THE EFFECT OF CHILDREN LEARNING IN SCIENCE (CLIS) MODEL ON STUDENTS LEARNING OUTCOMES IN THERMAL EXPANSION TOPIC AT VII GRADE IN SMP N 1 TEBING TINGGI.

By:

Rani Suryani N. Damanik Reg.Number: 409322024

Study Program: Physics Bilingual Education

THESIS

Submitted to Acquire Eligible Sarjana Pendidikan

PHYSICS DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCES STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN

MEDAN 2013

iv

PREFACE

I would like to say the praise and gratitude to God Almighty, for all the graces and blessings that provide health and wisdom to me so that this study can be completed properly in accordance with the planned time.

This thesis with title “The Effect of Children Learning in Science (CLIS) Model on Students’ Learning Outcomes in Thermal Expansion Topic at VII Grade in SMP N 1 Tebing Tinggi” is arranged to acquire the degree of “Sarjana Pendidikan”, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences State University of Medan.

I would like to thank Mr Dr. Ridwan Abdul Sani, M.Si as Thesis Advisor who has provided guidance and suggestions to me since the beginning of the research until the completion of this thesis writing. Thank you very much also to Mr. Prof. Drs. Motlan, M.Sc., Ph.D, Mrs. Dr. Derlina, M.Si, Mr. Alkhafi M. Siregar M.Si who have provided input and suggestions from the research proposal to complete the preparation of this thesis make this thesis better. Thanks also presented to Mr. Drs. J.H. Panggabean, M.Si, as the Academic Supervisor and the Examiner lecturer and also the entire Lecturer and Staff in Physics Department FMIPA UNIMED who have helped me.

Appreciation were also presented to Headmaster and all teacher in SMP N 1 Tebing Tinggi especially for my guided Teacher, Mrs. Rosmiati, S.pd, my dearest students in class VII-8 and VII-9 SMP N 1 Tebing Tinggi who have helped during this research.

I would like to thank especially to my dear father J. Damanik and my dear mother R. Siagian and also my sisters Febrina M Damanik, Agustina S Damanik, my brothers Surya D.P Damanik, Jarrenson P Damanik and all family who have always prayed and gave me encouragement and funding keep me struggle to complete the study in UNIMED.

Especially thanks to all my friend in Bilingual Physics Class 2009, Agnesia Damanik, Astrid P. Hrp, Avolen B.I. Siahaan, Carolina Nainggolan, Debora B Sitanggang, Dewi S Situmorang, Evi V. Silalahi, Fetriana Simanihuruk, Gita R Anugrah, Hanna M. Hutabarat, Henriko Hutabarat, Janiar S Gultom, Jefri S. Waruwu, Lucius Marbun, Mas Andri Marbun, Pretti T. M Ambarita, Ribka M. Tambunan, Rika Y. Fitri, Riris M. Rumahorbo, Rita Situmorang, Tionar M. Malau who have helped, prayed and gave supported to me, nice to know all of you and our memories will always remain in my mind. Appreciation were also presented to UKMKP UP-MIPA as a place for me to grow up spiritually. I also would like to thank my Brother Leybert Purba who have pray and support me makes me grow up spiritually in “Metanoia” together with Agnesia M.D, Janiar S.G, Rita S.S. Thanks also to my friends in Library Team UP-MIPA, Novalia Manihuruk, Hertiana Manurung, Rani Banjarnahor, Mei Marpaung. Thanks to Jasmen E. Sihotang, Asri B Saragih for their support and for trust me to guide them. Last but not least, I would like to thank to my best friends, Reni Sirait, Desi M Sijabat, Yeni Malau, Marlina Tambunan, Keasy Manurung, Bernard R Nainggolan and Pratiwi D Sirait who have helped and gave suppported during my research.

Last word, the author have do as much as possible in completing this thesis, but the author aware and recognize that there are many drawbacks in terms of both content and grammar, then the authors welcome any suggestions and constructive criticism from readers for this thesis perfectly. The author hope the contents of this thesis would be useful in enriching the knowledge and be useful for all of us.

Medan, May 2013 Author,

vi

LIST OF CONTENT

Page

Validation Sheet i

Biography ii

Abstract iii

Preface iv

Contents List vi

Figure List viii

Table List ix

Appendix List x

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of Study 1

1.2 Problem Identification 3

1.3 Problem Limitation 3

1.4 Problem Formulation 4

1.5 Research Objective 4

1.6 Benefits of study 4

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Definition of Learning 5

2.2 Definition of Teaching and Learning 6

2.3 Definition of Science 7

2.4 Learning Outcomes 8

2.4.1 Cognitive Domain 9

2.5 Direct Instruction Model 10

2.5.1 Syntax of Direct Instruction Model 11

2.6 Children Learning in Science (CLIS) Model 13

2.6.1 The Understanding of CLIS Model 13

2.6.2 Aims of CLIS Model 14

2.6.3 Syntax of CLIS Model 14

2.6.4 The Advantages and Disadvantages of CLIS Learning Model 20

2.7 Thermal Expansion 20

2.7.1 Definition of Thermal Expansion 20

2.7.2 Thermal Expansion of Solid 21

2.7.3 Thermal Expansion of Liquids 26

2.7.3.1 Water Anomaly 27

2.7.4 Thermal Expansion of Gasses 27

2.7.4.1 Boyle’s Law 28

2.7.4.2 Gay Lussac’s Law 29

2.7.5 The Principles of Thermal Expansions in Daily Life 29

2.8 Conceptual Framework 31

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Location and Time of Reseach 33

3.2 Population and Sample 33

3.2.1 Research Population 33

3.2.2 Research Sample 33

3.3 Variable of Research 33

3.3.1 Independent Variable 33

3.3.2 Dependent Variable 33

3.4 Type and Design of Research 33

3.5 Research Procedure 34

3.6 Research Instrument 35

3.6.1 Test of Learning Outcomes 35

3.6.2 Validity Test 37

3.7 Data Processing Technique 37

3.8 Data Analysis Technique 37

CHAPTER IV RESULT OF RESEARCH AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Result of Research 41

4.1.1 Pre test of Experiment and Control Class 41 4.1.2 Post test of Experiment and Control Class 42

4.2 Data Analysis 43

4.2.1 Normality of Data 43

4.2.2 Data Homogeneity 43

4.2.3 Hypothesis Testing 44

4.3 Discussion 45

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

5.1 Conclusion 47

5.2 Suggestion 47

ix

LIST OF TABLE

Page Table 2.1 Stages, Purpose and Methods that can used in

Learning activities using CLIS Learning Model 18 Table 2.2 Coefficient of Linear Expansion of Selected

Materials 23

Table 2.3 Coefficient of Volumetric Expansion of Selected

Liquids 26

Table 3.1 Design of Research 34

Table 3.2 Specification of learning outcomes test in

Thermal Expansion Topic 36

Table 4.1 Pre test Data Normality Test of

Experimental and Control Class 43 Table 4.2 Summary of Homogeneity Test Result of Pre test Data 44 Table 4.3 Calculation of Hypothesis Test of Post test 44

LIST OF FIGURE

_Page

Figure 2.1 Stages of CLIS Learning Model 17 Figure 2.2 Thermal Expansions in Rail Way 21 Figure 2.3 Thermal Expansions of Water 26

Figure 2.4 Water Anomaly 27

Figure 2.5 Thermal expansions in Bimetal 30 Figure 2.6 Thermal Expansions on a Bridge 31 Figure 4.1 Bar Chart of Pre test Data in

Experimental and Control Class 42 Figure 4.2 Bar Chart of Post test Data in

x

LIST OF APPENDIX

Page Appendix 1. Specification of Learning Outcomes

Test on Thermal Expansion Topic 50

Appendix 2. Instrument of Learning Outcomes 59

Appendix 3. Lesson Plan 1 65

Appendix 4. Students Worksheet 1 75

Appendix 5. Lesson Plan 2 76 Appendix 6. Students Worksheet 2 82

Appendix 7. Lesson Plan 3 84 Appendix 8. Student Worksheet 3 92

Appendix 9 Tabulation of Pre-test Answer in Experiment Class 94

Appendix 10 Tabulation of Pre-test Answer in Control Class 96

Appendix 11 Tabulation of Post test Answer in Experiment Class 98

Appendix 12 Tabulation of Post test Answer in Control Class 100

Appendix 13 Students’ Learning Outcomes Data 102

Appendix 14 Calculation of Mean Value and Standard Deviation in experiment class 104

Appendix 15 Calculation of Mean Value and Standard Deviation in control class 105

Appendix 16 Normality Test Calculation of Data 107

Appendix 17 Homogenity Test Calculation of Data 111

Appendix 18 Calculation of Hypothesis Test 113

Appendix 19 List of critical value for Liliefors 115

Appendix 20 List percentile value for distribution t 116

Appendix 21 List of area under normal curve o to z 117

Appendix 22 List of F Distribution 118 Appendix 23 Research Documentation 120

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of Study

Gagne in Sridevi (2008) state that science is what the scientist does. It is a process by which we increase and refine our understanding and of the universe through continuous observation, experiment, application and verification. Sciences is related, how to find about natural phenomenon systematically, so that science is not just mastery knowledge in the form of collection of facts, concepts or principle but also a process of discovery (Depdiknas in Yuyun,2010:1). Just like the branches of a tree, a branch of science is made up of many smaller branches. Physics is smaller branches of science.

In curriculum of SMP/MTs (Depdiknas in Asshagab,2012:3) the aim of physics education is to make students able to use scientific methode based on scientific attitude to solve problems faced so that they will more aware of the Majesty of God Almighty. All those skills can be acquired through a process of inquiry learning (discovery), lab activities or experiments so that students get hands-on experience and discover the process themselves.

Based on a preliminary study in one junior high school in the Tebing Tinggi city on January 15, 2013 found the fact that the process of learning that takes place in class in general, is still centered on the teacher as an information center. The teacher still uses conventional learning in teaching the students. The teacher usually uses direct instruction model to teach the students. Even in the process of learning physics, teachers usually try to transfer its knowledge to the students, so it tends to make passive students, because students just do activities sitting, silent, listen, noted in accepting the knowledge that is transferred through the processing of teachers without prior knowledge already possessed by students. Also from preliminary studies by the author, it was found that in one class in one of the junior high school at Tebing Tinggi, only 50% who liked physics, because physics is an interesting and challenging lesson. And the rest of students don’t like physics. Usually topics in physics lesson not relate by the teacher with things in

2

daily life. So they still confused about their aim to learn about physics, they just know how to solve problems without application in their daily life.

One indicator of the quality and success of the learning process is the learning outcomes achieved by the students. This is in accordance with that expressed by Sudjana (2001:45) states that "every process of learning success is measured by how big the learning outcomes achieved by students, as well as measured in terms of the process." But in a preliminary study by the authors also found that, students also less involved in the learning process, so it's easy to forget the concepts that have been given, and make the lack of understanding of concepts and skills of students in solving problems. It can be seen from the average value of learning achievement in physics last semester of school year 2012/2013 was only 64.4. This value is below the minimum completeness criteria (MCC) established by the curriculum that is 75.0. Just 39% of students who get value above the minimum value of mastery criteria, the rest 61% get value below the minimum value of mastery criteria. In addition, the physics teacher is also not usual in using visual aids and demonstrations in physics, causing students are not usual to doing practical activities. This is one of the causes of low student learning outcomes.

To improve student learning outcomes, teachers can perform a variety of ways, for example by using a model of effective teaching and learning in accordance with the objectives set in the curriculum. Suparno (in Asshagab, 2012:5) state that in the last decade constructivist philosophy has influenced and improved learning physics in particular and science in general. Constructivism is not a new concept. It is learning or meaning making theory. It suggests that individuals create their own understanding, based upon the interaction of what they already know and believe and the phenomena or ideas which they come into contact (Sridevi, 2008:9). A model of teaching is a plan or pattern that can be used to shape curriculums (long term courses of studies), to design instructional materials and to guide instruction in the classroom and other settings (Joyce, 2003). One model of learning is based on constructivist views of learning models

Children's Learning in Science (CLIS) developed by the CLIS in the UK, led by Driver (Tytler, 2002:2).

The aim of the Children’s Learning in Science was to discover how to use a constructivist approach to teach the selected topics, and translate this into materials which could be used by other teachers. Based on the findings Driver in Adey (Matitamole, 2012:3), that if the activity increases, student learning outcomes will also increase. Therefore, one way to improve student learning outcomes is to increase activities in learning. In relation to this, the application of CLIS learning model developed by Driver is expected to be an alternative to classroom teaching and improve student learning outcomes.

Based on the background as it has been presented, the author is interested in doing research entitled“The Effect of Children Learning in Science (CLIS) Model on Students’ Learning Outcomes in Thermal Expansion Topic at VII Grade in SMP N 1 Tebing Tinggi.”

1.2 Problem Identification

Based on the background above, problems that can be identified are as follows :

1) Student’s physics learning outcomes are still relatively low 2) Students are less actively in the physics learning activities

3) Lack of interaction among students in physics learning activities. 4) Lack of media learning utilization.

5) Learning model still not variety in physics learning activities.

1.3 Problem Limitation

Many problems that have to be resolved as described in the problem identification above. But given the limitations by the author, to provide a clear scope of the discussion, the study is limited to:

1) Student’s physics learning outcomes are still relatively low 2) Students are less actively in the physics learning activities.

4

1.4 Problem Formulation

By considering the background and limitation of problems in the study then the formulation of the problem is:

is there any effect of using CLIS learning model in learning outcomes of student grade VII SMP N 1 Tebing Tinggi in Physics lesson of Thermal Expansion topic?

1.5 Research Objective

Based on the research question above, the research objective is:

To know the effect of using CLIS learning model in learning outcomes of student grade VII SMP N 1 Tebing Tinggi in Physics lesson of Thermal Expansion topic.

1.6 Benefits of Study

The significances of study that expexted are:

 For School : Can give a good contribution in order to improve the learning process and improve the quality of schools by increasing student achievement and teacher professionalism.

 For teacher : As a consideration in selecting learning model in learning physics.

 For students : Students are more motivated to learn physics, so that the educational goals can be achieved.

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

5.1 Conclusion

Based on the research result, data analysis, and discussion so can be concluded that:

There is significant effect of using CLIS learning model in learning outcomes of student grade VII SMP N 1 Tebing Tinggi in Physics lesson of Thermal Expansion topic, where is average of learning outcomes while using CLIS learning model is higher than students who learn with direct instructional model. This result can happened because in CLIS learning model, students learn the topic with experiment based worksheet and based application in daily life. Then students are easier to understanding about the topic.

5.2 Suggestion

Based on research result and discussion before, researcher give suggestions as follows:

1) Experiences of researcher, the experiment in CLIS learning model not occurs well. Because the instrument for experiment not complete enough. When teacher use CLIS learning model, teacher should choose the experiment that have simple instrument so the experiment can occurs better.

2) Experiences of researcher, the time when learning activities occur not manage well. When teacher use CLIS learning model, teacher should use the time as efficient as possible, so that the stages in CLIS learning model can occurs well.

48

REFERENCES

Ali, I. (2008). Implementasi Model Pembelajaran CLIS untuk Meningkatkan prestasi belajar Siswa.Tesis UPI : Tidak diterbitkan

Arikunto, S.(2003). Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan. Penerbit Bumi Aksara, Jakarta

Asshagab, S.M.N. (2012). Penerapan Model Pembelajaran Children’s Learning in Science (CLIS) untuk Meningkatkan Keterampilan Proses Sains dan Pemahaman Konsep Hukum Newton Siswa. Tesis UPI: Tidak diterbitkan Djamarah, S.B. (1996). Strategi Belajar Mengajar. PT Asdi Maha Satya: Jakarta Ginting, A.S. (2010). Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Koperatif tipe STAD

dengan Menerapkan Children Learning In Science (CLIS) Terhadap Hasil Belajar Siswa Kelas IX SMPN 1 Tigabinanga Tahun Pelajaran 2009/2010. UNIMED: Medan

Joyce, B. & Martha W. (2003). Models of Teaching 5th Edition. Prentice Hall: New Jersey

Manurung, K.R. (2012). The Application of CLIS to Improve Student’s Learning Outcome and Learning Activity in Biology for XI Science Student SMA Negeri 1 Tebing Tinggi Academic Year 2011/2012. UNIMED: Medan Matitamole, L.E. (2012). Penerapan Model Pembelajaran Children Learning in

Science untuk Meningkatkan Hasil Belajar Siswa dalam Pembelajaran Fisika di SMP pada Pokok Bahasan Suhu dan Kalor. UPI: Tidak Diterbitkan

Needham, R in association with Hill, P. (1987). CLIS in the Classroom “teaching strategies for developing understanding in science. Children’s Learning in Science Project: University of Leeds

Prasodjo, B., et al. (2009). Physics 1 for Junior High School Year VII. Yudhistira Sanjaya, W., (2006). Kurikulum Pembelajaran Teori dan Praktik Pengembangan

KTSP, Jakarta; Kencana

Sardiman.(1986). Interaksi dan Motivasi : Belajar Mengajar. PT RajaGrafindo Persada: Jakarta

Salwin, M.D. (1996). Kemampuan Menerapkan Konsep Fisika Model Children’s Learning in Science. Tesis UPI : Tidak diterbitkan

Scott, P in association with Dyson, T. And Gater, S. (1987). A constructivist view of learning and teaching in science. Children’s Learning in Science Project: University of Leeds

Sridevi, K.V.(2008). Constructivism in Science Education. Discovery Publishing House : New Delhi

Sudjana, N.(2001). Metode Statistika, Tarsito : Bandung

Sudjana, N.(2009). Penilaian Hasil Proses Belajar Mengajar, Penerbit PT Remaja Rosdakarya, Bandung

Tytler, R.(2002) Teaching for understanding in Science: Student conceptions research, & changing views of learning. Australian Science Teachers Journal: Proquest Research Library

Yuyun, Y.(2010). Pembelajaran IPA Topik Pesawat Sederhana Melalui Model CLIS untuk Meningkatkan Ketrampilan Berpikir Rasional Siswa. UPI: Tidak Diterbitkan

daily life. So they still confused about their aim to learn about physics, they just know how to solve problems without application in their daily life.

One indicator of the quality and success of the learning process is the learning outcomes achieved by the students. This is in accordance with that expressed by Sudjana (2001:45) states that "every process of learning success is measured by how big the learning outcomes achieved by students, as well as measured in terms of the process." But in a preliminary study by the authors also found that, students also less involved in the learning process, so it's easy to forget the concepts that have been given, and make the lack of understanding of concepts and skills of students in solving problems. It can be seen from the average value of learning achievement in physics last semester of school year 2012/2013 was only 64.4. This value is below the minimum completeness criteria (MCC) established by the curriculum that is 75.0. Just 39% of students who get value above the minimum value of mastery criteria, the rest 61% get value below the minimum value of mastery criteria. In addition, the physics teacher is also not usual in using visual aids and demonstrations in physics, causing students are not usual to doing practical activities. This is one of the causes of low student learning outcomes.

To improve student learning outcomes, teachers can perform a variety of ways, for example by using a model of effective teaching and learning in accordance with the objectives set in the curriculum. Suparno (in Asshagab, 2012:5) state that in the last decade constructivist philosophy has influenced and improved learning physics in particular and science in general. Constructivism is not a new concept. It is learning or meaning making theory. It suggests that individuals create their own understanding, based upon the interaction of what they already know and believe and the phenomena or ideas which they come into contact (Sridevi, 2008:9). A model of teaching is a plan or pattern that can be used to shape curriculums (long term courses of studies), to design instructional materials and to guide instruction in the classroom and other settings (Joyce, 2003). One model of learning is based on constructivist views of learning models

Children's Learning in Science (CLIS) developed by the CLIS in the UK, led by Driver (Tytler, 2002:2).

The aim of the Children’s Learning in Science was to discover how to use a constructivist approach to teach the selected topics, and translate this into materials which could be used by other teachers. Based on the findings Driver in Adey (Matitamole, 2012:3), that if the activity increases, student learning outcomes will also increase. Therefore, one way to improve student learning outcomes is to increase activities in learning. In relation to this, the application of CLIS learning model developed by Driver is expected to be an alternative to classroom teaching and improve student learning outcomes.

Based on the background as it has been presented, the author is interested in doing research entitled“The Effect of Children Learning in Science (CLIS) Model on Students’ Learning Outcomes in Thermal Expansion Topic at VII Grade in SMP N 1 Tebing Tinggi.”

1.2 Problem Identification

Based on the background above, problems that can be identified are as follows :

1) Student’s physics learning outcomes are still relatively low 2) Students are less actively in the physics learning activities

3) Lack of interaction among students in physics learning activities. 4) Lack of media learning utilization.

5) Learning model still not variety in physics learning activities.

1.3 Problem Limitation

Many problems that have to be resolved as described in the problem identification above. But given the limitations by the author, to provide a clear scope of the discussion, the study is limited to:

1) Student’s physics learning outcomes are still relatively low 2) Students are less actively in the physics learning activities.

1.4 Problem Formulation

By considering the background and limitation of problems in the study then the formulation of the problem is:

is there any effect of using CLIS learning model in learning outcomes of student grade VII SMP N 1 Tebing Tinggi in Physics lesson of Thermal Expansion topic?

1.5 Research Objective

Based on the research question above, the research objective is:

To know the effect of using CLIS learning model in learning outcomes of student grade VII SMP N 1 Tebing Tinggi in Physics lesson of Thermal Expansion topic.

1.6 Benefits of Study

The significances of study that expexted are:

 For School : Can give a good contribution in order to improve the learning process and improve the quality of schools by increasing student achievement and teacher professionalism.

 For teacher : As a consideration in selecting learning model in learning physics.

 For students : Students are more motivated to learn physics, so that the educational goals can be achieved.

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

5.1 Conclusion

Based on the research result, data analysis, and discussion so can be concluded that:

There is significant effect of using CLIS learning model in learning outcomes of student grade VII SMP N 1 Tebing Tinggi in Physics lesson of Thermal Expansion topic, where is average of learning outcomes while using CLIS learning model is higher than students who learn with direct instructional model. This result can happened because in CLIS learning model, students learn the topic with experiment based worksheet and based application in daily life. Then students are easier to understanding about the topic.

5.2 Suggestion

Based on research result and discussion before, researcher give suggestions as follows:

1) Experiences of researcher, the experiment in CLIS learning model not occurs well. Because the instrument for experiment not complete enough. When teacher use CLIS learning model, teacher should choose the experiment that have simple instrument so the experiment can occurs better.

2) Experiences of researcher, the time when learning activities occur not manage well. When teacher use CLIS learning model, teacher should use the time as efficient as possible, so that the stages in CLIS learning model can occurs well.

REFERENCES

Ali, I. (2008). Implementasi Model Pembelajaran CLIS untuk Meningkatkan prestasi belajar Siswa.Tesis UPI : Tidak diterbitkan

Arikunto, S.(2003). Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan. Penerbit Bumi Aksara, Jakarta

Asshagab, S.M.N. (2012). Penerapan Model Pembelajaran Children’s Learning in Science (CLIS) untuk Meningkatkan Keterampilan Proses Sains dan Pemahaman Konsep Hukum Newton Siswa. Tesis UPI: Tidak diterbitkan Djamarah, S.B. (1996). Strategi Belajar Mengajar. PT Asdi Maha Satya: Jakarta

Ginting, A.S. (2010). Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Koperatif tipe STAD dengan Menerapkan Children Learning In Science (CLIS) Terhadap Hasil Belajar Siswa Kelas IX SMPN 1 Tigabinanga Tahun Pelajaran 2009/2010. UNIMED: Medan

Joyce, B. & Martha W. (2003). Models of Teaching 5th Edition. Prentice Hall: New Jersey

Manurung, K.R. (2012). The Application of CLIS to Improve Student’s Learning Outcome and Learning Activity in Biology for XI Science Student SMA Negeri 1 Tebing Tinggi Academic Year 2011/2012. UNIMED: Medan Matitamole, L.E. (2012). Penerapan Model Pembelajaran Children Learning in

Science untuk Meningkatkan Hasil Belajar Siswa dalam Pembelajaran Fisika di SMP pada Pokok Bahasan Suhu dan Kalor. UPI: Tidak Diterbitkan

Needham, R in association with Hill, P. (1987). CLIS in the Classroom “teaching strategies for developing understanding in science. Children’s Learning in Science Project: University of Leeds

Prasodjo, B., et al. (2009). Physics 1 for Junior High School Year VII. Yudhistira

Sanjaya, W., (2006). Kurikulum Pembelajaran Teori dan Praktik Pengembangan KTSP, Jakarta; Kencana

Sardiman.(1986). Interaksi dan Motivasi : Belajar Mengajar. PT RajaGrafindo Persada: Jakarta

Salwin, M.D. (1996). Kemampuan Menerapkan Konsep Fisika Model Children’s Learning in Science. Tesis UPI : Tidak diterbitkan

Scott, P in association with Dyson, T. And Gater, S. (1987). A constructivist view of learning and teaching in science. Children’s Learning in Science Project: University of Leeds

Sridevi, K.V.(2008). Constructivism in Science Education. Discovery Publishing House : New Delhi

Sudjana, N.(2001). Metode Statistika, Tarsito : Bandung

Sudjana, N.(2009). Penilaian Hasil Proses Belajar Mengajar, Penerbit PT Remaja Rosdakarya, Bandung

Tytler, R.(2002) Teaching for understanding in Science: Student conceptions research, & changing views of learning. Australian Science Teachers Journal: Proquest Research Library

Yuyun, Y.(2010). Pembelajaran IPA Topik Pesawat Sederhana Melalui Model CLIS untuk Meningkatkan Ketrampilan Berpikir Rasional Siswa. UPI: Tidak Diterbitkan