Concepts in Senior High School - RSIS International

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume IV, Issue VIII, August 2020|ISSN 2454-6186

www.rsisinternational.org Page 426

The Development of Mechanics Problem-Based

Learning Model with Multi Representation Approach

to Practice Students‟ Critical Thinking Skill of

Elasticity and Hooke‟s Law, And Static Fluid

Concepts in Senior High School Dr. Rosyid Althaf

Reseacher, Head of Section of Senior High School Development & Special Education at the Education Office of East Java

Province, Jember Region, Indonesia

Abstract: This research aims to develop instructional model

problem-based mechanics with multi representation approach

(the instructional model of Orientation IPA) to practice students’

critical thinking skill. The used method is research and

development referring to Borg & Gall. This development

research includes three stages, namely preliminary study stage,

the development of model design and trials stage, and model

evaluation stage. The focus of this research is in preliminary

study and model design development stages resulting the

instructional model of Orientation IPA. The expert validation is

conducted by three experts and eight teachers of model users.

The trial stage is conducted to students of 10th grade of Science

Mathematics department of three classes. The sample

determination uses Simple Random Sampling technique. The data

analysis uses quantitative descriptive technique. The research

results show that the instructional model of Orientation IPA

meets the validation, practice and effectiveness requirements.

Keywords: critical thinking skill, instructional model of

Orientation IPA, multi representation .

I. INTRODUCTION

he educational goals emphasize on knowledge acquisition

and must describe the result study until to the high level

of thinking, even to the ability to solve problems. In line with

this, Gagne (1985) has opinion that the study condition has to

be directed to problem solving which is the highest capability

in thinking skill. The learning must be directed not only to get

understanding achievement but also to improve the critical

thinking skill. The development of critical thinking is

considered as one of the most important goals from

educational knowledge for more than one century (Forawi,

2012). The definitions of critical thinking very vary from the

simple one to the complex one. Ennis (1991) defines the

critical thinking as reflective and reasonable thinking focusing

on deciding what have to do. Halpern (1996), the critical

thinking is defined as cognitive ability utilization or strategy

improving the desired possible result. Other definitions

include; the formulation of logical summary (Simon &

Kaplan, 1989), to develop careful and logical reasoning (Stall

& Stall, 1991), to decide what must be conducted or what

must be trusted by natural reflective thinking (Ennis, 1991)

and the goal determines what to be accepted, rejected or

postpone the assessment (Moore & Parker, 1994).

Related to the improvement of process and its result

quality, there are important problems facing by education

world today, they are how to attempt to build the

understanding (Brooks dan Brooks, 1993) and to empower

students‟ critical thinking skill by learning (Krulik & Rudnick,

1996; Marzano, 1993). These are required to be done because

it is assumed that many students do not have high level of

critical thinking (Berger et al., 1987). The reality is that the

mean score achievement of Science students in Indonesia is

still low, they are only able to recognize an amount of basic

facts but they are not yet able to communicate and relate

various science topics, event to apply the complex and

abstract concepts (TIMSS, 2011). The preliminary study result

to find out students‟ critical thinking skill in Senior High

School in Jember Regency is ranging (13,28 % - 45,50 %).

This result shows that students‟ critical thinking skill is still

low (Rosyid et al., 2013). This low students‟ critical thinking

skill must be improved. The low students‟ critical thinking

and study achievement are suspected that there is relationship

with the on going learning process. Thus, it is required an

alternative solution to improve this. One of which is by using

instructional model of problem-based mechanics with multi

representation approach. The problem-based learning has been

used effectively to improve study retention causing the

increase Physics understanding (Maloney, 1994; Hobden,

1999; Gaigher, 2004) and to affect the students‟ conceptual

development positively (Kumar et al., 2010), also it is advised

as the promising strategy to improve students‟ critical

thinking skill and problem solving skill (Tiwari, 1999; Chan,

2013). Based on the above explanation, to improve students‟

critical thinking skill, it is required a development of

“Instructional Model of Problem-Based Learning through

T

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Chan%20ZC%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=23452036



Multi Representation Approach”. This research aims to

develop the problem-based mechanics by multi representation

approach which can be used to teach critical thinking skill of

senior high school students.

II. RESEARCH METHODS

The used method is research and development,

referring to Borg & Gall model. The development of this

research includes three stages, namely preliminary study

stage, the development of model design and trials stage, and

model evaluation stage. The development design is presented

in Figure 1. The developed product is the instruction model of

Orientation IPA for 10th

grade Mathematic Science (MS)

senior high school‟s student meeting the validity, practice and

effectiveness requirements. This research is conducted in

State Senior High School in Jember Regency, East Java,

namely State Senior High School 3 Jember (trial). The used

sample for model trial is 3 classes. The sample selection uses

Simple Random Sampling technique to determined the will-

be-researched classes. The research data collection uses

observation, questionnaire, interview and test techniques. The

critical thinking skill test uses 18 questions essay.

III. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

The Initial Design Model

The instructional model problem-based mechanics with

multi representation approach is built from some basic

theories that problem-based learning can give chances for

students to involve the multi intelligences (Fogarty, 2007;

Arends,2007;Gardner, 1999) and is based on constructivism

learning theory (Piaget,1952; Vygotsky,1978), to improve

critical thinking skill (Tiwari, 1999; Arends, 2004; Hasting,

2001; Rindell, 1999), and cognitive study theory. While the

multi representations have three main functions in learning,

namely as the complementary, interpretation limit and

understanding builder (Ainsworth, 1999). The representation

like demonstration method can help to limit the difficulty in

Physics study insisting more to involve physical knowledge

and mathematic logics (Dahar 1989; Van den Berg, 1991).

Izsak and Saherin (2003) state that learning by involving multi

representations gives plentiful contexs for students to

understand a concept. Tytler et al. (2013), states that student‟s

effort to understand or explain Science concepts requires

representational work and study on new concept which can

not be separated from studying how to represent the concepts

in a representation. Anderson (2001) states that students can

be said to understand if they have thinking ability to construct

meanings from learning materials like verbal, written and

graph communication, or meaning based on initial knowledge

possessed, or to interpret new knowledge to scheme which has

been in students‟ thought.

Standing on these theories, so in this research, it will be

developed a mechanics instructional model referring to

Arends‟s (1997) problem-based learning with multi

representation approach of IF-SO framework from Corolan et

al. (2008), developed by Tytler et al., (2013), so it rises

learning order (syntax), namely problem orientation and

identification, problem representation in group, investigation,

observation result presentation in various representation, and

process analysis and evaluation of problem solving. Based on

this learning order, so the mechanics instructional model is

named by instructional model of ORIENTATION IPA

(based on the acronym; Orientation, Representation,

Investigation, Presentation, and Analysis). This

implementation in class, this syntax can be developed,

especially about teacher‟s and students‟ activity in proposing

and hypothesis test, design, and also experiment

implementation or observation process in its relation to

practice concept understanding and critical thinking skill. The

syntax of instructional model of Orientation IPA (hypothetic

model) is presented in table 1.

Table 1. The Initial syntax of Instructional model of Orientation IPA

Phase Teacher‟s actions

Phase 1:

Problem orientation and identification

1. Teacher informs learning goals and describes study demands

2. Motivates students to involve in problem solving activity

3. Teacher identifies key problems from topic to build student‟s representation

4. Teacher focuses explicitly on delivering different functions and representation forms

Phase 2:

Problem representation in group

1. Organizes students to form groups, each group consists of 5-6 students

2. Teacher helps students to determine and regulate study tasks relating to problems. 3. Teacher gives representational challenge order to raise ideas in developing concept understanding.

Phase 3:

Investigation

1. Teacher helps students to collect suitable information.

2. Teacher guides students to conduct research stage by stage, look for explanation and solution to develop critical thinking skill.

Phase 4:

Observation result presentation in

various representations

1. Teacher guides students to make conclusion and discussion from observation result in various representations.

2. Teacher helps students to plan, prepare, and present work results such as experiment report, model and helps

them to share their works.

Phase 5:

Analysis and evaluation of problem

solving process

1. Teacher helps students conduct analysis and evaluation of problem solving process for observation and process

they use in various representation forms (Multi representations).

2. Teacher must see students‟ representation work as the study proofs.



The Model Design and Trial Stage

The Characteristics of Instructional Model of Orientation IPA

The characteristics of instructional model of Orientation IPA

are formulated based on theory study results and preliminary

study & development. The instructional model of Orientation

IPA is developed referring to instructional model

characteristics according to Arends (1997), which mention

that there are minimum four specific characteristics of

instructional model which can be used to achieve learning

goals, namely logical theoretic rationale from its design,

learning goals which want to be achieved, the required

teacher‟s behaviour in teaching to implement learning, and the

required study environment to achieve learning goals. In

summary, the instructional model characteristics of

Orientation IPA as follow:

a. The Theory Rationale

The instructional model of Orientation IPA is built from some

basic theories, namely multiple intelligence theory,

constructivism learning theory, cognitive learning theory, and

multi representation theory (IF-SO framework). These four

theories are the main base in developing the instructional

model of Orientation IPA enabling to practice concept

understanding and critical thinking skills by scientific work in

various representation forms. These theories are consideration

in arranging steps in problem orientation and identification,

problem representation, investigation, presentation, and

analysis-evaluation and follow-up. The relationships of

theories above to instructional model are explained as follow:

1) Multiple Intelligence Theory

The Multiple Intelligence theory is theory as the base of

instructional model of Orientation IPA that various child

intelligences must be facilitated by teacher in selecting

strategy, approach, model, learning method. This is related to

the 2nd

phase in learning syntax of instructional model of

Orientation IPA namely problem representation phase. The

problem must be represented in various forms namely verbal,

graph, figure, and mathematics.

2) The Cognitive Study Theory

The unique characteristic of cognitive study is on study to

obtain and use representation forms (2nd

phase) representing

the facing objects, whether the objects are people, things or

events. These objects are represented or presented in one

person by responds, ideas or symbols which are all mentally.

In thinking, the objects are in the form of representation, like

responds, definitions (concepts), and verbal symbols. In

studying to think, students are faced to a problem they have to

solve (1st Phase, problem orientation and identification). The

figure creation is one of heuristic forms often found in

completing mechanics problems (2nd

phase, problem

representation). The cognitive strategy is a way possessed by

students to manage study process. If a student is faced to a

new problem, so to solve this problem, he/she must relate not

only previous study results, namely information and

intellectual skill which have been learned (1st phase: problem

orientation and identification), he/she also must have strategy

to solve this new problem. The student may regulate his/her

thinking process by internally organized strategies, for

example by investigation (3rd

phase).

The findings from cognitive psychology provide theoretical

base for instructional model of Orientation IPA. The basic

premise in cognitive psychology is study which is a new

knowledge construction based on current knowledge. These

cognitive processes affect knowledge utilization; and social

and conceptual factors affect learning. This theory underlies

1st phase (problem orientation and identification).

3) Constructivism learning theory

Jean Piaget learns how students think and about processes

relating to intellectual development to try to understand their

surrounding world. This curiosity motivates them to construct

actively representations about their environment (2nd

phase).

In all their development stages, students‟ demand to

understand their environment motivates them to investigate

and construct the explaining theory (3rd

phase: investigation).

Lev Vygotsky believes that intellectual develops when an

individual faces new and confusing experiences and when

they try to solve the arising problems from these experiences.

In the effort to get this understanding, an individual relates

new knowledge to previous knowledge and constructs the new

one. Vygostky emphasizes on the importance of study social

aspect because social interaction with other encourage the

new idea construction and improve students‟ intellectual

development (Nur, 2008). This theory is the base for 5th

phase

:Analysis, Evaluation and follow-up.

The view about education with school as bigger society

reflection and class will be laboratory for observation and

problem solving of real life (3rd

phase: Investigation). The

Dewey pedagogy supports teacher to involve students in

various problem-oriented projects and help them to investigate

various social and important intellectual problems. Dewey and

his followers (Nur, 2000) assure that learning at school should

be purposeful, not too abstract. The purposeful learning vision

in problem centred supported by student nature curiosity to

explore situations which mean personally for them (1st phase :

problem orientation). Bruner emphasizes on inductive

reasoning and observation process as the unique

characteristics of scientific method (3rd

phase : investigation).

4) Multi representations

Multi representataions have three main functions, namely

complementary, interpretation limit and understanding builder

(Ainsworth, 1999). As the complementary, multi

representations are used to give representation containing

complementary information or help to complete cognitive

process. The representation is a thing to represent, describe or

summary object and/or process. Multi representation also

means to represent again the same concept with different


www.rsisinternational.org 29

format, including verbal, mathematic, figure and graph (Prain

& Waldrip, 2007). Thus, the view above has meaning that

multi representations are a way to state a concept in various

ways and forms. Standing on these theories, so multi

representations are the choice to be attached in problem-based

learning.

b. The achieved learning goals

The goals of the instructional model development of

Orientation IPA are to practice concept understanding and

critical thinking skill, and other goals are to encourage

students‟ activity and respond in learning, and to improve

students‟ motivation and activity in learning. To achieve these

goals, the instructional model of Orientation IPA is conducted

by collaborative and cooperative activities by scientific

approach, social interaction by independent and group study

experience and by presentation of conceptual problem in

various representations.

c. Syntax

a) Problem Orientation and Identification

The goals of this step are to attract students‟ interest and

motivate them to actively involve in learning process. Before

doing problem orientation and identification, teacher

communicates the learning goals to student based on Lesson

Plan. Based on curriculum of 2013, these learning goals

include the core competency, basic competency and

indicators. Then, teacher presents physical events, incidents

and phenomenon often seen and experienced by students in

their daily life. This aims to prepare study students by

attracting their interest, centring the students‟ interest at topic

which will be discussed, and reminding students about their

relevant study result to the will-be discussed topics

(apperception).

b) Problem representation

Students are prepared with model representation and

demonstration from the physical phenomenon seen by its

goals to help students to understand mechanics materials and

solve problems which will be discussed. The presentation and

demonstration of mechanics material can be done by various

approaches which can be adjusted to learning goals and

deliver material characteristics. Teacher presents various

representations (verbal, figure, mathematic, and graphs) and is

strengthened by animation presentation/physical simulation to

embed concept in interactive setting, such as PhET Simulator.

This information is delivered only for its outline so it will not

waste the learning time. The detail explanations about

material are in BAS. Teacher needs to master the overall

concepts or skills so he/she can demonstrate a concept or skill

well.

c) Investigation

In this stage, the students are encouraged to collect

information with assistance of Student Work Sheet ( 3rd

Attachment), then, teacher guides them to conduct observation

stage by stage, look for explanation, and solution to build

critical thinking skills including (1) formulating problems (2)

formulating hypothesis (3) identifying variables (4) writing

operational definition of variables (5) writing experiment tools

and materials (6) conducting experiment (7) organizing the

experiment result data (8) analysing experiment result data

and (9) making conclusion. Then, teacher guides them to

discuss and make conclusion from the investigation result in

various representations.

d) Presentation

One of the unique stages in syntax of instructional model of

Orientation IPA to improve concept understanding and critical

thinking skill is to conduct presentation of investigation

results. It is required to be noticed that teacher‟s duty is to

guide in making conclusion and discussion from observation

results in various representations and help in planning,

preparing and presenting work result.

e) Analysis, Evaluation and Follow-up

In this phase, teacher helps to analysis and evaluate problem

solving process of the observation and processes in various

representation forms (multi representations), sees students‟

works as the study proofs (the Student Work Sheet is

collected), and facilitates the study follow-up by giving

structural task (task in BAS).

d. The Study Environment and Task Management

As in general instructional models, teaching and learning

activity using instructional model of Orientation IPA to

practice concept understanding and critical thinking skill,

teacher plans the activity structurally and strictly. The success

of this instructional model utilization is also determined by

environment preparation and good instructional media to

support each teacher‟s and students‟ activity in each stage in

syntax. Teacher has a role to manage class to ensure the

conducive learning environment and situation, such as

forming group, regulating how students communicate,

regulating presentation time, regulating students‟ active

involvement especially in investigation and presentation, and

solving any students‟ deviation behaviour. This instructional

model has these following principles:

1) Making Groups

Teacher makes groups consisting of 5-6 students in one group.

The group formation can be done in the first meeting, so the

students have had fixed group during the learning process

which implements Orientation IPA model. This is to save time

in the next meeting.

2) Regulating Students To Speak

Teacher needs to have rules about prohibition of talking any

inappropriate topics with the concept in class and determines

it consistently to handle and avoid the students who like to

talk about things beyond the learning context. Besides, teacher

also gives the same chances to all students to comment,



deliver advices, or questions, so there will no domination of

clever students. Teacher‟s task is to guide or direct and to be

motivator.

3) Regulating Presentation

The Physics learning implementation in class is limited by

time, so not all groups can present in front of class. So, this

requires regulation, for example, in first meeting, there are

two groups which are presenting and other groups will be on

the next meeting. The provided time for the two groups is 10

minutes for each group. The teacher‟s role is to motivate

students to ask and respond students‟ presentation to give

strengthened.

4) Regulating Participation

Teacher as the motivator/fasilitator has duty to activate

students‟ participation. For passive students, it is required

some things, for example, by using „activity zone‟. This

activity zone is certain area in class where students are more

active. In this activity zone, teacher can conduct better eye

contact. Teacher is required to give evenly attention and

supervision for each student during the investigation and

presentation.

5) Handling behaviour Deviation

If this instructional model is implemented in big class, so it is

possible that there are students doing deviation behaviour.

Teacher is advised to centre attention directly to the behaviour

deviation, for example by reprimanding or coming to the

student.

The expert assessment result to the validity / properness of

instructional model of Orientation IPA

Based on expert assessment, it shows that the developed

instructional model of Orientation IPA has high content

validity and construct of 91,54%; the components of

instructional model of Orientation IPA has high theoretical

base robustness; and the components of instructional model

(syntax, reaction principle, social system, supporting system,

and instructional effect also following effects) internally have

high consistency (90,95%) so it is reliable to be used in

Physics learning in Senior high school. While, all practitioner

valuators give assessment that instructional model of

Orientation IPA has content validation of 91,40 and construct

validation of 91,70. The decision of these eight valuators is

that the instructional model of Orientation IPA is reliable to

be used in Physics learning in senior high school and in

accordance to curriculum of 2013.

The learning tool validity is conducted to Lesson Plan (RPP),

Student Work Sheet (LKS), BAS, Competency-Based

Curriculum test, Observation sheet, interview guidance, and

questionnaire; the validity for all these tools are consecutively

the RPP validity reaches the mean of 93,97 % (RPP of

elasticity & Hooke Law) and 93,45 % (RPP of static fluid),

LKS for elasticity & Hooke law of 90,05 %, LKS for static

fluid of 88,80 %, while BAS, Competency-Based Curriculum

(KBK) test, Observation sheet, interview guidance, and

questionnaire are stated to be valid and reliable to be used.

The trial result test of critical thinking skill instrument is

stated to be valid ranging 0,389 – 0,439, and reliable (0,825-

0,842), with sensitivity level of each question of PK for

elasticity & Hooke Law, KBK for elasticity & Hooke Law,

PK for static fluid and KBK for static fluid consecutively are

0,51; 0,47; 0,54; and 0,45 stated to be sensitive. So, it can be

concluded that the instructional model of Orientation IPA and

its tools are reliable to be used with high validity level.

The expert assessment results to the instructional model of

Orientation IPA by model book and its learning tools (RPP,

LKS, BAS, and assessment tools) result model have high

content validity and construct validity. the percentage

achievement of expert assessment is 91,54% (content validity)

and 90,95% (construct validity) based on expert assessment of

State University lecturers, while the assessment from model

teachers (the practitioners) for content validity and construct

validity consecutively are 91,40 % and 91,70 %. Based on

validity achievement criteria (Ratumanan, 2003), so the

results of content and construct validity are ranging from 85

% - 100 %, so, it is said to be very valid. The instructional

model of Orientation IPA is reliable to be used in Physics

learning enabling to improve students‟ critical thinking skill.

The Instructional model of Orientation IPA can be well

implemented by model teachers by guiding to development

result tools which have been stated to be valid. The expert

validity results for all RPP of elasticity & Hooke Law, and

static fluid concepts are ranging from 91,93 % – 95,31 %, so it

is said to be very valid based on Ratumanan‟s opinion (2003)

and almost all Physics teacher in MGMP- Discipline Teacher

Discussion Forum state that this model is accordance to the

requirement of Curriculum 2013 referring to scientific

approach, so, it is reliable to be used. The expert assessment

to LKS is ranging from 88,19 % - 90,63 %, so it is stated to be

valid based on validity achievement criteria. The expert

assessment to the test for content validity, question

construction and question language and writing is stated to be

valid. While, from instrument trial result, all questions are

stated to be sensitive. The expert assessment to BAS,

observation sheet, interview guidance and questionnaires, all

are stated to be valid. The test validity and reliability to

concept understanding and critical thinking skill are also valid

and reliable based on alpha cronbach’s using SPSS program

version 17. All questions of sensitive test has the lowest

sensitivity index of 0,31 and the highest one of 0,63.

The learning using instructional model of Orientation IPA can

give study chances to students having different abilities in

understanding Physics concepts. This is also the same opinion in

theory delivered by experts that problem-based learning gives

chances to involve multiple intelligences possessed by students

(Fogarty, 1997; Gardner, 1999). The involvement of multiple

intelligences in problem solving with problem approach can

be a tool for students to have various multiple intelligences to

involve their ability optimally in problem solving.



The trial result of the instructional model of Orientation IPA is

in line with the research conducted by Adesoji (1995, 1997) that

problem solving is an effective strategy in teaching students with

different ability levels. The research results of Çaliscan et al.,

(2010) and Selçuk, G.S., (2010) also show that teaching with

problem solving strategy has positive effects to problem solving

performance and students‟ physics achievement. While, related

to concept multi representation ability, Ainsworth, (2004) says

that multi representations are as a tool for improving students‟

understanding especially to complex knowledge. Corolan,J at

al.,’s (2008) opinion also supports the research conducted by

the writer that skilful students often use qualitative

representations like figure, graphs, and diagram to help

understanding questions before using mathematic equations to

solve problems quantitatively.

The learning implementation to limited trials

a. The feasibility of instructional model of Orientation

This model feasibility is seen from observer observation

results to the learning implementation by lesson plan. The

elements which are seen are learning syntax, social system and

reaction principle. The achievement percentages of 1st trial

class for syntax component consecutively are 74,04 % -

81,73% (class_A), 77,88 % - 85,58 % (class _B), and 80,77 %

- 87,50 % (class _C). The percentage mean achievement of

social system component for each class are 80 % - 87,50 %

(class _A), 82,50 % - 90,00 % (class B, and 82,50% - 90,00 %

(class _C). The percentage means of teacher‟s behaviour

component are 80,00 % - 87,50 % (class_A), 82,50 % - 90,00

% (class _B), and 80,00 % - 92,50 % (class _C). The learning

feasibility data with instructional model of Orientation IPA of

elasticity and Hooke law topics is described in Figure 1.

Figure 1. The Bar Chart of learning feasibility with Orientation IPA

model in 1st trial

Figure 1 shows that the feasibility percentage

achievement of Orientation IPA tends to be consistent in

all trial classes with score above 74,04 % - 97,50 %,

meaning that lesson plan can be implemented well.

While, the 2nd

trial, the percentage ranges of learning

feasibility to syntax component consecutively are 82,69 %

- 93,27% (class_A), 79,81% - 90,38% (class _B), and

85,58% -94,23% (class _C). The percentage mean

achievement of social system component for each class is

80 % - 87,50 % (class_A), 82,50 % - 95,00 % (class B),

and 85% - 95,00 % (class _C). The percentage averages of

teacher‟s behaviour component are 80,00 % - 90 % (class

_A), 80 % -97,50 % (class _B), and 90,00% - 97,50 %

(class _C). The learning feasibility data with instructional

model of Orientation IPA of static fluid topic is described

in Figure 2.

Figure 2. The Bar Chart of learning feasibility with Orientation IPA

model in 2nd trial

Figure 2 shows the learning component achievements for

all trial classes are consistent and high category based in

model feasibility level criteria. All 2nd

trial classes get

score above 79,81%, it means that lesson plan can be

implemented well. The model development results in

limited trial create phase revision in model syntax like in

table 2.

70

75

80

85

90

95

Lea

rnin

g_

1

Lea

rnin

g_

2

Lea

rnin

g_

3

Lea

rnin

g_

1

Lea

rnin

g_

2

Lea

rnin

g_

3

Lea

rnin

g_

1

Lea

rnin

g_

2

Lea

rnin

g_

3

Class A Class B Class C

Syntax Social system Reaction principle

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Lea

rnin

g_

1

Lea

rnin

g_

2

Lea

rnin

g_

3

Lea

rnin

g_

4

Lea

rnin

g_

1

Lea

rnin

g_

2

Lea

rnin

g_

3

Lea

rnin

g_

4

Lea

rnin

g_

1

Lea

rnin

g_

2

Lea

rnin

g_

3

Lea

rnin

g_

4


Syntax Social system Reaction principle



Table 2. The syntax Revision result of the instructional model of Orientation IPA

Phase Teacher‟s activities Students‟ activities

1st Phase: Problem orientation

1. Conduct apperception

2. Present physical event, incident, phenomenon which are often seen and

experienced by students in their daily life.

3. Explain learning goals and competency 4. Present and demonstrate model from the

reviewed physical phenomenon.

1. Students listen to and pay attention to

teacher‟s explanation

2. Students observe physical phenomenon 3. Students listen to explanation

4. Students observe and try model, for example

PhET Simulator and media

2nd Phase :

Problem representation

in groups

1. Organize students to form groups, each

group consists of 5-6 students 2. Present various representations (verbal,

figure, mathematic, diagram and graph)

strengthened by animation / simulation display to embed concept in interactive

setting, for example using PhET Simulator.

1. Students form groups

2. Students pay attention and try to represent

problems

3rd phase : Investigation

1. Support to collect suitable information

2. Guide to conduct investigation stage by

stage, look for explanation and solution to

build critical thinking skill 3. Guide in making conclusion and discussion

from investigation result in various

representations.

1. Students collect information for investigation

2. Students try to conduct investigation 3. Students relate and conclude investigation

4th phase :

Presentation of

investigation results in various representations

1. Help to plan, prepare, and present investigation results and discussion results.

2. Direct and guide the

1. Students plan and prepare to the presentation 2. Students work together to actively involve in

presentation activity

5th phase:

Analysis, evaluation of

problem solving and follow-up process

1. Help to conduct analysis and evaluation of

problem solving process and processes in

various representations (Multi representations).

2. See the students‟ work as study proofs.

3. Facilitate the study follow-up by giving structural tasks.

1. Students analysis the discussion results based

on investigation data in Student Work Sheet 2. Students collect individual and group work

results.

3. Students accept tasks from teacher.

Analysis to the feasibility of the instructional model of

Orientation IPA is seen from the implementation of the

Lesson Plan during the learning, both at trial or

implementation of the instructional model of Orientation IPA.

The conducted trial and implementation of learning activity in

this research are seven Lesson Plans namely 3 Lesson Plans

for elasticity and Hooke Law topics, and the four lesson plans

for static fluid topic. The result analysis of lesson plan‟s

provided during the trial and at the time of implementation

show that the learning process goes well and consistently to

all experiment classes, meaning that all phases of the learning

model syntax on all topics (elasticity and Hooke Law, and

static Fluid) based on feasibility level have a high feasibility

ranging from 80% - 100%. This fact indicates that all

elements in the instructional model of Orientation IPA

including syntax, social systems, and reaction principle are

properly implemented and in accordance with the principles

of the instructional model of Orientation IPA. The feasibility

of Instructional model of Orientation IPA from the first

meeting until the seventh meeting raises obstacles in learning

process which can be directly solved by the teacher models.

These constraints for example are students who speak for

themselves, and the discrepancy of planned presentation time

based on lesson plan. These obstacles are solved by giving

attention and adjusting students‟ seat positions; and the one

which is associated with time, there is rearrangement in

presentation implementation.

Social system in the instructional model of Orientation IPA is

focused on interaction and norms between teachers and

students, and students with students in the feasibility of

learning in the class. Teacher‟s interaction with students and

students with students are very good and communicative,

open, and democratic. The Instructional model of Orientation

IPA emphasizes on the effort to develop the students‟ ability

to have competencies to interact with others as an effort to

build a democratic student attitudes respecting differences in

learning. The learning is directed in efforts to involve students

to understand, study, apply and receive social functions and

role in the group. This model requires students to cooperate;

teacher guides students to define problems, collects relevant

data, and formulates hypotheses. This is in line with

Vygotsky‟s opinion emphasizing on the importance of the

social study aspect because social interaction with other

people encourages new ideas and enhance the students‟

intellectual development (Nur, 2008).

While the reaction principle relates to teacher‟s behaviour

patterns in giving a reaction to students‟ behaviour in learning,

for example, how the teacher gives the student questions and

responds to students‟ answer, and teacher‟s role as a whole in

learning. Reaction principle goes well, where the teacher acts



as a facilitator, motivator, and a good companion in improving

student learning in order to achieve concept understanding of

the mechanics concept and raise students' critical thinking

skills. During the lesson, the teacher has given support

emphasizing on students‟ hypothesis and discussions. In this

learning, the teacher provides assistance in considering the

hypothesis, directs students on specific examples, as well as

provides support and assesses the used critical thinking

strategies by students. The conclusion of the instructional

model of Orientation IPA the feasibility associated with the

reaction principle indicates that the mean formed students‟

motivation is high.

b. The Students’ Respond to the Learning

Implementation using Instructional Model of Orientation IPA

Students‟ respond to the attractiveness of teaching materials,

innovation of teaching materials, interest in learning methods,

the impact of teaching material utilization, clarity of learning

models, problem solving skill, and the ability to work on 1st

and 2nd

trials questions are summarized in Figure 3.

Figure 3. The bar diagram of students' response to instructional model of

Orientation IPA.

Figure 3 illustrates that students‟ response in learning using

the developed instructional model of orientation IPA has high

category, both in 1st and 2

nd trials. Student responses are

always increasing and tend to be consistent for all observed

aspects by observer.

The observations results are responses given by students to

learning implementation using instructional model of

Orientation IPA during the trial and implementation. The

observation results of students' response to the attractiveness

and innovation of teaching materials, interest in learning

methods, clarity of learning models, the impact of teaching

material utilization, problem solving skill, and the ability to

work on the problems show very high response to learning.

The high response illustrates the attractiveness of the students

at learning model. The mean students‟ positive response to

learning is always increased in every meeting, over 80.21%

meaning that the implementation of the instructional model of

orientation IPA is able to evoke interest, motivation, passion,

and great curiosity in learning.

Student‟s responses which are presented related to the interest

and innovation (material / content of the lesson, BAS,

worksheets, learning atmosphere), students' interest at

learning methods are very high and consistent for all

experiment classes. Response to BAS that book helps to

support students develop thinking skills, teacher‟s teaching

model is very clear, the problem-solving skills is not a

difficult, and the ability to answer the test item is not difficult.

These facts illustrate that the attractiveness of the developed

instructional model of orientation IPA is very high.

These results support Nieveen‟s idea (1999) that the

practicality of a learning model in terms of the observer

assessment results based on its observer states that, the model

implementation feasibility level in learning implementation in

classroom has good category. The model feasibility in

learning implementation in class is in terms of three

observation aspects, namely: (a) the learning syntax feasibility,

(b) the social system feasibility, and (c) the feasibility of

management reaction principles to the provided support

system.

c. The effectiveness of instructional model of

Orientation IPA

The model effectiveness indicators are seen from teacher‟s

ability in managing learning, students‟ activity during the

learning process, the achievement of concept understanding

and students‟ critical thinking skill.

1) Teacher’s ability in managing learning

Teacher‟s ability in managing learning includes all activities

in class, from the introduction to closing, including teacher‟s

ability in managing learning time and situation in class which

has high category and consistent to all trial classes. This is

described in Figure 4.

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.0090.00

100.00

Students’ respond

Class A Elasticity and Hooke's Law

Class A Static fluid

Class B Elasticity and Hooke's Law

Class B Static fluid

Class C Elasticity and Hooke's Law

Class C Static fluid



Figure 4. The bar chart of teacher‟s ability in managing learning

2) Students’ activity in learning

The observation results to students‟ activity are very high. The

observer observation shows that there is irrelevant activity

percentage decrease from 6,09 % (1st trial) to be 3,53 % (2

nd

trial) in A class. And also in B class, there is also irrelevant

activity decrease of 6,08 % (1st trial) to be 3,93 % (2

nd trial).

And in C class, there is an increase of irrelevant activity from

2,87 % (1st trial) to be 9,12 % (2

nd trial), so it can be

concluded that instructional model of Orientation IPA

successfully increases students‟ activity in learning, described

in figure 5.

Figure 5. The observation result of student‟s learning activity in State Senior

High School 2 Jember

The observation results show that students activity in learning

are very high and consistent, supported by the percentage

mean achievement of relevant students‟ activity above

96.12%. the high activity achievement reflects that

instructional model of Orientation IPA has been well

implemented. This achievement is because there are complete

facility and infrastructure supports from school as the

conducted research place, and the model teacher‟s

understanding to Orientation IPA model is very good. This

research results are in line with the research conducted by

Kumar at al., (2010) that the effects of problem-based active

learning in Science education to 7th

class academic

achievement and concept learning find out that the

implementation of problem-based active learning model

affects positively to students‟ academic achievement and

behaviour toward Science learning. In general, it can be

concluded that the instructional model of Orientation IPA is

effective in increasing students‟ activity in learning process.

3) Students’ critical thinking skill

The N-gain achievement results of students‟ critical thinking

skill for all trial classes are presented in figure 6.

Figure 6. The bar chart of N-gain of critical thinking skill

Figure 6 shows N-gain score mean results of critical thinking

skill in 1st trial (elasticity and Hooke law) are in medium

category, while the N-gain score mean for 2nd

trial (static

fluid) for all classes get high vategory of N-gain and also

consistent for all trial classes.

The development result of Instructional model of Orientation

IPA is based on multiple intellectual theory, constructivism

learning theory, cognitive theory and multi representation

theory. The instructional model of Orientation IPA has unique

characteristics which are problem-based, collaborative and

cooperative, and scientific work-based approach enabling to

improve concept understanding and students‟ critical thinking

skill. Like general instructional model, the instructional model

of Orientation IPA has syntax, social system, reaction

principle, supporting system, instructional effects and

following effects. This is in line with Joyce et al.‟s, (2009),

Arends‟s (1997) opinions. The syntax from instructional

model of Orientation IPA are problem orientation and

identification (1st phase), problem representation (2

nd phase),

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Lea

rn_

1

Lea

rn_

2

Lea

rn_

3

Lea

rn_

1

Lea

rn_

2

Lea

rn_

3

Lea

rn_

4

Trial class 1 Trial class 2


97.70 98.05 96.52 97.87 96.32 98.82

2.30 1.95 3.48 2.13 3.68 1.18

Ela

stic

ity

an

d

Ho

oke

's L

aw

Sta

tic

Flu

id

Ela

stic

ity

an

d

Ho

oke

's L

aw

Sta

tic

Flu

id

Ela

stic

ity

an

d

Ho

oke

's L

aw

Sta

tic

Flu

id

Experimental

class A

Experimental

class B

Experimental

class C

The students activities in learning

processPercentage frequency of relevant student

activities Percentage frequency of student activities

that are not relevant

0.65

0.7

0.75


N-Gain critical thinking

N-gain critical thinking elasticity and

Hooke's Law

N-gain critical thinking Static fluid



group investigation (3rd

phase), work result presentation (4th

phase) and analysis-evaluation & follow-up (5th

phase). These

five phases can be conducted in Physics learning in senior

high school.

The development result of this instructional model has been

proven to be able to increase students‟ critical thinking skill,

especially how students solve problems in mechanic concepts

in various representations. The presented problem is generally

presented in the verbal and mathematic forms; in reality, the

students are seldom brought to understand concepts from

other representations, for example from figure to verbal, from

verbal to figure, from verbal to graph or combination from

verbal, figure, graphs, mathematic or other representation

forms. It is usual that students who are clever at verbal

representation but sometime they are low in graph or figure

understanding. These conditions are at school based on

preliminary study result which students are insisted in concept

understanding from verbal only to mathematic and also forget

about other representation, this is proven from multi

representation test results which is low (Rosyid et al., 2013).

This model can clearly improve concept understanding in

various representation forms. This is in line with Russel‟s

opinion in Soesanto (2009) and Bowen (1998) stating that to

be able to understanding Physics conceptually, it is required

an ability to represent and translate physical problem and

phenomenon into representation in the forms of macroscopic,

symbolic, and microscopic simultaneously. From the trial

results of instructional model of Orientation IPA conducted

both in 1st and 2

nd trials, it is obtained that the results of

instructional model of Orientation IPA are valid, practical and

effective to be implemented.

IV. FINDINGS

Based on analysis results and research discussion of this

instructional model of Orientation development, there are

some findings, namely;

1. The Instructional model of Orientation IPA is an

instructional model of problem-based mechanics by

multi representation approach based on multiple

intelligence theory, constructivism learning theory,

cognitive theory and multi representation theory. The

instructional model of Orientation IPA has 5 syntax,

namely Problem Orientation and Identification,

problem representation, group investigation,

presentation and analysis-evaluation and follow-up.

This instructional model is also able to practice

concept understanding by various multi presentations

(verbal, figure, graphs, mathematic, and others) and

can improve critical thinking skill by scientific

works, namely including (1) formulating problems

(2) formulating hypothesis (3) identifying variables

(4) writing operational definition of variables (5)

writing experiment tools and materials (6)

conducting experiment (7) organizing the experiment

result data (8) analysing experiment result data and

(9) making conclusion. The instructional model of

Orientation IPA has characteristics, namely (1)

problem-oriented, (2) collaborative-cooperative, and

(3) scientific work approach.

2. The instructional model of Orientation IPA has high

content and construct validity based on expert and

practitioner‟s discussion and assessment.

3. The instructional model of Orientation IPA has high

practicality, shown by feasibility and attractiveness

level (students‟ response) by observation from

observers.

4. The learning effectiveness of instructional model of

Orientation IPA is high, based on teacher‟s ability in

managing learning and students‟ activity by observer

observation.

V. SUMMARY

Based on research results, it can be concluded that

instructional model of Orientation IPA has high content and

construct validity implemented in 5 learning steps (syntax),

namely Problem Orientation and Identification, problem

representation, group investigation, presentation and analysis-

evaluation and follow-up. The trial results of instructional

model of Orientation IPA can improve critical thinking skill in

elasticity, Hooke law and static fluid topics, namely:

1. The practicality and effectiveness level of instructional model

of Orientation IPA has high category in practicing critical

thinking skill.

2. The obtained critical thinking skill by instructional model of

Orientation IPA is effective in high category of N-gain

achievement.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The writer gives the biggest rewards to LPDP- Educational

Fund Management Institute of Ministry of Finance which has

to be the single sponsor for this research.

REFERENCE

[1] Ainsworth, S. (1999).The Functions of Multiple Representations.Computers & Education, 33, 131-152.

[2] Anderson, Lorin W., & Krathwohl, David R. (2001). A Taxonomy

for Learning, Teaching and Assessing: a Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy.New York. LongmanPublishing.(http:

//www.kurwongbss. qld.edu.au/ thinking/Bloom/blooms.htm).

[3] Arends, R. I. (1997). Classroom Instruction and Management. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies.

[4] Arends, R.I. (2004). Learning to Teach. New York: McGraw-Hill.

[5] Arends, R.I. (2008). Learning to Teach, Belajar untuk Mengajar. Edisi Ketujuh. Jilid Dua. (Translated by Soedjipto, Helly, P. and

Soedjipto, Sri, M.) Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

[6] Berger, D.E., Pezdeck, K., dan Banks, W.P. (1987). Application of Cognitive Psychology: Problem solving, education, and

computing, Hillsdale: New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

[7] Bowen, C.W. (1998). “ Item Design Conciderations for Computer

Based Testing of Student Learning in Chemistry”. Journal of Chemical Education. 75.(9).1172-1175.

[8] Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G.(1993). In search of

understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms.

http://www.kurwongbss.qld.edu.au/thinking/Bloom/blooms.htm

http://www.kurwongbss.qld.edu.au/thinking/Bloom/blooms.htm



Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum

Development.

[9] Burden, P.R., & Byrd, D.M. (1994). Methods for effective teaching.

Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, Inc. [10] Çaliscan, S., Selçuk, G.S, and Erol, M. (2010). Effects of The

Problem Solving Strategies Instruction on the Students’ Physics

Problem Solving Performances and Strategy Usage. Turkey: Journal of Social and Behavioral Sciences Vol. 2: 2239-2243 ,

www.sciencedirect.com.

[11] Champagne, A. B., Gunstone, R. F., & Klopfer, L. E. (1985). Instructional consequences of students' knowledge about physical

phenomena. In L. H. T. West & A. L. Pines (Eds.), Cognitive

structure and conceptual change (pp. 61-90). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

[12] Chan ZC.(2013). Exploring creativity and critical thinking in

traditional and innovative problem-based learning groups. US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health.Pub

Med.gov (dowload tgl. 21 Juni 2013).

[13] Corolan,J., Prain, V., & Waldrip, B. (2008). Using representations

for teaching and learning in science, 54(1), 18-23.

[14] Dahar, R.W. (1989). Teori-teori Belajar. Jakarta: Erlangga.

[15] Dochi, F.J.R.C. (1996).Prior Knowledge and Learning. Dalam Corte, E.D. & Weinert,F. (Eds): International Encyclopedia of

Development and Instructional Psychology . New York:

Pergamon. [16] Duch, B.J., Groh, S.E., Allen, D.E., (2001) “The Power of Problem-

based Learning”, Stylus: Virginia.

[17] Ennis, R. H. (1991). Critical thinking: A streamlined conception. Teaching Philosophy, 14(1), 5-24.

[18] Fogarty, R. (1997). Problem-based learning and other curriculum

models for the multiple intelligences classroom. Arlington Heights, Illinois: Sky Light.

[19] Forawi, S.A. (2012). Perceptions on Critical Thinking Attributes of Science Education Standards. International Conference on

Education and Management Innovation IPEDR vol.30 (2012) ©

(2012) IACSIT Press, Singapore.

[20] Gagne, R.M. (1985). The Conditions of Learning and Theory of

Instruction, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

[21] Gaigher, E.(2004). Effects of a structured problem solving strategy on and conceptual understanding of physics: A study in

disadvantaged South African schools. PhD thesis, University of

Pretoria. http: //upetd.up.ac.za/thesis/available/etd-02022006-160908. Retrieved on January, 10, 2008.

[22] Gardner, H. (1999). The dicipline mind: What all students should

understand. New York:Simon & Schuster Inc. [23] Halpern, D.F. (1996). Thought and knowledge: An introduction to

critical thinking. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

[24] Hastings, David. (2001). Case Study: Problem-Based Learning and the active

Classroom.(Online).http:/www.cstudies.ubc.ca/facdev/services/ne

wsletter/index/html. accessible 2 Januari 2013. [25] Hobden,P.A.(1999). The context of problem tasks in school

physical science. Doctorial dissertation, University of Natal,

Durban. [26] Ibrahim, Muslimin., Nur, Mohamad. (2000). Based Teaching

Problem. Surabaya : University Press.

[27] Izhak and Sherin, M.G. (2003). Exploring the Use of New Representation as a Resource for Teaching Learning. The University of

Georgia and North Western University, Journal School Science and

Mathematics.103, (1). [28] Joyce, B., Weil M., & Calhoun Emily. (2009). Models of

Teaching, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, Inc.

[29] Kemp, Jerold E. (1994). Designing Effective Instruction. New York: College Publishing Company.

[30] Krulik, S., dan Rudnick, J.A. (1996), The New Sourcebook for

Teaching Reasoning and Problem Solving in Yunior and Senior High School, Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

[31] Kumar, D.D., P.V.Thomas., John D.Morris., Karen M.Tobias.,

Mary Baker Trudy Jermanovich. (2010), Effect of Current Electricity Simulation Supported Learning On the Conceptual

Understanding of Elementary and Secondary Teachers, J Sci Educ

Technol ,.DOI10.1007/s10956-010-9229-4.Learning, Educational

Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.

[32] Liem, T. L. (1992). Invitations to Science Inquiry. Second Edition.

Chino Hills, California: Science Inquiry Enterprises. [33] Maloney, D.P. (1994). Research on problem solving in physics. In

D.L Gabel (Ed.),Handbook of research in science teaching and

learning (pp.327-354.) New York: Macmillian. [34] Marzano, R. J. (1993). How classroom teachers approach the

teaching of thinking. Dalam Donmoyer, R., & Merryfield, M. M

(Eds.): Theory into practice: Teaching for higher order thinking. 32(3). 154-160.

[35] McDermott, L.C. & PEG.(2004). Physics by Inquiry [Online]

Tersedia: http://www.phys.washington.edu/RGoups/peg/pbi.html. [36] Moore, B.N., & Parker, R. (1994). Critical thinking. Mountain

View, CA: Mayfield.

[37] Moust, J.H.C., Van BerkeL, H.J.M., and Schimdt, H.G. (2005). “Signs of erosion: Reflections on three decades of problem-based

learning at Maastricht University.” Higher Education, 50, 665-683.

[38] National Education Department. 2013. Currillum 2013 physics for

senior high school. Jakarta: Depdiknas.

[39] National Education System No. 20/2003, Jakarta

[40] Nieveen, Nienke. (1999). Prototyping to Reach Product Quality. Dalam Akker, Jan van Den. 1999. “ Design Approaches and Tools

in Education and Training”. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic

Publishers. [41] Nur, M. (2008). Problem Based Learning. Surabaya: PSMS

Unesa.

[42] Paul, R.W. (1995). Critical thinking: How to prepare students for a rapidly changing world. Santa Rosa,CA: Foundation for Critical

Thinking.

[43] PhET Interactive Simulations.2013. Retrieved Januari 2013. from https: // phet. colorado. edu /in/ simulations/ category/ physics

©2013 University of Colorado. [44] Ratumanan, T. G. (2003). The Development of Interactive

Learning Model with Cooperative setting (PISK Model) and its

effect on students mathematics learning outcome for hunior high

schoool in Ambon. Disertation of unesa post graduate programme:

unpublished.

[45] Reif, F. (1995). Millikan Lecture (1994): understanding and teaching important scientific thought processes. Am. J. Phys. 63

(1). January 1995.

[46] Rindell, A. J. A. (1999). Applying Inquiry-Based and Cooperative Group Learning Strategies to Promote Critical Thinking. Journal

of College Science Teaching (JCST) 28(3): 203-207.

[47] Rosyid, Jatmiko,B.,& Supardi. I.Z.A. (2013). A Preliminary Study of Conceptual Understanding of Mechanics and Critical Thinking

Skill of Senior High School students in Jember Regency.

Proceeding of physics national seminar Proceeding, Physics Department of Unnes, ISBN: 978-602-97835-3-7, Semarang:

FP37-42.

[48] Rosyid, Jatmiko,B.,& Supardi. I.Z.A. (2013). A Study of Problem Based Learning in The Teaching of Physics in Attempts to

Improving Thinking Skills. Proceeding of Physics National

Seminar, Physics Department of Unnes, ISBN: 978-602-97835-3-7, Semarang: FP 63-68.

[49] Rosyid, Jatmiko,B.,& Supardi. I.Z.A. (2013). Implementation of

the IPA orientation instruction model on Mechanics Concept in senior high school. Proceedings of National Seminar of FMIPA

Unesa, ISBN: 978-6-02171-46-6-9, Surabaya: p22-26.

[50] Schafersman, Steven. D. (1991). An introduction to critical thinking. http://www.freeinquiry.com/critical-thinking.html.p 1-13.

[51] Simon, H.A., & Kaplan, C.A. (1989). Foundations of Cognitive

Science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [52] Singh, C., & Schunn, C.D. (2009). Connecting three pivotal

concepts in K-12 science state standards and maps of conceptual

growth to research in physics education. J. Phys. Tchr. Educ. Online, 5(2), 16-42.

[53] Soesanto, H. (2009). Pembelajaran sistem koloid dengan Multi

representasi untuk meningkatkan kemampuan berpikir kritis siswa SMA. Tesis UPI. Bandung: Tidak dipublikasikan.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Chan%20ZC%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=23452036

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/



http://www.nih.gov/

http://www.phys.washington.edu/RGoups/peg/pbi.html

http://www.freeinquiry.com/critical-thinking.html.p%201-13



[54] Stahl, N.N., & Stahl, R.J. (1991). We can agree a er all: Achieving

a consensus for a critical thinking component of a gi ed program

using the Delphi technique. Roeper Review, 14(2), 79-88.

[55] TIMSS .(2007). Science Framework: Eight-Grade Content Domain.

[56] Tiwari, A., Chan, S., Sullivan, P.L., Dixon, A.S., & Tang, C.

(1999). Enhancing students‟ critical thinking through problem-based learning. In J. Marsh (Ed.) Implementing Problem Based

Learning Project: Proceedings of the First Asia Pacific Conference

on Problem Based Learning (pp.75-86). Hong Kong: The University Grants Committee of Hong Kong, Teaching

Development Project.

[57] Tytler,R., Prain,V., Hubber.P., and Waldrip.B. (Eds.).(2013). Constructing Representations to Learn in Science, 1–14. © 2013

Sense Publishers. All rights reserved.

[58] Van den Berg, (Eds) (1991). Miskonsepsi Fisika dan remediasinya. Salatiga: Universitas Kristen Satyawacana.

[59] Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). “Mind and society: The development of

higher psychological processes.” Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press.

[60] Waldrip, B., Prain, V., & Sellings, P. (2012). Explaining Newton‟s laws of motion: Using student reasoning through representations

to develop conceptual understanding. Instructional Science

(online, March). [61] Waldrip, B., Prain, V., and Carolan, J. (2006). Learning Junior

Secondary Science Teacher through Multi-Model Representations.

Electronic Journal of Science Education. 11, (1), 88-107. [62] Wandersee, J.H., Mintzes, J.J., & Novak, J.D. (1994) Research on

alternative conceptions in science. In Handbook of Research on

Science Teaching and Learning (ed. D.L. Gabel), pp. 177-210. Macmillan, New York.

[63] Wang, H. C. A. Thomson., and Shuler, C. F. (1998). Essential

Components of Problem-Based Learning for the K-12 Inquiry Science Instruction. (Online). http:// searchyahoo.com/ search?

p=problem+based+learning. Diakses 9 Maret 2013.

Concepts in Senior High School - RSIS International

Documents

Transcript of Concepts in Senior High School - RSIS International