eprintid: 81666
rev_number: 9
eprint_status: archive
userid: 1290
dir: disk0/00/08/16/66
datestamp: 2024-07-03 01:43:27
lastmod: 2024-07-03 01:43:27
status_changed: 2024-07-03 01:43:27
type: thesis
metadata_visibility: show
creators_name: Lestari, Diah Puji
creators_name: Paidi, Paidi
title: Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Inkuiri Berbasis NOS-Argumentasi (IB-NOSA) untuk Meningkatkan Kemampuan Literasi sains dan Keterampilan Argumentasi Ilmiah Peserta Didik SMP.
ispublished: pub
subjects: D2
subjects: ipa
divisions: pps_ip
full_text_status: restricted
keywords: argumentasi ilmiah, IB-NOSA, inkuiri, literasi sains, NOS
abstract: Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk (1) menghasilkan model pembelajaran inkuiri berbasis NOS-argumentasi (IB-NOSA), (2) menguji kelayakan model pembelajaran IB-NOSA, (3) menguji kepraktisan model pembelajaran IB- NOSA, dan (4) menguji keefektifan model IB-NOSA dalam meningkatkan kemampuan literasi sains dan keterampilan argumentasi ilmiah peserta didik SMP.
Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian dan pengembangan dengan menerapkan prosedur Borg & Gall yang terdiri dari 10 langkah. Subjek uji coba lapangan utama yaitu 32 peserta didik kelas VIII pada satu sekolah menengah pertama (SMP) di Kabupaten Sleman tahun ajaran 2022/2023. Subjek uji coba lapangan operasional yaitu 280 peserta didik kelas VIII dari tiga SMP di Kabupaten Sleman tahun ajaran 2022/2023. Data yang dikumpulkan berupa data kuantitatif dan kualitatif. Data analisis kebutuhan dianalisis menggunakan deskriptif kuantitatif; data kelayakan dan kepraktisan model pembelajaran IB- NOSA dianalisis menggunakan deskriptif statistik; dan data keefektifan dianalisis menggunakan uji MANOVA, sedangkan untuk mengetahui besarnya pengaruh model digunakan pengukuran effect size dengan partial eta square.
Hasil penelitian ini adalah sebagai berikut. (1) Model pembelajaran IB- NOSA terdiri dari landasan filosofis (progresivisme), teori belajar konstruktivistik (teori perkembangan kognitif Piaget, teori sosiokultural Vygotsky), dan observational learning Bandura; sintaks (orientasi, identifikasi masalah, konseptualiasi, investigasi, membuat argument mapping, menyimpulkan, dan refleksi); prinsip reaksi (respon guru terhadap peserta didik); sistem sosial (kerjasama antar peserta didik); sistem pendukung (buku model, buku panduan, silabus, RPP, modul IPA, LKPD, instrumen kemampun literasi sains dan keterampilan argumentasi ilmiah); dampak instruksional (kemampuan literasi sains dan keterampilan argumentasi ilmiah), dan dampak pengiring (minat belajar, hasil belajar, dan rasa ingin tahu). (2) Model pembelajaran IB- NOSA dinyatakan sangat layak digunakan dalam pembelajaran IPA berdasarkan penilaian oleh dosen ahli. (3) Model pembelajaran IB-NOSA dinyatakan sangat praktis berdasarkan hasil uji kepraktisan model dan keterlaksanaan model pada uji coba lapangan utama dan operasional. (4) Model pembelajaran IB-NOSA efektif dalam meningkatkan kemampuan literasi sains dan keterampilan argumentasi ilmiah peserta didik SMP. Keefektifan model pembelajaran dilihat dari adanya perbedaan yang signifikan antara kelas yang menggunakan model IB-NOSA, guided inquiry, dan discovery learning. Effect size model pembelajaran IB-NOSA terhadap peningkatan kemampuan literasi sains dan keterampilan argumentasi ilmiah tergolong besar (large effect) dengan peningkatan sebesar 97,6%. Dengan demikian, model pembelajaran IB-NOSA berpengaruh signifikan terhadap peningkatan kemampuan literasi sains dan keterampilan argumentasi ilmiah peserta didik SMP.
date: 2024-03-20
date_type: published
institution: Sekolah Program Pascasarjana
department: Ilmu Pendidikan
thesis_type: disertasi
referencetext: Abaniel, A. (2021). Enhanced conceptual understanding, 21st century skills and learning attitudes through an open inquiry learning model in physics. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 11(1), 30–43. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.1004
Abidin, Y., Mulyati, T., & Yunansah, H. (2018). Literacy learning: strategies to improve literacy skills in mathematics, science, reading and writing. Bumi Aksara.
Acar, O., & Patton, B. R. (2012). Argumentation and formal reasoning skills in an argumentation-based guided inquiry course. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 4756–4760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.331
Adnan, Mulbar, U., Sugiarti, & Bahri, A. (2021). Scientific literacy skills of students: Problem of biology teaching in junior high school in South Sulawesi, Indonesia. International Journal of Instruction, 14(3), 847– 860. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.14349a
Aiken, L. (1985). Three coefficients for analysing reliability and validity of rating. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 45, 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/07399863870092005
Akerson, V. L., Morrison, J. A., & McDuffie, A. R. (2006). One course is not enough: preservice elementary teachers’ retention of improved views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(2), 194– 213. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20099
Aktan, M. B. (2016). Pre-service science teachers’ perceptions and attitudes about the use of models. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 15(1), 7– 17. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/16.15.07
Al-Ajmi, B., & Ambusaidi, A. (2019). The level of scientific argumentation skills in chemistry. Science Education International, 33(1), 66–74. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v33.i1.7
Alberts, B. (2022). Why science education is more important than most scientists think. FEBS Letters, 596(2), 149–159. https://doi.org/10.1002/1873-3468.14272
Alit, M. I. M., & Praginda, W. (2009). Hakikat IPA dan pendidikan IPA. Pusat Pengembangan dan Pemberdayaan Pendidik dan Tenaga Kependidikan Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam (PPPPTK IPA).
Amielia, S. D., Suciati, S., & Maridi, M. (2018). Enhancing students’ argumentation skill using an argument driven inquiry-based module. Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn), 12(3), 464–471.
222
https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v12i3.8042
Amineh, R. J., & Asl, H. D. (2015). Review of constructivism and social constructivism. Journal of Social Sciences, Literature and Languages, 1(1), 9–16.
Anchunda, H. Y., & Kaewurai, W. (2021). Instructional model development based on collaborative and communicative approaches to enhance lower secondary students’ English-speaking skills in Thailand. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 42, 287–292.
Andrini, V. S. (2016). The effectiveness of inquiry learning method to enhance students ’ learning outcome : a theoritical and empirical review. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(3), 38–42.
Anjarsari, P. (2014). Literasi sains dalam kurikulum dan pembelajaran IPA SMP. Prosiding Semnas Pensa VI ”Peran Literasi Sains”, 602–607.
Anwar, N. P., & Ali, M. A. (2020). The effect of socio-scientific issue (SSI) based discussion: A student-centred approach to the teaching of argumentation. SOTL in the South, 4(2), 35–62. https://doi.org/10.36615/sotls.v4i2.76
Archila, P. A., Molina, J., & Mejía, A. T. De. (2020). Using history scientific controversies to promote undergraduates’ argumentation. Science and Education, 647–671. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00126-6
Arends, R. I. (2015). Learning to teach (Tenth Edit). McGraw-Hill Education.
Arianti, E., Fadly, W., Anwar, M. K., & Sayekti, T. (2021). Analisis kemampuan membuat kesimpulan menggunakan model contextual teaching and learning berbasis education for sustainable development. Jurnal Tadris IPA Indonesia, 1(2), 99–107. https://doi.org/DOI: https://doi.org/10.21154/jtii.v1i2.133
Arsal, Z. (2017). The impact of inquiry-based learning on the critical thinking dispositions of pre-service science teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 39(10), 1326–1338. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1329564
Arviansyah, R., Indrawati, I., & Harijanto, A. (2016). Pengaruh model pembelajaran guided inquiry disertai LKS audiovisual terhadap aktivitas dan hasil belajar IPA siswa di SMP. Jurnal Pembelajaran Fisika, 4(4), 308-314–314.
Asyafah, A. (2019). Menimbang model pembelajaran (Kajian teoritis-kritis atas model pembelajaran dalam pendidikan islam). TARBAWY : Indonesian Journal of Islamic Education, 6(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.17509/t.v6i1.19459
223

Attokaran, M. (2017). Natural food flavors and colorants. In Syria Studies (Second Edi, Vol. 7, Issue 1). John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Aulia, E. V., Poedjiastoeti, S., & Agustini, R. (2018). The effectiveness of guided inquiry-based learning material on students’ science literacy skills. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 947(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/947/1/012049
Aydeniz, M., Pabuccu, A., Cetin, P. S., & Kaya, E. (2012). Argumentation and students’ conceptual understanding of properties and behaviors of gases. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10(6), 1303–1324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-012-9336-1
Aydin, S., & Tortumlu, S. (2015). The analysis of the changes in integration of nature of science into Turkish high school chemistry textbooks: Is there any development? Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(4), 786–796. https://doi.org/10.1039/c5rp00073d
Bachtiar, S., Zubaidah, S., Corebima, A. D., & Indriwati, S. E. (2018). The spiritual and social attitudes of students towards integrated problem based learning models. Issues in Educational Research, 28(2), 254–270.
Bae, J., Shavlik, M., Shatrowsky, C. E., Haden, C. A., & Booth, A. E. (2023). Predicting grade school scientific literacy from aspects of the early home science environment. Frontiers in Psychology, 14(April), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1113196
Baines, D. (2012). Defining the term “natural” in the context of food products. In Natural food additives, ingredient and flavourings. Woodhead Publishing Limited.
Bell, P., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing for learning from the web with KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 797–817. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006900412284
Bilgin, I. (2009). The effects of guided inquiry instruction incorporating a cooperative learning approach on university students’ achievement of acid and bases concepts and attitude toward guided inquiry instruction. Scientific Research and Essays, 4(10), 1038–1046.
Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (1983). Educational research: an introduction (Second). Longman.
Botha, R. J. (Nico). (2016). Inquiry-based learning: Improving South African schools. Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology, 7(2), 76–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/09766634.2016.11885703
Bussière, P., Knighton, T., & Pennock, D. (2007). Measuring up: Canadian results of the OECD PISA study: the performance of Canada’s youth in mathematics, reading and science: 2012 first results for Canadians
224

aged 15. Human Resource and Social Development Canada and Council of Ministers of Education. http://public.eblib.com/choice/PublicFullRecord.aspx?p=3290903
Cabe, T. K., Atwood, R. K., Christopher, J. E., & Sackes, M. (2010). The effect of guided inquiry-based instruction on middle school students’ understanding of lunar concepts. Research in Science Education, 40(3), 451–478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-009-9129-x
Callahan, C. M., Moon, T. R., Oh, S., Azano, A. P., & Hailey, E. P. (2015). What works in gifted education: documenting the effects of an integrated curricular/instructional model for gifted students. American Educational Research Journal, 52(1), 137–167. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831214549448
Cansiz, M., & Cansiz, N. (2019). Reconceptualizing and field testing the scientific literacy framework by exploring the aspect of scientific literacy in Turkish science curriculum. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 18(5), 681–691. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/19.18.681
Capps, D. K., & Crawford, B. A. (2013). Inquiry-based professional development: What does it take to support teachers in learning about inquiry and nature of science? International Journal of Science Education, 35(12), 1947–1978. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.760209
Cavagnetto, A. R. (2010a). Argument to foster scientific literacy: a review of argument interventions in K-12 science contexts. In Review of Educational Research (Vol. 80, Issue 3). https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654310376953
Cavagnetto, A. R. (2010b). Argument to foster scientific literacy: A Review of argument interventions in K-12 science contexts. Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 336–371. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654310376953
Celli, L. M. (2014). Teaching at the middle school level: Best practices and considerations for promoting social and emotional development. In Betwixt and between : understanding and meeting the social and emotional development needs of students during the middle school transition years. Rowman & Littlefield Education.
Chen, C. M., & Wang, W. F. (2020). Mining effective learning behaviors in a web-based inquiry science environment. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(4), 519–535. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020- 09833-9
Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2010). Students’ questions and discursive interaction: Their impact on argumentation during collaborative group discussions in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(7),
225

883–908. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20385
Choi, A., Seung, E., & Kim, D. E. (2021). Science teachers’ views of argument in scientific inquiry and argument-ased science instruction. Research in Science Education, 51(0), 251–268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-9861-9
Clough, M., & Olson, J. (2008). Teaching and assessing the nature of science: An introduction. Science and Education, 17, 143–2145. https://doi.org/10.1023/A
Cofré, H., Núñez, P., Santibáñez, D., Pavez, J. M., Valencia, M., & Vergara, C. (2019). A critical review of students’ and teachers’ understandings of nature of science. Science and Education, 28(3–5), 205–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00051-3
Cook, S. B., Druger, M., & Ploutz-Snyder, L. L. (2011). Scientific literacy and attitudes towards American space exploration among college undergraduates. Space Policy, 27(1), 48–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spacepol.2010.12.001
Dagar, A., & Yadav, A. (2016). Constructivism: A paradigm for teaching and learning. Arts and Social Sciences Journal, 7(4), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.4172/2151-6200.1000200
Dagher, Z. R., & Erduran, S. (2016). Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education: why does it matter? Science and Education, 25(1–2), 147–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-015-9800-8
Dagys, D. (2017). Theoretical inquiry-based learning insights on natural science education: from the source to 5E model. Pedagogika, 126(2), 83–98. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.15823/p.2017.21 83
Dahnuss, D., Sarwi, S., Marwoto, P., & Linuwih, S. (2023). Argumentation writing skills of preservice teacher in higher education: Mapping for development. BIO Web of Conferences, 79, 05009. https://doi.org/10.1051/bioconf/20237905009
Dani, D. (2009). Scientific literacy and purposes for teaching science: a case study of Lebanese private school teachers. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 4(3), 289–299. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ884398.pdf
Dawson, V. (2023). Teachers’ support in developing year 7 students’ argumentation skills about water-based socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2023.2226334
Demircioglu, T., Karakus, M., & Ucar, S. (2023). Developing students’ critical thinking skills and argumentation abilities through augmented reality–based argumentation activities in science classes. In Science and
226

Education (Vol. 32, Issue 4). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00369-5
Dianty, A. P., Supeno, S., & Astutik, S. (2020). Kemampuan decision making siswa SMA dalam pembelajaran fisika berbasis inkuiri terbimbing. Jurnal Pembelajaran Fisika, 9(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.19184/jpf.v9i1.17935
Dogan, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2008). Turkish grade 10 students’ and science teachers’ conceptions of nature of science: A national study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(10), 1083–1112. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20243
Doğru, M., Kirbaci, G. Y., & Çelik, M. (2021). An analysis of representation of nature of science in science textbooks. Socialinis Ugdymas, 2021, t. 55, Nr. 1, p. 85-97, 55(1), 85–97.
Dragoş, V., & Mih, V. (2015). Scientific literacy in school. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 209(July), 167–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.273
Duschl, R. (2008). Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education, 32(0), 268–291. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X07309371
Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38(1), 39–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260208560187
Duschl, R. A., & Schweingruber, H. (2007). Taking science to school: learning and teaching science in grades K-8. In Choice Reviews Online (Vol. 45, Issue 06). The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.45-3327
Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., & Stewart, I. (2010). The evaluation of argument mapping as a learning tool: Comparing the effects of map reading versus text reading on comprehension and recall of arguments. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 5(1), 16–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2009.05.001
Eggen, P. D., & Kauchak, D. P. (2016). Educational psychology windows on classrooms. In The Social Science Encyclopedia. Pearson Education.
Emerton, V., Choi, E., House, T. G., Park, S., & Road, M. (2008). Essential guide to food additives. Leatherhead Food International Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1039/9781847559234
Erdani, Y., Hakim, L., & Lia, L. (2020). Pengaruh model pembelajaran inkuiri terbimbing terhadap kemampuan literasi sains siswa di SMP Negeri 35 Palembang. Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika Dan Teknologi, 6(1), 45–52. https://doi.org/10.29303/jpft.v6i1.1549
227

Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2005). The role of argumentation in developing scientific literacy. Research and the Quality of Science Education, 381–394. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3673-6_30
Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation : Developments in the application of Toulmin’s argument pattern. Science Education, 88(6), 915–933. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20012
Ferretti, R. P., MacArthur, C. A., & Dowdy, N. S. (2000). The effects of an elaborated goal on the persuasive writing of students with learning disabilities and their normally achieving peers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 694–702. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022- 0663.92.4.694
Flick, L. B., & Lederman, N. G. (2006). Scientific inquiry and nature of science. In Scientific Inquiry and Nature of Science. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5814-1_5
Friska, R. I., Siahaan, P., & Hendayana, S. (2022). Junior high school students scientific argumentation skills on conventional biotechnology materials. Journal of Educational Sciences, 6(1), 143. https://doi.org/10.31258/jes.6.1.p.143-157
Fryling, M. J., Johnston, C., & Hayes, L. J. (2011). Understanding observational learning: An interbehavioral approach. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 27(1), 191–203. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03393102
García-Carmona, A., Criado, A. M., & Cruz-Guzmán, M. (2017). Primary pre-service teachers’ skills in planning a guided scientific inquiry. Research in Science Education, 47(5), 989–1010. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9536-8
Genç, M. (2015). The effect of scientific studies on students’ scientific literacy and attitude. Ondokuz Mayis University Journal of Faculty of Education, 34(1), 141–152. https://doi.org/10.7822/omuefd.34.1.8
Gilbert, S. W. (2011). Model based science teaching. NSTA Press.
Gillies, R. M. (2023). Using cooperative learning to enhance students’ learning and engagement during inquiry-based science. Education Sciences, 13(12). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13121242
Ginanjar, W. S., Utari, S., & Muslim, D. (2015). Application of the argument-driven inquiry model in science learning to improve junior high school students’ scientific argumentation skills. Jurnal Pengajaran Matematika Dan Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam, 20(1), 32. https://doi.org/10.18269/jpmipa.v20i1.559
Glaze, A. L. (2018). Teaching and learning science in the 21st century: Challenging critical assumptions in post-secondary science. Education Sciences, 8(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8010012
228

Gökçe, S., Yenmez, A. A., & Çelİk, T. (2020). Argumentation-based learning : An example of mathematical questions through online interactions among prospective teachers. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 53, 458–487. https://doi.org/10.21764/maeuefd.
Gormally, C., Brickman, P., & Lut, M. (2012). Developing a test of scientific literacy skills (TOSLS): Measuring undergraduates’ evaluation of scientific information and arguments. CBE Life Sciences Education, 11(4), 364–377. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-03-0026
Hair, J. H., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis. Annabel Ainscow. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119409137.ch4
Handoyono, N. A., & Arifin, Z. (2016). Pengaruh inquiry learning dan problem-based learning terhadap hasil belajar pkkr ditinjau dari motivasi belajar. Jurnal Pendidikan Vokasi, 6(1), 31. https://doi.org/10.21831/jpv.v6i1.8114
Heng, L. L., Surif, J., & Seng, C. H. (2015). Malaysian students’ scientific argumentation: Do groups perform better than individuals? International Journal of Science Education, 37(3), 505–528. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.995147
Holbrook, J, & Rannikmae, M. (2009). The meaning of scientific literacy. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 4(3), 275–288. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254162731_The_Meaning_of _Scientific_Literacy
Holbrook, Jack, & Rannikmae, M. (2007). The nature of science education for enhancing scientific literacy. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1347–1362. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690601007549
Hsu, P. S., Van Dyke, M., Chen, Y., & Smith, T. J. (2015). The effect of a graph-oriented computer-assisted project-based learning environment on argumentation skills. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(1), 32–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12080
Inanna. (2021). Strategi pembelajaran. Tahta Media Group.
Iordanou, K. (2022). Supporting strategic and meta-strategic development of argument skill: the role of reflection. Metacognition and Learning, 17(2), 399–425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-021-09289-1
Iskandar, Sastradika, D., & Defrianti, D. (2019). Optimizing inquiry-based learning activity in improving students’ scientific literacy skills. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1233(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-
229

6596/1233/1/012061
Istiana, R., Herawati, D., & Ardianto, D. (2020). Argumentation real-world inquiry to improve students’ argumentation skill. Jurnal Bioedukatika, 8(2), 79–90. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.26555/bioedukatika.v8i2.12705 science
Jarman, R., & Clune, B. (2007). Developing Scientific Literacy. Open University Press.
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Erduran, S. (2007). Argumentation in science education: an overview. In Argumentation in Science Education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/tst13_080_05_30
Joyce, B., Weil, M., & Calhoun, E. (2015). Models of teaching (Ninth). Pearson Education, Inc.
Jufrida, J., Basuki, F. R., Kurniawan, W., Pangestu, M. D., & Fitaloka, O. (2019). Scientific literacy and science learning achievement at junior high school. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 8(4), 630–636. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v8i4.20312
Jumadi, J., Perdana, R., Riwayani, & Rosana, D. (2021). The impact of problem-based learning with argument mapping and online laboratory on scientific argumentation skill. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 10(1), 16–23. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v10i1.20593
Kaeppel, K. (2021). The influence of collaborative argument mapping on college students’ critical thinking about contentious arguments. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 40(March), 100809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100809
Kang, J. (2022). Interrelationship between inquiry-based learning and instructional quality in predicting science literacy. Research in Science Education, 52(1), 339–355. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-020-09946-6
Kang, J., & Keinonen, T. (2018). The effect of student-centered approaches on students’ interest and achievement in science: relevant topic-based, open and guided inquiry-based, and discussion-based approaches. Research in Science Education, 48(4), 865–885. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9590-2
Karisan, D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2017). Contextualization of nature of science within the socioscientific issues framework: A review of research. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 5(2), 139–152. https://doi.org/10.18404/ijemst.270186
Kartina, A. A., Suciati, & Harlita. (2019). Analisis hasil ujian nasional materi zat aditif dan zat adiktif SMP di Surakarta. Seminar Nasional Pendidikan Sains, 162–167.
230

Kay, D., & Kibble, J. (2016). Learning theories 101: Application to everyday teaching and scholarship. Advances in Physiology Education, 40(1), 17– 25. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00132.2015
Kendrick, A. (2012). Natural foos and beverage colourings. In Natural food additives, ingredient and flavourings. Woodhead Publishing Limited.
Khaleghinezhad, S. A. (2016). Epistemological beliefs and academic achievement : Mediating role of academic self- efficacy and learning strategies. Journal of Psychology and Education, 42(2), 61–47.
Kharismawati, L. R. S., Nirwansyah, Fauziah, S., Puspita, R. A., Gasalba, R. A., & Rabbani, T. A. S. (2020). HOTS-oriented module: discovery learning. SEAMEO QITEP in Language.
Khishfe, R., Alshaya, F. S., BouJaoude, S., Mansour, N., & Alrudiyan, K. I. (2017). Students’ understandings of nature of science and their arguments in the context of four socio-scientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 39(3), 299–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1280741
Kilbane, C. R., & Milman, N. B. (2014). Teaching models: Designing instruction for 21st century learners. Pearson Education Inc.
Kober, N. (2000). What we know about science teaching and learning. Council for Educational Development and Research.
Kremer, K., Specht, C., Urhahne, D., & Mayer, J. (2014). The relationship in biology between the nature of science and scientific inquiry. Journal of Biological Education, 48(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2013.788541
Kuhlthau, C. C., & Maniotes, L. K. (2010). Building guided inquiry teams for 21st-century learners. School Library Monthly, 26(5).
Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77(3), 319–337. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730770306
Kuhn, D. (2005). Education for thinking. MA: Harvard University Press.
Kutluca, A. Y., & Aydın, A. (2017). Changes in pre-service science teachers’ understandings after being involved in explicit nature of science and socioscientific argumentation processes. Science and Education, 26(6), 637–668. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-017-9919-x
Le Foll, B., Piper, M. E., Fowler, C. D., Tonstad, S., Bierut, L., Lu, L., Jha, P., & Hall, W. D. (2022). Tobacco and nicotine use. Nature Reviews Disease Primers, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41572-022-00346-w
Lederman, N., Antink, A., & Bartos, S. (2014). Nature of science, scientific inquiry, and socio-scientific issues arising from genetics: A pathway to
231

developing a scientifically literate citizenry. Science and Education, 23(2), 285–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9503-3
Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science : past, present, and future. In Handbook of research on science education (pp. 831–879). Routledge.
Lederman, N. G., Lederman, J. S., & Antink, A. (2013). Nature of science and scientific inquiry as contexts for the learning of science and achievement of scientific literacy. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 1(3), 138–147. www.ijemst.com
Lennert, M. (2023). The role of evaluative thinking in generating, evaluating and scaling innovations in learning: A case study of the greenland education system. In Education, equality and inclution: Teaching and learning for sustainable north. Springer Nature Switzerland.
Levitt, R., Janta, B., & Wegrich, kai. (2008). Accountability for teachers: A literature review. Rand Corporation. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1r4xd2h.38
Lin, H. shyang, Hong, Z. R., & Huang, T. C. (2012). The role of emotional factors in building public scientific literacy and engagement with science. International Journal of Science Education, 34(1), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.551430
Liu, C. C., & Chen, I. J. (2010). Evolution of constructivism. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 3(4), 63–66. http://blue-ap.org
Liu, S. Y., & Lederman, N. G. (2007). Exploring prospective teachers’ worldviews and conceptions of nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 29(10), 1281–1307. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690601140019
Lonigan, C., Allan, N., & Lerner, M. (2011). Assessment of preschool early literacy skills: linking childern’s educational needs with empirically supported instructional activities. Psychology in the Schools, 78(5), 488–501. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits
Lutfi, Arfi, Yogica, R., Muttaqiin, A., & Fitri, R. (2020). Metodologi pembelajaran: Strategi, pendekatan, model, dan metode pembelajaran. CV IRDH.
Mars, B. (2001). Addiction-free naturally: liberating yourself from sugar, caffeine, food addictions, tobacco, alcohol, and prescription drugs. Healing Arts Press One.
Mason, L., & Boscolo, P. (2004). Role of epistemological understanding and interest in interpreting a controversy and topic-specific belief change. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(2), 103–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.01.001
232

Mbati, L. (2017). Online social media applications for constructivism and observational learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(5), 543–544.
McComas, W. F., & Nouri, N. (2016). The nature of science and the next generation science standards: analysis and critique. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 27(5), 555–576. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972- 016-9474-3
Mello, P. S., Natale, C. C., Trivelato, S. L. F., Marzin-Janvier, P., Vieira, L. Q., & Manzoni-de-Almeida, D. (2019). Exploring the inquiry-based learning structure to promote scientific culture in the classrooms of higher education sciences. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 47(6), 672–680. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.21301
Metcalfe, M., & Sastrowardoyo, S. (2013). Complex project conceptualisation and argument mapping. International Journal of Project Management, 31(8), 1129–1138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2013.01.004
Meyer, X., & Crawford, B. A. (2011). Teaching science as a cultural way of knowing: Merging authentic inquiry, nature of science, and multicultural strategies. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 6(3), 525–547. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-011-9318-6
Miranti, K., Syahmani, S., & Santoso, U. T. (2021). Kepraktisan perangkat pembelajaran dengan model pembelajaran inkuiri terbimbing pada materi zat aditif dan zat adiktif. Journal of Banua Science Education, 2(1), 9–14. https://doi.org/10.20527/jbse.v2i1.61
Mui, M. S. (2010). Experiencing clay: Inquiry-based learning and assessment for learning. International Journal of Art and Design Education, 29(3), 244–256. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1476-8070.2010.01664.x
National Research Council, N. (2007). Taking science to school: learning and teaching science in grades K-8 (R. A. Duschl, H. A. Schweingruber, & A. W. Shouse (eds.)). The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.45-3327
Ni’mah, F. (2019). Research trends of scientific literacy in Indonesia: Where are we? Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan IPA, 5(1), 23–30. https://doi.org/10.21831/jipi.v5i1.20862
Nikat, R. F. (2021). Exploration of students’ argumentation skill assisted format representation in solving electrical concept. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains (Jps), 9(1), 42. https://doi.org/10.26714/jps.9.1.2021.42-50
Nurita, T., Fauziah, A. N. M., Mahdiannur, M. A., & Susiyawati, E. (2023). Contribution of the inquiry learning model to student scientific argumentation skills on fluid. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(9),
233

7638–7644. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i9.4012
Nurohman, S., Sunarno, W., Sarwanto, & Yamtinah, S. (2021). The validation of digital analysis tool-assisted real-world inquiry (Digita-ri) as a modification of the inquiry-based learning model in the digital age. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 10(3), 387–399. https://doi.org/10.15294/JPII.V10I3.30779
Nurul, I. N., Mukti, R. M., Yuliskurniawati, I. D., Mahanal, S., & Zubaidah, S. (2019). Students’ scientific argumentation skills based on differences in academic ability. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1241(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1241/1/012034
Ocak, İ. (2018). The relationship between teacher candidates’ views of the nature of science and their problem solving skills. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 419–432. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11329a
OECD. (2019a). PISA 2018 asessment and analytical framework. OECD- Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/f30da688-en
OECD. (2019b). PISA 2018 Results. What school life means for students’ lives. In OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/PISA2018_CN_IDN.pdf
OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 results (Volume I): The state of learning and equity in education. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en
Olusegun, Adeoye, A., Olutunde, Ojewole, A., & Oluwatoyin, Babalola, J. A. (2014). Biblical perspectives on Albert Bandura theory of observational learning. International Journal of Philosophy and Theology (IJPT), 2(3). https://doi.org/10.15640/ijpt.v2n3a13
Ornstein, A. C., Levine, D. U., Gutek, G. L., & Vocke, D. E. (2011). Foundations of education (11th ed.). Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Osborne, J. (2010). Arguing to learn in science: The role of collaborative, critical discourse. Science, 328(5977), 463–466. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1183944
Ozturk, E., & Ucus, S. (2015). Nature of science lessons, argumentation and scientific discussions among students in science class: A case study in a successful school. Journal of Education in Science, Environment and Health, 1(2), 102. https://doi.org/10.21891/jeseh.07331
Pallant, J. (2016). SPSS survival manual: a step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS (6th ed.). MC Graw Hill Education.
Pantiwati, Y., & Husamah. (2019). Management of scientific literacy-based questions. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 53(9), 1232– 1241. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
234

Paramita, A. K., Dasna, I. W., & Yasmin. (2019). Kajian pustaka: Integrasi STEM untuk keterampilan argumentasi dalam pembelajaran sains. Jurnal Pembelajaran Kimia, 4(2), 92–99. https://doi.org/10.17977/um026v4i22019p092
Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., de Jong, T., van Riesen, S. A. N., Kamp, E. T., Manoli, C. C., Zacharia, Z. C., & Tsourlidaki, E. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review, 14, 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003
Pongsavee, M. (2009). Effect of borax on immune cell proliferation and sister chromatid exchange in human chromosomes. Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, 4(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1745-6673-4-27
Prasetyo, Z. K. (2013). Konsep dasar pendidikan IPA. In Jurnal Pendidikan Syech Nurjati.
Pursitasari, I. D., Suhardi, E., & Sunarti, T. (2019). Promoting science literacy with discovery learning. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1233(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1233/1/012074
Rahim, A., Hernani, H., & Mudzakir, A. (2016). Pengembangan alat ukur penilaian literasi sains pada konten struktur atom dan ikatan kimia menggunakan konteks wayang kulit. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan Kimia: Kajian Hasil Penelitian Pendidikan Kimia, 3(2), 138–146. https://doi.org/10.36706/jppk.v3i2.8160
Rahman, A., Munandar, S. A., Fitriani, A., Karlina, Y., & Yumriani. (2022). Pengertian pendidikan, ilmu pendidikan dan unsur-unsur pendidikan. Al Urwatul Wutsqa: Kajian Pendidikan Islam, 2(1), 1–8.
Rahmatika, R., Amin, M., Al-Muhdhar, M. H. I., & Suwono, H. (2022). Scientific literacy refinement at Islamic junior high schools using socio- science spirituality learning model. JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), 8(1), 40–50. https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v8i1.18989
Ramallosa, J. M., Funa, A. A., Geron, A. T., Ibardaloza, R. T., & Prudente, M. S. (2022). Meta-analysis on the effectiveness of argument-based learning on students’ conceptual understanding. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 315–323. https://doi.org/10.1145/3514262.3514305
Rapanta, C., & Walton, D. (2016). The use of argument maps as an assessment tool in higher education. International Journal of Educational Research, 79(2015), 211–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2016.03.002
Retnawati, H. (2016). Analisis kuantitatif instrumen penelitian. Parama
235

Publishing.
Rezai, N., & Saghazadeh, A. (2022). Intoduction to integrated education and learning. In Integrated Education and learning. Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15963-3_9
Ristanto, R. H., Ahmad, A. S., & Komala, R. (2022). Critical thinking skills of environmental changes: A biological instruction using guided discovery learning-argument mapping (gdl-am). Participatory Educational Research, 9(1), 173–191. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.22.10.9.1
Robertshaw, B., & Campbell, T. (2013). Constructing arguments: Investigating pre-service science teachers’ argumentation skills in a socio-scientific context. Science Education International, 24(2), 195– 211. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=9150 8841
Ruiter, A., & Scherpenisse, P. (2012). Analysis of chemical preservatives in foods. In Methods of analysis of food components and additives (Second, pp. 423–444). CRC Press.
Rukiyati, & Purwastuti, L. A. (2015). Mengenal filsafat pendidikan. UNY Press.
Salminen, S., & Tahvonen, R. (2022). Food additive intake assesment. In Food attives: Second edition revised and expanded. Marcel Dekker, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-65961-8_33
Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2009). The impact of collaboration on the outcomes of scientific argumentation. Science Education, 93(3), 448– 484. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20306
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 craft written arguments: an exploratory study. Science Education, 95(2), 217–257. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20421
Sandoval, W. A., & Millwood, K. A. (2007). What can argumentation tell us about epistemology? In Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from Classroom-based Research (pp. 68–85). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2_4
Santi, A. (2017). Analisis kandungan zat pengawet boraks pada jajanan sekolah di SDN Serua Indah 1 kota Ciputat. Holistika Jurnal Ilmiah Pgsd, 1(1), 57–62. jurnal.umj.ac.id/index.php/holistika
Santos, M., Maia, P., & Justi, R. (2020). A model of science to base the introduction of sspects of nature of science in teaching contexts and to analyse such contexts. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa Em Educação Em
236

Ciências, 20(u), 617–651. https://doi.org/10.28976/1984- 2686rbpec2020u617651
Santrock, J. W. (2011). Educational psychology; 6th edition. MC Graw Hill Education.
Saputra, H., Al Auwal, T. M. R., & Mustika, D. (2018). Inquiry learning based on virtual laboratory to improve scientific literacy skills of prospective physics education teacher students at Samudra University. Jurnal IPA & Pembelajaran IPA, 1(2), 143–148. https://doi.org/10.24815/jipi.v1i2.9688
Schleigh, S. P., Bossé, M. J., & Lee, T. (2011). Redefining curriculum integration and professional development: In-service teachers as agents of change. Current Issues in Education, 14(3), 1–14.
Schunk, D. H. (2016). Learning theories : an educational perspective. Pearson.
Sengul, O. (2019). Linking scientific literacy, scientific argumentation, and democratic citizenship. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 7(4), 1090–1098. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2019.070421
Sengul, O. (2021). Preservice science teachers practice teaching online through 4E instructional model. Journal of College Science Teaching, 51(7), 5–11. https://login.ezproxy.lib.purdue.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.c om/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=152241807&site=ehost-live
Shahzadi, I., & Nasreen, A. (2020). Assessing scientific literacy levels among secondary school science students of District Lahore. Bulletin of Education and Research, 42(3), 1–21.
Shanmugavelu, G., Parasuraman, B., Ariffin, K., Kannan, B., & Vadivelu, M. (2020). Inquiry method in the teaching and learning process. International Journal of Education, 8(3), 6–9. https://doi.org/10.34293/education.v8i3.2396
Shanthi, R. (2019). Multivariate data analysis: using SPSS and amos. MJP Publisher.
She, H. C., Lin, H. shyang, & Huang, L. Y. (2019). Reflections on and implications of the Programme for International Student Assessment 2015 (PISA 2015) performance of students in Taiwan: The role of epistemic beliefs about science in scientific literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(10), 1309–1340. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21553
Sherkat, D. E. (2011). Religion and Scientific Literacy in the United States. Social Science Quarterly, 92(5), 1134–1150. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2011.00811.x
237

Sholahuddin, A., Susilowati, E., Prahani, B. K., & Erman, E. (2021). Using a cognitive style-based learning strategy to improve students’ environmental knowledge and scientific literacy. International Journal of Instruction, 14(4), 791–808. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.14445a
Slavin, R. E. (2018). Educational Psychology. Pearson Education, Inc.
Songsil, W., Pongsophon, P., Boonsoong, B., & Clarke, A. (2019). Developing scientific argumentation strategies using revised argument- driven inquiry (rADI) in science classrooms in Thailand. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 5(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41029-019- 0035-x
Stark, R., Puhl, T., & Krause, U. M. (2009). Improving scientific argumentation skills by a problem-based learning environment: Effects of an elaboration tool and relevance of student characteristics. Evaluation and Research in Education, 22(1), 51–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500790903082362
Stender, A., Schwichow, M., Zimmerman, C., & Härtig, H. (2018). Making inquiry-based science learning visible: The influence of CVS and cognitive skills on content knowledge learning in guided inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 40(15), 1812–1831. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1504346
Sugianto, I., Suryandari, S., & Age, L. D. (2020). The effectiveness of the inquiry learning model on student learning independence at home. Jurnal Inovasi Penelitian, 1(3), 159–170. https://doi.org/10.47492/jip.v1i3.63
Sulthon, S. (2017). Menguji hipotesis sebagai warrant merupakan penghubung antara pernyataan dan data atau bukti. ELEMENTARY: Islamic Teacher Journal, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.21043/elementary.v4i1.1969
Supahar, Rosana, D., Ramadani, M., & Dewi, D. K. (2017). The instrument for assessing the performance of science process skills based on nature of science (NOS). Jurnal Cakrawala Pendidikan, 36(3), 435–445.
Suparlan, H. (2014). Filsafat pendidikan Ki Hadjar Dewantara dan sumbangannya bagi pendidikan Indonesia. Jurnal Filsafat, 25(1), 1–19.
Suryani, E., Yusiran, Y., Hairullah, O., Siswanto, S., Nurfathurrahmah, N., & Ariyansyah. (2020). Identifying argumentation skills using three tier test on pre-service physics and biology teachers. Proceedings of the 7th Mathematics, Science, and Computer Science Education International Seminar, MSCEIS 2019. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.12-10- 2019.2296428
Susilowati. (2014). IPA dan pembelajarannya. UNY Press.
238

Techakosit, S., & Wannapiroon, P. (2015). Connectivism learning environment in augmented reality science laboratory to enhance scientific literacy. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174(2), 2108–2115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.02.009
Tippett, C. (2009). Argumentation : The language of science. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(1), 17–25.
Torres, J., Moutinho, S., & Vasconcelos, C. (2015). Nature of science, scientific and Geoscience models: Examining students and teachers’ views. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 12(4), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.12973/tused.10148a
Toulmin, S. (2003). The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840005
Türk, C. K., & Çam, A. (2024). The effect of argumentation on middle school students’ scientific literacy as well as their views, attitudes and knowledge about socioscientific issues. Science and Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-023-00489-6
Uçar, B., & Çevik, Y. D. (2020). The effect of argument mapping supported with peer feedback on pre-service teachers’ argumentation skills. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 37(1), 6–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2020.1815107
Ugwuozor, F. O. (2020). Constructivism as pedagogical framework and poetry learning outcomes among Nigerian students: An experimental study. Cogent Education, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2020.1818410
Utomo, Y. S., Ashadi, & Sarwanto. (2019). Argumentation skills profile on 8th grade students using Toulmin’s argument pattern on controversial topic. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1233(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1233/1/012095
Vargo, F. E., & Young, N. D. (2014). Social and emotional development during the middle school years: Theories and educational considerations. In Betwixt and between: Understanding and meeting the social and emotional development needs of students during the middle school transition years. Rowman & Littlefield Education.
Venville, G. J., & Dawson, V. M. (2010). The impact of a classroom intervention on Grade 10 students’ argumentation skills, informal reasoning, and conceptual understanding of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(8), 952–977. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20358
Virtič, M. P. (2022). Teaching science & technology: components of scientific literacy and insight into the steps of research. International
239

Journal of Science Education, 44(12), 1916–1931. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2105414
Vitasari, S., & Supahar. (2018). Assessment instrument of scientific literacy skills on motion and simple machines learning based on nature of science. International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2018), 40, 108–119. http://gssrr.org/index.php?journal=JournalOfBasicAndApplied
Voss, S., Kruse, J., & Kent-Schneider, I. (2022). Comparing student responses to convergent, divergent, and evaluative nature of science questions. Research in Science Education, 52(4), 1277–1291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-021-10009-7
Wajdi, M., Jamaluddin, A. Bin, Nurdiyanti, N., & Magfirah, N. (2022). The effectiveness of problem-based learning with environmental-based comic in enhancing students environmental literacy. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 11(3), 1049–1057. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v11i3.22140
Wenning, C. J. (2006). A framework for teaching the nature of science. J. Phys. Tchr. Educ. Online, 3(3), 3–10. http://www2.phy.ilstu.edu/pte/publications/teaching_NOS.pdf
Wenning, C. J. (2011). Level of inquiry: using inquiry spectrum learning sequences on teach science. Journal of Physics Teacher Eucation Online, 6(2), 11–20.
Widhi, W., Hakim, A. R., Wulansari, N. I., Solahuddin, M. I., & Admoko, S. (2021). Analysis of students’ scientific argumentation skills in the learning model based on Toulmin’s Argumentation Pattern (TAP) in understanding physics concepts using the library research method. PENDIPA Journal of Science Education, 5(1), 79–91. https://doi.org/10.33369/pendipa.5.1.79-91
Widodo, A., Waldrip, B., & Herawati, D. (2016). Students argumentation in science lessons: a story of two research projects. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 5(2), 199–208. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v5i2.5949
Widodo, E., Widowati, A., & Setyaningsih, A. (2019). The effectiveness of nature of science (NOS) within guided inquiry learning approach for developing students’ scientific literacy in junior high school. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1321(3). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742- 6596/1321/3/032071
Widoyoko, E. P. (2009). Evaluasi program pembelajaran: panduan praktis bagi pendidik dan calon pendidik (Evaluation of learning programs: a practical guide for educators and prospective educators) (1st ed.). Pustaka Pelajar.
240

Wilujeng, I. (2017). IPA terintegrasi dan pembelajaran. UNY Press. Wisudawati, A., & Sulistyowati, E. (2017). Metodologi pembelajaran IPA.
Bumi Aksara.
Wong, D., & Pugh, K. (2014). Dewey and the learning science. In Encyclopedia of Science Education (pp. 1–7). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6165-0
Yacoubian, H. A. (2021). Students’ views of nature of science: a long-term study. Science and Education, 30(2), 381–408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00179-7
Yacoubian, H. A., & Boujaoude, S. (2010). The effect of reflective discussions following inquiry-based laboratory activities on students’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(10), 1229–1252. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20380
Yalamanchili, B. S., Vaddi, R. S., & Anne, K. R. (2015). Inquiry-based guided learning to enhance interest and higher-order thinking in engineering graduates: A computing education perspective. Proceedings of the International Conference on Transformations in Engineering Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-1931-6
Yore, L. D., Pimm, D., & Tuan, H. L. (2007). The literacy component of mathematical and scientific literacy. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5(4), 559–589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-007-9089-4
Yuliana, I., Cahyono, M. E., Widodo, W., & Irwanto, I. (2021). The effect of ethnoscience-themed picture books embedded within context-based learning on students’ scientific literacy. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 21(94), 379–396. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2021.94.17
Zetterqvist, A., & Bach, F. (2023). Epistemic knowledge–a vital part of scientific literacy? International Journal of Science Education, 45(6), 484–501. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2023.2166372
Zhang, J., & Browne, W. J. (2022). Exploring Chinese high school students’ performance and perceptions of scientific argumentation by understanding it as a three-component progression of competencies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21819
citation:   Lestari, Diah Puji and Paidi, Paidi  (2024) Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Inkuiri Berbasis NOS-Argumentasi (IB-NOSA) untuk Meningkatkan Kemampuan Literasi sains dan Keterampilan Argumentasi Ilmiah Peserta Didik SMP.  S3 thesis, Sekolah Program Pascasarjana.   
document_url: http://eprints.uny.ac.id/81666/1/disertasi_diah%20puji%20lestari_20703261022.pdf