The Assessment and Preference of Student-Centered Learning Under Subject of Chemistry among PERMATApintar Students

Abstract

Teaching and learning chemistry at all levels of education have faced numerous challenges. These challenges include students' struggles with problem-solving skills, limited spatial visualization abilities, difficulties in grasping chemistry vocabulary, and inadequate communication between students and teachers. As a result, researchers across various educational contexts have consistently advocated for the creation of a learning methods that effectively addresses these difficulties. This research delves into an examination of the pedagogical approaches, both as currently perceived and preferred, among PERMATA@Pintar College students in the realm of chemistry education. The investigation concentrates on two primary pedagogical paradigms: student-centered teaching and teacher-centered teaching. The study encompasses a cohort of 150 students ranging in age from 13 to 18 years. To gauge the students' perceptions of their teachers' instructional methods and their own preferences, a revised version of the Approaches to Teaching Inventory (ATI) originally developed by Prosser and Trigwell was employed.The findings of this study reveal that the prevailing pedagogical approach in chemistry classes appears to strike a balance between teacher-centered and student-centered learning. However, in terms of the students' own inclinations, they exhibit a slight preference for the teacher-centered method, emphasizing information transfer, over the student-centered approach, which emphasizes conceptual change. Interestingly, when considering the desired shift in teaching methods as envisioned by the students, their preference leans significantly towards an increased frequency of student-centered methods, highlighting a distinct preference for these methods over teacher-centered ones.

Keywords: Pedagogy; education; student-centered; teacher-centered; chemistry

References

Ali, S. S. (2019). Problem based learning: A student-centered approach. English Language Teaching, 12(5), 73. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v12n5p73

Blonder, R., & Mamlok‐Naaman, R. (2019). Factors affecting the study of Chemistry in different countries around the world: Findings from an international survey. Israel Journal of Chemistry, 59(6–7), 625–634. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijch.201800100

Bradford, J., Mowder, D., & Bohte, J. (2016). You can lead students to water, but you can’t make them think: An assessment of student engagement and learning through student-centered teaching. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 16(4), 33–43. https://doi.org/10.14434/josotl.v16i4.20106

Dahsah, C., & Wannagatesiri, T. (2010). Quantitative Chemistry teaching and learning at the high school level: A case study in Thailand. The International Journal of Learning: Annual Review, 17(9), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.18848/1447-9494/cgp/v17i09/47226

Gilis, A., Clement, M., Laga, L., & Pauwels, P. (2008). Establishing a competence profile for the role of student-centred teachers in higher education in Belgium. Research in Higher Education, 49(6), 531–554. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-008-9086-7

Göksu, V., & İnaltekin, T. (2019). The analysis of student- and teacher-centered pedagogic processes in science classes using student notebooks. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 11(4), 237–259. https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2019.04.017

Hofstein, A., Nahum, T. L., & Shore, R. (2001). Assessment of the learning environment of inquiry-type laboratories in high school Chemistry. Learning Environments Research, 4(2), 193–207. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1012467417645

Ibrahim, M., & Jamaludin, K. A. (2019). The roles of teacher and students via blended problem-based learning: Improving students’ mastery of three representation levels of Chemistry. EDUCATUM, 6(2), 9–21. https://doi.org/10.37134/ejsmt.vol6.2.2.2019

Juuti, K., Lavonen, J., Uitto, A., Byman, R., & Meisalo, V. (2009). Science teaching methods preferred by grade 9 students in Finland. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(4), 611–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-009-9177-8

Kara, N. (2021). A systematic review of the use of serious games in science education. Contemporary Educational Technology, 13(2), ep295. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/9608

Kasim, T. S. a. B. T. (2014). Teaching paradigms: An analysis of traditional and student-centred approaches. Jurnal Usuluddin, 40(40), 199–218. https://ijie.um.edu.my/index.php/JUD/article/view/7492

Malie, S., & Akir, O. (2012). Bridging the gaps between learning and teaching through recognition of students’ learning approaches: A case study. Research in Education, 87(1), 75–94. https://doi.org/10.7227/rie.87.1.6

Manager, S. (2019, January 3). 21st Century Learning Teachers Campaign launch - PADU. PADU. https://www.padu.edu.my/events/21st-century-learning-teachers-campaign-launch/

Nzeyimana, J. C., & Ndihokubwayo, K. (2019). Teachers’ role and learners’ responsibility in teaching and learning science and elementary technology in Rwanda. African Journal of Educational Studies in Mathematics and Sciences, 15(2), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.4314/ajesms.v15i2.1

Polly, D., Margerison, A., & Piel, J. A. (2013). Kindergarten teachers’ orientations to teacher-centered and student-centered pedagogies and their influence on their students’ understanding of addition. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 28(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2013.822949

Suaalii, F., & Bhattacharya, M. (2007). Conceptual model of learning to improve understanding of high school Chemistry. The Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 18(1), 101–110. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/21911/article_21911.pdf

Tasir, Z., Noor, N. M., Harun, J., & Ismail, N. I. (2008). A survey on online teaching preference among pre- service teachers in Malaysia: Andragogy vs pedagogy. Proceedings Ascilite Melbourne 2008. http://www.ascilite.org/conferences/melbourne08/procs/tasir.pdf

Trigwell, K., & Prosser, M. (2004). Development and use of the approaches to teaching inventory. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 409–424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-004-0007-9

Wu, H. K., & Huang, Y. (2007). Ninth-grade student engagement in teacher-centered and student-centered technology-enhanced learning environments. Science Education, 91(5), 727–749. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20216

Wulf, C. (2019). “From teaching to learning”: Characteristics and challenges of a student-centered learning Culture. In Springer eBooks (pp. 47–55). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14223-0_5

Yunus, H. M., Ismail, Z., & Raper, G. (2004). Malaysian primary teachers’ classroom practice of teaching and learning science. Journal of Science and Mathematics Education in Southeast Asia, 27(1), 166–203. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ854265

Zhang, W., & Birdsall, S. (2016). Analysing early childhood educators’ science pedagogy through the lens of a pedagogical content knowing framework. Australian Journal of Early Childhood. https://doi.org/10.1177/183693911604100208

Σάλτα, Κ., & Tzougraki, C. (2004). Attitudes toward chemistry among 11th grade students in high schools in Greece. Science Education, 88(4), 535–547. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10134