International Journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

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

Frequency: 12
line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 11, Issue 8 (August 2024), Pages: 158-168

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

 Original Research Paper

A framework for building scientific literacy through an inquiry learning model using an ethnoscience approach

 Author(s): 

 Yatin Mulyono 1, *, Sapuadi Sapuadi 2, Yuliarti Yuliarti 3, Suhailee Sohnui 4

 Affiliation(s):

 1Department of Science Education, IAIN Palangka Raya, Palangkaraya, Indonesia
 2Department of Tarbiyah, IAIN Palangka Raya, Palangkaraya, Indonesia
 3Department of Information Systems, STMIK Palangka Raya, Palangkaraya, Indonesia
 4Department of Oriental Languages, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand

 Full text

  Full Text - PDF

 * Corresponding Author. 

  Corresponding author's ORCID profile: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4148-9119

 Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2024.08.017

 Abstract

Scientific literacy is an essential skill in today's complex information age, particularly in 21st-century education. The inquiry-based learning model, which encourages students to actively engage in research, has been shown to effectively improve scientific literacy. However, combining this model with an ethnoscience approach, which links scientific learning to local cultural knowledge, is important for creating a more comprehensive and relevant learning experience. This study aims to combine the strengths of these two methods to develop a framework for an inquiry-based learning model that incorporates an ethnoscience approach. Through a review of existing literature, the study finds that integrating ethnoscience into inquiry-based learning can enhance student engagement, relevance, and learning impact. The proposed model consists of five key components: Syntax, principles of reaction, social systems, support systems, and instructional effects and follow-up. This approach has shown significant positive effects in adult education, helping students understand science while valuing local cultural knowledge. By fully utilizing the potential of inquiry-based learning, ethnoscience approaches, and scientific literacy, we can create a more inclusive, relevant learning environment that promotes students' overall development.

 © 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

 Scientific literacy, Inquiry-based learning, Ethnoscience, Cultural context, Holistic learning environment

 Article history

 Received 25 April 2024, Received in revised form 18 July 2024, Accepted 19 August 2024

 Acknowledgment 

No Acknowledgment.

 Compliance with ethical standards

 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:

 Mulyono Y, Sapuadi S, Yuliarti Y, and Sohnui S (2024). A framework for building scientific literacy through an inquiry learning model using an ethnoscience approach. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 11(8): 158-168

 Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

 Fig. 1 Fig. 2 

 Tables

 No Table

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

 References (61)

  1. Agustini NLP, Nursalam N, Sukartini T, Rismayanti IDA, and Suniadewi NW (2023). Palliative care learning model based on transformational learning theory in palliative care of nursing students in Indonesia. Enfermería Clínica (English Edition), 33(2): 102-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enfcle.2022.10.001   [Google Scholar] PMid:36206968
  2. Amala IA, Sutarto S, Putra PDA, and Indrawati I (2023). Analysis of scientific literacy ability junior high school students in science learning on environmental pollution. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(3): 1001-1005. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i3.1816   [Google Scholar]
  3. Ardianti SD and Raida SA (2022). The effect of project based learning with ethnoscience approach on science conceptual understanding. Journal of Innovation in Educational and Cultural Research, 3(2): 207-214. https://doi.org/10.46843/jiecr.v3i2.89   [Google Scholar]
  4. Aristeidou M and Herodotou C (2020). Online citizen science: A systematic review of effects on learning and scientific literacy. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 5(1):  1-12. https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.224   [Google Scholar]
  5. Arslan HO, Genc M, and Durak B (2023). Exploring the effect of argument-driven inquiry on pre-service science teachers’ achievement, science process, and argumentation skills and their views on the ADI model. Teaching and Teacher Education, 121: 103905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103905   [Google Scholar]
  6. Ates CB and Aktamis H (2024). Investigating the effects of creative educational modules blended with cognitive research trust (CoRT) techniques and problem based learning (PBL) on students' scientific creativity skills and perceptions in science education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 51: 101471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101471   [Google Scholar]
  7. Atmojo SE, Kurniawati W, and Muhtarom T (2019). Science learning integrated ethnoscience to increase scientific literacy and scientific character. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1254(1): 012033. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1254/1/012033   [Google Scholar]
  8. Budiarti IS and Tanta T (2021). Analysis on students’ scientific literacy of Newton’s law and motion system in living things. Indonesian Journal of Science Education, 9(1): 36-51. https://doi.org/10.24815/jpsi.v9i1.18470   [Google Scholar]
  9. Chen CC (2023). Information literacy in the digital age. In: Chen CC, Wang ML, Chu SKW, Ishita E, Tuamsuk K, and Shamila MS (Eds.), Information literacy education of higher education in Asian countries: 1-17. Springer, Singapore, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-0522-5   [Google Scholar]
  10. Dah NM, Noor MSAM, Kamarudin MZ, and Azziz SSSA (2024). The impacts of open inquiry on students’ learning in science: A systematic literature review. Educational Research Review, 43: 100601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2024.100601   [Google Scholar]
  11. Dewi CA, Khery Y, and Erna M (2019). An ethnoscience study in chemistry learning to develop scientific literacy. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 8(2): 279-287. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v8i2.19261   [Google Scholar]
  12. Dye K (2023). Developing scientific literacy with a cyclic independent study assisted CURE detecting SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater. Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education, 24(3): 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.00147-23   [Google Scholar] PMid:38107999 PMCid:PMC10720503
  13. Fathali S (2024). Social and cognitive presence in a community of inquiry: An epistemic network analysis of CALL students’ interactions via nowcomment. System, 121: 103233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2024.103233   [Google Scholar]
  14. Fernández GE, López-Banet L, and Ruiz-Vidal A (2022). Students’ performance in the scientific skills during secondary education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(10): em2165. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12444   [Google Scholar]
  15. Fridman R, Eden S, and Spektor-Levy O (2020). Nascent inquiry, metacognitive, and self-regulation capabilities among preschoolers during scientific exploration. Frontiers in Psychology, 11: 1790. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01790   [Google Scholar] PMid:32849056 PMCid:PMC7396714
  16. Grooms J, Fleming K, Berkowitz AR, and Caplan B (2021). Exploring modeling as a context to support content integration for chemistry and earth science. Journal of Chemical Education, 98(7): 2167-2175. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00319   [Google Scholar]
  17. Großmann N and Wilde M (2019). Experimentation in biology lessons: Guided discovery through incremental scaffolds. International Journal of Science Education, 41(6): 759-781. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1579392   [Google Scholar]
  18. Hartono A, Djulia E, Hasruddin H, and Jayanti UNAD (2023). Biology students' science literacy level on genetic concepts. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 12(1): 146-152. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v12i1.39941   [Google Scholar]
  19. Hinostroza JE, Armstrong-Gallegos S, and Villafaena M (2024). Roles of digital technologies in the implementation of inquiry-based learning (IBL): A systematic literature review. Social Sciences and Humanities Open, 9: 100874. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2024.100874   [Google Scholar]
  20. Hu Y, Tang Y, and Wang C (2024). Learning and teaching strategies as related to language arts in China: A heterogeneity study. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 81: 101334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.101334   [Google Scholar]
  21. Jong MSY (2023). Pedagogical adoption of SVVR in formal education: Design-based research on the development of teacher-facilitated tactics for supporting immersive and interactive virtual inquiry fieldwork-based learning. Computers and Education, 207: 104921. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104921   [Google Scholar]
  22. Joyce B and Calhoun E (2024). Models of teaching. 10th Edition, Routledge, Abingdon, UK. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003455370   [Google Scholar]
  23. Kavanagh SS, Farrow J, Bernhard T, Guillotte A, and Dean CP (2024). Practicing inquiry: Investigating how coaches support teachers to lead inquiries in project-based learning classrooms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 144: 104575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104575   [Google Scholar]
  24. Kinskey M and Zeidler D (2021). Elementary preservice teachers’ challenges in designing and implementing socioscientific issues-based lessons. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 32(3): 350-372. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2020.1826079   [Google Scholar]
  25. Koustourakis GS, Spiliopoulou G, Asimaki A, and Lavidas K (2020). Family cultural activities and educational expectations of day high school students. International Journal of Sociology of Education, 9(1): 93-119. https://doi.org/10.17583/rise.2020.4715   [Google Scholar]
  26. Kwangmuang P, Jarutkamolpong S, Sangboonraung W, and Daungtod S (2021). The development of learning innovation to enhance higher order thinking skills for students in Thailand junior high schools. Heliyon, 7: e07309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07309   [Google Scholar] PMid:34195420 PMCid:PMC8239472
  27. Li M and Yuan R (2022). Enhancing students’ metacognitive development in higher education: A classroom-based inquiry. International Journal of Educational Research, 112: 101947. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2022.101947   [Google Scholar]
  28. Maass K, Geiger V, Ariza MR, and Goos M (2019). The role of mathematics in interdisciplinary STEM education. ZDM–Mathematics Education, 51: 869-884. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019-01100-5   [Google Scholar]
  29. Mulyono Y, Suranto, Yamtinah S, and Sarwanto (2023). Development of critical and creative thinking skills instruments based on environmental socio-scientific issues. International Journal of Instruction, 16(3): 691-710. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2023.16337a   [Google Scholar]
  30. Murphy C, Abu-Tineh A, Calder N, and Mansour N (2021). Teachers and students views prior to introducing inquiry-based learning in Qatari science and mathematics classrooms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 104: 103367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103367   [Google Scholar]
  31. Muskita M, Subali B, and Djukri (2020). Effects of worksheets base the levels of inquiry in improving critical and creative thinking. International Journal of Instruction, 13(2): 519-532. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13236a   [Google Scholar]
  32. Nieswandt M, McEneaney EH, and Affolter R (2020). A framework for exploring small group learning in high school science classrooms: The triple problem solving space. Instructional Science, 48(3): 243-290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-020-09510-9   [Google Scholar]
  33. Nurcahyani D, Rahmayanti H, Ichsan IZ, and Rahman MM (2021). Ethnoscience learning on science literacy of physics material to support environment: A meta-analysis research. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1796(1): 012094. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1796/1/012094   [Google Scholar]
  34. Nzomo CM, Rugano P, Njoroge JM, and Gitonga CM (2023). Inquiry-based learning and students self-efficacy in Chemistry among secondary schools in Kenya. Heliyon, 9: e12672. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e12672   [Google Scholar] PMid:36685452 PMCid:PMC9849974
  35. Özburak Ç (2021). Sustainable life practice for preschool pupils: Sustainable environmental education program (SEEP) model. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 8(10): 77–84. https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2021.10.009   [Google Scholar]
  36. Palines KME and Cruz RAOD (2021). Facilitating factors of scientific literacy skills development among junior high school students. LUMAT: International Journal on Math, Science and Technology Education, 9(1): 546-569. https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.9.1.1520   [Google Scholar]
  37. Peni N, Priska M, and Wao YP (2022). Students scientific literacy profile of mathematics education study program in chemistry subjects. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 8(6): 3050-3054. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v8i6.2295   [Google Scholar]
  38. Pratiwi SN, Cari C, and Aminah NS (2019). Pembelajaran IPA abad 21 dengan literasi sains siswa. Jurnal Materi dan Pembelajaran Fisika, 9(1): 34-42.   [Google Scholar]
  39. Putra HS (2021). Ethnoscience a bridge to back to nature. E3S Web of Conferences, 249: 01002. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202124901002   [Google Scholar]
  40. Putri LA, Permanasari A, Winarno N, and Ahmad NJ (2021). Enhancing students' scientific literacy using virtual lab activity with inquiry-based learning. Journal of Science Learning, 4(2): 173-184.   [Google Scholar]
  41. Qamariyah SN, Rahayu S, Fajaroh F, and Alsulami NM (2021). The effect of implementation of inquiry-based learning with socio-scientific issues on students' higher-order thinking skills. Journal of Science Learning, 4(3): 210-218. https://doi.org/10.17509/jsl.v4i3.30863   [Google Scholar]
  42. Radu I, Huang X, Kestin G, and Schneider B (2023). How augmented reality influences student learning and inquiry styles: A study of 1-1 physics remote AR tutoring. Computers and Education: X Reality, 2: 100011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cexr.2023.100011   [Google Scholar]
  43. Richter J, Lachner A, Jacob L, Bilgenroth F, and Scheiter K (2022). Self‐concept but not prior knowledge moderates effects of different implementations of computer‐assisted inquiry learning activities on students' learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(4): 1141-1159. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12673   [Google Scholar]
  44. Rubin M (2022). The costs of HARKing. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 73(2): 535-560. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/axz050   [Google Scholar]
  45. Sari FP, Maryati M, and Wilujeng I (2023). Ethnoscience studies analysis and their integration in science learning: Literature review. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(3): 1135-1142. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i3.2044   [Google Scholar]
  46. Schwartz RS, Lederman JS, and Enderle PJ (2023). Scientific inquiry literacy: The missing link on the continuum from science literacy to scientific literacy. In: Lederman NG, Zeidler DL, and Lederman JS (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education: 749-782. Routledge, New York, USA. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367855758-28   [Google Scholar]
  47. Sharon AJ and Baram‐Tsabari A (2020). Can science literacy help individuals identify misinformation in everyday life? Science Education, 104(5): 873-894. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21581   [Google Scholar]
  48. Sotero MC, Alves ÂGC, Arandas JKG, and Medeiros MFT (2020). Local and scientific knowledge in the school context: Characterization and content of published works. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, 16: 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-020-00373-5   [Google Scholar] PMid:32375893 PMCid:PMC7201971
  49. Suwono H, Rofi’Ah NL, Saefi M, and Fachrunnisa R (2023). Interactive socio-scientific inquiry for promoting scientific literacy, enhancing biological knowledge, and developing critical thinking. Journal of Biological Education, 57(5): 944-959. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2021.2006270   [Google Scholar]
  50. Thompson WH and Skau S (2023). On the scope of scientific hypotheses. Royal Society Open Science, 10: 230607. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.230607   [Google Scholar] PMid:37650069 PMCid:PMC10465209
  51. Verawati NNSP, Hikmawati H, Prayogi S, and Bilad MR (2021). Reflective practices in inquiry learning: Its effectiveness in training pre-service teachers' critical thinking viewed from cognitive styles. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 10(4): 505-514. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v10i4.31814   [Google Scholar]
  52. Wen CT, Liu CC, Chang HY, Chang CJ, Chang MH, Chiang SHF, Yang CW, and Hwang FK (2020). Students’ guided inquiry with simulation and its relation to school science achievement and scientific literacy. Computers and Education, 149: 103830. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103830   [Google Scholar]
  53. Winarto W, Cahyono E, Sumarni W, Sulhadi S, Wahyuni S, and Sarwi S (2022). Science teaching approach Ethno-SETSaR to improve pre-service teachers' creative thinking and problem solving skills. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 12(2): 327-344. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.1367   [Google Scholar]
  54. Wu X (2023). Fostering Chinese preservice teachers’ global competence through inquiry learning in glocalised educational contexts. Teaching and Teacher Education, 122: 103961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103961   [Google Scholar]
  55. Yeung MMY, Chan EA, Wong MMY, and Mok ALF (2024). Teaching and learning strategies foster the development of autonomous learning and its interrelated factors in prelicensure nursing education: A scoping review. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 19(2): e288–e297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2023.11.012   [Google Scholar]
  56. Yuliana I, Cahyono ME, Widodo W, and Irwanto I (2021). The effect of ethnoscience-themed picture books embedded within context-based learning on students' scientific literacy. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 92: 317-334. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2021.92.16   [Google Scholar]
  57. Yuliarti Y, Suwandi S, Andayani A, and Sumarwati S (2023). Learning model inquiry-based local wisdom dilemmas stories and their effects on critical thinking and scientific writing abilities. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 22(5): 538-557. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.22.5.27   [Google Scholar]
  58. Zeng T, Jin B, Glade T, Xie Y, Li Y, Zhu Y, and Yin K (2024). Assessing the imperative of conditioning factor grading in machine learning-based landslide susceptibility modeling: A critical inquiry. Catena, 236: 107732. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2023.107732   [Google Scholar]
  59. Zidny R and Eilks I (2022). Learning about pesticide use adapted from ethnoscience as a contribution to green and sustainable chemistry education. Education Sciences, 12(4): 227. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12040227   [Google Scholar]
  60. Zubrod A, Conway III LG, Conway KR, and Ailanjian D (2021). Understanding the role of linguistic complexity in famous trial outcomes. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 40(3): 354-377. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X20958439   [Google Scholar]
  61. Zulfiani Z, Permana Suwarna I, Muin A, Mulyati T, and El Islami RAZ (2023). Developing the MathSci 21st app: Enhancing higher-order thinking skills assessment in mathematics and science education within an Islamic context. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 10(8): 19-31. https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2023.08.003   [Google Scholar]