Asep Mulyani(1*),

(1) Tadris IPA Biologi IAIN Syekh Nurjati Cirebon
(*) Corresponding Author


This study aims to determine the mastery of biology teacher candidate students to visual representation in phanerogamae botanical courses. Teachers must have the ability in the mastery of visual representation that is used as a tool to clarify the material to be delivered on learning activities. Therefore, the ability of prospective biology teacher students to visual representation should be good so that by the time it becomes a teacher can provide quality biology learning. The research method used is descriptive quantitative research method. The population is a biology teacher candidate who has attended phanerogamae botany lecture in 2016 in four classes. The sample is taken, one class. The instrument used is a multiple choice test. The results showed that the ability of biology teacher candidates to master visual representation in phanerogamae botanical course is the average score of 45.31. It was concluded that the mastery of biology teacher candidates in the mastery of visual representation is low. The mastery of visual representation is influenced by visual literacy, the scope of matter, the level of material representation, and the type of visual representation.

Keywords: biology teacher candidate, visual representation, botani phanerogamae.

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui penguasaan mahasiswa calon guru biologi terhadap representasi visual dalam mata kuliah botani phanerogamae. Guru harus mempunyai kemampuan dalam penguasaan representasi visual yang digunakan sebagai alat untuk memperjelas materi yang akan disampaikan pada kegiatan belajar pembelajaran. Oleh karena itu, kemampuan mahasiswa calon guru biologi terhadap representasi visual harus baik agar pada saat sudah menjadi guru dapat memberikan pembelajaran biologi yang berkualitas. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode penelitian deskriptif kuantitatif. Populasinya adalah mahasiswa calon guru biologi yang telah mengikuti perkuliahan botani phanerogamae di tahun 2016 sebanyak empat kelas. Sampel yang diambil satu kelas. Instrumen yang digunakan adalah tes pilihan ganda. Hasil penelitian menunjukan jika kemampuan mahasiswa calon guru biologi dalam menguasai representasi visual dalam mata kuliah botani phanerogamae yaitu nilai rata-ratanya 45,31. Disimpulkan bahwa penguasaan mahasiswa calon guru biologi dalam penguasaan representasi visualnya rendah. Penguasaan representasi visual dipengaruhi oleh literasi visual, ruang lingkup materi, tingkat representasi materi, dan tipe representasi visual.

Kata kunci: Calon guru biologi, representasi visual, Botani phanerogamae.


Guru Biologi, representasi visual, Botani phanerogamae

Full Text:



Ainsworth, S. (2008). The Educational Value of Multiple-representations when Learning Complex Scientific Concepts. In Eilam, Billie & Gilbert, John K. (Ed.), Visualization: Theory and Practice in Science Education(pp. 191-208). London: Springer.

Anagnostopoulou, K., Hatzinikita, V., & Cristidou, V. (2012). Pisa and Biology School Textbooks: The Role of Visual Material. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 46. Hal. 1839 – 1845.

Catley, Kefyn M. & Novick, Laura R. (2008). “Seeing the Wood for the Trees: An Analysis of Evolutionary Diagrams in Biology Textbooks”. BioScience, Vol. 58, No. 10.

Gooding, David(2004). Visualisation, inference and explanation in the sciences. In Malcolm, Grant (Ed.), Studies in Multidisciplinarity, Volume 2: Multi disciplinary Approaches to Visual Representations and

Interpretations(1-25). Netherlands: Elevier.

Halverson, Kristy L. & Friedrichsen, Patricia (2013). Learning Tree Thinking: Developing a New Framework of Representational Competence. In Tsui, C. & Treagust, D. F. (Ed.), Multiple Representations in Biological Education(pp. 185-201). London: Springer.

Liu, Yang., Won, Mihye, & Treagust, David. F. (20). Secondary Biology Teachers’ Use of Different Types of Diagrams for Different Purposes. In Gilbert, John K., Reiner, Miriam, & Nakhleh , Mary. (Ed.), Science Teachers’ Use of Visual Representations (pp. 103-121). London: Springer.

Phillips, Linda M., Norris, Stepphen P., & Macnab, John S. (2010). Visualization in Mathematics, Reading and Science Education. London: Springer.

Roth, Wolf-Michael, Pozzer-Ardenghi, Lilian, & Han, Jae Young(2005). Critical Graphicacy: Understanding Viusal Representastion Practices in School Science. London: Springer.

Shulman, L. S.(1986). “Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching”. Educational Researcher, Vol. 15, No. 2.,pp 4-14.

Tsui, C. & Treagust, D. F. (2013). Introduction to Multiple Representations: Their Importance in Biology and Biological education. In Tsui, C. & Treagust, D. F. (Ed.), Multiple Representations in Biological Education(pp. 3-18). London: Springer.

Vinisha, K. & Ramadas, J. (2013). “Visual Representations of the Water Cycle in Science Textbooks”. Contemporary Education Dialogue 10(1)7-36.

DOI: 10.24235/sc.educatia.v6i1.1376

Article Metrics

Abstract view : 808 times
PDF - 471 times


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Scientiae Educatia indexed by:

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. 

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

Stat Counter (Link)