HomePsychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journalvol. 19 no. 10 (2024)

The Level of Scientific Research Skills of Senior High School Students in an Academic Research

Rosemharie Servado

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

The Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013 (Republic Act No. 10533), the additional two years of Senior High School, aims to broaden the goal of high school education for college preparation. As prescribed by RA 10533, the curriculum shall be relevant, responsive, and research-based. This study aims to determine students' research skills in senior high school through self-assessment in Inquiry-Based Learning. This study utilized a quantitative approach, merging descriptive-comparative and correlational design with 80 respondents from Grade 11 and 12 STEM students. The research utilized an adopted questionnaire by Santiago (2022), composed of 21 items, using the proposed 7-point Likert scale based on mastery classification. The mean score of the level of research skills of Grade 12 (m=4.97 s=.89) was higher than that of Grade 11 students (m=4.57 s= 1.09), with a t-test result for the independent sample (p=0.074) revealed no significant difference between the mean scores when the group to year level. However, there is a strong direct correlation between academic achievement and level of research skills and vice versa. Conclusively, research training and skills start at the primary level, which translates to the secondary level and reaches the senior high school level as a preparatory stage for college to develop scientific literacy. Thus, initiatives, such as workshops, programs, and developmental training, are recommended for students to enhance their processing and managing skills to enhance and advance their academic research endeavors.



References:

  1. Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R.,
  2. ... & Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Abridged Edition. White Plains, NY: Longman.
  3. Andrini, V. S. (2016). The effectiveness of inquiry learning method to enhance students’ learning outcome: A theoretical and empirical review. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(3).
  4. Barber, M. (2013). An avalanche is coming. Higher Education and the revolution ahead, 73. http://www.studynet2.herts.ac.uk/intranet/lti.nsf/0/684431DD8106AF1680257B560052BCCC/$FILE/avalanche-is-coming_Mar2013_10432.pdf
  5. BichevaI.B. (2017). Formation of the teacher-leader in the educational process of the university// Vestnik of Minin University. 2017. No. 3 (20). C. 5 (in Russian).
  6. Cobos-alvarado, F., Peñaherrera León, M., & Ortiz Colon, A (2016). Validation of a questionnaire on research-based learning with engineering students. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 6(3), 219-233. 2016. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jotse.227
  7. Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental
  8. Science,    24(2),   97-1https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791
  9. Department of Education. Department Order number 21 series of 2019 (DO no. 21, s. 2019) Policy Guidelines on K to 12 Basic Education Program. 2019.
  10. doi:10.1177/0022487100051003002
  11. Goda, Y., Yamada, M., Kato, H., Matsuda, T., Saito, Y., & Miyagawa, H. (2015). Procrastination and other learning behavioral types in e-learning and their relationship with learning outcomes. Learning and Individual Differences, 37, 72–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.11.001
  12. Gorman, (2018), Learning objectives for concept mapping based on the complete bloom’s taxonomy to promote meaningful learning. Proc. of the Eighth Int. Conference on Concept Mapping. Medellín, Colomb
  13. Greene, J. A., Bolick, C. M., Jackson, W. P., Caprino, A. M., Oswald, C., & McVea, M. (2015). Domains pecificity of self-regulated learning processing in science and history. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 42, 111–128.
  14. Ilyashenko L. (2019) . Determining the level of students’ research skills and design the model of influencing factors on research skills. Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews. https://doi.org/10.18510/hssr.2019.7386
  15. Kuzhabekova, A., & Lee, J. (2018). International Faculty Contribution to Local Research Capacity Building: A View from Publication Data. Higher Education Policy, 31(3),423 446. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-017-0067
  16. Orleans A V. The condition of secondary school physics education in the Philippines:
  17. Panadero, E. (2017). A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research.Frontiers in Psychology,8(422), 1–28.
  18. Ssempala, F. (2017). Science teachers’ understanding and practice of inquiry-based instruction in Uganda.     [Doctoral         dissertation,     Syracuse          University] https://surface.syr.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1690&context=etd
  19. Tauber, S. (U.) K., & Dunlosky, J. (2016). A brief history of metamemory research and handbook overview. In J. Dunlosky & S. K. Tauber (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of metamemory (pp. 7–21). Oxford University Press.
  20. Wilson C. E (2020), “The Effects of Inquiry-Based Learning and Student Achievement in the Science Classroom”.          Student           Research          Submissio https://scholar.umw.edu/student_research/370.
  21. Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview. Educational Psychologist,   25(1),   3–17.