S BIO 1100234 Bibliography
67
DAFTAR PUSTAKA
Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (1998). The nature of science
and instructional practice: Making the unnatural natural. Science
Education, 82(4), 417–436.
Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Akerson, V. L. (2004). Learning as conceptual change:
Factors mediating the development of preservice elementary teachers’
views of nature of science. Science Education, 88,785–810.
Abd-El-khalick, F., Khishfe, R. (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus
implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders’ views of nature of
science.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551-578.
Adisendjaja, Y.H. (2014). Modul Pelatihan Pengembangan Pengetahuan Tentang
Hakikat Sains dan Inkuiri Serta Implikasinya dalam kurikulum 2013.
Bandung.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1989). Project
2061: Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
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.
Berland, L. K., & McNeill, K. L. (2010). A learning progression for scientific
argumentation: Understanding student work and designing supportive
instructional contexts. Science Education, 94(5),765–793.
Cavagnetto, A. (2010). Argument to foster scientific literacy: A review of
argument interventions in K-12 science contexts. Review of Educational
Research, 80(3), 336–371.
Chinn, C. A., & Brewer, W. F. (1998). An empirical test of a taxonomy of
responses to anomalous data in science. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 35(6), 623–654.
Hoolbrok, J., & Rannikmae, M. (2009). The meaning of scientific literacy.
International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 4(3), 275288.
Khishfe, R. (2012a). Relationship between nature of science understanding and
argumentation skills: a role for counterargument and contextual factors.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(4), 489-514.
Irsalina Hidayati Apriliani, 2016
PERBAND INGAN PAND ANGAN SISWA TENTANG HAKIKAT SAINS D AN ARGUMENTASI SISWA
MENGGUNAKAN PEMBELAJARAN EKSPLISIT-REFLEKTIF D AN IMPLISIT BERBASIS ARGUMENTASI
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu|perpustakaan.upi.edu
68
Khishfe, R. (2012b). Nature of science and decision- making. International
Journal of Science Education, 34(1), 67-100
Khishfe, R. (2013). Explicit nature of science and argumentation instruction in the
context of sosiosaintifik issues: an effect on student learning and transfer.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(6), 1-45.
Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning legitimate peripheral
participation. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
Lawson, A.E. (1982). The nature of advanced reasoning and science instruction.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 19, 743–760.
Leach, J., Hind, A., & Ryder, J. (2003). Designing and evaluating short teaching
interventions about the epistemology of science in high school classrooms.
Science Education, 87(6), 831–848.
Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-khalick, F., Bell, R.L., dan Schwartz, R. S. (2002).
Views of nature of science questionnaire: toward va lid and meaningful
assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497-521.
Lederman, N.G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of
science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 29(4), 331–359.
Liu, S., & Lederman, N. G. (2002). Taiwanese gifted students’ views of nature of
science. School Science and Mathematics, 102(3), 114–123.
McDonald, C. V. (2010). The influence of explicit nature of science and
argumentation instruction on preservice primary teacher’s views of nature
of science. International Journal of Science Education, 47(9), 1137-1164.
Nuangchalerm, P. (2010). Engaging students to perceive nature of science through
socioscientific isseus-based instruction. European Journal of Social
Sciences, 13(1), 34-37.
Oh, S., & Jonassent, D. H. (2007). Scaffolding online argumentation during
problem solving. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 95–110.
Rowe, M.B. (1974). A humanistic intent: The program of preservice elementary
education at the University of Florida. Science Education, 58, 369–376.
Sadler, T.D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding sosioscientific issues: a critical
review of research. Journal of research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513536.
Irsalina Hidayati Apriliani, 2016
PERBAND INGAN PAND ANGAN SISWA TENTANG HAKIKAT SAINS D AN ARGUMENTASI SISWA
MENGGUNAKAN PEMBELAJARAN EKSPLISIT-REFLEKTIF D AN IMPLISIT BERBASIS ARGUMENTASI
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu|perpustakaan.upi.edu
69
Sadler, T. D., Chambers, W. F., Zeidler, D. L. (2004). Student conceptualizations
of the nature of science in response to a sosioscientific issues.
International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 387- 409
Sandoval, W. A., & Milwood, K. A. (2008). What can argumentation tell us about
epistemology? In S. Erduran & M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.),
Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based
research (pp. 71–88). Dordrecht: Springer.
Zeidler, D.L., Walker, K.A., Ackett, W.A., & Simmons, M.L. (2002). Tangled up
in views: Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific
dilemmas. Science Education, 86, 343–367.
Irsalina Hidayati Apriliani, 2016
PERBAND INGAN PAND ANGAN SISWA TENTANG HAKIKAT SAINS D AN ARGUMENTASI SISWA
MENGGUNAKAN PEMBELAJARAN EKSPLISIT-REFLEKTIF D AN IMPLISIT BERBASIS ARGUMENTASI
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu|perpustakaan.upi.edu
DAFTAR PUSTAKA
Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (1998). The nature of science
and instructional practice: Making the unnatural natural. Science
Education, 82(4), 417–436.
Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Akerson, V. L. (2004). Learning as conceptual change:
Factors mediating the development of preservice elementary teachers’
views of nature of science. Science Education, 88,785–810.
Abd-El-khalick, F., Khishfe, R. (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus
implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders’ views of nature of
science.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551-578.
Adisendjaja, Y.H. (2014). Modul Pelatihan Pengembangan Pengetahuan Tentang
Hakikat Sains dan Inkuiri Serta Implikasinya dalam kurikulum 2013.
Bandung.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1989). Project
2061: Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
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.
Berland, L. K., & McNeill, K. L. (2010). A learning progression for scientific
argumentation: Understanding student work and designing supportive
instructional contexts. Science Education, 94(5),765–793.
Cavagnetto, A. (2010). Argument to foster scientific literacy: A review of
argument interventions in K-12 science contexts. Review of Educational
Research, 80(3), 336–371.
Chinn, C. A., & Brewer, W. F. (1998). An empirical test of a taxonomy of
responses to anomalous data in science. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 35(6), 623–654.
Hoolbrok, J., & Rannikmae, M. (2009). The meaning of scientific literacy.
International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 4(3), 275288.
Khishfe, R. (2012a). Relationship between nature of science understanding and
argumentation skills: a role for counterargument and contextual factors.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(4), 489-514.
Irsalina Hidayati Apriliani, 2016
PERBAND INGAN PAND ANGAN SISWA TENTANG HAKIKAT SAINS D AN ARGUMENTASI SISWA
MENGGUNAKAN PEMBELAJARAN EKSPLISIT-REFLEKTIF D AN IMPLISIT BERBASIS ARGUMENTASI
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu|perpustakaan.upi.edu
68
Khishfe, R. (2012b). Nature of science and decision- making. International
Journal of Science Education, 34(1), 67-100
Khishfe, R. (2013). Explicit nature of science and argumentation instruction in the
context of sosiosaintifik issues: an effect on student learning and transfer.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(6), 1-45.
Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning legitimate peripheral
participation. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
Lawson, A.E. (1982). The nature of advanced reasoning and science instruction.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 19, 743–760.
Leach, J., Hind, A., & Ryder, J. (2003). Designing and evaluating short teaching
interventions about the epistemology of science in high school classrooms.
Science Education, 87(6), 831–848.
Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-khalick, F., Bell, R.L., dan Schwartz, R. S. (2002).
Views of nature of science questionnaire: toward va lid and meaningful
assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497-521.
Lederman, N.G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of
science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 29(4), 331–359.
Liu, S., & Lederman, N. G. (2002). Taiwanese gifted students’ views of nature of
science. School Science and Mathematics, 102(3), 114–123.
McDonald, C. V. (2010). The influence of explicit nature of science and
argumentation instruction on preservice primary teacher’s views of nature
of science. International Journal of Science Education, 47(9), 1137-1164.
Nuangchalerm, P. (2010). Engaging students to perceive nature of science through
socioscientific isseus-based instruction. European Journal of Social
Sciences, 13(1), 34-37.
Oh, S., & Jonassent, D. H. (2007). Scaffolding online argumentation during
problem solving. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 95–110.
Rowe, M.B. (1974). A humanistic intent: The program of preservice elementary
education at the University of Florida. Science Education, 58, 369–376.
Sadler, T.D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding sosioscientific issues: a critical
review of research. Journal of research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513536.
Irsalina Hidayati Apriliani, 2016
PERBAND INGAN PAND ANGAN SISWA TENTANG HAKIKAT SAINS D AN ARGUMENTASI SISWA
MENGGUNAKAN PEMBELAJARAN EKSPLISIT-REFLEKTIF D AN IMPLISIT BERBASIS ARGUMENTASI
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu|perpustakaan.upi.edu
69
Sadler, T. D., Chambers, W. F., Zeidler, D. L. (2004). Student conceptualizations
of the nature of science in response to a sosioscientific issues.
International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 387- 409
Sandoval, W. A., & Milwood, K. A. (2008). What can argumentation tell us about
epistemology? In S. Erduran & M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.),
Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based
research (pp. 71–88). Dordrecht: Springer.
Zeidler, D.L., Walker, K.A., Ackett, W.A., & Simmons, M.L. (2002). Tangled up
in views: Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific
dilemmas. Science Education, 86, 343–367.
Irsalina Hidayati Apriliani, 2016
PERBAND INGAN PAND ANGAN SISWA TENTANG HAKIKAT SAINS D AN ARGUMENTASI SISWA
MENGGUNAKAN PEMBELAJARAN EKSPLISIT-REFLEKTIF D AN IMPLISIT BERBASIS ARGUMENTASI
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu|perpustakaan.upi.edu