Validitas Model Pembelajaran Conceptual Change Model With Cognitive Conflict Approach
DOI:
10.29303/jipp.v3i1.54Published:
2018-05-12Downloads
Abstract
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menguji kevalidan model pembelajaran CCM CCA melalui kegiatan FGD (Focused Group Discussions). Desain penelitian yang digunakan mengikuti metode Education Research and Development, yaitu pengembangan model dimulai dari mendesain model sampai implementasi model. Uji kevalidan model melalui kegiatan FGD dilaksanakan di Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta (UNY) oleh dua (2) Dosen Pendidikan Sains Pogram Pascasarjana UNY sebagai validator ahli (expert) serta lima (5) Mahasiswa S3 Pendidikan Sains Universitas Negeri Surabaya (Dosen Pendidikan Fisika). Validasi model pembelajaran dengan metode FGD dilakukan dengan tujuan untuk memperoleh masukan dan perbaikan terhadap model pembelajaran hipotetik yang telah dikembangkan oleh peneliti. Hasil uji validitas menunjukkan bahwa model pembelajaran CCM CCA adalah model pembelajaran yang valid secara isi dan konstruk serta menunjukkan adanya kebutuhan (need), kebaruan (state of the art), memiliki landasan yang kuat, dan terdapat konsistensi antar komponen model.References
Arends, R.I. (1997). Classroom Instructional and Management. New York: Mc Graw-Hill Book Companies, Inc.
Borich, D. (1994). Observation Skills for Effective Teaching. Englewood Cliffs: Macmillan Publishing company.
Byun, Taejin & Lee, Gyoungho. (2011). An Explanation for the Difficulty of Leading Conceptual Change Using a Counterintuitive Demonstration: The Relationship Between Cognitive Conflict and Responses. Res Sci Educ DOI 10.1007/s11165-011-9234-5. Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011.
Chan, C., Burtis, J., & Bereiter, C. (1997). Knowledge building as a mediator of conceptual change. Cognition & Instruction, 15(1), 1 – 40.
Chi, M.T.H. (2008). Three types of conceptual change: Belief revision, mental model transformation, and categorical shift. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), Handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 61-82). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Chinn, C. A., & Brewer, W. F. (1993). The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: A theoretical framework and implications for science education. Review of Educational Research, 63, 1–49.
Dole, J. A., & Sinatra, G. M. (1998). Reconceptualizing change in the cognitive construction ofknowledge. Educational Psychologist. 33 (2/3), 109 – 128.
Jonassen, D., Strobel, J., & Gottdenker, J. (2005). Model Building for Conceptional Change. Interactive Learning Environments Vol. 13, No.1–2, April–August 2005, pp. 15 – 37.
Makhrus, M., Nur, M., & Widodo, W. (2014). Model Perubahan Konseptual dengan Pendekatan Konflik Kognitif. Jurnal Pijar MIPA, Vol.IX No.1, Maret: 20-25.
Moreno, R. (2010). Educational Psychology. New York: Joh Wiley & Sons Inc.
Nieveen, N. (1999). Prototyping to reach product quality. In Akker, J.V.D., Branch, R.M., Gustafson, K., Nieveen, N., dan Plomp, T. (Eds.), Design Approaches and Tools in Education and Training (pp. 125-135). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
Ratumanan, G.T. dan Laurens. (2006). Evaluasi Hasil Belajar yang Relevan dengan Kurikulum Berbasis Kompetensi. Surabaya: Unesa University Press.
Richey, R.C. dan Klein, J.D. (2005). Developmental research methods; creating knowledge from instructional design and development practice. Journal of Computing in Higher Education. Vol. 16 No. 2. pp. 23-38.
Tracey, M.W. dan Richey, R.C. (2007). ID model construction and validation: a multiple intelligences case. Educational Technology Research and Development. Vol. 55 No. 4. pp. 369-390.
Wirth, Karl R. & Perkins, Dexter. (2008). Learning to Learn. Available from: http://www.macalester.edu/geology/wirth/CourseMaterials.html (version 16 September 2008)
klik di sini 
