I enjoyed Natural Science classes in elementary school. In junior high school, I liked physics and biology. In senior high school, I chose the natural sciences stream (with a focus on physics). Later, I pursued a bachelor's degree in Fisheries at the Faculty of Animal Science, as I was interested in natural sciences related to seawater.
Do I enjoy practical activities? Yes, I certainly do! To me, there are three types of practical activities: 1) conducting experiments inside the laboratory; 2) conducting fieldwork outside the laboratory (in the actual natural environment)—which I particularly enjoy because I love being outdoors; and 3) applying a treatment or intervention (such as mixing chemicals in the lab) and then observing the resulting changes.
This third type of practicum is something I find sometimes enjoyable and sometimes not. It is enjoyable when the resulting changes align with the practicum protocol, and unpleasant when they do not. My impression is that if the outcome does not match the protocol, then the practicum has failed.
This unpleasant aspect (in my view) ought to change: the realization that a procedure might yield results inconsistent with the laboratory protocol—or even no change at all—should not be viewed as a failure, but rather as a step toward success. When the obtained results deviate from the protocol, they must still be recorded and analyzed to identify potential causes—such as chemical contamination. Subsequently, the experiment is repeated, addressing the factors suspected of causing the discrepancy between the actual results and those outlined in the protocol. This is followed by an analysis of the repeated experiment. The process continues in this manner until results aligning with the laboratory protocol are achieved.
Naturally, this requires more time and additional materials. However, there is no such thing as failure simply because the results—or changes in the results—differ from what is written in the laboratory protocol. After all, experiments always yield facts that can be analyzed and discussed as part of the learning process inherent in the practical method.
In conclusion: 1) In the learning process using the practicum method, there is no such thing as failure, because every experiment yields results—or variations in results—that are worthy of analysis and discussion. 2) When a practicum produces results that differ from those specified in the protocol, this should not be labeled a failure; instead, it should be regarded as an additional phenomenon to be analyzed and discussed, thereby enriching understanding regarding the reasons for the discrepancy. 3) Ideally, if a practicum yields results inconsistent with the protocol, the experiment should be repeated—with adjustments made to the suspected areas requiring improvement—and the resulting data subsequently analyzed and discussed.
Thursday, July 9, 2026, at 01:48 WIB
Dr. Constantinus, S.Pi, S.H., S.Psi, M.M., M.M., M.Psi, Adv., Psi. (Green Industry & Management)
