Rethinking Science Teaching Through Station Rotation, Flipped Classrooms, and Enhanced Spaced Learning: A Constructivist Perspective
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70232/jrmste.v3i4.99Keywords:
Constructivism, Enhanced Spaced Learning, Flipped Classroom, Teaching Methods, Station RotationAbstract
Science education continues to face persistent challenges associated with teacher-centred instruction, including limited student engagement, weak scientific process skills, superficial conceptual understanding, and poor long-term retention. Although numerous student-centred approaches have been proposed, existing research has largely examined instructional strategies in isolation, offering limited guidance on integrating complementary approaches into a coherent framework for science teaching. This paper addresses this gap through a conceptual synthesis of recent empirical and theoretical literature, examining station rotation, flipped classrooms, and enhanced spaced learning through the lens of constructivist learning theory. Drawing on the complementary contributions of Vygotsky, Bruner, and Piaget, the paper examines how each strategy can support a distinct dimension of learning: station rotation promotes collaborative engagement and scaffolded learning, flipped classrooms create opportunities for inquiry and knowledge construction, and enhanced spaced learning supports retention and conceptual consolidation. The paper proposes an integrated constructivist framework in which the three approaches function as a cyclical and mutually reinforcing instructional system. The framework incorporates formative feedback and adaptive responses, allowing any of the three strategies to serve as an entry point according to instructional context and learner needs. Retrieval and revisiting of concepts provide opportunities for consolidation and refinement of understanding, while evidence generated through learning activities can inform subsequent instructional decisions. The proposed framework provides a theoretically grounded model for integrating cognitive, social, and metacognitive dimensions of science learning. Implications are discussed for science teaching, curriculum design, teacher education, and future empirical research examining the effectiveness and underlying mechanisms of integrated instructional systems in diverse educational contexts.
References
Abdullah, G., Arifin, A., Saro’i, M., & Uhai, S. (2024). Assessing the influence of learning styles, instructional strategies, and assessment methods on student engagement in college-level science courses. International Education Trend Issues, 2(2), 142–150. https://doi.org/10.56442/ieti.v2i2.466
Adebiyi, E. B., Ukoh, E. E., & Adeduyigbe, A. M. (2025). Enhanced spaced learning strategy and secondary school students’ attitude toward the concept of linear momentum. Physics Education, 60(6), Article 065030. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6552/ae0d3c
Arifin, Z., Sukarmin, Saputro, S., & Kamari, A. (2025). The effect of inquiry-based learning on students’ critical thinking skills in science education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 21(3), Article em2592. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/15988
Ayob, N. F. S., Halim, N. D. A., & Zulkifli, N. N. (2020). Effect of blended learning using the station rotation model towards students’ achievement in learning chemistry. Innovative Teaching and Learning Journal, 4(1), 29–40. http://161.139.21.34/itlj/index.php/itlj/article/view/50
Blake, B., & Pope, T. (2008). Developmental psychology: Incorporating Piaget’s and Vygotsky’s theories in classrooms. Journal of Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives in Education, 1(1). Retrieved from http://people.wm.edu/~mxtsch/Teaching/JCPE/Volume1/JCPE_2008-01-09.pdf
Brakhage, H., Gröschner, A., Gläser-Zikuda, M., & Hagenauer, G. (2023). Fostering students’ situational interest in physics: results from a classroom-based intervention study. Research in Science Education, 53(5), 993–1008. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-023-10120-x
Cakir, M. (2008). Constructivist approaches to learning in science and their implications for science pedagogy: a literature review. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 3(4), 193-206. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ894860.pd
Cauring, A., Camua, A., & Dalgan, N. (2021). Station rotation model with ICT integration enhances students’ problem solving skill in physics. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 8(4), 619–640. https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.84.10060
Chand, S. P. (2023). Constructivism in education: Exploring the contributions of Piaget, Vygotsky, and Bruner. International Journal of Science and Research, 12(7), 274–278. https://doi.org/10.21275/SR23630021800
Doğan, Y., Batdı, V., & Yaşar, M. D. (2023). Effectiveness of flipped classroom practices in teaching of science: A mixed research synthesis. Research in Science & Technological Education, 41(1), 393–421. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2021.1909553
Ferdiansyah, H., Degeng, I. N. S., Kuswandi, D., & Praherdhiono, H. (2025). Integrating the tudang sipulung culture into the flipped classroom strategy for conceptual understanding and problem solving in science subjects. Educational Process International Journal, 18(1), Article e2025438. https://doi.org/10.22521/edupij.2025.18.438
Gizaw, G., & Sota, S. (2023). Improving science process skills of students: A review of literature. Science Education International, 34(3), 216–224. https://icaseonline.net/journal/index.php/sei/article/view/526
Hardy, I., Meschede, N., & Mannel, S. (2022). Measuring adaptive teaching in classroom discourse: Effects on student learning in elementary science education. Frontiers in Education, 7, Article 1041316. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.1041316
Hasnah, A., Daud, F., Jumadi, O., Hala, Y., & Faisal, F. (2026). The effect of skul.id-based blended learning with the station rotation model on students’ perceptions, activities, and science learning outcomes at the junior high school. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 12(1), 367–374. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v12i1.14312
Irwanto, I., Rahmah, S. N., & Nanda, E. V. (2024). Flipped classrooms with peer instruction: the impact on students’ conceptual understanding. TEM Journal, 1283–1289. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM132-42
Jorajuria, I., & Usart, R. M. (2025). The use of the station rotation model to enhance science achievement in secondary education: a systematic review. Revista de Investigación Educativa, 43. https://doi.org/10.6018/rie.599901
Laid, S. M. T., & Adlaon, M. S. (2025). A systematic review of innovative teaching strategies in science: exploring hands-on learning, technology integration, and student-centered approaches. Acta Pedagogia Asiana, 4(2), 101–114. https://doi.org/10.53623/apga.v4i2.645
Li, X., Zhang, Y., Yu, F., Zhang, X., Zhao, X., & Pi, Z. (2024). Do science teachers’ believes related to inquiry-based teaching affect students’ science process skills? Evidence from a multilevel model analysis. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 6(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-023-00089-y
Lombardi, D., & Shipley, T. F. (2021). The curious construct of active learning. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 22(1), 8–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100620973974
Mamman, B., Abuhassna, H., Umara, K., Mustapha, A., Awae, F., Ali, A., Radzi, M., Alshehhi, A., & Almheiri, A. (2022). Pre-service teachers’ views on how the station rotation model with a blended social learning environment (SRM-BSCLE) enhances their critical thinking skills. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 11, 1298–1334. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v11-i2/14134
Mamombe, C., & Mathabathe, K. C. (2024). Active versus passive learning: Comparative case study of problem-solving competencies in stoichiometry. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 20(6), Article em2455. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/14594
Muhammed, K. V., & Mercian, G. (2024). Impact of spaced learning techniques on cognitive domains of achievement in chemistry among secondary school students. I-Manager’s Journal on Educational Psychology, 18, Article 42. https://doi.org/10.26634/jpsy.18.1.20935
Putri, Y., Cahyono, E., & Indriyanti, D. R. (2021). Implementation of flipped classroom learning model to increase student’s critical thinking ability. Journal of Innovative Science Education, 10(2), 143–151. https://doi.org/10.15294/jise.v9i3.41408
Ramadan, S., Istiyono, E., Farisiyah, U., Setyaningsih, K., & Mustakim, S. S. B. (2025). Evaluating the effectiveness of the blended learning station rotation model: A meta-analysis of student learning outcomes. Harmoni Sosial: Jurnal Pendidikan IPS, 12(2), 226–239. https://doi.org/10.21831/hsjpi.v12i2.91592
Rapi, N. K., Suastra, I. W., Widiarini, P., & Widiana, I. W. (2022). The influence of flipped classroom-based project assessment on concept understanding and critical thinking skills in physics learning. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 11(3), 351–362. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v11i3.38275
Robertson, W. H. (2022). The constructivist flipped classroom. Journal of College Science Teaching, 52(2), 17–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/0047231X.2022.12290644
Strat, T. T. S., Henriksen, E. K., & Jegstad, K. M. (2024). Inquiry-based science education in science teacher education: A systematic review. Studies in Science Education, 60(2), 191–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2023.2207148
Sugrah, N., Suyanta, & Wiyarsi, A. (2023). Promoting students’ critical thinking and scientific attitudes through socio-scientific issues-based flipped classroom. LUMAT: International Journal on Math, Science and Technology Education, 11(1), 140–165. https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.11.1.1856
Turan, Z. (2023). Evaluating whether flipped classrooms improve student learning in science education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 67(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2021.1983868
Uluçınar, U. (2023). The effect of problem-based learning in science education on academic achievement: a meta-analytical study. Science Education International, 34(2), 72–85. https://icaseonline.net/journal/index.php/sei/article/view/505
Vygotsky, L. S., & Cole, M. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. https://tinyurl.com/43w78wp2
Wright, G. W., & Park, S. (2022). The effects of flipped classrooms on K-16 students’ science and math achievement: A systematic review. Studies in Science Education, 58(1), 95–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2021.1933354
Yılmaz, Y., & Fırat, E. A. (2026). Station-rotation blended learning model in science education a case study for rural classrooms. International Journal of Science Education, 48(1), 45–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2024.2394707
Yuan, X. (2022). Evidence of the spacing effect and influences on perceptions of learning and science curricula. Cureus, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.21201
Zhou, Y., Hartley, R., Bernardelli, A., & Tolmie, A. (2025). The impact of spaced learning within physics lessons in secondary schools. PLoS ONE, 20(4), Article e0321552. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0321552
Zourmpakis, A.-I., Kalogiannakis, M., & Papadakis, S. (2024). The effects of adaptive gamification in science learning: a comparison between traditional inquiry-based learning and gender differences. Computers, 13(12), Article 324. https://doi.org/10.3390/computers13120324
Zvoch, K., Holveck, S., & Porter, L. (2019). Teaching for conceptual change in a density unit provided to seventh graders: a comparison of teacher- and student-centered approaches. Research in Science Education, 51(5), 1395–1421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09907-8
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Bamidele Emmanuel Tijani, Adeniyi Michael Adeduyigbe
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
