Paedagogie

Articles

Media Digital dan Pendekatan Saintifik: Membangun Kesadaran Lingkungan di SDN 060970 Medan Belawan

Muhammad Dekar , Dinda Widyastika , Dichi Akbar Wahyudi , Teuku Muhmmad Hary Ramadhan , Fahmy Armanda , Nazla Ritongga

Published
2 March 2026

Vol. 21 No. 1 (2026)
Pages 669-676

DOI

Open Access
Share

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine how the environmental awareness of third-grade students at SD Negeri 060970 Medan Belawan was influenced by a scientific approach focused on character education and digital-based interactive media. A 2 × 2 factorial design was used in the experimental methodology of this study. One hundred students were selected as the research sample using a simple random sampling method. An environmental awareness test instrument that had undergone validity and reliability testing was used to collect data. After successfully completing the normality and homogeneity tests, data analysis was conducted using a two-way ANOVA at a significance level of 0.05. The research findings indicated that: (1) students' environmental awareness was significantly influenced by a scientific approach focused on character education; (2) students' environmental awareness was significantly influenced by interactive digital media; and (3) there was a significant interaction between the scientific approach and digital media. The highest level of environmental awareness was achieved when both were combined. Therefore, it is recommended that digital media and a character-based scientific approach be combined as an efficient teaching method to help elementary school students develop their environmental awareness.

Keywords

Scientific Approach; Character Education; Digital Interactive Media; Environmental Awareness; Elementary School

References

  1. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
  2. Anagün, Ş. S. (2018). Teachers’ perceptions about the relationship between 21st century skills and managing constructivist learning environments. International Journal of Instruction, 11(4), 825–840.
  3. Ardoin, N. M., Bowers, A. W., & Gaillard, E. (2020). Environmental education outcomes for conservation: A systematic review. Biological Conservation, 241, 108224.
  4. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.
  5. Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Harvard University Press.
  6. Bybee, R. W. (2020). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Creating teachable moments. Science and Children, 58(1), 8–13.
  7. Chen, C. H., Liu, G. Z., & Hwang, G. J. (2021). Interaction between gaming and multistage guiding strategies on students’ field trip learning performance and motivation. Computers & Education, 160, 104032.
  8. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
  9. Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24(2), 97–140.
  10. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what†and “why†of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268.
  11. Dekar, M., Sitorus, R. H., & Ariantika, P. (2022). Meta Analisis Efektifitas Penggunaan Media Video Terhadap Hasil Belajar Siswa SD pada Mata Pelajaran IPA. Journal on Teacher Education, 4(2), 1324-1331.
  12. Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
  13. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2019). How to design and evaluate research in education (10th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
  14. Furtak, E. M., et al. (2021). Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of inquiry-based science teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 91(3), 410–452.
  15. García-Martínez, I., et al. (2021). Promoting environmental awareness through inquiry-based learning. Sustainability, 13(6), 3204.
  16. Hattie, J. (2020). Visible learning: The sequel. Routledge.
  17. Kim, M., & Tan, A. L. (2021). Rethinking difficult science concepts: Teacher-centered versus student-centered approaches. Research in Science Education, 51, 55–75.
  18. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall.
  19. Krajcik, J. S., & Shin, N. (2021). Project-based learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  20. Lai, C. L., Hwang, G. J., & Tu, Y. H. (2022). The effects of computer-supported self-regulation in science learning: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 35, 100434.
  21. Lickona, T. (1991). Educating for character: How our schools can teach respect and responsibility. Bantam Books.
  22. Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  23. Mayer, R. E. (2021). Multimedia learning (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  24. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.
  25. Nugroho, A., Permanasari, A., & Firman, H. (2023). Digital-based scientific learning to improve students’ critical thinking skills. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 32, 567–580.
  26. OECD. (2020). Education in the digital age: Healthy and happy children. OECD Publishing.
  27. Orr, D. W. (1992). Ecological literacy: Education and the transition to a postmodern world. SUNY Press.
  28. Piaget, J. (1970). Science of education and the psychology of the child. Orion Press.
  29. Rahmawati, Y., & Ridwan, A. (2022). Integrating character education in science learning: A systematic review. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(4), em2095.
  30. Schindler, L. A., Burkholder, G. J., Morad, O. A., & Marsh, C. (2017). Computer-based technology and student engagement: A critical review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14, 25.
  31. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.
  32. Stevenson, R. B., Brody, M., Dillon, J., & Wals, A. E. J. (2021). International handbook of research on environmental education. Routledge.
  33. Stevenson, R. B., et al. (2021). Environmental literacy and sustainability education: A systematic review. Environmental Education Research, 27(6), 789–810.
  34. Suprapto, N., Liu, W. Y., & Ku, C. H. (2022). The effectiveness of scientific approach in science learning: A meta-analysis study. International Journal of Instruction, 15(2), 109–126.
  35. Suryawati, E., Osman, K., & Meerah, T. S. M. (2020). The effectiveness of problem-based learning on students’ science literacy. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 19(2), 310–323.
  36. Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education, 48, 1273–1296.
  37. UNESCO. (2017). Education for sustainable development goals: Learning objectives. UNESCO Publishing. https://unesdoc.unesco.org
  38. Voogt, J., Knezek, G., Cox, M., Knezek, D., & ten Brummelhuis, A. (2021). Under which conditions does ICT have a positive effect on teaching and learning? Computers & Education, 157, 103975.
  39. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Article Metrics
77
Views
27
Downloads

SCITE

DIMENSIONS

Publication Information
Published 2 March 2026
Section Articles
Copyright Copyright (c) 2026 Paedagogie
Keywords
  • Scientific Approach
  • Character Education
  • Digital Interactive Media
  • Environmental Awareness
  • Elementary School