Contextual Learning: Implementation and Challenges for Science Teacher in Private Middle School

Risya Pramana Situmorang, Elia Suwi, Failasuf Aulia Nugroho


This purpose of this study is to: (1) describe the implementation of contextual learning by science teacher in Salatiga Private Middle School, (2) analyze the challenges of science teacher in Salatiga Private Middle School in implementing contextual learning. The study employed qualitative research in which the sample was 4 teachers of private middle school of Salatiga. The data obtained from the observation and questionnaire instruments constructed from six criteria. The criteria of contextual learning are: 1) constructivism, 2) asking, 3) finding, 4) learning community, 5) modeling, 6) reflection. Data analysis from the research that has been conducted is by processing data descriptively. The research shows that the implementation of contextual learning in every Private Middle School of Salatiga for science subject are on the good category (score interval: 2,82 ≤ score < 3,37). The highest accomplishment from the whole indicator of contextual learning from finding aspect with score 3,00 (good category). Teacher's challenges in implementing contextual learning, in general, are the limited facility to apply scientific method through practicum or experimenting in the laboratory, lack of opportunities for teachers in developing contextual-based media, and lack of assistance provided by the teacher in the aspects of a learning community, constructivism, and finding.


Contextual Learning; Science Teacher; Private Middle School

Full Text:



Arikunto 2015, Metodologi Penelitian Pendidikan, Rineka Cipta, Jakarta

Crawford, M 2001, ‘Contextual Teaching and Learning: Strategies for Creating Constructivist Classrooms’, National Tech Prep Network, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 1-6.

Dewi, NLPR., Suastra, IW, & Pujani, NM 2017, ‘Effectiveness of Contextual Science Practicum Module to Improve Science Process Skills and Environmental Caring Character, SHS Web of Conferences, vol. 42, no. 00037, pp. 1-6.

Gagne, RM 2005, Principles of Instructional Design., Wadsworth Publishing Co, New York

Isnaini, M., Wardani, D. K., & Noviani, L 2016, ‘Pengaruh kompetensi dosen dan fasilitas bela¬jar terhadap kepuasan mahasiswa pendidikan ekonomi FKIP UNS’,Jurnal Pendidikan Bisnis dan Ekonomi, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 1-20.

Johnson, Elaine. B 2007, Contextual Teaching and Learning, Menjadikan Kegiatan Belajar Mengajar Mengasyikkan dan Bermakna, MLS, Bandung.

Kamaruddin, NKM, bt Jaafar., N, Amin, Zn 2011, ‘A study of the effectiveness of the contextual approach to teaching and learning statistics at the University Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM)’, US-China Education Review A, vol. 1, pp. 13-9.

Lazarou, D., Sutherland, R., & Erduran, S 2016, ’Argumentation in Science Education as a Systemic Activity: An Activity-Theoretical Perspective’. International Journal of Educational Research, vol. 79, pp.150-56.

Majid 2008, Perencanaan Pembelajaran, Remaja Rosdakarya Offset, Bandung.

Nurhadi 2003, Pembelajaran Kontekstual dan Penerapannya dalam KBK, Universitas Negeri Malang, Malang.

Özdem Yilmaz, Y., Cakiroglu, J., Ertepinar, H., & Erduran, S 2017, ‘The pedagogy of argumentation in science education: science teachers’ instructional practices’, International Journal of Science Education, vol. 39, no.11, pp. 1443-64

Öztürk, A, Doğanay, A 2019, ‘Development of Argumentation Skills through Socioscientific Issues in Science Course: A Collaborative Action Research’, Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 52-89.

Priyambodo, P & Situmorang, RP 2017, Antigen Antibodi Pembelajaran. Pustaka Pelajar, Yogyakarta

Rauh, J 2011, ‘The utility of online choice options: Do purely online schools increase the value to students?’, Education Policy Analysis Archives, vol. 19, no. 34, pp. 1-18.

Sardiman 2011, Interaksi Motifasi Belajar Mengajar, Raja Grafindo Persada, Jakarta

Thoron, A., & Myers, B 2012, ‘Effects of Inquiry-based Agriscience Instruction on Student Sci¬entific Reasoning’, Journal of Agricultural Educa-tion, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 156–70.

Topaloglu, M., & Kiyici, F 2015, ‘The Opinions of Science and Technology Teachers Regarding the Usage of Out-Of-School Learning Environ¬ments in Science Teaching’, Journal of Turkish Science Education, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 31-50.

Tosun, C. & Taskesenligil, Y 2011, ‘the effect of Problem-Based Learning on Student Motivation Toward Chemistry Classes and On Learning Strategies’, Journal of Turkish Science Education, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 104-25.

Wallace CS, Tsoi MY, Calkin J, & Darley M 2003, ‘Learning From Inquiry-Based Laboratories in Non-Major Biology: An Interpretive Study of The Relationships Among Inquiry Experience, Epistemologies, and Conceptual Growth’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 2, no. 40, pp. 986-1024.

Zion, M, 2008, ‘On-Line Forums as a "Rescue Net’ in an Open Inquiry Process',International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 351-75.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2019 Jurnal Penelitian dan Pembelajaran IPA

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Creative Commons License

Jurnal Penelitian dan Pembelajaran IPA is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Copyright © 2021 Jurnal Penelitian dan Pembelajaran IPA. All rights reserved.