Guided Discovery Learning and its Effects on Students’

Self-regulated Learning

Joko Suratno

, Wilda Syam Tonra

, Ardiana

Mathematics Education Study Program, Universitas Khairun, Ternate, Indonesia

Keywords: Guided discovery learning, Self-regulated learning

Abstract: This study focuses on how to solve the problems of students’ self-regulated learning. The purpose of this

study is to compare students’ self-regulated learning between students taught by guide discovery learning

and students taught by traditional approaches. The research method used is a quasi-experimental. The

variables in this study consist of independent variables namely guided discovery learning and the dependent

variable is self-regulated learning. The quasi-experimental design used in this study is post-test-only design

with none equivalent. The research subjects were fifty 3

semester pre-service mathematics teacher from

two full classers. Self-regulative learning questionnaire this research has been prepared by Pintrich and

Degroot. The items were set based on Likert scale and five choices ranging from completely disagree (1) to

completely agree (5). Based on the research data it was found that there was no significant differences in

students’ self-regulated learning between students who are taught with guided discovery learning and

students, who are taught traditionally. Self-regulated learning is one form of affective aspects. Various

studies show that there is a tendency that affective aspects are rather difficult to change within time

constraints.

1 INTRODUCTION

Traditional learning model is the one of learning

models that is commonly found in classroom

activities. This model begins with the explanation

of a concept or subject matter by the teacher, then

the teacher explained the procedures necessary for

solving a problem or task, and continued with the

student’s practice procedures have been explained

by teachers with additional issues (Chapko and

Buchko, 2004). In this study, teachers play an

active role in classroom activities on the other hand

passive students receive lessons (Aziz and Hossain,

2010). The learning activities are often referred to

as one-way learning, where the teacher is only the

conveyer of information. Learning is dominated by

teacher without being accompanied by student

responses and feedback. Sometimes the material

delivered is only based on learning notes and books.

Learning activities are also lack of practical

activities, teacher handwriting as a determinant of

material clarity because of its quality, insufficient

interaction with students in the classroom, more

emphasis on existing theories without real practice

and situations, learning by memorizing but not

understanding, and results oriented (Damodharan

and Rengarajan, 2007).

Traditional learning makes students only as

listeners and not as learners. As a result, students are

not used to being independent in learning. Students

only receive lessons delivered by the teacher. Time

limitations in class make students unable to

maximize their potential. On the other hand, students

are required to be able to manage themselves in

learning. The better students in managing time will

be the better the quality of learning and its potential.

Students who have been independent in learning are

students who are actively involved in maximizing

their opportunities and abilities to learn (Darr and

Fisher, no date). This can be understood because

regulated-learning is an active and constructive

process for students in designing their learning goals

and then try to monitor, sustain and monitor their

awareness, motivation, and behavior that are guided

and limited to their goals and highlight the context

in the environment (Pintrich, 2000).

Regulated-learning is an indication of how and

why students choose to use a particular strategy or

response (Zimmerman, 1990). The regulated-

learning is a process that helps students organize

Suratno, J., Tonra, W. and Ardiana, .

Guided Discovery Learning and Its Effects on Students’ Self-regulated Learning.

DOI: 10.5220/0008899402070210

In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Teaching and Learning (ICTL 2018), pages 207-210

ISBN: 978-989-758-439-8

207

their thoughts, behaviors, and emotions for the

purpose of success in their learning experiences

(Zumbrunn, Tadlock and Roberts, 2011). Learning

independence that has been maximized by students

can be used by students in facing life in society.

Students who are rich in experience and can stand

alone will easily adjust to the inside social life. Life

in the future demands independence, not just

individual independence, but the independence of

the community up to the independence of the nation.

An independent nation can be seen as an advanced

nation because it is not too dependent on the state or

other parties.

If traditional learning always to be used as the

main means in delivering subject matter, then

students’ potential cannot grow. Students will

always depend on the teacher without knowing what

to do to improve their quality. Therefore, curriculum

reform requires teachers to use multi-strategy and

multimedia in delivering subject matter. One

alternative learning model that can be used is guided

discovery learning. The advantages of guided

discovery learning strategies allow this learning

approach to be used as a tool to solve problems that

occur. The use of computers in learning is also

important because the integration of computers is a

requirement of the curriculum and is expected to

improve the quality of student learning. Therefore,

this research is important to do to solve problems

because the success of students in learning is the

hope that each student wants to achieve.

2 METHODS

The research method used is a quasi-experimental.

The main difference of this study with true

experimental research lies in placing individuals into

groups. In experimental studies, individuals were

chosen randomly to minimize bias. If individual

selection is perceived as impossible or impractical,

quasi-experimental research is the right choice.

Because the quasi-experimental design does not

provide full control, it is very important for

researchers to pay attention to factors that affect

internal and external validity in interpret the results

of his research (Suratno, Ardiana and Tonra, 2018).

The variables in this study consist of independent

variables namely guided discovery learning and the

dependent variable is self-regulated learning. The

quasi-experimental design used in this study is Post-

test-Only Design with None Equivalent Groups as

shown below.

NR X O

NR O

Notes:

= O

Nonrandom (Not Random)

Guided Discovery Learning

Self-Regulated Learning

The dashed line between two sample classes,

namely the experimental class and the control class

indicates that the two classes are not formed by

randomly placing individuals or research subjects

into sample classes. The research subjects were fifty

semester pre-service mathematics teacher from

two full classers. Students who are subject to the

experimental class are taught with guided discovery

learning while students who are used as the research

subject in the control class are taught

conventionally. At the end of the learning activities,

students in both sample classes were given a

questionnaire (O

= O

), which is to be used to

measure their self-regulated learning. Self-regulation

learning questionnaire this research has been

prepared by Pintrich and Degroot. The items were

set based on Likert scale and five choices ranging

from completely disagree (1) to completely agree

(5). Inverse scores were used in some questions. The

scale is composed of 22 items whose reliability for

cognitive and metacognitive sub-scales were

determined by Pintrich and Degroot as 0.83 and

0.74; respectively (Pintrich, 2000).

3 RESULTS

Description of students' self-regulated learning can

be seen based on the average and standard deviation.

There were two groups of treatment. Description of

students' self-regulated learning is on the Table 1.

ICTL 2018 - The 1st International Conference on Teaching and Learning

208

Table 1: Description of Students' Self-Regulated Learning.

Treatment Mean

Std.

Deviation

GDL 67,192 5,044 26

Conventional 67,917 4,452 24

Both of guided discovery learning (GDL) and

conventional classes were 50 students. The average

of students' self-regulated learning in GDL class was

67,192 with a standard deviation of 5,044. In other

hand, the average students' self-regulated learning in

conventional classroom were 67,917 with a

standard deviation of 4,452. Students' self-regulated

learning to have a range of values between 0 - 110

so students' self-regulated learning in the GDL and

conventional class be able to be classified in the

good criteria.

Normality test of the data based on learning

approach showed that both the GDL and

conventional classes have p-value > 0.05 by

Shapiro- Wilk test, and conventional class has p-

value > 0.05. Test of homogeneity of variance

showed that GDL and conventional class have a p-

value > 0.05. Therefore, it can be concluded that test

based on learning approach that data of students'

self-regulated learning came from normal distributed

population and abilities of students' in self-regulated

were homogeny based learning approach.

Statistical tests of effects of method of learning

and students' self-regulated learning used the

Independent Sample Test. The output of test is on

Table 2.

Table 2. T-Test for Equality of Means

t df Sig. (2-tailed)

-0,537 48 0,594

-0,539 47,911 0,592

Table 2 showed factor of learning approach that has

a p-value > 0.05. It means learning approaches that

factor has no effect on the ability of students' self-

regulated learning.

4 DISCUSSION

The research instrument is used to describe how

students in design, monitor, evaluate, and reflect all

of their activities that have been prepared. Some of

the statements in the instrument include: When I

study for a test, I try to put together the information

on from class and from the book; When I do

homework, I try to remember what the teacher is

said in class so I can answer the questions correctly;

It is hard for me to decide what the main ideas are in

what I read; When I study I put my ideas into my

own words; and I always try to understand what the

teacher is saying even if it doesn't make sense. The

five statements are part of the questionnaire

The results of the study show that there is no

effect of the learning model on students’ self-

regulated learning. Some researchers state that it is

rather difficult to change affective domain of

learning in a short time. Leaning activities need

enough time to change student habits, especially in

terms of students’ self-regulated learning. On the

other hand, previous studies have shown that guided

discovery learning has contributed to an increase in

various mathematical abilities of students. One

research concluded that self-regulated learning of

students who earn mathematics learning by using

learning guided discovery better than students who

are learning mathematics conventional (Noer, 2010).

Guided discovery learning also showed results better

than conventional learning in terms of improving

mathematical communication skills, mathematical

problem solving abilities, mathematical dispositions

of students (Karlimah, 2010). Combining guided

discovery learning with models or other strategies

also showed good results. This can be shown by the

high level of mathematical thinking ability and the

independence of students who learn using the guided

discovery approach with the Jigsaw cooperative type

setting better than the high level mathematical

thinking abilities of students who learn using guided

discovery approaches (Sugandi, 2010).

5 CONCLUSION

Guided discovery learning is a constructivist

learning design model that combines the principles

of learning with the discovery and radical

constructivism with the principles of constructivism

learning design theory. Constructivism is a

postmodern theory of knowledge that has the

potential to change educational theory (Fleury,

Guided Discovery Learning and Its Effects on Students’ Self-regulated Learning

209

1998). In addition, constructivism is not just a

learning theory but also a theory of knowledge

(Confrey, 1998). In addition, there were significant

differences in the behavior of students who were

taught with guided discovery learning strategies

compared to the behavior of students who were

taught without using guided discovery strategies

(Akanmu and Fajemidagba, 2012).

Self-regulated learning is one form of affective

aspects. Various studies show that there is a

tendency that affective aspects are rather difficult to

change within time constraints. This can also be seen

from the results of this study which concluded that

there was no difference between students taught

guided discovery learning and students taught with

conventional learning.

REFERENCES

Akanmu, M. A. and Fajemidagba, M. O. (2012) ‘Guided-

discovery learning strategy and senior school students

performance in mathematics in Ejigbo, Nigeria’,

Journal of Education and Practice, 4(12), pp. 82–90.

Aziz, Z. and Hossain, M. A. (2010) ‘A comparison of

cooperative learning and conventional teaching on

students’ achievement in secondary mathematics’,

Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, pp. 53–

62.

Chapko, M. A. and Buchko, M. (2004) ‘Math Instruction

for Inquiring Minds’, Principal, 84(2), pp. 30–33.

Confrey, J. (1998) ‘Voice and perspective: hearing

epistemological innovation in students’ words’, in

Larochelle, M., Bednarz, N., and Garrison, J. (eds)

Constructivism and education. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, pp. 104–120.

Damodharan, V. S. and Rengarajan, V. (2007) Innovative

methods of teaching. Available at:

http://math.arizona.edu/~atp-

mena/conference/proceedings/

Damodharan_Innovative_Methods.pdf.

Darr, C. and Fisher, J. (no date) ‘Self-regulated learning in

the mathematics class’, in NZARE Conference.

Wellington.

Fleury, S. C. (1998) ‘Social studies, trivial constructivism,

and the politics of social knowledge’, in Larochelle,

M., Bednarz, N., and Garrison, J. (eds) Constructivism

and education. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press, pp. 156–172.

Karlimah (2010) Pengembangan kemampuan komunikasi

dan pemecahan masalah serta disposisi matematis

mahasiswa PGSD melalui pembelajaran berbasis

masalah. Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.

Noer, S. H. (2010) Peningkatan Kemampuan berpikir

kritis, kreatif, dan reflektif matematis siswa smp

melalui pembelajaran berbasis masalah. Universitas

Pendidikan Indonesia.

Pintrich, P. R. (2000) ‘The role of goal orientation in self-

regulated learning’, in Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P. R.,

and Zeidner, M. (eds) Handbook of Self-Regulation.

San Diego: Academic Press, pp. 451–502.

Sugandi, A. I. (2010) Pengaruh pembelajaran berbasis

masalah dengan setting kooperatif tipe jigsaw

terhadap pencapaian kemampuan berpikir matematik

tingkat tinggi dan kemandirian belajar siswa sma.

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.

Suratno, J., Ardiana and Tonra, W. S. (2018) ‘Computer-

assisted guided discovery learning of algebra’, in

Journal of Physics: Conference Series. doi:

10.1088/1742-6596/1028/1/012132.

Zimmerman, B. J. (1990) ‘Self-regulated learning and

academic achievement: An overview’, Educational

Psychologist, 25(1), pp. 3–17.

Zumbrunn, S., Tadlock, J. and Roberts, E. D. (2011)

Encouraging self-regulated learning in the classroom:

A review of the literature. Virginia: Metropolitan

Educational Research Consortium (MERC).

ICTL 2018 - The 1st International Conference on Teaching and Learning

210