International Journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Frequency: 12
line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 11, Issue 12 (December 2024), Pages: 207-214

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

Integrating 5E inquiry-based learning and STEM education to enhance grade 5 students’ science process skills and achievement in friction

 Author(s): 

 Thanaporn Kaewmanee 1, Aimon Srisenpila 2, Wittaya Worapun 1, *

 Affiliation(s):

 1Faculty of Education, Mahasarakham University, Mahasarakham, Thailand
 2Muang Roi Et School, Roi Et, Thailand

 Full text

  Full Text - PDF

 * Corresponding Author. 

  Corresponding author's ORCID profile: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2122-9432

 Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2024.12.023

 Abstract

This research examines the impact of a teaching plan that combines the 5E inquiry-based learning model with STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) principles on the science process skills and learning achievement of grade 5 students in the topic of friction in a Thai educational context. The study used classroom action research to evaluate whether students achieved specific skill and knowledge objectives. A purposive sampling method was used to select 45 grade 5 students from a public school. The tools used included the integrated 5E-STEM teaching plan, a science process skills test, and a friction learning achievement test. Data were analyzed using percentages, mean scores, standard deviation, and a paired samples t-test. The results showed significant improvements in students' science process skills and learning achievement, highlighting the benefits of adopting innovative teaching approaches like 5E inquiry-based learning and STEM education. However, the small sample size and absence of qualitative data suggest the need for further research to refine and expand these practices.

 © 2024 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords

 Inquiry-based learning, STEM education, Science process skills, Learning achievement, Friction education

 Article history

 Received 26 June 2024, Received in revised form 14 November 2024, Accepted 26 November 2024

 Acknowledgment

This research project was financially supported by Mahasarakham University.

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Ethical considerations

Written informed consent was obtained from the parents or guardians of all participants. Participant confidentiality and well-being were prioritized throughout the research process.

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

 Citation:

 Kaewmanee T, Srisenpila A, and Worapun W (2024). Integrating 5E inquiry-based learning and STEM education to enhance grade 5 students’ science process skills and achievement in friction. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 11(12): 207-214

 Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

 No Figure

 Tables

 Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4

----------------------------------------------   

 References (34)

  1. Alberts B (2022). Why science education is more important than most scientists think. FEBS Letters, 596(2): 149–159. https://doi.org/10.1002/1873-3468.14272   [Google Scholar] PMid:35006607
  2. Anderman EM, Sinatra GM, and Gray DL (2012). The challenges of teaching and learning about science in the twenty-first century: Exploring the abilities and constraints of adolescent learners. Studies in Science Education, 48(1): 89-117. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2012.655038   [Google Scholar]
  3. Bantaokul P and Polyiem T (2022). The use of integrated 5Es of inquiring-based learning and gamification to improve grade 8 student science learning achievement. Journal of Educational Issues, 8(1): 459-469. https://doi.org/10.5296/jei.v8i1.19802   [Google Scholar]
  4. Bybee RW (2009). The BSCS 5E instructional model and 21st century skills. BSCS, Colorado Springs, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  5. Choi Y, Yang JH, and Hong SH (2016). The effects of smart media based steam program of 'chicken life cycle' on academic achievement, scientific process skills and affective domain of elementary school students. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 35(2): 166–180. https://doi.org/10.15267/keses.2016.35.2.166   [Google Scholar]
  6. Choirunnisa NL, Prabowo P, and Suryanti S (2018). Improving science process skills for primary school students through 5e instructional model-based learning. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 947(1): 012021. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/947/1/012021   [Google Scholar]
  7. Coffman T (2017). Inquiry-based learning: Designing instruction to promote higher level thinking. Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  8. Damrongpanit S, Chamrat S, and Manokarn M (2024). The development of skills and awareness in integrating content, teaching methods, and technology in the learning management for teachers in the education sandbox, Thailand. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 10(11): 202–212. https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2023.11.025   [Google Scholar]
  9. Duran LB and Duran E (2004). The 5E instructional model: A learning cycle approach for inquiry-based science teaching. Science Education Review, 3(2): 49–58.   [Google Scholar]
  10. El Islami RAZ, Sari IJ, and Utari E (2024). Conceptualizing bioinformatics education in STEM literacy development for pre-service biology teachers. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 10(12): 193–202. https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2023.12.021   [Google Scholar]
  11. Eroğlu S and Bektaş O (2022). The effect of 5E-based STEM education on academic achievement, scientific creativity, and views on the nature of science. Learning and Individual Differences, 98: 102181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2022.102181   [Google Scholar]
  12. Faikhamta C, Ketsing J, Tanak A, and Chamrat S (2018). Science teacher education in Thailand: A challenging journey. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 4: 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41029-018-0021-8   [Google Scholar]
  13. Ha S, Lee G, and Kalman CS (2013). Workshop on friction: Understanding and addressing students' difficulties in learning science through a hermeneutical perspective. Science and Education, 22: 1423-1441. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9465-5   [Google Scholar]
  14. Holbrook J (2010). Education through science as a motivational innovation for science education for all. Science Education International, 21(2): 80–91.   [Google Scholar]
  15. Jessani SI (2015). Science education: Issues, approaches and challenges. Journal of Education and Educational Development, 2(1): 79–87. https://doi.org/10.22555/joeed.v2i1.51   [Google Scholar]
  16. Khalil RY, Tairab H, Qablan A, Alarabi K, and Mansour Y (2023). STEM-based curriculum and creative thinking in high school students. Education Sciences, 13(12): 1195. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13121195   [Google Scholar]
  17. Kurniawati A (2021). Science process skills and its implementation in the process of science learning evaluation in schools. Journal of Science Education Research, 5(2): 16-20. https://doi.org/10.21831/jser.v5i2.44269   [Google Scholar]
  18. Manzo RD, Whent L, Liets L, de la Torre A, and Gomez-Camacho R (2016). The impact of the 5E teaching model on changes in neuroscience, drug addiction, and research methods knowledge of science teachers attending California’s ARISE professional development workshops. Journal of Education and Learning, 5(2): 109-120. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v5n2p109   [Google Scholar]
  19. McCOMAS WF, Almazroa H, and Clough MP (1998). The nature of science in science education: An introduction. Science and Education, 7: 511–532. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008642510402   [Google Scholar]
  20. Meier DR and Sisk-Hilton S (2013). Nature education with young children: Integrating inquiry and practice. Routledge, New York, USA. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203078396   [Google Scholar]
  21. Moran E (2022). The role of science in elementary education. M.Sc. Theses, Dominican University of California, San Rafael, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  22. OECD (2022). Thailand student performance (PISA 2022). Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France. 
  23. Ong ET, Govindasamy D, Singh CKS, Ibrahim MN, Wahab NA, Borhan MT, and Tho SW (2021). The 5E inquiry learning model: Its effect on the learning of electricity among Malaysian students. Cakrawala Pendidikan, 40(1): 170-182. https://doi.org/10.21831/cp.v40i1.33415   [Google Scholar]
  24. Öztürk N, Tezel Ö, and Acat MB (2010). Science process skills levels of primary school seventh grade students in science and technology lesson. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 7(3): 15-28.   [Google Scholar]
  25. Samputri S (2020). Science process skills and cognitive learning outcomes through discovery learning models. European Journal of Education Studies, 6(12): 181–188.   [Google Scholar]
  26. Sari MM, Yulinda R, and Zubaidah S (2023). Analysis of sciences process skills of science education students in microbiology practice. Asian Journal of Science Education, 5(1): 83-89. https://doi.org/10.24815/ajse.v5i1.31393   [Google Scholar]
  27. Sen C, Sonay Z, and Kiray SA (2018). STEM skills in the 21st century education. In: Shelley M and Kiray A (Eds.), Research highlights in STEM education. ISRES Publishing, Konya, Turkey.   [Google Scholar]
  28. Sen S and Oskay OO (2017). The effects of 5E inquiry learning activities on achievement and attitude toward chemistry. Journal of Education and Learning, 6(1): 1-9. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v6n1p1   [Google Scholar]
  29. Stringer ET (1996). Action research: A handbook for practitioners. SAGE, Thousand Oaks, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  30. Udonsathian T and Worapun W (2024). Enhancing analytical thinking in grade 8 science education: Integrating 5E inquiry-based and 5W1H techniques. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 11(5): 62–69. https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2024.05.007   [Google Scholar]
  31. Ültay N, Zivali A, Yilmaz H, Bak HK, Yilmaz K, Topatan M, and Kara PG (2020). STEM-focused activities to support student learning in primary school science. Journal of Science Learning, 3(3): 156–164. https://doi.org/10.17509/jsl.v3i3.23705   [Google Scholar]
  32. Yakob N, Kaliun K, Ahmad AM, Rashid RAA, and Abdullah A (2020). The effect of coupled inquiry-5E in enhancing the understanding of meiosis concept. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 9(1): 129–137. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v9i1.20393   [Google Scholar]
  33. Yonyubon S, Khamsong J, and Worapun W (2022). The effects of 5E inquiring-based learning management on grade 7 students' science learning achievement. Journal of Educational Issues, 8(2): 193-201. https://doi.org/10.5296/jei.v8i2.20082   [Google Scholar]
  34. Yumusak GK (2016). Science process skills in science curricula applied in Turkey. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(20): 94–98.   [Google Scholar]