Scientific Approach to Promote Response Fluency Viewed from Social Intelligence: Is It Effective?

Edi Istiyono,M Zainudin

doi:10.12973/eu-jer.8.3.801

Abstract

<p style="text-align:justify">This study was aimed at investigating whether or not there is an interaction between learning approach and social intelligence towards response fluency. A number of 126 eighth grade students (M = 13.9; SD = 0.5 years) in Bojonegoro, Indonesia were randomly selected to participate in this study. This research used 2x3 factorial quasi-experiment with the matching static comparison design. The statistical Analysis Of Covariance (ANCOVA) ware implemented for analysis of data in the study. The results show that: there is a significant difference in response to fluency between students who learn with a scientific approach and direct learning approach; there are significant differences in response to fluency between students who have high, medium, and low social intelligence, both in scientific and direct learning approaches, the students with high social intelligence levels have better response to fluency than those with moderate social intelligence or low, and the students with moderate social intelligence have better response to fluency than those with low social intelligence, in all levels of social intelligence, the students who were taught by using scientific approach have better response to fluency than those who were taught by using direct learning approach.</p>

Highlights

The main goals of mathematics learning in the 21st century have 4-Cs characteristics, namely; Communication, Collaboration, Critical Thinking, and Problem Solving, Creativity and Innovation
The results show that: there is a significant difference in response to fluency between students who learn with a scientific approach and direct learning approach; there are significant differences in response to fluency between students who have high, medium, and low social intelligence, both in scientific and direct learning approaches, the students with high social intelligence levels have better response to fluency than those with moderate social intelligence or low, and the students with moderate social intelligence have better response to fluency than those with low social intelligence, in all levels of social intelligence, the students who were taught by using scientific approach have better response to fluency than those who were taught by using direct learning approach
The results showed that the level of fluency response from the answers produced by students in the types of learning approaches and social intelligence levels are different

Summary

Introduction

The main goals of mathematics learning in the 21st century have 4-Cs characteristics, namely; Communication, Collaboration, Critical Thinking, and Problem Solving, Creativity and Innovation. This is in line with the results of research conducted by more than 250 researchers, the members of the ATC21S (Assessment & Teaching of 21st Century Skills), from 60 institutions worldwide. They grouped 21st-century skills in 4 categories; one of them is creativity (Binkley, et al, 2012). Creativity plays a pivotal role in healthy mental status, overcoming change, and emotional growth (Plucker, Beghetto & Dow, 2004; Richards, 2001). Craft (2014) suggests that individuals are facilitated to develop their creative potential and use their creativity to develop other potentials they have

Objectives

Methods

Discussion

Conclusion