Enhancing Students' Conceptual Understanding through the Generative Learning Model on the Topic of 'Light

Roni .

Roni . ITKES Muhammadiyah Sidrap

Keywords: generative learning model, conceptual understanding, physics education, light, SMA Muhammadiyah Pangsid.

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the effect of the generative learning model on students' conceptual understanding of the topic "Light" at SMA Muhammadiyah Pangsid. The research utilized a pre-experimental design with a one-group pretest-posttest approach. The population consisted of all students at SMA Muhammadiyah Pangsid, and the sample was selected through simple random sampling. A multiple-choice test was used as the research instrument to measure students' conceptual understanding before and after implementing the generative learning model. Data were analyzed using paired t-tests, and the results revealed a significant improvement in students' understanding, with a -tobs value (-59.73) less than -ttable (-2.093) at a significance level of α = 0.05. These findings demonstrate that the generative learning model effectively enhances students' conceptual understanding of physics, particularly in the topic of "Light." The study emphasizes the importance of active learning models in fostering deeper conceptual comprehension among students.

References

1. Arikunto, S. (2010). Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.
2. Flick, L. B. (1996). Understanding a Generative Learning Model of Instruction. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 7(2), 115–126.
3. Osborne, R., & Wittrock, M. C. (1985). The Generative Learning Model and Its Implications for Science Education. Studies in Science Education, 12(1), 59–87.
4. Ritchie, D., & Volkl, C. (2000). Effectiveness of Two Generative Learning Strategies in the Science Classroom. School Science and Mathematics, 100(2), 83–89.
5. Rosdianto, H. (2017). Pengaruh Model Generative Learning terhadap Hasil Belajar Ranah Kognitif Siswa pada Materi Hukum Newton. Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika dan Keilmuan, 3(2), 66–69.
6. Rosdianto, H., Murdani, E., & Hendra. (2017). The Implementation of POE (Predict Observe Explain) Model to Improve Student’s Concept Understanding on Newton’s Law. Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika, 6(1), 55–57.
7. Subana, M. (2011). Dasar-dasar Penelitian Ilmiah. Bandung: Pustaka Setia.
8. Sugiyono. (2007). Statistika untuk Penelitian. Bandung: Alfabeta.
9. Sugiyono. (2012). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D. Bandung: Alfabeta.
10. Taber, K. S. (2001). Constructivism as Educational Theory: Contingency in Learning, and Optimally Guided Instruction. Educational Studies, 27(1), 39–54.
11. Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia Learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12. Bruner, J. S. (1960). The Process of Education. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
13. Duit, R., & Treagust, D. F. (2003). Conceptual Change: A Powerful Framework for Improving Science Teaching and Learning. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 671–688.
14. Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning How to Learn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
16. Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Objectivism versus Constructivism: Do We Need a New Philosophical Paradigm? Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(3), 5–14.
17. Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus Traditional Methods: A Six-thousand-student Survey of Mechanics Test Data for Introductory Physics Courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64–74.
18. Slavin, R. E. (2006). Educational Psychology: Theory and Practice. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
19. Piaget, J. (1952). The Origins of Intelligence in Children. New York: International Universities Press.
20. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing Scientific Knowledge in the Classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5–12.