 |
Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume 19, Issue 1, Article 12 (Jun., 2018) |
From the first results found that GIMuR model is more efficient in increasing students' mathematics modeling ability than traditional learning. The results of the GIMuR model implementation are also in line with the research conducted by (Hettmannsperger, Mueller, Scheid, & Schnotz, 2015; Wong, Sng, Ng, & Wee, 2011) which concluded that multi-representation-based learning could improve understanding of physics concept (optics and mechanics) and help to clarify which kind of cognitive processes can be enhanced by which kind of representational learning activity. Then (Sunyono, Yuanita, & Ibrahim, 2015) said of the mental model that multi-representation-based learning can improve the teacher's mental model. The sequence step from GIMuR model can make significant differences in making hypothesis of the problem.
More specific research on the application of magnetism has been carried out by (Challapalli, Michelini, & Vercellati, 2013) which states that experimental inquiry-based applications are necessary for providing an understanding of the concept of the magnetic field to learners. It starts with the use of a compass and describes the direction and pattern of the magnetic field. The results of this study found that experimental inquiry-based experiments can improve students' thinking ability. This is in line with the GIMuR learning model which also implements guided inquiry and conducts investigations with experiments.
In the second result found that teacher and students' activities in all steps of GIMuR model have an outstanding category. In the inquiry, activities ensure the physical and mental participation of students in the learning process (Sen & Yilmaz, 2016). There was an exciting finding in the second step of GIMuR model. At the time of implementation second step, sequence and hypothesis are not as easy as the planning is made. At the first meeting, the teacher still difficulties in directing learners to make hypotheses and difficulties in providing appropriate representations with the material. These findings are not strange, because in other studies also found the problem that prospective teachers in Turkey also have difficulty in preparing hypotheses and teacher should spend more time focusing students on the conceptual aspects (Aydoğdu, 2015; Taasoobshirazi & Farley, 2013). For this reason, at the next meeting, the teacher is required to prepare the right form of representation before learning begins. Eventually, discussions between Physics teachers from several schools were conducted before the second meeting, to redefine the correct representation form for magnetic field learning.
In the third result found that how student builds the conception with their mathematics modeling ability. From questions 1 and two suggest that in the same problem but with different representation makes students confused. This finding was same with Heckler, et al. (2015) that as students have difficulty determining the direction of a vector; they also sometimes have trouble finding the magnitude of a vector from its components because of arrow representation. In a different context (vector addition), others have noted a misapplication of this theorem; it is unclear whether this misapplication was due to a difficulty with the concept of magnitude or with the addition operation (Barniol & Zavala, 2012; Deventer & Wittmann, 2007; Nguyen & Meltzer, 2003, 2005). Additionally, the same research suggests that students struggle with understanding cross products outside of any physics context, as well as in the context of magnetism and in other physics areas such as torque (Ambrosis & Onorato, 2013; Scaife & Heckler, 2011).
This error, too, was dependent on the representation of the field. For those given a problem with magnetic poles, this sign error was at least partly due to reversing the direction of the magnetic field (from south to north instead of north to south). However, (Scaife & Heckler, 2010) found that these sign errors were not systematic, indicating that there are multiple sources for this incorrect response.
From all these findings, given multiple representations in inquiry learning make student thinking how to find the concept and finally increasing student's mathematics modeling ability. According to Schonborn & Anderson's theory (2006) that the thinking process of students in learning science has three main factors, namely conceptual (Conceptual = C), Reasoning (R), and Mode representation (M). The ability of the representation of learners is strongly influenced also by the representation of teachers in implementing learning (Majidi & Emden, 2013; Waldrip, Prain, & Carolan, 2006). The sequence is done by adjusting the characteristics of the material to be learned (Waldrip et al., 2006).
