Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study addressed the issue of low science learning outcomes among fourth-grade students at SDN 04 Kinali. The purpose of this research was to examine the impact of the 9E Learning Cycle model on students' science learning outcomes. The study employed a quantitative approach with a quasi-experimental design, specifically the posttest-only control group design. The population included all fourth-grade students at SDN 04 Kinali. The sample was divided into two groups: class IVA as the experimental group (27 students) and class IVB as the control group (28 students). Data collection was carried out using a 15-item multiple-choice test that had undergone validation for validity, reliability, discriminating power, and difficulty level. Data analysis involved normality testing, homogeneity testing, and hypothesis testing (t-test) with the assistance of SPSS 27. The findings revealed that the experimental group achieved an average score of 81, whereas the control group obtained 72. The hypothesis test produced a significance value of 0.013 < 0.05, indicating that H0 was rejected and H1 was accepted. This means that the 9E Learning Cycle model had a notable effect on the science learning outcomes of fourth-grade students at SDN 04 Kinali. The model proved effective as it encouraged students to actively build their understanding through exploration, elaboration, and evaluation stages. Teachers are advised to consider the 9E Learning Cycle model as an alternative instructional strategy, and future researchers may explore affective and psychomotor domains or incorporate other variables such as learning motivation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marfilinda et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: