KEBERKESANAN MODEL 4I-PBL (INSPIRE, INQUIRE, INNOVATE, IMPLEMENT) DALAM MENINGKATKAN PENGALAMAN PEMBELAJARAN STEM BAGI PELAJAR PINTAR DAN BERBAKAT
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE 4I-PBL MODEL (INSPIRE, INQUIRE, INNOVATE, IMPLEMENT) IN ENHANCING STEM LEARNING EXPERIENCES AMONG GIFTED AND TALENTED STUDENTS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35631/IJEPC.1162053Keywords:
Inovasi Digital (Digital Innovation), Model 4I-PBL (4I-PBL Model), Pembelajaran Berasaskan Projek (PBL) (Project-Based Learning (PBL), Pendidikan Pintar Dan Berbakat ( Gifted and Talented Education), STEM ( STEM Education)Abstract
Kajian ini bertujuan menilai keberkesanan Model 4I-PBL (Inspire, Inquire, Innovate, Implement) dalam memperkaya pengalaman pembelajaran STEM dalam kalangan pelajar pintar dan berbakat. Model ini mengintegrasikan pembelajaran berasaskan projek (PBL), teknologi digital dan kolaborasi dengan pakar industri sebagai alternatif kepada pedagogi konvensional yang kurang menekankan penerokaan aktif dan aplikasi dunia sebenar. Kajian melibatkan 77 orang pelajar aliran Digital Inovator di Kolej PERMATA@Pintar Negara, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia ini menggunakan pendekatan kaedah campuran merangkumi data kuantitatif dan kualitatif. Analisis statistik deskriptif menunjukkan tahap kepuasan dan motivasi pelajar yang tinggi, dengan nilai min antara 4.10 hingga 4.50 serta sisihan piawai yang rendah. Analisis korelasi Pearson pula mendapati hubungan positif yang signifikan antara kepuasan dan motivasi pelajar, serta antara konstruk afektif ini dengan kemahiran penyelesaian masalah, kreativiti dan inovasi. Dapatan ini menunjukkan bahawa fasa berperingkat dalam Model 4I-PBL berfungsi secara saling berkaitan dalam menyokong pembelajaran bermakna dan berorientasikan aplikasi sebenar. Dapatan kualitatif turut mengukuhkan hasil ini dengan menunjukkan peningkatan kemahiran teknikal, pemikiran kreatif dan aplikasi pengetahuan STEM. Secara keseluruhan, kajian ini membuktikan bahawa Model 4I-PBL merupakan strategi pedagogi STEM yang holistik dan berimpak tinggi untuk pembangunan potensi pelajar pintar dan berbakat.
This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the 4I-PBL model (Inspire, Inquire, Innovate, Implement) in enriching STEM learning experiences among gifted and talented students. The model integrates project-based learning (PBL), digital technologies, and collaboration with industry experts as an alternative to conventional pedagogical approaches that place limited emphasis on active exploration and real-world application. The study involved 77 students from the Digital Innovator stream at Kolej PERMATA@Pintar Negara, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, and employed a mixed-methods approach incorporating both quantitative and qualitative data. Descriptive statistical analysis revealed high levels of student satisfaction and motivation, with mean scores ranging from 4.10 to 4.50 and low standard deviations. Pearson correlation analysis further identified significant positive relationships between student satisfaction and motivation, as well as between these affective constructs and the development of problem-solving, creativity, and innovation skills. These findings indicate that the progressive phases of the 4I-PBL model operate in an interconnected manner to support meaningful, application-oriented learning. Qualitative findings reinforced the quantitative results, highlighting improvements in technical skills, creative thinking, and the application of STEM knowledge in authentic contexts. Overall, the study demonstrates that the 4I-PBL model is a holistic and high-impact STEM pedagogical strategy for nurturing the potential of gifted and talented students.
Downloads
References
AlAli, M. (2024). Integrating STEM and PBL for 21st-century competencies: A systematic review. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 22(3), 415–432.
Andriyani, M., Kriswantoro, K., Asrial, A., & Damris, D. (2025). Analisis Kebutuhan Pengembangan Multimedia Interaktif Berbasis STEM-PjBL Pada Materi Ikatan Kimia. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika Dan Sains, 13(Special_issue), 338–348.
Andriyani, N., Putra, H., & Rahmawati, S. (2025). STEM-integrated project-based learning and its impact on students’ problem-solving skills. Journal of STEM Education Research, 12(1), 33–48.
Bell, S. 2010. Project-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future. The Clearing House, 83(2), 39–43. A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas.
Dym, C.L., “Learning Engineering: Design, Languages, and Experiences,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 88, no. 2, 1999, pp. 145–148.
Effendi, R., & Yoto, Y. (2024). STEM-Project-Based Learning to enhance innovation and workforce readiness. Journal of Technical and Vocational Studies, 9(2), 112–129.
Gagné, F. 2005. From gifts to talents: The DMGT as a developmental model. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 98–119). Cambridge University Press.
Hakiki, F. A., Munawaroh, S., & Lestari, D. (2022). STEM education for building global-ready learners: A conceptual analysis. Indonesian Journal of Science Education, 6(4), 211–226.
Haritzah, B., Ananda, R., & Azizah, N. (2024). Developing 4C skills through STEM-based PBL in secondary schools. Journal of 21st Century Learning, 5(1), 77–89.
Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. 2000. An instructional design framework for authentic learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(3), 23–48.
Heryanti, S. (2020). Project-based STEM learning to foster students’ creativity. Journal of Educational Innovation, 10(2), 54–63.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E. 2004. Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235–266.
Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. (2023). Laporan perkembangan pendidikan STEM di Malaysia 2023. Bahagian Perancangan dan Penyelidikan Dasar Pendidikan.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355
Lestari, R., Widodo, A., & Pramana, D. (2023). The effectiveness of STEM-PBL integration on conceptual understanding and creativity. Journal of Science Learning, 8(1), 15–29.
Mona, R., & Rachmawati, T. (2023). Project-Based Learning in developing 21st-century competencies in STEM classrooms. Journal of Modern STEM Pedagogy, 4(2), 101–118.
Renzulli, J. S. (2021). Advancing the development of gifted and talented students through creativity and innovation. Routledge.
Smith, J., Brown, K., & Taylor, M. (2022). Project-Based Learning and student motivation in STEM education: A longitudinal study. International Journal of STEM Education, 9(14), 1–12.
Schraw, G., Crippen, K. J., & Hartley, K. (2006). Promoting Self-Regulation in Science Education: Metacognition as Part of a Broader Perspective on Learning. Research in Science Education, 36, 111-139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-005-3917-8
Subotnik, R. F., Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Worrell, F. C. 2011. Rethinking giftedness and gifted education: A proposed direction forward based on psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12(1), 3–54.
Sundari, N. (2023). Pedagogi autentik untuk pelajar pintar dan berbakat dalam era pendidikan digital. Journal of Gifted Education Studies, 8(2), 45–58.
Sutrisno, A., & Syukur, A. (2023). STEM-based PBL and the development of innovation skills among high school students. Journal of Science Education Research, 17(3), 63–78.
Thomas, J. W. 2000. A review of research on project-based learning. San Rafael, CA: The Autodesk Foundation. Retrieved from
VanTassel-Baska, J., & Wood, S. 2010. The integrated curriculum model (ICM). Learning and Individual Differences, 20(4), 345–357.
Wicaksono, A. (2020). Interdisciplinary STEM-PBL approach to developing higher-order thinking skills. Journal of Educational Science and Technology, 6(2), 89–98.
Ziadat, A. H., & Sakarneh, M. (2021). Meeting gifted learners’ needs through advanced PBL and technology-enhanced pedagogy. Journal of Gifted Education and Creativity, 8(1), 25–40
