International Journal of Instruction January 2020 Vol.13, No.1
e-ISSN: 1308-1470 www.e-iji.net p-ISSN: 1694-609X
pp. 567-586
Citation: Wuryaningrum, R., Bektiarso, S., & Suyitno, I. (2020). The Effects of Knowledge-
Transforming Text on Elementary Students’ Declarative, Procedural Knowledge, and Motivation in
Environmental Learning. International Journal of Instruction, 13(1), 567-586.
https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13137a
Received: 24/03/2019
Revision: 28/08/2019
Accepted: 02/09/2019
OnlineFirst:19/11/2019
The Effects of Knowledge-Transforming Text on Elementary Students’
Declarative, Procedural Knowledge, and Motivation in Environmental
Learning
Rusdhianti Wuryaningrum
Universitas Jember, Indonesia, rusdhiyan[email protected]
Singgih Bektiarso
Universitas Jember, Indonesia, singgih[email protected].id
Imam Suyitno
Universitas Negeri Malang, Indonesia, imam.suyitno[email protected]
In environmental learning, declarative and procedural knowledge is needed to to
improve understanding of concepts and problem solving. The text used in KTT
contains descriptions and arguments to understand declarative and procedural
knowledge. This study aimed to investigate the effect of applying knowledge-
transforming text (KTT) on declarative, procedural knowledge, and students'
presentation skill as well as their motivation towards learning with KTT applied in
environmental education material. The study applied control group design. Prior to
treatment, homogeneity tests were carried out with one way ANOVA test.
Furthermore, in the experimental class instructional strategy armed with KTT was
in place, the result of which was then analyzed by several quantitative analyses.
These analyses included (1) normality test with a non-parametric one-sample
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test; (2) Mann-Whitney U test non-parametric statistic to
compares the means between unrelated groups on some continous, and (3)
significance tests. The results showed that KTT posed significant effect on
declarative and procedural knowledge yet it insignificantly affected student
presentation skills. The significant effects of KTT learning on declarative and
procedural knowledge was supported by content space, rhetorical space, and
corrective elements in KTT. Quantitaive descriptive analysis was carried out by
interpreting the percentage of student motivation as investigated by questionnaires
on KTT learning. Students were relatively motivated towards KTT and hoped to
learn to use KTT.
Keywords: knowledge-transforming text, declarative knowledge, procedural knowledge,
environment education, motivation, elementary students
568 The Effects of Knowledge-Transforming Text on Elementary
International Journal of Instruction, January 2020 Vol.13, No.1
INTRODUCTION
In the 2013 curriculum, students in Indonesia encounter various texts and tasks to
understand the textual materials. In that case, language is functionally seen as a tool for
understanding other subjects (Kemendikbud, 2013; Suwandi 2013). In this context, text-
based learning is applied. Through text, students obtain declarative and procedural
knowledge. Therefore, what needs to be provided is learning material appropriate for
learning. Kul, Çelik, & Aksu (2018) state that students need appropriate learning
material to help them construct knowledge and initiate active thinking. Therefore, text as
a learning material has to support knowledge building and knowledge creation (Bereiter
& Scardamalia, 2014). Text needs to completely convey a concept in the apt rhetoric
and to be supported by context and made easily understood and interpreted. In this
regard, text needs to be precisely produced through knowledge-transforming. In this
study, the text is called knowledge-transforming text (KTT).
Bereiter & Scardamalia (1987), as quoted by Renkema (2004: 221), describe two types
of text production, namely knowledge-telling and knowledge-transforming. In
knowledge-telling, the text only presents information and does not involve a variety of
interesting references. In addition, it does not make any connections between sets of
information to highlight important points. Instead of knowledge- transforming, the text
is formed with various references and is presented by making connections between sets
of information to compose interesting piece of writing.
Learning process directs students to obtain declarative knowledge through knowing or
understanding, while procedural knowledge aims to enable students to carry out a series
of actions. Declarative knowledge is the knowledge that we are aware of and can
express certain intended meaning clearly (Baumard, 1999). Procedural knowledge
means real knowledge (Sahdra & Thagard, 2003). Jiamu (2001) posits that procedural
knowledge involves basic skills and domain specific strategies; declarative knowledge
and conceptual understanding of a domain. Good learning material must encourage the
acquisition of both types of knowledge. Students not only understand the concept of
knowledge but also explain the knowledge in procedural steps, while the rest can be
practiced through demonstrations.
In the material of Pendidikan Lingkungan Hidup (PLH) or Educational Environment
(EE), students in Indonesia are faced with numerous texts grounded within the 2013
curriculum. The material descriptions in textbook text are described in the following
picture.
Figure 1
Material Flow per Chapter in EE Text Book in Indonesia
Wuryaningrum, Bektiarso & Suyitno 569
International Journal of Instruction, January 2020 Vol.13, No.1
The chart shows that students need to take declarative and procedural tests. Efforts to
provide text are needed, particularly those which can accommodate students' needs
through meaningful learning to understand the declarative and procedural knowledge. In
addition, the characteristics of EE in Indonesia are scaffolding students’ ability to
convey ideas about their environment and grow the motivation to care about the
environment.
The provision of text in transforming knowledge fashion is done by providing texts
which comply with Bereiter and Scardamalia’s (1987) opinions, particularly concerned
with the use of such techniques as highlighting key points, restructuring various sections,
drawing connections between different parts of the material, and using various contexts
to support meaningful knowledge. The texts are given in specific main topic derived
from sub-chapters 1 and 2. The texts used in the learning activities have been relatively
knowledge-telling. Hereunder are the differences between the two types of tests.
Table 1
Texts Oriented to Knowledge-Telling Text and Knowledge-Transforming Text
Knowledge-Telling
Knowledge-Transforming
Family medicinal plants are functional
plants. The plants can be consumed as a
medicine, such as ginger, turmeric, betel
nut, and so on. Some examples of family
medicinal plants are turmeric, ginger,
betel nut, red galangal, and so on. These
plants can be used as traditional
medicine. For example, turmeric is used
to cure heartburn and stomachache;
ginger is consumed for curing cough; and
betel is used to treat wounds. Guava
leaves can also be used to cure diarrhea.
Family medicinal plants are very
beneficial for our health. You can plant
them in your house. If you have
medicinal plants at home, you can use
them at any time if a family member is
sick. These traditional medicines can also
be found in traditional markets and super
markets.
Indonesia is famous for herbal medicines. Our
ancestors used herbal medicine for medication.
Herbs are produced from natural herbal
ingredients such as ginger, turmeric, reeds,
betel nut, white turmeric, and so on. You can
also use these plants as medicine. For example,
to make your stomach comfortable and reduce
heat or to obtain antibiotic you can take 2
turmeric as big as an adult's thumb, peel them,
and mash them then boil them with two glasses
of water. Boil them until 1 cup of water is left
and add honey and lime. Turmeric herbs can be
consumed as medicine. It’s so easy, isn't it?
That is medicinal plants. These medicinal
plants can be found at common Indonesian
houses. Therefore, it is also called family
medicinal plants. Is there any in your house?
If not, let's start planting the medicinal plants at
your home by planting the seeds as seeds.
Shoots will grow after 1 to 2 weeks. Be sure to
water them so that they continue to flourish.
The text knowledge-telling is produced by definition, function, example, and expansion.
Thus, the text contains knowledge and efforts to convey it with information to the reader
or conative function.
In transforming-knowledge texts, texts are produced with context-examples-elaboration-
procedure exposure 1-definition-persuasion- procedure exposure 2. The text is presented
with conative-structural-rhetorical-persuasion facts. There is declarative and procedural
knowledge presented in knowledge-transforming text.
570 The Effects of Knowledge-Transforming Text on Elementary
International Journal of Instruction, January 2020 Vol.13, No.1
The purpose of text learning in EE is basically knowledge, attitude, and skills that are
realized declaratively in understanding definitions, concepts, meaning of terms, and
description of facts. In addition, procedurally speaking, students have to be able to
explain how to solve problems in logical and appropriate stages, make products, and
explain how to create the products. From the attitudinal aspect, teacher motivates
students to think and act in accordance with the declarative and procedural knowledge
they obtain, for example no littering, planting and caring for trees, and actively
maintaining cleanliness and environmental sustainability such as holding school
cleaning activities, releasing hatchlings at the beach, and planting trees around the house
and school. The two types of knowledge being referred are declarative and procedural
knowledge. The following is the differences and commonalities between the two.
Table 2
The Construction of Procedural and Declarative Knowledge (Developed from
Marzano’s model, 2012)
Declarative
Procedural
The learner knows or understands a concept
The learner is able to actualize a concept
Information 1: Explaining a definition, the
meaning of a term
Explaining a procedure through a series of steps.
Information 2: facts, concepts, and
generalizationswithin content
knowledge
The case deals with even complex processes like
writing, reading a bar graph, and setting up an
experiment. Although the sequence is not always
linear, there are steps which need to be performed
in the skills and processes
This research provides an overview of the impact of interdisciplinary learning. The KTT
as part of a text-based learning method, on language learning, has an impact on
environmental learning. The novelty of this research is concerned with the effect of
learning material produced in knowledge-transforming manner towards students'
declarative and procedural knowledge, as well as their ability to present their ideas.
During this time, the text as learning material produced by knowledge-telling.
Information is conveyed without considering rhetorical space, but employing
storytelling strategies.
This study looked at the effects of applying knowledge-transforming text (KTT) in EE
learning, which is expected to answer four quantitative questions and one quantitative
descriptive question.
The quantitative questions are related to the following hypotheses.
1- Does KTT learning pose a significant effect on students’ declarative knowledge?
H0: Learning with KTT does not pose a significant effect on students’ declarative
knowledge.
H1: Learning with KTT poses a significant effect on students’ declarative knowledge
2- Does KTT learning pose a significant effect on students’ procedural knowledge?
H0: Learning with KTT does not pose a significant effect on students’ procedural
knowledge.
H1: KTT learning pose a significant effect on students’ procedural knowledge
Wuryaningrum, Bektiarso & Suyitno 571
International Journal of Instruction, January 2020 Vol.13, No.1
3- Does KTT learning pose a significant effect on students’ presentation skills?
H0: KTT learning does not pose a significant effect on students’ presentation skills.
H1: KTT learning pose a significant effect on students’ presentation skills.
4- Quantitaive descriptive question is related to student motivation.
How is students’ motivation when engaged in KTT learning?
This study includes the provision of learning material devoted to EE, which is
considered appropriate to improve students' declarative and procedural knowledge. The
learning material is a supplementary text in the form of basic material texts arranged in a
knowledge-transforming fashion or knowledge-transforming text. Then, the provision of
learning material in the form of a KTT is investigated for its effects by delving into
variables related to (1) declarative knowledge, (2) procedural knowledge, (3)
presentation skills, and (4) student motivation towards learning with KTT.
Theoretical Background
Dehler (1996) mentions knowledge-transforming as an approach associated with the
opinion of Bereiter and Scardamalia (1987) which is concerned with intentional learning
as "the specific goal of developing independence" aimed at achieving several goals
throughout a learner’s learning trajectory. Through transforming knowledge, students
intentionally and independently learn to construct the meaning of what is learned.
Functionally speaking, as Vygotsky (1962) stated, language is an intellectual tool. In
addition, Çetin & Demiral (2012) also state that language is an important tool for
medium of self-expression and understanding everything in life. Learning material is
closely related to how language is used and activated to serve as a tool for understanding
knowledge. Teaching materials as teacher's speech is a component of language use
which has a big influence on learning outcomes. Rymes (2008:367) states that learning
is an interactive process that makes students not only learn new material, but also learn
new ways of speaking and participating. This opinion shows that students learn to
communicate and interact through language in classroom including how language is
used in text as learning material.
Galbraith (2009) in his research shows that knowledge-telling is a process involving
retrieving already-formed "ideas" from an explicit store of knowledge in long-term
memory and presumably translating these directly into text. By contrast, knowledge-
transforming is the process of goal-directed evaluation and manipulation of ideas or
translating them into text. With regard to writing skills, Galbraith (2009) states that the
knowledge-transforming model of higher-level reflective thinking is involved in writing.
Texts produced by knowledge transformation play a role in helping the students’
thinking process to see a concept as a whole and serving as the procedure to perform
complete logical steps. This is directly related to descriptive and procedural abilities.
Bereiter & Scardamalia (1987) show the process of writing model based on the level of
expertise and knowledge of the author. This is where knowledge-telling directly conveys
information, but does not show complex problem solving activities. By contrast, the
transforming knowledge model is done by presenting a context to solve problems
germane to various phenomena which require continuous content generation and
572 The Effects of Knowledge-Transforming Text on Elementary
International Journal of Instruction, January 2020 Vol.13, No.1
planning. Sevgi (2016) states that the model is in line with the 'content generation
process' which is built on Strauss and Corbin's definition of the term 'process' and is
described as the idea used in written text. The term ‘process’ refers to idea used in
written text. The planning process that takes place in the rhetorical space refers to the
organization and management of these aspects reflected in the text.
Figure 2
Bereiter & Scardamalia Knowledge-Transforming Model
The procedure for writing in knowledge-transforming seeks to pay attention to the
conative element by realizing what is in the writer’s mind towards what will be written
by paying attention to the content and rhetorical strategy. Based on the model,
knowledge-transforming text in learning will meet the needs of students to (1)
understand concepts through points in the text, (2) perform analysis and synthesis of
contextual examples, and (3) understand ways and procedures to solve problems in
logical work order.
Bereiter & Scardamalia (2014) explain that there are formidable barriers to instituting
knowledge building in education. Some of these are the barriers any intellectually
serious approach faces: excessive amounts of material to cover, excessive emphasis on
test scores, and so on. On the other hand, there are obstacles driven by the lack of
motivation and focusing on efforts to improve students’ skills. Therefore, innovation is
needed on producing novel materials, alternative tests, and efforts to increase
motivation.
The two types of knowledge that underlie knowledge building are declarative and
procedural knowledge. The concept of Berge & Hezewijk (1999) shows the relationship
between declarative and procedural knowledge. They say that declarative knowledge is
not an alternative knowledge, as is usually the case in memory theory, but rather serves
as part of procedural knowledge. Declarative knowledge is related to psychological
(cognitive) aspects as the basis of procedural knowledge. Thus, from this opinion it can
be said that this knowledge cannot be separated. To understand procedural needs
declarative and vice versa. It can be said that in some cases procedural memory is
relatively autonomous, compared to declarative memory. Thus, both are very important
aspects of knowledge building, as pointed out by Bereiter and Scardamalia (2014).
Declarative knowledge is suggestive or real knowledge, while procedural knowledge is
real knowledge that can be seen from working on a series of steps and understanding of
CONTENT
SPACE
What do I mean
RHETORICAL
SPACE
What do I say
Wuryaningrum, Bektiarso & Suyitno 573
International Journal of Instruction, January 2020 Vol.13, No.1
taking action (Sahdra & Thagard, 2003). Decalarative and procedural knowledge are
complementary in nature. Anderson (1993) states that knowledge starts from
declarative, conscious, and control actions. This control paves the way for procedural
processes. Declarative knowledge is the basis of knowledge transfer, procedural
knowledge plays a significant role in structuring concepts and explaining declarative
knowledge (Lawson, et al, 2000). Learning needs to accommodate these two types of
knowledge, including text as material learning in text-based learning. Text serves as the
main source of information that can be re-read by students and is a reflection of students'
knowledge.
Related Studies
Bank & Millward (2007) see the relationship between organizational knowledge on
teams and teams’ performance through differentiating between declarative and
procedural knowledge. The results show the effects of procedural knowledge on team
performance. Accurate procedural knowledge is positively associated with team
performance, and shared procedural knowledge is negatively associated with team
performance. This finding is interesting in the context of broader questions pertinent to
the organization of knowledge in group work. Thus, to improve group work, accurate
procedural knowledge is needed. Simply put, group work without shared procedural
knowledge actually has better knowledge performance. This research applies Shared
Mental Models (SMMs) to increase declarative knowledge that supports group process
and performance. This is in line with Utami, Sa'dijah, Subanji, & Irawati (2018) who
show that the mental model can portray students' thinking process. SMMs in Blank and
Millward's (2007) research are used to show declarative and procedural ways of
thinking to differentiate team performance in terms of ways of thinking and interacting.
Research on declarative and procedural knowledge shows the relationship between
success and knowledge. Yilmaz & Yalçin (2012) apply the Qualitative Measurement
Tool (QMT) obtained from several books and developed by previous researchers. The
study looked at understanding Newton's lows of motion in first-year Science students.
The results show that students' success rates are higher in procedural-knowledge
questions than declarative-knowledge questions, but they are more successful in
declarative questioning procedures. In other words, students fail to reflect their higher
procedural knowledge for their level of success in declarative knowledge. Since their
success rate is higher than their knowledge, it implies that their level of success does not
represent their level of knowledge. The study shows that knowledge of procedural action
is easier to master than the conceptual knowledge, but is related to the success of
procedures to understand the concept.
In general, efforts to increase declarative and procedural knowledge relate to education
in all fields, comprising of medicine, language, business, science, environmentalism, and
so on. One of them is the study of Abu-Zaed & Khan (2013) who report an increase in
declarative and procedural knowledge through the provision of multiple-choice
questions (MCQs). The results of these studies demonstrate that declarative and
procedural MCQs can help organize learning process. Declarative learning is the way to
promote deep learning. MCQs can integrate scientifically correct (declarative) and
574 The Effects of Knowledge-Transforming Text on Elementary
International Journal of Instruction, January 2020 Vol.13, No.1
scientifically-sound (procedural) knowledge in science. This study shows that efforts to
stimulate student interaction declaratively and procedurally can be done by giving
questions characterized by the declarative and procedural dimensions. Both are
important parts of deep learning.
Ashley, Schaap, & Brujin (2016) report the results of their research through analysis of
dialogic interaction and students' writing assignments, descriptive research, and insights
on how knowledge-transforming writing contributes to a conceptual understanding of a
course for international business students. Pre-, mid- and post-tests revealing conceptual
understanding indicate that stimulating knowledge-transforming dialogic writing through
class interaction and writing assignments is positively related to the development of
students' conceptual understanding. Results suggest that meaning construction, active
engagement and knowledge integration are key effects. Educators need to stimulate the
self-regulatory processes needed for knowledge-transforming. The results of these
studies demonstrate that knowledge-transforming can improve conceptual
understanding. The action that needs to be done to optimize the understanding is the
management of individual student involvement. The concept in this case is declarative
knowledge which can support procedural knowledge.
The characteristics of declarative and procedural knowledge research, based on several
studies, include (1) the efforts to increase both knowledge through action (2) the
attempts to show the effect and influence of learning on both types of knowledge that
broadly shows the level of knowledge in detail, (3) the application of both types of
knowledge and the implementation of an approach to increase students’ performance. It
is necessary to carry out a research on the effect of a learning approach or model on
both types of knowledge and further see the resultant effects in detail from both
quantitative and qualitative perspectives.
KTT is a process of building knowledge through reading comprehension in which
students interact to form knowledge extracted from reading material. In the reading
example about "Oxygen Charity" for example, students form descriptive knowledge
through understanding what oxygen is, what processes produce oxygen, the
environmental conditions with less oxygen, why humans need oxygen, and the need for
oxygen charity. The understanding of material is embedded within a dialectic enterprise
between content and rhetorical spaces. This is the hallmark of KTT in establishing
declarative knowledge. What needs to be considered in reading material is
understanding on surface structure and deep structure. Harvey & Anderson (1996)
explain that in declarative knowledge there are two elements of knowledge, namely
episodic knowledge containing knowledge of context related to where, when, who and
so on; semantic knowledge which contains facts and meanings of words. Thus, it can be
assumed that understanding concepts in the text will increase declarative knowledge.
Procedural knowledge is knowledge in understanding working procedures, steps, and
how to solve problems according to these steps. The opinion of Berge &Hazewijk
(1999) needs to be underlined, especially the differences between declarative and
procedural knowledge. These differences set knowing what apart from knowing how.
Declarative knowledge is considered as an alternative kind of knowledge, as is the case
Wuryaningrum, Bektiarso & Suyitno 575
International Journal of Instruction, January 2020 Vol.13, No.1
in theories of memory, but as part of procedural knowledge. This shows that procedural
knowledge is strongly supported by declarative knowledge. Similarly, Marzano (2012)
points out that we cannot presume that procedural knowledge is more important than
declarative knowledge. Declarative knowledge will lead students to take measures to
solve problems using their declarative knowledge.
METHOD
The Design of the Study
This study employed a of quantitative methods. Quantitative research was applied with
control group design in two classes divided into control class and experimental class.
The research population included three classes (clusters), and the number of students in
each class was 32 students in class A, 32 students in class B, and 33 students in class C.
The three classes were tested for homogeneity based on formative values (regular
achievement tests) with one way ANOVA test. Furthermore, in the experimental class
knowledge-transforming learning was applied, while in the control class the usual
learning methodology was applied, namely knowledge-telling text. After 9 learning
sessions had been conducted, declarative (DCLR) knowledge tests, procedural (PRCD)
knowledge tests, and presentation (PRST) skill tests were conducted, followed by
distributing questionnaires to investigate students' motivation towards KTT. The test
results of the DCLR, PRCD, and PRST variables of the control and experimental classes
were tested with inferential statistics using compare means test analysis with the
technique of Mann-Whitney U test and continued with a test of significance value
significance compared with 0.05. The variables were measured quantitative descriptive
by using a questionnaire to ask students’ opinions on their learning motivation using a
KTT with Likert scale.
The DCLR knowledge test in this study contained a test of conceptual knowledge about
definitions, meanings of terms, facts, and generalizations. The PRCD knowledge test
contained questions about the logical stages of action and how to solve problems based
on the right concepts. The PRST test contained presentations of environmental problems
around students’ lives and their solutions.
The research was carried out from February 4
th
2019 to February 22
nd
2019. Learning
was carried out for 9 sessions in 3 weeks (3 sessions per week). The time needed for
each session was 90 minutes.
Participants
As explained earlier, this study was conducted to investigate the effects of knowledge-
transforming text on understanding declarative knowledge, procedural knowledge, the
ability to present environmental cases and solutions, and student motivation towards
learning using KTT. The number of elementary school students involved in this study
was 97 students divided into 3 classes consisting of 32 students in class A, 32 students
in class B, and 33 students in class C. These students were at grade 5 of elementary
school (they are around 10-11 years old) who received EE material since their first
grade. In the experimental class (Class A), students obtained the knowledge-
576 The Effects of Knowledge-Transforming Text on Elementary
International Journal of Instruction, January 2020 Vol.13, No.1
transforming text and each session ended with the comprehension question on the
contents presented in the readings. These consist of questions related to main points and
descriptions of the contents. The reading main points are (1) keywords and (2) main
ideas or reading topics. Furthermore, in the description of reading content students
answered questions about (1) events in the text or problems, (2) solutions described, and
(3) tasks on compiling sentences about the concepts contained in the text.
Instruments
To meet data requirements, there were 5 instruments employed in this study, namely:
1. Readings related to EE
2. Test on Declarative knowledge
3. Test on Procedural knowledge
4. Test on presentation skills
5. Questionnaire on the implementation of KTT in motivating the mastery of EE
material
Procedure and Task
KTT was applied to the experimental class. There was also a description of the material
for the 9 KTT-focused meetings as shown in the table below,
Table 3
Topics of KTT
Meetings
Text Title
1
Sedekah Oksigen (Giving Oxygen)
2
Indonesia Pengekspor Asap (Indonesia: Smoke Exporter)
3
Mencangkok Tanaman Mangga dan Jambu (Transplanting Mango and Guava)
4
Hemat Listrik (Save Energy)
5
Tanaman Obat Keluarga (Family Herbal Plants)
6
Tanaman dalam Pot (Plants in Pots)
7
Selamatkan Kehidupan Sosial Kita dengan Gotong Royong (Save our Social Life
through “Gotong Royong” /Working Bees)
8
Jus Sehat dan Lezat (Healthy and Delicious Juice)
9
Mematuhi Rambu Lalu Lintas (Complying with Traffic Regulations)
At the first stage, understanding the content of KTT was at work. Students obtained
information from the teacher's explanation of the material according to the assigned title
for 10 minutes. Afterward, they were given the opportunity to do silent reading, for
approximately 30 minutes. As stated above, texts formed with knowledge-transforming
strategy involved tasks of highlighting key points, restructuring various sections, and
finding the connection between different parts of the material, and using various
contexts to support meaningful knowledge. Then, students answered KTT-related
comprehension questions and submitted their assignments. Afterwards, they were given
score by the teacher. For example, the questions given in the first meeting were related
to (1) what are the important points in the reading? (2) what is the topic of the reading?
(3) why do we need alms oxygen? (4) How to give oxygen? (5) What are the
characteristics that indicate the good air quality around us?
Wuryaningrum, Bektiarso & Suyitno 577
International Journal of Instruction, January 2020 Vol.13, No.1
At the second stage, on the 10
th
meeting, DCLR knowledge was measured. The teacher
distributed DCLR questions to measure students' knowledge of what was understood.
The question contained details related to organic and inorganic waste. There were 5
questions covering (1) the definition of organic and inorganic waste (2) the
characteristics of organic and inorganic waste, (3) the functions of separating organic
and inorganic waste, (4) the sources of organic and inorganic waste, and (5) difficulties
in dealing with organic waste and inorganic. Then, the researchers recorded the
students’ scores.
At the third stage, still on the 10
th
meeting, PRCD was measured by distributing
questions about how to do something in accordance with declarative concept and
knowledge. In this test, students were required to explain how to make organic fertilizer
from dried leaves that fell to the ground. Then, the researchers recorded students’
scores.
At the fourth stage, a performance test was conducted, in the form of a PRST test. The
test was carried out on the next day after DCLR and PRCD. The test was in the form of
a presentation about the problem of waste around the students’ environment and how to
overcome it. On this test, each student was given the opportunity to deliver a
presentation for 10 minutes at most. Then, the researchers recorded the students’ scores.
In the fifth stage, the questionnaire was given. The questionnaire aimed to garner
descriptive evidence on students' motivation towards the implementation of KTT.
Questionnaire in the form of test questions, coupled with Likert scale ranging from 1 to
5, was operative. The questionnaire included 5 questions.
In this study, quantitative analysis was conducted by (1) normality test by Kolmogorov-
Smirnov non parametric one-sample statistical test, (2) different test tests with non-
parametric statistics Mann Whitney U-Test, and (3) significance test by comparison
against a value of 0.05. Qualitative results analysis is done by calculating the percentage
of students' motivation towards KTT and describing the results to highlight essential
meaning.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
As stated earlier, the novelty in this study is to know the effect of learning through text
that is read by students toward their declarative knowledge, procedural knowledge, and
presentation skills. Declarative and procedural knowledge of students is indicated by the
performance in DCLR knowledge test with knowledge question maps on definitions,
characteristics, concepts, and functions; test on PRCD knowledge involves map of
knowledge of solutions and steps to solve problems. Next, a PRST test is performed. On
the PRST test, students bring their work into a demonstration.
Quantitative Analysis Effect of KTT on DCLR, PRCD Knowledge, and PRST Skill
The population in this study were class A involving 32 students, class B involving 32
students, and class C involving 33 students. In total, 97 students were involved. Then the
578 The Effects of Knowledge-Transforming Text on Elementary
International Journal of Instruction, January 2020 Vol.13, No.1
homogeneity test was carried out based on the results of the previous formative test with
one way ANOVA inferential statistical test with the following results.
Table 4
Test of Homogeneity of Variances
Levene Statistic
df1
df2
Sig.
1,274
2
94
,284
Based on the table above, sig 0.284> 0.05 indicates that all classes belonging to the
population are homogeneous. Furthermore, from the three classes, class A is selected as
the experimental class, and class B is the control class. Taking these two classes as
samples from the population is done by cluster random sampling.
Table 5
Normality Test: One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
X1
X2
X3
X4
X5
X6
N
32
32
32
32
32
32
Normal
Parameters
a,b
Mean
19,5000
17,7500
19,7188
17,9375
18,4375
18,3438
Std.
Deviation
1,41421
1,07763
1,17045
,80071
1,50134
,60158
Most Extreme
Differences
Absolute
,237
,279
,218
,313
,195
,372
Positive
,237
,252
,218
,313
,149
,372
Negative
-,201
-,279
-,189
-,250
-,195
-,253
Test Statistic
,237
,279
,218
,313
,195
,372
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)
,000
c
,000
c
,001
c
,000
c
,003
c
,000
c
Before the effect test of KTT learning on declarative knowledge, procedural knowledge,
and presentation skills, normality tests were carried out with the non-parametric
statistical test using one-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, generating the following
results.
The table 4 shows X1 as the declarative knowledge test results of the experimental class,
X2 as test results of declarative knowledge test of the control class, X3 as test results of
procedural knowledge test of the experimental class, X4 as test results of procedural
knowledge of control class, X5 as the test results of experimental class in presentation
test, and X6 as the test results of control class in presentation test. Based on the table
above, it can be interpreted that the results of a declarative knowledge, procedural
knowledge, and presentation skills test are unnormally distributed (Asymp. Sig. (2-
tailed) 0,000<0,05). Therefore, this research has applied Mann-Whitney U test
nonparametric statistics to compares the means between unrelated groups on some
continous.
The effect of KTT on declarative knowledge
The results of tests on declarative knowledge by Mann-Whitney U test nonparametric
statistic in the experimental class (1) and the control class (2) can be investigated in
following table.
Wuryaningrum, Bektiarso & Suyitno 579
International Journal of Instruction, January 2020 Vol.13, No.1
Table 6
Effect Test of KTT on DCLR Knowledge
Ranks
Class
N
Mean Rank
Sum of Ranks
DCLR
1,00
32
43,48
1391,50
2,00
32
21,52
688,50
Total
64
Test Statistics
a
DCLR
Mann-Whitney U
160,500
Wilcoxon W
688,500
Z
-4,872
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)
,000
These results indicate that the significance value is α/2. The significance is 0.000 < 0.05,
which means that H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted. In other words, KTT learning poses
significant effect on students' declarative knowledge in understanding EE material.
Several points about these results need to be elaborated. As explained earlier, EE in
Indonesia is carried out by reading and answering questions as in figure 1. In one
chapter, students read 3 texts. On the other hand, the text was presented in a knowledge-
telling manner, with inadequate rhetorical aspects. Galbraith (2014) shows that there are
two features in writing. First, it reflected the facts related to ideas represented, not only
as a reflection of the author's knowledge (content space), but also in terms of their
rhetorical functions in the text (rhetoric space). Second, writing is not just a matter of
adapting content to a rhetorical context, but rather serves as an emerging process in
which content is formulated as developing text, using context to support rhetorical
aspects. Both are fulfilled in knowledge-transforming writings. Bereiter and Scardamalia
(1987) contend that a KTT characterized by the use of such techniques as highlighting
key points, restructuring various sections, finding connection between different parts of
material, and using various contexts to support meaningful knowledge.
Content space and rhetorical space make it easier for students to understand concepts
and various real problems and solutions. The key lies in developing content formulation.
Thus, although it retains the knowledge-telling model as a content comprehension
retrieved from memory, this is embedded in a dialectic space between content and
rhetorical spaces (Galbraith, 2014). That being said, characteristics of objects, functions,
and concepts of objects that are part of declarative knowledge are embedded within a
dialectic space between content and rhetorical spaces. Thus, what Glassman (2001) says
is that language serves as an intellectual tool as conceptualized by Vigotsky (1962)
through language knowledge management, making content easily understood. Through
rhetorical space, knowledge can be made more meaningful. This view supports the
results of KTT which pose an effect on declarative knowledge. Similarly, research by
Ashley, Schaap, & Brujin (2016) shows the application of knowledge- transforming
actions. The results demonstrate that stimulating knowledge-transforming writing is
positively related to the development of students' conceptual understanding. This shows
580 The Effects of Knowledge-Transforming Text on Elementary
International Journal of Instruction, January 2020 Vol.13, No.1
that there are conceptual features in KTT both in the text and in their performance that
can increase declarative knowledge.
Effect of KTT on procedural knowledge
The results of tests on procedural knowledge by Mann-Whitney U test nonparametric
statistic in the experimental class (1) and the control class (2) can be investigated in
following table.
Table 7
Effect Test of KTT on PRCD Knowledge
Ranks
Group
N
Mean Rank
Sum of Ranks
PRCD
1,00
32
44,94
1438,00
2,00
32
20,06
642,00
Total
64
PSDR
Mann-Whitney U
114,000
Wilcoxon W
642,000
Z
-5,508
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)
,000
These results indicate that the significance value is α/2, a significance value of 0.0000
<0.05, which means that the hypothesis H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted. In other
words, learning with KTT has a significant effect on students' procedural knowledge in
understanding EE material.
KTT helps students to gradually understand declarative and procedural knowledge.
Procedural knowledge, for example, is understanding how oxygen is produced and how
to solve the problem of reduced oxygen, how to give oxygen, and how to plant trees.
KTT can provide corrections to what was done. In this research, KTT presents the
problems and solutions to the functions of the actions taken. For example, in the step of
planting trees there are recommendations about spacing. KTT explains why and how
these actions should be carried out as material for correction on things that should not be
done. By understanding these steps in detail, students can understand how to do things.
Wang's research (2016) also indicates similar finding. The applied Metalinguistic
Corrective Feedback (MFC) has been proven to increase declarative and procedural
knowledge. Learners' declarative knowledge on both structures has also improved, but
not as drastically as has their procedural knowledge. MCF plays a positive role in
bridging the gap between declarative knowledge and procedural knowledge (Wang,
2016). MCF facilitates the proceduralization of declarative knowledge, i.e. procedural
knowledge has increased significantly through MCF actions which are hierarchically
carried out with detailed word correction and structure. By understanding the details and
causality relationships between problems and solutions, learning procedures can
increase procedural knowledge.
The research findings relate to KTT in terms of the element of correction. The
corrective actions contained in the MFC and KTT have major effect on procedural
Wuryaningrum, Bektiarso & Suyitno 581
International Journal of Instruction, January 2020 Vol.13, No.1
knowledge. In addition, procedural knowledge denotes proceduralization of declarative
knowledge. This research also explains how students understand procedural knowledge
based on declarative knowledge. This is the case when students improve their
procedural knowledge based on the understanding that humans need oxygen, that
oxygen is obtained from plants, and that oxygen deprivation has taken place. Students
therefore understand why oxygen is needed. With the knowledge that plants take
nutrients from the soil, students understand the meaning of spacing. In the end, students
comprehend procedural knowledge about how to plant trees. Thus, procedural
knowledge is supported by declarative knowledge. In other words, the statement of
Berge & Hazewijk (1999), stating that declarative is part of procedural, has been
proven.
The effects of KTT on presentation skills on environmental problems and solutions
The results of tests on presentation skills ability by Mann-Whitney U test nonparametric
statistic in the experimental class (1) and the control class (2) can be investigated
following table.
Table 8
Effect Test of KTT on PRST Skill
Ranks
Class
N
Mean Rank
Sum of Ranks
PRTS
1,00
32
34,52
1104,50
2,00
32
30,48
975,50
Total
64
Test Statistics
a
DCLR
Mann-Whitney U
447,500
Wilcoxon W
975,500
Z
-,919
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)
,358
These results indicate that the significance value is α/2, which is 0,358/2 = 0,179. Thus,
the significance value is 0.179>0.05, which means that the hypothesis H0 is accepted
and H1 is rejected. In other words, the implementation of KTT does not have a
significant effect on the students' presentation skills on issues concerned with the
environmental problems and their solutions.
Presentation is a combination of knowledge, skills to do things, and the ability to convey
ideas in spoken language. In KTT, students get content-based information packaged in
rhetorical strategies to make it easier for students to understand the material. In
presentations, students must express information and employ rhetorical strategies
correctly by preparing themselves before presentation. This seems to have a
considerable effect on their presentation skills. Although in general, they master the
concepts and procedures, but there are some assessment indicators that have not been
met by students, especially on the quality points of action to be taken. For example,
when students explain how to make natural fertilizers, students do not explain the target
of incorporating materials, managing, and use tools. In other words, student
582 The Effects of Knowledge-Transforming Text on Elementary
International Journal of Instruction, January 2020 Vol.13, No.1
presentations are not accurate. This shows the students’ weak control over conative
functions. Conative function is language function related to emphasizing the
understanding of listeners (Bühler, 2011). These conative functions have not been well
taken into account by students as part of their presentation. In presentations, students
should not only apply referential functions, but also conative functions.
Bank & Millward's (2007) research shows the complexity of presentation problems. The
SMMs or Shared Mental Models model is a shared declarative knowledge between
teams related to team performance. Conversely, shared procedural knowledge is
negatively related to team performance. Accurate procedural knowledge was positively
related to team performance. Therefore, procedural information sharing carried out by
the team does not affect the group's performance. Students need to obtain procedural
knowledge because the distribution of procedural information in the groups does not
indicate positive contribution.
What needs to be considered from these studies is accurate procedural knowledge in
presentation or team performance. Presentation requires not only declarative and
procedural knowledge, but also the skills to convey ideas verbally as part of productive
language skills. This is part of accurate procedural knowledge. Without accuracy of the
procedural knowledge, presentation will be flawed. The problem of describing the
quality of actions expected in each step described by students demonstrates the lack of
accurate procedural knowledge. This can be assumed to be the cause of the insignificant
effect of KTT on procedural knowledge.
Quantitative Analysis of Students’ Motivation towards Learning with KTT
Based on the results of the student motivation questionnaire about learning with KTT,
the following results are obtained.
Table 9
Percentage of Learning Motivation Questionnaire toward KTT
Statements
Attitude
1
2
3
4
5
f
%
f
%
f
%
f
%
f
%
KTT is fun
0
0
4
12,5
3
9,37
16
50
9
28,13
I am interested in learning activity
using KTT
0
0
7
21,9
2
6,25
18
56,25
5
15,6
KTT helps me to understand material
better
0
0
8
25
0
0
21
65,62
3
9,38
KTT is more comprehensible than
texts in school textbooks
0
0
2
6,25
0
0
21
65,62
9
28,13
I want to learn with KTT
0
0
5
15,62
0
0
23
78,87
5
12,51
Description
1: strongly disagree
2: disagree
3: neutral
4: agree
5: strongly agree
Wuryaningrum, Bektiarso & Suyitno 583
International Journal of Instruction, January 2020 Vol.13, No.1
From the questionnaire results, it is known that students want to learn using KTT, as
evinced by 23 students reporting this attitude or 78.87% of total sample. On the other
hand, this is corroborated by the fact that 65.62% of the students’ report that KTT
makes it easier for them to understand the material and 65.62% state that they are
encouraged to explain problem and solution in detail. This shows their positive attitude
toward KTT. The other findings from questionnaire confirm support for these two
indicators. Thus, it can be stated that in general students express positive attitudes in the
form of desires, interests, and objective judgments voicing the idea that KTT presents
problems and solutions in detail and facilitates understanding. These indicate that they
are motivated to learn with KTT strategy.
CONCLUSION
Based on the findings and discussion above, a number of conclusions regarding the
effects of KTT on declarative, procedural, and presentation knowledge, as well as
student motivation towards learning using KTT are drawn.
Answering the first question, the students’ ability in the experimental class, who study
knowledge-transforming text material to achieve declarative knowledge, are found to
perform better than those in the control class who learn with knowledge-telling text. The
implementation of Knowledge-transforming text has a significant effect on students'
declarative knowledge about EE material with a significance value of 0.000<0.05. This
is supported by the condition of KTT-driven learning. KTT contains two features,
namely (1) content space and (2) rhetoric space. Content space and rhetoric space are
portrayed in developing text assisted by the supporting real context. Both of these
features are considered the formula for KTT, particularly related to the use of such
techniques as highlighting key points, restructuring various sections, finding connection
between different parts of material, and using various contexts to support meaningful
knowledge. These techniques support the development of declarative knowledge. The
research findings contend that the features of KTT improve students' declarative
understanding. It can also imply that KTT can increase declarative knowledge.
Answering the second question, the students in the experimental class who study the
transforming text knowledge material to achieve procedural knowledge perform better
than those in the control class who learn with knowledge-telling text. The application of
Knowledge-transforming text poses a significant effect on students' procedural
knowledge about EE material, as evinced by a significance value of 0,000<0.05. This is
acknowledged by the context of KTT which provides a description of logical steps.
Students understand how to perform an action, why it should be done in certain way,
and what factors support and hinder the success of the action. Corrective measures on
incorrect performance or product have to be avoided at all costs. Thus, it can be
assumed that discourse production through KTT can increase students' procedural
knowledge. Moreover, it can be implied that KTT possesses the indicators contributing
to improved procedural knowledge.
Answering the third question, the experimental class learning with KTT has resulted in
slightly better presentation skills than has the control class learning. Although the scores
584 The Effects of Knowledge-Transforming Text on Elementary
International Journal of Instruction, January 2020 Vol.13, No.1
of student presentation skills in the experimental class are better than their peers, this
does not bring about a significant effect as corroborated by significance value of
0.372>0.05. This relates to accurate procedural knowledge in presentations. Based on
the research findings, it can be stated that accurate procedural knowledge denotes the
actualization of declarative knowledge, procedural knowledge, and presentation skills in
expressing ideas related to problems and their solutions in logical sequences as well as
corrective statements on how they work. In addition, this has to be supported by the
statement describing the quality of each step or action taken. This shows the complexity
of the presentation made by the students. At this point, it can be assumed that the
insignificance of KTT aforementioned is influenced by students' lack of accurate
procedural knowledge.
Answering the fourth question, students are basically motivated to engage in KTT
learning. The questionnaire results show that most students express their desires,
interests, and objective assessments expressed in the judgments which point out that
KTT presents problems and solutions in detail and also facilitates understanding. These
indicate that they are motivated to engage in KTT learning. This has implications for EE
learning in Indonesia to use KTT as a reference for EE learning that requires
understanding on real concepts and practices in preserving the environment.
LIMITATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
There are limitations in this study. First, this study is applied to small-scale populations
with 3 clusters due to the limited number of parallel classes in Indonesian schools. This
can be a consideration to expand future research in terms of population and research
actions as well as data collection in a relatively longer timespan. To see the impact of
learning in detail, classroom observation is needed. Therefore, in further research it is
necessary to apply qualitative methods such as observation and group discussion to get
precise findings.
Second, KTT learning practices are oriented to environmental education material that
involves textual learning material. Texts in environmental education are easier to be
expanded with respect to its concept and context. Thus, it is easier to organize content
space and rhetorical space in producing KTT. It is difficult to apply KTT to material
that requires practical actions whose concepts and theories require a lot of declarative or
procedural knowledge. Implementing KTT on these materials requires more in-depth
thinking. Therefore, the results in this study imply the need for broader generalization in
terms of material choices. In further research, future researchers need to ponder material
characteristics or subjects who will receive KTT learning.
Thirdly, the students’ initial ability in reading is a variable that can be assumed to
influence their understanding of KTT. In this study, the students’ reading
comprehension is not taken into account. Homogeneity is only taken from formative
tests. Therefore, in further research it is necessary to put the students’ reading
comprehension under investigation to investigate their ability to understand KTT.
Wuryaningrum, Bektiarso & Suyitno 585
International Journal of Instruction, January 2020 Vol.13, No.1
REFERENCES
Abu-Zaid, A. & Khan, T. A. (2013). Assessing declarative and procedural knowledge
using multiple-choice. Medical Education Online, 22(18), 21132. doi:
10.3402/meo.v18i0.21132.
Anderson, J. R. (1993). Rules of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ashley, S., Schaap, H., & Brujin, E. D. (2016). Stimulating knowledge-transforming
writing to foster conceptual understanding in international business student. 15th EARLI
SIG Coference on Writing (pp. 1-10). Liverpool, UK: Utrecht University.
Banks, A. P., & Millward, L. J. (2007). Differentiating knowledge in teams: The effect
of shared declarative and procedural knowledge on team performance. Group Dynamic-
Theory Research and Practice 11(2), 95-106.
Berge, T. & Hezewijk, R. (1999). Procedural and declarative knowledge: An
evolutionary perspective. Theory & Psychology, 606-624.
Baumard, P. (1999). From tacit to explicit, the conjectural pattern of knowing. In P.
Baumard (Ed.), Tacit knowledge in organization (pp. 52-77). London: Sage Publication.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition.
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2014). Knowledge building and knowledge creation:
One concept, two hills to climb. In H. J. S. C. Tan (Eds), Knowledge creation in
education (p. 35-52). Singapore: Springer.
Bühler, K. 2011. Theory of language. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Çetin, A. & Demiral, H. (2012). Evaluation of language and literature skill of secondary
school students in Turkey according to international baccalaureate diploma program
criteria. International Journal of Instruction, 5(2), 153-172.
Dehler, G. E. (1996). Management education as intentional learning: A knowledge-
transforming approach to written composition. Journal of Management Education,
20(2), 221-235. doi: 10.1177/105256299602000205.
Galbraith, D. (2009). Cognitive models of writing. German as Foreign Lan., 2-3, 7-22.
Glassman, M. (2001). Dewey and Vygotsky: Society, experience, and inquiry in
educational practice. Edu. Researcher, 30(4), 3-14. doi: 10.3102/0013189X030004003.
Harvey, L., & Anderson, J. (1996). Transfer of declarative knowledge in complex
information-processing domains. Human-Computer Interaction, 11, 69-96.
Jiamu, C. (2001). The great irnportance of the distinction between declarative and
procedural knowledge. Análise Psicológica, 19(4), 559-566. doi: 10.14417/ap.362.
586 The Effects of Knowledge-Transforming Text on Elementary
International Journal of Instruction, January 2020 Vol.13, No.1
Kemendikbud. (2013). Modul implementasi kurikulum 2013 (2013 Curriculum
Implementation Module). Jakarta: Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Republik
Indonesia.
Kul, Ü., Çelik, S., & Aksu, Z. (2018). The impact of educational material use on
mathematics achievement: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Instruction, 11(4),
303-324.
Lawson, A. E., Alkhoury, S., Benford, R., Clark, B. R., & Falconer, K.A. (2000). What
kinds of scientific concepts exist? Concept construction and intellectual development in
college biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 996-1018. doi:
10.1002/1098-2736(200011)37:9<996::AID-TEA8>3.0.CO;2-J.
Marzano, R. J., & Pickering, D. J. (2012). Dimension of learning. USA: ASCD
Renkema J. (2004). Introduction to discourse studies. Amsterdam and Philadelphia:
John Benjamins.
Rymes, B. 2008. Classroom discourse: A tool for critical reflection. Cresskill, NJ:
Hampton Press
Sahdra, B., & Thagard, P. (2003). Procedural knowledge in molecular biology.
Philosophical Psychology. 16(4), 477-498.
Suwandi, S. (2013). Pembelajaran bahasa dan sastra Indonesia dalam lurikulum 2013:
Beberapa catatan terhadap konsep (Indonesian Language and Literature Learning in
Curriculum 2013: Some Notes on Concepts). Seminar Nasional Jurusan Pendidikan
Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia (p.7-15). Yogyakarta, Indonesia: FBS, Universitas Negeri
Yogyakarta.
Sevgi, E. (2016). A comparison of the cognitive processes involved in L2 learners’
writing process when they are composing in English and in their L1. International
Conference on Teaching and Learning English as an Additional Language, (p. 347-
353). Antalya, Turkey: Elsevier.
Utami, A. D., Sa'dijah, C., Subanji, & Irawati, S. (2019). Students' pre-initial mental
model: the case of Indonesian first-year of college student. International Journal of
Instruction, 12(1), 1173-1188. doi: 10.29333/iji.2019.12175a.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Language and thought. Ontario: Massachusetts Institute of
Technology.
Wang, Q. (2016). bridging the gap between declarative knowledge and procedural
knowledge through metalinguistic corrective feedback. Boston: Boston University
Theses & Dissertations.
Yilmaz, İ., & Yalçin, N. (2012). The relationship of procedural and declarative
knowledge of science teacher candidates in newton’s laws of motion to understanding.
American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 50-55.