The effect of learning cycle multiple representation model on biology students’ critical thinking perceived from academic ability

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of Learning Cycle Multiple Representation (LCMR) on the critical thinking skills of Biology students in terms of academic ability. The participants were 62 Biology Education students from two universities, namely Universitas Pendidikan Mandalika and Universitas Nahdlatul Wathan Mataram Indonesia. The study was conducted in March-August 2020. The instrument utilized to assess critical thinking skills was an essay test on Plant Physiology, which consisted of 11 valid and reliable questions. The data were analyzed using the ANCOVA test with a significance level of 5%. The results demonstrated that: a) there were differences in students’ critical thinking skills based on the learning model, students using the LCMR model performed better than students using the Learning Cycle (LC) model; b) there were differences in students’ critical thinking skills based on academic abilities, students with high academic abilities were more critical than students with low academic abilities; c) there were differences in students’ critical thinking skills based on the interaction between learning models and students’ academic abilities. Based on LSD notation, students’ critical thinking skills from the highest to the lowest are LCMR students with high academic ability, LCMR students with low academic ability, LC students with high academic ability, and LC students with low academic ability. The findings of this study indicate that the LCMR learning model can aid students in enhancing their critical thinking skills.

Full text

AIP Conference Proceedings 2569, 020022 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0112430 2569, 020022
© 2023 Author(s).
The effect of learning cycle multiple
representation model on biology students’
critical thinking perceived from academic
ability
Cite as: AIP Conference Proceedings 2569, 020022 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0112430
Published Online: 10 January 2023
Any Fatmawati, Siti Zubaidah, Sutopo Sutopo, et al.

The Effect of Learning Cycle Multiple Representation Model
on Biology Students’ Critical Thinking Perceived from
Academic Ability
Any Fatmawati1, 2, a), Siti Zubaidah1, b), Sutopo Sutopo3, c), and Susriyati Mahanal1, d)
1) Biology Education Study Program, Universitas Negeri Malang, Jl. Semarang 5 Malang 65145, Indonesia.
2) Biology Education Study Program, Universitas Pendidikan Mandalika, Jl. Pemuda No. 59 A Mataram Nusa
Tenggara Barat, Indonesia.
3) Physics Education Study Program, Universitas Negeri Malang, Jl. Semarang 5 Malang 65145, Indonesia.
a) anyfatmawati@ikipmataram.ac.id
b) Corresponding author: siti.zubaidah.fmipa@um.ac.id
c) sutopo.fisika@um.ac.id
d) susriyati.mahanal.fmipa@um.ac.id
Abstract. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of Learning Cycle Multiple Representation (LCMR) on
the critical thinking skills of Biology students in terms of academic ability. The participants were 62 Biology Education
students from two universities, namely Universitas Pendidikan Mandalika and Universitas Nahdlatul Wathan Mataram
Indonesia. The study was conducted in March-August 2020. The instrument utilized to assess critical thinking skills was
an essay test on Plant Physiology, which consisted of 11 valid and reliable questions. The data were analyzed using the
ANCOVA test with a significance level of 5%. The results demonstrated that: a) there were differences in students’ critical
thinking skills based on the learning model, students using the LCMR model performed better than students using the
Learning Cycle (LC) model; b) there were differences in students’ critical thinking skills based on academic abilities,
students with high academic abilities were more critical than students with low academic abilities; c) there were differences
in students’ critical thinking skills based on the interaction between learning models and students’ academic abilities. Based
on LSD notation, students’ critical thinking skills from the highest to the lowest are LCMR students with high academic
ability, LCMR students with low academic ability, LC students with high academic ability, and LC students with low
academic ability. The findings of this study indicate that the LCMR learning model can aid students in enhancing their
critical thinking skills.
INTRODUCTION
Learning Cycle (LC) is a constructivist-based learning model in which students construct new ideas on top of
their existing ones (1). LC is a constructivist model of learning that is widely used (2). By allowing students to take
responsibility for their learning, learn through experience, and transfer knowledge, the LC model enables students to
practice in real-life contexts (3). The LC model benefits and serves lecturers in higher education by providing
examples of how a structuralist approach to learning processing can be applied and facilitating reform-based
instruction (4). This model can be used in science education to improve practice quality and design science programs
based on structural approaches and cognitive psychology. It can also be used to assist students in redefining and
changing preconceived notions through interaction with peers and their environment (5). Learning cycles enable
educators to engage students in a series of relevant activities and help them practice their critical thinking skills (6).
LC 5E is composed of five stages of learning: Engagement, Exploration, Explanation, Elaboration, and
Evaluation (5). Each step includes activities that can assist students in developing their concepts. Multi representation
as a strategy for learning can complement the LC model’s steps, beginning with the second E, namely exploration.
Clément and Castéra (7) explain that students can use the LC model to develop their representation. LC needs to
The 5th International Conference on Mathematics and Science Education (ICoMSE) 2021
AIP Conf. Proc. 2569, 020022-1–020022-8; https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0112430
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-4277-1/$30.00
020022-1

acquire additional strategy inserts to ensure that lecturers maintain significant control over multiple phases of learning
activities (8), one of which is through multi-representation. Due to the LC’s weakness, researchers can complete it
by utilizing various representations (9).
According to Ainsworth (10), multi-representation (MR) is a strategy that can be advantageous when people are
learning complex new ideas. Multi-representation is a component of cognitive development processes, as using
various representations is one of the characteristics of human intelligence (11). Students can operate each
representation flexibly with MR, improving their comprehension (12). Reflina (13) discovered that representation
could aid in the development of additional abilities such as skill, diligence, and critical thinking.
Critical thinking is an essential skill that schools can pass on to graduates and has become a learning objective
at all levels of education (14). Critical thinking is a complex process requiring higher-level reasoning to accomplish
the desired result (15). Critical thinking can also be defined as thinking with a purpose: proving something,
interpreting what something means, solving problems, collaborating effectively, and conducting non-competitive
efforts (16). The skills required for learning biology are critical thinking skills that enable students to comprehend
society’s most recent scientific advances (17). Critical thinking is needed as an effort in education to produce quality
human beings, specifically by acquainting students with a critical thinking culture throughout the learning process to
master concepts in depth (16). Critical thinking skills are acquired through practice and have emerged as critical
abilities required to compete in today’s new information age (18).
Students’ critical thinking skills are not fully developed, as evidenced by the findings of previous related
research. Temel (19) discovered that pre-service teachers generally lacked critical thinking skills. According to a
study conducted at several universities in Indonesia, including STKIP Bima (20), UIN Alauddin Makassar, STKIP
PI Makassar, UPRI Makassar, and STKIP Yapim Maros (21), Universitas PGRI Ronggolawe Tuban (22), and STKIP
Yapim Maros (23), students’ critical thinking skills are classified as low. Additionally, a preliminary study conducted
in the fourth semester of the 2018/2019 academic year at Universitas Pendidikan Mandalika revealed that biology
education students’ critical thinking skills had a mean score of 2.2, placing them in the undeveloped category.
Students’ lack of critical thinking skills is a hot topic in education, and thus critical thinking skills must be improved
by using various learning strategies in the classroom (24).
Critical thinking correlates with academic ability. There is a difference in concept mastery between students
with high and low academic abilities (25). Groups of students with limited academic ability continue to struggle with
mastering the necessary material (26). Students who excel academically will possess superior higher-order thinking
abilities (27). Academic ability refers to students’ ability to solve problems or complete tasks following their
knowledge (28). Academic ability can also be defined as a student’s knowledge or ability to master a subject and is
a necessary component of acquiring broader and more complex knowledge (29). Students with varying academic
abilities have different perceptions of the same learning material. Thus, students who take proficiency tests fall into
two categories: those with high abilities and those with low abilities (30).
Learning Cycle will be combined with Multi Representation to form Learning Cycle Multiple Representation
(LCMR) based on the description above. The LCMR learning model is expected to solve problems in biology
education, particularly in terms of empowering students’ critical thinking when learning complex subjects such as
Plant Physiology. As a result, it is necessary to research the LCMR model’s effect on students’ critical thinking skills
with varying academic abilities.
METHODS
Type of Research
This study was designed as a quasi-experimental study that employed a pretest-posttest only control group
design. It involved two classes as samples assigned as the experimental and control groups. The participants of this
study consisted of 62 sixth-semester students from the Department of Biology Education at Universitas Pendidikan
Mandalika and Universitas Nahdlatul Wathan Mataram, West Nusa Tenggara, Indonesia. The study was conducted
during the fourth semester of the 2019/2020 academic year.
Research Procedures
The research activity began with a pretest to determine the students’ academic abilities. The pretest assessed the
participants’ initial critical thinking skills and was administered in experimental and control classes. The academic
020022-2

ability test was used to classify the students academically. The following step was to help treatment to all classes, with
the experimental class using the learning cycle multiple representation (LCMR) learning model and the control class
using the learning cycle (LC) learning model. For 11 meetings, learning activities were conducted using the prepared
Student Worksheets. Once a week, the learning process was carried out. After all instructional materials had been
taught to students, a post-test was administered.
Research Instrument
The critical thinking skill instrument was based on indicators developed by Finken and Ennis (31),
specifically: 1) focus, 2) reason, 3) inference, 4) situation, 5) clarity, and 6) overview, abbreviated as FRISCO. The
instrument comprised eleven essay tests covering Plant Physiology materials, some of them indicated in Table 1. The
instrument was valid (mean score of 0.613) and reliable (0.836, very reliable). The scoring rubric employed a 0-5
point system. The participants’ critical thinking skills were classified as 0-2 (not developed), 3-4 (well-developed),
and 5 (very well-developed) (32). Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) at a 5% significance level for data analysis.
TABLE 1. Examples of research instrument to measure critical thinking skills
Number
Questions
1
Plants need water and minerals for growth, usually plants are watered with plain water, but what if
plants are watered with saltwater? Explain!
2
Diffusion, osmosis, active transport, endocytosis, and exocytosis are the movement of substances
from high and low concentrations. Plants use these transport mechanisms to obtain nutrients. From
all of them, which one is the most efficient? Give your reasons!
3
The transport process in plants involves xylem and phloem, but the two structures are different. Is
there a difference in the speed at which the substance passes through the two? Explain!
4
Normally plants obtain nutrients by photosynthesis, but the Venus flytrap (Dionaea muscipula) is a
plant that gets its nutrition by catching insects. How can this phenomenon occur? Explain!
5
Phototropism is movement in plants caused by the influence of light stimulation. The effect of
phototropism is the movement of plants towards light. In your opinion, why do plants always face the
light? What mechanism occurs in plants? Explain!
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The following section will discuss the results of data analysis using ANCOVA at a 5% level of significance. To
begin, Table 2 will summarize the results of the overall data analysis. It will then be broken down into stages, starting
with the effect of the LCMR model on critical thinking skills, the influence of academic ability on critical thinking
skills, and the effect of the LCMR model and academic ability interaction on critical thinking skills.
TABLE 2. The Result of the ANCOVA test analysis
Source
Type III Sum of
Squares
df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
Partial Eta Squared
Corrected Model
9955.902a
4
2488.975
365.549
.000
.962
Intercept
491.042
1
491.042
72.118
.000
.559
Pre_Critical
162.474
1
162.474
23.862
.000
.295
Model
166.631
1
166.631
24.473
.000
.300
Academic
360.539
1
360.539
52.951
.000
.482
Model * Academic
516.216
1
516.216
75.815
.000
.571
Error
388.105
57
6.809
Total
319598.876
62
Corrected Total
10344.007
61
a. R Squared = 0.915 (Adjusted R Squared = 0.909)
As shown in Table 2, critical thinking in the LCMR class has a significance value of 0.000 (P-value 0.05),
indicating differences in students’ critical thinking skills when several learning models are used. Additionally, critical
020022-3

thinking has a significance value of 0.000 (P-value 0.05) in the treatment of academic abilities, indicating that “there
are differences in the critical thinking skills of students with varying academic abilities.” Furthermore, critical thinking
has a significance value of 0.000 (P-value 0.05) in the interaction of LCMR and academic ability, indicating that
“there are differences in students’ critical thinking skills as a result of the interaction of multiple learning models and
varying academic abilities.”
The Differences in Students’ Critical Thinking Skills based on Learning Models
The boxplots in Fig 1 depict students’ critical thinking scores after learning with different learning models. As
illustrated in Figure 1, the LCMR class achieved a higher mean score than the LC class. The LCMR class obtained a
quartile of 81.28, while the LC class had 60.63.
FIGURE 1. Boxplots depicting the differences in students’ critical thinking scores after learning model
implementation.
According to the LSD notation in Table 3, the LCMR group’s mean score on critical thinking skills was
significantly different from the LC group’s. Students in the LCMR model class have superior critical thinking abilities
to those in the LC class.
TABLE 3. The Result of the LSD Test on Students’ Critical Thinking Based on Learning Models.
No.
Learning
Model
Mean Score
Total Mean
Score
LSD Notation
Pretest
Post-test
1.
LCMR
41.232
81.282
76.120
a
2.
LC
27.878
60.635
65.474
b
The use of LCMR can assist students in learning science concepts, correcting incorrect or incomplete knowledge,
delving deeper into concepts, and adapting classroom learning to their daily lives (33). Additionally, LCMR in science
education can be used to supplement content, increase students’ attention to learning, ensure long-term learning,
change students’ attitudes toward science, and make learning more enjoyable and valuable. According to Campbell
(34), the 5E learning cycle fosters constructivism, conceptual change, and inquiry-based learning in the classroom.
Additionally, lecturers can guide students through investigative activities and improve data collection during the
exploration stage. More precisely, the lecturer can provide activities or procedures for students to follow during the
exploration phase (9).
Critical thinking is a multidimensional construct that includes cognitive, dispositional, motivational, attitude,
and metacognitive functions (35). Halpern (36) argues that critical thinking aims for an individual to accomplish goals
in the most efficient manner possible due to its multidimensional nature. In addition, critical thinking allows
individuals to consider the same information from multiple perspectives (37). Critical thinking can motivate someone
to continue striving for excellence, as evidenced by their behavior during the thinking process (38). Zubaidah (39)
suggests that students can exercise critical thinking skills by observing the differing perspectives of others. Critical
thinking skills can be linked to the critical thinking indicators proposed by experts. Finken and Ennis (31) state that
critical thinking consists of six fundamental components, called FRISCO (focus, reason, inference, situation, clarity,
and overview).
020022-4

The Effect of Academic Ability on Students’ Critical Thinking Skills
Fig 2 depicts students’ critical thinking skills across various academic abilities. According to Figure 2, students
with high academic abilities have superior critical thinking skills to students with low academic abilities. The top
quartile of students with high academic ability is 77.39, while the top quartile of students with low academic ability
is 63.80.
Additionally, Table 4 summarizes the results of the LSD test of students’ critical thinking skills concerning their
academic ability. According to Table 4, the mean score for critical thinking skills of high academic students is
significantly different from that of low academic students, as indicated by the LSD notation. Students with superior
academic ability possess excellent critical thinking skills than students with inferior academic ability.
Critical thinking stimulates rapid, accurate, and assumption-free thought processes related to the previous
student’s academic ability (40). This critical thinking ability should be fostered early through education, particularly
science education (39), as it is necessary for preparing students to become critical thinkers capable of solving
problems. They were developing independence, avoiding indoctrination, fraud, brainwashing, and making appropriate
and responsible decisions. Critical thinking skills should consistently be reinforced during the educational process
(41). Students’ critical thinking skills can demonstrate an understanding of complex biological relationships, allowing
them to connect complex phenomena occurring at various levels of the organization to their conceptual mastery (17).
Since critical thinking is related to concept mastery, students will demonstrate their knowledge by mastering concepts
and applying it to new situations (42).
FIGURE 2. Boxplots depicting the differences in students’ critical thinking scores based on academic abilities
TABLE 4. The Result of the LSD Test on Students’ Critical Thinking Based on Academic Abilities
No
Academic
Ability
Mean Score
Total Mean Score
LSD
Notation
Pretest
Post-test
1.
High
37.487
77.390
75.096
a
2.
Low
31.192
63.860
66.498
b
Academic ability is a term that refers to a student’s level of knowledge about a particular subject that has been
studied and can be used as a springboard for acquiring more advanced and complex knowledge (43). Academic ability
refers to students’ ability to solve problems or complete tasks based on their knowledge (28). Academic ability is
classified into high, medium, and low (30). Additionally, it is explained that high-ability students have a more
significant starting state than the class average. In contrast, low-ability students have a starting state that is less than
or equal to the class average. Due to the unequal distribution of academic abilities, schools are classified as having
high or low academic capabilities.
Someone with high academic ability demonstrates exemplary behavior and study habits than someone with low
academic ability (44). This behavior and study habits are also associated with a student’s ability to manage his study
time. According to Semerci and Batdi (29), academic ability can be determined by solving problems following the
learning process. This ability is beneficial for deciding progress made and determining the next steps in the learning
process. As a result, Belapurkar (1) proposes that learning activities should consider differences in academic abilities
to minimize the gap between students with high and low abilities in both the process and learning outcomes. According
to the study’s findings, the use of innovative models was able to close the gap between groups of students with high
academic abilities and groups of students with low academic abilities in terms of students’ science process skills (45).
020022-5

Students’ Critical Thinking Skills Perceived from the Interaction between Learning Model
and Academic Ability
Additionally, data on the differences in students’ critical thinking skills results will be presented about the
interaction between the learning model and academic ability, as illustrated in Fig 3. Fig 3 shows boxplots of students’
critical thinking skills based on the interaction of the learning model with students’ academic ability. The first group
is LCMR and high academic ability with a quartile of 85.57; the second group is LCMR and low academic ability
with 76.67. The third group is LC and high academic ability with a quartile of 69.71, and the last group is LC and low
academic ability with a quartile of 51.52.
According to the LSD notation in Table 5, the mean score of critical thinking skills for students with high academic
ability who learned using LCMR is statistically significantly different from the mean score for all treatments. Students’
critical thinking scores, from highest to lowest, are reported by the interaction between LCMR and high academic
ability, LCMR and low academic ability, LC and high academic ability, and LC and low academic ability. Table 5
contains sample responses from students on the critical thinking test.
FIGURE 3. Boxplots depicting the differences in students’ critical thinking scores based on the interaction between
the learning model and academic ability
TABLE 5. The Result of the LSD Test on Students’ Critical Thinking Pretest and Post-test Scores Based on the
Interaction between Learning Model and Academic Ability
No. Interaction
Mean Score
Total Mean
Score
Increase LSD Notation
Pretest
Post-test
1.
LCMR-High Ability
45.718
85.574
77.054
87.17 %
a
2.
LCMR- Low Ability
36.747
76.99
75.187
109.51 %
b
3.
LC_-High Ability
29.771
69.717
73.139
134.17 %
c
4.
LC-Low Ability
25.985
51.552
57.810
98.39 %
d
Prior knowledge provides the basis or foundation for critical thinking and conclusion-making (46). In this study,
students’ responses reflected only one or two indicators of critical thinking, such as focus and inference or reason and
overview. As a result, there is a need for treatment that helps students develop their critical thinking skills. As previous
research has indicated, pre-learning activities influence and contribute to students’ critical thinking skills (47). Critical
thinking is a process that mobilizes all of one’s knowledge and abilities to solve problems, make decisions, analyze
all arising assumptions, and conduct investigations or research based on the data and information gathered to obtain
the desired data or conclusions (35). Critical thinking skills are influenced by the learning environment, which is the
classroom’s instructional model (48,49).
CONCLUSION
The results of the study showed that: a) there was a difference in students’ critical thinking skills based on the
learning model implemented in the classroom, where the LCMR group demonstrated better critical thinking skills
than the LC group; b) there was a difference in critical thinking skills between high-ability and low-ability students,
where the high-ability students performed better than the low-ability students; c) there was a difference in students’
020022-6

critical thinking skills based on the interaction between learning model and academic ability. As indicated by the LSD
Notation, students’ critical thinking scores, from highest to lowest, are reported by the interaction between LCMR and
high academic ability, LCMR and low academic ability, LC and high academic ability, and LC and low academic
ability.
REFERENCES
1. Belapurkar AM. Effectiveness of 5E Learning Instructional Model on Academic Achievement of Science
Students. Sch Res J Humanit Sci English Lang. 2017;4(19):4334–9.
2. Namgyel T, Bharaphan K. The Development of Simulation and Game in 5E Learning Cycle to Teach
Photoelectric Effect for Grade 12 Students. Asia-Pacific Forum Sci Learn Teach. 2017;18(2):1–30.
3. Güneş Koç RS, Sarikaya M. The Effect of The 5E Learning Model and The Context Based Teaching Method on
Achievement and Permanence Towards Subject of Light. e-Kafkas Eğitim Araştırmaları Derg. 2020;7(1):430–
57.
4. Seven S, Tiryaki S, Ceylan H. The Effect of the 5E Learning Cycle Model and Cooperative Learning Method in
the Constructivist Approach on Academic Success and Students’ Attitude towards Subject of “Sound.” J Educ
Soc Behav Sci. 2017;21(4):1–11.
5. Bybee RW, Taylor JA, Gardner A, Van Scotter P, Powell JC, Westbrook A, et al. The basic 5E instructional
model: origins and effectiveness. Off Sci Educ Natl Institutes Heal. 2006.
6. Bevevino MM, Dengel J, Adams K. Constructivist Theory in the Classroom Internalizing: Concepts through
Inquiry Learning. Clear House A J Educ Strateg Issues Ideas. 1999;72(5):275–8.
7. Clément P, Castéra J. Multiple representations of human genetics in biology textbooks. D.F. Treagust, C.-Y.
Tsui, editors. Multiple Representations in Biological Education. Springer; 2013. 147–164 p.
8. Snajdr E. Using the 5E Learning Cycle of Science Education to Teach Information Skills. Indiana Libr.
2011;30(2):21–4.
9. Bell CV, Odom AL. Reflections on Discourse Practices During Professional Development on the Learning
Cycle. J Sci Teacher Educ. 2012;23(6):601–20.
10. Ainsworth S. The Educational Value of Multiple-Representations when Learning Complex Scientific Concepts
Shaaron Ainsworth School of Psychology and Learning Sciences Research Institute University of Nottingham
Abstract Figure 1 . SMV Chem Figure 2 . Connected Chemistr. In: Gilbert JK, Reiner M, Nakhleh M, editors.
Visualization: Theory and practice in science education. London: Sringer; 2008. p. 191–208.
11. Eilam B, Poyas Y, Hashimshoni R. Science teachers’ use of visual representations. Eilam B, Gilbert J., editors.
Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; 2014. 338 p.
12. Wong W-K, Yin S-K, Yang H-H, Cheng Y-H. Using Computer-Assisted Multiple Representations in Learning
Geometry Proofs. Educ Technol Soc. 2011;14(3):43–54.
13. Reflina R. Peningkatan kemampuan representasi matematis siswa SMP melalui pembelajaran kooperatif tipe
formulatife-share-litsen-create (FSLC). Axiom. 2017;VI(1):1–10.
14. Thompson C. Critical Thinking across the Curriculum: Process over Output. Int J Humanit Soc Sci. 2011;1(9):p4.
15. Wechsler SM, Saiz C, Rivas SF, Vendramini CMM, Almeida LS, Mundim MC, et al. Creative and critical
thinking: Independent or overlapping components? Think Ski Creat . 2018;27(January 2017):114–22.
16. Facione PA. Critical Thinking : What It Is and Why It Counts. Insight Assess. 2011;(ISBN 13: 978-1-891557-
07-1.):1–28.
17. Verhoeff RP, Boersma KT, Waarlo AJ. Multiple Representations in Biological Education. Mult Represent Model
Strateg Dev Syst Think Biol Educ Mult Represent Biol Educ Ser Model Model Sci Educ. 2013;7:19–38.
18. Ismail NS, Harun J, Zakaria MAZM, Salleh SM. The effect of Mobile problem-based learning application
DicScience PBL on students’ critical thinking. Think Ski Creat. 2018;28:177–95.
19. Temel S. The effects of problem-based learning on pre-service teachers’ critical thinking dispositions and
perceptions of problem-solving ability. South African J Educ. 2014;34(1):1–20.
20. Nurfathurrahmah N. Penerapan Model Problem Based Learning (PBL) Berbasis Kontekstual Terhadap
Peningkatan Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis Mahasiswa. Oryza ( J Pendidik Biol ). 2018;7(1):21–8.
21. Amin AM, Duran Corebima A, Zubaidah S, Mahanal S. The Critical Thinking Skills Profile of Preservice
Biology Teachers in Animal Physiology. 2017;128(Icet):179–83.
22. Wulandari TSH, Amin M, Zubaidah S, Al Mudhar MH. Implementasi keterampilan berpikir kritis dosen biologi
di universitas. In: Seminar Nasional ke-2 Biologi/IPA dan Pembelajarannya. Malang: Universitas Negeri
020022-7

Malang; 2015. p. 32–40.
23. Jirana J, Amin M, Suarsini E, Lukiati B. Keterampilan Berpikir Kritis Mahasiswa STKIP Yapim Maros Pada
Mata Kuliah Evolusi. Saintifik. 2019;5(1):8–13.
24. Mahanal S, Tendrita M, Ramadhan F, Zubaidah S. The Analysis of Students’ Critical Thinking Skills on Biology
Student. Anatol J Educ. 2017;2(2):21–39.
25. Husni M, Jamaluddiin J, Sedijani P. Effect of Inductive Thinking Learning Model towards the Understanding of
Science Concept , Science Process Skills , and Critical Thinking Ability of Junior High Schools. Int J Multicult
Multireligious Underst. 2019;6(6):234–42.
26. Rahmat I, Chanunan S. Open inquiry in facilitating metacognitive skills on high school biology learning: An
inquiry on low and high academic ability. Int J Instr. 2018;11(4):593–606.
27. Lee C, Ng M, Phang R. Effects of Cooperative Learning on Elementary School Children in Singapore. Asia
Pacific J Educ. 2002;22(1):3–15.
28. Woolfolk A. Educational Psychology, 11th Edition. 11th ed. The Ohio State University: Pearson; 2010.
29. Semerci Ç, Batdi V. A Meta-Analysis of Constructivist Learning Approach on Learners’ Academic
Achievements, Retention and Attitudes. J Educ Train Stud. 2015;3(2).
30. Arikunto S. Prosedur Penelitian suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara; 2013. 120 p.
31. Finken M, Ennis RH. Illionis Critical Thinking Essay Test. Champaign. 1993;17.
32. Zubaidah S, Corebima AD, Mahanal S, Mistianah. Revealing the relationship between reading interest and
critical thinking skills through remap GI and remap jigsaw. Int J Instr. 2018;11(2):41–56.
33. Balta N. The Effect of 7E Learning Cycle on Learning in Science Teaching: A meta-Analysis Study. Eur J Educ
Res. 2016;5(2):61–72.
34. Campbell M. The effects of the 5Es learning cycle model on students’ understanding of force and motion concets.
2006;62(1):27–40.
35. Saiz Sanchez C, Fernandez Rivas S, Olivares Moral S. Collaborative learning supported by rubrics improves
critical thinking. J Scholarsh Teach Learn. 2014;15(1):10–9.
36. Halpern DF. Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking (5th ed.). New York: Psychology
Press; 2014.
37. Hong YC, Choi I. Assessing reflective thinking in solving design problems: The development of a questionnaire.
Br J Educ Technol. 2015;46(4):848–63.
38. Miele DB, Wigfield A. Quantitative and Qualitative Relations Between Motivation and Critical-Analytic
Thinking. Educ Psychol Rev. 2014;26(4):519–41.
39. Zubaidah S. Berpikir Kritis : Kemampuan Berpikir Tingkat Tinggi. Makal Semin Nas Sains Dengan Tema Optim
Sains Untuk Memberdayakan Mns Pascasarj Unesa. 2010;16(2009):1–14.
40. Caroselli M. 50 Activities for Developing Critical Thinking Skills. Complimentary Resources from HRD Press;
2009. 301 p.
41. Johnson EB. Contextual Teaching and Learning. The SAGE Encyclopedia of Online Education. California:
Corwin Press, Inc,; 2016. p. 167.
42. Deveci T, Ayish N. Correlation between Critical Thinking and Lifelong Learning Skills of Freshman Students.
Bartın Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Derg. 2017;282–282.
43. Daly WM. The development of an alternative method in the assessment of critical thinking as an outcome of
nursing education. J Adv Nurs. 2001;36(1):120–30.
44. Sarwar M, Bashir M, Khan MN, Khan MS. Study-Orientation of High and Low Academic Achievers at
Secondary Level in Pakistan. Educ Res Rev. 2009;4(4):204–7.
45. Prayitno BA, Corebima D, Susilo H, Zubaidah S, Ramli M. Issn 1648-3898 Issn 2538-7138 Closing the Science
Process Skills Gap Between Students With High and Low Level. J Balt Sci Educ. 2015;16:266–77.
46. Quitadamo IJ, Kurtz MJ. Learning to Improve: Using Writing to Increase Critical Thinking Performance in
General Education Biology. CBE - Life Sci Educ. 1993;6:1–15.
47. Gurian MC, Ballew A. The Boys and Girls Learn Differently Action Guide for Teachers. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass. 2003. p. 8–12.
48. Prayogi S, Muhali, Yuliyanti S, As’ary M, Azmi I, Verawati NNSP. The effect of presenting anomalous data on
improving student’s critical thinking ability. Int J Emerg Technol Learn. 2019;14(6):133–7.
49. Fatmawati A, Zubaidah S, Mahanal S, Sutopo. Critical Thinking, Creative Thinking, and Learning Achievement:
How They are Related. J Phys Conf Ser. 2019;1417(1).
020022-8