Comparative Effectiveness of Learning Cycle 5E-Based and Regular Worksheets on Conceptual Understanding of Current Electricity
- 1Universitas Negeri Semarang
Abstract
Conceptual understanding of current electricity requires instructional materials that guide students systematically through exploration, explanation, application, and evaluation. This study compared the effectiveness of student worksheets that explicitly integrated the Learning Cycle 5E phases with that of regular worksheets in supporting junior high school students' conceptual understanding. A quasi-experimental nonequivalent control group design was employed with two intact ninth-grade classes, comprising 30 students in the experimental group and 30 in the control group. Both groups followed the same Learning Cycle 5E instructional sequence; the treatment differed only in the type of worksheet used. Conceptual understanding was measured using a 25-item three-tier multiple-choice test and analyzed using ANCOVA, partial eta squared, Hedges' g, and indicator-level analysis. After controlling for initial ability, the adjusted posttest mean of the experimental group was 54.17, compared with 32.64 for the control group. The difference was significant, F(1, 57) = 44.324, p < .001, with ηp² = .437 and Hedges' g = 1.10, indicating a large between-group effect. Indicator-level analysis showed that the largest between-group difference occurred in interpreting, while summarizing remained the lowest-achieving indicator in the experimental group. Under the conditions of this study, worksheets that explicitly integrated the Learning Cycle 5E phases showed greater comparative effectiveness than regular worksheets in supporting conceptual understanding of current electricity.
Related
- Enhancing Students’ Conceptual Understanding of Elasticity Through IoT Based Real Time Multiple Representations: A Quasi Experimental Study
- Development of A Google Sites-Based Granular Mechanics E-Module to Facilitate Students' Conceptual Understanding
- Development of A STEM-Integrated Guided Inquiry E-Module on Global Warming to Enhance Students’ Conceptual Understanding
- AI-based scoring systematically underestimates conceptual understanding of linguistically weak students' explanations in physics
- Optimizing Train Driving to Minimize the Electricity Cost of an Entire Railway Traffic Mesh using Evolutionary Algorithms
BibTeX
@article{hidayat2026comparative,
title = {{Comparative Effectiveness of Learning Cycle 5E-Based and Regular Worksheets on Conceptual Understanding of Current Electricity}},
author = {Muhammad Syarif Hidayat and Siti Wahyuni},
journal = {Physics Communication},
year = {2026},
month = aug,
doi = {10.15294/pc.v10i2.58999},
url = {https://doi.org/10.15294/pc.v10i2.58999},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Comparative Effectiveness of Learning Cycle 5E-Based and Regular Worksheets on Conceptual Understanding of Current Electricity
AU - Muhammad Syarif Hidayat
AU - Siti Wahyuni
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/08/01
JO - Physics Communication
DO - 10.15294/pc.v10i2.58999
UR - https://doi.org/10.15294/pc.v10i2.58999
AB - Conceptual understanding of current electricity requires instructional materials that guide students systematically through exploration, explanation, application, and evaluation. This study compared the effectiveness of student worksheets that explicitly integrated the Learning Cycle 5E phases with that of regular worksheets in supporting junior high school students' conceptual understanding. A quasi-experimental nonequivalent control group design was employed with two intact ninth-grade classes, comprising 30 students in the experimental group and 30 in the control group. Both groups followed the same Learning Cycle 5E instructional sequence; the treatment differed only in the type of worksheet used. Conceptual understanding was measured using a 25-item three-tier multiple-choice test and analyzed using ANCOVA, partial eta squared, Hedges' g, and indicator-level analysis. After controlling for initial ability, the adjusted posttest mean of the experimental group was 54.17, compared with 32.64 for the control group. The difference was significant, F(1, 57) = 44.324, p < .001, with ηp² = .437 and Hedges' g = 1.10, indicating a large between-group effect. Indicator-level analysis showed that the largest between-group difference occurred in interpreting, while summarizing remained the lowest-achieving indicator in the experimental group. Under the conditions of this study, worksheets that explicitly integrated the Learning Cycle 5E phases showed greater comparative effectiveness than regular worksheets in supporting conceptual understanding of current electricity.
SN - 2528-5971
SN - 2528-598X
ER -