Attitude towards science among lower secondary students in Johor Bahru

Leong, Sok Yee

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to investigate attitude towards science among lower secondary students in Johor Bahru. The attitude in this study included interest, perception towards science and motivation. The study was carried out in Johor Bahru, Johor. The study adopted quantitative descriptive research designs and questionnaires were used in the study. A total of 370 respondents constituted the sample of the study, which included Form 2 lower secondary students from Johor Bahru. Data was analysed to obtain frequency, mean and standard deviation. The results revealed that laboratory activity, curiosity to discovery science and science as a tool to understand the world is able to improve science learning. As a conclusion, interest especially created by laboratory activity, perception of student when they are curios to discovery science and motivation factor when students know that science as a tool to understand the world are able to improve students science learning in lower secondary schools in Johor Bahru. The implication was that school teachers could prepare more laboratory activities in science lesson. They also can stimulate students’ curiosity to discovery science and related science knowledge to the world so that students are interested and motivated to learn science. Future studies on this subject would be beneficial to understand more deeply the relationship between student personal factors with science achievement.

References

1. Mok, S. S. (2008). Ilmu pendidikan untuk KPLI (Sek. rendah: Komponen 1 & 2). Psikologi Pendidikan & Pedagogi. Subang Jaya: Kumpulan Budiman Sdn. Bhd. 2. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Goh, S. & Cotter, K. (Eds.) (2016). TIMSS 2015 Encyclopedia: Education policy and curriculum in mathematics and science. Boston College, TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center website. Retrieved from http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2015/encyclopedia/ 3. Boo, S. L. (2015, November 2). Parents partly to blame for bad science results, teachers say. Malaymail online. Retrieved from http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/parents-partly-to-blame-for-bad-science-results-teachers-say 4. Strommen, E., F., & Lincoln, B. (1992). Constructivism, technology, and the future of classroom learning. Children’s Television Workshop. 5. Badlishah, M. N., Mustamam, M. & Nurulhuda, A. R. (2016). Sikap pelajar terhadap pembelajaran fizik dan hubungan dengan pencapaian dalam kalangan pelajar sains. Jurnal Personalia Pelajar, 19, 23 - 38. 6. Cavas, P. (2011). Factors affecting the motivation of Turkish primary students for science learning. Science Education International, 22(1), 31 - 42. 7. Mekonnen, S. (2014). Problems challenging the academic performance of physics students in higher government institutions in the case of Arbaminch, Wolayita Soclo, Hawassa and Dilla Universities. Natural Science, 6, 362 - 375. 8. Ng, K. T., Lay, Y. F., Areepattamannil, S., Treagust, D. F., & Chandrasegaran, A. L. (2012). Relationship between affect and achievement in science and mathematics in Malaysia and Singapore. Research in Science & Technological Education, 30(3), 225-237. 9. Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111-127. 10. Elster, D. (2007). Student interests – the German and Austrian ROSE survey. Educational Research, 42(1), 5 – 11. 11. Hulleman, C. S. & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2009). Promoting interest and performance in high school science classes. Science, 326, 1410 – 1412. 12. Wolter, B. H., Lundeberg, M. A. & Bergland, M. (2013). What makes science relevant? Student perceptions of multimedia case learning in ecology and health. Journal of STEM Education, 14(1), 26 – 35. 13. Phanga, F. A., Abua, M. S., Alia, M. B., & Sallehb, S. (2014). Faktor penyumbang kepada kemerosotan penyertaan pelajar dalam aliran sains: Satu analisis sorotan tesis. Sains Humanika, 2(4), 63–71. 14. Portnov-Neeman, Y., & Barak, M. (2013). Exploring students’ perceptions about learning in school: An activity theory based study. Journal of Education and Learning, 2(3), 9-25. 15. Brophy, J. E. (2004). Motivating Students to Learn (2nd ed.). Retrieved from http://books.google.com.tr/books?id=gD7_VSNmu7cC&dq=isbn:0805847723/ 16. Owoeye, P. O., & Aghaje, R. O. (2016). Students’ attitude and gender as correlates of students’ academic performance in Biology in senior secondary school. International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews, 3(3), 1 – 8. 17. Portal Pejabat Pendidikan Daerah Johor Bahru. (2015). Retrieved from http://ppdjb.edu.my/v3/sekolah2.php 18. Krejcie, R. V. & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, 607 – 610. 19. Glynn, S. M., Brickman, P., Armstrong, N. & Taasoobshirazi, G. (2011). Science motivation questionnaire II: Validation with science majors and nonscience majors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(10), 1159 – 1176. 20. Maxwell, D. O., Lambeth, D. T., & Cox, J. T. (2015). Effects of using inquiry-based learning on science achievement for fifth-grade students. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 16(1), 1-31. 21. Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitude towards science: a review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049–1079. 22. Schiefele, U. (1991). Interest, learning and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26(2&3), 299-323. 23. Sorić, I. & Palekčić, M. (2009). The role of students’ interests in self-regulated learning: The relationship between students’ interests, learning strategies and causal attributions. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 24(4), 545-565. 24. Aikenhead, G. S. (2006). Science education for everyday life: Evidence-based practice. New York: Teachers College Press. 25. Obomanu, B. J., & Adaramola, M. O. (2011). Factors Related to Under Achievement in Science, Technology and Mathematics Education (STME) in Secondary Schools in Rivers State, Nigeria. World Journal of Education, 1(1), 102 - 109. 26. Miller, R. B. & Brickman, S. J. (2004). A model of future-orientated motivation and self-regulation. Educational Psychology Review, 16(1), 9-33. 27. Miller, R. B., DeBacker, T. K., & Greene, B. A. (1999). Perceived instrumentality and academics: The link to task valuing. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 26, 250 –261. 28. Harackiewicz, J. M., Tibbetts, Y., Canning, E. & Hyde, J. S. (2014). Hardenessing values to promote motivation in education. Advances in Motivation and Achievement, 18, 71-105. 29. Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Soenens, B., Matos, L., & Lacante, M. (2004). Less Is Sometimes More: Goal Content Matters. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96 (4), 755–764.