This study discusses the step by step in building the STEM Inspirational？Module. This research uses a purposive sampling technique that collecting data？from panel of expert (lecturer), six teachers and 20 students. Research instruments used are questionnaires and structured interviews conducted to？both teachers and students. Data were collected and mean analysis and percentages？were carried out. The findings show that educational innovation can help？teachers overcome the time constraints in designing lesson plan with STEM？Activities. STEM Inspirational Module Kit is easy to handle and is readily？available for teachers to use. Furthermore, the modules are based on low cost and easy-to-use materials and tools.
References
[1]
Aikens, M. L. (2020). Meeting the Needs of a Changing Landscape: Advances and Challenges in Undergraduate Biology Education. Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, 82, Article No. 60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-020-00739-6
[2]
Alias, N. A. (2007). Design and Development of a ‘Learning Console’ to Scaffold the Adult Online Distance Learner’s Motivational Self-Regulation and Self-Direction. International Islamic University Malaysia.
[3]
Britner, S. L., & Pajares, F. (2006). Sources of Science Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Middle School Students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 485-499.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20131
[4]
Brownell, S. E., Kloser, M. J., Fukami, T., & Shavelson, R. (2012). Undergraduate Biology Lab Courses: Comparing the Impact of Traditionally Based “Cookbook” and Authentic Research-Based Courses on Student Lab Experiences. Journal of College Science Teaching, 41, 36-45.
[5]
Chiel, H. J., McManus, J. M., & Shaw, K. M. (2010). From Biology to Mathematical Models and Back: Teaching Modeling to Biology Students, and Biology to Math and Engineering Students. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 9, 248-265.
https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.10-03-0022
[6]
Christensen, R., Knezek, G., & Tyler-Wood, T. (2014). Student Perceptions of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Content and Careers. Computers in Human Behavior, 34, 173-186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.046
[7]
Creswell, J. W. (2002). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative (Vol. 7). NJ: Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River.
[8]
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Sage Publications.
[9]
Dokumen Standard Kurikulum Dan Pentaksiran (DSKP) SainsTingkatan Satu. 2016. Bahagian Pembangunan Kurikulum.
[10]
Gendjova, A. (2007). Enhancing Students’ Interest in Chemistry by Home Experiments. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 6, 5-15.
[11]
Gya, R., &Bjune, A. E. (2021). Taking Practical Learning in STEM Education Home: Examples from Do-It-Yourself Experiments in Plant Biology. Ecology and Evolution, 11, 3481-3487. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.7207
[12]
Henson, K. T. (2015). Curriculum Planning: Integrating Multiculturalism, Constructivism, and Education Reform. Waveland Press.
[13]
Hole, T. N. (2018). Working and Learning in a Field Excursion. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 17, Article ar24. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.17-08-0185
[14]
Jones, K. R., Gwynn, E. P., & Teeter, A. (2019). Quantitative or Qualitative: Selecting the Right Methodological Approach for Credible Evidence. Journal of Human Sciences and Extension, 7, Article 5. https://doi.org/10.54718/KUET2761
[15]
Koneru, I. (2010). Addie: Designing Web-Enabled Information Literacy Instructional Modules. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 30, 23-34.
[16]
Kuhn, D., Black, J., Keselman, A., & Kaplan, D. (2000). The Development of Cognitive Skills to Support Inquiry Learning. Cognition and Instruction, 18, 495-523.
https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532690XCI1804_3
[17]
Lombardi, D., Shipley, T. F. et al. (2021). The Curious Construct of Active Learning. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 22, 8-43.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100620973974
[18]
Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V., Foy, P., & Stanco, G. M. (2012). TIMSS 2011 International Results in Science. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.
[19]
Mullis, I. V., & Martin, M. O. (2017). TIMSS 2019 Assessment Frameworks. Amsterdam: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.
[20]
Nabors, M. L., Edwards, L. C., & Murray, R. K. (2009). Making the Case for Field Trips: What Research Tells Us and What Site Coordinators Have to Say. Education, 129.
[21]
Navarro, R. L., Flores, L. Y., & Worthington, R. L. (2007). Mexican American Middle School Students’ Goal Intentions in Mathematics and Science: A Test of Social Cognitive Career Theory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54, 320-335.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.54.3.320
[22]
Patall, E. A., Pituch, K. A., Steingut, R. R., Vasquez, A. C., Yates, N., & Kennedy, A. A. (2019). Agency and High School Science Students’ Motivation, Engagement, and Classroom Support Experiences. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 62, 77-92.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2019.01.004
[23]
Pyatt, K., & Sims, R. (2007). Learner Performance and Attitudes in Traditional versus Simulated Laboratory Experiences. In Proceedings of ASCILITE—Australian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education Annual Conference 2007 (pp. 870- 879). Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education.
[24]
Richey, R. C., & Klein, J. D. (2014). Design and Development Research. In Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 141-150). New York, NY: Springer.
[25]
Springer, K. (2009). Educational Research: A Contextual Approach. John Wiley & Sons.
[26]
Turner, J., & Parisi, A. (2008). Take-Home Physics Experiment Kit for On-Campus and Off-Campus Students. Teaching Science, 54, 20-23.
