Training Students to Ask Questions through Situation-Based Learning
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/a9egd792Keywords:
Elementary Students, Asking Questions, Problem Posing, Situation-Based LearningAbstract
Elementary school students have a high curiosity. This curiosity needs to be facilitated so that it can develop. However, what happens in the classroom is just the opposite, when elementary school students get older, the more reluctant they are asking. This results in the lack of courage to ask questions. This study aims at providing a clear picture and alternative to how to train and develop students’ skills in asking questions through Situation-Based Learning (SBL). This study employs the ADDIE method (Analyzing, Designing, Developing, Implementing, and Evaluating) that aims at illustrating how the SBL learning model can help training elementary students’ abilities and skills in asking questions. The subjects in this study were in 5th grade elementary school students ranging in age from 10 to 12 years. The results showed that the example of learning materials should be designed based on the characteristics SBL learning, and how the students’ response in asking questions. Therefore, it can be concluded that the students’ skills in asking questions were still relatively low, but could still be improved because the ability can to be trained and developed continuously through SBL learning with customized teaching materials. It is expected that the students have adequate asking skills, hence, they will be able to follow the trends of information and communication in this 4.0 era.
Downloads
References
1. Sarah Wallcook, Louise Nygård, Anders Kottorp & Camilla Malinowsky (2019). The use of everyday information communication technologies in the lives of older adults living with and without dementia in Sweden. Assistive Technology. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2019.1644685
2. Patience Cofie, Manuela De Allegri, Bocar Kouyaté & Rainer Sauerborn (2013). Effects of information, education, and communication campaign on a community-based health insurance scheme in Burkina Faso. Global Health Action, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.3402/gha.v6i0.20791
3. Bharat Mehra & Dean Papajohn (2007). “Glocal” patterns of communication-information convergences in Internet use: Cross-cultural behavior of international teaching assistants. International Information & Library Review, 39(1), 12–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572317.2007.10762728
4. Dimitris Mourtzis, Sophia Fotia, Nikoletta Boli & Ekaterini Vlachou (2019). Modelling and quantification of Industry 4.0 manufacturing complexity based on information theory: A robotics case study. International Journal of Production Research, 57(22), 6908–6921. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1571686
5. Isrokatun, I., Hanifah, N., & Maulana, M. (2018). Acceptance finding ability. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 434(1), 012295.
6. Isrokatun, I., Syahid, A. A., Putri, H. E., Julia, J., & Sunaengsih, C. (2019). Problem posing skill of elementary school students. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1318(1), 012124.
7. Suhaebar, I., & Isrokatun, I. (2019). Situation-based learning for self-regulated learning on mathematical learning. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1318(1).
8. Isrokatun, I., Anggita, D., Purwono, B. S., Sunaengsih, C., & Syahid, A. A. (2019). Scaffolding in conceptual science. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1402(4), 044079.
9. Isrokatun, I., Rosdiyana, R., Amalia, I., Fauziah, M. S., & Ramdan, M. (2019). Improving student intelligences through questioning identification. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1318(1), 012121.
10. Isrokatun, & Purwono, B. S. (2020). Acceptance finding ability (AFA) of elementary school students. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, 9(1), 261–263.
11. Jiwen Liang (2015). Live video classroom observation for teacher professional development. Journal of Education for Teaching, 41(3), 235–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2015.1045314
12. Talbot Bielefeldt (2012). Guidance for technology decisions from classroom observation. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 44(3), 205–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2012.10782587
13. Maike Schermer & Tim Fosker (2019). Reconsidering methods for systematic classroom observation. International Journal of Research & Method in Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2019.1687667
14. Courtney A. Bell et al. (2019). Qualities of classroom observation systems. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 30(1), 3–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2018.1539014
15. Jerrell C. Cassady et al. (2004). The differentiated classroom observation scale. Roeper Review, 26(3), 139–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190409554259
16. Tony Lawson (2011). Sustained classroom observation: Changing teaching practices. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 35(3), 317–337. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2011.558891
17. Xiaogang, XIA., LÜ Chuanhan, WANG Bingyi, & SONG Yunming (2007). Experimental research on situated creation and problem-based instruction. Frontiers of Education in China, 2(3), 366–377.
18. Xia, X., Lu, C., & Wang, B. (2008). Research on mathematics instruction experiment based on problem posing. Journal of Mathematics Education, 1(1), 153–163.
19. Kusumah, Y. S., Suryadi, D., & Sabandar, J. (2014). Situation-based learning to improve creative problem solving. Far East Journal of Mathematical Education, 12(2), 119.
20. Isrok’atun, & Tiurlina, T. (2014). Enhancing students’ problem solving through situation-based learning. Journal of Mathematical Theory and Modeling, 4, 44–49.
21. Isrok’atun, & Tiurlina, T. (2015). Enhancing problem solving through situation-based learning. International Journal of Education and Research, 3(9), 73–80.
22. Isrok’atun, I. (2018). Improving mathematical creative problem solving skill through situation-based learning. JPP, 24(2), 42–50.
23. Brown, S. I., & Walter, M. I. (2005). The Art of Problem Posing. Psychology Press.
24. Carroll Ferguson Nardone & Renée Gravois Lee (2010). Critical inquiry across disciplines. College Teaching, 59(1), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2010.489077
25. Jane M. Watson & Lyn D. English (2017). Statistical problem posing. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 17(4), 347–365. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2017.1380867
26. Jinfa Cai (2003). Singaporean students’ mathematical thinking. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 34(5), 719–737. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207390310001595401
27. Steven Silber & Jinfa Cai (2017). Pre-service teachers' mathematical problem posing. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 48(2), 163–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2016.1232843
28. Han-Yu Sung, Gwo-Jen Hwang & Ya-Chi Chang (2016). Mobile learning based on collaborative problem posing. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(3), 456–471. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2013.867889
29. Phuong Nam T. Nguyen et al. (2016). Effects of self-questioning on EFL students’ engagement. Culture and Education, 28(4), 702–737. https://doi.org/10.1080/11356405.2016.1231759
30. H.Y. Tay, K.N.N. Kee & Sammy King Fai Hui (2019). Effective questioning and feedback for learners with autism. Cogent Education, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2019.1634920
31. Tomas Englund (2010). Questioning parental educational authority. Education Inquiry, 1(3), 235–258. https://doi.org/10.3402/edui.v1i3.21944
32. Horace Crogman & Maryam Trebeau Crogman (2018). Modified generated question learning. Cogent Education, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2018.1459340
33. Martin Jaeger & Desmond Adair (2014). Interest, ability & personal situation in PBL environments. European Journal of Engineering Education, 39(1), 84–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2013.833172
34. Kathleen M. Quinlan (2019). What triggers students’ interest during lectures? Studies in Higher Education, 44(10), 1781–1792. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1665325
35. Sebastian Habig et al. (2018). Context characteristics & situational interest in chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 40(10), 1154–1175. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1470349
36. Niels Bonderup Dohn (2013). Situational interest during a zoo visit. International Journal of Science Education, 35(16), 2732–2751. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.628712
37. M. Nurtanto et al. (2019). Problem-based learning in Industry 4.0. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 7(11), 2487–2494. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2019.071128
38. R. Rabiman, M. Nurtanto, & N. Kholifah (2020). E-learning system development in vocational education.
39. M. Nurtanto et al. (2019). Learning by creating: Converting automotive materials to visual animation. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, 8(10), 1634–1642.
40. Z. Arifin et al. (2020). The TAWOCK conceptual model in vocational teaching. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v9i3.20561
41. M. Nurtanto et al. (2020). Effects of STEM-EDP in professional learning. Journal of Education and Gifted Young Scientists, 8(2), 633–656. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/jegys/645047
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
