TY  - JOUR
T1  - AGHAMIC Action Approach (A3): Its Effects on the Pupils’  Conceptual Understanding on Matter
AU  - Rogayan, Danilo Jr.
AU  - Macanas, Genalin
PY  - 2020
DA  - March
DO  - 10.17478/jegys.635161
JF  - Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists
JO  - JEGYS
PB  - Genç Bilge Yayıncılık
WT  - DergiPark
SN  - 2149-360X
SP  - 223
EP  - 240
VL  - 8
IS  - 1
LA  - en
AB  - We are now at the onset of FourthIndustrial Revolution, thus, Education 4.0 requires more innovative and moreengaging pedagogical strategies to develop globally-competitive andfunctionally-literate learners. Teachers must continue to innovate strategiesand approaches to make Science teaching more engaging, more fun and morecollaborative. This two-group quasi-experimental action research seeks toexplore the effects of the developed AGHAMIC Action Approach (A3) onthe conceptual understanding on matter of Grade 6 pupils. The study involved 23pupils in the control group taught using traditional method of instruction(TMI) and 24 pupils in the experimental group taught using the A3 ina public elementary school in Zambales, Philippines for the school year 2019-2020. Pretest and posttest were administered beforeand after the application of the intervention. The study found out that use A3and TMI improved the conceptual understanding of the pupils. However, pupilsexposed to the use of A3 yielded a higher gain score compared to theuse of the conventional approach of teaching. Science teachers may utilize the AGHAMICAction Approach to improve pupils’ conceptual understanding in science.
KW  - action research
KW  - AGHAMIC action approach
KW  - conceptual understanding
KW  - elementary pupils
KW  - science teaching
CR  - Acar, B., & Tarhan, L. (2008). Effects of cooperative learning on students’ understanding of metallic bonding. Research in Science Education, 38(4), 401–420.
CR  - Acuña, L., Gutierrez, M.R., & Areta, G. (2015). Content Area Reading-Based Strategic Intervention Materials (CARB-SIMs) in Science VI. The Normal Lights, 9(2), 205 – 232.
CR  - Adami, A.F. (2004). Enhancing students’ learning through differentiated approaches to teaching and learning: A Maltese perspective. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 4(2), 91-97.
CR  - Bender, W.N. (2012). Differentiating instruction for students with learning disabilities: New best practices for general and special educators (3rd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Crowin.
CR  - Cetin-Dindar, A., & Geban, O. (2017). Conceptual understanding of acids and bases concepts and motivation to learn chemistry. The Journal of Educational Research, 110(1), 85-97.
CR  - Chi, M. T. H. (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(1), 73–105.
CR  - Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1–35.
CR  - Day, S.P. & Bryce, T.G.K. (2013). The benefits of cooperative learning to socio-scientific discussion in secondary school Science. International Journal of Science Education, 35(9), 1533-1560.
CR  - Gernale, J., Duad, D., & Arañes, F. (2015). The effects of Predict-Observe-Explain (POE) approach on the students’ achievement and attitudes towards science. The Normal Lights, 9(2), 1 – 23.
CR  - Hong, Z.R. (2010) Effects of a collaborative science intervention on high achieving students’ learning anxiety and attitudes toward Science. International Journal of Science Education, 32(15), 1971-1988.
CR  - Kaya, E. (2013) Argumentation Practices in Classroom: Pre-service teachers' conceptual understanding of chemical equilibrium, International Journal of Science Education, 35(7), 1139-1158.
CR  - Mokiwa, HO, & Agbenyeku, E. U. (2019). Impact of activity-based teaching strategy on gifted students: A case of selected junior secondary schools in Nigeria. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 7(2), 421-434.  http://dx.doi.org/10.17478/jegys.529919
CR  - Omari, D. & Chen, L. (2016). Conceptual understanding in science. Journal of Science Education, 8,(1), 13-16.
CR  - Qin, Z., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1995). Cooperative versus competitive efforts and problem solving. Review of Educational Research, 65(2), 129–143.
CR  - Rogayan, D.V., Jr. (2019). Biology Learning Station Strategy (BLISS): Its effects on science achievement and attitude towards biology. International Journal on Social and Education Sciences, 1(2), 78-89.
CR  - Sandoval, W. A., & Reiser, B. J. (2004). Explanation‐driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88(3), 345-372.
CR  - Schnotz, W. (2005). An integrated model of text and picture comprehension. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
CR  - Seufert, T. (2003). Supporting coherence formation in learning from multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 13, 227–237.
CR  - Sunga, D. L. & Hermosisima, M. V. C. (2016). Fostering better learning of Science concepts through creative visualization. The Normal Lights, Special Issue 2016, 50 – 63.
CR  - Wisetsat, C. & Nuangchalerm, P. (2019). Enhancing innovative thinking of Thai pre-service teachers through multi-educational innovations. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 7(3), 409-419.
CR  - Woods-McConney, A., Wosnitza, M., & Sturrock, K. L. (2016). Inquiry and groups: Student interactions in cooperative inquiry-based science. International Journal of Science Education, 38(5), 842-860.
CR  - World Economic Forum (WEF). (2018). Global Competitiveness Report (2017-2018). Retrieved 18 October 2019 from http://www3.weforum.org/docs/GCR2017-2018/05FullReport/TheGlobalCompetitivenessReport2017%E2%80%932018.pdf
UR  - https://doi.org/10.17478/jegys.635161
L1  - https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/975771
ER  -