Concepts in Senior High School - RSIS International
Transcript of 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
International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume IV, Issue VIII, August 2020|ISSN 2454-6186
www.rsisinternational.org Page 427
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.
International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume IV, Issue VIII, August 2020|ISSN 2454-6186
www.rsisinternational.org Page 428
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
International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume IV, Issue VIII, August 2020|ISSN 2454-6186
www.rsisinternational.org Page 429
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,
International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume IV, Issue VIII, August 2020|ISSN 2454-6186
www.rsisinternational.org Page 430
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.
International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume IV, Issue VIII, August 2020|ISSN 2454-6186
www.rsisinternational.org Page 431
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
Class A Class B Class C
Syntax Social system Reaction principle
International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume IV, Issue VIII, August 2020|ISSN 2454-6186
www.rsisinternational.org Page 432
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
International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume IV, Issue VIII, August 2020|ISSN 2454-6186
www.rsisinternational.org Page 433
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
International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume IV, Issue VIII, August 2020|ISSN 2454-6186
www.rsisinternational.org Page 434
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
Class A Class B Class C
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
Class A Class B Class C
N-Gain critical thinking
N-gain critical thinking elasticity and
Hooke's Law
N-gain critical thinking Static fluid
International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume IV, Issue VIII, August 2020|ISSN 2454-6186
www.rsisinternational.org Page 435
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.
International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume IV, Issue VIII, August 2020|ISSN 2454-6186
www.rsisinternational.org Page 436
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.
International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume IV, Issue VIII, August 2020|ISSN 2454-6186
www.rsisinternational.org Page 437
[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.