IMPLEMENTASI PEMBELAJARAN IPA BERBASIS STEM BUDIKDAMBER UNTUK MENGEMBANGKAN COMPUTATIONAL THINKING SISWA
Keywords:
Budikdamber, computational thinking, science learning, STEM, sustainabilityAbstract
Learning that connects ecological concepts with real-world problems is essential for developing students’ computational thinking. This study aimed to analyze the implementation of STEM-based Budikdamber science learning and the development of four dimensions of students’ computational thinking. The study employed a mixed-methods approach with an embedded implementation design and a one-group pretest–posttest component. The participants were 32 seventh-grade students who took part in a five-week Budikdamber project, a simple fish-farming system using buckets. Data were collected through tests, implementation observations, response
questionnaires, students’ work, and interviews. Quantitative and qualitative data were analyzed separately and integrated through a joint display. The results showed that learning implementation reached 93.75%, categorized as very good. The mean computational thinking score increased from 56.25 to 77.17, indicating a moderate gain and a large effect size. The greatest improvements
occurred in abstraction and algorithmic thinking. Student responses reached 90.47%, categorized as highly positive. Qualitative findings showed that students were able to decompose systems, recognize changes, select relevant information, and formulate problem-solving procedures. STEM Budikdamber has the potential to provide an authentic unplugged learning context for developing
computational thinking and sustainability awareness. Further research should involve comparison groups, larger samples, and longer implementation periods.
References
Abdoellah, O. S., Schneider, M., Nugraha, L. M., Suparman, Y., Voletta, C. T., Withaningsih, S., Parikesit, Heptiyanggit, A., & Hakim, L. (2020). Homegarden commercialization: Extent, household characteristics, and effect on food security and food sovereignty in rural Indonesia.
Sustainability Science, 15, 797-815. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-020-00788-9
Aragón, L., & Manzano, B. E. (2025). Can school gardens contribute to resilient communities from a scientific and eco-social perspective in early childhood education? Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42322-024-00185-1
Baykır, A., Mirici, S., & Sönmez, D. (2022). Aquaponics systems as an educational tool: effects on students’ achievement and teachers’ views conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY-NC-ND) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). In International
Journal of Curriculum and Instruction (Vol. 15, Number 1). https://orcid.org/0000-0003-49998628
Bell, S. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future. The Clearing House, 83(2), 39-43. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098650903505415
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Houghton Mifflin.
Carroll, C., Patterson, M., Wood, S., Booth, A., Rick, J., & Balain, S. (2007). A conceptual framework for implementation fidelity. Implementation Science, 2, 40. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-2-40
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Fan, S. C., & Yu, K. C. (2017). How an integrative STEM curriculum can benefit students in engineering design practices. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 27(1), 107-129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9328-x
Fetters, M. D., Curry, L. A., & Creswell, J. W. (2013). Achieving integration in mixed methods designs-Principles and practices. Health Services Research, 48(6), 2134–2156. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12117
Genello, L., Fry, J. P., Frederick, J. A., Li, X., & Love, D. C. (2015). Fish in the classroom: A survey of the use of aquaponics in education. European Journal of Health and Biology Education, 4(2), 9-20.
Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K–12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38-43. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12463051
Ibrahim, L. A., Shaghaleh, H., El-Kassar, G. M., Abu-Hashim, M., Elsadek, E. A., & Alhaj Hamoud, Y. (2023). Aquaponics: A sustainable path to food sovereignty and enhanced water use efficiency. Water, 15(24), 4310. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15244310
Junge, R., Yavuzcan Yildiz, H., & Milliken, S. (2019). Aquaponics as an educational tool for sustainable STEM learning. In Aquaponics Food Production Systems (pp. 561–595). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15943-6
Kelley, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z
Krajcik, J. S., & Shin, N. (2014). Project-based learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2nd ed., pp. 275–297). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139519526.018
Lakens, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: A practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 863. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863
Li, Z., & Oon, P. T. (2024). The transfer effect of computational thinking in STEM education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of STEM Education, 11, 44. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-024-00498-z
Liu, Z., Gearty, Z., Richard, E., Orrill, C. H., Kayumova, S., & Balasubramanian, R. (2024). Bringing computational thinking into classrooms: a systematic review on supporting teachers in integrating computational thinking into K-12 classrooms. In International Journal of STEM
Education (Vol. 11, Number 1). Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-024-00510-6
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Ogegbo, A. A., & Ramnarain, U. (2022). A systematic review of computational thinking in science classrooms. Studies in Science Education, 58(2), 203–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2021.1963580
Shapiro, S. S., & Wilk, M. B. (1965). An analysis of variance test for normality: Complete samples. Biometrika, 52(3–4), 591–611. https://doi.org/10.2307/2333709
Shin, N., Bowers, J., Krajcik, J., & Damelin, D. (2021). Promoting computational thinking through project-based learning. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 3, 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-021-00033-y
Shute, V. J., Sun, C., & Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying Computational Thinking. Educational Research Review, 22, 142–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.003
Thomas, J. W. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning. Autodesk Foundation.
Wang, C., Shen, J., & Chao, J. (2022). Integrating computational thinking in STEM education: A literature review. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 20, 1949–1972. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10227-5
Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M., Orton, K., Jona, K., Trouille, L., & Wilensky, U. (2016). Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25, 127-147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9581-5
Wilcoxon, F. (1945). Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biometrics Bulletin, 1(6), 80-83. https://doi.org/10.2307/3001968
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215
Zhang, W., Guan, Y., & Hu, Z. (2024). The efficacy of project-based learning in enhancing computational thinking: A meta-analysis. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 1451314545. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12392-2
