Abstract
The educational process has become more accustomed to active classroom engagement. Physics teaching should focus more on young pupils’ investigative journey. This research investigates the effect of the ICT-based 5Es instructional model on the conceptual understanding and science process skills of grade 6 pupils on light reflection. The 5E Model stands for Engage, Explore, Explain, Elaborate, and Evaluate. The study used a mixed-method design involving 24 students participating in a 5E-based intervention. The pre- and post-test results showed a significant improvement in conceptual knowledge and science process skills. Statistical analysis using paired t-tests and Cohen's d found that the 5E Model has significantly improved students' conceptual understanding of the topic and their science process skills. The study also used a phenomenological analysis and identified three critical themes that contributed to the success of the intervention. These themes were high interest and excitement in using laboratory materials, collaboration among students in exploring light reflection, and teacher scaffolding and facilitation to help students overcome challenges. The 5Es Model, which involves engaging, examining, explaining, elaborating, and evaluating stages, was highly influential in keeping students interested and enthusiastic throughout the learning process. The study confirms that the 5Es instructional model positively impacts students’ science process skills and conceptual understanding. Using both quantitative and qualitative analyses provides a thorough understanding of the intervention’s effectiveness and offers recommendations for improving the implementation of the 5Es Model in science education. This study recommended providing professional development opportunities for teachers to enhance their skills in implementing the 5Es instructional model. Regular workshops, collaborative sessions, and opportunities for knowledge exchange can equip teachers with up-to-date teaching strategies and insights.
References
O. S. Tan, Problem-based learning innovation: Using problems to power learning in the 21st century. Gale Cengage Learning. Stanford University Press, 2021 (in English).
A. Harper & S. Kayumova, “Invisible multilingual Black and Brown girls: Raciolinguistic narratives of identity in science education,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2023, 60(5), pp. 1092-1124. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21826. (in English).
S. Lane, Challenges of Teaching Science in Primary School. September 2023. [online]. Available: https://eduedify.com/challenges-of-teaching-science-in-primary-school/?expand_article=1 (in English)
G. P. Thomas & H. J. Boon (Eds.). Challenges in Science Education: Global Perspectives for the Future. Springer Nature, Berlin, Germany, 2023 (in English).
H. Oliveira & J. Bonito, “Practical work in science education: a systematic literature review,” In Frontiers in Education, 2023, vol. 8, p. 1151641. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1151641. (in English)
S. Martinko & S.T. Vorkapic, “Could Students' Attitudes towards Learning Physics Significantly Predict Their Learning Outcomes: Implications for Innovative Methods in Teaching Physics,” International Journal for Talent Development and Creativity, 2017, vol. 5, pp. 109-123 [Online]. Available: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1301490 (in English)
N. F. Ikoh, D. I. Tommy & N. O Jonah, “5Es Constructivist Instructional Strategy and Academic Performance of Pupils in Basic Science and Technology in Akwa Ibom South Senatorial District. African,” Journal of Humanities and Contemporary Education Research, 2023, 11(1), 83-108 [Online]. Available: https://publications.afropolitanjournals.com/index.php/ajhcer/article/view/479 (in English)
C. C. Ihejiamaizu, D. D. Ukor & H. A. Neji, “Utilization of 5Es' constructivist approach for enhancing the teaching of difficult concepts in biology,”. Global Journal of Educational Research, 2018, 17(1), pp. 55-60. doi: https://doi.org/10.4314/gjedr.v17i1.8. (in English)
N.K. Cakir, “Effect of 5E learning model on academic achievement, attitude, and science process skills: meta-analysis Study,” Journal of Education and Training Studies, 2017, 5(11), pp. 157-170. doi: https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v5i11.2649. (in English)
Z. Koyunlu Ünlü & I. Dökme, “A systematic review of 5E Model in science education: proposing a skill-based STEM instructional model within the 21st century skills. International Journal of Science Education, 2022, 44(13), pp. 2110-2130. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2114031 (in English)
E. Halcomb & L. Hickman, Mixed methods research. Faculty of Science, Medicine, and Health - Papers: part A, pp. 2656. The University of Wollongong, Australia [online]. Available: https://ro.uow.edu.au/smhpapers/2656 (in English)
N. V. Ivankova & J. W. Creswell, Mixed methods. Qualitative research in applied linguistics: A practical introduction, Springer Nature, Berlin, Germany, 2009, vol. 23, pp. 135-161 [online]. Available: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1057/9780230239517#page=149 (in English)
C. F. Waltz & B. R. Bausell, Nursing research: design statistics and computer analysis. CA: USA: FA Davis Co., 1981. (in English)
K.S. Taber, “The use of Cronbach's alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education,” Research in Science Education, 2018, vol. 48, pp. 1273-1296. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2 (in English)
I. Sotáková & M. Ganajová, “The effect of the 5E instructional model on students' cognitive processes and their attitudes towards chemistry as a subject,” Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 2023, 19(9), pp. em2317. doi: https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13469. (in English)
P. H. Cheng, Y. T. Yang, S. H. G. Chang, & F. R. R. Kuo, “5E mobile inquiry learning approach for enhancing learning motivation and scientific inquiry ability of university students,” IEEE Transactions on Education, 2015, 59(2), pp. 147-153. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2015.2467352. (in English)
S. Walan, “Teaching children science through storytelling combined with hands-on activities–a successful instructional strategy?”Education 3-13, 2019, 47(1), 34-46. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2017.1386228. (in English)
H. Manishimwe, W. A. Shivoga & V. Nsengimana, “Perceptions of teachers towards the Use of Inquiry-Based Learning Following 5Es Instructional Model in Biology at Upper Secondary School Level in Rwanda. African Journal of Educational Studies in Mathematics and Sciences, 2023 19(1), 135-147 [Online]. Available: https://www.ajol.info/index.php/ajesms/article/view/261644 (in English)
I. Garcia, F. Grau, C. Valls, N. Piqué & H. Ruiz-Martín, “The long-term effects of introducing the 5E model of instruction on students’ conceptual learning,” International Journal of Science Education, 2021, 43(9), 1441-1458. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.1918354. (in English)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2024 Frank Angelo Pacala