education Research (BER). Data for the analyses came from the research about scientific literacy on Physics and Biology Education from courses at institutions across Indonesia. The results showed that the two metrics lead to different inferences about student learning. First, normalized gain g being biased in favor of populations with higher pretest means. Second, effect size Cohen’s d may mitigate the limitations of these metric for measuring the learning of high or low pretest populations of students by accounting for the distribution of tests scores. Third, by comparing the two metrics across all data, effect size Cohen’s d is larger than normalized gain g in these cases for the same size change in the means. This work reveals that the bias in normalized gaing can harm efforts to improve student’s scientific literacy by misrepresenting the efficacy of teaching practices across populations of students and across institutions. This work, also, recommends use effect size Cohen’s d for measuring student learning, based on reliability statistical method for calculating student learning. In addition, using effect size Cohen’s d would allow scholars to use their work in subsequent studies and meta-analyses, align with the practices of the larger education research community, nor facilitating more cross-disciplinary conversations and collaborations as well.

The Difference Between Hake’s Normalized Gain g and Effect Size Cohen’s d for Measuring the Improvement of Student’s Scientific Literacy

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adib Rifqi Setiawan
Keyword(s):  
Student Learning ◽  
Effect Size ◽  
Scientific Literacy ◽  
Cohen’S D ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Cohen's D ◽  
Normalized Gain

This work investigate the implications on claims about student learning that result from choosing between one of two metrics: Hake’s normalized gain g and effect size Cohen’s d, that is based exclusively on the preexist data about scientific literacy on physics and biology across Indonesia.

The Difference Between Hake’s Normalized Gain g and Effect Size Cohen’s d for Measuring the Improvement of Student’s Scientific Literacy

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adib Rifqi Setiawan
Keyword(s):  
Student Learning ◽  
Effect Size ◽  
Scientific Literacy ◽  
Cohen’S D ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Cohen's D ◽  
Normalized Gain

This work investigate the implications on claims about student learning that result from choosing between one of two metrics: Hake’s normalized gain g and effect size Cohen’s d, that is based exclusively on the preexist data about scientific literacy on physics and biology across Indonesia.

Pengaruh edukasi stunting menggunakan metode brainstorming dan audiovisual terhadap pengetahuan ibu dengan anak stunting

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 141
Author(s):  
Izka Sofiyya Wahyurin ◽  
Arfiyanti Nur Aqmarina ◽  
Hiya Alfi Rahmah ◽  
Ade Uswatun Hasanah ◽  
Christy Nataly Br Silaen
Keyword(s):  
Time Series ◽  
Series Design ◽  
Time Series Design

Latar Belakang: Stunting merupakan kondisi gagal tumbuh untuk mencapai pertumbuhan normal yang diakibatkan oleh status gizi kurang dalam periode waktu lama. Pencegahan serta penanganan stunting dapat dilakukan dengan meningkatkan pengetahuan ibu yang memiliki anak stunting agar tidak berlanjut pada anak selanjutnya. Pemberian edukasi pada ibu dapat dilakukan menggunakan metode brainstorming dan audiovisual. Tujuan: Mengetahui pengaruh pemberian edukasi dengan metode brainstorming dan audiovisual terhadap pengetahuan ibu tentang stunting di Desa Gununglurah, Cilongok, Kabupaten Banyumas. Metode: Desain penelitian adalah quasy experimental with time series design. Subjek penelitian terdiri dari 34 ibu yang memiliki balita stunting. Data pengetahuan ibu mengenai stunting dikumpulkan menggunakan kuesioner pretest dan posttest. Pemberian edukasi gizi mengenai stunting dilakukan dengan metode brainstorming (curah pendapat) menggunakan alat bantu leaflet. Pemberian edukasi gizi mengenai stunting dengan metode audiovisual dilakukan menggunakan film ilustrasi. Hasil: Rerata skor pengetahuan ibu pada saat pretest adalah 6,44±1,65 sedangkan skor pada saat posttest naik menjadi 7,38±1,76. Analisis statistik menggunakan uji beda Wilcoxon menunjukkan adanya perbedaan signifikan antara pengetahuan ibu mengenai stunting pada waktu sebelum dan sesudah dilakukan intervensi (p=0,009). Kesimpulan: Terdapat perbedaan pengetahuan ibu yang signifikan mengenai stunting pada waktu sebelum dan sesudah pemberian edukasi gizi dengan metode brainstorming dan audiovisual. 

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document