Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Scientific literacy is one of the sixteen skills needed in the 21st century. The result of PISA survey in 2015 found that the students’ scientific literacy ability in Indonesia was at the low level. PjBL-STEM model can help motivate students on activities relevant to their daily lives. Students can implement the scientific knowledge they possess in solving problems in their daily lives through their scientific literacy ability. This research aimed to analyze the improvement on students’ scientific literacy through PjBL-STEM model on the substance pressure discussion as well as its implementation. This research was a mixed method research with embedded experimental type. The sampling technique in this research was purposive sampling. The subjects were 36 students of Class VIII-A in SMP Negeri 4 Malang in the even semester of 2018/2019 academic year. The treatment instruments were the lesson plans and student worksheets. The measurement instruments were observation sheets and scientific literacy questions. The quantitative data were in the forms of pretest and posttest scores. The qualitative data were the results of observations and students’ responses to the results of the interviews. The quantitative data analysis consisted of descriptive statistical, Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for One-Sample test, paired t-test, d-effect size test, and N-Gain. The qualitative data analysis consisted of observation notes during the learning process from the observer, cross tabulation, and the results of interviews with students. The d-effect size test obtained the score of 1.14 which belonged to very high category. The N-Gain test obtained the score 0.45 which belonged to medium category. The result of this research showed that learning with PjBL-STEM model was highly influential on the improvement of students’ scientific literacy. In this research, students’ scientific literacy improved on medium category.
Mustikasari et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: