Thursday, August 30, 2018

ARTIKEL JOURNAL THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SUBJECT SPECIFIC PEDAGOGY BASED ON PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING TO EMPOWER STUDENT’S ECOLOGICAL LITERACY

Tags



THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SUBJECT SPECIFIC PEDAGOGY BASED
ON PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING TO EMPOWER STUDENT’S
ECOLOGICAL LITERACY
Idhun Prasetyo Riyadi1, Baskoro Adi Prayitno2, Puguh Karyanto3
1Magister Science Education, Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta
2Department of Biology Education, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education,
Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta
3Research Group of Human and Environmental Interface, Environmental
Studies of Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta
e-mail:idhunriyadi@gmail.com

Abstract: This study aims to examine the effectiveness of Subject Specific
Pedagogy (SSP) based Problem-Based Learning (PBL) to facilitate the students'
ecological literacy. This research involved in a Biology Education Program of a
Faculty of Teaching and Learning Science in a public university in Indonesia. The
research used a posttest-only control design. The participants were undergraduate
students who had learned or were learning Ecology, as many as 46 students in
theexperiment class and 57 students in the control class. The posttest score of the
ecological literacy for the experimental class was 80.77% while the control class
was 68.14%. Using an independent t-test, it was indicated that the sig value = 0,00,
therefore it might be said that there is difference of ecological literacy between
experiment class and control class. Accordingly, it is concluded that the PBL-based
SSP affects the ecological literacy of biology education students.
Keywords: Subject Specific Pedagogy, Problem-Based Learning, effectiveness,
Ecological Literacy

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SUBJECT SPECIFIC PEDAGOGY BASED
ON PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING TO IMPROVE STUDENTS’
ECOLOGICAL LITERACY
Abstrak: Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menguji keefektivan Subject Specific
Pedagogy (SSP) berbasis Problem-Based Learning (PBL) untuk memberdayakan
literasi ekologi mahasiswa. Penelitian ini dilaksanakan pada Program Studi
Pendidikan Biologi di Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan di sebuah
universitas negeri di Indonesia. Desain penelitian yang digunakan adalah posttestonly
control design. Sampel penelitian terdiri atas mahasiswa yang sudah atau
sedang mempelajari Ekologi, yaitu sejumlah 46 di kelas eksperimen dan sejumlah
57 di kelas kontrol. Pada kelas eksperimen, mahasiswa belajar menggunakan
pendekatan SSP berbasis PBL, sedangkan di kelas kontrol siswa mengikuti
perkuliahan dengan pendekatan ceramah (tradisional). Didapatkan skor posttest
literasi ekologi untuk kelas eksperimen sebesar 80,77% sedangkan kelas kontrol
sebesar 68,14%. Menggunakan independent t-test, diperoleh t(df)=value, sig=0,00,
sehingga dikatakan terdapat perbedaan literasi ekologi antara kelas eksperimen dan
kelas kontrol. Oleh sebab itu, pendekatan SSP berbasis PBL disimpulkan efektif
untuk memfasilitasi literasi ekologi pada mahasiswa pendidikan biologi.
Kata Kunci: Subject Specific Pedagogy, Problem-Based Learning, Keefektivan,
Literasi Ekologi

INTRODUCTION
The UI GreenMetric is a world
ranking to measure the university's ability
to maintain a sustainable campus
environment and its surroundings (Team,
2016).One of the UI GreenMetric
objectives was to see the contributions of
the academic discourse on sustainability of
education and campus greening programs
including the application of environmentbased
curriculum in each subject as well as
creating an environmentally friendly
campus. A total of 28 universities in
Indonesia have participated in UI
GreenMetric in maintaining a sustainable
campus environment through the Green
Campus program.
Green Campus is a place to
implement eco-friendly practices by
combining the role of education to promote
sustainability programs in campus
environment(NEEATeam).Campus
residents can examine environmental issues
and provide solutions through the Green
Campus activity(UNS, 2014).Sebelas
Maret University (UNS) is ranked 76th in
the world and ranked 5th nationally with a
value of 5,960 (Rizki, 2016). Sebelas Maret
University and 6 other universities were
selected as pilot projects to implement the
Green Campus program under the guidance
of the Ministry of Environment (UNS,
2014).The implementation of the Green
Campus program can be supported by using
an environment-based curriculum given in
the course. According to Roy (2008)the
environment-based curriculum can be
applied to environmental issues on campus
and its surroundings to reduce waste and
energy consumption. Environmental-based
education if managed well can be beneficial
to improve eco-friendly behavior (Cheang,
So, & Zhan, 2017; Li & Lang, 2015).
Environmental-based education
builds on environmental knowledge; about
the causes and consequences of ecological
disasters, ecological security, and concepts
of human positions in nature (Kallas,
Solovjeva, & Minakova, 2015). IUCN
(2002)added solutions for environmental
improvement through education which had
been formulated in the design of agenda 21.
One of the formulas contained in agenda 21
states that education plays an important role
in realizing sustainable
development(UNESCO-UNEP, 1996). UI
GreenMatric recognizes the important role
of higher education in addressing
environmental issues because as a basic
step of raising awareness through education
for sustainable development (Team, 2016).
The concrete steps of Agenda 21 are
formulated in Education for Sustainable
Development (EfSD).
Education for Sustainable
Development (EfSD) is a type of teaching
approach based on the ideals and principles
underlying sustainable development and
concerning with all levels and types of
education. Education for sustainable
development allows one to develop
knowledge, values and skills in taking
decisions on making a better quality of life
in the future(Hooi, Hassan, & Mat, 2012).
Ecological science is an environment-based
education that can be used to decide on
various actions to be taken related to
environmental issues (Kiker, Bridges,
Varghese, Seager, & Linkov, 2005).
Utilization of ecological science for
the internalization of environmental cares
can be done through a study of related
literature on ecological. The literature on
ecological literacy today emphasizes the
role of scientific knowledge and ecological
thought to enable better decision making
(McBride B. , Brewer, Berkowitz, &
Borrie, 2013).McGinn (2014)defines
ecological literacy as one's own knowledge
of the ecological system, the urge to know
it, not only knowing about the system but
also feeling responsible for the ecological
situation and ultimately acting on his/her
knowledge and responsibilities.Orr
(1992)states that to know the ecological
literacy, one must understand the basic
knowledge of ecological and its
sustainability beside his/ her eagerness to
solve an environmental problem.
In relation to differences of the
definition of Ecological literacy, Al-
Dajeh(2012)found there are three
components behind the same definition.
Components of Ecological literacy
according to Al-Dajeh include: Knowledge,
Attitude, and Concern. Each component has
several aspects that support the goal to
determine the level of one's Ecological
literacy. Knowledge component using the
aspect expressed by Lewinsohn (2015)aims
to facilitate the level of student knowledge
related to the concept of ecological. The
second dimension is attitude using the scale
of the assessment of NEP (New Ecological
Paradigm). Instruments for attitude
components use NEP instruments that have
been validated and have been applied in
several countries(Ogunbonde, 2013).
While the third component is the concern
which is a form of concern or action of
every human being in preserving the
environment(Eurobarometer, 2008).
Biology FKIP UNS students’
preliminary data of ecological literacy
ability showed relatively low results in one
component of ecological literacy. The
results of ecological literacy ability of FKIP
UNS Biology Education students of 2014
viewed from each dimension are as follows;
a). ecological knowledge is 57.10%, b).
ecological concerns is 71.74%, and c). NEP
is 62.83%. The average ability of ecological
literacy of Biology Education students is
still relatively low so it must be followed up
to increase students’ awareness in
maintaining the environment around the
campus and to succeed the Green Campus
program at Sebelas Maret University.
The study of environmental
materials can motivate the students to
enhance ecological literacy. Ecological
literacy can be improved in simple ways,
such as providing information that is easy
to understand. The ecological literacy of
students in formal education can be
enhanced through the provision of courses
relevant to ecological(McBride B. B.,
Brewer, Berkowitz, & Borrie, 2013).
Ecological learning in lectures can provide
knowledge for students as a special
experience that forms attitudes and
behavioral habits(Irham & Wiyani, 2013).
Selection of appropriate approaches,
strategies and learning models can
determine the effectiveness of learning
(School Education Department of
Education & Training, 2005). Specific
learning designs according to field of study
will maximize learning activities that
produce better knowledge along with the
formation of attitudes and behavioral
habits.
Prayitno & Wangid (2005)states
that Subject Specific Pedagogy which is
developed specifically for character and
knowledge is proven to be able to improve
students’ character and knowledge. Hartati,
et al. (2009)states that several components
of SSP tool includes: RPS, teaching
materials, learning media, and evaluation.
Learning that refers to specific learning
tools on ecological materials is one
effective way and is expected to improve
students' ecological literacy.
Subject Specific Pedagogy is
included in the development field that has
an output product in the form of semester
learning plan (RPS), teaching materials,
learning media and evaluation instruments.
Development of Subject Specific Pedagogy
is packaged in a set of whole lessons,
including the learning model used.
According to Sujarwo (2011) each learning
model has specific characteristics.
According to Rustaman (2005)learning
kontruktivisme emphasizes the active role
of students to interact with teachers and
other students to improve the development
of concepts and skills of critical thinking.
One model of constructivism learning that
can facilitate students to improve the ability
of ecological literacy is Problem-Based
Learning (PBL).
Problem-Based Learning is part of
the experimental learning that provides
meaningful learning experiences for
students (Hmelo-Silver C. E.,
2004).Barrows & Tamblyn (1980)states
that in PBL students learn by solving
problems and reflecting on their
experiences. According to
Barrows(1993)one of the goals of PBL
learning is to develop knowledge flexibly
and to use skills in solving problems
effectively. Problem-Based Learning can
facilitate every concept and method used as
needed in the process of developing a
solution to a particular
problem(Lewinsohn, Attayde, Fonseca,
Ganade, & Jorge, 2015).The purpose of
Problem-Based Learning can facilitate
students to improve their skills and
knowledge in developing the students'
ecological literacy skills.
METHOD
The students’ ecological literacy
data Intake uses ecological literacy
questionnaire instrument consisting of three
components, namely: knowledge, concern,
and attitude. The instrument rubric of the
knowledge component is based on the
ecological concept according to
Lewinsohn(2015). He states that ecological
concept has 10 aspects including ecosystem
resilience, productivity, nutrient cyling,
functional redundancy, trophic cascade,
habitat fragmentation, community
assembly, dispersal, population control,
ecophysiological adaptation, and one
additional aspect of anti-antropocentrism,
the development of it is in corresponding to
knowledge and cognitive dimensions
according to Taxsonomy Bloom which has
been revised by Anderson(2014).
Instruments for attitude components
use NEP (New Ecological Paradigm)
instruments that have been validated and
have been applied in several
countries(Ogunbonde, 2013).The NEP has
five aspects including the fragility of
nature's balance, the reality of limits to
growth, the possibility of an eco-crisis, antianthropocentrism,
rejection of
exceptionalism(Ogunbonde, 2013; Dunlap,
1978).Currently, NEP instruments have
been enhanced and developed into fifteen
statements with 5 points Likert
scale(Kopnina, 2011; Dunlap R. E., 2000;
Hawcroft & Milfont, 2010).
Instrument of concern component is
developed to measure the students’
readiness in eco-friendly behaving.
Furthermore, it is arranged with three
aspects including the basic concept that
covers 22 questions, the frequency with 15
questions, and the eagerness of acts with 15
questions. Preparation of an instrument of
concern for each aspect uses a
questionnaire containing question and
statement with 5 point Likert scale
assessment.
Student sample taking is done by
using propotionate stratified random
sampling technique toward Biology
Education student at Sebelas Maret
University. The research design uses
posttest-only control design with two
classes: control class and experimental
class. The control class were 7th semester
students with 69 population but only 57
students who participated in filling the
questionnaires. Meanwhile, the
experimental class were 6th semester
students with 46 students.
The analysis of the results of the
study used independent t-test to find
differences in ecological literacy between
the control class and the experimental class.
The t test is also conducted to find the
difference of average score of each
component of ecological literacy between
the control class and the experimental class.
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Result
The application of ecological
literacy instrument is applied on biology
students of 6th semester to know the effect
of SSP product based on PBL towards
students' ecological literacy capability.The
result of posttest of ecological literacy
instrument on biology students of 6th
semester can be seen in Table 1. Below:
Table 1. Ecological experimental
class literacyresults
Literacy Ecological Score (%)
Knowledge
Concern
Attitude
71,01
87,39
83,93
The application of ecological
literacy instruments in the control class of
7th semester students of biology resulted
differently compared to experimental class.
The highest average value of ecological
literacy is on components of concern which
is about 87.39% while the knowledge
component has the lowest score of 71.01%.
The average posttest result of the
application of ecological literacy
instrument to 7th semester students of
biology can be seen in Table 2. Below:
Table 2. Ecological control class
literacy results
Literacy
Ecological
Score (%)
Knowledge
Concern
Attitude
61,61
75,89
66,92
Based on the data in Table 2, it can
be seen that the ecological literacy score of
control class has the highest value in the
concern component of 75.89% while the
lowest value in the knowledge component
of 61.61%. The comparison of the mean
score of each ecological literacy component
in the experimental and control class can be
presented in Figure 1. as follow:
Figure 1. Average Score of each Ecological
literacy Component of ExperimentalClass
and Control Class
The descriptive analysis result of
posttest ecological literacy score in
eksperimental and control class groups are
presented in Table 3below:
Table 3. The Posttest Ecological Literacy
Scores of the Eksperimental and Control
Class
Class
Group
Sc
ore
Ra
ng
e
Min
imu
m
Sco
re
Max
imu
m
Scor
e
M
ea
n
Std.
Dev
iati
on
(S.
D)
Ekspe
rimen
tal
Po
stte
st
12
,9
0
66,1
5
79,0
5
71
,6
7
3,36
Contr
ol
Po
stte
st
19
,2
1
55,7
2
74,9
3
68
,1
4
4,11
Based on Tabel 3, it can be seen the
average score posttest in eksperimental
class and control class is different, the
average score of posttest eksperimental
class is higher than the control class, where
the posttest score average of eksperimental
class is 71,67 with S.D is 3,36 and the
posttest score average of control class is
68,14 with S.D 4,11.
Posttest results from the
experimental and control class were then
analyzed using independent t-test to test the
effectiveness of Subject Specific Pedagogy
71.01
87.39 83.93
61.61
75.89
66.92
Knowledge Attitude Concern
Experimental Class Control Class
based on Problem-Based Learning on
Conservation Ecological material preceded
by preliminary statistical parametric test
that was normality test and homogeneity
test as in Table 4.
Table 4. Summary of Prerequisite
Test
Test Prerequisite Sig. Conclusion
a. Normality
test
Control Class
Experimental
Class
0,20
0,20
Ho received,
Normal
b. Homogeneity
test
0,42 Ho accepted,
Homogeneous
Based on Table 4 it can be seen that
the value of homogeneity and reliability is
eligible for t test. Homogeneity value is
0,420 so Ho is accepted. The reliability
value for the experimental class and the
control class is 0,200 so Ho is accepted and
the data is normally distributed. The
average test result of the ecological literacy
component between the control class and
the experimental class is listed in Table 5.
Table 5. Ecological literacy Test
Results
T test Sig. Conclusion Decision
Ecological
literacy
0,00 Sig <0,05 Ho
Denied
There is a
difference
Through the result of t-test of
ecological literacy using independent t-test,
it is obtained significance value of 0,00
(<0,05) so that Ho is rejected and there are
differences in ecological literacy between
experimental class and control class. The t
test results for each average ecological
literacy component can be seen in Table 6.
Table 6. T-test Result of Ecological literacy
Components
T test Sig. Conclusion Decision
Knowl
edge
Concer
n
Attitud
e
0,00
0,03
0,00
Sig <0,05
Sig <0,05
Sig <0,05
Ho
Rejected,
There is
a
differenc
e
Based on the result of t test in Table
6, it can be seen for each component of
ecological literacy that Ho is rejected. In the
other word, there is a difference in each
component of ecological literacy between
the control class and the experimental class.
Discussion
The result of t test shows that
Subject Specific Pedagogy based on
Problem-Based Learning on Conservation
Ecological subject is effective in increasing
students' ecological literacy. The results
obtained from the t test which is to
determine whether there is a ecological
literacy difference between the control class
and the experimental class that apply the
SSP based on PBL produce sig = 0,000
(<0,05), so Ho is rejected and it can be
concluded that there is a difference between
the ecological literacy in the control class
and experimental class. The t-test results
can conclude that the subject- Specific
Pedagogy based on Problem-Based
Learning produces different values of
ecological literacy toward biology
education students.
The effectiveness of Subject
Specific Pedagogy based on Problem-
Based Learning on Conservation
Ecological is also explained by the
difference of ecological literacy posttest
score of students' in control class (7th
semester) and experimental class (6th
semester). The average score of posttest of
control class is 68,14% while the average
score of posttest of experimental class is
71,67%.
Based on the results of t-test on the
ecological literacy ability of biology
education students, it can be assumed that
Subject Specific Pedagogy based on
Problem-Based Learning is effective in
increasing the students' ecological literacy.
According to Hart (1978)the insertion of
ecological concepts on learning can be the
best predictor of improving eco-friendly
attitudes and behavior. Additionally,
Lewinsohn (2015) explores the importance
of understanding one's ecology concept
towards one’s ecological literacy ability,
ecology concept is crucial to the ability of
ecological literacy because it can support a
person to facilitate decision-making on
environmental issues and take action to
choose the right solution. The concept of
ecological must be in accordance with the
curriculum applicable in educational
institutions, the curriculum used must
promote environment-based learning
(Maknun, 2011). The development of
curriculum by inserting ecological concepts
about environmental issues is needed to
prepare students to think about active and
effective role in protecting the environment
in the future (Ugulu, Aydin, Yorek, &
Dogan, 2008).
The effectiveness of Subject
Specific Pedagogy based on Problem-
Based Learning is better than the
conventional learning tool in courses in
order to increase students' ecological
literacy because PBL-based SSP has
learning subject achievement, graduated
learning achievement, the material, as well
as clear and specific learning method in
relation to the ecological literacy
component that includes knowledge,
concern, and attitude. One part of the SSP
development which is in the form of
Semester Learning Plan with the addition of
ecological literacy component is proven to
have the potential to increase students'
ecological literacy according to the
expected goal. Subject Specific Pedagogy
based on Problem-Based Learning has steps
of learning activities that are related to
subject learning as well as graduate
learning achievements, and student
characteristics and models used, so it can
support the development of students'
ecological literacy.
Learning activities included in
Subject Specific Pedagogy based on
Problem Based Learning consists of finding
and analyzing problems, finding solutions
through independent discussion activities
and groups, presenting the results of
discussions, and linking solutions to other
sciences and summarizing them. Problembased
learning can increase the high
curiosity of the students that leads them to
find solutions to the problems encountered.
This statement is supported by Lewinsohn
(2015)who states that problem-based
learning (PBL) can facilitate every concept
and method used as needed in the process
of developing solutions to a particular
problem. Probem-Based Learning is one of
the intracuctive-centered approaches that
empowers students to research, integrate
theory and practice, and apply knowledge
and skills to develop feasible solutions to
problems faced(Savery, 2006).
Problem-based learning (PBL) is
part of an experiential learning tradition
that requires students to solve problems
using their existing experience (Barrows &
Tamblyn, 1980). Problem-based learning is
perfect for helping students to become
active learners because of learning the realworld
problems and getting students
responsible for their learning. Those can
make students develop strategies and skills
to build knowledge or concepts (Collins,
Brown, & Newman, 1989).
The activity of Subject Specific
Pedagogy based on Problem-Based
Learning consists of identifying the
characteristics of a problem well. This stage
allows students to grow a flexible and open
way of thinking in addressing a problem.
Problems encountered let students evaluate
the effectiveness of their knowledge,
reasoning, and strategies to create a solution
so that it can solve a problem (Koschmann,
Myers, Feltovich, & Barrows, 1994).
Furthermore, problems that have been
identified is to be sought their solution
immediately. Finding solutions from a
problem faced by students is done
independently or in groups(Salomon,
1993). The search for solutions to problem
solving is done in groups to enable students
to distribute cognitive loads among group
members and let the whole group solve
problems. According to Brown (1995),
group discussion in the PBL stage can
improve high-level thinking and encourage
the development of students’ knowledge.
The last stage of the learning
activities is a reflection activity that aims to
help students understand the relationship
between learning objectives and problemsolving
activities. Reflection helps students
to connect new knowledge gained with
prior understanding, and understand how
learning strategies and problem solving to
reapply(Hmelo-Silver C. E., 2004).
The t test is also conducted to find
out that there is a significant difference in
each ecological literacy component
between the control class and the
experimental class. The average score of
ecological knowledge of control class is
61,61% while the mean score of the
experimental class is 71,01%. The average
score of ecological knowledge has
increased due to PBL based SSP tools on
Conservation Ecological materials. The
result of t test is used to know whether there
is difference of ecological knowledge score
between control class and experiment class.
The t test shows that there is a difference
between the control class and the
experimental class using the PBL based
SSP with the value of sig = 0,00 (<0,05) so
that Ho is rejected and it can be concluded
that there is a difference between ecological
knowledge in Biology Education Study
Program Faculty of Teacher Training and
Education Science Sebelas Maret
University Surakarta with the application of
Subject Specific Pedagogy based on
Problem-Based Learning.
The score of ecological knowledge
is improved because problem-based
learning can stimulate students' knowledge
to be more flexible and open to identify
problems and to find solutions to any
problems (Hmelo-Silver, 2004). One of the
goals of problem-based learning is to
require students to build a broad and
flexible knowledge in learning a fact.
According to Kolodner (1993)), the
knowledge of students will be increasing
and growing when applying the knowledge
they have on various situations and
problems. The score of ecological
knowledge is increasing because Subject
Specific Pedagogy which is developed
specifically for specific purposes will yield
the results in accordance with expectations,
in this study the SSP is specifically focused
on improving the concept of ecological or
components of student knowledge.
Prayitno & Wangid(2005) in his research
stated that the SSP developed specifically
to develop student knowledge is able to
increase students' knowledge.
The results are in line with
expectation because the development of
PBL based SSP on Conservation Ecology
materials focuses on the component of
ecological knowledge. Besides, through the
preliminary analysis, it is known that the
ecological knowledge of students is at low
category. The development of indicators in
the semester learning plan is focused on
improving the ecological knowledge
component by including indicators of
knowledge that include ecosystem
resilience, productivity, nutrient cycling,
functional redundancy, trophic cascade,
habitat fragmentation, community
assembly, dispersal, population control,
ecophysiological adaptaion and anti
anthopocentrise. These results,
theoretically, can influence the behavior
formed but according to Fisher & Fisher
(1992)the knowledge, although needed, is
not enough to form eco-friendly behavior.
Knowledge can work best to influence
behavior when combined with mutual
motivation through emerging behavioral
skills. This opinion is supported by the
research of Ajzen et al. (2011)and Fisher et
al. (1994)who claim that knowledge does
not consistently affect behavior, when the
effect is relatively small and must be
mediated through one’s skills they
possessed.
The average score of ecological
concern of control class is 75,89%, while
the average score of the experimental class
is 87,39%. The average score of ecological
concerns has increased and the t test results
show the same thing, hence it can be
concluded that the Subject Specific
Pedagogy based on Problem-Based
Learning on Conservation Ecological
material can effectively increase the
students' ecological literacy. The results
obtained from the t test is to determine
whether there is a difference of ecological
concern between the control class and the
experimental class using PBL based SSP
which is resulted sig = 0,03 (<0,05) so that
Ho is rejected, therefore it can be concluded
that there is difference of ecological
concern of the student Biology Education
Studies Faculty of Teacher Training and
Education Sebelas Maret University
Surakarta with the application of Subject
Specific Pedagogy based on Problem-
Based Learning.
The score of ecological concern is
increasing because the ecological concepts
gained from problem-based learning can
support students' awareness in protecting
the environment. Awareness is one form of
human behavior that arises when having a
concept of good knowledge. Knowledge
possesses can increase one's awareness in
protecting the environment (Ajzen, Joyce,
Sheikh, & Cote, 2011). This is in line with
the wrong outcome of the learning process
that aims to improve the behavior of
learners. A person's awareness will increase
when a problem presented to them and urge
them to make decisions and take action;
from environmental problems occurred,
someone will raise awareness to protect the
environment better. However, according to
DeChano(2006), the level of ones’ concern
is not influenced by the knowledge they
have. This behavior is strongly influenced
by existing attitudes such as research that
has been done by Hye-Eun(2007)who states
that there is a strong correlation between
attitudes and person’s behavior. The score
of ecological concern shows high results
which means that there is readiness to
behave from students to be more
environmentally friendly(Ajzen, Joyce,
Sheikh, & Cote, 2011).
The average score of ecological
attitude is increasing in control class which
is 66,92% while the mean score of
ecological attitude of the experimental class
is 83,93%. The average score of ecological
attitude is increasing considerably and the
result of t test shows that Subject Specific
Pedagogy based on Problem-Based
Learning on Conservation Ecological was
effective in increasing the students'
ecological literacy. The results obtained
from the t test is to determine whether there
are differences in ecological attitude
between the control class and experimental
class that apply the PBL based SSP which
results sig = 0,00 (<0,05) so that Ho is
rejected and it can be concluded that there
are differences in student ecological
attitude Biology Education Studies
Program Teacher Training Faculty and
Education Sebelas Maret University
Surakarta with the application of Subject
Specific Pedagogy based on Problem-
Based Learning.
Ecological attitude results have
increased because the concept of ecological
owned by students through learning using
PBL-based SSP gives a good influence on
attitudes that are formed on students.
According to Shamuganathan &
Karpundewan (2015), one solution in
teaching ecological literacy is by giving a
problem on environmental issues because
by that, one will behave more responsibly
in protecting the environment. Their
attitudes then can be more eco-friendly as
described by Fishbein and Ajzen(1980)in
the research that has been conducted.
According to Vining & Ebreo(1992), the
attitudes of environmental care owned also
refers to the amount of awareness of the
environment. Readiness to behave is
influenced by attitudes possessed to
perform a particular action and apply
subjective norms. (Ajzen et al., 2011).
Another thing that affects the formation of
attitude according to Stutzman & Green
(1982)is a factual knowledge that becomes
a prerequisite for any desired attitude.
According to Kollmus & Agyeman
(2002), there are several opinions that
knowledge can influence attitudes and will
ultimately shape environmentally
responsible behaviors. It turns out to be less
precise because there is a large and
unexplained gap between attitudes and
behavior. Shamuganathan &
Karpudewan(2015) stated that there has
been an attempt to address this gap in
Fishbein & Ajzen(1974)research through
the theory of reasoned action and theory of
planned behavior according to Ajzen
(1985). According to Fishbein &
Ajzen(1980)as a matter of fact that there is
a correlation between attitudes and
behaviors yet attitudes do not have a direct
effect on behavior, but only affect the
readiness to behave and in turn determine
the behavior that is formed.
Based on the results of each
component of ecological literacy above, it
can be concluded that the development of
Subject Specific Pedagogy based on
Problem-Based learning is proven effective
to increase student's ecological literacy.
Zverev (1995)considers that integrated
ecological education using a model can
develop person permanently to be directed
to the formation of knowledge and practical
scientific skills, valuable orientation, as
well as moral and aesthetic relationships
that give someone the ecological
responsibility to protect the environment
sustainably.
CONCLUSION
The effectiveness of Subject
Specific Pedagogy based on Problem-
Based Learning on Conservation
Ecological by using t test on the average
score of ecological literacy shows a good
significance value between the control class
and the experimental class. Result of t test
show sig value = 0,00 (<0,05) so that there
is difference of average score of ecological
literacy between control class and
experiment class using SSP based on PBL.
The value of t test is also different in each
ecological literacy component between the
control class and the experimental class.
The t test for each ecological literacy
component has sig <0,05 so that there is
difference in each component of ecological
literacy between control class and
experiment class.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thanks to the Institute for Research and
Service, UNS for giving a grant to support
this research and publication.Baskoro Adi
Prayitno and Puguh Karyanto at Master of
Science Education, Sebelas Maret
University who acted as mentors and comentors
in compiling this paper.
REFERENCES
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980).
Understanding Attitudes and
Predicting Social Behavior.
Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Ajzen, I., Joyce, N., Sheikh, S., & Cote, N.
G. (2011). Knowledge and the
Prediction of Behavior: The Role of
Information Accurary in the Theory
of Planned Behavior. Basic and
Applied Social Psychology, 101-
117.
Al-Dajeh, H. I. (2012). Assessing
Environmental Literacy of Prevocational
Education Teachers in
Jordan. College Student Journal,
492-507.
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R.
(2014). Kerangka Landasan untuk
Pembelajaran, Pengajaran, dan
Asesmen: Revisi Taksonomi
Pendidikan Bloom. Yogyakarta:
Pustaka Belajar.
Barrows, H. S., & Tamblyn, R. (1980).
Problem-Based Learning: An
Approach to Medical Education.
New York: Springer.
Barrows, H., & Kelson, A. (1993).
Problem-based learning in
secondary education and the
Problem-based Learning Institute
(Monograph). Southern Illinois
University School of Medicine:
Springfield.
Brown, A. L. (1995). The advancement of
learning. Educ. Res, 4-12.
Chu, H.-E. e. (2007). “Korean Year 3
Children’s Environmental Literacy:
A Prerequisite for a Korean
Environmental Education
Curriculum. International Journal
of Science Education, 731-746.
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E.
(1989). Cognitive apprenticeship:
Teaching the crafts of reading,
writing, and mathematics. In
Resnick, L. B. Knowing, Learning,
and Instruction: Essays in Honor of
Robert Glaser, 453–494.
DeChano, L. (2006). A multy-country
examination of the relationship
between environmental knowledge
and attitude. International Research
in Geographical and
Environmental Education.
Dunlap, R. E. (1978). The new
environmental paradigm. Journal of
Environmental Education, 10-19.
Dunlap, R. E. (2000). Measuring
Endorsement of the New Ecological
Paradigm: A Revised NEP Scale.
Journal of Social Issues, 425-442.
Eurobarometer. (2008). Attitudes of
European Citizens toward the
Environmental. Europa: Special
Eurobarometers 295.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1974). Attitudes
toward objects as predicators of
single and multiple behavioral
criteria. Psychological Review, 59-
74.
Fisher, J. D., & Fisher, W. A. (1992).
Changing AIDS-risk behavior.
Psychological Bulletin, 455-474.
Fisher, J. D., Fisher, W. A., Williams, S. S.,
& Malloy, T. E. (1994). Empirical
tests of an information-motivationbehavioral
skills model of AIDSpreventive
behavior with gay men
and heterosexual university
students. Health Psychology, 283-
250.
Hart, E. (1978). Examination of BSCS
Biology and Nonbiology Student’s
Ecology Comprehension,
Environmental Information Level,
and Environmental Attitude.
Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 75-78.
Hartati, T., & dkk. (2009). Productive
Pedagogy & Subject Spesific
Pedagogy. Bandung: UPI Bandung.
Hawcroft, L., & Milfont, T. (2010). Use
(and abuse) of the new
environmental paradigm scale over
the last 30 years: A meta-analysis.
Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 143-158.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-Based
Learning: What and How Do
Students Learn? Educational
Psychology Review, 235-266.
Hooi, K. K., Hassan, F., & Mat, M. C.
(2012). An Exploratory Study of
Readiness and Development of
Green University Framework in
Malaysia. Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 525-536.
Irham, M., & Wiyani, N. A. (2013).
Psikologi Pendidikan. Yogyakarta:
Ar-ruzz Media.
IUCN. (2002). Education and
Sustainability Responding to the
Global Challenge. Cambridge UK:
IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and
Cambridge, UK.
Kallas, E. V., Solovjeva, T. P., &
Minakova, L. Y. (2015).
Implementation of Ecological
Education in a Higher School.
Procedia- Sosial and Behavioral
Sciences, 453-459.
Kiker, G., Bridges, T., Varghese, A.,
Seager, P., & Linkov, I. (2005).
Application of multicriteria
decision analysis in environmental
decision making. Integrated
Environmental Assessment and
Management, 95-108.
Kollmus, A., & Agyemen, J. (2002). Mind
the gap: why do people act
environmentally and what are the
barriers to pro environmental
behavior? Environmental
Education Research, 239-260.
Kolodner, J. (1993). Case-Based
Reasoning. San Mateo, CA:
Morgan Kaufmann.
Kopnina, H. (2011). Applying The New
Ecological Paradigm Scale in the
Case of Environmental Education:
Qualitative Analysis of The
Ecological Worldview of Dutch
Children. Journal of Peace
Education and Social Justice, 374-
388.
Koschmann, T. D., Myers, A. C., Feltovich,
P. J., & Barrows, H. S. (1994).
Using technology to assist in
realizing effective learning and
instruction: A principled approach
to the use of computers in
collaborative learning. J. Learn. Sci,
225–262.
Lewinsohn, T. M., Attayde, J. L., Fonseca,
C. R., Ganade, G., & Jorge, L. R.
(2015). Ecological literacy and
beyond: Problem-based learning for
future professionals. AMBIO,
44:154-162.
Maknun, D. (2011, December). Praktikum
Proyek Ekologi Berbasis Kondisi
Ekobiologis Lokal dalam
Meningkatkan Literasi Lingkungan
dan Tindakan Konservasi
Mahasiswa. Holistik, 1-39.
McBride, B. B., Brewer, C., Berkowitz, A.
R., & Borrie, W. T. (2013).
Environmental literacy, ecological
literacy, ecoliteracy: What do we
mean and how did we get here?
Ecosphere.
McGinn, A. E. (2014). Quantifying and
Understanding Ecological Literacy:
A Study of First Year Students at
Liberial Arts Institutions. Dickinson
College Honor Theses, 1-55.
NEEATeam. (t.thn.). Dipetik Mei 1, 2017,
dari www.epa.gov: http.epa.gov
Ogunbonde, C. (2013). The NEP Scale:
measuring ecological
attitude/worldviews in an african
context. Enviro Dev Sustain, 15:
1477-1494.
Orr, D. (1992). Ecological Literacy:
Education and the Transition to a
Post-modern World. Albany: State
University of New York Press.
Prayitno, S. M., & Wangid, M. N. (2005).
Subject Specific Pedagogy
Thematic Integrative Model For
The Development Of Students ’
Respect And Responsibility. Jurnal
Pendidikan Karakter, 195-207.
Rizki. (2016, December 30). UI Green
Matric. Dipetik July 26, 2017, dari
www.ui.ac.id: www.ui.ac.id
Roy, R., Potter, S., & Yarrow, K. (2008).
Designing low carbon higher
education systems Environmental
impacts of campus and distance
learning systems. International
Journal of Sustainability in Higher
Education, 116-130.
Rustaman, N. (2005). Strategi Belajar
Mengajar Biologi. Malang: UM
PRESS.
Salomon, G. (1993). No distribution
without individual cognition: A
dynamic interactional view. New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Savery, J. R. (2006). Overview of Problembased
learning: Definitions and
Distinctions. Interdisciplinary
Journal of Problem-Based
Learning, 1(1).
School Education Department of Education
& Training. (2005). Professional
Learning in Effective Schools: The
Seven Principles of Highly Effective
Professional Learning. Melbourn:
Leadership and Teacher
Development Branch Office of
School Education Department of
Education & Training.
Shamuganatha, S., & Karpudewan, M.
(2015). Modeling Environmental
Literacy of Malaysian Pre-
University Students. International
Journal of Environmental &
Science Education, 757-771.
Stutzman, T. M., & Green, S. B. (1982).
Factors affecting energy
consumption: two field tests of the
Fishbein-Ajzen model. Journal of
Social Psychology, 183-201.
Team, U. G. (2016). Guidline of UI
GreenMetric World University
Ranking 2016. Depok: Universitas
Indonesia.
Ugulu, I., Aydin, H., Yorek, N., & Dogan,
Y. (2008). The impact of endemism
concept on environmental attitudes
of secondary school students.
Nature Montenegrina,, 165-173.
UNESCO-UNEP. (1996, June). Education
for sustainable development.
UNS, T. G. (2014). Rencana Strategi
Pengambangan Green Campus.
Surakarta: Universitas Sebelas
Maret.
Vining, J., & Ebreo, A. (1992). Predicting
recycling behavior from global and
specific environmental attitudes and
changes in recycling opportunities.
Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 1580-1607.
Zverev, I. (1995). Priorities of ecological
education. I Moscow scientificpractical
conference on continuous
ecological education. Moscow:
Moscow State University.

 Referensi:
https://journal.uny.ac.id/index.php/cp/article/view/15809


Referensi dan Informasi Lebih Lanjut:

Blogger
Disqus
Pilih Sistem Komentar Yang Anda Sukai

No comments