Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Hartati Muchtar
Zulrahmat Togala
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to: Hartati Muchtar, Depatement of
Zulrahmat Togala, MAN 1 Kendari (Senior High School), Jl. Pasaeno No. 3 Kendari, Kendari
93117 Indonesia.
zultogalatp12@gmail.com.
THE EFFECT OF SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES AND COGNITIVE 2
Abstract
This study aimed at determining the effect of learning approach and thinking style towards the
learning outcomes of electronics skills by controlling prior knowledge. There were 36 students
choosen as participants of this study and they were divided into two treatment classes. The
results analyzed using Analysis of Covariat (ANCOVA) showed: (1) the use of scientific
approach enables students to get a better improvement for their electronics learning achievement
than the use of expository approach; (2) there is an interconnection effect between learning
approach and students thinking style towards the learning outcomes they achieved for the
electronics skill subject, by controlling students prior knowledge; (3) students whose more
divergent thinking style are better taught using scientific approach by controlling prior
knowledge; (4) the expository learning approach is more effective for students whose convergent
knowledge
THE EFFECT OF SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES AND COGNITIVE 3
December 2013 that Indonesia was ranked bottom of 65 countries surveyed in mapping
capabilities math, reading, and science. While the Human Development Index (HDI) Indonesia
in 2013 is ranked 121 of 187 countries in the world. This fact shows that the implementation of
education in Indonesia generally and particularly the implementation process of learning requires
student, learning, administration, learning tools, management system. Among those factors, the
learning process and students individual differences are regarded more important than others.
The learning process in this case refers to scientific and expository approaches. In terms of
analyzed, cognitive style (divergent and convergent) and students prior knowledge.
Literature Review
which persists over a period of time, and which is not simpliy ascribable to processes of growth,
Driscoll (Reiser and Dempsey, 2012: 36); Smaldino, Lowther, and Russel (2011: 13) the
consequences of changes in the ability that comes from experience and interaction with the
world. Richey, Klein, and Tracey (2011: 61); Schunk (2012: 39); Sims and Sims (2009: 2)
THE EFFECT OF SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES AND COGNITIVE 4
Based on the description above, I may conclude that the essential meanings of learning
are: (1) learning is a consequence of changes that is caused by the ability resulted from student's
experience and interaction; (2) learning should be long lasting and can be applied any time,
anywhere and in any contexts; and (3) the acquisition of knowledge, skills and attitudes can be
The competent teachers should be able to assess the learning outcomes and adapt the
2007: 638). According to Slavin (2011: 255) learning objectives are statements about the ability
or concept that is expected to be mastered by the learner at the end of the learning period.
Bloom et al. (1979: 7) classify learning outcomes into three domainds: (1) cognitive; (C2)
psychomotor; and (3) affective. Which aspects to measure is depended on the purposes of the
assessment of the learning. Further, Anderson and Krathwohl (2001: 31) revise the proposed
taxonomy of Blooms cognitive domains refers to: remember, understand, apply, analyze,
evaluate, and create. Aronson and Briggs (Reigeluth, 1983: 98) describes that the learning
outcomes is the performance that can be observed and which indicates that certain capability has
performance; while Gagne (Gredler, 2011: 180-181) assumes it as the capabilities owned by the
learners after the learning process; Briggs (1979: 149) refers the instructional objectives to a
whole skill and everything that is acquired through the process of teaching and learning in
Scientific approach
Scientific knowledge must be based on the observation and experimental data, it means
that the explanation of the phenomena occured must be proved by empirical data (Bybee, 2006:
2-3). The fundamental characteristic of the scientific method is that an observation, collection of
data to establish the basic conclusions about the nature of the data being observed (Cozby, 2003:
5). Abruscato and De Rosa (2010: 11) argues that knowledge refers to a process of
systematically collecting information using the scientific process to gather knowledge. Kerlinger
(1986: 37) defines the scientific approach as a systematic investigation, controlled, empirical, ...
Acquiring knowledge must be built through the experience of life, especially through
participation and interaction with others in meaningful activities. Teachers need to engage
students in learning activities in which they are actually doing by themseves with some
experiences the teacher has created. (Yerrick and Roth, 2005: 126-127)
This opinion is supported by Dewantara who states that "... the teacher's task is not only
providing necessary knowledge and punishment but also learners must find it for themselves and
then use it for public use"; and Mohammad Syafei "... the process of learning must be changed
where students occupy their position as subjects. Teachers assign students to examine what the
Suchman (Joyce, Weil, and Calhoun, 2009: 213-214) suggests that learning through
scientific inquiry can deliver the students the habit of doing strategies, values, attitudes and skills
such as observing, collecting and processing data, identify and control variables, formulate and
Expository Approach
THE EFFECT OF SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES AND COGNITIVE 6
Expository teaching is a way that teacher is explaining a new concept or skill to students (Joyce,
Weil, and Calhoun, 2009: 369). Furthermore, according to Diaz, Pelletier, and Profenzo (2006:
306); Orlich et al. (2010: 34-35) expository approach is a form of learning in which teacher
delivers learning material directly to students by emphasizing on the mastery of knowledge and
skills.
Cognitive Style
terms of learner style, one way to differentiate learners as the implication result of an
instructional design is based on their learning style (Spector, 2012: 100). Cognitive style
identifies the ways individuals react to different situations. It is one way to characterize
individual differences (Saracho, 1977: 3). Cognitive styles are individual differences in
organizing, managing information and solving problems (Sternberg, 1997: 134); (Li and
Sternberg, 2006: 99); (Riding and Rayner, 2012: 15); (Chang, Weng and Zakharova,
Guilford (See De Cecco, 1968: 455); Badgett and Christmann (1981: 81) suggests that
divergent thinking is the ability to provide a variety of responses to a given problem, while
convergent thinking is the ability to produce one correct answer. Kolb state that individuals
whose divergent thinking styles has two tendencies in the way they think, they would rather
engage in a new experience (concrete experience), observe and reflect on their experiences from
THE EFFECT OF SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES AND COGNITIVE 7
different aspects (reflection observation). While individual convergers have the ability to create
any concepts that integrate observations into sound theory (abstract conceptualization) and use
the concepts to solve problems (active experimentation) (Reid, 1995: 56-58). Divergent thinking
has four dimensions: fluency, flexibility, originality and elaboration (Eggen and Kauchak, 2007:
150); (Cohean and Swerdlik, 2010: 342); (Kauffman, Plucker and Baer, 2008: 18). The fourth
Prior Knowledge
Judging from the context of educational technology, there are several important steps
which must be done by a teacher before planning his learning process, one of which is to conduct
an analysis on the students. According to Keller (2010: 70), two major products are expected
from the stage of Identifying Entry Behaviors and Characteristics. One is a set of identified
entry behaviors or skills that should have already been mastered by the target audience before
beginning the instruction. The other one is the characteristics of students prior knowledge. Prior
knowledge has some difinitions, it is entry skills (Dick, Carey, and Carey, 2009: 93), entry
competencies (Morrison et al., 2007: 56), and prerequesite skill (Richey, 2013: 243). Eventhough
the definitions look different, they are basically refers to the students prior knowledge that
Research Questions
This study aims at answering the problems of the effect of learning approach and thinking
styles divergent and convergent- towards the learning outcomes, by controlling the students
prior knowledge. The problem statements are: (1) whether there are differences in the results of
students learning achievement for electronics subject between the instruction using scientific
and expository approach by controlling prior knowledge; (2) whether there is difference in the
THE EFFECT OF SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES AND COGNITIVE 8
student learning outcomes between they whose divergent and convergent thinking style by
controlling prior knowledge; (3) whether there is an interaction effect between cognitive style
and learning approach in the students learning outcomes after controlling prior knowledge; (4)
whether there are differences in the learning outcomes between the use of expository approach
and scientific one toward the students whose divergent thinking style, after controlling prior
knowledge; (5) whether there are differences in the students learning achievement for
electronics subject taught by expository and scientific approach on the students with convergent
thinking style, after controlling their prior knowledge; (6) whether there are different learning
outcomes between divergent style students and the convergent one taught by scientific approach,
after controlling prior knowledge; and (7) whether there are different learning outcomes gained
between students with divergent thinking style and they whose convergent one taught by
Method
This study uses a quasi-experimental method with 2 x 2 factorial designs. The research
variables consist of: (1) the dependent variable which belongs to the students learning outcomes
for electronic subject; (2) the independent variable that belongs to the treatment variables
(scientific approach and expository approach) and attribute variables (divergent and convergent
thinking styles); and (3) the covariate variable which belongs to the students prior knowledge.
The target population of this research is all students of MAN Model Kendari that consist of 860
students. It was decided that samples of this study were the 11th year students classified into an
experimental and control class by random sampling. The number of each experimental and
control class are 32 students. The students whose divergent and convergent thinking styles in
each treatment class were measured by using verbal and figural test instruments developed by
THE EFFECT OF SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES AND COGNITIVE 9
Guilford and Torrance. The indicators of the test are: fluency, flexibility, originality and
elaboration. The verbal and figural testing scores show that the number of divergent and
Hypothesis test is done by two-way Ancova with 2x2 factorial designs (Kadir, 2015: 431-
437) and post hoc is done by Tukey's test (Glass and Hopkins, 1984: 371). The requirement
analysis which consists of: (1) normality; (2) homogeneity (Kadir, 2015: 146-147, 160-162); (3)
a regression linearity test (Sudjana, 2005: 330-337); (4) The significance test of regression effect;
and (5) homogentity slopes (Agung, 2006: 284) was done before testing the hypothesis.
Result
Table 1.
JK RJK
Variance Db Fo F-table
y res y res
A 61.52 1 61.52 5.50** 4.15
B 30.33 1 30.33 2.71ts 4.15
Interraction
95.61 1 95.61 8.55** 4.15
AxB
Prior
986.55 1 986.55 88.26 4.15
Knowledge
Res 346.49 31 11.17
Total 533.96 34
The hypothesis test shows the interaction between learning approaches and thinking style,
then post hoc is done by Tukey test. The Tukey test result is presented in Table 2.
Table 2.
testing Qo Qt Conclutions
Q(A1B1)(A2B1) 5,30 4,41 Significant
THE EFFECT OF SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES AND COGNITIVE 10
Non-
Q(A1B2)(A2B2) 0,61 4,41
susgnificant
Non-
Q(A1B1)(A1B2) 1,20 4,41
susgnificant
Q(A2B1)(A2B2) 4,71 4,41 Significant
Table 3.
Differences in students Electronics achievement are shown after they were taught using
Based on the Ancova calculation (Table 1) the variance between A source indicates that
the price of Fo= 5.50 > Ft= 4.15 (= 0.05), Ho is refused and H1 is accepted. It means that there is
a difference in students learning achievement for Electronics subjects after the teaching using
scientific and expository approach. The evidence shown by the average result of group of
students who are taught by the scientific approach= 77.07 and a group of students who are taught
by expository approach= 74.71; Thus, the students learning outcomes who are taught by the
scientific approach is higher than they who are taught by the expository one by controlling their
prior knowledge.
THE EFFECT OF SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES AND COGNITIVE 11
Differences in students Electronics achievement are shown between the students whose
divergent and convergent thinking style by controlling their prior knowledge. (Main effect)
Based on the Ancova calculation (Table 1) on the source of variance between B shows
that Fo= 2.71 < Ft= 4.15 (= 0.05), Ho is refused and H1 is accepted. It means that there is no
difference in the students electronics outcomes between they who have the divergent and
convergent thinking styles. On the other hand, the acquisition value of the group of students with
divergent thinking styles have an average= 76.83. It is greater than the acquisition value of the
group of students who have convergent thinking style of mean= 74.29. The data show that
although the average value of students learning outcomes for the divergent thinkers are higher
than the average value of students learning outcomes for the convergent thinkers, the difference
is not significant.
The interaction between instructional approach and students thinking style towards the
learning outcomes for the Electronics skill subjects are shown after controlling students prior
interaction of A x B shows that the Fo= 8.55 > Ft= 4.15 at = 0.05, Ho is refused and H1 are
accepted. This means that the learning approach has an influence on the learning outcomes for
Electronics skill subjects depending on the style of thinking, after controlling for prior
knowledge.
The differences between the learning outcomes for Electronics skills subjects of students
who are taught by scientific approach and they who are taught by the expository one on the
divergent thinker style after controlling for prior knowledge. (Simple effect)
THE EFFECT OF SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES AND COGNITIVE 12
The results of a further test by Tukey's test in Table 2 shows that the value of Qtest= 5.30
> Qtable= 4.41 at = 0.05, H0 is refused and H1 are accepted, based on the test results on average
residue (Table 3) obtained value= 77, 86 > 71.95. Thereby, the learning outcomes for Electronics
skills subjects that the students are gained by the use of scientific approach is higher than the
student learning outcomes by the use of expository approach on the divergent students after
Differences in the learning achievement for the Electronics subjects of students taught by
the use of scientific approach and expository one on the convergent students are shown by
Based on the results of a further test by Tukey's test in Table 2, it is obtained that the
value of Qtest= 0.61 < Qtabel= 4.41 at = 0.05, H0 is accepted and H1 are refused. So, there was no
significant difference in the students learning outcomes of the Electronic subjects on students
who were taught by scientific approach and by expository one on the convergent students by
controlling the prior knowledge. On the other hand, though the average test results residues
(Table 3) obtained by the value= 76.52 < 77.20, statistically the difference was not significant. It
can be concluded that there is no differences in students learning achievement for the Electronic
skill subjects by the use of scientific and expository approach on the students who have a
Differences are in the students Electronics achievement for they whose thinking style
tends to be divergent and convergent by the use of scientific teaching approach after controlling
The further test results by Tukey's test in Table 2 obtained the value of Qtest= 1.20 <
Qtable= 4.41 at = 0.05, H0 is accepted and H1 is refused, thus no significant difference in the
THE EFFECT OF SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES AND COGNITIVE 13
Electronics skills subjects of divergent and convergent students are found if they are taught by
the scientific approach after controlling the prior knowledge. In the other words, though the
average test results residues (Table 3) obtained by the value 77.86 > 76.52, but statistically, the
difference was not significant. Further, the Electronics learning achievements of students whose
thinking style tends to be divergent or convergent has no different if being taught by the
scientific approach.
Differences are shown in the students learning outcomes for the Electronics subjects of
students who have divergent and convergent thinking style taught by expository approach after
A further test results by Tukey's test in Table 2 shows the value of Qtest= 4.71 > Qtable=
4.41 at = 0.05, H0 is refused and H1 is accepted. Based on the test results of the average residue
(Table 3) obtained by the value= 71.95 < 77.20. Thereby, the learning outcomes for Electronic
skill subjects the divergent students have been achieved are lower than the students whose
convergent thinking style when expository teaching approach is used by controlling the students
prior knowledge.
Discussion
The first hypothesis testing results show that the learning outcomes for Electronic skill
subjects the students have achieved are higher if they are taught by scientific approach than the
achievement gained by the group of students who are taught by expository one after controlling
their prior knowledge. Thus, it can be inferred from this research that the use of scientific
approach in the Electronic skill instruction can improve students learning outcomes better than
the use of expository approach. This finding supports the research hypothesis stating that the
THE EFFECT OF SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES AND COGNITIVE 14
learning outcomes of students who are taught by the scientific approach is better than students
Proving the hypothesis based on empirical studies conducted by the researchers of this
study is supported by theories and concepts from many experts, such as, Suchman state that
learning through scientific inquiry enables student to gain habit of doing strategies, values,
attitudes and skills for observing, collecting and processing data, identifying and controlling
variables, formulating and testing hypotheses, and then, drawing conclusions (Joyce et al., 2009:
213-214). Barrow and Lynda (2007: 7) likewise argue that applying a scientific approach to
learning allows students to acquire new knowledge and skills when facing real challenges and
problems. Besides, being able to renew (up-to-date) knowledge and skills, it also helps students
overcome the knowledge gap through independent study and learn together, thus enabling them
Results of this study were also strengthened by a research conducted by Akinoglu and
facilitating activity of students may affect students achievement. In the research, they compared
learning strategy that prioritizes the activity of students with traditional learning strategy. The
result shows that although there was an increasing in learning outcomes for both strategies (seen
in the pre-test and post-test), the learning strategy which emphasis on activity of student tends to
be higher than traditional strategy. Another similar study done by Aktamis and Ergin (2008: 1)
revealed that learning with scientific process skills can improve student achievement. Similarly,
Inquiry and Direct Instruction in Science concludes that learning by scientific approach may
offer significant potential benefits to the learning process. They suggest that in doing the
THE EFFECT OF SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES AND COGNITIVE 15
teaching and learning process, teacher is demanded to create student-centered activities such as
conducting investigations, interpretation of data, group discussion and cooperative learning. This
strategy can help develop mental skills and mastery of concepts for students.
(http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED514406.pdf).
The second hypothesis testing shows that there are no differences in the students learning
outcomes of Electronics skills subjects for the groups of students who have divergent thinking
styles and they whose convergent one, after controlling the prior knowledge. These findings are
relevant with the opinion of Li, et al. (2012: 235-236) there is a significant relationship between
the thinking style of divergent and convergent with academic achievement. Further, they explain
that if comparing both styles of thinking (divergent and convergent) on the learning outcomes, it
is not only dominated by one thinking style but by both. Similarly. Kolb and Kolb state divergent
thinkers have higher personal effectiveness than the convergent one, students with convergent
thinking style are considered to have the ability to customize the materials better than the
divergent students. This is because students have a tendency to apply what they have learned and
(http://learningfromexperience.com/media/2010/08/tech_spec_lsi.pdf.).
The third hypothesis testing shows the interaction between the selection of learning
approaches and cognitive styles. To improve the learning outcomes for the Electronics skills
subjects of divergent students, they are better learnt by scientific approach, while for students
with convergent thinking styles are better learnt by expository approach. Accuracy in selecting
appropriate learning approaches, strategies and methods may provide clear direction to the
teaching process. In addition, teachers can design and set up rules or general principles for their
ideal instruction. In terms of students internal conditions of learning, particularly the students
THE EFFECT OF SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES AND COGNITIVE 16
thinking style, it can also define their learning outcomes. This is in line with a research
conducted by Chang, entitled "A Study of the Relationship between Cognitive Styles and
Learning Strategies," it concludes that there is a significant influence between style thinking
The fourth hypothesis testing shows that students whose divergent thinking styles are
gained higher learning outcomes for the Electronics skill subjects by scientific approach than by
expository one, after controlling their prior knowledge. Learning by scientific approach in this
research tends to improve students learning outcomes for Electronics skills subjects better than
by expository learning approach for the divergent thinker students by controlling their prior
knowledge.
knowledge, skills and attitudes based on the scientific method. In other words, students are
directed to construct or find the knowledge by their own. The scientific approach is done by
identifying the problem, making hypotheses, and conducting investigations related to the
problems. The key word of the investigation process is to ask significant questions, shape the
behavior directed at scientific attitudes using certain methods, conduct a survey of problems
develop ideas to order to find various alternative solutions to resolve the problems synonymously
with the characteristics of creative thinking. Individuals who have divergent thinking styles will
quickly adjust to the scientific learning environment. With the creative potency they own, they
are able to explore learning to find their own knowledge, but of course in the teachers guidance,
On the other hand, learning by expository approach will lead to a teacher centered model
that would be difficult for students with divergent thinking style. They might feel like in the
situation in which their creativity will be constrained because of being lack involved in the
The fifth hypothesis testing shows that there is no difference in the learning outcomes the
convergent thinking style after controlling their prior knowledge. Expository approach is a kind
of learning that prioritizes the delivery of information by the way of explaining concepts and
procedures to students. This approach will be very effective if being implemented in the right
procedure. On the other hand, scientific approach requires the skill to process information with a
variety of ideas and solutions in solving the problems faced, and this skill is more possessed by
students whose divergent thinking styles than the convergent thinkers. However, it would be
possible for the convergent students to be able to adjust to the scientific learning if they are
explored and trained appropriately under the teachers direction and guidance. This is in line
have stated that a convergent individual has the ability to customize the higher material and has a
tendency to apply what he or she has learnt and to see the target learning in a positive way.
The results of this study are also supported by the research conducted by Koe entitled
Mathematical Problem Solving Abilities of Grade Ten Student", which investigates the
convergent thinking style scored significantly higher than individuals with divergent thinking
styles (http://circle.ubc.ca/bitstream/id/71989/UBC_1979_A8%20K64.pdf).
THE EFFECT OF SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES AND COGNITIVE 18
The sixth hypothesis testing showed that there was no difference between the learning
outcomes of students who have divergent thinking styles and students who have convergent
thinking styles when being taught by scientific approach, after controlling their prior knowledge.
However, the results of this study were not significant enough to state that divergent thinkers are
better than the convergent one if being taught by scientific approach. Although the calculation of
average shows that the divergent students scored higher than the convergent students, the
These results are in line with the views expressed by Sharpes (2002: 73) that convergent
thinking is a way of thinking of an individual in which he or she try to look for the right answer.
A convergent thinker student may get benefit in the multiple-choice tests because there is only
one correct response that should be selected. In general, teachers can plan an instruction by using
a combination of divergent and convergent thinking style to develop students' ability to think
Results of other studies that support this research is a study conducted by Premuzic and
convergent thinking". It is found that under a certain condition, there is a variable that allows the
(http://www.drtomascp.com/uploads/ThreatDivergentThinking_JRP_2008.pdf.).
The seventh hypothesis testing shows that the Electronics learning outcomes of students
whose divergent thinking styles is lower than the divergent students if they are taught by
Expository approach is a learning approach which promotes activities for teachers during
the learning process and puts the teacher as the main source of information for students. In this
case, the role of students is to listen and to observe all the teacher activities in order to master the
subject matter presented. The explanation process is structured and focused on the learning
materials. Hence, most of the learning process emphasizes on how to remember factual
information. Such learning is suitable for the convergent students that tend to process the
The results are in line with the opinion of Riding and Reyner (2012: 27) that state
students who have a convergent thinking style prefer confronting a formal and structured task
demanding logical thinking and they tend to give logical answers or conclusions (reasoning) to
respond to the information provided. Their responses mostly emphasize on achieving single and
most appropriate answers (Reid, 1995: 58). On the other hand, students who have particularly
divergent thinking style, will find it difficult to follow such a learning process, because they
prefer to be in a learning atmosphere which explores their creativity and potency. This is in
accordance with Sattler quoted in Woolflok (2004: 21) that states the characteristics of students
with divergent thinking style is that they have a curiosity, a high concentration, adaptability, high
energy, sense of humor, independence, an interest in complex things and mystery, but not
Based on the research findings, data analysis, hypothesis testing and discussion of the
results on the effects of learning approach and thinking style towards the learning outcomes for
First, students Electronic skills achievement taught by scientific approach was higher
than groups of students who are taught by expository approach by controlling students prior
knowledge. Thus, the scientific approach is considered to enable of providing a better impact
for the improvement of students learning outcomes for the Electronics skill subjects.
Second, there is an interaction effect between learning approach and students thinking
style towards their achievement of Electronic skill subjects by controlling the prior knowledge.
Therefore, the learning outcomes the students achieved through scientific approach are different
among the divergent and convergent thinking students after controlling their prior knowledge. It
means that learning approaches and cognitive style are two factors that may determine the
Third, for the group of students whose divergent thinking styles, their Electronics
achievement are higher when being taught by scientific approach than the group of students who
are taught by expository one after controlling their prior knowledge. Hence, it can be inferred
that to improve the students Electronics achievement for the divergent thinking students,
Fourth, for the group of divergent thinking students learning by expository teaching
methods, their Electronics learning achievement are lower than students whose convergent
thinking style after controlling the prior knowledge. It is therefore, the expository learning
approach is more effective applied to students whose convergent thinking style after controlling
characteristics, eg, differences in cognitive styles (divergent and convergent) and the level of
THE EFFECT OF SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES AND COGNITIVE 21
prior knowledge of students, it is important in the learning process, so that the teachers really
Comparing with other studies, this study has also some disadvantages that cannot be
controlled by the researchers. The most substantive one is that a form of achievement test given
to students with divergent and convergent thinking style. Therefore, it is recommended that it
would be better to conduct further research of this matter in order to assess student learning
References
Agung, IG. N. (2006). Statistika Penerapan Model Rerata-Sel Multivariat dan Model Ekonometri
Akinoglu, O., Tandogan. (2007). The Effects of Problem-Based Active Learning in Science
Journal of Mathematics. Science & Technology Education. 3 (1), 71-81. Retriefed From
Aktamis, H., Ergin, O. (2008). The Effect of Scientific Process Skills Education on Students'
Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A Taxonomy for Leraning, Teaching and Assessing:
Badgett, John L., Christmann, Edwin P. (1981). Designing Elementary Instruction and
Barrow, H. S., Lynda, Wee K.N. (2007). Principles & Practice of aPBL. Jurong-Singapore:
Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., Krathwohl, D. R. (1979). Taxonomy of
7.
Briggs, L. J. (1979). Instructional Design: Principles and Application. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall,
Inc., 149.
Bybee, R. W. (2006). Scientific Inquiry And Nature Of Science: Implications for Teaching,
Learning, and Teacher Education, ed. Flick Lawrence B. and Lederman Norman G.
Chang, J. S. A Study of the Relationship between Cognitive Styles and Learning Strategies.
Chang, M., Weng, C., Zakharova, A. (2013). Vocabulary Learning Strategies and Cognitive
http://www.iafor.org/offprints/ acll2013offprints/ACLL2013_Offprint_0271.pdf.
Cobern, W., Schuster, D., Adams, B. (2010). Experimental Comparison of Inquiry and Direct
Cohean, R. J., Swerdlik, M. E. (2010). Psychology Testing and Assessment 7th edition. New
Cozby, P. C. (2003). Method in Behavioral Research, 8th Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill
Companies Inc., 5.
THE EFFECT OF SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES AND COGNITIVE 23
Diaz, C. F., Pelletier, C. M., Profenzo, Jr.,E. F. (2006). Touch the FutureTeach. New York:
Dick, W., Carey, L., Carey, L. (2009). The Systematic Design of Instruction. New Jersey:
Eggen, P., Kauchak, D. (2007). Educational Psychology: Windows on Classrooms, 7th edition.
Gagne, R. M. (1977). The Conditions of Learning 3th Edition. New York: Rinehart And
Winston, 3.
Glass, G. V., Hopkins, K. D. (1984). Statistical Method in Education and Psyshology 2nd
Gredler, M. E. (2011). Learning In Instruction: Theory in to Practice 6th Edition, Translate: Tri
Joyce, B., Weil, M., Calhoun, E. (2009). Models of Teaching 8th Edition, translate: Fawaid dan
Kadir. (2015). Statistika Terapan: Konsep, Contoh, dan Analisis Data dengan Program
SPSS/Lisrel dalam Penelitian. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers, pp. 431-437, 146-147, 160-162.
Kauffman, J. C., Plucker, J. A., Baer, J. (2008). Essentials of Creativity Assessment. New Jersey:
Keller, John M. (2010). Motivational Design for Learning and Performance: The ARCH Model
Killen, R. (2009). Effective Teaching Strategies: Lessons from Research and Practice 5th ed.
http://217quiz1pdfs.wikispaces.com/file/view/Killen+teaching+strategies.pdf.
http://circle.ubc.ca/bitstream/id/71989/UBC_1979_A8%20K64.pdf.
Kolb, A. Y., Kolb, D. A., (2010). Learning Style InventoryVersion 3.1, Retriefed From
http://learningfromexperience.com/media/2010/08/tech_spec_lsi.pdf.
Li, F. Zhang, Sternberg, R.J. (2006). The Nature of Intellectual Style. Lawrence Erlbaum
Li, F. Zhang, Sternberg, R. J., Rayner, S. (2012). Handbook of Intellectual Styles: Preferences in
Cognition, learning, and Thinking. New York: Springer Publishing Company, LLC, pp.
235-236.
Messick, S. (1996). Report Research: Bridging Cognition and Personality in Education: The
Role of Style in Performance and Developmen. New Jersey: Educational Testing Service,
Instruction 5th Edition. New Jersey: John Willey & Sons, 56.
Orlich, D. C., Harder, R. J., Callahan, R. C., Trevisan, M. S., Brown, A. H. (2010). Teaching
Strategies: A Guide to Effective Instruction, 9th Edition. Boston: Wadsworth, pp. 34-35.
http://www.drtomascp.com/uploads/ThreatDivergentThinking_JRP_2008.pdf.
THE EFFECT OF SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES AND COGNITIVE 25
Reid, J. M. (1995). Learning Style in the ESL/EFL Classroom. Massacusetts: Heinle & Heinle
Reiser, R. A., Dempsey, J. V. (2012). Trend and Issue in Instructional Design and Technology.
Richey, R. C., Klein, J. D., Tracey, M. W. (2011). The Instructional Design Knowledge Base:
Riding, R., Rayner, S. (2012). Understandi Style Differences in Learning and Behavior. New
Saracho, O. N. (1977). Teachers and Students Cognitif Style in Early Childhood Education.
Sharpes, D. K. (2002). Advanced Educational Foundations for Teacher: The History, Phylosopy
Sims, R. R., Sims, S. J. (2009). The Importance Of Learning Styles: Understanding The
Slavin, R. E. (2011). Educational Psychology, Theory and Practice 9th Edition. Translate:
Smaldino, S.E., Lowther, D.L., Russell, J. D. (2011). Instructional Technology and Media for
Learning 9th Editions, Translate: Arif Rahman. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group,
13.
Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Thinking Styles. New York: Cambridge University Press, 134.
Tilaar, H. A. R. (2015). Pedagogik Teoretis untuk Indonesia. Jakarta: Kompas Media Nusantara,
pp. 145-146.
Woolflok, A. (2004). Educational Psychology. Nedham Heights MA: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 21.
Yerrick, R., Roth, WM. (2005). Establishing Scientific Classroom Discourse Communities
Multiple Voices of Teaching and Learning Research. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum