Universitas Muhammadiyah Malang, East Java, Indonesia

JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia)

p-ISSN 2442-3750, e-ISSN 2537-6204 // Vol. 5 No. 3 November 2019, pp. 367-378

10.22219/jpbi.v5i3.7819 http://ejournal.umm.ac.id/index.php/jpbi jpbi@umm.ac.id 367

Research Article

Students’ perceptions concerning the learning
environment based on biology teachers’ TPACK

Cut Intan Evtia Nurina a,1,*, R. Riandi a,2, Ari Widodo a,3, Hendra Yulisman a,4
a Master's Program in Science Education, School of Postgraduates, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Jl. Dr. Setiabudhi No.229,

Bandung City, West Java 40154 Indonesia
1 cutintanevtia@student.upi.edu*; 2 rian@upi.edu; 3 widodo@upi.edu; 4 hendra.yulisman@fkip.unsyiah.ac.id

* Corresponding author

INTRODUCTION

Technology use in Indonesia is growing rapidly in all aspects of society (Salam et al., 2018), for example,
the increasing use of social media activities (Das, Gryseels, Sudhir, & Tan, 2016; McKemmish, Anwar, &
Ardianto, 2017; Poushter, Bishop, & Chwe, 2018). However, in the education aspect, the use of technology still
not effective because of problems faced by teachers, students, schools, and the government. Although the
education ministry has made policies regarding the importance of integrating technology into learning, there are
some factors that inhibit technology integration, such as teachers’ beliefs in using technology and the
availability of supporting facilities. The use of technology in learning known as the strategy to enhance the
learning environment to become more positive. The teachers’ ability to integrate technology determines how
technology affects the learning environment (Sulisworo, Kusumaningtyas, Nursulistiyo, & Handayani, 2019). In

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Article history
Received March 06, 2019

Revised April 16, 2019

Accepted November 01, 2019

Published November 30, 2019

Research about students’ perceptions concerning the learning environment based
on biology teachers’ TPACK still limited. The purpose of this study was to obtain
information about the impact of biology teachers’ TPACK on students’ perceptions
concerning their learning environment. TPACK scores were obtained from instrument in
the form of multiple-choice test questions. Furthermore, students’ perceptions of their
learning environment were obtained using a Likert scale questionnaire. Two biology
teachers were used as research samples determined by purposive sampling, which is
referring to their TPACK score. Furthermore, students who became the research
sample were students from those two teachers that consists of 64 students. The
analysis results show that teachers have different TPACK ability at the level of TPACK
forming components. Furthermore, there are differences in students' perceptions based
on their teachers' TPACK ability. The results were indicated teacher professionalism, in
this case, TPACK has the impact on learning environment. Therefore, teachers,
schools, government, and education providers are expected to give special attention to
teacher professionalism.

This is an open access article under the CC–BY-SA license

Keywords
Biology teachers’ TPACK

Learning environment

Students’ perceptions

How to cite: Nurina, C. I. E., Riandi, R., Widodo, A., & Yulisman, H. (2019). Students’ perceptions concerning the learning

environment based on biology teachers’ TPACK. JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), 5(3), 367-378. doi:
https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v5i3.7819

http://ejournal.umm.ac.id/
http://u.lipi.go.id/1422867894
http://u.lipi.go.id/1460300524
https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v5i3.7819
https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v5i3.7819
http://ejournal.umm.ac.id/index.php/jpbi
mailto:jpbi@umm.ac.id
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v5i3.7819
https://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.22219/jpbi.v5i3.7819&domai

JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia)
Vol. 5, No. 3, November 2019, pp. 367-378

368

Nurina et al (Students perception concerning …)

order to enhance the learning environment by technology use, teachers must act as a facilitator. So, learning is
more student-centered, and it is suitable for the needs of students in the 21st-century (Srisawasdi, 2014).

The ability of biology teachers to integrate technology into their classrooms can be seen through teachers’
Technological Pedagogical And Content Knowledge (TPACK) (Agustin, Liliasari, Sinaga, & Rochintaniawati,
2018). TPACK is often used as the teachers' ability of technology integration because components of TPACK
have teacher professional competence, namely pedagogic and professional competence (related to content
mastery) (Nofrion, Wijayanto, Wilis, & Novio, 2018; Rehmat & Bailey, 2014). Furthermore, TPACK also consists
of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) components which are potential indicators of the learning quality
provided by the teachers. PCK will continue to develop according to teachers' teaching experience (Anwar,
Rustaman, Widodo, & Redjeki, 2014; Widodo, 2017). Therefore, the ability of technology integration in this
research is reviewed from the teachers’ TPACK.

TPACK consists of three main components and four integrated components (a combination of the main
components). The main components consist of Technological Knowledge (TK), Content Knowledge (CK), and
Pedagogical Knowledge (PK). Furthermore, the integrated components consist of Pedagogical Content
Knowledge (PCK), Technological Content Knowledge (TCK), Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK),
and Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) (Koehler, Greenhalgh, Rosenberg, & Keenan,
1993; Valtonen, Sointu, Mäkitalo-Siegl, & Kukkonen, 2015).

Integrating technology can increase the effectiveness of learning activities, create student-centered learning
and outcome-focused, as well as the transition to conventional learning towards modern learning. Furthermore,
the rapid development of technology also helps students to learn more flexible and independent according to
their respective abilities (Gupta & Fisher, 2012). Additionally, previous research shows that technology
integration has benefited students and teachers, such as the rapid information transfer for students and
supporting collaborative learning environment (Akturk & Ozturk, 2019).

The learning environment consists of several aspects like psychological, sociological, physical
environment, and the interaction between teachers and students. These aspects can affect the quality of the
learning environment such as students' attitudes and their learning outcomes. It is not enough for teachers
only use tests and examinations to assess student learning outcomes, but teachers must also pay attention to
psychosocial aspects so that teachers can create a conducive learning environment (Khine, Fraser, Afari, Oo,
& Kyaw, 2018).

Furthermore, the learning environment can be seen from the opinions of students about their academic
experience. The learning environment includes students' perceptions about the learning environment in their
classroom, including their relationships with teachers and fellow students, as well as their involvement in the
classroom. Although each of the students has their own personal view about the learning environment, there
is also a sense of togetherness between students and teachers, so the learning environment is a common
perception among teachers and students in the classroom. Students’ perceptions often define the learning
environment because of their responses to various learning environments and their opportunities to form
views that are able to provide credible perspectives for making judgments (Barr, 2016).

Students’ perceptions of the learning environment consist of five aspects that describe the situation of
teachers and students as well as the interaction among them. Student cohesiveness refers to the extent to
which students know, help and support each other. Teacher support refers to the extent to which teachers
help, be friends, trust and pay attention to their students. Involvement refers to the extent to which students
have an interest and are attentive in participating in learning, active in discussions, working on additional tasks
from their teacher and feel comfortable in the classroom. Cooperation refers to the extent to which students
are able to work together rather than compete with each other in their learning. Furthermore, equity refers to
the extent to which students are treated equally by the teacher (Afari, Aldridge, Fraser, & Khine, 2013; Alt,
2018; Khalil & Aldridge, 2019; Khine et al., 2018).

Previous research on the learning environment is focused more on students' perceptions about the
learning environment (Khine et al., 2018), creating a positive learning environment (Barr, 2016), and its impact
on the development of students’ learning outcomes (Sandilos, Rimm-Kaufman, & Cohen, 2017). The research
that focused on differences in the learning environment was carried out by Widodo, Maria, and Fitriani (2017),
who aimed to analyze the learning environment during virtual laboratory and real laboratory activities.

Previous research about teachers’ TPACK is still examined the description of teachers’ TPACK, for
example, studies conducted by Lestari (2015), Nofrion et al (2018), and Pusparini, Riandi, and Sriyati (2017).
Meanwhile, research about students’ perceptions concerning the learning environment based on biology
teachers’ TPACK still limited. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct a research to describe the relationship
between biology teachers’ TPACK and students’ learning environment. The purpose of this research was to

JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia)
Vol. 5, No. 3, November 2019, pp. 367-378

369

Nurina et al (Students perception concerning …)

obtain information about the impact of biology teachers’ TPACK on students’ perceptions concerning their
learning environment.

The results of this research are expected to be useful information for education providers, teachers,
researchers, and students about the importance of increasing teacher professionalism through the application
of the TPACK model. Biology teachers who have good TPACK are expected to be able to create a learning
environment that suits students' needs.

METHOD

Research design
This research is quantitative with survey research design. The data collection method for biology teachers’

TPACK and students’ perceptions used a cross-sectional survey. The use of a cross-sectional survey helped
researchers explain the questions asked by the sample (Fraenkel, Wallen, & Hyun, 2012). The study began
with the distribution of test questions through training activities. The test results were then analyzed
descriptively. Based on the results, the researchers determined the schools, teachers, and students to obtain
information about the student’s learning environment. The research was conducted from July to October 2018.

Research samples

The sample consisted of two teachers and 64 students from two junior high schools in Banda Aceh City-
Aceh Province. The sample of teachers is determined by purposive sampling, which is based on their TPACK
score. Both biology teachers have almost the same total TPACK value. However, when assessed by TPACK
forming components, it will be seen the differences in some of the TPACK forming components. Furthermore,
the students who became the sample of this study were students of the two teachers. The aim is to obtain a
complete information of their perceptions of their learning environment. To obtain more in-depth information,
the researcher also asked a number of questions related to the learning and teaching process to both teachers.
For ease of analysis and discussion, the school and the teachers are given a different code, namely SMP A,
SMP B, Teacher A, and teacher B. Both of science teachers are from Biology Education background.

Instruments

The data of biology teachers’ TPACK were obtained from multiple choice test instruments. The indicators
are based on TPACK for 21st-century skills (Valtonen, Kukkonen, Kontkanen, Mäkitalo-Siegl, & Sointu, 2018;
Valtonen et al., 2017) and TPACK survey for Meaningful Learning (Chai, Ling Koh, Tsai, & Lee Wee Tan, 2011;
Deng, Chai, So, Qian, & Chen, 2017; Koh, Chai, & Tsai, 2013). The development of this instrument is also
adapted to scientific content and the integration of technology with pedagogically meaningful way which
suitable the 21st-century skills framework (Valtonen et al., 2017), which focuses on communication,
collaboration, critical thinking, and creative thinking (Valtonen et al., 2017) and meaningful learning dimensions
(Koh et al., 2013). From the results of teachers' TPACK analysis, the two teachers were chosen who had
average TPACK that were not much different, coded as Teacher A (SMP A) and Teacher B (SMP B).
Furthermore, the description of biology teachers’ TPACK profile is carried out. To obtain in-depth information,
teachers of SMP A and SMP B were observed and interviewed.

The data about students’ perceptions concerning the learning environment obtained from an instrument that
developed based on What Is Happening In this Class? (WIHIC) instrument that consists of five aspects namely,
student cohesiveness, teacher support, involvement, cooperation, and equity (Afari et al., 2013; Khine et al.,
2018) (see Table 1). This instrument consists of 35 items, which were assessed based on a 5-point Likert
scale, where 1 represents “Never”, 2 represents “Rarely”, 3 represents “Sometimes”, 4 represents “Often”, and
5 represents “Always”. The results of this instrument formed five groups of data based on these answers.

Before being used to obtain the data, the instrument was tested on 41 students from one of Junior High
School in Bandung. The instrument is distributed to the students using Google Form. The results of validity and
reliability indicated that there were two invalid statements that must be issued. Furthermore, the reliability test
result showed very high reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.927).

Instruments distribution and data analysis

The questionnaires distributed by visiting schools and giving questionnaires to students used direct
administration to a group method. The instruments distributed through training activities carried out at Teacher

JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia)
Vol. 5, No. 3, November 2019, pp. 367-378

370

Nurina et al (Students perception concerning …)

Training and Education Faculty-Universitas Syiah Kuala, Aceh Province. The training was carried out by
researchers in collaboration with Teacher Training and Education Faculty-Universitas Syiah Kuala and
Education and Culture Office of Banda Aceh, Aceh Province. Instruments for students are distributed to
students in their respective schools.

Data analysis was carried out through descriptive statistics. Teachers’ TPACK analysis is done by making a
percentage of correct answers for each of the TPACK forming components. Furthermore, in order to facilitate
analysis, grouping, and drawing conclusions, the data about students’ perceptions of class climate are divided
into three groups (initially five groups), namely routine (combination of “Often” and “Always” response groups),
non-routine (combination of “Rarely” and “Sometime” response groups), and never.

Table 1. Variables, components/aspects, and indicators used in this research

Variables Components/Aspects Indicators

Science
teachers’
TPACK

Technological knowledge Skills to use technology efficiently
Interest in following the latest technological developments

Content knowledge Understand the concepts, laws, and theories of science and its application
Develop science learning material

Pedagogical knowledge Understand the characteristics of students
Organize learning activities that educate
Develop students’ potential (critical thinking, creative thinking, collaboration,
communication)
Communicate with students effectively, empathetically, and politely
Organize assessment and evaluation of processes and learning outcomes

Pedagogical content
knowledge

Develop science learning materials that support students’ potential (critical thinking,
creative thinking, collaboration, communication)
Implement appropriate learning activities with science learning materials

Technological content
knowledge

Use appropriate technology for the representation of science materials
Use appropriate technology to develop science learning materials

Technological
pedagogical knowledge

Use appropriate technology to support learning activities
Using appropriate technology that supports students’ independence and
communication
Use appropriate technology that supports students’ thinking skills (critical and
creative thinking)

Technological
pedagogical content
knowledge

Implement technology-based learning activities in accordance with science learning
materials effectively
Develop and share information about effective technology-based learning activities

Students’
perceptions
concerning
the learning
environment

Student cohesiveness Students’ perceptions of classmates
Students’ perceptions of student relationships that support each other with
classmates

Teacher support Students’ perceptions of the learning media that provided by the teacher
Students’ perceptions of teacher attitudes in supporting learning activities
Students’ perceptions of the use of technology in learning activities

Involvement Students’ perceptions of their attitude in participating learning activities
Students’ perceptions of the questions raised by the teacher during the discussion
Students’ perceptions of the assignments given by the teacher

Cooperation Students’ perceptions of cooperation between themselves and classmates in
learning activities
Students’ perceptions of cooperation between themselves and classmates in
completing the assignments given by the teacher
Students’ perceptions of collaboration between themselves and classmates in
sharing information obtained from the internet

Equity Students’ perception of the extent to which students are treated equally by the
teacher
Students’ perceptions about the extent to which students are treated equally by the
teacher in providing support

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Information regarding biology teachers’ TPACK relationship and students’ perceptions of the learning
environment is rather difficult to obtain, especially if linked to inferential statistical analysis. The problem lies in
the greater number of teachers sampled, the more the number of students. Therefore, this study tries to obtain
information about the relationship between biology teachers’ TPACK with students’ perceptions about their
learning environment in descriptive statistics. To obtain more comprehensive information, the selected teachers

JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia)
Vol. 5, No. 3, November 2019, pp. 367-378

371

Nurina et al (Students perception concerning …)

are teachers who have a total TPACK score that is almost similar, but different in terms of TPACK forming
components.

In order to obtain comprehensive information about differences in students’ perceptions concerning the
learning environment based on their teachers’ TPACK ability, the discussion was carried out in three stages.
First, the results of the analysis are displayed in the form of a percentage table (Table 2), which is the answer
or response (from students and teachers) based on the components and aspects of forming variables
(students' perceptions of their learning environment and teachers’ TPACK). The teacher answers displayed are
a percentage of the average value of the teacher's correct answers in each of their TPACK components score.
The student perceptions responses shown are student data from the routine response group. This stage aims
to show the differences about teachers TPACK ability and students’ perceptions clearly based on their
respective schools.

Second, a percentage of student responses are displayed based on each statement item. It aims to obtain
detailed information about differences in students’ perceptions of each statement given. Third, the descriptive
results are built based on a comparison of the mean values of each aspect of the learning environment. This
was done to strengthen the results of the analysis of the previous stage.

Table 2. The comparison of teachers’ TPACK profile and students’ perceptions concerning their learning environment

Sample Components Teacher A (%) Teacher B (%)

Teachers’ TPACK (percentage based on the number of correct
answers)

TK 100 60
CK 100 100
PK 58 67
PCK 57 71
TCK 75 50
TPK 50 33
TPCK 40 60
Mean 69 63

Sample Components SMP A (%) SMP B (%)

Students’ Perceptions (percentage based on routine response
group)

Student cohesiveness 28 67
Teacher Support 18 45
Involvement 58 67
Cooperation 49 71
Equity 64 81

Table 2 shows that the average percentage of biology teachers’ TPACK scores is slightly different.
However, when viewed from each TPACK forming component, there will be a clear difference, where 6 out of 7
TPACK forming components for the two teachers have different percentages. Teacher A excelled in technology
components and technology integration components, such as TK, TCK, and TPK. While Teacher B excelled in
pedagogical components and pedagogical integration components such as PK, PCK, and TPCK.

In accordance with the results of Swallow and Olofson (2017), this difference can be caused by the
teachers’ background, where the teachers’ background is able to moderate the formation of their TPACK.
Teacher A is one of the instructors of multimedia utilization in learning in Aceh Province that is why he has
good technological knowledge. Furthermore, a teacher who teaches at SMP B, besides being a science
teacher, she also works as a vice principal in Kindergarten at the institution, so that she has a good
understanding of pedagogy, especially an understanding of student characteristics.

The results of the interview with Teacher A have obtained information that SMP A has facilities such as
projectors and internet connections. However, both facilities cannot be used for various reasons. Furthermore,
the results of the interview with Teacher B have obtained information that SMP B has complete facilities, such
as projectors available in each class, internet connections that can be used by students, and tablet (iPad) for
each student of class VII. These results indicate that the school facilities, in this case the technological facilities
can assist teachers in creating a positive learning environment. Research results from Huda (2019) show that
the availability of facilities and teacher competencies in using technology are factors that can influence teachers
in using technology. In addition, motivation and support from schools also have an impact on the use of
technology by teachers.

The results of the analysis of the learning environment based on aspects of forming variables have shown
general information about students’ perceptions of the learning environment in both schools. To get a more
specific information, further analysis conducted based on statement items.

JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia)
Vol. 5, No. 3, November 2019, pp. 367-378

372

Nurina et al (Students perception concerning …)

In general, the students of SMP B are having more cohesiveness than students of SMP A (Table 3). The
students of SMP B regularly (routine) collaborating, getting help, and helping each other in using technology.
However, they were difficult in helping other students. Furthermore, the students of SMP A showed a high
percentage of “non-routine” in each activity. Another result is the students having more cohesiveness in
collaborating outside learning activities. This is evidenced by the high percentage “I collaborate with friends in
class”. This statement is a general statement, which is not explained that students cooperate in what kind of
activities. Furthermore, other activities related to the lesson, the percentage of routine not higher than the
percentage of general activities.

Table 3. The results of students’ perceptions about the student cohesiveness

Statements

Responses (%)

N NR R

A B A B A B

I collaborate with friends in class 0 0 63 4 37 96
I help classmates who experience difficulties in learning 0 0 68 56 32 44
Classmates help me when I experience difficulties in learning 0 2 74 36 26 62
My friends and I help each other in using technology in learning in the classroom 26 7 58 29 16 64

Description: N=Never; NR=Non-Routine; R=Routine; A=SMP A; B=SMP B

The results showed problems in the cohesiveness of students, especially the students of SMP A. According
to Sartika, Said, and Ibrahim (2013), the caused students find it difficult to interact, especially in terms of
helping each other in learning activities is that students often get unpleasant treatment from classmates while
studying. For example, ridiculed by friends when unable to answer questions from the teacher so students do
not dare to express their opinions in class. King (2019) said that this problem greatly affects collaborative
learning, where the objectives of the learning cannot be achieved. Therefore, the students are only able to
develop their cohesiveness outside learning activities. Whereas in fact, according to Borůvková and
Emanovský (2016), the effectiveness of learning groups is largely determined by the extent of interaction that
allows members to clarify their own understanding, build their respective contributions, filter meaning, ask
questions, and answer questions, based on feelings of comfort and respect.

The use of technology (conventional and ICT technology) in learning activities is still not routinely carried
out, especially the teacher from SMP A (Table 4). This is indicated by the non-routine use of several
technologies, such as LCD projectors, media presentations, computer-based simulations, and social media.
Furthermore, the two schools are not routinely using conventional media (learning props and lab work).
Activities that are routinely carried out by the teacher are giving instructions to complete the assignments,
describing the learning objectives, and asking the students to obtain information using the internet. These
results indicated that the use of learning media, both ICT and learning props have not been used routinely.

Table 4. The results students’ perceptions about teacher support

Statements

Responses (%)

N NR R

A B A B A B

The teacher use a LCD projector (e.g. Infocus) in learning activities 26 0 68 42 5 58
The teacher uses media presentations (e.g. Ms. PowerPoint) through the computer
in learning activities

53 0 47 56 0 44

The teacher uses computer-based simulation media (e.g. virtual laboratories) in
learning activities

58 60 42 33 0 7

The teacher uses learning props in learning activities 32 11 58 60 11 29
The teacher gives instructions to complete the assignment 0 0 47 9 53 91
On the topic of learning that requires lab work, the teacher invites us to do lab work
in the laboratory

58 62 37 22 5 16

The teacher guides us in designing group activities 84 29 5 33 11 38
The teacher always sends assignments through social media (e.g. Facebook and
WhatsApp)

21 7 74 49 5 44

The teacher asks us to gather information using the internet 0 0 32 24 68 76

Description: N=Never; NR=Non-Routine; R=Routine; A=SMP A; B=SMP B

There are several learning media that used in science learning such as PowerPoint, picture, and video (e.g.
animation and discovery) through LCD projectors, science KIT, learning props, lab work, doing observation in
the school environment, and natural surroundings are needed in learning activities. The teacher has to make

JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia)
Vol. 5, No. 3, November 2019, pp. 367-378

373

Nurina et al (Students perception concerning …)

sure that learning media is appropriate to students’ needs. The other benefits obtained from the use of learning
media are making the abstract subject more concrete, overcoming constraints of space and time, and
overcoming limitations of the human senses. Thus, the information on learning materials presented by the right
media will give an impression and longer to be remembered by students (Indayani, 2015; Nurina, 2017).

The low percentage of SMP A is caused by the availability of media as a tool that helps to learn. Based on
the results of the interview with the teacher was obtained information that in SMP A is lacks electricity. If the
laboratory computer is used, the electricity in the school will be extinguished. Based on the results of the
description on this aspect was obtained information that “teacher support” was correlated with the availability of
school facilities and infrastructure.

Based on Table 5, the students from SMP B has a higher percentage of involvement than the students from
SMP A. In SMP A, students were not routine in paying attention to the teacher during the teaching-learning
process. They also did not want to be involved in answering the teacher questions during the discussion.
According to Rosegard and Wilson (2013), the lack of students’ attention in learning activities can be caused by
learning methods or media that used by the teacher are not able to attract the attention of students. The way
that the teachers can do to gain students' interest and attention is by implementing several methods such as
hook, trigger, attention getter/grabber and other anticipatory methods.

Table 5. The results students’ perceptions about involvement

Statements

Responses (%)

N NR R

A B A B A B

I pay attention to the teacher during the teaching-learning process 5 0 53 44 42 56
I am looking for the answers from the questions given by the teacher 5 0 47 49 47 51
I asked by the teacher to provide evidence of each answer that I gave 0 0 47 42 53 58
I am looking for the answers from the questions during discussions 0 0 16 27 84 73
I answer the questions given by the teacher during discussions 58 11 32 36 11 53
I assume it is important to complete each assignment given by the teacher 0 0 16 22 84 78
I solve problems using information that I get by myself using the internet 0 0 16 2 84 98

Description: N=Never; NR=Non-Routine; R=Routine; A=SMP A; B=SMP B

Furthermore, the students’ desire to answer the teacher’s questions during the discussion can be influenced
by students who still do not understand the questions or do not know the answers. Based on this problem, it
can be concluded that teacher pedagogy is very important in learning activities. The teacher must be able to
adjust learning activities to the students’ condition during learning activities. According to Barendsen and Henze
(2019), the approach that appropriate to solve problems caused by students is the use of an authoritative
approach. Authoritative is the dominant behavior of the teacher. Teachers can stimulate students to engage in
learning activities using their authoritative characteristics.

Table 6 shows the level of “cooperation” of students from SMP B is very good. This is indicated by the high
percentage of routine choices in each statement. This result is different from the responses of the students
from SMP A, they are still not routine in sharing textbooks and learning materials from the internet in the
classroom during discussions. The reason is students are not permitted to use smartphones in school.
Furthermore, facilities in schools also do not support students to carry out these activities.

Table 6. The results students’ perceptions about cooperation

Statements

Responses (%)

N NR R

A B A B A B

My friends and I work together to achieve learning goals in the classroom 0 0 42 22 58 78
My friends and I in listen to each other and respect each other’s opinions during
learning activities the classroom

32 9 53 31 16 60

My friends and I discussed how to solve problems in the assignments given by the
teacher in the classroom

0 0 26 11 74 89

I cooperate with friends in the classroom when we have group assignments 32 4 47 31 21 64
My friends and I share information from the internet to solve the problems given by
the teacher in the classroom

0 0 32 22 68 78

I share my textbook and learning materials from the internet with friends in the
classroom during discussions

37 24 42 36 21 40

My friends and I study together through social media 0 0 16 13 84 87

Description: N=Never; NR=Non-Routine; R=Routine; A=SMP A; B=SMP B

JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia)
Vol. 5, No. 3, November 2019, pp. 367-378

374

Nurina et al (Students perception concerning …)

Based on the information obtained from the teacher, SMP A has a Wi-Fi connection, but it is not permitted
to use by students so that the students unable to use the internet in their learning activities at school.
Furthermore, the students in SMP A are not routinely cooperating with friends in the classroom and they are not
routinely listening to each other and respecting each other’s opinion during learning activities. This is caused by
the low level of cooperation between students in SMP A. The ways that teachers can do to increase the level of
collaboration between students is to apply the Jigsaw (Kusuma, 2018) or Think-Pair-Share learning methods
(Rosita & Leonard, 2015).

According to Pielmeier, Huber, and Seidel (2018), student characteristics are related to the formation of
effective teaching and learning activities in the classroom. Therefore, the teacher must know the characteristics
of each student. Through this problem, it is known that the role of teacher pedagogy knowledge is important.
Based on Table 7, it indicated that both of SMP A and SMP B show a high percentage of routine in each
statement, except statements about the opportunity to express opinions during discussions from SMP A. The
students from SMP A are not routinely getting the opportunity to express their opinions in class discussions.
Therefore, the teacher must be able to regulate the classroom conditions so that the teacher can provide equal
opportunities to the students.

Table 7. The results students’ perceptions about equity

Statements

Responses (%)

N NR R

A B A B A B

I had the opportunity to express my opinion during class discussions 11 2 53 42 37 56
The teacher gave me the same opportunity to answer questions with other friends
in the classroom

5 2 21 9 74 89

The teacher treated me the same as other friends in the classroom 5 0 42 7 53 93
I get the same amount of help from the teacher as other friends in the classroom 0 0 32 13 68 87
The teacher encouraged me as other friends in the classroom 0 0 16 20 84 80
The teacher gives praise for the results of my work as other friends in the
classroom

0 0 32 16 68 84

Description: N=Never; NR=Non-Routine; R=Routine; A=SMP A; B=SMP B

The results of the descriptive analysis of the five aspects showed that the role of pedagogical knowledge is
very important, especially in supporting the students in forming positive learning environment. Therefore, the
teacher should not only increase content knowledge, they also must always improve pedagogical knowledge,
including technological knowledge. These three knowledge’s can determine teacher professionalism (Nofrion et
al., 2018). This is in accordance with Yeh, Lin, Hsu, Wu, and Hwang (2015) which states that professionals are
those who can decide what to do based on the current conditions and justify their choices and practices.
Furthermore, to understand the level of “Routine” and item analysis statements, the difference of students’
perceptions of the learning environment is also determined from the mean obtained from the total score of each
aspect of the learning environment.

The comparison of the mean values (Table 8) showed that SMP B has a higher mean value in all aspects of
the learning environment. These results reinforce the results of the analysis based on the level of "routine" and
item analysis before. These results prove that the learning environment in SMP B is more positive compared to
SMP A.

Table 8. Comparison of mean values for each learning environment aspect

Aspect SMP A SMP B

Student cohesiveness 12.21 15.33

Teacher support 23.21 29.91

Involvement 25.37 27.49

Cooperation 23.32 26.89

Equity 23.63 25.31

As reviewed from the teachers’ profile and school facilities, the relationship between students and the use of
technology in SMP A is lower than SMP B. The teacher has less pedagogical knowledge that affects
relationships between students. Furthermore, although Teacher A has good knowledge of technology (TK,
TCK, TPK), the use of technology in learning activities is still low. This is caused by problems with school
facilities. Therefore, in assisting teachers to improve their professionalism, the government and education

JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia)
Vol. 5, No. 3, November 2019, pp. 367-378

375

Nurina et al (Students perception concerning …)

providers must pay attention to the teachers’ TPACK ability and school facilities. The results of Evens, Elen,
Larmuseau, and Depaepe (2018) research suggest that increasing teacher professionalism (in their research
using the PCK approach) must be done thoroughly. Their results showed that the explicit application of PCK to
teachers was more useful in the development of their PCK, compared to the application of PCK separately
between PK, CK, and PCK.

The relationship between students and the use of technology by the students of SMP B are higher than
SMP A. These results were influenced by teachers’ pedagogical knowledge (PK, PCK, and TPCK) that are
better than Teacher A. Furthermore, although Teacher B has the lower technological knowledge than Teacher
A, the level of technology use at SMP B is higher than SMP A. Both of these comparisons showed that
teachers’ abilities and school facilities affect the condition of the learning environment. According to Gupta and
Fisher (2012), technology has the potential to be an effective tool to improve teachers’ pedagogical knowledge
by helping teachers to give attention, fast feedback, and motivation for students.

CONCLUSION

The results showed that the learning environment of students can be influenced by teacher professionalism,
in this research in terms of their TPACK ability. The results of this study indicate that differences in pedagogical
and technological teacher abilities can have an impact on students’ learning environments. However, it is
interesting that biology teachers who have pedagogy and are supported by good technological facilities (even
though their technological abilities are not prominent), help shape a positive learning environment. Explicitly,
the results of this study also show that incomplete technological facilities can inhibit the integration of
technology in learning activities.

The results of this study provide important information for the government and education providers. Both
parties are expected to give special attention to improving teacher professionalism. Implementation of training
activities for teachers to increase professionalism should be done regularly, especially in the increased
professionalism in today’s digital age.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We would like to thank Indonesia Endowment Fund for Education, abbreviated as LPDP (Lembaga
Pengelola Dana Pendidikan), Teacher Training and Education Faculty-Universitas Syiah Kuala, Education and
Culture Office of Banda Aceh, and science teachers of Junior High Schools in Banda Aceh city for their
contributions during this research.

REFERENCES

Afari, E., Aldridge, J. M., Fraser, B. J., & Khine, M. S. (2013). Students’ perceptions of the learning
environment and attitudes in game-based mathematics classrooms. Learning Environments Research,
16(1), 131–150. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-012-9122-6

Agustin, R. R., Liliasari, Sinaga, P., & Rochintaniawati, D. (2018). The investigation of science teachers’
experience in integrating digital technology into science teaching. Journal of Physics: Conference
Series, 1013(1). doi: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1013/1/012079

Akturk, A. O., & Ozturk, H. S. (2019). Teachers’ TPACK levels and students’ self-efficacy as predictors of
students’ academic achievement. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES),
5(1), 283–294. Retrieved from https://www.ijres.net/index.php/ijres/article/view/543

Alt, D. (2018). Teachers’ practices in science learning environments and their use of formative and summative
assessment tasks. Learning Environments Research, 21(3), 387–406. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10
984-018-9259-z

Anwar, Y., Rustaman, N. Y., Widodo, A., & Redjeki, S. (2014). Kemampuan pedagogical content knowledge
guru biologi yang berpengalaman dan yang belum berpengalaman. Jurnal Pengajaran Matematika Dan
Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam, 19(1), 69–73. doi: https://doi.org/10.18269/jpmipa.v19i1.426

Barendsen, E., & Henze, I. (2019). Relating teacher PCK and teacher practice using classroom observation.
Research in Science Education, 49(5), 1141–1175. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9637-z

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-012-9122-6
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1013/1/012079
https://www.ijres.net/index.php/ijres/article/view/543
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-018-9259-z
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-018-9259-z
https://doi.org/10.18269/jpmipa.v19i1.426
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9637-z

JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia)
Vol. 5, No. 3, November 2019, pp. 367-378

376

Nurina et al (Students perception concerning …)

Barr, J. J. (2016). Developing a positive classroom climate. Idea, Idea paper(October), 1–9. Retrieved from
https://www.ideaedu.org/Portals/0/Uploads/Documents/IDEA Papers/IDEA Papers/PaperIDEA_61.pdf

Borůvková, R., & Emanovský, P. (2016). Problems of education in the 21st century small group learning
methods and their effect on learners’ relationships. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 70, 45–
58. Retrieved from http://www.scientiasocialis.lt/pec/node/files/pdf/vol70/45-58.Boruvkova_Vol.70_PEC.
pdf

Chai, C. S., Ling Koh, J. H., Tsai, C. C., & Lee Wee Tan, L. (2011). Modeling primary school pre-service
teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) for meaningful learning with
information and communication technology (ICT). Computers and Education, 57(1), 1184–1193. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.01.007

Das, K., Gryseels, M., Sudhir, P., & Tan, K. T. (2016). Unlocking Indonesia’s digital opportunity. In McKinsey
Indonesia Office October. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Locations/
Asia/Indonesia/Our Insights/Unlocking Indonesias digital opportunity/Unlocking_Indonesias_digital_op
portunity.ashx

Deng, F., Chai, C. S., So, H. J., Qian, Y., & Chen, L. (2017). Examining the validity of the technological
pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) framework for preservice chemistry teachers. Australasian
Journal of Educational Technology, 33(3), 1–14. doi: https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3508

Evens, M., Elen, J., Larmuseau, C., & Depaepe, F. (2018). Promoting the development of teacher
professional knowledge: Integrating content and pedagogy in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 75, 244–258. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.07.001

Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education.
Retrieved from https://saochhengpheng.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/jack_fraenkel_norman_wallen_hel
en_hyun-how_to_design_and_evaluate_research_in_education_8th_edition_-mcgraw-hill_humanities_s
ocial_sciences_languages2011.pdf

Gupta, A., & Fisher, D. (2012). Technology-supported learning environments in science classrooms in India.
Learning Environments Research, 15(2), 195–216. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-012-9103-9

Huda, M. (2019). The problematic: Teachers’ pedagogical ability in using technology on mathematics learning
of junior high school. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1200(1). doi: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-
6596/1200/1/012009

Indayani, L. (2015). Peningkatan prestasi belajar peserta didik melalui penggunaan media KIT IPA di SMP
Negeri 10 Probolinggo. Jurnal Kebijakan Dan Pengembangan Pendidikan, 3(1), 54–60. Retrieved from
http://ejournal.umm.ac.id/index.php/jmkpp/article/download/2197/2346

Khalil, N., & Aldridge, J. (2019). Assessing students’ perceptions of their learning environment in science
classes in the United Arab Emirates. Learning Environments Research, (0123456789). doi: https://doi.o
rg/10.1007/s10984-019-09279-w

Khine, M. S., Fraser, B. J., Afari, E., Oo, Z., & Kyaw, T. T. (2018). Students’ perceptions of the learning
environment in tertiary science classrooms in Myanmar. Learning Environments Research, 21(1), 135–
152. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-017-9250-0

King, J. (2019). Asked students to help each other understand ideas or concepts. Retrieved February 14,
2019, from IDEA website: https://www.ideaedu.org/Client-Resources/Teaching-Learning-Resources/As
ked-students-to-help-each-other-understand-ideas-or-concepts

Koehler, M., Greenhalgh, S., Rosenberg, J., & Keenan, S. (1993). What the tech is going on with teachers’
digital teaching portfolios? Using the TPACK framework to analyze teachers’ technological
understanding. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 25(1), 31–59. Retrieved from https://ww
w.learntechlib.org/primary/p/173346/

Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., & Tsai, C. C. (2013). Examining practicing teachers’ perceptions of technological
pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) pathways: A structural equation modeling approach.
Instructional Science, 41(4), 793–809. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-012-9249-y

Kusuma, A. W. (2018). Meningkatkan kerjasama siswa dengan metode Jigsaw. Konselor, 7(1), 26–30. doi:
https://doi.org/10.24036/02018718458-0-00

Lestari, S. (2015). Analisis kemampuan technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) pada guru
biologi SMA dalam materi sistem saraf. In A. Saputra (Ed.), Seminar Nasional XII Pendidikan Biologi
FKIP UNS 2015 (Vol. 1, pp. 123–136). Retrieved from https://jurnal.uns.ac.id/prosbi/article/view/7006

McKemmish, S., Anwar, M., & Ardianto, D. (2017). IT empowering communities: How social media and mobile
technologies shape Indonesia’s community landscape. Retrieved February 14, 2019, from Monash

https://www.ideaedu.org/Portals/0/Uploads/Documents/IDEA%20Papers/IDEA%20Papers/PaperIDEA_61.pdf
http://www.scientiasocialis.lt/pec/node/files/pdf/vol70/45-58.Boruvkova_Vol.70_PEC.pdf
http://www.scientiasocialis.lt/pec/node/files/pdf/vol70/45-58.Boruvkova_Vol.70_PEC.pdf
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.01.007
https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Locations/Asia/Indonesia/Our%20Insights/Unlocking%20Indonesias%20digital%20opportunity/Unlocking_Indonesias_digital_opportunity.ashx
https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Locations/Asia/Indonesia/Our%20Insights/Unlocking%20Indonesias%20digital%20opportunity/Unlocking_Indonesias_digital_opportunity.ashx
https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Locations/Asia/Indonesia/Our%20Insights/Unlocking%20Indonesias%20digital%20opportunity/Unlocking_Indonesias_digital_opportunity.ashx
https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3508
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.07.001
https://saochhengpheng.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/jack_fraenkel_norman_wallen_helen_hyun-how_to_design_and_evaluate_research_in_education_8th_edition_-mcgraw-hill_humanities_social_sciences_languages2011.pdf
https://saochhengpheng.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/jack_fraenkel_norman_wallen_helen_hyun-how_to_design_and_evaluate_research_in_education_8th_edition_-mcgraw-hill_humanities_social_sciences_languages2011.pdf
https://saochhengpheng.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/jack_fraenkel_norman_wallen_helen_hyun-how_to_design_and_evaluate_research_in_education_8th_edition_-mcgraw-hill_humanities_social_sciences_languages2011.pdf
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-012-9103-9
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1200/1/012009
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1200/1/012009
http://ejournal.umm.ac.id/index.php/jmkpp/article/download/2197/2346
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-019-09279-w
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-019-09279-w
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-017-9250-0
https://www.ideaedu.org/Client-Resources/Teaching-Learning-Resources/Asked-students-to-help-each-other-understand-ideas-or-concepts
https://www.ideaedu.org/Client-Resources/Teaching-Learning-Resources/Asked-students-to-help-each-other-understand-ideas-or-concepts
https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/173346/
https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/173346/
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-012-9249-y
https://doi.org/10.24036/02018718458-0-00
https://jurnal.uns.ac.id/prosbi/article/view/7006

JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia)
Vol. 5, No. 3, November 2019, pp. 367-378

377

Nurina et al (Students perception concerning …)

Doctoral Information Day website: https://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/1442855/IT-
Empowering-Communities-How-social-media-and-mobile-technologies-shape-Indonesias-community-la
ndscape.pdf

Nofrion, Wijayanto, B., Wilis, R., & Novio, R. (2018). Analisis technological pedagogical and content
knowledge (TPACK) guru geografi di Kabupaten Solok, Sumatera Barat. Jurnal Geografi, 10(2), 105–
116. doi: https://doi.org/10.24114/jg.v10i2.9070

Nurina, C. I. E. (2017). Science education teaching and learning activity in Islamic boarding school.
International E-Journal of Advances in Education, 3(9), 484–491. Retrieved from http://ijaedu.ocerintjour
nals.org/tr/download/article-file/390136

Pielmeier, M., Huber, S., & Seidel, T. (2018). Is teacher judgment accuracy of students’ characteristics
beneficial for verbal teacher-student interactions in classroom? Teaching and Teacher Education, 76,
255–266. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.01.002

Poushter, J., Bishop, C., & Chwe, H. (2018). Social media use continues to rise in developing countries but
plateaus across developed ones: Digital divides remain, both within and across countries. Retrieved
from https://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2018/06/15135408/Pew-Research-Cen
ter_Global-Tech-Social-Media-Use_2018.06.19.pdf

Pusparini, F., Riandi, R., & Sriyati, S. (2017). Developing technological pedagogical content knowledge
(TPACK) in animal physiology. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 895, 012052. doi: https://doi.org
/10.1088/1742-6596/895/1/012052

Rehmat, A. P., & Bailey, J. M. (2014). Technology integration in a science classroom: Preservice teachers’
perceptions. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(6), 744–755. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007
/s10956-014-9507-7

Rosegard, E., & Wilson, J. (2013). Capturing students’ attention: An empirical study. Journal of the
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 13(5), 1–20. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ10
17063.pdf

Rosita, I., & Leonard, L. (2015). Meningkatkan kerja sama siswa melalui pembelajaran kooperatif tipe think
pair share. Formatif: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan MIPA, 3(1), 1–10. doi: https://doi.org/10.30998/formatif.v3
i1.108

Salam, U., Lee, S., Fullerton, V., Yusuf, Y., Krantz, S., & Henstridge, M. (2018). Indonesia case study: Rapid
technological change – challenges and opportunities. (No. 8). Retrieved from https://pathwayscom
mission.bsg.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2019-09/indonesia_case_study_rapid_technological_change .pdf

Sandilos, L. E., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., & Cohen, J. J. (2017). Warmth and demand: The relation between
students’ perceptions of the classroom environment and achievement growth. Child Development,
88(4), 1321–1337. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12685

Sartika, W., Said, A., & Ibrahim, I. (2013). Masalah-masalah interaksi sosial siswa dengan teman sebaya di
sekolah. KONSELOR: Jurnal Ilmiah Konseling, 2(1), 141–145. Retrieved from http://ejournal.unp.ac.id/
index.php/konselor/article/view/877/736

Srisawasdi, N. (2014). Developing technological pedagogical content knowledge in using computerized
science laboratory environment: An arrangement for science teacher education. Research and Practice
in Technology Enhanced Learning, 9(1), 123–143. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/14f
0/7d71ad66ea44d58b23d10f6a2344afc08c2c.pdf

Sulisworo, D., Kusumaningtyas, D. A., Nursulistiyo, E., & Handayani, T. (2019). Mobile learning infusion
through enhancing teachers’ perception: Case study in eastern of Indonesia. International Conference
on Science, Technology, Education, Arts, Culture and Humanity (STEACH 2018), 277, 85–88. doi:
https://doi.org/10.2991/steach-18.2019.19

Swallow, M. J. C., & Olofson, M. W. (2017). Contextual understandings in the TPACK framework. Journal of
Research on Technology in Education, 49(3–4), 228–244. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2017.
1347537

Valtonen, T., Kukkonen, J., Kontkanen, S., Mäkitalo-Siegl, K., & Sointu, E. (2018). Differences in pre-service
teachers’ knowledge and readiness to use ICT in education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34,
174–182. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12225

Valtonen, T., Sointu, E., Kukkonen, J., Kontkanen, S., Lambert, M. C., & Mäkitalo-Siegl, K. (2017). TPACK
updated to measure pre-service teachers’ twenty-first century skills. Australasian Journal of Educational
Technology, 33(3), 15–31. doi: https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3518

Valtonen, T., Sointu, E., Mäkitalo-Siegl, K., & Kukkonen, J. (2015). Developing a TPACK measurement

https://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/1442855/IT-Empowering-Communities-How-social-media-and-mobile-technologies-shape-Indonesias-community-landscape.pdf
https://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/1442855/IT-Empowering-Communities-How-social-media-and-mobile-technologies-shape-Indonesias-community-landscape.pdf
https://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/1442855/IT-Empowering-Communities-How-social-media-and-mobile-technologies-shape-Indonesias-community-landscape.pdf
https://doi.org/10.24114/jg.v10i2.9070
http://ijaedu.ocerintjournals.org/tr/download/article-file/390136
http://ijaedu.ocerintjournals.org/tr/download/article-file/390136
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.01.002
https://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2018/06/15135408/Pew-Research-Center_Global-Tech-Social-Media-Use_2018.06.19.pdf
https://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2018/06/15135408/Pew-Research-Center_Global-Tech-Social-Media-Use_2018.06.19.pdf
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/895/1/012052
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/895/1/012052
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-014-9507-7
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-014-9507-7
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1017063.pdf
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1017063.pdf
https://doi.org/10.30998/formatif.v3i1.108
https://doi.org/10.30998/formatif.v3i1.108
https://pathwayscommission.bsg.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2019-09/indonesia_case_study_rapid_technological_change.pdf
https://pathwayscommission.bsg.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2019-09/indonesia_case_study_rapid_technological_change.pdf
https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12685
http://ejournal.unp.ac.id/index.php/konselor/article/view/877/736
http://ejournal.unp.ac.id/index.php/konselor/article/view/877/736
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/14f0/7d71ad66ea44d58b23d10f6a2344afc08c2c.pdf
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/14f0/7d71ad66ea44d58b23d10f6a2344afc08c2c.pdf
https://doi.org/10.2991/steach-18.2019.19
https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2017.1347537
https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2017.1347537
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12225
https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3518

JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia)
Vol. 5, No. 3, November 2019, pp. 367-378

378

Nurina et al (Students perception concerning …)

instrument for 21 st century pre-service teachers. International Journal of Media, Technology and
Lifelong Learning, 11(2), 87–100. Retrieved from https://journals.hioa.no/index.php/seminar/article/view/
2353/2182

Widodo, A. (2017). Experienced biology teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) on photosynthesis.
AIP Conference Proceedings, 1848, 060017. doi: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4983985

Widodo, A., Maria, R. A., & Fitriani, A. (2017). Constructivist learning environment during virtual and real
laboratory activities. Biosaintifika: Journal of Biology & Biology Education, 9(1), 11-18. doi: https://doi.or
g/10.15294/biosaintifika.v9i1.7959

Yeh, Y. F., Lin, T. C., Hsu, Y. S., Wu, H. K., & Hwang, F. K. (2015). Science teachers’ proficiency levels and
patterns of TPACK in a practical context. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(1), 78–90.
doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-014-9523-7

https://journals.hioa.no/index.php/seminar/article/view/2353/2182
https://journals.hioa.no/index.php/seminar/article/view/2353/2182
https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4983985
https://doi.org/10.15294/biosaintifika.v9i1.7959
https://doi.org/10.15294/biosaintifika.v9i1.7959
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-014-9523-7