Efektivitas Model Discovery Learning dalam Meningkatkan Pemahaman Konsep IPAS Siswa Kelas V SD
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63822/rryscj54Keywords:
discovery learning, conceptual understanding, IPAS, guided discovery, primary schoolAbstract
Conceptual understanding is a central goal of integrated natural and social science (IPAS) instruction in primary schools, yet it is hard to achieve when pupils only listen to explanations. This article reviews the effectiveness of discovery learning in improving fifth-grade pupils' understanding of IPAS concepts. A library research method was applied to books and journal articles published between 2000 and 2015. The review indicates that discovery learning allows pupils to construct concepts through observation, data collection, and drawing their own conclusions. However, its advantage appears only when discovery is guided by the teacher; unguided discovery has not been shown to outperform direct instruction, particularly for novice learners. Guided discovery learning is therefore worth considering for IPAS lessons in grade five, provided that teachers prepare problems, materials, and guiding questions carefully.
References
Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021017
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
Balim, A. G. (2009). The effects of discovery learning on students' success and inquiry learning skills. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 35, 1–20.
Bell, R. L., Smetana, L., & Binns, I. (2005). Simplifying inquiry instruction. The Science Teacher, 72(7), 30–33.
Dahar, R. W. (2011). Teori-teori belajar dan pembelajaran. Erlangga.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520701263368
Husein, A., Yusron, A., Arianto, A., Atika, A., & Sari, N. (2026). Kesiapan belajar siswa sekolah dasar melalui implementasi kegiatan pra-pembelajaran. Cokroaminoto Journal of Primary Education, 9(1), 339-351.
Hosnan, M. (2014). Pendekatan saintifik dan kontekstual dalam pembelajaran abad 21: Kunci sukses implementasi Kurikulum 2013. Ghalia Indonesia.
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1
Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. American Psychologist, 59(1), 14–19. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.14
Sanjaya, W. (2008). Strategi pembelajaran berorientasi standar proses pendidikan. Kencana.
Slavin, R. E. (2006). Educational psychology: Theory and practice (8th ed.). Pearson.
Syah, M. (2004). Psikologi pendidikan dengan pendekatan baru. Remaja Rosdakarya.
Trianto. (2007). Model-model pembelajaran inovatif berorientasi konstruktivistik. Prestasi Pustaka.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Masyitoh Hasibuan, Arafatul Soraya, Mhd Ali Wardana, Ani Saputri, Futri Ramadani, Rizky Ramayanti (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
