PLANT BLINDNESS MENUJU LITERASI MORFOLOGI TUMBUHAN: SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW TENTANG PEMBELAJARAN, IDENTIFIKASI TUMBUHAN, DAN LITERASI BOTANI

Authors

  • I Made Diarta Universitas Mahasaraswati Denpasar, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36733/jsp.v16i2.14293

Keywords:

plant morphology learning, plant blindness, botanical literacy, plant identification, systematic literature review

Abstract

Plant morphology is a fundamental component of biology education because it supports students’ ability to observe, describe, identify, classify, and understand plants as living organisms with ecological significance. However, plants often receive less attention in educational contexts compared with other biological organisms, contributing to plant blindness or plant awareness disparity. Addressing this issue requires the development of botanical literacy, including morphological literacy, which emphasizes the ability to recognize, describe, interpret, and use plant morphological characteristics in scientific contexts. This systematic literature review aims to synthesize research on instructional strategies for plant morphology learning and examine their contribution to botanical literacy, morphological literacy, plant awareness, and efforts to overcome plant blindness. Articles were retrieved from the Scopus database in May 2026 using TITLE-ABS-KEY terms related to plant morphology, plant identification, herbarium, plant blindness, plant awareness, botanical literacy, morphological literacy, learning, teaching, and educational participants. The initial search yielded 282 records. After applying inclusion criteria related to article type, English language, publication years 2016–2026, final publication stage, and Social Sciences subject area, 44 articles remained. Nineteen full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, and two articles were excluded due to lack of relevance, resulting in 17 articles included in the final synthesis. The findings identified five major instructional clusters: outdoor observation and field-based learning; educational gardens, herbaria, and local biodiversity learning; digital applications and artificial intelligence for plant identification; virtual field trips and online learning resources; and inquiry-based learning integrated with local knowledge. The reviewed studies indicate that meaningful plant morphology learning involves direct interaction with plants, systematic observation of morphological characteristics, use of botanical terminology, and integration of scientific validation. Digital technologies provide valuable support for identification and engagement but should complement rather than replace direct morphological observation. This review concludes that strengthening morphological literacy is an important pathway for developing botanical literacy and increasing plant awareness. Future plant education should move beyond memorizing plant structures toward contextual scientific experiences that enable learners to understand plants as organisms with structural, functional, ecological, and cultural significance.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Akpınarlı, S. S., Akaydın, G., & Köseoğlu, P. (2026). Learning to see plants: Overcoming future teachers’ plant blindness through outdoor educational activities. Millî Eğitim, 55(249), 177–214. https://doi.org/10.37669/milliegitim.1637327

Azevedo, H., Soares-Silva, I., Fonseca, F., Alves, P., Silva, D., & Azevedo, M.-M. (2022). Impact of educational gardens and workshop activities on 8th-grade student’s perception and knowledge of plant biology. Education Sciences, 12(9 AR-619). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12090619

Bacon, K. L. (2024). Investigating student experiences of botanical field work using a semi-immersive virtual botanical fieldtrip. Journal of Biological Education, 58(5), 1551–1590. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2023.2192733

Becker, L., & Dreesmann, D. C. (2023). Simulating environmental issues: New digital tools to teach biology in silico. Sustainability, 15(19 AR-14325). https://doi.org/10.3390/su151914325

Canuto, P. P. (2023). Perceptions of primary pre-service teachers in the utilization of plant identification apps as educational tools. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 22(5), 799–812. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/23.22.799

Ceylan, B., & Karakuş, M. A. (2024). Development of an artificial intelligence-based mobile application platform: Evaluation of prospective science teachers’ project on creating virtual plant collections in terms of plant blindness and knowledge. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 8(4), 668–688. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijtes.595

Culbert, P. D. (2020). Supplementing forestry field instruction with video and online dynamic quizzing. Natural Sciences Education, 49(1 AR-e20015). https://doi.org/10.1002/nse2.20015

Doménech, M. C. (2025). Knowing much to teach little: The teaching of botany by Pius Font i Quer in the selection and training course for secondary education teachers in 1933. Science & Education, 34, 4663–4682. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-025-00638-z

Echeverria, A., Ariz, I., Moreno, J., Peralta, J., & Gonzalez, E. M. (2021). Learning plant biodiversity in nature: The use of the citizen-science platform iNaturalist as a collaborative tool in secondary education. Sustainability, 13(2 AR-735). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13020735

Finger, A., Groß, J., & Zabel, J. (2022). Plant identification in the 21st century—What possibilities do modern identification keys offer for biology lessons? Education Sciences, 12(12 AR-849). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12120849

Gatarira, C., Nsengimana, V., Muterampundu, J., Mukandera, A., & Habimana, O. (2026). Artificial intelligence plant classification complements dichotomous key to enhance student understanding and engagement in plant identification in Rwanda. Discover Education, 5 AR-285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-026-01237-y

Gonzaga-Leong-on, M. S. (2020). Implementation and evaluation of 7Es scientific inquiry through plant assay guide manual among Grade 9 Science, Technology, and Engineering (STE) junior high school students. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(8), 3496–3501. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.080824

Júnior, A. J. V., & de Azevedo, L. G. (2020). Empirical and scientific knowledge in interface: A dialogue of knowledge to environmental education. Revista Universidad y Sociedad, 12(5), 109–116.

Linderwell, S., Hargiss, C. L. M., & Norland, J. (2024). Do demographic factors impact plant knowledge and plant awareness disparity? Natural Sciences Education, 53(1 AR-e20146). https://doi.org/10.1002/nse2.20146

Pernat, N., Gathof, A. K., Herrmann, J., Seitz, B., & Buchholz, S. (2023). Citizen science apps in a higher education botany course: Data quality and learning effects. Sustainability, 15(17 AR-12984). https://doi.org/10.3390/su151712984

Pongsophon, P., & Jituafua, A. (2021). Developing and assessing learning progression for botanical literacy using Rasch analysis. Science Education International, 32(2), 125–130. https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v32.i2.5

Wyner, Y., & Doherty, J. H. (2019). Seeing the trees: What urban middle school students notice about the street trees that surround them. Journal of Biological Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2019.1667407

Downloads

Published

2026-09-14

Citation Check

Most read articles by the same author(s)