Online Professional Development for Improving Teacher's STEM PCK Competence, Can It Be An Alternative? (An Evaluation Using the CIPP Model)

Santi Setiani Hasanah*, Anna Permanasari, Riandi Riandi

Abstract


During the pandemic, face-to-face training should not be carried out to reduce the spread of the covid outbreak. Therefore, online teacher professional development is an alternative method to replace the face-to-face training. In a program implementation, evaluation is an important component to determine whether the program has been implemented well or not. This evaluation is important to determine the effect of this online training on improving STEM PCK teachers. The evaluation used the CIPP model (Context, Input, Process, and Product), with the embedded mixed method research. This research was conducted on 60 science teachers of SMP alumni online training organized by PPPPTK IPA, from the “Sayangi Bumi” classroom. The results of the context evaluation show that 100% of respondents stated that the program is in accordance with the needs of teachers to strengthen their PCK., while the resources used in the program (Input evaluation) were good. The program implementation process ran 100% as planned and the product evaluation shows an increased teachers' understanding of the STEM approach. Teacher considered that the online professional development is very useful for teachers and can develop their skills in implementing STEM learning during distance learning. Online PD, apart from low-cost, can actually be an alternative way in improving teachers' STEM PCK competence and it also can reach all islands in Indonesia

Keywords


online teacher professional development, STEM PCK, CIPP evaluation

Full Text:

PDF

References


Bickmore, D.L., 2012. Professional learning experiences and administrator practice: is there a connection? Professional Development in Education 38, 95–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2011.579004

Binmohsen, S.A., Abrahams, I., 2020. Science teachers’ continuing professional development: online vs face-to-face. Research in Science & Technological Education 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2020.1785857

Chai, C.S., 2019. Teacher Professional Development for Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Education: A Review from the Perspectives of Technological Pedagogical Content (TPACK). Asia-Pacific Edu Res 28, 5–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-018-0400-7

Clarke, D., Hollingsworth, H., 2002. Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth. Teaching and Teacher Education 18, 947–967. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(02)00053-7

Creswell, J.W., 2012. Educational research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research, 4th ed. ed. Pearson, Boston.

Darling-Hammond, L., 2000. Teacher Quality and Student Achievement: A Review of State Policy Evidence. ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation 8, 44.

Eckman, E.W., Williams, M.A., Marquette University, Silver-Thorn, M.B., Marquette University, 2016. An Integrated Model for STEM Teacher Preparation: The Value of a Teaching Cooperative Educational Experience. JSTE 51, 71–82. https://doi.org/10.30707/JSTE51.1Eckman

Eilks, I., Markic, S., 2011. Effects of a Long-Term Participatory Action Research Project on Science Teachers’ Professional Development. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 7, 149–160. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75196

Epstein, D., Miller, R.T., 2011. Elementary School Teachers and the Crisis in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Education. Center for American Progress.

Fore, G.A., Feldhaus, C.R., Sorge, B.H., Agarwal, M., Varahramyan, K., 2015. Learning at the nano-level: Accounting for complexity in the internalization of secondary STEM teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education 51, 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.06.008

Hasanah, S.S., Permanasari, A., 2019. The Effectiveness Of The Teacher Professional Development Program In Implementing Curriculum 2013 In The Framework Of STEM Education. Presented at the AES 2019, Bali, p. 4.

Kanadlı, S., 2019. A Meta-Summary of Qualitative Findings about STEM Education. INT J INSTRUCTION 12, 959–976. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12162a

Kirkpatrick, D.L., Kirkpatrick, J.D., 2006. Evaluating training programs: the four levels, 3rd ed. ed. Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco, CA.

Lecorchick, D., Papadopoulos, J., Tabor, L., 2020. Engineering Education through an International Collaboration: A Framework. Procedia Computer Science 172, 838–842. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2020.05.120

Lom, E., Sullenger, K., 2011. Informal spaces in collaborations: exploring the edges/boundaries of professional development. Professional Development in Education 37, 55–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2010.489811

Masters, J., De Kramer, R.M., O’Dwyer, L.M., Dash, S., Russell, M., 2010. The Effects of Online Professional Development on Fourth Grade English Language Arts Teachers’ Knowledge and Instructional Practices. Journal of Educational Computing Research 43, 355–375. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.43.3.e

Nadelson, L.S., Seifert, A., Moll, A.J., Coats, B., 2012. i-STEM Summer Institute: An Integrated Approach to Teacher Professional Development in STEM. Journal of STEM Education: Innovation and Outreach 13, 69–83.

Shernoff, D.J., Sinha, S., Bressler, D.M., Ginsburg, L., 2017. Assessing teacher education and professional development needs for the implementation of integrated approaches to STEM education. IJ STEM Ed 4, 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-017-0068-1

Shriki, A., Lavy, I., 2012. Perceptions of Israeli mathematics teachers regarding their professional development needs. Professional Development in Education 38, 411–433. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2011.626062

Srikoom, W., Faikhamta, C., Hanuscin, D.L., 2018. Dimensions of Effective STEM Integrated Teaching Practice. K-12 STEM Education 4, 313–330.

Stufflebeam, D.L., 2000. 16. THE CIPP MODEL FOR EVALUATION, in: The CIPP Model for Evaluation. In: Stufflebeam D.L., Madaus G.F., Kellaghan T. (Eds) Evaluation Models. Evaluation in Education and Human Services. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 279–317.

Stufflebeam, D.L., 1971. The Relevance of The CIPP Evaluation Model For Educational Accountability. Presented at the AASA Annual Meeting, Evaluation Center, Ohio State University, Columbus, p. 31.

Turcsányi-Szabó, M., 2008. Online Professional Development for Teachers, in: Voogt, J., Knezek, G. (Eds.), International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education. Springer US, Boston, MA, pp. 747–760. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-73315-9_43

Voogt, J.R., Natalie Pareja, 2010. 21st Century Skills.

Wahono, B., Chang, C.-Y., 2019. Assessing Teacher’s Attitude, Knowledge, and Application (AKA) on STEM: An Effort to Foster the Sustainable Development of STEM Education. Sustainability 11, 950. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11040950

Warju, W., 2016. Educational Program Evaluation using CIPP Model. INVOTEC 12, 36–42. https://doi.org/10.17509/invotec.v12i1.4502

Yildirim, B., Sahin Topalcengiz, E., 2019. STEM Pedagogical Content Knowledge Scale (STEMPCK): A Validity and Reliability Study. JSTE 53, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.30707/JSTE53.2Yildirim

Yusof, Y.Mohd., Zakaria, E., Maat, S.M., 2012. Teachers’ General Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) and Content Knowledge of Algebra. The Social Sciences 7, 668–672. https://doi.org/10.3923/sscience.2012.668.672




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24815/jipi.v5i2.20713

Article Metrics

Abstract view : 0 times
PDF - 0 times

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2021 Jurnal IPA & Pembelajaran IPA


JIPI (Jurnal IPA dan Pembelajaran IPA)

ISSN 2614-0500  (print) | 2620-553X (online)
Organized by Universitas Syiah Kuala 
Published by Master of Science Education Study Program Graduate School Universitas Syiah Kuala, Banda Aceh, Indonesia
Website : http://jurnal.usk.ac.id/jipi
Email     : jipi@usk.ac.id

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.