Drivers and Barriers of Science Teacher Development Program on STEM Learning Using Arduino
DOI:
10.29303/jpm.v19i4.6905Published:
2024-05-23Issue:
Vol. 19 No. 4 (2024): July 2024Keywords:
Arduino Project; Science Teacher Development; STEM LearningArticles
Downloads
How to Cite
Downloads
Metrics
Abstract
The science teacher development program on STEM Learning using Arduino was conducted to enhance science teacher competencies in designing and implementing a 21st-century skills-based teaching approach. This study implemented research evaluation with Context, Input, Process, and Product (CIPP) to determine the drivers that supported and enhanced the program's effectiveness and address the barriers that obstruct teachers' competencies. The methodology employed in this study is both qualitative and quantitative methods. Qualitative methods gather data through observations, interviews, and document analysis. In addition, quantitative methods involve calculating the percentage of participants who complete the training program. Interviews and document studies in context evaluation help determine if program objectives are relevant to teachers' needs and aligned with the curriculum. Observation, interview, and document study were employed to evaluate input, process, and product and complement with quantitative data. The result shows that the science teacher development program is highly relevant today in enhancing teachers' competencies to design 21st-century skills-based teaching. However, some improvements are still needed to support the drivers and eliminate the barriers to make the program more effective. Some drivers, such as participants' motivation, well-organized content, competent facilitators, and sufficient resources, are assets to continue the program. However, the revision of the indicator objectives program, the selection process of participants, the time to conduct the workshop session, guidance, and content representation are essential to note.
References
Binswanger, M. (2019). Digital Transformation and Employment: Where will new jobs be created?. In e-Proceedings of 2nd Connect-Us Conference (CuC 2019) (pp. 45-48).
Adnan, A. H. M., Rahmat, A. M., Mohtar, N. M., & Anuar, N. (2021, February). Industry 4.0 critical skills and career readiness of ASEAN TVET tertiary students in Malaysia, Indonesia and Brunei. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1793, No. 1, p. 012004). IOP Publishing.
Marrero, M. E., Gunning, A. M., & Germain-Williams, T. (2014). What is STEM education?. Global Education Review, 1(4).
Martín‐Páez, T., Aguilera, D., Perales‐Palacios, F. J., & Vílchez‐González, J. M. (2019). What are we talking about when we talk about STEM education? A review of literature. Science Education, 103(4), 799-822.
Sarah, L. L. (2021). Automatic Trash bin Arduino Project (ATAP): Enhancing Computational Thinking Skills through STEM Learning. SEAQIS Journal of Science Education, 1(1), 27-35.
OECD (2022). PISA 2022: Factsheet Indonesia. https://oecd.org
Baran, M., Baran, M., Karakoyun, F., & Maskan, A. (2021). The influence of project-based STEM (PjbL-STEM) applications on the development of 21st century skills. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 18(4), 798-815.
Anderson, J., & Li, Y. (2020). Integrated Approaches to STEM Education. An International Perspective, Springer Nature.
Machmud, M. T., & Fakhri, M. M. (2021). Indonesia teacher competencies in integrating information and communications technology for education. Athens Journal of Technology & Engineering, 331.
Dat, N. D., Van Bien, N., Khuyen, N. T. T., Ha, N. T. V., An, H. T. T., & Anh, N. T. P. (2024). Arduino-Based Experiments: Leveraging Engineering Design and Scientific Inquiry in STEM Lessons. International Journal of STEM Education for Sustainability, 4(1), 38-53.
Widhalm, D., Goeschka, K. M., & Kastner, W. (2021, October). Is Arduino a suitable platform for sensor nodes?. In IECON 2021–47th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society (pp. 1-6). IEEE
Ardiansah, I., Bafdal, N., Suryadi, E., & Bono, A. (2020). Greenhouse monitoring and automation using Arduino: a review on precision farming and internet of things (IoT). Int. J. Adv. Sci. Eng. Inf. Technol, 10(2), 703-709.
Nurbekova, Z., Tolganbaiuly, T., Nurbekov, B., Sagimbayeva, A., & Kazhiakparova, Z. (2020). Project-based learning technology: An example in programming microcontrollers. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15(11), 218-227.
Kondaveeti, H. K., Kumaravelu, N. K., Vanambathina, S. D., Mathe, S. E., & Vappangi, S. (2021). A systematic literature review on prototyping with Arduino: Applications, challenges, advantages, and limitations. Computer Science Review, 40, 100364.
Guzmán-Fernández, M., Zambrano de la Torre, M., Ortega-Sigala, J., Guzmán-Valdivia, C., Galvan-Tejeda, J. I., Crúz-Domínguez, O., ... & Durán-Muñoz, H. A. (2021). Arduino: a Novel Solution to the Problem of High-Cost Experimental Equipment in Higher Education. Experimental Techniques, 1-13.
Pearce, R. H., Chadwick, M. A., & Francis, R. (2024). Experiential learning in physical geography using arduino low-cost environmental sensors. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 48(1), 54-73.
Pratidhina, E., Rosana, D., Kuswanto, H., & Dwandaru, W. S. B. (2021). Using Arduino and online block-structured programing language for physics practical work. Physics Education, 56(5), 055028.
Czaja, Z. (2023). Simple Measurement Method for Resistive Sensors Based on ADCs of Microcontrollers. IEEE Sensors Journal
Fathimah, N. S. A., Septivani, T. W., Rahman, E. F., & Wahyudin, W. (2023). The Development of Students’ Logical Thinking Skills Using Arduino as A Learning Utility in the Computer System Subject. TeknoIS: Jurnal Ilmiah Teknologi Informasi dan Sains, 13(2), 213-220.
Maryati, R. E., Permanasari, A., & Ardianto, D. (2022). Fluid Learning with Arduino-Based on Engineering Design Process (EDP) to Improve Student's Problem Solving Ability. Scientiae Educatia: Jurnal Pendidikan Sains, 11(2), 154-162.
Pratiwi, U. (2019). Needs Analysis of Training Web Exe CMS (Content Management System) and Arduino “Two In One” For Physics Teacher. JIPF (Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan Fisika), 4(2), 118-125.
Sarı, U., & Kırındı, T. (2019). Using arduino in physics teaching: arduino-based physics experiment to study temperature dependence of electrical resistance. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 7(14), 698-710.
Çoban, A., & Çoban, N. (2020). Using Arduino in physics experiments: determining the speed of sound in air. Physics Education, 55(4), 043005.
Freitas, W. P. S., Cena, C. R., Alves, D. C., & Goncalves, A. M. B. (2018). Arduino-based experiment demonstrating Malus’s law. Physics Education, 53(3), 035034.
Papadimitropoulos, N., Dalacosta, K., & Pavlatou, E. A. (2021). Teaching chemistry with Arduino experiments in a mixed virtual-physical learning environment. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 30(4), 550-566.
J. L. Fitzpatrick, J. R. Sanders, and B. R. Worthen. (2010). Program evaluation : alternative approaches and practical guidelines.
Mokhtari, H., Saberi, M. K., Amiri, M. R., Vakilimofrad, H., & Moradi, Z. (2022). Evaluating the Speed and Performance of the Websites of Hospitals and Specialty and Super-specialty Clinics of Hamadan University of Medical Sciences by GTmetrix. Informology, 1(1), 57-66.
Sari, U., Çelik, H., Pektaş, H. M., & Yalçın, S. (2022). Effects of STEM-focused Arduino practical activities on problem-solving and entrepreneurship skills. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3), 140-154.
Sarı, U., Pektaş, H. M., Şen, Ö. F., & Çelik, H. (2022). Algorithmic thinking development through physical computing activities with Arduino in STEM education. Education and Information Technologies, 27(5), 6669-6689.
Mohaghegh, D. M., & McCauley, M. (2016). Computational thinking: The skill set of the 21st century.
G. Guven and N. K. Cakir. (2020). Investigation of the Opinions of Teachers Who Received In-Service Training for Arduino-Assisted Robotic Coding Applications. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research. Vol. 15, no. 1. pp. 253–274. doi: 10.29329/epasr.2020.236.14.
Lee, E. (2020). Developing a Low-Cost Microcontroller-Based Model for Teaching and Learning. European Journal of Educational Research, 9(3), 921-934.
B. Akyol. (2016). Öğretmen adaylarının öz yeterlik algıları, öğrenme yönelimli motivasyonları ve yaşam boyu öğrenme eğilimleri: Bir modelleme çalışması. Egitim Arastirmalari - Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, vol. 2016, no. 65, pp. 19–34, doi: 10.14689/ejer.2016.65.02.
Chong, W. H., & Kong, C. A. (2012). Teacher collaborative learning and teacher self-efficacy: The case of lesson study. The journal of experimental education, 80(3), 263-283.
Author Biographies
Lia Laela Sarah, Science Education Department, Indonesia University of Education
Nahadi Nahadi, Science Education Department, Indonesia University of Education
Siti Sriyati, Science Education Department, Indonesia University of Education
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Lia Laela Sarah, Nahadi Nahadi, Siti Sriyati
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The following terms apply to authors who publish in this journal:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal first publication rights, with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International License (CC-BY License) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and first publication in this journal.
2. Authors may enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., posting it to an institutional repository or publishing it in a book), acknowledging its initial publication in this journal.
3. Before and during the submission process, authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website), as this can lead to productive exchanges as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
