Post on 27-Jan-2021
PENERAPAN CONTEXT BASED LEARNING (CBL) DENGAN
STRATEGI CM2RA UNTUK MEMPERBAIKI MODEL MENTAL
SISWA SMA TERKAIT KONSEP PEMANASAN GLOBAL
TESIS
diajukan untuk memenuhi sebagian syarat untuk
memperoleh gelar Magister Pendidikan Fisika
Oleh
Asep Saepul Ulum
1706447
PROGRAM STUDI PENDIDIKAN FISIKA
SEKOLAH PASCASARJANA
UNIVERSITAS PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA
2019
PENERAPAN CONTEXT BASED LEARNING (CBL) DENGAN
STRATEGI CM2RA UNTUK MEMPERBAIKI MODEL MENTAL
SISWA SMA TERKAIT KONSEP PEMANASAN GLOBAL
Oleh
Asep Saepul Ulum
S.Pd UPI Bandung, 2016
Sebuah tesis yang diajukan untuk memenuhi salah satu syarat memperoleh
gelar Magister Pendidikan (M.Pd.) pada program studi Pendidikan Fisika
© Asep Saepul Ulum 2019
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
Agustus, 2019
Hak Cipta dilindungi undang-undang.
Tesis ini tidak boleh diperbanyak seluruhnya atau sebagian,
dengan dicetak ulang, difoto kopi, atau cara lainnya tanpa izin dari penulis.
ASEP SAEPUL ULUM
PENERAPAN CONTEXT BASED LEARNING (CBL) DENGAN
STRATEGI CM2RA UNTUK MEMPERBAIKI MODEL MENTAL
SISWA SMA TERKAIT KONSEP PEMANASAN GLOBAL
disetujui dan disahkan oleh pembimbing:
Pembimbing I
Prof. Dr. Andi Suhandi, M.Si.
NIP. 196908171994031003
Pembimbing II
Dr. Achmad Samsudin, M.Pd.
NIP. 198310072008121004
Mengetahui,
Ketua Program Studi Magister Pendidikan Fisika
Sekolah Pascasarjana Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
Dr. Taufik Ramlan Ramalis, M.Si.
NIP. 195904011986011001
iv
PENERAPAN CONTEXT BASED LEARNING (CBL) DENGAN STRATEGI
CM2RA UNTUK MEMPERBAIKI MODEL MENTAL SISWA SMA
TERKAIT KONSEP PEMANASAN GLOBAL
Asep Saepul Ulum
1706447
Pembimbing I: Prof. Dr. Andi Suhandi, M.Si.
Pembimbing II: Dr. Achmad Samsudin, M.Pd.
ABSTRAK
Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk memperbaiki model mental siswa sekolah
menengah terkait dengan konsep pemanasan global melalui penerapan model CBL
menggunakan strategi CM2RA (konteks, model mikroskopis, fenomena makroskopis, dan
representasi analogi). Kategori model mental yang ditinjau meliputi model mental ilmiah,
sintetis, dan awal. Kategori model mental ini ditentukan berdasarkan data hasil tes tingkat
pemahaman konsep. Metode pra-eksperimen dengan desain satu kelompok pretest-posttest
digunakan dalam penelitian ini. Jumlah subjek penelitian adalah 40 siswa yang terdiri dari
24 siswa perempuan dan 16 siswa laki-laki, di salah satu sekolah menengah di Kabupaten
Tasikmalaya provinsi Jawa Barat. Instrumen yang digunakan untuk mengumpulkan data
adalah tes untuk memahami konsep pemanasan global dalam bentuk essai yang mencakup
tiga bagian pertanyaan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa sebelum penerapan CBL,
persentase kategori model mental pada soal pertama; Scientific (5%), Synthetic (40%), dan
Initial (55%), sedangkan setelah penerapan CBL, jumlah siswa dalam setiap kategori
model mental menjadi; Scientific (78%), Synthetic (15%), dan Initial (7%). Pada soal
kedua, Scientific (8%), Synthetic (35%) dan Initial (58%), setelah penerapan CBL,
persentase kategori model mental menjadi: Scientific (70%), Synthetic (25%) dan Initial
(5%). Soal ketiga diperoleh: Scientific (3%), Synthetic (35%) dan Initial (58%), sedangkan
setelah penerapan CBL, persentase kategori model mental siswa menjadi; Scientific (68%),
Synthetic (28%) dan Initial (5%). Hasil ini menunjukkan bahwa implementasi CBL dengan
strategi CM2RA memiliki efektivitas tinggi dan sedang dalam memfasilitasi pencapaian
model mental Scientific.
Kata Kunci : Context Based Learning (CBL), Strategi CM2RA, Model mental
v
IMPLEMENTATION CONTEXT BASED LEARNING (CBL) WITH
CM2RA STRATEGY TO IMPROVE MENTAL MODEL OF SENIOR
HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS RELATED TO THE CONCEPT ON
GLOBAL WARMING
Asep Saepul Ulum
1706447
Supervisor I: Prof. Dr. Andi Suhandi, M.Si.
Supervisor II: Dr. Achmad Samsudin, M.Pd.
ABSTRACT
The aim of this study is to improve the mental model of high school students related to the
concept of global warming through the implementation of the CBL model using the
CM2RA strategy (context, microscopic models, macroscopic phenomena, and analogy
representation). The mental model categories reviewed include scientific, synthetic and
initial mental models. This mental model category is determined based on the test results
data level of concept understanding. A pre-experiment method with one group pretest-
posttest design has been used in this research. The number of research subjects was 40
students consisting of 24 female students and 16 male students, in one of the high schools
in the Tasikmalaya district of West Java province. The instrument used to collect data is a
test of understanding the concept of global warming in the form of essays covering three
part of the question. The results show that prior to the implementation of CBL, the number
of students in each category of mental models in the first question was: scientific (5%),
synthetic (40%), and initial (55%), whereas after the implementation of CBL, the number
of students in each mental model categories become: scientific (78%), synthetic (15%) and
initial (7%). In the second problem are: scientific (8%), synthetic (35%), and initial (58%),
whereas after applying CBL, the number of students in each category of mental models
becomes: scientific (70%), synthetic (25%), and initial (5%). Whereas the third problem is:
scientific (3%), synthetic (35%) and initial (58%), whereas after applying CBL, the number
of students in each category of mental models becomes: scientific (68%), synthetic (28%),
and initial (5%). These results indicate that the implementation of CBL with the CM2RA
strategy has a high effectiveness in facilitating the achievement of scientific mental models.
These results indicate that the implementation of CBL with the CM2RA strategies has high
effectiveness in facilitating the achievement of the scientific mental model.
Keyword: Context Based Learning (CBL), CM2RA Strategy, Mental Model
vi
DAFTAR ISI
KATA PENGANTAR ................................................................................... i
UCAPAN TERIMA KASIH ........................................................................ ii
ABSTRAK ..................................................................................................... iv
DAFTAR ISI .................................................................................................. vi
DAFTAR TABEL ......................................................................................... viii
DAFTAR GAMBAR ..................................................................................... x
DAFTAR LAMPIRAN ................................................................................. xi
BAB I PENDAHULUAN
1.1. Latar Belakang Penelitian ......................................................................... 1
1.2. Rumusan Masalah Penelitian .................................................................... 7
1.3. Tujuan Penelitian ...................................................................................... 8
1.4. Manfaat Penelitian .................................................................................... 8
1.5. Definisi Operasional .................................................................................. 8
1.6. Struktur Organisasi Tesis .......................................................................... 9
BAB II KAJIAN PUSTAKA
2.1. Model Context Based Learning (CBL) dan Strategi CM2RA .................. 11
2.2. Model Mental ............................................................................................ 25
2.3. Materi Pemanasan Global ......................................................................... 30
2.4. Hubungan CBL dengan Strategi CM2RA dan Model Mental .................. 31
2.5. Kerangka Pikir Penelitian ......................................................................... 33
BAB III METODE PENELITIAN
3.1. Metode dan Desain Penelitian .................................................................. 36
3.2. Partisipan .................................................................................................. 37
3.3. Populasi dan Sampel ................................................................................. 37
3.4. Instrumen Penelitian ................................................................................. 37
3.5. Prosedur Penelitian ................................................................................... 39
3.6. Analisis Data ............................................................................................. 41
BAB IV TEMUAN DAN PEMBAHASAN
4.1. Temuan ..................................................................................................... 47
4.2. Pembahasan .............................................................................................. 62
vii
BAB V SIMPULAN, IMPLIKASI, DAN REKOMENDASI
5.1. Simpulan ................................................................................................... 69
5.2. Implikasi ................................................................................................... 70
5.3. Rekomendasi.............................................................................................. 70
DAFTAR PUSTAKA ....................................................................................... 71
LAMPIRAN ...................................................................................................... 78
viii
DAFTAR TABEL
Tabel Halaman
2.1. Tahapan, Aktivitas Guru, Siswa dan Perangkat Pelaksanaan CBL ............ 15
2.2. Matriks Hubungan Aktivitas CBL dengan Kompetensi Siswa .................... 17
2.3 Kategori Model Mental ................................................................................ 26
2.4 Rubrik Penilaian Levels of Understanding .................................................. 28
2.5 Rubrik Penilaian Respons Visual ................................................................. 29
2.6 Rubrik Penilaian Model Mental ................................................................... 29
2.7 Hubungan Model Pembelajaran CBL, Strategi CM2RA dan Model Mental 32
3.1. Jenis, Fungsi dan Waktu Penggunaan Instrumen Penelitian ....................... 38
3.2. Rekapitulasi Hasil Judgement Ahli .............................................................. 42
3.3. Kategori Reliabilitas Tes .............................................................................. 43
3.4. Kriteria Keterlaksanaan Model Pembelajaran ............................................. 44
3.5. Kriteria Efektivitas Penggunaan Model CBL Dengan Strategi CM2RA
dalam Memfasilitasi Perbaikan Model Mental Siswa ............................... 45
3.6. Interpretasi Kriteria Persentase Tanggapan ................................................. 46
4.1. Skor Siswa Sebelum dan Sesudah CBL pada Konsep Pemanasan Global .. 48
4.2. Data Level Pemahaman Konsep Soal Pertama Sebelum dan Setelah CBL . 49
4.3. Jumlah Siswa di setiap Kategori Model Mental terkait Konsep Pemanasan
Global Sebelum dan Sesudah Implementasi CBL ....................................... 50
4.4. Skor Siswa Sebelum dan Sesudah CBL pada Konsep Gas Rumah Kaca .... 51
4.5. Data Level Pemahaman Konsep Soal Kedua Sebelum dan Setelah CBL ... 52
4.6. Jumlah Siswa di Setiap Kategori Model Mental pada Konsep Gas Rumah
Kaca Sebelum Dan Sesudah Implementasi CBL ......................................... 53
4.7. Skor Siswa Sebelum dan Sesudah CBL pada Konsep Gelombang
Elektromagnetik ........................................................................................... 54
4.8. Data Level Pemahaman Konsep Soal Ketiga Sebelum dan Setelah CBL ... 55
4.9. Jumlah Siswa di Setiap Kategori Model Mental pada Konsep Gas Rumah
Kaca Sebelum dan Sesudah Implementasi CBL .......................................... 56
4.10. Persentase Model Mental Siswa Sebelum dan Sesudah CBL ................... 60
ix
4.11. Rekapitulasi Tanggapan Siswa Setelah Pembelajaran Model CBL dengan
Strategi CM2RA pada Konsep Pemanasan Global .................................. 61
4.12. Rekapitulasi Persentase Keterlaksanaan Pembelajaran oleh Guru ........... 62
4.13. Rekapitulasi Persentase Keterlaksanaan Pembelajaran oleh Siswa ........... 63
x
DAFTAR GAMBAR
Gambar Halaman
2.1. Kajian Phycics Triangle ............................................................................... 19
2.2. Model Interaksi Foton Molekul Gas yang digunakan Model CBL.............. 21
2.3. Model Lapisan Kaca yang digunakan dalam Penerapan Model CBL ......... 22
2.4. Analogi untuk Hamburan Foton oleh Molekul Gas ..................................... 23
2.5. Analogi Rumah Kaca untuk Pemanasan Global .......................................... 24
2.6. Bagan Kerangka Pikir Penelitian ................................................................ 35
3.1. Bagan One Group Pretest-Posttest Design .................................................. 36
3.2. Bagan Alur Penelitian .................................................................................. 40
4.1. Pola Perubahan dalam Kategori Model Mental Soal Satu yang dicapai
oleh Siswa dari Sebelum ke Setelah Mengikuti Aktivitas CBL .................. 50
4.2. Pola Perubahan dalam Kategori Model Mental Soal Dua yang dicapai
oleh Siswa dari Sebelum ke Setelah Mengikuti Aktivitas CBL .................. 53
4.3. Pola Perubahan dalam Kategori Model Mental Soal Tiga yang dicapai
oleh Siswa dari Sebelum ke Setelah Mengikuti Aktivitas CBL .................. 56
4.4. Grafik Model Mental Siswa pada Konsep Pemanasan Global ................... 58
4.5. Grafik Model Mental Siswa pada Konsep Gas Rumah Kaca ...................... 58
4.6. Grafik Model Mental Siswa pada Gelombang Elektromagnetik ................. 59
xi
DAFTAR LAMPIRAN
1. Perangkat Pembelajaran
1.1. Rencana Pelaksanaan Pembelajaran (RPP) ............................................... 80
1.2. Skenario Pembelajaran Pertemuan 1 ......................................................... 85
1.3. Skenario Pembelajaran Pertemuan 2 ......................................................... 90
1.4. Artikel Pertemuan 1 dan 2......................................................................... 94
2. Instrumen Tes
2.1. Kisi-kisi Soal Tes Pemahaman Konsep .................................................... 97
2.2. Lembar Validasi Isi Pemahaman Konsep ................................................. 101
2.3. Hasil Validasi Isi Tes Pemahaman Konsep .............................................. 108
2.4. Soal Tes Tes Pemahaman Konsep ............................................................ 109
2.5. Rekapitulasi Hasil Uji Coba Instrumen Pemahaman Konsep ................... 111
3. Instrumen Non Tes
3.1. Format Observasi Aktivitas Guru ............................................................. 113
3.2. Format Observasi Aktivitas Siswa ........................................................... 114
3.3. Skala Sikap Tanggapan Siswa ................................................................. 115
4. Data dan Pengolahan Data Hasil Penelitian
4.1. Rekapitulasi Hasil Aktivitas Guru dan Siswa .......................................... 117
4.2. Rekapitulasi Hasil Model Mental ............................................................. 118
4.3. Rekapitulasi Tanggapan Siswa ................................................................ 120
5. Surat Penelitian
5.1. Surat Ijin Melaksanakan Penelitian .......................................................... 122
5.2. Surat Keterangan Telah Melaksanakan Penelitian ................................... 123
6. Dokumentasi Penelitian
71
DAFTAR PUSTAKA
Abraham, M. R., Williamson, V. M., & Westbrook, S.L. (1994). A Cross-age Study
of The Understanding of Five Chemistry Concepts. Journal of Research in
Science Teaching, 31 (2), 147-165.
Arikunto, S. (2013). Dasar-dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan. Jakarta: PT Bumi Aksara.
Avargil, S., Herscovitz, O. & Dori J. Y. (2011). Teaching Thinking Skills in
Context-Based Learning: Teachers’ Challenges and Assessment
Knowledge. Journal Science Education Technolgy, 21(2), 207–225.
Bennett, J., & Holman, J. (2002). Context-based approaches to the teaching of
chemistry: What are they and what are their effects? In J. K. Gilbert, O. De
Jong, R. Justi, D. F. Treagust, & J. H. Van Driel (Eds.), Chemical education:
Towards research-based practice (pp. 165–184). Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic Press.
Bennett, J. (2005). Bringing Science to Life: The Research Evidence on Teaching
Science in Context. University of York: Department of Educational Studies.
Bennett, J., Lubbe, F. & Hogarth, S. (2007). Bringing Science to Life: A Synthesis
of The Research Evidence On The Effects of Context-based and STS
Approaches to Science Teaching, Sciеnce Eduction, 91(3), 347–370.
Bennett, Ј. & Lubben, F. (2007). Context-based Chemistry: The Salters Approach,
International Journal of Science Education, 28 (09), 999-1015.
Çalik, M., & Ayas, A. (2005). A Comparison of Level of Understanding of Eighth-
grade Students and Science Student Teachers Related to Selected Chemistry
Concepts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(6), 638–667.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20076
Chamany, K., Allen, D., & Tanner, K. (2008). Making Biology Learning Relevant
to Students: Integrating People, History, and Context into College Biology
Teaching. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 7(3), 267-278.
Chittleborough, G. D., Treagust, D. F., Mamiala, T. L., & Mocerino, M. (2005).
Students' Perceptions of The Role of Models in The Process of Science and
in The Process of Learning. Research in Science and Technological
Education, 23(2), 195-212.
Coll, R.K. (2008). Chemistry Learners Preferred Mental Models For Chemical
Bonding. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 5 (1), hlm. 22-47.
Corpuz, E. D., & Rebello, N. S. (2011). Investigating Students’ Mental Models and
Knowledge Construction of Microscopic Friction. I. Implications for
https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20076
72
Curriculum Design and Development. Physical Review Special Topics –
Physics Education Research, 7(2), 1–8.
Creswell, J.W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and
Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. United States of
America: Pearson.
De Jong, O. (2006). Context-based Chemical Education: How to Improve it.
Chemical Education International, 8(1), 1-7.
Dori, Y. J., Avargil, S., Kohen, Z., Saar, L. (2018). Context-based learning and
metacognitive prompts for enhancing scientific text comprehension,
International Journal of Science Education, Vol. 40, No. 10, 1198–1220.
Duit, R. (1991). On The Role of Analogies and Metaphors In Learning Science.
Science Education, 75(6), 649-672. doi: 10.1002/sce.3730750606
Frankel. (2011). How to Design and Evaluate Research. New York: McGRAW-
HILL INC.
Genter, D. (2002). Psychology Of In N.J. Smelser & P.B. Dates (Eds). International
Encyclopedia of The Social and Behavioral Science, 9683-9687.
Gilbert, J.K. (2005). Mental Models: Theoritical Issues for Visualization In Science
Education. Journal Visualization In Science Education, 43-60.
Grant, E., Gardner, M., Jones, G. & Ferzli, M. (2009). Popular Media in the Biology
Classroom: Viewing Popular Science Sceptically. The American Biology
Teacher, 71(6), 332-335.
Guo, Y., Shen, J., Ye, X., Chen, H. & Jiang, A. (2013). The Design and Testing of
a Caring Teaching Model Based on The Theoretical Framework of Caring
in The Chinese Context: A Mixed-method Study. Nurse Education Today,
33 (8), 912–918.
Greca, I. M., & Moreira, M. A. (2000). Mental Models, Conceptual Models,
Modelling. International Journal of Science Education, 86, 352-381.
Greca, I. M., & Moreira, M. A. (2002). Mental, Physical, and Mathematical Models
in the Teaching and Learning of Physics. Science Education, 86 (1), 106–
121. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10013
Harrison, A.G., & Treagust, D.F., (2000). Learning about Atoms, Molecules, and.
Chemical Bonds: A Case Study of Multiple–model Use in Grade 11.
Chemistry. Science Education, 84, 352 – 381.
Harrison, A.G., & Coll, R.K., (2005). Using Analogies in Middle and Secondary
Science Classrooms. New York: Plenum Ltd.
https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10013
73
Herscovitz, O., Kaberman, Z., Saar, L., & Dori, Y. J. (2012). The relationship
between metacognition and the ability to pose questions in chemical
education. In A. Zohar & Y. J. Dori (Eds.), Metacognition in science
education: Trends in current research (pp. 165–195). Dordrecht: Springer.
Hestenes, D. (1996). Modeling Methodology for Physics Teachers 2. Course
Objectives and Scope. Physics, (August).
Holbrook, Ј. (2014). A Context-Based Approach to Science Teaching. Journal of
Baltic Science Education, 13 (2), 1648–3898.
Holyoak, K. J. (2012). Analogy and Relational Reasoning. The Oxford Handbook
of Thinking and Reasoning. New York: Oxford University Press.
James, M.C., & Scharmann, L.C. (2006). Using Analogies to Improve the Teaching
Performance of Preservice Teachers. Journal Of Research In Science
Teaching, 44, (4), 565–585.
Jansoon, N., Coll, R.K. dan Somsook, E. (2009). Understanding Mental Models of
Dilution in Thai Students. International Journal of Environmental &
Science Education. 4(2), 147-168.
Johnstone, A. H. (2000). Teaching of Chemistry - Logical or Psychological?. Chem.
Educ. Res. Pract., 1(1), 9–15. https://doi.org/10.1039/A9RP90001B
Kaboro, P. G. (2015). Enhancing Students ’ Self-Concept of Physics Concepts
through Analogy Teaching, 6(5), 337–346.
Kuhn, J. & Müller, A. (2014). Context-Based Science Education By Newspaper
Story Problems: A Study On Motivation And Learning Effects. Perspectives
in Science, 2(1), 5-21.
Kukliansky, I. & Eshach, H. (2014). Evaluating A Contextual-Based Course On
Data Analysis For The Physics Laboratory. Journal Science Education
Technology, 23(1), 108–115. doi:10.1007/s10956-013-9456-6.
Kurnaz, M. A., & Ekşi, Ç. (2015). An Analysis of High School Students’ Mental
Models of Solid Friction in Physics. Educational Sciences: Theory &
Practice, 15(3), 787–795.
Laliyo, L.A.R. (2011). Model Mental Siswa dalam Memahami Perubahan Wujud
Zat. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan, 8, (1),
Lin, J. W., & Chiu, M. H. (2007). Exploring The Characteristics and Diverse
Sources of Students’ Mental Models of Acids and Bases. International
Journal of Science Education, 29(6), 771–803.
https://doi.org/10.1039/A9RP90001B
74
Lin, J. W., & Chiu, M. H. (2010). The Missmatch between Students’ Mental Models
of Acids/Bases and Their Sources and Their Teacher’s Anticipations
thereof. International Journal of Science Education. 32(12), 1617-164.
Liu, N. T., Cowie, B. & Jones, A. (2010). Senior High School Student Biology
Learning in Interactive Teaching. Reserche Science Education. 40(29, 267–
289. doi:10.1007/s11165-008-91078.
Lye, H., Fry, M. & Hart, C. (2001). What does it mean to teach physics “in
context”?. Australian science teachers journal, 48 (1), 16-22.
Maharaj-Sharma, R., & Sharma, A. (2015). Observations from Secondary School
Classrooms in Trinidad and Tobago: Science Teachers’ Use of Analogies.
Science Education International, 26(4), 557–572.
Mansyur, J. (2010). Kajian Fenomenografi Aspek-aspek Model Mental Subjek
Lintas Akademik dalam Problem Solving Konsep Dasar Mekanika.
(Disertasi). Sekolah Pascasarjana, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia:
Bandung.
Mustaqim, M. (2015). Pengaruh Diskusi terhadap Model Mental Mahasiswa Pada
Fenomena Konduksi Panas. Prosiding Pertemuan Ilmiah XXXIX HFI
Jateng & DIY, (0583-0823).
Otero, V., Pollock, S., & Finkelstein, N. (2010). A Physics Department’s Role in
Preparing Physics Teachers: The Colorado Learning Assistant Model.
American Journal of Physics, 78(11), 1218–1224.
https://doi.org/10.1119/1.3471291.
Ozcan, O. (2011). What are the students’ mental models about the spin and
“photon” concepts in modern physics?. Procedia Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 15(4) 1372–1375
Ozcan, O., & Bezen, S. (2016). Students’ Mental Models About the Relationship
Between Force and Velocity Concepts. Journal of Baltic Science Education,
15(5), 630–641.
Parchmann, I. & Luecken, M. (2010). Context-based Learning for Students and
Teachers: Professional development by participating in school innovation
projects. In Leibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education (IPN),
Kiel Paper presented at the International Seminar, Professional Reflections,
National Science Learning Centre, York.
Park, E. J., & Light, G. (2009). Identifying Atomic Structure As A Threshold
Concept: Student Mental Models and Troublesomeness. International
Journal of Science Education, 31(2), 233–258.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701675880
https://doi.org/10.1119/1.3471291https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701675880
75
Pilot, A. & Bulte M. W. A., (2006). The Use Of “Contexts” as A Challenge For The
Chemistry Curriculum: Its Successes and The Need for Further
Development and Understanding. International Journal of Science
Education, 28(9), 1087–1112.
Pilot, A. & Bulte, M. W. A. (2007). Editorial: Why do you ‘need-to-know’:
Context-Based Education. International Journal of Science Education,
28(9), 953-955.
Richland, L. E., & Simms, N. (2015). Analogy, Higher Order Thinking, and
Education. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 6(2), 177–
192.https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1336
Riduwan. (2012). Belajar Mudah Penelitian Untuk Guru, Karyawan, Peneliti.
Pemula. Bandung: Alfabeta.
Sağlam A. A., (2009). Cross-grade Comparison of Students’ Understanding of
Energy Concepts. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19(3),
303-313.
Saglam, A. A., & Devecioglu, Y. (2010). Student Teachers’ Levels of
Understanding and Model of Understanding about Newton’s Laws of
Motion. Asia-Pacifc Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 11(1),.
Seddon, J. (2008). Vets and Videos: Student Learning from Context-Based
Assessment in A Pre-Clinical Science Course. Assessment & Evaluation in
Higher Education, 33(5), 559–566.
Stanisavljević, J., & Đurić, D. (2011). Effects of The Exemplary Teaching Biology.
Innovations in Magazine For Modern Teaching, 24(4), 67-75.
Sudjana, N. (1995). Penilaian Hasil Proses Belajar Mengajar. Bandung: PT.
Remaja Rosdakarya.
Suhandi, A., Wibowo, F. C. (2012). Pendekatan Multirepresentasi dalam
Pembelajaran Usaha-Energi dan Dampaknya terhadap Pemahaman Konsep
Mahasiswa. Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika Indonesia, 8, 1 – 7.
Supriyatman. (2016). Pengembangan Program Perkuliahan Kelistrikan Dan
Kemagnetan Berbasis Pemecahan Masalah Untuk Memperbaiki Model
Mental Dan Meningkatkan Mental Modeling Ability Mahasiswa Calon
Guru Fisika. (Disertasi). Sekolah Pascasarjana, Universitas Pendidikan
Indonesia, Bandung.
Susanty, P. (2014). Profil Model Mental Siswa SMA Beserta Faktor-Faktor
Yang Mempengaruhinya Menggunakan Tes Diagnostik Metode Predict-
Observe Explain (POE) Pada Materi Larutan Penyangga. (Tesis). Sekolah
Pascasarjana, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung.
76
Suyatna, A., Anggraini, D., Agustina, D., dan Widyastuti, D., (2017). The role of
visual representation in physics learning: dynamic versus static
visualization. International Conference on Science and Applied
Science.(909) 012048.
Suyono, Amaria, Muchlis, dan Setiarso, P. (2013). Diseminasi Model Prevensi dan
Kurasi Miskonsepsi Siswa pada Konsep Kimia. Laporan Akhir Penelitian
Unggulan Perguruan Tinggi. Surabaya: LPPM Unesa.
Taasoobshirazi, G. & Carr, M. (2008). A Review and Critique of Context Based
Physics Instruction and Assessment. Educational Research Review, 3(2),
155–167.
Taber, S. K. (2013). Ken Springer: Educational Reserche: A contextual Approach.
Science & Education, 22(5), 1267-1279. doi:10.1007/s 11191-011-9420x.
Thiele, R. B., & Treagust, D. F. (1994). Te Nature and Extend of Analogies In
Secondary Chemistry Textbooks. Instructional Science, 22 (1), 61–74
Treagust, D., Harrison, A., & Venville, G. (1996). Using an Analogical Teaching
Approach to Engender Conceptual Change. International Journal of
Science Education, 18(2), 213- 229
Trianto. (2010). Mengembangkan Model Pembelajaran Tematik. Jakarta: PT
Prestasi Pustaka.
Tsaparlis, G., Hartzavalos, S. & Nakibog˘lu, C. (2013). Students’ Knowledge of
Nuclear Science and Its Connection with Civic Scientific Literacy in Two
European Contexts: The Case of Newspaper Articles. Science & Eduction,
22(8), 1963–1991. doi:10.1007/s11191-013-9578-5.
Ültay, N. & Çalıka, M. (2012). Thematic Review of Studies into the Effectiveness
of Context-Based Chemistry Curricula. Journal Science Education
Technolgy. 21(6), 686–701. doi:10.1007/s10956-011-9357-5.
Veer, C. G., & Melguizo, M. (2003). Mental models. In J.A. Jacko & A. Sears
(Eds.), The humancomputer interaction handbook: Fundamentals, evolving
technologies, and emerging applications (pp. 52-80). Uitgever:Lawrence
Erlbaum & Associates.
Vos, A. J. M., Taconis, R., Jochems, M. G. & W. Pilot, A. (2010a). Classroom
Implementation of Context-Based Chemistry Education by Teachers: The
Relation Between Experiences of Teachers and The Design of Materials.
International Journal of Science Education, 33(10), 1407-1432.
Vos, A. J. M., Taconisa, R., Jochemsa, G. W., & M. Pilot, A. (2010b). Teachers
Implementing Context-Based Teaching Materials: A Framework for Case-
77
Analysis in Chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 11(3),
193-206.
Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1994). Mental Models of The Day/Night Cycle.
Cognitive Science, 18, 123-183.
Wang, C.Y. (2007). The Role of Mental-Modeling Ability, Content Knowledge And
Mental Models in General Chemistry Student’s Understanding about
Molecular Polari. (Dissertation). Graduate School of The University of
Missouri, Columbia.
Weber, A. (2010). Learning About Plants in The Context of Everyday Life and
Nature Experience. ERIDOB. Book of apstracts, p166.
Wieringa, N., Janssen, F. J., & Van Driel, J. H. (2011). Biology Teachers Designing
Context-Based Lessons for Their Classroom Practice-The importance of
rules-of-thumb. International Journal of Science Education, 33(17), 2437-
2462
Wittrock, M. C., & Alesandrini, K. (1990). Generation of Summaries and
Analagiles and Analytic and Holistic Abilities. American Educational
Research Journal, 27, 489-502.