DAFTAR PUSTAKA - UPI Repository

130

Rendi Restiana Sukardi, 2017 PEDAGOGIC CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (PCK) GURU TENTANG PENALARAN SISWA, PELAKSANAAN PEMBELAJARAN, DAN KEMAMPUAN PENALARAN SISWA Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu

DAFTAR PUSTAKA

Abell, S.K. (2008). Twenty years later: does pedagogical content knowledge

remain a useful idea? International Journal of Science Education, 30 (10),

hlm. 1405-1416.

Achmad, R. (2004). Kimia Lingkungan. Yogyakarta: Andi Press

Adadan, E. & Oner, D. (2014). Exploring the progression in preservice chemistry

teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge representations: the case of

behavior of bases. Research Science Education, 44(6), hlm. 829-7858.

Albe, V. (2008). When scientific knowledge, daily life experience,

epistemological and social considerations intersect: students’ argumentation

in group discussions on a socio-scientific issue. Research Science

Education, 38(1), hlm. 67-90.

Alshamali, M.A., & Daher, W.M. (2016). Scientific reasoning and its relationship

with problem solving: the case of upper primary science teacher.

Instructional of Science and Mathematics Education, 14 (6), hlm. 1003-

1019.

Aprianto, V. Y. (2014). Pengetahuan guru tentang representasi materi Fisika

dalam pembelajaran Fisika yang dimiliki oleh 3 orang guru Fisika SMA di

Yogyakarta. (Skripsi). Program Studi Pendidikan Fisika, Universitas Sanata

Dharma, Yogyakarta.

Arends, R. I. (2009). Learning to Teach. New York: The McGraw-Hill

Companies, Inc.

Arikunto, S. (2006). Dasar-dasar evaluasi pendidikan (Edisi Revisi). Jakarta:

Bumi Aksara.

Asrori, M. (2007). Psikologi Pembelajaran. Bandung: Wacana Prima. Cetakan

Pertama.

Aufschnaiter, C.V., et al. (2008). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: case

studies of how students’ argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge.

Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45 (1), hlm. 101-178.

130

131


Aydin, et al. (2015). The nature and development of interaction among

components of pedagogical content knowledge in practicum. Teaching and

Teacher Education. 46, hlm. 37-50.

Aydin, S. & Boz, Y. (2013). The nature of integration among PCK components: a

case study of two experienced chemistry teachers, Chemistry Educational

Research and Practice, 14 (4), hlm. 615-624.

Aydin, S., et al. (2015). Examination of the topic-specific nature of pedagogical

content knowledge in teaching electrochemical celss and nuclear reactions.

Chemistry Education Research Practice, 15 (4), hlm. 658-674.

Bao et al. (2009). Learning and scientific reasoning. Education Forum, 323 (1),

hlm. 586-587.

Baxter, J.A. & Lederman, N.G. (1999). Assesment and Measurment of

Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Dalam Gess-Newsome, J. & Lederman,

N.G (Penyunting), Examining PCK: the construct and its implications for

science education. Boston: Kluwer Academic Press, hlm. 147-162.

Bekiroglu, F.O. & Eskin, H. (2012). Examination of the relationship between

engagement in scientific argumentation and conceptual knowledge.

International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. 10 (6), hlm.

1415-1443.

Bektas, O., et al. (2013). Pre-service chemistry teachers’ pedagogical content

knowledge of the nature of science in the particle nature of matter.

Chemistry Educational Research, and Practice, 14(2), hlm. 201-231.

Berland, L. K. & Hammer, D. (2011). Framing for scientific argumentation.

Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49 (1), hlm. 68-94.

Bertram, A. & Loughran, J. (2012). Science teacher’s views on CoRe and PaP-

eRs as a framework for articulating and developing pedagogical content

knowledge. Research in Science Education, 42(6), hlm. 1027-1047.

Brookhart, S. (2010). How to asses higher order thinking skills in your classroom.

Alexandria,VA: ASCD.

Brown, N. J. S., et al. (2010). The evidence-based reasoning framework: assessing

scientific reasoning. Educational Assessment, 15(3-4), hlm. 123-141.

132


BSNP. (2006). Panduan Penyusunan Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan

Jenjang Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah. Jakarta: Badan Standar Nasional

Pendidikan.

Bulgren, J.A., Ellis, J.D., & Marquis, J.G. (2014). The use and effectiveness of an

argumentation and evaluation intervention in science classes. Journal of

Science Educational Technologies, 23 (1), hlm. 82-97.

Chang Rundgren, S-N. & Rundren, C-L. (2010). SEE-SEP: From a separate to

holistic view of socioscientific issues. Asia-Pasific Forum on Science

Learning and Teaching, 11 (1), hlm. 1-24.

Chen, C-T. & She, H-C. (2015). The effectiveness of science inquiry with/without

integration of science reasoning. Intenational Journal of Science and

Mathematics Education, 20, hlm. 1-20.

Chin, C-C., Yang, W-Y., & Tuan, H-L. (2014). Argumentation in a socio

scientific context and its influence on fundamental and derived science

literacies. Instructional of Science and Mathematics Education, 14 (4), hlm.

603-617.

Choi, A., Hand, B., & Meier, L.N. (2013). Grade 5 students’ online argumentation

about their in-class inquiry investigation. Research Science Education. 44,

(2), hlm.267-287.

Christenson, N., Rundgren, S.N.C., & Zeidler, D.L. (2014). The Relationship of

discipline background to upper secondary students’ argumentation on

socioscientific Issues. Research Science Education, 44 (4), hlm. 581-601.

Cross, D., et al. (2008). Argumentation: a strategy for improving achievement and

revealing scientific identities. International Journal of Science Education,

30 (6), hlm. 837-861.

Dahar, R.W. (1996). Teori-teori belajar. Jakarta: Erlangga.

Dawson, V. & Venville, G. J. (2009). High-school students’ informal reasoning

and argumentation about biotechnology: an indicator of scientific literacy?.

International Journal of Science Education, 3 (11), hlm. 1421–1445.

Dawson, V. M., & Venville, G. (2010). Teaching strategies for developing

students’ argumentation skills about socioscientific issues in high school

genetics. Research Science Education. 40, (2), hlm.133–148.

133


Depkominfo. (2005). Himpunan Perundang-Undangan Lingkungan Hidup.

Jakarta: Departemen Komunikasi dan Informatika RI.

Destiansari, E. (2016). Kemampuan guru dalam mengintegrasikan penalaran dan

wellbeing siswa ke dalam PCK melalui pelatihan. (Tesis). Sekolah

Pascasarjana, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung.

Dolan, E. & Grady, J. (2010). Recognizing students’ scientific reasoning: a tool

for categorizing complexity of reasoning during teaching by inquiry.

Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21 (1), hlm. 31 – 55.

Duschl, R. A. (2007). Quality of argumentation and epistemic criteria. Dalam

Erduran, S. & Jimenez-Aleixandre, M (Penyunting). Argumentation in

Science Education, Science & Technology Education Library, 35, hlm. 159-

175.

Duschl, R.A., & Osborne, J. (2002): Supporting and Promoting Argumentation

Discourse in Science Education. Studies in Science Education, 38 (1), hlm.

39-72.

Eames, C., et al. (2012) Core: a way to build pedagogical content knowledge for

beginning teacher. Artikel: Teaching & Learning Research Initiative,

University of Waikato.

Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation:

development in the application of Toulmin's argumentation pattern for

studying science discourse. Science Education,88 (6), hlm. 915-933.

Faikhamta, C. dan Clarke, A. (2013). A self study of a Thai teacher educator

developing a better understanding of PCK for teaching about teaching

science. Research Science Education. 43 (3), hlm. 955 -979.

Falk, A., & Brodsky, L. (2013). Scientific argumentation as a foundation for the

design of inquiry-based science instruction. The Journal of Mathematics and

Science: Collaboratibe Exploration, 13 (Spring) hlm. 27-55.

Fischer, et al. (2014). Scientific reasoning and argumentation: Advancing an

interdisciplinary research agenda in education. Frontline Learning Research,

2 (3), hlm. 28-45.

Fogarty, Robin. (1991). The Mindful School: How to Integrate the Curricula.

Illinois: IRI/Skylight Publishing. Inc.

134


Foong, C.C., & Daniel, E.G.S. (2013). Students’ argumentation skills across two

socio-scientific issues in a confucian classroom: is transfer possible?

International Journal of Science Education, 35 (14), hlm. 2331-2355.

Fraenkel, J.R., Wallen, N.E., & Hyun, H.H. (2012). How to design and evaluate

research in education. New York : McGraw-Hill.

Frosch, C. A. (2008). A framework for analyzing reasoning in science classroom

discourse: paper presented at the annual meeting of the American.

Educational Research Association, 14 (1), hlm. 39-44.

Furtak, et al. (2008). A framework for analyzing reasoning in science classroom

discourse. New York: Annual Meeting of the American Educational

Research Association.

Garcia-Mila et al. (2013). The effect of argumentative task goal on the quality of

argumentative discourse. Science Education. 97, (4), hlm.497-523.

Garcia-Mila, M. & Andersen, C. (2007). Cognitive Foundations of Learning

Argumentation. Dalam Erduran, S. & Jimenez-Alexandrie, M.P

(Penyunting), Argumentation in Science Education, Volume 35 of the series

Science & Teachnology Education Library (hlm. 29-45). Netherlands:

Springer Netherlands.

Garritz, A., Irazoque, G., & Izquierdo, M. (2012). Pedagogical knowledge of

chemical equilibrium: a comparison between high school teachers and

undergraduate professors. [Online]. Diakses dari

https://seminariorepensarlabioquimica.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/garritz-

izquierdo- irazoque-feb2014.pdf

Gillies et al. (2014). Primary students’ scientific reasoning and discourse during

cooperative inquiry-based science activities. International Journal of

Educational Research, 63, hlm. 127–140.

Gillies, et al. (2012). The effects of two meta cognitive questioning approaches on

children’s explanatory behaviour, problem-solving, and learning during

cooperative, inquiry-based science. International Journal of Educational

Research, 53, hlm.93–106.

https://seminariorepensarlabioquimica.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/garritz-izquierdo-irazoque-feb2014.pdf

https://seminariorepensarlabioquimica.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/garritz-izquierdo-irazoque-feb2014.pdf

135


Gillies, R. (2011). Promoting thinking, problem-solving and reasoning during

small group discussions. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 17

(1), hlm. 73–89.

Grooms, J., Sampson, V., & Golden, B. (2014). Comparing the effectiveness of

verification and inquiry laboratories in supporting undergraduate science

students in constructing arguments around socioscientific issues.

International Journal of Science Education, 39 (9), hlm. 1412-1433.

Grossman, P.L. (1990). The making of a teacher: teacher knowledge and teacher

education. New York: The Teachers Collages Press.

Hanuscin, D., Lee, M. (2011). Elementary teachers’ pedagogical content

knowledge for teaching the nature of science. Science Education, 95 (1),

hlm. 145-167.

Harlen, W. (1992). The teaching of science: studies in primary education.

Michigan: David Fulton Publishers Inc.

Harlen, W. (Ed) (2010). Principal and big ideas of science education. Hatfiled,

Herts: Association for Science Education.

Harris, R. & Ratcliffe, M. (2005) Socio-scientific issues and the quality of

exploratory talk - what can be learned from schools involved in a 'collapsed

day' project? The Curriculum Journal, 16 (4). Hlm. 439-453.

Hayat, M.S (2015). Analisis persepsi mahasiswa terhadap implementasi wacana

argumentasi dalam pembelajaran. Prosiding Semnas Sains &

Enterpreneurship II: ISBN:978-602-99975-1-4 (hlm.403-410). Semarang:

Universtas PGRI Semarang

Heng, L.L., Surif, J., & Seng, C.H. (2015). Malaysian students’ scientific

argumentation: do groups perform better than individual? International

Journal of Science Education, 37 (3), hlm. 505-528.

Herawati, D. (2015). Penalaran ilmiah (scientific reasoning) siswa sekolah

berorientasi lingkungan dan sekolah multinasional. (Tesis). Sekolah


Herlina, L. (2015). Perkembangan pedagogic content knowledge mahasiswa

calon guru Biologi peserta program pengalaman lapangan. (Tesis). Sekolah


http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/view/creators/90004259.html

http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/24605/



136


Hodgkinson, G.P., et al. (2002). Further reflection on the elimination of framing

bias in strategic decision making. Strategic Management Journal, 23 (11),

hlm. 1069-1076.

Hornikx, J. & Hahn, U. (2012). Reasoning and argumentation: Toward an

integrated psychology of argumentation. Thinking & Reasoning, 18 (3), hlm.

225-243.

Hume, A. & Berry, A. (2011). Constructing CoRes- a strategy for building PCK

in pre-service science teacher education. Research Science Education, 41(3),

hlm. 341-355.

Hume, A. & Berry, A. (2013). Enhancing the practicum experience for pre-service

chemistry teachers through collaborative CoRe design with mentor teachers.

Research Science Education, 43(5), hlm. 2107-2136.

Hume, A. (2010). CoRes as Tools for Promoting Pedagogical Content Knowledge

of Novice Science Teacher: Chemistry Education in New Zealand. Waikato:

School of Education, University of Waikato.

Inch, E.S., Warnick, B., & Endres, D. (2006). Critical thinking and

communication. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.

Jasin, M. (2011). Ilmu alamiah dasar. Jakarta: Grafindo

Jiménez-Aleixandre, et al. (2000). “Doing the lesson” or “doing science”:

Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84 (6), hlm. 757–792.

Karahan, E. & Roehrig, G. (2016). Secondary school students’ understanding of

science and their socio scientific reasoning. Research Science Education,

DOI 10.1007/s11165-016-9527-9, hlm. 1-28.

Kartal, T., Ozturks, N., & Ekici, G. (2012). Developing pedagogical content

knowledge in preservice science teacher through microteaching lesson

study. Procedia-Social and Behevioral Sciences, 46, hlm.2753-2758.

Kelly, G.J. & Takao, A. (2002). Epistemic levels in argument: An analysis of

university oceanography students’ of evidence in writing. Science

Education, 86, hlm. 314–342.

Khan, W., & Ullah, H. (2010). Scientific reasoning: a solution to the problem of

induction. International Journal of Basic Applied Science, 10 (3), hlm. 58-

62.

137


Kiliç, D. & Saglam, N. (2014). Students’ understanding of genetics concepts: the

effect of reasoning ability and learning approaches. Journal of Biological

Education, 48 (2), hlm. 63-70.

Kind, P.M., et al. (2011). Peer argumentation in the school science laboratory -

exploring effects of task features. International Journal of Science

Education. 33(8), hlm. 2527–2558.

Kind, V. (2009). Pedagogical content knowledge in science education:

perspectives and potential for progress. Studies in Science Education, 45 (2),

hlm. 169–204.

Klosterman, M.L. & Sadler, T.D. (2010). Multi‐level assessment of scientific

content knowledge gains associated with socioscientific issues‐based

instruction. International Journal of Science Education, 32 (8), hlm. 1017-

1043.

Kompas. (2011). 70 Persen Tanah DKI Tercemar Air Limbah. [Online]. Diakses

dari http://nasional.kompas.com/read/2011/04/25/17360217/70-Persen-

Tanah-DKI-Tercemar-Air-Limbah

Kostantinidou, A. & Macagano, F. (2013). Understanding students’ reasoning:

argumentation schemes as an interpretation method in science education.

Science and Education, 22 (1), hlm. 1069-1087.

Kuhn, D. & Udell, W. (2003). The development of argument skills. Child

Development, 74 (5), hlm. 1245 – 1260.

Kuhn, D. (2010). Handbook of childhood cognitive development: What is

scientific thinking and how does it develop? New York: Teacher Collage

Columbia University.

Kuhn, D. (2010). Teaching and learning science as argument. Science Education,

95 (5) hlm. 810-824.

Kurniadi, A., et al. (2015). Analisis Reasoning Skill Siswa pada Pembelajaran

Biologi SMA. Prosiding Simposium Nasional Inovasi dan Pembelajaran

Sains 2015. Hlm. 237-240.

Lawson, A.E. (2004). The nature and development of scientific reasoning: a

synthetic view. International Journal of Science and Mathematics

Education, 2 (3), hlm. 307-338.

https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=xeNQlBsAAAAJ&citation_for_view=xeNQlBsAAAAJ:Zph67rFs4hoC



http://nasional.kompas.com/read/2011/04/25/17360217/70-Persen-Tanah-DKI-Tercemar-Air-Limbah

http://nasional.kompas.com/read/2011/04/25/17360217/70-Persen-Tanah-DKI-Tercemar-Air-Limbah

138


Lazonder, A. W., & Drost S. W. (2015). Advancing scientific reasoning in upper

elementary classrooms: direct instruction versus task structuring. Journal of

Science Education and Technology, 24, hlm. 69-77.

Lebrun et al. (2002). Past and current trends in the analysis of textbooks in a

Quebec context. Curriculum Inquiry, 32, (1), hlm. 51-83.

Lin, S-S & Mintzes, J.J. (2010). Learning argumentation skills through instruction

in socioscientific issues: the effect of ability level. International Journal of

Science and Mathematics Education, 8(6), hlm. 993-1017.

Loughran, J., Berry, A., & Mulhall, P. (2012). Understanding and developing

science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Rotterdam: Sense

Publishing.

Loughran, J., Mulhall, P., & Berry, A. (2004). In search of pedagogical

knowledge in science: developing ways of articulating and documenting

professional practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41 (4), hlm.

370-391.

Magnusson, S., Krajacik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and

development of PCK for science teaching, Dalam Gess-Newsome, J &

Lederman, N.G. (Penyunting), Examining PCK: the construct and its

implications for science education. Boston: Kluwer Academic Press, hlm.

95-120.

Margiyono, I. & Mampouw, H.L. (2011). Deskripsi pedagogic content knowledge

guru pada bahasan tentang bilangan rasional. Proceeding International

Seminar and the Fourth National Conference on Mathematics Education

(ISBN : 978–979–16353–7–0). Yogyakarta: Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta.

Matlin, M.W. (2009) Cognitive psychology (seventh edition international student

version). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Mavhunga, E. & Rollnick, M. (2013). Improving PCK of chemical equilibrium in

pre-service teachers. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science,

and Technology Education, 17 (1-2), hlm. 113-125.

McDonald, C. V. (2013). An examination of preservice primary teachers’ written

arguments in an open inquiry laboratory task. Science Education

International, 24 (3), hlm. 254-281.

139


McNeill, K.L. & Pimentel, D.S. (2010). Scientific discourse in three urban

classrooms: the role of the teacher in engaging high school students in

argumentation. Science Education, 94 (2), hlm. 203-229.

Mohammad, R. F., & Kumari, R. (2007). Effective use of textbooks: a neglected

aspect of education in Pakistan. Journal of Education for International

Development, 3 (1), hlm 1-12.

Nichols, K., Hedberg, J., & Gillies, R.M. (2016). Primary teachers’

representational practices: from competencies to fluency. Cambridge

Journal Education, 46 (4), hlm. 509-531.

Nilson, P. (2014). When teaching makes difference:developing science teacher’s

pedagogical content knowledge through learning study. Internatioanal

Journal of Science Education, 36(11), hlm. 1794-1814

Nilsson, P. & Loughran, J. (2012). Exploring interaction among components of

pedagogical content knowledge in practicum: the development of pre-

service science elementary teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge.

Science Teacher Education, 23(7), hlm. 699-721.

Okumus, S. & Unal, S. (2012). The effects of argumentation model on students’

achievement and argumentation skills in science. Procedia-Social and

Behavioral Sciences, 46, hlm. 457 – 461.

Osborne, J., et al. (2001). Enhancing the quality of argument in school science.

School Science Review, 82 (301), hlm. 63-70.

Osborne, J., et al. (2013). Learning to argue: a study of four school and their

attempt to develop the use of argumentation as a common instructional

practice and its impact on students. Journal of Research in Science

Teaching, 50 (3), hlm, 315-347.

Padilla, K. & Garritz, A. (2011). The pedagogical content knowledge of university

chemistry professors teaching stoichiometry, NARST 2011 Annual Meeting.

Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia Nomor 16 tahun

2007, Tentang Standar Kualifikasi dan Kompetensi Guru.

Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia Nomor 16 Tahun

2007, Tentang Standar Kualifikasi dan Kompetensi Guru.

140


Piraksa, C., Srisawasdi, N., & Koul, R. (2014). Effect of gender on students’

scientific reasoning ability : a case study in Thailand. Procedia – Social and

Behavioral Sciences, 116, hlm. 486 – 491.

Prawirohartono, S. 2004. Sains Biologi Satu. Jakarta : Bumi Aksara.

Purwaningsih, E. (2015). Potret Representasi Pedagogical Content Knowledge

(PCK) Guru dalam Mengajarkan Materi Getaran dan Gelombang pada

Siswa SMP. Indonesian Journal of Applied Physics. 5, (1), hlm. 9-16.

Purwanto, N. (2010). Prinsip – prinsip dan teknik evaluasi pengajaran. Bandung:

Remaja Rosdakarya.

Rachmawati, L. D. dan As’ari, F. Pencemaran air. [Online]. Diakses dari

http://pollutiononmyearth.weebly.com/pencemaran-air.html

Remigio, K.B., Yangco, R.T., & Espinosa, A.A. (2014). Analogy-enhanced

instruction: Effect on reasoning skills in science. The Malaysian Online

Journal of Educational Science, 2 (2), hlm. 1-9.

Robinson, T. J., et al. (2014). The impact of open textbooks on secondary science

learning outcomes. Educational Researcher, 43 (7), hlm. 341 – 351.

Rozenszajn, R., Yarden, A. (2014). Expansion of biology teachers’ pedagogical

content knowledge (PCK) during a long-term professional development

program. Research Science Education, 44(1), hlm.189-213.

Ruswandi dan A. Yani. (2011). Pendidikan Lingkungan Hidup. Bandung: Mughni

Sejahtera.

Sagala, S. (2010). Konsep dan makna pembelajaran. Bandung: Alfabeta.

Salandanan, G. G. (2000). Teaching Approaches and Strategies. Quezon city:

Katha Publishing Co., Inc.

Sampson, V & Clark, D.B. (2008). Assessment of the ways students generate

arguments in science education: current perspectives and recommendations

for future directions. Science Education, 92(3), hlm. 447-472.

Sampson, V. & Blanchard, M. (2012). Science teachers and scientific

argumentation: trends in views and practice. Journal of Research in Science

Teaching, 49 (9), hlm. 1122-1148.

Sampson, V., Grooms, J., & Walker, J.P. (2011). Argument-driven inquiry as a

way to help students learn how to participate in scientific argumentation and

http://pollutiononmyearth.weebly.com/pencemaran-air.html

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/%28ISSN%291098-2736

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/%28ISSN%291098-2736

141


craft written arguments: an exploration study. Science Education, 95 (2),

hlm. 217-257.

Sarkim, T. (2015). Pedagogical content knowledge: Sebuah konstruksi untuk

memahami kinerja guru di dalam pembelajaran. Prosiding Pertemuan

Ilmiah XXIX HFI Jateng & DIY (hlm.7-12). ISSN : 0853-0823.

Scott, J. H. (2009). The principle of argumentation. [Online]. Diakses dari

http://www.csun.edu/~hcpas003/argument.html

Scott, P., Mortimer, E., & Aguiar, O. (2006). The tension between authoritative

and dialogic discourse: a fundamental characteristic of meaning making

interactions in high school science lessons. Science Education, 90, hlm.

605–631.

Shefarat, R. (2015). Critical thinking, reasoning, and logical concluding’ abilities

in relation to academic achievement among Indian adolescent students. The

International Journal of Indian Psychology, 3 (1), hlm. 145-155.

Shemwell, J. T., & Furtak, E. M. (2010). Science Classroom Discussion as

Scientific Argumentation: A study of conceptually rich (and poor) student

talk. Educational Assessment, 15(3-4), hlm. 222-250.

Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching,

Educational Researcher, 15(2), hlm. 4–14.

Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform,

Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), hlm. 1-22.

Sianipar, P.N. (2014). Pengetahuan guru tentang strategi pembelajaran Fisika:

studi kasus 3 orang guru Fisika SMA di Yogyakarta. (Skripsi). Program

Studi Pendidikan Fisika, Universitas Sanata Dharma, Yogyakarta.

Simonneaux, L. & Simonneaux, J. (2009). Socio-scientific reasoning influenced

by identities. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 4 (3), hlm. 705-711.

Simosi, M. (2003). Using Toulmin’s framework for the analysis of everyday

argumentation: Some methodological consideration. Argumentation, 16,

hlm. 185-202.

Sugiyono. (2011). Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif dan R & D. Bandung:

Alfabeta.

http://www.csun.edu/~hcpas003/argument.html

142


Sukardi, R.R & Agustrianti, Y.V. (2017). Analysis of students’ argumentation

skill and conceptual knowledge in friction force lesson through

argumentative task. Atlantis Press : Advances in Social Science, Education,

and Humanities Research (ASSEHR), 57, hlm. 80-84.

Sukmadinata, N.S. (2009). Metode penelitian pendidikan. Bandung : PT Remaja

Rosdakarya.

Tempo. (2012). Walhi: Pencemaran Air Naik Lebih dari 30 Persen. [Online].

Diakses dari

https://nasional.tempo.co/read/news/2012/04/06/206395227/walhi-

pencemaran-air-naik- lebih-dari-30-persen.

Tempo. (2013). Citarum, Sungai Paling Tercemar di Bumi. [Online]. Diakses dari

https://nasional.tempo.co/read/news/2013/11/07/173527891/citarum-sungai-

paling-tercemar-di-bumi.

Tytler, R. & Peterson S. (2003). Tracing young children’s scientific reasoning.

Research in Science Education, 33(4), hlm. 433-465.

Tytler, R., Prain, V., Hubber, P., & Waldrip, B. (2013). Constructing

representations to learn in science. The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

Tytler, R.,et al. (2009). An explicit representational focus for teaching and

learning about animals in the environment. Teaching Science, 55 (4), hlm.

21-27

Van Driel, J.H., Verloop, N. dan De Vos, W. (1997). Developing science

teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Research in Science Teaching, 35

(6), hlm.673-695.

Van Driel, V. (2010). Model-based development of science teacher’ pedagogical

content knowledge. Paper Presented at Internation Seminar, Professional

Reflecions, National learning centre, New York. February.

Varma, K. (2014). Supporting scientific experimentation and reasoning in young

elementary school students. Journal of Science Education and Technology,

23 (3), hlm. 381–397.

Wahyuni, H.T. (2013). Pemahaman guru Fisika tentang materi pembelajaran dan

hubungannya dengan proses pembelajaran dan penilaian hasil belajar.

https://nasional.tempo.co/read/news/2012/04/06/206395227/walhi-pencemaran-air-naik-lebih-dari-30-persen.

https://nasional.tempo.co/read/news/2012/04/06/206395227/walhi-pencemaran-air-naik-lebih-dari-30-persen.

https://nasional.tempo.co/read/news/2013/11/07/173527891/citarum-sungai-paling-tercemar-di-bumi

https://nasional.tempo.co/read/news/2013/11/07/173527891/citarum-sungai-paling-tercemar-di-bumi

143


(Skripsi). Program Studi Pendidikan Fisika, Universitas Sanata Dharma,

Yogyakarta.

Waldrip, B. & Prain, V. (2012). Reasoning through representing in school

science. Teaching Science, 58 (4), hlm. 14-18.

Waldrip, B., Prain, V., & Selling, P. (2013). Explaining Newton’s laws of

motion: using student reasoning through representations to develop

conceptual understanding. Instructional Science, 41 (1), hlm.165-189.

Walsh, J.A. & Sattes, B. D. (2005). Quality questioning: research-based practice

to engage every learner. New Delhi: Sage Publications India Pvt, Ltd.

Williams, J. et al. (2012). Promoting pedagogical content knowledge development

for early career secondary teachers in science and technology using content

representtaions. Research in Science & Technological Education, 30 (3),

hlm. 327-343.

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 a socio-scientific issue. Research in Science Education,

41(5), hlm. 771-785.

Wu, Y.T. & Tsai, C.C. (2007). High school students’ informal reasoning on a

socio-scientific issue: qualitative and quantitative analyses. International

Journal of Science Education, 29 (9), hlm. 1163-1187.

Wu, Y.T. & Tsai, C.C. (2011). High school students’ informal reasoning

regarding a socio-scientific issue, with relation to scientific epistemological

beliefs and cognitive structures. International Journal of Science Education,

33 (3), hlm 371-400.

Yang, F-Y & Tsai, C-C. (2010). Reasoning about science-related uncertain issues

and epistemological perspectives among children. Instructional Science: An

International Journal of the Learning Sciences, 38 (4), hlm. 325-354.

Zimmerman, C. (2007). The development of scientific thinking skills in

elementary and middle school. Development Review, 27(2), hlm. 172-223.

Zohar, A. & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation

skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science

Teaching, 39 (1), hlm. 35-62.

DAFTAR PUSTAKA - UPI Repository

Documents