Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan IPA


5E model, NGSS, local potential, data literacy, problem-solving

Document Type



This study aims at revealing the effectiveness of the next generation science standards based 5E learning model by utilizing the local potential of environmental education centre Puntondo to enhance students' data literacy and problem-solving abilities. This research can be categorized as an experimental study. The subjects of this study were the seventh grade students of State Junior High School 2 Takalar. Two classes were involved, totaling 64 students. The data collection technique was carried out by using the test instrument. The data analysis technique used the gain score test and t-test analysis. The results showed that the gain score for the two classes for both abilities was in the medium category, with a value indicating that the gain from the experimental class was greater than the control class. Meanwhile, the t-test value is Sig. (2.tailed) data literacy of 0.003 and problem solving of 0.008. The acquisition of the value of the two abilities shows that the Sig. (2.tailed) is less than 0.05. Based on the research results, it can be concluded that the NGSS-based 5E learning model by utilizing the local potential of EEC Puntondo is considered effective to enhance the data literacy and problem-solving abilities.

First Page


Last Page


Page Range






Digital Object Identifier (DOI)





Aç?şl?, S., Yalç?n, S. A., & Turgut, Ü. (2011). Effects of the 5E learning model on students' academic achievements in movement and force issues. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2459-2462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.128

Alshehri, M. A. (2016). The impact of using (5e's) instructional model on achievement of mathematics and retention of learning among fifth grade students. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education (IOSR-JRME), 6(2), 43-48. https://doi.org/10.9790/7388-06214348

Bagno, E., & Eylon, B. (1997). From problem solving to a knowledge structure: An example from the domain of electromagnetism. American Journal of Physics, 65(8), 726-736. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18642

Bybee, R. (2014). Guest editorial: The BSCS 5E instructional model: personal reflections and contemporary implications. Science and Children, 051(08). https://doi.org/10.2505/4/sc14_051_08_10

Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. a, Gardner, A., Scotter, P. V, Powell, J. C., Westbrook, A., & Landes, N. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: origins, effectiveness, and applications. Colorado Springs BSCS.

Carlgren, T. (2013). Communication, critical thinking, problem solving: A suggested course for all high school students in the 21st century. Interchange, 44(1-2), 63-81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-013-9197-8

Dash, S., Kamath, U., Rao, G., Prakash, J., & Mishra, S. (2016). Audio-visual aid in teaching "fatty liver." Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 44(3), 241-245. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.20935

Gök, T., & Sýlay, I. (2010). The effects of problem solving strategies on students' achievement, attitude and motivation. Latin-American Journal of Physics Education, 4(1). https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=3694877

Hake, R. R. (1999). Analyzing change/Gain scores. http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi/AnalyzingChange-Gain.pdf

Haviz, M., Karomah, H., Delfita, R., Umar, M. I. A., & Maris, I. M. (2018). Revisiting generic science skills as 21st century skills on biology learning. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 7(3), 355-363. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v7i3.12438

Krajcik, J., Codere, S., Dahsah, C., Bayer, R., & Mun, K. (2014). Planning instruction to meet the intent of the next generation science standards. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(2), 157-175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-014-9383-2

Laurens, T., Laamena, C., & Matitaputty, C. (2014). Development a set of instructional learning based realistic mathematics education and local wisdom. Proceedings of International Seminar Innovation in Mathematics and Mathematics Education, 66, 571-576.

McComas, W. F. (2014). Framework for K-12 science education. In The Language of Science Education (pp. 41-41). SensePublishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-497-0_38

McComas, W. F., & Nouri, N. (2016). The nature of science and the Next Generation Science Standards : Analysis and critique. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 27(5), 555-576. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-016-9474-3

Miller, M. D., Linn, R. L., & Gronlund, N. E. (2013). Measurement and assessment in teaching. Pearson.

Next Generation Science Standards. (2013). Next generation science standards. In Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States (Vols. 1-2). National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18290

Ohlsson, S. (2012). The problems with problem solving: reflections on the rise, current status, and possible future of a cognitive research paradigm. The Journal of Problem Solving, 5(1), 101-128. https://doi.org/10.7771/1932-6246.1144

Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 32 Tahun 2009 tentang perlindungan dan pengelolaan lingkungan hidup, Pub. L. No. 32 (2009).

Pressman, A. (2019). Design thinking : a guide to creative problem solving for everyone. Routledge.

Purwanto, N., & Purwanto, M. N. (2006). Prinsip-prinsip dan teknik evaluasi pengajaran. Remaja Rosda Karya.

Ridsdale, C., Rothwell, J., Smit, M., Ali-Hassan, H., Bliemel, M., Irvine, D., Kelley, D., Matwin, S., & Wuetherick, B. (2015). Strategies and best practices for data literacy education. In Knowledge Synthesis Report (Issue January). https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.1922.5044

Rusyna, A. (2014). Keterampilan Berpikir. Ombak.

Sugiyono, S. (2015). Metode penelitian pendidikan: Pendekatan kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan R & D. Alfabeta.

Sya`ban, M. F., & Wilujeng, I. (2016). Pengembangan SSP zat dan energi berbasis keunggulan lokal untuk meningkatkan literasi sains dan kepedulian lingkungan. Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan IPA, 2(1), 66-75. https://doi.org/10.21831/jipi.v2i1.8369

Temel, S., Y?lmaz, A., & Özgür, S. D. (2013). Use of the learning cycle model in the teaching of chemical bonding and an investigation of diverse variables in prediction of achievement. International Journal of Education and Research, 1(5), 1-14. https://www.ijern.com/images/May-2013/26.pdf

Trianto, T. (2012). Mendesain model pembelajaran inovetif-progresif konsep, landasan dan implementasinya pada KTSP. Kencana.

Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. Jossey-Bass.

Tuna, A., & Kaçar, A. (2013). The effect of 5E learning cycle model in teaching trigonometry on students' academic achievement and the permanence of their knowledge. International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications, 4(1), 214. http://www.ijonte.org/FileUpload/ks63207/File/07.tuna.pdf

Türkmen, H. (2006). What technology plays supporting role in learning cycle approach for science education. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 5(2), 71-76.

Türkmen, H., & Usta, E. (2007). The role of learning cycle approach overcoming misconceptions in science. Ekim Kastamonu Education Journal, 15(2), 491-500. http://www.kefdergi.com/pdf/15_2/hturkmen.pdf

Wilder, M., & Shuttleworth, P. (2005). Cell inquiry: A 5E learning cycle lesson. Science Activities: Classroom Projects and Curriculum Ideas, 41(4), 37-43. https://doi.org/10.3200/SATS.41.4.37-43

Wilujeng, I., Prasetya, Z. K., & Suryadarma, I. (2017). Science learning based on local potential: Overview of the nature of science (NoS) achieved. AIP Conference Proceedings, 080005. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4995189

Zhou, Q. (2018). Research on scientific data literacy education system. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 06(06), 187-199. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2018.66017