Developing SIPCaR projects utilizing modern technologies
Its impact to students’ engagement, R&D skills, and learning outcomes
Keywords:student engagement, R&D skills, learning outcomes, modern technologies, STEM education
Due to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the education sector responded quickly to change the mode of delivering instructions to students in hybrid learning. Since in-school learning is no longer feasible, schools are devising teaching-learning pedagogies that are practical to achieving positive students' learning and quality instruction. This study aims to find out the impact of science investigatory projects, capstone projects, and robotics (SIPCaR) to students' engagement, and research and development (R&D) skills, and learning outcomes. Using purposive sampling and mixed-method research design, results revealed that students were very engaged, their R&D skills and learning outcomes proficiency are highly evident. Students were very cognitively engaged, behaviorally engaged, socially engaged, and moderately emotionally engaged, with means 4.27, 4.16, 4.41, and 3.44, respectively. Their R&D skills consist of analytical skills, information seeking skills, problem-solving skills, communication skills, and methodology skills are proficient with means 4.10, 4.06, 3.80, 4.30, and 3.78, sequentially. The findings of the study prove that, if appropriately implemented, SIPCaR projects open countless opportunities for students to achieve high-level learning outcomes, collaborate and innovate modern technologies that could potentially help emerging societal problems. Despite the challenges posed by the health crisis, STEM educators may formulate activities that result in students' holistic development in a remote classroom setting.
Acut, D.P., Carpo, M.J.C., Caparoso, J.K.V., Magsayo, J.R. & Sombilon, V.A. (2016). Relationship of Students’ Internet Usage and Academic Performance. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference of Science Educators and Teachers, 45–51.
Acut, D.P. & Latonio, R.A.C. (2021). Utilization of stellarium-based activity: its effectiveness to the academic performance of Grade 11 STEM strand students. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1835(1), 012082. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1835/1/012082
Alarde, H.P.., Bartolabac, K.J., Acut, D.P., Morales, J.J.., Calvo, P.J., Curaraton, E.P., Latonio, R.A.C., Cane, J.F., Magsayo, J.R., Capuyan, M. (2021a). STEAM Education for the Filipino Youth in the New Normal utilizing do-it-yourself Photobioreactors. Research Paper presented to the 4th International Annual Meeting on STEM Education, Keelung, Taiwan.
Alarde, H.P.., Bartolabac, K.J., Acut, D.P.. (2021b). Development of an Arduino-based Photobioreactor (AbPBR) to investigate Algae growth rate and Carbon dioxide (CO2) removal efficiency. International Journal of Robotics and Automation, 11(2), 141–160. http://doi.org/10.11591/ijra.v11i2.pp141-160
Aparecio, M.M. (2018). Mentoring, self-efficacy and performance in conducting investigatory projects: A mixed-method analysis. Asia Pacific Journal of Contemporary Education and Communication Technology, 4(2), 65–76. https://doi.org/10.25275/apjcectv4i2edu7
Barker, B.S. & Ansorge, J. (2007). Robotics as Means to Increase Achievement Scores in an Informal Learning Environment. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39 (3), 229–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2007.10782481
Barton, K.C. & Smith, L.A. (2000). Themes or motifs? Aiming for coherence through interdisciplinary outlines. The Reading Teacher, 54(1), 54–63.
Beane, J. (1997). Curriculum Integration. Teachers College Press: New York.
Bruner, J. S. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31(1), 21–32.
Bull, G. & Bell, R.L. (2008). Education Technology in the Science Classroom. Technology in the Secondary Science Classroom, Washington, D. C. National Science Teachers Association Press, 1–8.
Buntting, C. (2021). The role of teacher educators in supporting STEM curriculum reform - lessons from New Zealand. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1835(1), 012001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1835/1/012001
Chan, R. (2016). Simple Programmable Robotic Arm. Arduino Project Hub. https://create.arduino.cc/projecthub/ryanchan/simple-programmable-robotic-arm-bd28a0?ref=platform&ref_id=424_respected__beginner_&offset=8
Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., Ecclestone, K. (2004). Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: a systematic and critical review. Learning and Skills Research Centre, London.
Cuartero, O. (2016). Impact of doing science investigatory project (SIP) on the interest and process skills of elementary students. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Academic Research, 4(5), 27–41.
Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (2002). An overview of self-determination theory: An organismic-dialectical perspective. In E. Deci, & R. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, NY. http://www.elaborer.org/cours/A16/lectures/Ryan2004.pdf
Department of Education (DepEd). (2018). National Science and Technology Fair for School Year 2018-2019. https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/DM_s2018_134.pdf
Department of Education (DepEd). (2016). Science K to 12 Curriculum Guide. https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Science-CG_with-tagged-sci-equipment_revised.pdf
Department of Education (DepEd). (2019). PISA 2018: National Report of the Philippines. https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/PISA-2018-Philippine-National-Report.pdf
Dewey, J. (1897). My Pedagogical Creed. The School Journal, 56:77–80.
Embedotronics Technologies. (2019). Attendance System Using Arduino and RFID with Python © GPL3+. Arduino Project Hub. https://create.arduino.cc/projecthub/embedotronics-technologies/attendance-system-using-arduino-and-rfid-with-python-3b69c8?ref=search&ref_id=attendance%20system&offset=1
Fredricks, J.A., Blumenfeld, P.C., Paris, A.H. (2004). School Engagement: Potential of the Concept, State of the Evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
Fredricks J.A., McColskey W. (2012). The Measurement of Student Engagement: A Comparative Analysis of Various Methods and Student Self-report Instruments. In: Christenson S., Reschly A., Wylie C. (eds) Handbook of Research on Student Engagement. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_37
Gamale, J.N.L., Acut, D.P., Niere, K.M.F.P., Silagan, G.S.S., Curaraton, E.P., Latonio, G.C. & Latonio, R.A.C. & Magsayo, J.R. (2021). Development of a do-it-yourself (D.I.Y.) gel electrophoresis apparatus for Grade-12 STEM general biology students. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1835(1), 012033. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1835/1/012033
Gomez, R.G. (2013). A Project-Based Approach to Enhance Skills in Science Investigatory Projects among Secondary School Students in Northern Mindanao. The Mindanao Forum, 26(1): 63–83. https://ejournals.ph/article.php?id=7123
Green, B.A. (2015). Measuring Cognitive Engagement With Self-Report Scales: Reflections From Over 20 Years of Research. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 14–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.989230
Guarin, R.M., Buan, A.T., Malicoban, E., Barquilla, M.B., Yuenyong, C. (2019). Formulating Refreshment Drink Activity Utilizing STEM Education for Grade 8 Learners. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1340(1), 012078. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1340/1/012078
Jackson, A.W. & Davis, G.A. (2000). Turning Points 2000: Educating adolescents in the 21st century. New York: Teachers College Press.
Jugar, R.R. (2013). Teacher-coaches’ perspective on the validity and acceptability of commercial laboratory testing and analysis of high school science investigatory projects. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 106, 2516–2521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.289
Juuti, K., Lavonen, J., Salonen, V., Salmela-Aro, K., Schneider, B., Krajcik, J. (2021). A Teacher-Researcher Partnership for Professional Learning: Co-Designing Project-Based Learning Units to Increase Student Engagement in Science Classes. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 32(6), 625–641. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2021.1872207
Kolb, D.A. (1981). Experiential learning theory and the Learning Style Inventory: a reply to Freedman and Stumpf. Academy of Management Review, 6(2), 289–296.
Liu, C.H., & Matthews, R. (2005). Vygotsky’s philosophy: Constructivism and its criticisms examined. International Education Journal, 6(3), 386–399.
Madaiton, N., Tomaquin, M. E., Visitacion, E. J., Villaver, J. R., Malingin, J. M., Nacua, S., Acut, D., & Picardal, M. (2022). Conceptual Change Framework of Instruction (CCFI): An Instructional Model in Teaching Eclipses: Research Article. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 19(2), 622–640. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2022.141
Markham, T. (2011). Project Based Learning. Teacher Librarian, 39(2), 38–42.
McCubbins, O., Paulsen, T.H., Anderson, R. (2018). Student Engagement in a Team-Based Capstone Course: A Comparison of What Students Do and What Instructors Value. Journal of Research in Technical Careers, 2(1): 8–21. https://doi.org/10.9741/2578-2118.1029
Meerah, T.S.M., Osman, K., Zakaria, E., Haji Ikhsan, Z., Krish, P., Lian, D.K.C., Mahmod, D. (2012a). Measuring Graduate Students Research Skills. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 60, 626–629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.433
Meerah, T.S.M., Osman, K., Zakaria, E., Haji Ikhsan, Z., Krish, P., Lian, D.K.C., Mahmod, D. (2012b). Developing an Instrument to Measure Research Skills. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 60, 630–636. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.434
Microsoft. (n.d.). Building Machines That Emulate Humans. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/education/education-workshop/robotic-hand.aspx
Microsoft. (n.d.). Using Computational Thinking to understand earthquakes. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/education/education-workshop/seismograph.aspx
Montemayor, MT. (2018). Why include robotics in the PH school curriculum. Philippine News Agency, 1040784. https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1040784
Mullis, I.V.S., Martin, M.O., For, P., Kelly, D.L., Fishbein, B. (2020). TIMSS 2019 International Results In Mathematics and Science. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA), MA, United States. https://www.iea.nl/sites/default/files/2020-12/TIMSS-2019-International-Results-in-Mathematics-and-Science.pdf
OECD. (2018). PISA 2018 Results in focus 2015: Combined Executive Summaries. PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/Combined_Executive_Summaries_PISA_2018.pdf
OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 Assessment and Analytical Framework. PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/b25efab8-en
Othman, A.R., Yin, T.S., Sulaiman, S., Ibrahim, M.I.M., Razha-Rashid, M. (2011). Application of Mean and Standard Deviation in Questionnaire Surveys. Menemui Matematik (Discovering Mathematics), 33(1), 11–22.
Palines, K.M.E., Ortega-Dela Cruz, R.A. (2021). Facilitating factors of scientific literacy skills development among junior high school students. LUMAT: International Journal on Math, Science and Technology Education, 9(1), 546–569. https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.9.1.1520
Petrakis, K., Wodehouse, A., & Hird, A. (2021). Physical prototyping rationale in design student projects: An analysis based on the concept of purposeful prototyping. Design Science, 7(7), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2021.6
Piaget, J. (1971). Psychology and Epistemology: Towards a Theory of Knowledge. New York: Grossman.
Pimvichai, J., Yuenyong, C., & Buaraphan, K. (2019). Development of grade 10 students’ scientific argumentation through the science-technology-society learning unit on work and energy. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 9(3), 428–441. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.527
Primastuti, M., & Atun, S. (2018). Science Technology Society (STS) learning approach: an effort to improve students' learning outcomes. Journal of Physics: conference Series, 1097(1), 012062. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1097/1/012062
Rotas, E. E., & Cahapay, M. B. (2020). Difficulties in Remote Learning: Voices of Philippine University Students in the Wake of COVID-19 Crisis. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15(2), 147–158. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4299835
Sanchez, J.M.P., & Rosaroso, R.C. (2019). Science Investigatory Project Instruction: The Secondary School’s Journey. The Normal Lights, 13(1), 56–82.
Sullano, J.II. Mariquit, A.G., Mar, J.L.M., Acut, D.P., Calvo, P.J., Curaraton, E., Latonio, R.A., Cane, J.F., Magsayo, J.R., Capuyan, M. (2021). EduKahon: Water Roboat Learning Kit for Teaching STEM Concepts Remotely. Research Paper presented to the 4th International Annual Meeting on STEM Education, Keelung, Taiwan.
Uitto, A., Juuti, K., Lavonen, J., Byman, R., Meisalo, V. (2011). Secondary school students' interests, attitudes and values concerning school science related to environmental issues in Finland. Environmental Education Research, 17(2), 167–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2010.522703
Vars, G.F. (1991). Integrated curriculum in historical perspective. Educational Leadership, 49(2), 14–15.
Verner, I.M., Perez, H., Lavi, R. (2021). Characteristics of student engagement in high-school robotics courses. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-021-09688-0
Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). The Collected Works of L. S. Vygotsky (Vol. 1) , Plenum Press, New York and London.
Walker, K.A., Koralesky, K.E. (2021). Student and instructor perceptions of engagement after the rapid online transition of teaching due to COVID-19. Natural Sciences Education, 50(1). https://doi.org/10.1002/nse2.20038
Wang, M.T., Fredricks, J.A., Ye, F., Hofkens, T.L., Linn, J.S. (2016). The Math and Science Engagement Scales: Scale development, validation, and psychometric properties. Learning and Instruction 43, 16–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.01.008
Yadav S. (2018). Correlation analysis in biological studies. Journal of Practice of Cardiovascular Sciences, 4, 116–21. https://doi.org/10.4103/jpcs.jpcs_31_18
Yuenyong, C. (2006). Teaching and learning about energy: Using STS approach (Ph.D. Dissertation in Science Education). Kasetsart University, Bangkok.
Zimmerman, B.J. (2010). Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: An Overview. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2501_2
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2022 Dharel Acut
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.