Analysis of Science Education Students' Self-Efficacy in Developing Learning Products Through the Project-Based Learning Model
DOI:
10.29303/jpft.v11i1.9545Published:
2025-06-30Issue:
Vol. 11 No. 1 (2025): January-JuneKeywords:
self-efficacy, Project-Based Learning, Science Education, Learning Products, Argumentation SkillsArticles
Downloads
How to Cite
Downloads
Metrics
Abstract
Developing innovative learning products demands high self-efficacy from prospective educators. The Project-Based Learning (PjBL) model offers the potential to develop this competency, yet its impact on the self-efficacy of postgraduate students requires in-depth analysis. This study aims to analyze the self-efficacy levels of Master's students in Science Education in developing learning products (presentations, videos, and a book chapter) implemented through the PjBL model. This study employed a descriptive method with a mixed-methods approach. Data were collected from 11 students through a Likert-scale self-efficacy questionnaire and open-ended responses, then analyzed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. The results show that students' overall self-efficacy is high (mean score > 4.18), with slightly higher confidence in asynchronous tasks such as video production (4.24) and writing a book chapter (4.25). The main finding identifies a gap between the very high motivation and growth mindset and the lower self-efficacy in higher-order thinking skills, particularly in data analysis and applying theory to practice (lowest score 3.82). It is concluded that PjBL is effective in building self-efficacy and motivation, while also successfully identifying crucial areas for professional development. Therefore, it is recommended that future PjBL implementation be enriched with more focused guidance on strengthening analytical and synthesis skills to optimize the competencies of future science educators.
References
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American psychologist, 37(2), 122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066X.37.2.122
Bandura, A., & Wessels, S. (1997). Self-efficacy (pp. 4-6). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bleicher, R. E., & Lindgren, J. (2005). Success in science learning and preservice science teaching self-efficacy. Journal of science teacher education, 16(3), 205-225. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-005-4861-1
Boettcher, F., & Meisert, A. (2011). Argumentation in science education: A model-based framework. Science & education, 20, 103-140. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-010-9304-5
Boone, W. J., Townsend, J. S., & Staver, J. (2011). Using Rasch theory to guide the practice of survey development and survey data analysis in science education and to inform science reform efforts: An exemplar utilizing STEBI self‐efficacy data. Science Education, 95(2), 258-280. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20413
Bricker, L. A., & Bell, P. (2008). Conceptualizations of argumentation from science studies and the learning sciences and their implications for the practices of science education. Science education, 92(3), 473-498. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20278
de Laat, J., & Watters, J. J. (1995). Science teaching self-efficacy in a primary school: A case study. Research in Science Education, 25, 453-464. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02357387
Dorfman, B. S., & Fortus, D. (2019). Students' self‐efficacy for science in different school systems. Journal of research in science teaching, 56(8), 1037-1059. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21542
Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260208560187
Faize, F. A., Husain, W., & Nisar, F. (2017). A critical review of scientific argumentation in science education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(1), 475-483. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/80353
Fettahlioglu, P. (2018). The Effects of Argumentation Implementation on Environmental Education Self-Efficacy Beliefs and Perspectives According to Environmental Problems. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 6(4), 199-211. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v6i4.2925
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Erduran, S. (2007). Argumentation in science education: An overview. Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research, 3-27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2_1
Kıran, R., & Feyzioğlu, E. Y. (2021). Development of Self-Efficacy for Argumentation Scale. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 14(3), 449-475. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30831/akukeg.891057
Lane, H. C., Cahill, C., Foutz, S., Auerbach, D., Noren, D., Lussenhop, C., & Swartout, W. (2013). The effects of a pedagogical agent for informal science education on learner behaviors and self-efficacy. In Artificial Intelligence in Education: 16th International Conference, AIED 2013, Memphis, TN, USA, July 9-13, 2013. Proceedings 16 (pp. 309-318). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39112-5_32
Lytzerinou, E., & Iordanou, K. (2020). Teachers’ ability to construct arguments, but not their perceived self-efficacy of teaching, predicts their ability to evaluate arguments. International Journal of Science Education, 42(4), 617-634. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1722864
Nielsen, J. A. (2013). Dialectical features of students’ argumentation: A critical review of argumentation studies in science education. Research in Science Education, 43, 371-393. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9266-x
Ogan-Bekiroglu, F., & Aydeniz, M. (2013). Enhancing pre-service physics teachers’ perceived self-efficacy of argumentation-based pedagogy through modelling and mastery experiences. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 9(3), 233-245. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2013.932a
Osborne, J. (2005). The role of argument in science education. In Research and the quality of science education (pp. 367-380). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3673-6_29
Özdem Yilmaz, Y., Cakiroglu, J., Ertepinar, H., & Erduran, S. (2017). The pedagogy of argumentation in science education: science teachers’ instructional practices. International Journal of Science Education, 39(11), 1443-1464. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1336807
Roberts, J. K., Henson, R. K., Tharp, B. Z., & Moreno, N. P. (2001). An examination of change in teacher self-efficacy beliefs in science education based on the duration of in-service activities. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 12(3), 199-213. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016708016311
Sasson, I. (2014). The role of informal science centers in science education: attitudes, skills, and self-efficacy. JOTSE: Journal of Technology and Science Education, 4(3), 167-179. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.123
Webb-Williams, J. (2018). Science self-efficacy in the primary classroom: Using mixed methods to investigate sources of self-efficacy. Research in Science Education, 48(5), 939-961. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9592-0
Yıldız-Feyzioğlu, E., & Kıran, R. (2022). Investigating the relationships between self-efficacy for argumentation and critical thinking skills. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 33(5), 555-577. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2021.1967568
Author Biographies
Gunawan Gunawan, University of Mataram
Physics Education
Lovy Herayanti, Mandalika University of Education
Physics Education Study Program
Fuad Tamami, University of Mataram
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Gunawan Gunawan, Lovy Herayanti, Fuad Tamami
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika dan Teknologi (JPFT) agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International License (CC-BY-SA License). This license allows authors to use all articles, data sets, graphics, and appendices in data mining applications, search engines, web sites, blogs, and other platforms by providing an appropriate reference. The journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions and will retain publishing rights without restrictions.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika dan Teknologi (JPFT).
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
