Improving secondary school students' Scientific literacy ability through the design of better science textbooks

Parlindungan Sinaga; Ida  Kaniawati; Andhy  Setiawan

doi:10.36681/

Authors

Parlindungan Sinaga Indonesia University of Education, Bandung Indonesia
Ida Kaniawati Indonesia University of education, Bandung, Indonesia
Andhy Setiawan Indonesia University of education, Bandung, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36681/

Keywords:

Scientific literacy, science textbook, design textbook of science, secondary school students, better science textbooks

Abstract

This study assessed ways by which science textbooks can be designed and developed to increase scientific literacy in secondary school students. . Here inThe research and development method was used. The draft of the new science textbooks was incorporated into school instruction using a non-equivalent control group design with pretest and posttest measures. The instruments used comprised a test of textbook quality test, a text’s main idea readability test, and a scientific literacy ability test. Data on text’s main idea’s readability and textbook quality tests were analyzed qualitatively; an increase in scientific literacy was determined by the percentages of average normalized gains, Cohen’s d and t-test. The results reveal that the science textbooks developed in from the research have medium to high readability for of their main ideas, appropriate quality to be used as students’ handbooks or books accompanying teaching and learning, and can significantly increase scientific literacy.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

AAAS. (2006): About project 2061. Retrieved from http://www.project2061.org/about [Last accessed on 21 January 2014

Ahtee, M., & Varjola, I. (1998). Students’ understanding of chemical reaction. International Journal of Science Education, 20(3), 305-316.

Alsop, S. (2001). Living with and learning about radioactivity: A comparative conceptual study. International Journal of Science Education, 23(3), 263-281.

Arikunto, S. (2013).Prosedur penelitian: suatu pendekatan praktik, Jakarta, PT Rineka Cipta

Atiila, M.E., Gunel, M., & Buyukkasap, E.(2010). The Effect of Using Different Multi Modal Representations within Writing to Learn Activities on Learning Force and Motion Unit at the Middle School Setting, Journal of Turkish Science Education. Volume 7, Issue 4.

Balitbang Depdikbud. (2011). Seminar PISA: analisis trend kemampuan siswa Indonesia hasil PISA 2000-2009 ,Jakarta DepDik Bud

Baker, L. (1985). How do we know when we don't understand? Standards for evaluating comprehension. In D. L. Forrest, G. E., MacKinnnon, & T. G. Waller (Eds.),

Metacognition, cognition, and human performance (pp 155-205). New York: Academic Press

Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press

Best, R., Rowe, M., Ozuru, Y., & McNamara, D. (2005). Deep-level comprehension of science texts: the role of the reader and the text. Topics in Language Disorders, 25, 65-83

Bezzi, A. (1999). What is this thing called geoscience? Epistemological dimensions elicited with the repertory grid and their implications for scientific literacy. Science Education, 83(6), 675-700

Borg & Gall. (2010). Apllying Educational Research. Pearson: USA

Brandt, C.(2005). Examining the “script” in Science education: Critical literacy in the classroom, in A. J. Rodriguez and R. S. Kitchen (eds), Preparing Mathematics and Science Teachers for Diverse Classrooms, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, New Jersey, Chapter 12, pp. 243-261.

Brown, R. A. (1991). Humanizing physics through its history. School Science and Mathematics, 91(8), 357-361

Bryant, R. (2006). Assessment results following inquiry and traditional physics laboratory activities. Journal of College Science Teaching, 35(7), 56-61.

Campbell, T. (2006). The distant exploration of wolves: Using technology to explore student questions about wolves. Journal of College Science Teaching, 35(7), 16-21

Candan1, A., Türkmen, L., & Çardak, O. (2006) The Effects Of Concept Mapping On Primary School Students’ Understanding Of The Concepts Of Force And Motion. Journal of Turkish Science Education, Volume 3, Issue 1

Carnine, L., & Carnine, D. (2004). The interaction of reading skills and science content knowledge when teaching struggling secondary students. Reading & Writing

Quarterly, 20, 203-218.

Chambliss, M., & Calfee, R. (1989). Designing science textbooks to enhance student understanding.Educational Psychologist, 24, 307-322.

Chiappeta,E.L.,Filma, D.A .,& Setha,G.H. (1991). A Method to quantify major themes of scientific literacy in science texbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(8) 713-725

Coe, R (2000). What is an Effect Size ?.A Guide for User. Draft version.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. NewYork: Routledge

Cook, L., & Mayer, R. (1988). Teaching readers about the structure of scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 448-456

Dancy,M.,& Beichner, R.(2006). Impac of animation on assesment of conceptual understanding in physics. Phys. Rev.ST Phys.Educ.Res. 2, 010104.

DeLeone, C., & Gire,E.,(2005). edited by Heron, P., McCullough, L and Marx, J. 2005 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings, Salt Lake City, UT,2005, 45-48.

Dimopoulos, K., Koulaidis, V.,& Sklaveniti. S.(2003). Towards an Analysis of Visual Images in School Science Textbooks and Press Articles about Science and Technology, Research in Science Education 33: 189–216, 2003.

Ehindero, O.J. (1994). Curriculum foundation and development for Nigeria students. Lagos: Concept Publications Limited.

Finkelstein. N, et.al. (2005), When learning about the real world is better done vitually: A Study of Substituting Computer Simulation for laboratory Equipment. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 1, 010103

Georgia Department of Education. (2014). Asessment guide grade 3

Gu, L., Huang, R., & Marton, F. (2004) Teaching with Variation: A Chinese Way of Promoting Effective Mathematics Learning. In Fan, L., Wong, N.-Y., Cai, J.,& Li. S. (Eds.), How Chinese Learn Mathematics(pp.309-347). Singapore, World Scientific.

Hake, R.R. (1998). Interactive–engagement vs traditional methods: A six- thousand student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics course, American Journal of Physics, 66, 64-74

Halliday, M. A. K. (1996). On the language of physical science. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp. 54– 68). London: The Falmer Press

Hale.J. (2003). The Information Conveyed by Words in sentences. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, Vol 32 N0 2

Hayes, J.R.,& Nash,J.G. (1996).On the nature of planning in writing. In. Levy, C.M & Ransdell, S.(1966). The Science of Writing: Theories, Methods, Individual Differencies, and Application, Mahwah, NJ; Lawrence Erlbaum.

Idrees, M., Habib , Z., & Hafeez,M.A.(2014). Evaluating and Comparing the Textbooks of General Science: A Comparative Study of Published Textbooks in Pakistan, International J. Soc. Sci. & Education Vol.4 Issue 2,

Jacobi, D., & Schiele, B. (1989). Scientific imagery and popularized imagery: Differences and similarities in the photographic portraits of scientists. Social Studies bof Science, 19(4), 731–753

Kemendikbud (2013).Dokumen Kurikulum 2013. Jakarta: Kemendikbud ( 2012)

Kesidou, S., & Roseman, J. E.: 2002, How well do Middle School Science programs measure up? Findings from Project 2061’s curriculum review, Journal of Research in Science Teaching 39(6), 522-549

Kohl.P.B., & Finkelstein,N.D. (2008). Paterns of multiple representation use by experts and novices durin physics problem solving, Physical Review Special Topics, Physics Educational Research,4, 010111

Kohl, P.B., & Finkelstein, N.(2005) edited by P. Heron, L. McCullough & J. Marx, Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings, Salt Lake City, UT, 2005, 93-96

Kohl, P., & Finkelstein, N. (2006). Student representational competence and the role of instructional environment in introductory physics. In P. Heron, L. McCullough & J. Marx (Eds.), 2005 Physics Education Research Conference (Vol. 818, pp. 93-96). doi. 10.1063/1.2177031

Kohl. P. B. et al (2007). Strongly and weakly directed approach to teaching multiple representation use in physics. Physical Review Special Topics. Physics Education Research, 3, 010128

La Follette, M. C. (1990).Making science our own: Public images of science, 1910–1955. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press

Leedy, P. D., & Ormrod, J. E. (2010). Practical research: Planning and design (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall

Lemke, J. L. (1993). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Stamford, CT: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

Lemke, J. (2004).The literacies of science. In E.W. Saul (Ed.), Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction (pp 33-47). Newark: International Reading Association.

Lemmer, M., Edwards, J.A., & Rapule, S. (2008): Educators’ selection and evaluation of natural sciences textbooks, Vol. 28:175-187, South African Journal of Education..

Lundeberg, M. A., & Yadav, A. (2006). Assessment of case study teaching: Where do we go from here? Part I. Journal of College Science Teaching, 35(5), 10-13.

Lumpe, A.T., & Beck, J. (1996). Profile of high scho ol biology textbooks using scientific literacy recommendation. The American Biology Teacher, 18, 253-256

Magliano, J., Todaro, S., Millis, K., Wiemer-Hastings, K., Kim, H., & McNamara, D. (2005). Changes in reading strategies as a function of reading training: a comparison of live and computerized training. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32, 185-208.

Meltzer,D.E (2005) , Student ideas regarding entropy and second law of thermodynamics in an Introductory Physics” Am. J. Phys., 73, 463-478

Myers, G. (1990a). Writing biology: The social construction of popular science. Madison,WI: University of Wisconsin Press.

Myers, G. (1990b). Every picture tells a story: Illustrations in E. O. Wilson’s sociobiology. In M. Lynch & S. Woolgar (Eds.), Representation in scientific practice (pp. 231–265). Cambridge,MA: MIT Press.

Newton, D. P., & Newton, L. D.: 2006, Could elementary Mathematics text- books help give attention to reasons in the classroom?, Educational Studies in Mathematics 64, 69-84

Novak, J.D., & Gowin, D.B. (1984). Learning How tolLearn. New York: Cambridge University Press

OECD.(2006). The PISA 2003 Assessment Framework for Science, Reading, and Mathematics, Paris OECD

OECD. (2013).PISA (2015 ) Draft Science Framework. Paris: OECD (2013)

Ogan-Bekiroglu, F.: 2007, To what degree do the currently used Physics textbooks meet the expectations?, Journal of Science Teacher Education 18, 599–628.

Prain.V.,Tytler,R., & Peterson.S.(2009). Multiple representation in learning about evaporation, International Journal of Science Education, 31(6),787-808

Reddy, V.( 2006). Challenges to meet international Maths and Science standards, HSRC Review 4(1).

Reys, B. J., & Reys, R. E.: 2006, The development and publication of elementary Mathematics textbooks: Let the buyer beware!, Phi Delta Kappan 87(5), 377-383.

Rosengrant.D, Etkina. E, & Van Heuvelen. A,(2006). National Association for Research in Science Teaching Proceedings, San Francisco, CA

Rosengrant. D, Van Heuvelen. A., & Etkina. E, (2005) edited by Heron. P, . McCullough. L and Marx. J, (2005). Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings, Salt Lake City, UT, 49-52.

Roseman, J. E., Kesidou, S., Stern, L., & Caldwell, A. (1999). Heavy books light on learning: AAAS Project 2061 evaluates middle grades science textbooks. Science Books & Films, 35(6): 243-247.

Rudd, J. A.,II, Greenbowe, T. J., Hand, B. M., & Legg, M. J. (2001). Using the science writing heuristic to move toward an inquiry-based laboratory curriculum: An example from physical equilibrium. Journal of Chemical Education, 78(12), 1680-1686.

Sinaga,P., Suhandi,A .,& Liliasari. (2014). Improving the Ability of Writing Teaching Materials and Self-Regulation of Pre-Service Physics Teachers through Representational Approach, International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Aplied Research, 15(1), 80-94

Sinaga,P., Suhandi,A .,& Liliasari. (2015). The Effectiveness Of Scaffolding Design In Training Writing Skills And Improving Physics Conceptual Understanding: Preparing Pre-service Physics Teachers To Be Novice Writers Teaching Materials, International Journal of Instruction, 8(1) 19-34.

Steitner, C.M., Alberth, D., & Hellor, J. (2007). Concept mapping as a means to build E-Learning. In Buzetto-More, N.A (ed), Advanced Principles of Effective e-Learning (59-111). Santa Rosa, California. Information Science Press

Sursock, A. (2001). Quality and innovation in Higher Education, in N. Baijnath, S. Maimela and P. Singh (eds), Quality Assurance in Open and Distance Learning, University of South Africa and Technikon South Africa, Pretoria, pp. 81-93.

UNESCO, Paris.( 2003).Section of Education for Universal Values, Division for the Promotion of Quality Education, Education Sector,

Veel, R. (1998). The greening of school science: Ecogenesis in secondary classrooms. In J. R. Martin & R. Veel (Eds.), Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science (pp. 114–149). London and New York: Routledge.

Wang, Hsing Chi. (1998).Science Textbook Studies Reanalysis: Teachers "Friendly"Content Analysis Methods? the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (71st, SanDiego, CA, April 19-22, 199 Educational Resources Information Center (Eric).

Wieman, C. (2007). Why not try a scientific approach to Science Education?, Change (September-October 2007), 9-15.

Zimmerman, C., Gerson, S., Monroe, A., & Kearney, A. M. (2007). Physics is harder than psychology (or isit?): Developmental differences in calibration of domain-specific texts. In D. S. McNamara & J.G. Trafton (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty-ninth Annual Cognitive Science Society (pp.1683 –1688). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society. http://www.cogsci.rpi.edu/ csjarchive/proceedings /2007/docs/p1683.pdf