Numerical Taxonomy in School: Sustainability in Biodiversity Learning
Abstract
The younger generations of Indonesia are usually uninterested in studying biodiversity because the teaching process at schools tends to use the one-way lecture method, and the students tend to memorize. This paper discusses the implementation of numerical taxonomy into learning about biodiversity, which is likely more sustainable than existing teaching methods. Numerical taxonomy is a grouping system that consists of two approaches, phenetics and cladistics. The implementation of numerical taxonomy in biodiversity learning promoted students to be active, participative, and engaged in hands-on experience as required by sustainability education. Numerical taxonomy in biodiversity learning is characterized by student-centered learning, a lot of hands-on activities, exploring the 21st-century skill (4Cs), and imitating. In addition, it demonstrated quite good concept mastery of students and positive responses from the students. The results suggested that feeling fun and excited was a further simple meaning of sustainability itself. There is a strong connection between numerical taxonomy, 21st-century skills, and education for sustainable education.
Keywords: numerical taxonomy, biodiversity, phenetics, cladistics
References
[1] Corson C. Shifting environmental governance in a neoliberal world: US aid for conservation. Antipode. 2010;42(3):576–602.
[2] Yli-Panula E, Jeronen E, Lemmetty P, Pauna A. Teaching methods in biology promoting biodiversity education. Sustainability (Basel). 2018;10(10):1–18.
[3] Ilbury DT. Are we learning to change? Mapping global progress in education for sustainable development in the lead up to ‘rio plus 20,’. Glob Environ Res. 2010;14:101–7.
[4] Wan G, Gut DM. Bringing schools into the 21st century. New York: Springer; 2011.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0268-4.
[5] Oktaviani F, Hidayat T. Profil keterampilan berkomunikasi siswa sma menggunakan metode fenetik dalam pembelajaran klasifikasi arthropoda. Jurnal Pengajaran MIPA. 2015;15(1):13–24.
[6] Meisel RP. Teaching tree-thinking to undergraduate biology students. Evolution (N Y). 2010 Jul;3(4):621–8.
[7] Novick LR, Catley KM. Teaching tree thinking in an upper level organismal biology course: testing the effectiveness of a multifaceted curriculum. J Biol Educ. 2018;52(1):66–78.
[8] Novick LR, Catley KM. Reasoning about evolution’s grand patterns: college students’ understanding of the tree of life. Am Educ Res J. 2013;50(1):138–77.
[9] Voogt J, Roblin NP. A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21 st century competencies: implications for national curriculum policies. J Curric Stud. 2012;44(3):299–321.
[10] Edinyang SD. The significance of social learning theories in the teaching of social studies education. International Journal of Sociology and Anthropology Research. 2016;2(1):40–5.
[11] Nielsen M. Copying actions and copying outcomes: social learning through the second year. Dev Psychol. 2006 May;42(3):555–65.