Pembangunan model penaakulan saintifik pelajar sains berdasarkan isu sosio saintifik
Objektif kajian ini ialah untuk membangunkan model penaakulan saintifik pelajar sainsberasaskan faktor Pengetahuan Isi Kandungan (PIK), Kepercayaan Epistemologi Saintifik (KES),pelekatan Nilai Etika (NE), Teknologi Maklumat (TM) terhadap Penaakulan Saintifik (PS) berdasarkan Isu Sosio Saintifik (ISS...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | thesis |
| Language: | zsm |
| Published: |
2018
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://ir.upsi.edu.my/detailsg.php?det=5321 |
| Tags: | Add Tag |
| id |
oai:ir.upsi.edu.my:5321 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
uketd_dc |
| institution |
Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris |
| collection |
UPSI Digital Repository |
| language |
zsm |
| topic |
Q Science |
| spellingShingle |
Q Science Muhamad Ikhwan Mat Saad Pembangunan model penaakulan saintifik pelajar sains berdasarkan isu sosio saintifik |
| description |
Objektif kajian ini ialah untuk membangunkan model penaakulan saintifik pelajar sainsberasaskan faktor Pengetahuan Isi Kandungan (PIK), Kepercayaan Epistemologi Saintifik (KES),pelekatan Nilai Etika (NE), Teknologi Maklumat (TM) terhadap Penaakulan Saintifik (PS) berdasarkan Isu Sosio Saintifik (ISS) menggunakan Analysis of Moment Structure (AMOS)dan Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Reka bentuk penyelidikan kuantitatifdipilih untuk menjawab empat persoalan kajian dan 13 hipotesis. Lima set instrumen telah digunakan untuk mengukur PIK, KES, NE, TM dan PS. Seramai 450 orang pelajarsains tingkatan empat dipilih menjadi responden menggunakan teknik pensampelan rawakberlapis dua peringkat. Terdapat dua peringkat pada analisis model ini. Peringkatpertama, analisis model pengukuran. Kesahan model pengukuran merujuk kepada goodness-of- fit(GFI0.90), Construct Reliability (CR0.6) dan Average Variance Extracted (AVE0.5).Dapatan kajian menunjukkan item-item setiap konstruk pada pemboleh ubah PIK (GFI=0.96,CR=0.84 dan AVE=0.96), KES (GFI=0.97, CR=0.87 dan AVE=0.58), NE (GFI=0.98, CR=0.58 danAVE=0.73), TM (GFI=0.92, CR=0.65 danAVE=0.79), dan PS (GFI=0.94, CR=0.59 dan AVE=0.86) adalah sah dan sepadan dengan datakajian. Peringkat kedua, dapatan analisis Model PS menunjukkan tahap penaakulan saintifik pelajarsains masih di peringkat rendah (78%) kerana kurang menguasai PIK, kurang KES tetapimelalui NE pelajar dapat membuat penaakulan moral dalam ISS melalui pengetahuan agamadan masih menghormati masyarakat setempat. TM yang dijadikan sebagai pemboleh ubahpengantara tidak mempunyai hubungan secara langsung terhadap PS (0 >- 0.144) tetapi sekiranya TMdikekalkan maka Model PS akan menjadi lebih baik. Sebagai kesimpulan, kajian ini menunjukkan satu garis panduan berbentuk visual yang dapat meningkatkankemahiran menaakul pelajar. Implikasi kajian ialah potensi penggunaan modelpenaakulan saintifik ini dalam pelaksanaan pengajaran dan pembelajaran sains disekolah menengah. |
| format |
thesis |
| qualification_name |
|
| qualification_level |
Doctorate |
| author |
Muhamad Ikhwan Mat Saad |
| author_facet |
Muhamad Ikhwan Mat Saad |
| author_sort |
Muhamad Ikhwan Mat Saad |
| title |
Pembangunan model penaakulan saintifik pelajar sains berdasarkan isu sosio saintifik |
| title_short |
Pembangunan model penaakulan saintifik pelajar sains berdasarkan isu sosio saintifik |
| title_full |
Pembangunan model penaakulan saintifik pelajar sains berdasarkan isu sosio saintifik |
| title_fullStr |
Pembangunan model penaakulan saintifik pelajar sains berdasarkan isu sosio saintifik |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Pembangunan model penaakulan saintifik pelajar sains berdasarkan isu sosio saintifik |
| title_sort |
pembangunan model penaakulan saintifik pelajar sains berdasarkan isu sosio saintifik |
| granting_institution |
Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris |
| granting_department |
Fakulti Pembangunan Manusia |
| publishDate |
2018 |
| url |
https://ir.upsi.edu.my/detailsg.php?det=5321 |
| _version_ |
1747833182227529728 |
| spelling |
oai:ir.upsi.edu.my:53212020-10-22 Pembangunan model penaakulan saintifik pelajar sains berdasarkan isu sosio saintifik 2018 Muhamad Ikhwan Mat Saad Q Science Objektif kajian ini ialah untuk membangunkan model penaakulan saintifik pelajar sainsberasaskan faktor Pengetahuan Isi Kandungan (PIK), Kepercayaan Epistemologi Saintifik (KES),pelekatan Nilai Etika (NE), Teknologi Maklumat (TM) terhadap Penaakulan Saintifik (PS) berdasarkan Isu Sosio Saintifik (ISS) menggunakan Analysis of Moment Structure (AMOS)dan Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Reka bentuk penyelidikan kuantitatifdipilih untuk menjawab empat persoalan kajian dan 13 hipotesis. Lima set instrumen telah digunakan untuk mengukur PIK, KES, NE, TM dan PS. Seramai 450 orang pelajarsains tingkatan empat dipilih menjadi responden menggunakan teknik pensampelan rawakberlapis dua peringkat. Terdapat dua peringkat pada analisis model ini. Peringkatpertama, analisis model pengukuran. Kesahan model pengukuran merujuk kepada goodness-of- fit(GFI0.90), Construct Reliability (CR0.6) dan Average Variance Extracted (AVE0.5).Dapatan kajian menunjukkan item-item setiap konstruk pada pemboleh ubah PIK (GFI=0.96,CR=0.84 dan AVE=0.96), KES (GFI=0.97, CR=0.87 dan AVE=0.58), NE (GFI=0.98, CR=0.58 danAVE=0.73), TM (GFI=0.92, CR=0.65 danAVE=0.79), dan PS (GFI=0.94, CR=0.59 dan AVE=0.86) adalah sah dan sepadan dengan datakajian. Peringkat kedua, dapatan analisis Model PS menunjukkan tahap penaakulan saintifik pelajarsains masih di peringkat rendah (78%) kerana kurang menguasai PIK, kurang KES tetapimelalui NE pelajar dapat membuat penaakulan moral dalam ISS melalui pengetahuan agamadan masih menghormati masyarakat setempat. TM yang dijadikan sebagai pemboleh ubahpengantara tidak mempunyai hubungan secara langsung terhadap PS (0 >- 0.144) tetapi sekiranya TMdikekalkan maka Model PS akan menjadi lebih baik. Sebagai kesimpulan, kajian ini menunjukkan satu garis panduan berbentuk visual yang dapat meningkatkankemahiran menaakul pelajar. Implikasi kajian ialah potensi penggunaan modelpenaakulan saintifik ini dalam pelaksanaan pengajaran dan pembelajaran sains disekolah menengah. 2018 thesis https://ir.upsi.edu.my/detailsg.php?det=5321 https://ir.upsi.edu.my/detailsg.php?det=5321 text zsm closedAccess Doctoral Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris Fakulti Pembangunan Manusia Abdullah, M. S., Rahman, S., & Kinabalu, K. (2014). Gaya pembelajaran dan kesedaranmetakognitif dalam kalangan pelajar aliran sains. Proceeding of the Sosial Sciences Research ICSSR 2014, 12(123), 712719. Retrieved from http://worldconferences.netAbu Hassan, K. (2003). Kurikulum Sains Sekolah Malaysia, Modul Pengajaran.Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.Adam, B, Mitcham., C. (2012). Ethics and Science: An Introduction. Cambridge UniversityPress, New York.Albe, V. (2008a). Students positions and considerations of scientific evidence about acontroversial socioscientific issue. Science and Education, 17(89), 805827.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-007-9086-6Albe, V. (2008b). When scientific knowledge, daily life experience, epistemological and socialconsiderations intersect: Students argumentation in group discussions on a socio-scientific Issue. Research in Science Education, 38(1), 6790.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9040-2Alshare, K. A. (2008). Predicting Students Usage of Internet in Two Emerging EconomiesUsing an Extended Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Academy of Educational Leardership Journal,12(2), 109129.Amaratunga, D., Baldry, D., Sarshar, M., & Newton, R. (2007). Quantitative andqualitative research in the built environment?: application of `` mixed research approach Dilanthi Amaratunga. Work Study, 51(1). https://doi.org/10.1108/ 00438020210415488Anderson, L.W., Krathwohl, D.R., Airasian, P.W., Cruikshank, K.A., Mayer, R.E., Pintrich,P.R., Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision ofBlooms Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York, Longman.Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural Equation Modeling in Practice?: A Review andRecommended Two-Step Approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411423.Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., P.W., C., K.A., M., R.E., P., P.R., & Raths, J., & Wittrock, M.C. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of BloomsTaxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Longman.Arbuckle, J. L. (2005). AMOS 6.0 users guide. Spring House, PA: Amos pmentCorporation.Assessment, I. S., Cooperation, E., Council, A., Math, I., & Study, S. ScientificLiteracy and Contexts in PISA 2006 Science (2009). https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20332Babin, B. J., Hair, J. F., & Boles, J. S. (2008). Publishing research in marketingjournals using structural equation modeling. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice,16(4), 279286. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679160401Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On The Evaluation of Structural Equation Model.Journal of The Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 7494.Baharom Mohamad, Ali Suradin, & ZaaBa Helmi Khamisan. (2008). Peranan Pendidikan Islamdan Pendidikan Moral dalam Membina Sahsiah Pelajar Berkualiti. In Dalam PersidanganPembangunan Pelajar Peringkat Kebangsaan Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (pp. 2223).Balakrishnan, V., Liew, T. K., & Pourgholaminejad, S. (2014). Fun Learning With Edooware - A Social Media Enable Tool. Computers & Education.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.008Bao, L., Cai, T., Koenig, K., Fang, K., Han, J., Wang, J., Wu, N. (2009). Learning and ScientificReasoning. Science, 323, 586587. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1167740Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in SocialPsychological Research?: Conceptual , Strategic , and Statistical Considerations. Journalof Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.51(6), 1173 1182.Baxter Magolda, M. B. (1999). Creating Contexts for Learning and Self-authorship:Constructive-Developmental Pedagogy. Vanderbilt University Press Nashville.Beemt, A. Van Den, & Diepstraten, I. (2016). Computers & Education Teacher perspectiveson ICT?: A learning ecology approach. Computers & Education, 9293, 161170.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.10.017Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (2002). Understandings of the Nature of Science and Decision Makingon Science and Technology Based Issues. Wiley Interscience, 352377.https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10063Bencze, L., Sperling, E., & Carter, L. (2012). Students Research-Informed Socio-scientific Activism?: Re / Visions for a Sustainable Future, 129148.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9260-3Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indices in structural model. PsychologicalBulletin, 107, 238246.Bhat, M. A. (2016). The Predictive Power of Reasoning Ability on Academic Achievement.International Journal of Learning, Teaching and EducationalResearch, 15(1), 7988.Bhutta, Z. A. (2002). Ethics in international health research?: a perspective from the developingworld *. Buletin of the World Health Organization, 80(1).Bialek, W., & Botstein, D. (2004). Introductory Science and Mathematics Education for 21st-CenturyBiologists, 303(February), 788790.Blissett, S., Cavalcanti, R. B., & Sibbald, M. (2012). reflection Should we teach using schemas??Evidence from a randomised trial. In Medical Education (pp. 815 822). Blackwell Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012. 04311.xBlunch, N. (2013). Introduction to Structural Equation Modeling Using IBM SPSS Statisticsand Amos. SAGE Publication Ltd.Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural Equation with latent variables. New York: Wiley. Bonk, C. J.(2009). The World is Open: How Web Technology Is RevolutionizingEducation. Jossey-Bass Publishers, 350 Sansome St., San Francisco, CA 94104; Tel: 415-433-1767,.Breiner, J. M., Johnson, C. C., Harkness, S. S., & Koehler, C. M. (2012). What IsSTEM?? A Discussion About Conceptions of STEM in Education and Partnerships.School Science & Mathematics, 112(1), 311.Brien, C. O., Hartshorne, R., Beattie, J., & Jordan, L. (2012). RSCO A Comparison of Large Lecture, Fully Online , and Hybrid Sections of Introduction to Special Education. Rural SpecialEducation Quaterly, 30(4), 1931.Briggle, A., & Mitcham, C. (2012). Ethics and Science. Cambridge University Press, New York.Brophy, J., & Brophy, J. (2010). Toward a model of the value aspects of motivation in education?:Developing appreciation for .. Toward a Model of the Value Aspects of Motivation in Education?:Developing Appreciation for Particular Learning Domains and Activities, (February 2013), 3741.Byrne Barbara M. (2010). Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS (Second Edi).Routledge New York London.Cano, F. (2005). Epistemological beliefs and approaches to learning?: Their changethrough secondary school and their influence on academic performance, 203 221.https://doi.org/10.1348/000709904X22683Chang, H., & Lee, H. (2010). College Students Decision-Making Tendencies in the Context ofSocioscientific Issues ( SSI ). J Korea Assoc. Science Education,), 887900.\Christenson, N., & Rundgren, S.-N. C. (2014). A Framework for Teachers Assessment of Socio-scientific Argumentation?: An example using the GMO issue. Journal ofBiological Education, 9266(October), 110. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00219266.2014.923486Chua Yan Piaw. (2014). Ujian Regresi, Analisis Faktor Dan Analisis SEM. Mc Graw Hill Education.Cohen, J. (1968). Weighted Kappa: Nominal Scales Agreement With Provision For Scaled DisagreementOr Partial Credit. Psychological Bulletin, 70(4), 213220.https://doi.org/http://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/h0026256Cohen, J. (1992). Quantitative Methods in Psychology. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1),155159. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155Comstock, G. (2001). Ethics and genetically modified foods. Food Ethics, 183202.Conley, A. M., Pintrich, P. R., Vekiri, I., & Harrison, D. (2004). Changes inepistemological beliefs in elementary science students. Contemporary EducationalPsychology, 29(2), 186204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.01.004Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. S. (2003). Business Research Methods (8th editio).New York: McGraw Hill.Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research Design?: Quatitative, Qualitative, and Mixed MethodsApproaches. SAGE Publication, Inc.Cronbach, L. J. (1946). Educational and Psychological Measurement. Educational andPsychological Measurement, 6(475). https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164446 00600405Crowe, A., Dirks, C., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2008). Biology in Bloom?: Implementing Bloom sTaxonomy to Enhance Student Learning in Biology. Life Sciences Education, 7, 368381.https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.08Cunningham, E. (2008). A Practical Guide to Structural Equation Modelling using AMOS.Melbourne: Statsline.Daempfle, P. (2002). Instructional Approaches for the Improvement of Reasoning in IntroductoryCollege Biology Courses: A Review of the Research.Daempfle, P. (2012). Science & Society: Scientific Thought and Education for the 21stCentury. Retrieved March 7, 2016, from http://www.amazon.com/Science-Society-Scientific-Thought-Education/dp/1449685021/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8De Wulf, K. G., Odekerden-Schroder, & Lacobucci, D. (2001). Invesments in consumerrelationship: A cross-country and cross-industry exploration. Journalketing, 65(4), 3350.Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. (2011). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research.SAGE Publication Ltd.Driver, R., & Oldham, V. (2008). A Constructivist Approach to CurriculumDevelopment in Science. Studies in Science Education, (December 2014), 37 41.https://doi.org/10.1080/03057268608559933Duggan, S., & Gott, R. (2002). What sort of science education do we really need?International Journal of Science Education, 24(7), 661679. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690110110133Dunbar, K. N., & Klahr, D. (2012). Scientific Thinking and Reasoning. In The Oxford Handbook ofThinking and Reasoning (pp. 699718). https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199734689.013.0035Dwyer, C., Hogan, M., & Stewart, I. (2011). The promotion of critical thinking skills throughargument mapping.Ekborg, M., Ottander, C., Silfver, E., & Simon, S. (2013). Teachers Experience of Working withSocio-scientific Issues: A Large Scale and in Depth Study. Research in Science Education,43(2), 599617.Elder, A. . (1999). An Exploration of Fifth Grade Students Epistemological Beliefs in Science andan Investigation of Their Relation to Science Learning. University of Michigan, Michigan.Ellison, N. B. (2007). The Benefits of Facebook ?? Friends?:? Social Capital andCollege Students Use of Online Social Network Sites, 12, 11431168.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00367.xElm, D. R., & Weber, J. (1994). Measuring moral judgment: The Moral Judgment Interviewor the Defining Issues Test? Journal of Business Ethics, 13(5), 341 355.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00871762Fatin, A., Salleh, A.?; M., Bilal, A. M., & Salmiza, S. (2012). Faktor penyumbangkepada kemerosotan penyertaan pelajar dalam aliran sains: satu analisis sorotan tesis. Medc2012,17. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2011v36n3.2Fleis, J. L. (1971). MEASURING NOMINAL SCALE AGREEMENT AMONGMANY RATERS 1. Psychological Bulletin, 76(5), 378382. https://doi.org/http://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/h0031619Fleming, R. (1986). Adolescent Reasoning in Socio-Scientific Issues, Part I: SocialCognition. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23(8), 67787. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660230803Floyd, F. J., & Widaman, K. F. (1995). Factor Analysis in the Develepment & Refinementof Clinical Assessment Instrument.pdf. Psychology Assessment,, 286299.Floyd J Fowler, J. (2014). Survey Research Methods. SAGE Publication, Inc.Foong, C.-C., & Daniel, E. G. S. (2012). Students Argumentation Skills across Two Socio-Scientific Issues in a Confucian Classroom: Is transfer possible? International Journal ofScience Education, (January 2015), 125. https:// doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.697209Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Str Erroructural Equation Models withunobservable variables and Measurements. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 3950.Fowler, S. R. (2009). College students use of science content during socioscientific issues negotiation?: Impact of evolution understanding and acceptance. University of SouthFlorida.Fowler, S. R., & Zeidler, D. L. (2016). Lack of Evolution Acceptance Inhibits Students Negotiation of Biology-based Socioscientific Issues Lack of Evolution Acceptance InhibitsStudents Negotiation of Biology-based Socioscienti fi c Issues, 9266(March).https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2016.1150869Fowler, S. R., Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2009). Moral Sensitivity in the Context ofSocioscientific Issues in High School Science Students. International Journal of Science Education, 31(2), 279296. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701787909Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to Design Research in Education (3rd editio). NewYork: McGraw-Hill, Inc.Frankfort-Nach. (1992). Foundation of Behavioural Research. New York; St.Martins Press.Franko, D. L., Cousineau, T. M., Trant, M., Craig, T., Rancourt, D., Thompson, D., Ciccazzo, M.(2008). Motivation , self-ef fi cacy , physical activity and nutrition in college students?:Randomized controlled trial of an internet-based education program, 47, 369377.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2008.06.013Frazer, L., & Lawley, M. (2000). Questionnaire Design and Administration. Brisbane, Australia: JohnWiley & Sons.Furberg, A., & Ludvigsen, S. (2008). Students Meaning? making of Socio? scientific Issues inComputer Mediated Settings: Exploring learning through interaction trajectories.International Journal of Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09500690701543617Gallagher, M. W., & Brown, T. A. (2013). 14 . Introduction To Confirmatory Factor Analysis andStructural, (1), 289314.Garson, G. D. (2012). Structural Equation Mideling. Asheboro, NC: Statisticalsociates.Gerber, B. L., Cavallo, A. M. ., & Marek, E. A. (2001). Relationships among informal learningenvironments, teaching procedures and scientific reasoning ability. International Journal of Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 095006901750162892Goodfellow, M., & Wade, B. (2007). The Digital Divide And First-Year Students.J.College Student Retention, 8(4), 425438.Graham, J. W., Hofer, S. M., Donaldson, D. P., Mackkinnon, & Schafer, J. L. (1997). Analysis withmissing data in prevention research. In K. Bryant, M. Windle, &P. West (Eds.), The Science of prevention: Methodological advances from alcohol and substance abuse research (pp. 325366). Washinton , DC: American PsychologicalAssociation.Gravetter, F. J., & Wallnau, L. B. (2000). Statistics for the Behavioural Sciences (5th ed.).Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Gregory S. Blimling. (2016). Creating Contexts for Learning and Self-Authorship:Constructive Developmental Pedagogy (review). The Journal of Higher Education,73(May), 307309. https://doi.org/10.1352/jhe.2002.0015Grewal, R., Cote, J. A., Baumgartner, H., & Cote, J. A. (2004). Multicollinearity and MeasurementError in Structural Equation Models?: Implications for Theory. Marketing Science, 23, No.4(November 2014). https://doi.org/10.1287/ mksc.1040.0070Griffiths, D. (2016). Informal Learning Recognition and Management. Computer in Human Behaviour,55A(February), 501503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015. 10.019Hair, Joseph F. William C. Black. Barry J. Babin, . Rolph E. Anderson. (2011).Multivariate Analysis (seventh ed). New Jersey, Prentice Hall.Hall, J., & Sammons, P. (2013). Mediation, Moderation & Interaction. In T. T. (Ed) (Ed.), Handbookof Quantitative Methods for Educational Research (pp. 267 286). 2013 Sense Publishers.Hansson, L., Redfors, A., & Rosberg, M. (2011). Students Socio-ScientificReasoning in an Astrobiological Context During Work with a Digital Learning Environment. Journalof Science Education and Technology, 20, 388402. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-010-9260-5Hasnah Ali, Luqman Ahmad, Sanep Ahmad, & Noraziah Ali. (2009). Keperluan, Kepentingandan Sumbangan Perancangan Pendidikan Dalam Pembangunan Ekonomi Malaysia. Jurnal of SocialSciences and Humanities, 4(1), 1329.Hayes, A. F. (2009). Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical Mediation Analysis in the New Millennium. Communication Monographs, Vol.76(July 2013), 3741.https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750903310360Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation and Conditional ProcessAnalysis. GP The Guilford Press.Hmelo-silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., Chinn, C. A., Hmelo-silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C.A. (2007). Scaffolding and Achievement in Problem-Based and Inquiry Learning?: AResponse to Kirschner , Sweller , and Scaffolding and Achievement in Problem-Based andInquiry Learning?: A Response to Kirschner, Sweller , and Clark ( 2006 ), (October 2013), 3741. https://doi.org/10.1080/0 0461520701263368Hodson, D. (2014). Learning Science, Learning about Science, Doing Science: Differentgoals demand different learning methods. International Journal of Science Education, 36(15).https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.899722Hofer, B. K. (2000). Dimensionality and Disciplinary Differences in PersonalEpistemology. Contemporry Educational Psychology, 405, 378405. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1026Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The Development of Epistemological Theories: Beliefs AboutKnowledge and Knowing and Their Relation to Learning. Review of Educational Research, 67(spring 1997), 88140. https://doi.org/10.3102/ 00346543067001088Hogan, K. (2002). Small Groups TM Ecological Reasoning While Making an EnvironmentalManagement Decision. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(4), 341368.https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10025Hogan, M. J., Dwyer, C. P., Harney, O. M., Noone, C., & Conway, R. J. (2015).Metacognitive Skill Development and Applied Systems Science?: A Framework of Metacognitive Skills ,Self-regulatory Functions and Real-World Applications (pp. 75106). Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11062-2Hopwood, C. J., & Donnellan, M. B. (2010). How Should The Internal Structure of Personality Inventories be Evaluated? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14(3), 332346.Howitt, D., & Cramer, D. (2003). An Introduction to Statistics in Psychology: AComplete Guide for Students (Second edi). Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall.Hussey., J., & Hussey., R. (1997). Business Research: A Practical Guide forUndergraduate and Postgradute Students. London:Macmillan Press.IEA. (2012). TIMSS 2011 INTERNATIONAL RESULTS IN SCIENCE. New directionsment (Vol. 2012). https://doi.org/10.1002/yd.20038Ikhwan, M. S. M., Sadiah, B., & Eshah, M. S. (2017). Scientific reasoning skills basedon socio-scientific issues in the biology subject. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 4(3), 1318.https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2017.03.003Itin, C. M. (1999). Reasserting the philosophy of experiential education as a vehicle for change... The Journal of Experiental Education, Fall 1999(22,2), 91.James, M. C., Willoughby, S., James, M. C., & Willoughby, S. (2013). Listening to studentconversations during clicker questions?: What you have not heard might surprise you?! Listening tostudent conversations during clicker questions?: What you have not heard might surpriseyou?!, 123(2011). https://doi.org/10.1119/ 1.3488097Kalarova, T., Hadjiali, I., Denev, I. (2013). High School Students TM Reasoning in MakingDecisions about Socio-Ethical Issues of Genetic Engineering?: Case of Gene Therapy EDUCATION &BASIC SCIENCE. Education & Basic Science, (October 2014), 3741.https://doi.org/10.5504/BBEQ.2012.0133Kampa, N., Neumann, I., Heitmann, P., & Kremer, K. (2016). Epistemological beliefs in science a person-centered approach to investigate high school students profiles. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 46, 8193. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2016.04.007Kamtekar, R. (2012). Situationism and Virtue Ethics on the Content of Our Character*. Chicago Journals, 114(3), 458491. https://doi.org/10.1086/381696Karoline, E., & Justin, H. (2012). Understanding Student Participation and Choice in Science andTechnology Education. Springer Dordrecht Heidelberg New York London.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7793-4Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. (2013). Ringkasan Eksekutif Pelan Pembangunan Pendidikan Malaysia 2013-2025 (Pendidikan Prasekolah hingga Lepas Menengah). Retrieved from http://www.moe.gov.my/cms/upload_files/ articlefile/2013/articlefile_file_003113.pdfKenny, D. A., & McCoach, B. (2009). Effect of the Number of Variables on Measures ofFit in Structural Equation Modeling. Structural Equation Model: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 10(3)(February 2015), 333351. https://doi.org/ 10.1207/S15328007SEM1003Kent, R. (2001). Data Contruction and Data Analysis for Survey research. Palgrave, New York.Kerl nger, F. N. (2004). Foundation of The Behavioral Research (2nd editio). Sarjeet ication.Delhi.King, Patricia M.; Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing reflective judgment:Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking inadolescents and adults. ossey-Bass, 350 Sansome Street, San Francisco.King, P. M. (1981). Reflective Judgment?: Concepts of Justification and TheirRelationship to Age and Education, 16.Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. TheGuilford Press New York London.Klosterman, M. L., Sadler, T. D., & Brown, J. (2011). Science Teachers Use of Mass Media toAddress Socio-Scientific and Sustainability Issues. Research in Science Education, 42, 5174.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9256-zKlosterman, M. L., Sadler, T. D., & Brown, J. (2012). Science Teachers Use of Mass Media toAddress Socio-Scientific and Sustainability Issues. Research in Science Education, 42(1), 5174.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9256-zKlosterman, M. L., Sadler, T. D., & Brown, J. (2012). Science Teachers Use of Mass Media toAddress Socio-Scientific and Sustainability Issues. Research in Science Education, 42, 5174.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9256-zKPM. (2002). Huraian Sukatan Pelajaran Biologi Tingkatan 4.KPM. (2012). Dasar Pendidikan Kebangsaan. Perpustakaan Negara Malaysia.Retrieved from http://www.moe.gov.my/userfiles/file/BUKU DASAR.pdfKuhn, D., & Udell, W. (2003). The Development of Argument Skills, 74(5), 1245 1260.Laporan Awal Pelan Pembangunan Pendidikan Malaysia 2013-2025. (2012). Laporan Awal Pelan Pembangunan Pendidikan Malaysia 2013-2025. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.007Lederman, N. G., Abd-el-khalick, F., Bell, R. L., Hall, R., & Street, E. (2002). Views of Nature ofScience Questionnaire?: Toward Valid and Meaningful Assessment of Learners Conceptions of Natureof Science, 39(6), 497521. https://doi.org/ 10.1002/tea.10034Lee, H., & Witz, K. G. (2009). Science Teachers Inspiration for TeachingSocio? scientific Issues: Disconnection with reform efforts. International Journal ofScience Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690801898903Lee, Y. C. (2012). Socio-Scientific Issues in Health Contexts: Treading a ruggedterrain. International Journal of Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.613417Leighton, J. P. (2006). Teaching and Assessing Deductive Reasoning Skills. The Journalof Experimental Education, 74(2), 107136. https://doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.74.2.107-136Leighton, J. P., Gokiert, R. J., & Cui, Y. (2007). Using Exploratory and Confirmatory Methods toIdentify the Cognitive Dimensions In a Large-Scale Science Assessment.International Journal of Testing, 7(2), 141189. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/15305050701193520Levinson, R., & Levinson, R. (2007). Towards a Theoretical Framework for Teaching ControversialSocio scientific Issues Towards a Theoretical Framework for Teaching Controversial Socio-scientific, (September 2013), 3741. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600560753Levison, R. (2006). Towards a Theoretical Framework for Teaching ControversialSocio-scientific Issues. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 1201 1224.https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600560753Lewis, A., Smith, D., & Lewis, A. (2009). Defining higher order thinking, (March 2015),3741. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849309543588Lewis, J., & Leach, J. (2006). Discussion of Socio? scientific Issues: The role ofscience knowledge. International Journal of Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500439348Liou, P., & Hung, Y. (2014). Statistical techniques utilized in analyzing pisa andtimss data in science education from 1996 to 2013: a methodological review, (May).https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-014-9558-5Lodewyk, K. (2007). Educational Psychology?: An International Journal ofExperimental Relations among Epistemological Beliefs , Academic Achievement, and Task Performance in Secondary School Students. Educational Psychology, 27(November 2014),3741. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410601104080Loehlin, J. C. (2004). Latent Variable Models: An Introduction to Factor, Path, and StructuralAnalysis. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.Lori D. Patton, Kristen A. Renn, Florence M. Guido, S. J. Q. (2016). StudentDevelopment in College: Theory, Research, and Practice. Jossey-Bass Publishers, 350Sansome St., San Francisco, CA 94104; Tel: 415-433-1767,.Lynn, M. R. (1986). Determination and Quantificatiom of Content Validity. Nursing Research, 35(6),382385.Macer, D. R. J. (2006). A Cross-Cultural Introduction to Bioethics. No Title.Christchurch, N.Z.: Eubios Ethics Institute.Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., & Foy, P. (2007). TIMSS 2007 International Science Report.Science.Mastaglia, B., Toye, C., & Krisjanson, L. J. (2003). Ensuring content validity ininstrument development: Challenges and innovative approaches. Contemporaryse, 14(3).Mastaglia, B., Toye, C., & Kristjanson, L. J. (2003). Ensuring content validity ininstrument development: Challenges and innovative approaches. Contemporary Nurse, 14(June 2015),281291. https://doi.org/10.5172/conu.14.3.281Mathieu, J. E., & Taylor, S. R. (2006). Clarifying conditions and decision points for mediationaltypes inferens in organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 27, 10311056.Mchugh, M. L. (2012). Lessons in biostatistics Interrater reliability?: the kappastatistic. Biochemia Medica, 22(3), 276282.Mercer, N., Dawes, L., Wegerif, R., & Sams, C. (2004). Reasoning as a scientist: waysof helping children to use language to learn science. British Educational Research Journal, 30(3), 359377. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920410001689689Moss, K., & Crowley, M. (2011). Computers & Education Effective learning in science?:The use of personal response systems with a wide range of audiences. Computers & Education, 56(1), 3643. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.compedu.2010.03.021Mueller, M. P., & Zeidler, D. L. (2010). Moral Ethical Character and ScienceEducation?: EcoJustice Ethics Through Socioscientific Issues ( SSI ). In D.J Tippins et.al. (Ed.), Cultural Studies & Environmentalism (Vol. 3, pp. 105128). Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90- 481-3929-3Nazirmuddin Ahmad, Mohd Taib Arifin, Marinah Awang. (2005). Pengantar Etika.Pustaka Salam Sdn. Bhd.Neber, H., & Schommer-Ai,.H. (2010). Self-regulated Science Learning with Highly Gifted Students?:The role of cognitive , Self-regulated Science Learning with Highly Gifted Students?: therole of cognitive , motivational , epistemological ,. High Ability Studies, (March 2013), 3741. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 13598130220132316Noar, S. M. (2009). Structural Equation Modeling?: A The Role of Structural Equation Modeling in Scale Development. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 10(4)(February 2014), 622647. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM1004Nordin, A., & Lin, H. (2011). Hubungan sikap terhadap mata pelajaran sains dengan penguasaankonsep asas sains pelajar tingkatan dua. Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, (June), 89101. Retrieved from http://eprints. utm.my/13431/Nuangchale, P. (2009). Development of Socioscientific Issues-Based Teaching for PreserviceScience Teachers. Journal of Social Sciences, 5(3), 239243.https://doi.org/10.3844/jssp.2009.239.243Global Warmingthrough SocioscientificIssues-based Instruction, 6(8), 4247.Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric Theory (3rd editio). New York:McGraw-Hill.Oecd. (2011). Education at a Glance 2011. OECD indicators. Education. https://doi.org/10.1787/eag-2011-enOsborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (n.d.). International Journal of Science Attitudes towardsscience?: A review of the literature and its implications, (January 2013), 3741.https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000032199Pallant, J. (2001). SPSS survival manual - a step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS forwindows (version 10). Buckingham Open University Press.Park, M., Kjervik, D., Crandell, J., & Oermann, M. H. (2012). The relationship ofethics education to moral sensitivity and moral reasoning skills of nursing students. Nursing Ethics, 19(4), 568580. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733011433922Pegg, J. M. (2006). Developing explanations: student reasoning about scienceconcepts during claims-evidence inquiry lessons. Interpreting. Retrieved fromhttp://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/xmlui/handle/1957/3190Perry, William G., J. (1979). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in thecollege years: A scheme. Jossey-Bass Publishers, 350 Sansome St., San Francisco,CA 94104; Tel: 415-433-1767,.Piaget, J. (1976). Piaget TM s Theory. Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1976.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-46323-5_2Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2004). Nursing research: Principles and methods (7thedit). Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams, & Wilkins.Ratcliffe, M. (1997). Pupil decision?making about socio?scientific issues within thescience curriculum. International Journal of Science Education, 19(2), 167182.https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069970190203Reips, U.-D., & Frederick, F. (2008). Interval-level measurement with visualanalogue scales in Internet-based research?: V AS Generator, 40(3), 699704.https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.699Reis, P. (2009). Teaching Controversial Socio-Scientific Issues in Biology and GeologyClasses?: A Case Study. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 13, 124.Reiss, M. J. (2006). Teacher Education and the New Biology Teacher Education and the New Biology.Teaching Education, (April 2013), 3741. https://doi.org//10476210600680325Remenyi, D., Williams, B., Money, A., & Swartz, E. (1998). Doing Reserch in Businessand Management: An Introduction to process and method. Sage Publication.Repman, J., Zinskie, C., & Carlson, R. D. (2016). Effective Use of CMC Tools inInteractive Online Learning (Vol. 569). https://doi.org/10.1300/J025v22n01Reuker, S. (2016). The knowledge-based reasoning of physical education teachers?: A comparison between groups with different expertise. European Physical Educational Review, 122.https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336X15624245Rindermann, H., & Baumeister, A. E. E. (2014). Validating the Interpretations of PISAand TIMSS Tasks: A Rating Study. International Journal of Testing, 15(1), 122.https://doi.org/10.1080/15305058.2014.966911Robottom, I. (2012). Socio-Scientific Issues in Education: Innovative Practices andContending Epistemologies. Research in Science Education, 42, 95107.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9258-xRoss, S. M., Morrison, G. R., & Lowther, D. L. (2010). Educational Technology ResearchPast and Present?: Balancing Rigor and Relevance to Impact School Learning. ContemporaryEducational Technology, 1(1), 1735.Roth, W., & Is, C. V. A. (1993). The Development of Science Process Skills inAuthentic Contexts, 30(2), 127152.Sadler, T. D. (2004). Moral sensitivity and its contribution to the resolution of socio- scientificissues. Journal of Moral Education, 33(3), 339358. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305724042000733091Sadler, T. D. (2009a). Situated learning in science education: socio?scientific issues as contexts for practice. Studies in Science Education (Vol. 45).https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260802681839Sadler, T. D. (2009b). Situated learning in science education: socio?scientific issues as contextsfor practice. Studies in Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260802681839Sadler, T. D. (2011). A Socio-Scientific Issues in The Classroom?: Teaching, Learning and Learning.(Troy D. Sadler, Ed.). Springer. https://doi.org/DOI 10.1007/978- 94-007-1159-4_16.Sadler, T. D. (2011). Turkish Preservice Science Teachers Informal Reasoning RegardingSocioscientific Issues and the Factors Influencing Their Informal Reasoning, 313332.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-010-9221-0Sadler, T. D., Chambers, F. W., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). Student conceptualizations of the natureof science in response to a socioscientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 387409. https://doi.org/10.1080/69032000119456Sadler, T. D., & Donnelly, L. a. (2006). Socioscientific Argumentation: The effects of contentknowledge and morality. International Journal of Science Education, 28(12), 14631488.https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600708717Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). The Morality of Socioscientific Issues:Construal and Resolution of Genetic Engineering Dilemmas. Science Education, 88(1), 427.https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10101Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005a). The significance of content knowledge forinformal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: Applying genetics knowledgeto genetic engineering issues. Science Education, 89(1), 7193.https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20023Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005b). The significance of content knowledge for informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: Applying genetics knowledge to geneticengineering issues. Science Education, 89(1), 7193. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20023Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2009). Scientific literacy, PISA, and socioscientific discourse:Assessment for progressive aims of science education. Journal of Research in ScienceTeaching, 46(8), 909921. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20327Salomon, G., & Almog, T. (1998). Educational Psychology and Technology?: A Matter of Reciprocal Relations. Educational Psychology and Technology, 100(1), 222241.Sampson, V., Simon, S., Amos, R., & Evagorou, M. (2011). Metalogue: Engaging Students inScientific and Socio-scientific Argumentation BT - Socio-scientific Issues in The classroom.(pp. 193200). https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-94-007- 1159-4Santos, D. (2008). Scientific Literacy?: A Freirean Perspective as a Radical View.Wiley InterScience, (2006), 361382. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20301Saunders, K. J., & Rennie, L. J. (2011). A Pedagogical Model for Ethical Inquiry intoSocioscientific Issues In Science. On Line Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9248-zSaunders, M. N. K., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2012). Research Methods for BusinessStudents. (6 edition). London: FT Prentice Hall.Schmidt, C. D., Mcadams, C. R., & Foster, V. (2009). Promoting the moral reasoning of undergraduatebusiness students through a deliberate psychological education? based classroom intervention. Journal of Moral Education, 38(December 2014), 3741.https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240903101556Schommer-aikins, M., & Easter, M. (2006). Ways of Knowing and Epistemological Beliefs?: Combinedeffect on academic performance. Educational Psychology,. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410500341304Schumacker, & Lomax. (2004). A Beginners Guide to Structural Equation Modeling.Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.Sekaran, U. (2010). Research Methods For Business A Skill Building Approach. Journal of Education for Business Book Review, (March 2015), 13.https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.1993.10117635Sewall Wright. (1934). The Method of Path Coefficients. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics,5(3), 161215. https://doi.org/10.1002/0470011815.b2a13089Sharma, S. (1996). Applied multivariate techniques. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons. Shuell, T. J.(1986). Cognitive Conceptions of Learning. Review of EducationalResearch, 56(4), 411436. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543056004411Siegel, M. A., & Ranney, M. A. (2003). Developing the Changes in Attitude about the Relevance ofScience ( CARS ) Questionnaire and Assessing Two High School Science Classes, 40(8), 757775.https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10110Siegler, R. S. (2016). Continuity and Change in the Field of Cognitive Development and in thePerspectives of One Cognitive Developmentalist. Child Development Perspectives, 0(0), 16.https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12173Siew Fong Yap. (2014). Beliefs, values, ethics and moral reasoning in socio-scientific education.Issues in Educational Research, 24(3), 2014, 24(24(3)), 21. Retrieved fromhttp://www.iier.org.au/iier24/yap.pdfSimonneaux, L. (2008). Argumentation in socio-scientific contexts. Argumentation in ScienceEducation, 179199. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2Simonneaux, L., & Simonneaux, J. (2009). Students socio-scientific reasoning oncontroversies from the viewpoint of education for sustainable development. CulturalStudies of Science Education, 4, 657687. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11422-008-9141-xSmith, C. L., Maclin, D., Houghton, C., & Hennessey, M. G. (2010). Sixth-Grade StudentsTM Epistemologies of Science?: The Impact of School Science Experiences on Epistemological Development. Cognition and Instruction, 18(3)(May 2013), 349422.https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532690XCI1803_3Snyder, T. E., & Gamas, W. S. (2014). Promoting in conceptual change Acomparative meta-analysis science?: from interventions of instructional education reading educationand science, 28(2), 116159.Sobel, M. E. (1987). from the SAGE Social Science Collections . Rights Reserved . from All.Sociological Method & Research, volume 16(no.1). https://doi.org/ 10.1177/0049124187016001006Spector, P. E. (1992). Summated rating scale construction: An Introduction. Newbury Park?: SagePublication.Stan ey A. Mulaik. (2009). Linear Causal Modeling with Strctural Equations. CRCPress.Subiantoro, A. W. (2011). Socioscientific Issues and its Potency on BiologyInstruction for Character Education in Indonesia, (November), 16.Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2011). Using Multivariate Statistics (3rd editio).New York: Harper Collins College Publishers.Tal, R., & Hochberg, N. (2003). Assessing High Order Thinking of Students Participatingin The ?Wise? Project in Israel. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 29, 6989.https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-491X(03)00016-6Tal, T., Kali, Y., Magid, S., & Madhok, J. J. (2011). Socio-scientific issues in theClassroom. Socio-Scientific Issies in the Classroom: Teaching, Learning and Results,39(October), 1138. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1159-4Tal, T., & Kedmi, Y. (2006). Teaching socioscientific issues: classroom culture and studentsperformances. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 1(4), 615644.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-006-9026-9Tarhini, R. M. B. Y. O. A. (2016). "A Jordanian empirical study of the associations amongtransformational leadership, transactional leadership, knowledge sharing, job performance, andfirm performance: a structural equation modelling approach. Journal of ManagementDevelopment, 35(5).Thiroux, J. P. (2001). Ethics, Theory & Practice (7 edition). New Jersey, Prentice HallInc.Thompson, M., Bayi, E., & Boro, K. (2015). Teachers Practices in KindergardenClassrooms:Cognitive Constructivist Theory of Learning. International Open Acces Journal,13.TIMSS Implications for U.S. Education. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://christienken.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Tienken_AASA_Winter_ 13_TIMSS.pdfTrompenears, F., & Hamden-Turner, C. (1997). Riding The Wave of Culture:Understanding Culteral Diversity in Business (2nd editio). London?: Nicholas Brealey.Tsai, C. (2010). Relationships between student scientific epistemological beliefs and perceptions of constructivist learning environments. Educational Research, (February 2015), 3741.https://doi.org/10.1080/001318800363836Tsai, M., & Tsai, C. (2010). Innovations in Education and Teaching InternationalInformation searching strategies in web-based science learning?: the role of internetself-efficacy Information Searching Strategies in Web-Based Science Learning?: The Role of Internet Self-Efficacy, (October 2014), 3741.rg/10.1080/1355800032000038822Tytler, R., & Peterson, S. (2003). Tracing young childrens scientific reasoning.Research in Science Education, 33, 433465. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:RISE.0000005250.04426.67U. Narmadha, & Dr. S. Chamundeswari. (2013). Attitude towards Learning of Science and Academic Achievement in Science among Students at the Secondary Level. Journal ofSociological Research , 4(2), 114124. https:// doi.org/10.5296/jsr.v4i2.3909Venville, G. J., & Dawson, V. M. (2010). The impact of a classroom intervention on grade 10students argumentation skills, informal reasoning, and conceptual understanding of science.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 952977. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20358Vernon, D. T. A., & Blake, R. L. (1993). Does Problem Based Learning Work? AMeta-Analysis of Evaluative Research. Journal of The Association of America MedicalColleges, 68(7), 550563.Voss, J. F., Perkins, D. N., & Segal, J. w. (2009). Informal Reasoning and Education.Routledge New York London.Wheaton, B., Muthen, B., Alwin, D. F., & Summers, G. F. (1977). Assessing reliabilityand stability in panel models. Sociological Methodology, 8(1), 84136.https://doi.org/10.2307/270754Wicks, A. C., & Freeman, R. E. (1998). Organization Studies and the NewPragmatism?: Positivism , Anti-positivism , and the Search for Ethics.Orhanization Science, 9(2), 123140.Wu, Y. T., & Tsai, C. C. (2011). The Effects of Different On-line Searching Activities on High School Students Cognitive Structures and Informal Reasoning Regarding aSocio-scientific Issue. Research in Science Education, 41, 771785.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-010-9189-yYin, R. K. (1994). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (2nd editio). Beverly Hills, CA: SagePublication.Yuan, K.-H., Marshall, L. L., & Bentler, P. M. (2002). A unified approach toexploratory factor analysis with missing data, nonnormal data, and in the presence of outliers. Psychometrika, 67(1), 95121. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/BF02294711Yusri, I. M. (2010). Bimbingan Cepat: Analisis Data Penyelidikan Untuk Pendidikan & Sains Sosial.Bandar Ilmu, Kuantan, Pahang, Malaysia.Yusuf al-Qaradawi. (1994). The Lawful& The Prohibited in Islam?: Al-Halal Wal- Haram FilIslam. American Trust Publication.Zabani Darus. (2012). Status Pencapaian Malaysia dalam TIMSS dan PISA?: SatuRefleksi. Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia.Zainudin, A. (2014). A Hand Book on Structural Equation Modeling. MPWS RichResources, Selangor Malaysia.Zainudin, A. (2015). Research Methology & Data Analysis. UiTM Press.Zanaton, Lilia, & Kamisah. (2006). Sikap Terhadap Sains dalam Kalangan Pelajar Sains eli Peringkat Menengah dan Matrikulasi. Pertanika Journal Social Science, 14(2).Zeidler, D. L. (2003). The Role of Moral Reasoning on Socioscientific Issues andDiscourse in Science Education. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/1-4020-4996-XZeidler, D. L., Florida, S., & Nichols, B. H. (2009). Socioscientific Issues?: Theoryand Practice, 21(2), 4958.Zeidler, D. L., Herman, B. C., Ruzek, M., Linder, A., & Lin, S.-S. (2013). Cross-cultural epistemological orientations to socioscientific issues. Journal of Researchin Science Teaching, 50(3), 251283. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21077Zeidler, D. L., & Keefer, M. (2003). The Role of Moral Reasoning and the Status of SocioscientificIssues in Science Education. The Role of Moral Reasoning on Socioscientific Issues andDiscourse in Science Education, 738 TSCrossRef. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-4996-X_2 M4 -CitaviZeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2007). The Role of Moral Reasoning inArgumentation?: Conscience , Character , and Care. In Argumentation in science education (pp.201216). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2_10Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2008). Social and Ethical Issues in ScienceEducation?: A Prelude to Action 1 C. Science and Education, 799803.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-007-9130-6Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Applebaum, S., & Callahan, B. E. (2009). Advancing reflectivejudgment through Socioscientific Issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1),74101. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20281Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005a). Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education,89(3), 357377. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20048Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005b). Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education,89(3), 357377. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20048Zeidler, M. D., Ph, D., Howes, E., Ph, D., Ferron, J., Ph, D., Ph, D. (2009). College Students ?Use of Science Content During Socioscientific Issues Negotiation?: Impact of EvolutionUnderstanding and Acceptance by Samantha R . Fowler A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillmentof the requirements for the degree ofDoctor of P.Zikmund, W. G. (1994). Business Research Methods (4th ed.). Fort Worth: Dryden.Zimmerman, C. (2000). The Development of Scientific Reasoning Skills.Developmental Review, 20, 99149. https://doi.org/10.1006/drev.1999.0497Zimmerman, C. (2005). The Development of Scientific Reasoning Skills: What PsychologistsContribute to an Understanding of Elementary Science Learning. Final Report to the National Research Concil. https://doi.org/ 10.1006/drev.1999.0497Zimmerman, C. (2007). The development of scientific thinking skills in elementary and middle school. Developmental Review, 27, 172223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2006.12.001Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering Students TM Knowledge andArgumentation Skills Through Dilemmas in Human Genetics. Journal ofTeaching, 39(1), 3562. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008 |