Promoting Analytical Thinking in Physics Learning: The Integration of a Scientific Approach and Flying Water Apparatus in Projectile Motion Instruction
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37251/sjpe.v7i3.3394Keywords:
Analytical Thinking, Experimental Teaching Aid, Physics Learning, Projectile Motion, Scientific ApproachAbstract
Purpose of the study: This study aimed to investigate the effect of a Scientific Approach assisted by the Flying Water Apparatus on students’ analytical skills in projectile motion learning, specifically examining whether integrating inquiry-oriented activities with a physical visualization tool could effectively enhance students’ analytical thinking abilities.
Methodology: This study employed a quasi-experimental design using a non-equivalent control group design. Participants consisted of Grade 10 science students at Madrasah Aliyah Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta selected through purposive sampling. Data were collected using an analytical skills test and a Student Response Questionnaire. Statistical analyses included Shapiro–Wilk normality tests, Levene’s and Bartlett’s homogeneity tests, Mann–Whitney U tests, independent-samples t-tests, and N-gain analysis.
Main Findings: The experimental group achieved a higher posttest mean score (6.21) than the control group (4.57). Statistical analysis revealed a significant difference between groups (p = 0.001). The experimental group obtained a medium N-gain score (0.60), while the control group achieved a low N-gain score (0.23). The findings indicate that the scientific approach assisted by the Flying Water Apparatus significantly improved students’ analytical skills in projectile motion learning.
Novelty/Originality of this study: This study integrates the Scientific Approach and a low-cost Flying Water Apparatus within a single instructional intervention to enhance analytical skills in projectile motion learning. Unlike previous studies that focused on conceptual understanding or learning achievement, this research specifically examines analytical skills based on the dimensions of differentiating, organizing, and attributing, thereby extending evidence regarding inquiry-based physics instruction and higher-order thinking development.
References
K. S. Taber, “Science Education as a Field of Scholarship BT - Science Education: An International Course Companion,” K. S. Taber and B. Akpan, Eds., Rotterdam: SensePublishers, 2017, pp. 3–19. doi: 10.1007/978-94-6300-749-8_1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-749-8_1
OECD, PISA 2022 assessment and analytical framework. 2023.
T. Tanti, W. Utami, D. Deliza, and M. Jahanifar, “Investigation in vocation high school for attitude and motivation students in learning physics subject,” J. Eval. Educ., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 479–490, 2025, doi: 10.37251/jee.v6i2.1452. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/jee.v6i2.1452
K. L. Seeratan, K. W. McElhaney, J. Mislevy, R. McGhee Jr, D. Conger, and M. C. Long, “Measuring students’ ability to engage in scientific inquiry: A new instrument to assess data analysis, explanation, and argumentation,” Educ. Assess., vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 112–135, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.1080/10627197.2020.1756253. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2020.1756253
D. A. Kurniawan, A. Astalini, D. Darmaji, T. Tanti, and S. Maryani, “Innovative learning: Gender perception of e-module linear equations in mathematics and physics,” Indones. J. Learn. Adv. Educ., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 92–106, 2022, doi: 10.23917/ijolae.v4i2.16610. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23917/ijolae.v4i2.16610
G. M. Sinatra and D. Lombardi, “Evaluating sources of scientific evidence and claims in the post-truth era may require reappraising plausibility judgments,” Educ. Psychol., vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 120–131, Jul. 2020, doi: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2020.1730181
H. M. I. Zafeer, S. Maqbool, Y. Rong, and S. Maqbool, “Mapping the relationship and influence of school internal factors with an eye towards students’ science academic outcomes,” Heliyon, vol. 10, no. 19, Oct. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e38696. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e38696
B. E. Tijani and A. M. Adeduyigbe, “Relevance of science education for self-reliance and economic growth in Nigeria: a systematic literature review,” Discov. Educ., vol. 4, no. 1, p. 92, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s44217-025-00504-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00504-8
T. Tanti, D. A. Kurniawan, N. Kurniawan, and L. Anggraini, “Attitudes toward science based on analysis and correlation: Learning enjoyment & leisure interest on science,” Form. J. Ilm. Pendidik. MIPA, vol. 11, no. 1, 2021, doi: 10.30998/formatif.v11i1.5142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30998/formatif.v11i1.5142
R. Hidayat, I. Nugroho, Z. Zainuddin, and T. A. Ingai, “A systematic review of analytical thinking skills in STEM education settings,” Inf. Learn. Sci., vol. 125, no. 7–8, pp. 565–586, Nov. 2023, doi: 10.1108/ILS-06-2023-0070. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-06-2023-0070
J. West, “Utilizing Bloom’s taxonomy and authentic learning principles to promote preservice teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge,” Soc. Sci. Humanit. Open, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 100620, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100620. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100620
A. Awouda, E. Traini, M. Asranov, and P. Chiabert, “Bloom’s IoT taxonomy towards an effective Industry 4.0 education: Case study on Open-source IoT laboratory,” Educ. Inf. Technol., vol. 29, no. 12, pp. 15043–15065, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s10639-024-12468-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12468-7
S. Van den Eynde, B. P. Schermerhorn, J. Deprez, M. Goedhart, J. R. Thompson, and M. De Cock, “Dynamic conceptual blending analysis to model student reasoning processes while integrating mathematics and physics: A case study in the context of the heat equation,” Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res., vol. 16, no. 1, p. 10114, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.16.010114. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.16.010114
J. Fielding and K. Makar, “Challenging conceptual understanding in a complex system: supporting young students to address extended mathematical inquiry problems,” Instr. Sci., vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 35–61, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s11251-021-09564-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-021-09564-3
J. A. McLaughlin and J. M. Bailey, “Students need more practice with spatial thinking in geoscience education: a systematic review of the literature,” Stud. Sci. Educ., vol. 59, no. 2, pp. 147–204, Jul. 2023, doi: 10.1080/03057267.2022.2029305. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2022.2029305
L. Mason and S. Zaccoletti, “Inhibition and conceptual learning in science: A review of studies,” Educ. Psychol. Rev., vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 181–212, 2021, doi: 10.1007/s10648-020-09529-x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09529-x
M. Luo, D. Sun, L. Zhu, and Y. Yang, “Evaluating scientific reasoning ability: Student performance and the interaction effects between grade level, gender, and academic achievement level,” Think. Ski. Creat., vol. 41, p. 100899, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100899. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100899
T. Tanti, D. Deliza, and S. Hartina, “The effectiveness of using smartphones as mobile-mini labs in improving students’ beliefs in physics,” JIPF (Jurnal Ilmu Pendidik. Fis. Vol 9, No 3 Sept. 2024, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 387–394, 2024, doi: 10.26737/jipf.v9i3.5185. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26737/jipf.v9i3.5185
S. Piten, S. Rakkapao, and S. Prasitpong, “Cambodian students’ prior knowledge of projectile motion,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 901, p. 12116, Sep. 2017, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/901/1/012116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/901/1/012116
R. Dilber, I. Karaman, and B. Duzgun, “High school students’ understanding of projectile motion concepts,” Educ. Res. Eval., vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 203–222, Jun. 2009, doi: 10.1080/13803610902899101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13803610902899101
J. Jufrida et al., “Student responses to the application of the number head together learning model in physics subjects,” J. Pendidik. Fis. Indones., vol. 17, no. 2, Nov. 2021, doi: 10.15294/jpfi.v17i2.24083. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15294/jpfi.v17i2.24083
C. Cirkony, “Flexible, creative, constructive, and collaborative: the makings of an authentic science inquiry task,” Int. J. Sci. Educ., vol. 45, no. 17, pp. 1440–1462, Nov. 2023, doi: 10.1080/09500693.2023.2213384. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2023.2213384
D. T. Brookes, E. Ektina, and G. Planinsic, “Implementing an epistemologically authentic approach to student-centered inquiry learning,” Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res., vol. 16, no. 2, p. 20148, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.16.020148. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.16.020148
N. T. Arega and T. S. Hunde, “Constructivist instructional approaches: A systematic review of evaluation-based evidence for effectiveness,” Rev. Educ., vol. 13, no. 1, p. e70040, Apr. 2025, doi: 10.1002/rev3.70040. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.70040
N. Shin, J. Bowers, J. Krajcik, and D. Damelin, “Promoting computational thinking through project-based learning,” Discip. Interdiscip. Sci. Educ. Res., vol. 3, no. 1, p. 7, 2021, doi: 10.1186/s43031-021-00033-y. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-021-00033-y
J. Kranz, A. Baur, and A. Möller, “Learners’ challenges in understanding and performing experiments: A systematic review of the literature,” Stud. Sci. Educ., vol. 59, no. 2, pp. 321–367, Jul. 2023, doi: 10.1080/03057267.2022.2138151. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2022.2138151
P. Kwangmuang, S. Jarutkamolpong, W. Sangboonraung, and S. Daungtod, “The development of learning innovation to enhance higher order thinking skills for students in Thailand junior high schools,” Heliyon, vol. 7, no. 6, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07309. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07309
Maison, T. Tant, D. A. Kurniawan, W. Sukarni, Erika, and R. Hoyi, “Assessing students’ attitudes towards physics through the application of inquiry and jigsaw cooperative learning models in high schools,” Int. J. Instr., vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 439–450, 2021, doi: 10.29333/iji.2021.14426a. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.14426a
R. L. Gómez and A. M. Suárez, “Do inquiry-based teaching and school climate influence science achievement and critical thinking? Evidence from PISA 2015,” Int. J. STEM Educ., vol. 7, no. 1, p. 43, 2020, doi: 10.1186/s40594-020-00240-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00240-5
A. A. Alanazi, K. Osman, and L. Halim, “Development of technology-enhanced higher order thinking learning module based on scaffolding and guided discovery approaches,” in Auer, M.E., May, D. (eds) 2024 Yearbook Emerging Technologies in Learning. Learning and Analytics in Intelligent Systems, M. E. Auer and D. May, Eds., Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2025, pp. 485–509. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-80388-8_26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-80388-8_26
X.-M. Wang, X.-H. Yu, D. Yu, G.-J. Hwang, and M. Lan, “Does combining real and virtual experiments improve learning achievement in physics? Evidence from a meta-analysis (2001–2021),” Educ. Res. Rev., vol. 46, p. 100661, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2024.100661. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2024.100661
H. J. Banda and J. Nzabahimana, “Effect of integrating physics education technology simulations on students’ conceptual understanding in physics: A review of literature,” Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res., vol. 17, no. 2, p. 23108, Dec. 2021, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.023108. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.023108
F. B. Wadsworth et al., “Projectile motion: Experimental datasets and classroom exercises,” Phys. Educ., vol. 60, no. 4, p. 45024, 2025, doi: 10.1088/1361-6552/add2c5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6552/add2c5
Y. Wang, L. Zhang, and M. Pang, “Virtual experiments in physics education: A systematic literature review,” Res. Sci. Technol. Educ., vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 633–655, Apr. 2025, doi: 10.1080/02635143.2024.2327995. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2024.2327995
P. R. Hunter, F. J. Colón-González, J. Brainard, and S. Rushton, “Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions against COVID-19 in Europe in 2020: A quasi-experimental non-equivalent group and time series design study.,” Euro Surveill, vol. 26, no. 28, Jul. 2021, doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.28.2001401. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.28.2001401
C. J. Miller, S. N. Smith, and M. Pugatch, “Experimental and quasi-experimental designs in implementation research,” Psychiatry Res., vol. 283, p. 112452, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2019.06.027. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2019.06.027
M. Bulus, “Sample Size Determination and Optimal Design of Randomized/Non-equivalent Pretest-posttest Control-group Designs TT - Randomize/Eşdeğer Olmayan Öntest-Sontest Kontrol Gruplu Tasarımların Örneklem Büyüklüğünün Belirlenmesi ve Optimal Tasarımı,” Adıyaman Univ. J. Educ. Sci., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 48–69, 2021, doi: 10.17984/adyuebd.941434. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17984/adyuebd.941434
J. Kang, “Interrelationship Between Inquiry-Based Learning and Instructional Quality in Predicting Science Literacy,” Res. Sci. Educ., vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 339–355, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s11165-020-09946-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-020-09946-6
H.-H. Wang, Z.-R. Hong, H.-C. She, T. J. Smith, J. Fielding, and H. Lin, “The role of structured inquiry, open inquiry, and epistemological beliefs in developing secondary students’ scientific and mathematical literacies,” Int. J. STEM Educ., vol. 9, no. 1, p. 14, 2022, doi: 10.1186/s40594-022-00329-z. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-022-00329-z
Z. Ješková, S. Lukáč, Ľ. Šnajder, J. Guniš, D. Klein, and M. Kireš, “Active Learning in STEM Education with Regard to the Development of Inquiry Skills,” 2022. doi: 10.3390/educsci12100686. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12100686
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Mayuriko Olivia Pertiwi, Asay Gidena
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and acknowledge that the Schrödinger: Journal of Physics Education is the first publisher licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges and earlier and greater citation of published work.
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
