Design of collaborative learning approach-based activities in Malaysian lower secondary science textbooks: A qualitative content analysis
List of Authors
  • Venosha Ravana , Wong Seng Yue

Keyword
  • Science education, collaborative learning approach, instructional design and technology, qualitative content analysis, textbook analysis

Abstract
  • The latest science curricula in Malaysian secondary schools follow the Integrated Curriculum for Secondary School (KSSM), designed to develop students’ scientific knowledge, skills and competencies, attitudes, and values. Textbook designers have also significantly increased the number of projects and group works in the lower secondary science textbooks to allow for more student-centred active learning. This initiative falls in line with the current Malaysian Education Blueprint’s aspiration to foster unity and inclusiveness through education and to create a richer and more conducive science learning environment for students. Thus, this paper seeks to explore the project and group works suggested in the lower secondary science textbooks from the lens of constructivism and collaborative learning approach. The findings showed that pair, group and project activities in the textbooks lack in reflecting the working mechanisms of the collaborative learning approach. While there was too much focus on discussion, some other important strategies such as active facilitation, feedback, and reflection were found to be neglected. The findings of this study are expected to help teachers and students understand science activities better while encouraging science textbook designers to develop more theory-backed and evidence-driven learning content.

Reference
  • 1. Alshahrani, A. (2017). Power Distance and Individualism-Collectivism in EFL Learning Environment. Arab World English Journal, 8(2), 145–159. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol8no2.10 2. Avci, H., & Adiguzel, T. (2017). A case study on mobile-blended collaborative learning in an english as a foreign language (EFL) context. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 18(7), 45–58. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i7.3261 3. Azlan, A. A., Hamzah, M. R., Sern, T. J., Ayub, S. H., & Mohamad, E. (2020). Public knowledge, attitudes and practices towards COVID-19: A cross-sectional study in Malaysia. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0233668 4. Boyman, S. N., Jamal, M. B., Razali, N. A., & Abdul Aziz, M. S. (2020). ADDIE Model Design Process For 21st Century Teaching and Facilitation Activities ( Pdpc ) In Nationhood Studies Module. International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, 24(09), 2115–2124. 5. Chepkorir, S. (2013). The Impact of Students ’ Attitudes on the Teaching and Learning of Chemistry in Secondary Schools in Bureti District , Kenya. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies. 6. Daly-Smith, A., Quarmby, T., Archbold, V. S. J., Routen, A. C., Morris, J. L., Gammon, C., Bartholomew, J. B., Resaland, G. K., Llewellyn, B., Allman, R., & Dorling, H. (2020). Implementing physically active learning: Future directions for research, policy, and practice. Journal of Sport and Health Science, 9(1), 41–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JSHS.2019.05.007 7. Dasgupta, C., Magana, A. J., & Vieira, C. (2019). Investigating the affordances of a CAD enabled learning environment for promoting integrated STEM learning. Computers and Education, 129(October 2018), 122–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.10.014 8. Elo, S., Kääriäinen, M., Kanste, O., Pölkki, T., Utriainen, K., & Kyngäs, H. (2014). Qualitative Content Analysis. SAGE Open, 4(1), 215824401452263. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014522633 9. Ergün, S. S. (2019). Examining the STEM Awareness and Entrepreneurship Levels of Pre-Service Science Teachers. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 7(3), 142. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v7i3.3960 10. Falk, J. H., Dierking, L. D., Osborne, J., Wenger, M., Dawson, E., & Wong, B. (2015). Analyzing Science Education in the United Kingdom: Taking a System-Wide Approach. Science Education, 99(1), 145–173. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21140 11. Gomoll, A., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Šabanović, S., & Francisco, M. (2016). Dragons, Ladybugs, and Softballs: Girls’ STEM Engagement with Human-Centered Robotics. Journal of Science Education and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9647-z 12. Gredler, M. E. (2012). Understanding Vygotsky for the Classroom: Is It Too Late? In Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-011-9183-6 13. Günaydin, S., & Karamete, A. (2016). Material development to raise awareness of using smart boards: An example design and development research. European Journal of Contemporary Education, 15(1), 114–122. https://doi.org/10.13187/ejced.2016.15.114 14. Ibáñez, M. B., & Delgado-Kloos, C. (2018). Augmented reality for STEM learning: A systematic review. Computers and Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.05.002 15. Ismail, M. H. Bin, Salleh, M. F. M., & Nasir, N. A. M. (2019). The Issues and Challenges in Empowering STEM on Science Teachers in Malaysian Secondary Schools. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 9(13), 430–444. https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v9-i13/6869 16. Khotimah, R. P., Adnan, M., Ahmad, C. N. C., & Murtiyasa, B. (2021). Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education in Indonesia: A Literature Review. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1776(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1776/1/012028 17. Kivunja, C. (2018). Distinguishing between theory, theoretical framework, and conceptual framework: A systematic review of lessons from the field. International Journal of Higher Education, 7(6), 44–53. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v7n6p44 18. Lay, Y. F., & Chandrasegaran, A. L. (2018). The contribution of teacher preparation on grade 8 students’ science achievement in TIMSS: A comparative study between Malaysia and Singapore. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 17(4), 576–589. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/18.17.576 19. Marfilinda, R., Zaturrahmi, & Suma Indrawati, E. (2019). Development and application of learning cycle model on science teaching and learning : a literature review. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1317(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1317/1/012207 20. Ministry of Education. (2013). 2013 Malaysia Education BluEprint annual rEport Ministry of Education Malaysia. www.moe.gov.my 21. MOE. (2016). Malaysian Education Blueprint Report (2013-2025). Ministry of Education, 1–178. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004 22. Mokshein, S. E. (2019). Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) in Malaysia: Policy, Program and Evaluation. August. https://doi.org/10.2991/iccie-18.2019.2 23. Motallebzadeh, K., Ahmadi, F., & Hosseinnia, M. (2018). Relationship between 21st century skills, speaking and writing skills: A structural equation modelling approach. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 265–276. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11319a 24. Nabavi, R. T. (2012). Theories of Developmental Psychology: Bandura ’ s Social Learning Theory & Social Cognitive Learning Theory. University of Science and Culture, January 2012, 1–24. 25. Ng, C. H., & Adnan, M. (2018). Integrating STEM education through Project-Based Inquiry Learning (PIL) in topic space among year one pupils. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 296(1), 1383–1390. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/296/1/012020 26. Nurul-Awanis, A.W., Hazlina, A. H., Yoke-May, L. Zariyawati, M. . (2011). Malaysian education system reform : Educationists’ Perspectives. Proceeding of the International Conference on Social Science, Economics and Art, January, 107–111. 27. Oriol, M. D., Tumulty, G., & Snyder, K. (2010). Cognitive Apprenticeship as a Framework for Teaching Online. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 210–217. 28. Palpanadan, S. T., & Ahmad, I. (2018). Democratic classroom and student communication skills development of mechanical engineering education. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology. 29. Phuthi, N., & Mpofu, I. (2021). Critical Reflection in Science Teaching and Learning: Crossing Borders into Western Science. American Journal of Educational Research, 9(5), 313–319. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-9-5-9 30. Ramli, N., & Talib, O. (2017). Can Education Institution Implement STEM? From Malaysian Teachers’ View. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 7(3), 721–732. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v7-i3/2772 31. Roberts, T., Jackson, C., Mohr-Schroeder, M. J., Bush, S. B., Maiorca, C., Cavalcanti, M., Craig Schroeder, D., Delaney, A., Putnam, L., & Cremeans, C. (2018). Students’ perceptions of STEM learning after participating in a summer informal learning experience. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0133-4 32. Saleh, S. (2021). Malaysian students’ motivation towards Physics learning. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(4), 223–232. https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/ 9414 33. Selvanathan, M., Hussin, N. A. M., & Azazi, N. A. N. (2020). Students learning experiences during COVID-19: Work from home period in Malaysian Higher Learning Institutions. Teaching Public Administration. https://doi.org/10.1177/0144739420977900 34. Shahali, E. H. M., Halim, L., Rasul, M. S., Osman, K., & Zulkifeli, M. A. (2017). STEM learning through engineering design: Impact on middle secondary students’ interest towards STEM. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(5), 1189–1211. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00667a 35. Takim, R., Harris, M., & Nawawi, A. H. (2013). Building Information Modeling (BIM): A New Paradigm for Quality of Life Within Architectural, Engineering and Construction (AEC) Industry. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 101, 23–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.07.175 36. Verenikina, I. (2015). Understanding Scaffolding and the ZPD in Educational Research Over the past two decades , an increasing number of educators and researchers have used the. January 2003. 37. Virtue, D. (2017). Increasing Student Interaction in Technical Writing Courses in Online Environments. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 80(2), 217–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329490617689880 38. Yusoff, N., Puteh, M., & Yasin, A. A. (2021). Needs Analysis for Online Game Development for Form 2 Mathematics in the District of Bagan Datuk, Perak. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains Dan Matematik Malaysia, 11(Special Issue 2021), 29–38. https://ejournal.upsi.edu. my/index.php/JPSMM/article/view/4735