Article Sidebar

Submitted
May 28, 2024
Accepted
June 22, 2024
Published
June 22, 2024
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 28 Download : 70

Main Article Content

Abstract

The 21st century is marked by increasing technological progress and productivity. This progress has provided a challenge for the education sector to produce quality young people with adequate skills. This research examines the effectiveness of a learning approach that integrates a multi-subject called STEAM, namely science, technology, engineering, arts and mathematics, to improve 21st-century skills. These skills include collaboration, creativity, critical thinking and communication, known as the 4Cs. As a case study, this STEAM learning was given to students at two State Madrasahs in West Java. To achieve this goal, mixed methods were used. The research combined qualitative and quantitative approaches. A qualitative approach was used to observe phenomena experienced by students, learning design, and implementation. Moreover, a quantitative approach was used to analyze the impact of STEAM learning on student skills. The STEAM learning design was delivered in three learning meetings. Research findings show that the STEAM learning model by using a multi-subject approach could significantly improve students' collaboration skills. However, it did not significantly improve students’ critical thinking, creativity and communication skills. Meanwhile, student responses showed positive results on the implementation of this model. Factors that were considered to influence the implementation of this model are: Duration of learning, literacy skills and student learning experiences, as well as teacher competencies.

Keywords

Collaboration Madrasah STEAM Learning 21St-Century Skills

Article Details

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

References

  1. AlAli, R. (2024). Enhancing 21st Century Skills through Integrated STEM Education using Project-Oriented Problem-Based Learning. Geojournal of Tourism and Geosites. Year XVII, 53(2), 421-430. https://doi.org/10.30892/gtg.53205-1217
  2. An, S. (2020). The impact of STEAM Integration on Preservice Teachers’ Disposition and Knowledge. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 13(1), 27–42. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-01-2020-0005
  3. Angreni, S., Sari, R. T., & Mursyafiela, F. (2024). STEAM Approach to Enhance the Creativity of Students with Special Needs in Inclusive Primary Schools. JURNAL JPSD (Jurnal Pendidikan Sekolah Dasar), 10(1), 25-33. http://dx.doi.org/10.26555/jpsd.v10i1.a27420
  4. Barron, B., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2008). Teaching for Meaningful Learning: A Review of Research on Inquiry-Based and Cooperative Learning. Book Excerpt. George Lucas Educational Foundation. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED539399
  5. Bertrand, M. G., & Namukasa, I. K. (2020). STEAM education: Student Learning and Transferable Skills. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 13(1), 43–56. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-01-2020-0003
  6. Bertrand, M. G., & Namukasa, I. K. (2022). A Pedagogical Model for STEAM education. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning. 16(2). 169-191. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-12- 2021-0081
  7. Colucci-Gray, L., Trowsdale, J., Cooke, C. F., Davies, R., Burnard, P., & Gray, D. S. (2017). Reviewing the potential and challenges of developing STEAM education through creative pedagogies for 21st learning: how can school curricula be broadened towards a more responsive, dynamic, and inclusive form of education?. Retrieved from https://www.research.ed.ac.uk/en/ publications/reviewing-the-potential-and-challenges-of-developing-steam-educat
  8. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
  9. Daryanto, K., & Karim, D. S. (2017). Pembelajaran abad 21. In Yogyakarta: Penerbit Gava Media.
  10. Daugherty, M. K. (2013). The Prospect of an" A" in STEM Education. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 14(2), 10-15. Retrieved from https://www.jstem.org/jstem/index.php/JSTEM/article/view/1744
  11. de la Garza, A. (2021). Internationalizing the Curriculum for STEAM (STEM + Arts and Humanities): From Intercultural Competence to Cultural Humility. Journal of Studies in International Education, 25(2), 123–135. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315319888468
  12. Faizah, N., & Supriyanto, A. (2024). Systematic Literature Review of the Steam Model Learning For Developing Students'21st Century Characters And Skills. Journal of Integrated Sciences. 4(1), 102-126. Retrieved from https://jis.iou.edu.gm/article/view/383/
  13. Guerra, E. (2024). The Contribution of Critical Thinking to STEM Disciplines at the Time of Generative Intelligence. AIMS Press. STEM Education, 4(1), 71–81. https://doi.org/10.3934/steme.2024005
  14. Herro, D., & Quigley, C. (2016). Innovating with STEAM in Middle School Classrooms: Remixing education. On the Horizon, 24(3), 190–204. https://doi.org/10.1108/OTH-03-2016-0008
  15. Herro, D., Quigley, C., & Cian, H. (2019). The Challenges of STEAM Instruction: Lessons from the Field. Action in Teacher Education, 41(2), 172–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2018.1551159
  16. Hetland, L., & Winner, E. (2004). Cognitive Transfer from Arts Education to Nonarts Outcomes: Research Evidence and Policy Implications. In Handbook of research and policy in art education (pp. 143–170). Routledge.
  17. Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033007014
  18. Kang, N.-H. (2019). A review of the effect of integrated STEM or STEAM (science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics) education in South Korea. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 5(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41029-019-0034-y
  19. Katz-Buonincontro, J. (2018). Gathering STE (A) M: Policy, curricular, and programmatic developments in arts-based science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education Introduction to the special issue of Arts Education Policy Review: STEAM Focus. In Arts Education Policy Review, 119(2), 73–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632913.2017.1407979
  20. Kim, P. W. (2016). The Wheel Model of STEAM Education Based on Traditional Korean Scientific Contents. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(9). https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1263a
  21. Liao, C. (2016). From interdisciplinary to transdisciplinary: An arts-integrated approach to STEAM education. Art Education, 69(6), 44–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2016.1224873
  22. Luna Scott, C. (2015). The Futures of Learning 3: What kind of pedagogies for the 21st century? Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12799/3747
  23. Perignat, E., & Katz-Buonincontro, J. (2019). STEAM in practice and research: An integrative literature review. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 31, 31–43. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.10.002
  24. Quigley, C. F., Herro, D., & Jamil, F. M. (2017). Developing a Conceptual Model of STEAM Teaching Practices. School Science and Mathematics, 117(1–2), 1–12. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12201
  25. Sahrir, D. C., Madnasri, S., & Indriyanti, D. R. (2024). Research Trends in Ethno-STEAM-PjBL and Religion Integration oriented Educational Sustainable Development in Science Learning through Bibliometric Analysis. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains Indonesia. 12(2), 403-417, https://dx.doi.org/10.24815/jpsi.v12i2.36084
  26. Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Houghton Mifflin.
  27. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (Eds.). (2010). SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
  28. Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. John Wiley & Sons.
  29. Wijaya, E. Y., Sudjimat, D. A., Nyoto, A., & Malang, U. N. (2016). Transformasi pendidikan abad 21 sebagai tuntutan pengembangan sumber daya manusia di era global. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Pendidikan Matematika, 1(26), 263–278. Retrieved from https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/297841821.pdf
  30. Yakman, G. (2013). Steam education program description. Retrieved August, 15. Retrieved from https://steamedu.academia.edu/GeorgetteYakman
  31. Yin, R. K. (2017). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.