d ipa 1009627 bibliography
167
DAFTAR PUSTAKA
Anderson, L. W. & Krathwohl, D. R. (eds). (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning
Teaching and Assessing. A Revision of Bloom‟s Taxonomy of education
Objectives. New York: Addisin Wesley.
Ball, D.L. & McDiarmid,G.W. (1990). “The Subject Matter Preparation of
Teachers” Handbook of Research on Techer Educacation. A Project of
Associate of Teacher Education
Bay, J. M., Reys, B. J., & Reys, R. E. (1999).The top 10 elements that must be in
place to implement standards-based mathematics curricula.Kappan, 80,
503-512.
Beichner, R. J. (1996). “The Impact of Video Motion Analysis on Kinematics
Graph Interpretation Skills”. American Journal of Physics, 64(10), 1272 –
1277.
Beichner, R. J. (1996). Test of Understanding Graph of Kinematics version 2.6
Beichner, R. J (1994).“Testing Students‟ Interpretation of Kinematics Graphs”.
American Journal of Physics, 62 (8), 750 – 762.
Berland, L..& Reiser, B. (2009).“Making Sense of Argumentation and
Explanation”.Science Education. 93, 26 – 55.
Bricker, L., & Bell, P. (2009). “Conceptualizations of Argumentation from
Science Studies and the Learning Sciences and Their Implications for
The Practices of Science Education”. Science Education, 92, 473 . 498.
Brooks, K. (2002). “Reading, Writing, and Teaching Creative Hypertext: A
Genre-Based Pedagogy”. Pedagogy: Critical Approaches to Teaching
Literature, Language, Composition, and Culture 2 (3), 337–358.\
Carter, L. M. (1997). Arguments in Hypertext: Order and Structure in nonsequentialEssays. Disertasi pada University ofTexas, Austin.
Charles, M., Eliot R. S.,&Lousie, H. K. (1991). Research Methods in Social
Relations: International Edition(6th ed).London: Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich.
Clark, D. B., & Sampson, V. D. (2007). “Personally-Seeded Discussions to
Scaffold Online Argumentation”. International Journal of Science
Education, 29 (3), 253–277
Sondang R Manurung, 2013
Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Dengan Media Hiperteks Berdasarkan Skema Pemecahan
Masalah Berintikan Argumentasi Toulmin
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu
168
Conklin, J., & Begeman, M. L. (1987). “gIBIS: A Hypertext Tool for Team
Design Deliberation”.Proceedings of Hypertext ‘87. Chapel Hill, NC:
Association of Computing Machinery, 247- 268.
Cox Suzy (2006) A Conseptual Anallysis of Technological Pedagogical Content
Knowledge. Department of Instructional Psychology &Technology
Brigham Young University July 2006
Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods
approaches( 2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Dahar, R.W. (1989), Teori-Teori Belajar. Jakarta: Penerbit Erlangga
De Vries, E.,&De Jong, T. (1999). “The Design and Evaluation of Hypertext
Structures for Supporting Design Problem Solving”. Instructional Science
27, 285–302.Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers
Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). “Establishing the Norms of
Scientific Argumentation in Classrooms”. Science Education.84, 287312.
Duke,
K. (2005). Real-life Projects Energize Learning. Tersedia:
http://www.riviewjournal.com/wrg.home/2005/opinion/682710 [10 Januari
2012]
Duschl, R. (2008). “Quality Argumentation and Epistemic Criteria”, dalam
Erduran, S& Jiménez- Aleixandre, M. P (Eds.), Argumentation in science
education: Perspectives from classroom-based research, 159 -169.
Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer
Duschl, R., & Osborne, J. (2002). “Supporting and Promoting Argumentation
Discourse”. Studies in Science Education, 38, 39–72.
Eckstein, S. G., & Kozhevnikov, M. (1997). “Parallelism in the Development of
Children's Ideas and the Historical Development of Projectile Motion
Theories”.International Journal of Science Education, 19(9), 1057 1073.
Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). “TAPping into Argumentation:
Developments in the Application of Toulmin‟s Argument Pattern for
Studying Science Discourse”. Science Education, 88(6), 915-933.
Evans, A., Hawksley, F., Holland, M. R. & Caillau, I. (2008).“Improving Subject
Knowledge and Subject Pedagogic Knowledge in Employment Based
Secondary Initial Teacher Training in England”. Makalah disajikan
Sondang R Manurung, 2013
Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Dengan Media Hiperteks Berdasarkan Skema Pemecahan
Masalah Berintikan Argumentasi Toulmin
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu
169
padaThe Annual Conference of the Association of TeacherEducation in
Europe, Vrije Universiteit Brussel.
Eylon, B., & Reif, F. (1984). “Effects of Knowledge Organization on Task
Performance”.Cognition and Instruction, 1, 5-44.
Foltz, P.W. (1996). “Comprehension, Coherence and Strategies in Hypertext and
Linier Text”, dalam Route, J.F (Ed) Hypertext and Cognition. Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ford, M. (2008). “Disciplinary Authority and Accountability in Scientific Practice
and Learning”.Science Education, 92(3), 404-423.
Frank, B.W. (2009). The Dynamics Of Variability In Introductory Physics
Students’ Thinking: Examples From Kinematics. Disertasi pada
University of Maryland
Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2003). How to Design and Evaluate Research in
Science Education, (5th Ed.) NY. McGraw – Hill, Inc.
Gerace, W. J. (2001) “Problem Solving and Conceptual Understanding”, dalam S.
Franklin, J., Marx & K. Cummings (Eds) Proceedings of the 2001
Physics Education Research Conference, 33 -45.New York: PERC
Publishing, 33.
Gess-Newsome, J. (1999a). “Pedagogical Content Knowledge: An Introduction
and Orientation”, dalam J. Gess-Newsome& N. Lederman (Eds.)
Examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge. The Netherlands: Kluwer
Grinnel, Jr., R. M. (1988). Social Work Research and Evaluation. Illionis: F.E.
Peacock Pub. Inc.
Grossman, P. L. (in press). “Subject Matter Knowledge and the Teaching of
English”, dalam J. Brophy (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching 2.
Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Grossman, P. L. (1990). The Making of a Teacher: Teacher Knowledge and
Teacher Education. New York: The Teachers College Press.
Halliday,D.,Resnick, R.,& Walker,J. (2011). Fundamental of Physics(10th ed).
Singapore:John Wiley & Sons, Ptc Ltd
Haryanto, Zeni. (2006). Tahap Perkembangan Intelektual Siswa SMP dan SMA
Dengan Kaitanya Dalam Pembelajaran Fisika dan Kemampuan
Pemecahan Masalah. Disertasi pada Universitas Pendidikan
Indonesia.Bandung : Tidak diterbitkan
Sondang R Manurung, 2013
Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Dengan Media Hiperteks Berdasarkan Skema Pemecahan
Masalah Berintikan Argumentasi Toulmin
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu
170
Hasweh, M. (1987). “Effects of Subject-Matter Knowledge in the Teaching of
Biology and Physics”.Teaching and Teacher Education, 3(2), 109–120.
Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1991).Sharing cognition through collective
comprehension activity, dalam L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine & Teasley,
S. D. (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition. 331-348.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Hayes-Roth, B. and Hayes-Roth, F. (1979) “A Cognitive Model of Planning”,
Cognitive Science, 3, 275-310.
Heller, K & Heller, P. (2010). Cooperative Problem Solving in Physics A User’s
Manual. Tersedia: http://groups.physics.umn.edu/physed [10Januari
2011]
Heller, P & Hollabaugh, M (1992b). “Teaching Problem Solving Through
Cooperative
Grouping: Designing Problems and Structuring
Groups”.American Journal of Physics, 60 (7). 637-644.
Hollabaugh, M. (1995). Cooperative Learning Groups, Disertasi pada The
University of Minnesota
Ingraham, B. D. (2002). Scholarly Rhetoric in Digital Media.A Paper. Center
forLifelong Learning, The University of Teesside, Middlebrough, UK.
Tersedia: http//:www. acm.com. [5 April 2010].
Inherder, B & Piaget, J. (1958). The Growth of Logical Thinking from Childhood
to Adolescence. New York: Basic
Jonassen, D. H. (1989). Hypertext/hypermedia. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Educational Technology Publications.
Jonassen, D. H. (1992). “Designing hypertext for learning”, dalam E. Scanlon &
R. T. O'Shea (Eds.),New directions in educational technology, 123– 130.
Berlin Heidelberg: Springer Verlag.
Jonassen, D. H. (1997). “Instructional Design Models for Well-Structured and IllStructured Problem Solving Learning Outcomes”. Educational
Technology Research andDevelopment, 45(1), 65-94.
Jonassen, D.H., &Grabinger, R.S. (1990). “Problems and Issues in Designing
Hypertext/Hypermedia for Learning”, dalam D.H. Jonassen & H. Mandl,
(Eds), Designing Hypermediafor Learning, 123- 130.Berlin Heidelberg:
SpringerVerlag.
Sondang R Manurung, 2013
Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Dengan Media Hiperteks Berdasarkan Skema Pemecahan
Masalah Berintikan Argumentasi Toulmin
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu
171
Kelly, G. (2008). “Inquiry, Activity and Epistemic Practice”, dalam R. A.
Duschl.,& R. E. Grandy (Eds.), Teaching Scientific Inquiry:
Recommendations for Research and Implementation, 99-117. Rotterdam:
Sense Publishers
Kolbs, D. (1995). Socrates in the Labyrinth: Hypertext, Argument, Philosophy,
Eastgate Systems, Cambridge. Tersedia: http://www.acm.com [6 Januari
2012]
Kuhn, D. (2010). “Teaching and Learning Science as Argument”.Science
Education, 4(5), 810-824.
Lawson, A.E., Lawson, D. I., Lawson, C. A. (1984). Proportional Reasoning and
The Linguistic Abilities Required for Hypothetico-Deductive Reasoning.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21 (2), 119–131.
Lawson,
A.E. (1995).
Science Teaching and the Develpment
Thinking.Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
of
Lorenzo, M. (2005). “The Development, Implementation, and Evaluation of a
Problem Solving Heuristic”. International Journal of Science and
Mathematics Education, 3, 33-58
Magnusson, S., Krajcik , J. & Borko, H. (2002). “Nature, Sources, and
Development of PCK for Science Teaching”, dalamJ. Gess-Newsome &
N.G. Lederman (Eds), Examining PCK: The Construct and Its
Implications for Science Education, 95 - 132. New York: Kluwer
Academic Press.
Mallia,
G.
(2009).
“Hypertextual
Processing
and
Institutional
Change:Speculations on the Effects of Immersed New Media Users on
the Future of Educational Institutions”.The University of the Fraser
Valley Research Review2(3), 80- 97.
MacKay, R.S. (2008). Nonlinearity in Complexity Science. Mathematics Institute
and Centre for Complexity Science. University of Warwick, Coventry
CV4 7AL, U.K.
Maloney, D.P. (1994). “Research on Problem Solving: Physics”, dalam D.L.
Gabel (Ed.)Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and
Learning,327-354. NewYork: Macmillan.
Manurung, S.R. (2010), Pengembangan Pembelajaran Fisika Dasar untuk
meluruskan kesalahan konsep Mahasiswa jurusan Fisika Universitas
Negeri Medan. Laporan penelitian didanai P3M Dikti Depdiknas. Tidak
dipubikasikan.
Sondang R Manurung, 2013
Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Dengan Media Hiperteks Berdasarkan Skema Pemecahan
Masalah Berintikan Argumentasi Toulmin
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu
172
Manurung, S.R., & Rustaman, N.Y. (2011). Laporan Field Study. Tugas Mata
Kuliah Pengembangan Program Pedidikan IPA. Tidak dipublikasikan.
Martinez, M. E. (1998). “What is Problem Solving?, Phi Delta Kappan, 79, 605609.
Matlock- Hetzel, S (1997). “Basic Concepts in Item and Test Analysis”. Makalah
pada the Annual Meeting of the Southwest Educational Research
Association, Austin.
McDermott, L.C., Rosenquist, M.L&., van Zee, E.H. (1987). “Student Difficulties
in Connecting Graphs and Physics: Examples from Kinematics”.
American Journal of Physics, 55 (6), 503 513
McDermott, L.C. (1990). “A Perspective on Teacher Preparation in Physics and
Other Science: The Need for Special Science Course for Teachers”.
American Journal of Physics.58 (8), 734-742
McCloskey, M., Caramazza, A., & Green, B. (1980). “Curvilinear Motion in the
Absence of External Forces: Naive Beliefs About the Motion of
Objects”. Science, 210(4474), 1139-1141
Meltzer, D. E. (2002). “ The Relationship between Mathematics Preparation and
Conceptual Learning Gain in Physics: „ hidden variable‟ in Diagnostic
Pretest Scores”.American Journal Physics. 70(12), 1259 -1267.
Meskill, C. (1996). Computers, Creativity and Communivative Competence: An
Association Machine. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 9(2-3),
115 – 123
Nelson, T.H. (1987) Literary Machines.N.p.: Theodore Nelson.
Newmann, S. E. & Marshal, C. C. (1998). Pushing Toulmin Too Far: Learning
from
an
Argument
RepresentationScheme.
Tersedia:
http://www.csdl.tamu.edu/~marshall/toulmin.pdf [5 April2012].
Nguyen,
T-H.(2002). Hypertext Structure and Student’s
StrategiesTersedia: http//:www. acm.com. [5 April 2010].
Learning
National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards.
Washington DC: National Academic Press.
OECD, PISA 2006.Tersedia:
http://www.aapt.org/Conferences/newfaculty/upload/Coop-ProblemSolving-Book-2.pdf. [ 10 Maret 2010]
Sondang R Manurung, 2013
Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Dengan Media Hiperteks Berdasarkan Skema Pemecahan
Masalah Berintikan Argumentasi Toulmin
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu
173
Piaget, J. (1964) The Development of Thought: The Equilibrtion of cognitive
Structures, New York: Viking
Reif, F., Larkin, H., Brackett, C. (1976). “Teaching general learning and problemsolving skills”. American Journal of Physics,44, 212-217.
Rollnick, M., Bennett, J., Rhemtula, M., Dharsey, N., & Ndlovu. T (2008)
“ThePlace of Subject Matter Knowledge in Pedagogical Content
Knowledge: A Case Study of South African Teachers Teaching the
Amount of Substance and Chemical Equilibrium”. International Journal
of Science Education 30(10), 1365–1387
Sadler, T.D.,& Zeidler, D.L. (2005). “Patterns of Informal Reasoning in the
Context of Socioscientific Decision- Making”.Journal of Research in
Science Education, 42 , 112-138.
Santyasa, I. W. (2006). Pengembangan Pemahaman Konsep dan Kemampuan
Pemecahan Masalah Fisika bagi Siswa SMA dengan Pemberdayaan Model
Perubahan Konseptual Berseting Investigasi Kelompok.
Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2008). “Assessment of the Ways Students Generate
Arguments in Science Education: Current Perspectives and
Recommendations for Future Directions”. Science Education, 92(3),
447-472.
Sanders, L.R., Borko, H., & Lockard, J.D. (1993). “Secondary Science Teachers‟
Knowledge Base when Teaching Science Courses in and Out of Their
Area of Certification”. Journal of Research inScience Teaching, 30(7),
723–736.
Schommer – Aikin, M. (2004). “Explaining the Epistemological Belief of System
Introducing the Embeded systemic Model and Coordinated Research
Approach”. Educational Psychologist, 39(1).19-28.
Schwab, J. J. (1978). Education and the Structure of the Disciplines dalam I.
Westbury & N. Wilkof (Eds.), Science, curriculum, and Liberal
Education: Selected Essays, 229-272. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Seroto, J.(2012). “Student Teachers‟ Presentations of Science Lessons inSouth
African Primary Schools: Ideal and Practice”. International Journal
Education of Science, 4(2), 107-115.
Shapiro, A. M. and Niederhauser, D. (2004). “Learning from hypertext: research
issues and findings”, dalam D. H. Jonassen (Ed)Handbook of Research
Sondang R Manurung, 2013
Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Dengan Media Hiperteks Berdasarkan Skema Pemecahan
Masalah Berintikan Argumentasi Toulmin
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu
174
on Educational Communications and Technology, (2nd ed), 605–620.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Shapiro, A. M., & Niederhauser, D.S. (in press). Learning from Hypertext:
Research Issues and Findings, dalam D. Jonassen (Ed.)Handbook of
Research for Educational Communications and Technology, (2nd ed),
MacMillon
Shulman, L.S. (1986). “Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching.
Educational Researcher, 15 (2), 4-14.
Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. (2006). “Learning to Teach Argumentation;
Research and Development in the Science Classroom. International
Journal of Science Education, 28(2-3), 235-260
Siregar, N., Rustaman, N. Y. & Hidayat, E.M. (1995).Studi Penerapan Pedagogi
Materi Subjek dalam Penulisan Buku Teks MIPA untuk
Mengembangkan Keterampilan Intelektual Mahasiswa FPMIPA IKIP
Bandung.Penelitian IKIP Bandung: Tidak dipublikasikan.
Siregar, N. (1998). Penelitian Kelas: Teori, Metodologi, dan Analisis. Bandung:
IKIP Bandung Press
Siregar, N. (2000). Penelitian Kelas dan Penelitian Pendidikan: Suatu Tinjauan
Epistemologi. Mimbar Pendidikan
Siregar, N., & Dahar, R.W. (2000). “Pedagogi Materi Subyek: Suatu Upaya untuk
Meletakkan Dasar keilmuan dari PBM”. Makalah pada Seminar Staf
Dosen FPMIPA UPI.
Siregar, N., Kurnia., & Setiawan, Setiawan, W. (2009) . Pedagogi E-Learning:
Antar-Muka Pembaca Sebagai Dasar. Penelitian FPMIPA UPI. Tidak
dipublikasikan.
Smith, D. C.,& Neale, D. (1991). “The Construction of Subject Matter Knowledge
in Primary Science Teaching”, dalam J. Brophy (Ed.) Advances in
Research on Teaching, 2. London: JAI Press.
Smith, J. B., Weiss, S. F., & Ferguson, G. J. (1987). “A Hypertext Writing
Environment and Its Cognitive Basis”, dalam Proceedings of Association
forComputing Machinery‟s Hypertext.Tersedia: http//:www.acm.com.
[10 Mei 2010]
Spillane, J. P. (2000).“A Fifth Grade Teacher‟s Reconstruction of Mathematics
and Literacy Teaching: Exploring Interactions among Identity, Learning,
and Subject Matter”, Elementary School Journal , 100(4), 273-307.
Sondang R Manurung, 2013
Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Dengan Media Hiperteks Berdasarkan Skema Pemecahan
Masalah Berintikan Argumentasi Toulmin
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu
175
Spiro, R., & Jehng, J. (1990). “Cognitive Flexibility and Hypertext: Theory and
Technology for The Non-Linear and Multi-Dimensional Traversal of
Complex Subject Matter”, dalam Nix,D &Spiro, R. (Eds.), Cognition,
Education, Multimedia: Exploring Ideas in High Technology, 163-205.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Spiro, R. J., Feltovich, P. J., Jacobson, M. J., & Coulson, R. L. (1991). “Cognitive
Flexibility, Constructivism and Hypertext:Random Access Instruction for
Advanced Knowledge Acquisitionin Ill-Structured Domains”. Tersedia:
http://phoenix.sce.fct.unl.pt/simposio/Rand_Spiro.htm. [23 April 2012]
Tobin, Kenneth G.; Capie, William (1981) The Development and Validation of a
Group Test of Logical Thinking. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 41 (2), 413-423
Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The Uses of Argument.Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Van Dijk,T. & Kintsch,M. (1984). Strategis of Discourse Comprehension.New
York: Academic Press
Van Driel, J. H.,& Verloop, N. (2002). “Experienced Teachers Knowledge of
Teaching and Learning of Models and Modelling in Science Education”.
International Journal of Science Education, 24, 1255-1272.
Walton, D., & Reed, C. (2005). “Argumentation Schemes and Enthymemes”,
Synthese: An International Journal for Epistemology, Methodology and
Philosophy of Science, 145: 339-370.
Wenning, C. J. & Wenning, R. E. (2006). “A generic model for inquiry-oriented
lab inpostsecondary introductory physics”. Journal of Physics Teacher
Education Online.3(3). 24-33. Available at: http://www.phy.ilstu. edu/jpteo
Whitaker, R. J. (1983). “Aristotle is not dead: Student Understanding of
Trajectory Motion”. American Journal of Physics, 51(4), 352-357.
Widodo, W. (2010). Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran ‘MiKiR” pada
Perkuliahan Fisika Dasar untuk Meningkatkan Keterampilan Generik
Sains dan Pemecahan Mahasiswa Calon Guru SMK Program Keahlian
Tata Boga. Disertasi pada SPs UPI. Tidak dipublikasikan.
Sondang R Manurung, 2013
Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Dengan Media Hiperteks Berdasarkan Skema Pemecahan
Masalah Berintikan Argumentasi Toulmin
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu
176
Zohar, A.,& Nemet, F. (2002). “Fostering Students‟ Knowledge and
Argumentation Skills through Dilemmas in Human Genetics”.Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 25, 689–725.
Sondang R Manurung, 2013
Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Dengan Media Hiperteks Berdasarkan Skema Pemecahan
Masalah Berintikan Argumentasi Toulmin
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu
DAFTAR PUSTAKA
Anderson, L. W. & Krathwohl, D. R. (eds). (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning
Teaching and Assessing. A Revision of Bloom‟s Taxonomy of education
Objectives. New York: Addisin Wesley.
Ball, D.L. & McDiarmid,G.W. (1990). “The Subject Matter Preparation of
Teachers” Handbook of Research on Techer Educacation. A Project of
Associate of Teacher Education
Bay, J. M., Reys, B. J., & Reys, R. E. (1999).The top 10 elements that must be in
place to implement standards-based mathematics curricula.Kappan, 80,
503-512.
Beichner, R. J. (1996). “The Impact of Video Motion Analysis on Kinematics
Graph Interpretation Skills”. American Journal of Physics, 64(10), 1272 –
1277.
Beichner, R. J. (1996). Test of Understanding Graph of Kinematics version 2.6
Beichner, R. J (1994).“Testing Students‟ Interpretation of Kinematics Graphs”.
American Journal of Physics, 62 (8), 750 – 762.
Berland, L..& Reiser, B. (2009).“Making Sense of Argumentation and
Explanation”.Science Education. 93, 26 – 55.
Bricker, L., & Bell, P. (2009). “Conceptualizations of Argumentation from
Science Studies and the Learning Sciences and Their Implications for
The Practices of Science Education”. Science Education, 92, 473 . 498.
Brooks, K. (2002). “Reading, Writing, and Teaching Creative Hypertext: A
Genre-Based Pedagogy”. Pedagogy: Critical Approaches to Teaching
Literature, Language, Composition, and Culture 2 (3), 337–358.\
Carter, L. M. (1997). Arguments in Hypertext: Order and Structure in nonsequentialEssays. Disertasi pada University ofTexas, Austin.
Charles, M., Eliot R. S.,&Lousie, H. K. (1991). Research Methods in Social
Relations: International Edition(6th ed).London: Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich.
Clark, D. B., & Sampson, V. D. (2007). “Personally-Seeded Discussions to
Scaffold Online Argumentation”. International Journal of Science
Education, 29 (3), 253–277
Sondang R Manurung, 2013
Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Dengan Media Hiperteks Berdasarkan Skema Pemecahan
Masalah Berintikan Argumentasi Toulmin
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu
168
Conklin, J., & Begeman, M. L. (1987). “gIBIS: A Hypertext Tool for Team
Design Deliberation”.Proceedings of Hypertext ‘87. Chapel Hill, NC:
Association of Computing Machinery, 247- 268.
Cox Suzy (2006) A Conseptual Anallysis of Technological Pedagogical Content
Knowledge. Department of Instructional Psychology &Technology
Brigham Young University July 2006
Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods
approaches( 2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Dahar, R.W. (1989), Teori-Teori Belajar. Jakarta: Penerbit Erlangga
De Vries, E.,&De Jong, T. (1999). “The Design and Evaluation of Hypertext
Structures for Supporting Design Problem Solving”. Instructional Science
27, 285–302.Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers
Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). “Establishing the Norms of
Scientific Argumentation in Classrooms”. Science Education.84, 287312.
Duke,
K. (2005). Real-life Projects Energize Learning. Tersedia:
http://www.riviewjournal.com/wrg.home/2005/opinion/682710 [10 Januari
2012]
Duschl, R. (2008). “Quality Argumentation and Epistemic Criteria”, dalam
Erduran, S& Jiménez- Aleixandre, M. P (Eds.), Argumentation in science
education: Perspectives from classroom-based research, 159 -169.
Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer
Duschl, R., & Osborne, J. (2002). “Supporting and Promoting Argumentation
Discourse”. Studies in Science Education, 38, 39–72.
Eckstein, S. G., & Kozhevnikov, M. (1997). “Parallelism in the Development of
Children's Ideas and the Historical Development of Projectile Motion
Theories”.International Journal of Science Education, 19(9), 1057 1073.
Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). “TAPping into Argumentation:
Developments in the Application of Toulmin‟s Argument Pattern for
Studying Science Discourse”. Science Education, 88(6), 915-933.
Evans, A., Hawksley, F., Holland, M. R. & Caillau, I. (2008).“Improving Subject
Knowledge and Subject Pedagogic Knowledge in Employment Based
Secondary Initial Teacher Training in England”. Makalah disajikan
Sondang R Manurung, 2013
Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Dengan Media Hiperteks Berdasarkan Skema Pemecahan
Masalah Berintikan Argumentasi Toulmin
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu
169
padaThe Annual Conference of the Association of TeacherEducation in
Europe, Vrije Universiteit Brussel.
Eylon, B., & Reif, F. (1984). “Effects of Knowledge Organization on Task
Performance”.Cognition and Instruction, 1, 5-44.
Foltz, P.W. (1996). “Comprehension, Coherence and Strategies in Hypertext and
Linier Text”, dalam Route, J.F (Ed) Hypertext and Cognition. Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ford, M. (2008). “Disciplinary Authority and Accountability in Scientific Practice
and Learning”.Science Education, 92(3), 404-423.
Frank, B.W. (2009). The Dynamics Of Variability In Introductory Physics
Students’ Thinking: Examples From Kinematics. Disertasi pada
University of Maryland
Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2003). How to Design and Evaluate Research in
Science Education, (5th Ed.) NY. McGraw – Hill, Inc.
Gerace, W. J. (2001) “Problem Solving and Conceptual Understanding”, dalam S.
Franklin, J., Marx & K. Cummings (Eds) Proceedings of the 2001
Physics Education Research Conference, 33 -45.New York: PERC
Publishing, 33.
Gess-Newsome, J. (1999a). “Pedagogical Content Knowledge: An Introduction
and Orientation”, dalam J. Gess-Newsome& N. Lederman (Eds.)
Examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge. The Netherlands: Kluwer
Grinnel, Jr., R. M. (1988). Social Work Research and Evaluation. Illionis: F.E.
Peacock Pub. Inc.
Grossman, P. L. (in press). “Subject Matter Knowledge and the Teaching of
English”, dalam J. Brophy (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching 2.
Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Grossman, P. L. (1990). The Making of a Teacher: Teacher Knowledge and
Teacher Education. New York: The Teachers College Press.
Halliday,D.,Resnick, R.,& Walker,J. (2011). Fundamental of Physics(10th ed).
Singapore:John Wiley & Sons, Ptc Ltd
Haryanto, Zeni. (2006). Tahap Perkembangan Intelektual Siswa SMP dan SMA
Dengan Kaitanya Dalam Pembelajaran Fisika dan Kemampuan
Pemecahan Masalah. Disertasi pada Universitas Pendidikan
Indonesia.Bandung : Tidak diterbitkan
Sondang R Manurung, 2013
Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Dengan Media Hiperteks Berdasarkan Skema Pemecahan
Masalah Berintikan Argumentasi Toulmin
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu
170
Hasweh, M. (1987). “Effects of Subject-Matter Knowledge in the Teaching of
Biology and Physics”.Teaching and Teacher Education, 3(2), 109–120.
Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1991).Sharing cognition through collective
comprehension activity, dalam L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine & Teasley,
S. D. (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition. 331-348.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Hayes-Roth, B. and Hayes-Roth, F. (1979) “A Cognitive Model of Planning”,
Cognitive Science, 3, 275-310.
Heller, K & Heller, P. (2010). Cooperative Problem Solving in Physics A User’s
Manual. Tersedia: http://groups.physics.umn.edu/physed [10Januari
2011]
Heller, P & Hollabaugh, M (1992b). “Teaching Problem Solving Through
Cooperative
Grouping: Designing Problems and Structuring
Groups”.American Journal of Physics, 60 (7). 637-644.
Hollabaugh, M. (1995). Cooperative Learning Groups, Disertasi pada The
University of Minnesota
Ingraham, B. D. (2002). Scholarly Rhetoric in Digital Media.A Paper. Center
forLifelong Learning, The University of Teesside, Middlebrough, UK.
Tersedia: http//:www. acm.com. [5 April 2010].
Inherder, B & Piaget, J. (1958). The Growth of Logical Thinking from Childhood
to Adolescence. New York: Basic
Jonassen, D. H. (1989). Hypertext/hypermedia. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Educational Technology Publications.
Jonassen, D. H. (1992). “Designing hypertext for learning”, dalam E. Scanlon &
R. T. O'Shea (Eds.),New directions in educational technology, 123– 130.
Berlin Heidelberg: Springer Verlag.
Jonassen, D. H. (1997). “Instructional Design Models for Well-Structured and IllStructured Problem Solving Learning Outcomes”. Educational
Technology Research andDevelopment, 45(1), 65-94.
Jonassen, D.H., &Grabinger, R.S. (1990). “Problems and Issues in Designing
Hypertext/Hypermedia for Learning”, dalam D.H. Jonassen & H. Mandl,
(Eds), Designing Hypermediafor Learning, 123- 130.Berlin Heidelberg:
SpringerVerlag.
Sondang R Manurung, 2013
Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Dengan Media Hiperteks Berdasarkan Skema Pemecahan
Masalah Berintikan Argumentasi Toulmin
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu
171
Kelly, G. (2008). “Inquiry, Activity and Epistemic Practice”, dalam R. A.
Duschl.,& R. E. Grandy (Eds.), Teaching Scientific Inquiry:
Recommendations for Research and Implementation, 99-117. Rotterdam:
Sense Publishers
Kolbs, D. (1995). Socrates in the Labyrinth: Hypertext, Argument, Philosophy,
Eastgate Systems, Cambridge. Tersedia: http://www.acm.com [6 Januari
2012]
Kuhn, D. (2010). “Teaching and Learning Science as Argument”.Science
Education, 4(5), 810-824.
Lawson, A.E., Lawson, D. I., Lawson, C. A. (1984). Proportional Reasoning and
The Linguistic Abilities Required for Hypothetico-Deductive Reasoning.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21 (2), 119–131.
Lawson,
A.E. (1995).
Science Teaching and the Develpment
Thinking.Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
of
Lorenzo, M. (2005). “The Development, Implementation, and Evaluation of a
Problem Solving Heuristic”. International Journal of Science and
Mathematics Education, 3, 33-58
Magnusson, S., Krajcik , J. & Borko, H. (2002). “Nature, Sources, and
Development of PCK for Science Teaching”, dalamJ. Gess-Newsome &
N.G. Lederman (Eds), Examining PCK: The Construct and Its
Implications for Science Education, 95 - 132. New York: Kluwer
Academic Press.
Mallia,
G.
(2009).
“Hypertextual
Processing
and
Institutional
Change:Speculations on the Effects of Immersed New Media Users on
the Future of Educational Institutions”.The University of the Fraser
Valley Research Review2(3), 80- 97.
MacKay, R.S. (2008). Nonlinearity in Complexity Science. Mathematics Institute
and Centre for Complexity Science. University of Warwick, Coventry
CV4 7AL, U.K.
Maloney, D.P. (1994). “Research on Problem Solving: Physics”, dalam D.L.
Gabel (Ed.)Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and
Learning,327-354. NewYork: Macmillan.
Manurung, S.R. (2010), Pengembangan Pembelajaran Fisika Dasar untuk
meluruskan kesalahan konsep Mahasiswa jurusan Fisika Universitas
Negeri Medan. Laporan penelitian didanai P3M Dikti Depdiknas. Tidak
dipubikasikan.
Sondang R Manurung, 2013
Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Dengan Media Hiperteks Berdasarkan Skema Pemecahan
Masalah Berintikan Argumentasi Toulmin
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu
172
Manurung, S.R., & Rustaman, N.Y. (2011). Laporan Field Study. Tugas Mata
Kuliah Pengembangan Program Pedidikan IPA. Tidak dipublikasikan.
Martinez, M. E. (1998). “What is Problem Solving?, Phi Delta Kappan, 79, 605609.
Matlock- Hetzel, S (1997). “Basic Concepts in Item and Test Analysis”. Makalah
pada the Annual Meeting of the Southwest Educational Research
Association, Austin.
McDermott, L.C., Rosenquist, M.L&., van Zee, E.H. (1987). “Student Difficulties
in Connecting Graphs and Physics: Examples from Kinematics”.
American Journal of Physics, 55 (6), 503 513
McDermott, L.C. (1990). “A Perspective on Teacher Preparation in Physics and
Other Science: The Need for Special Science Course for Teachers”.
American Journal of Physics.58 (8), 734-742
McCloskey, M., Caramazza, A., & Green, B. (1980). “Curvilinear Motion in the
Absence of External Forces: Naive Beliefs About the Motion of
Objects”. Science, 210(4474), 1139-1141
Meltzer, D. E. (2002). “ The Relationship between Mathematics Preparation and
Conceptual Learning Gain in Physics: „ hidden variable‟ in Diagnostic
Pretest Scores”.American Journal Physics. 70(12), 1259 -1267.
Meskill, C. (1996). Computers, Creativity and Communivative Competence: An
Association Machine. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 9(2-3),
115 – 123
Nelson, T.H. (1987) Literary Machines.N.p.: Theodore Nelson.
Newmann, S. E. & Marshal, C. C. (1998). Pushing Toulmin Too Far: Learning
from
an
Argument
RepresentationScheme.
Tersedia:
http://www.csdl.tamu.edu/~marshall/toulmin.pdf [5 April2012].
Nguyen,
T-H.(2002). Hypertext Structure and Student’s
StrategiesTersedia: http//:www. acm.com. [5 April 2010].
Learning
National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards.
Washington DC: National Academic Press.
OECD, PISA 2006.Tersedia:
http://www.aapt.org/Conferences/newfaculty/upload/Coop-ProblemSolving-Book-2.pdf. [ 10 Maret 2010]
Sondang R Manurung, 2013
Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Dengan Media Hiperteks Berdasarkan Skema Pemecahan
Masalah Berintikan Argumentasi Toulmin
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu
173
Piaget, J. (1964) The Development of Thought: The Equilibrtion of cognitive
Structures, New York: Viking
Reif, F., Larkin, H., Brackett, C. (1976). “Teaching general learning and problemsolving skills”. American Journal of Physics,44, 212-217.
Rollnick, M., Bennett, J., Rhemtula, M., Dharsey, N., & Ndlovu. T (2008)
“ThePlace of Subject Matter Knowledge in Pedagogical Content
Knowledge: A Case Study of South African Teachers Teaching the
Amount of Substance and Chemical Equilibrium”. International Journal
of Science Education 30(10), 1365–1387
Sadler, T.D.,& Zeidler, D.L. (2005). “Patterns of Informal Reasoning in the
Context of Socioscientific Decision- Making”.Journal of Research in
Science Education, 42 , 112-138.
Santyasa, I. W. (2006). Pengembangan Pemahaman Konsep dan Kemampuan
Pemecahan Masalah Fisika bagi Siswa SMA dengan Pemberdayaan Model
Perubahan Konseptual Berseting Investigasi Kelompok.
Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2008). “Assessment of the Ways Students Generate
Arguments in Science Education: Current Perspectives and
Recommendations for Future Directions”. Science Education, 92(3),
447-472.
Sanders, L.R., Borko, H., & Lockard, J.D. (1993). “Secondary Science Teachers‟
Knowledge Base when Teaching Science Courses in and Out of Their
Area of Certification”. Journal of Research inScience Teaching, 30(7),
723–736.
Schommer – Aikin, M. (2004). “Explaining the Epistemological Belief of System
Introducing the Embeded systemic Model and Coordinated Research
Approach”. Educational Psychologist, 39(1).19-28.
Schwab, J. J. (1978). Education and the Structure of the Disciplines dalam I.
Westbury & N. Wilkof (Eds.), Science, curriculum, and Liberal
Education: Selected Essays, 229-272. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Seroto, J.(2012). “Student Teachers‟ Presentations of Science Lessons inSouth
African Primary Schools: Ideal and Practice”. International Journal
Education of Science, 4(2), 107-115.
Shapiro, A. M. and Niederhauser, D. (2004). “Learning from hypertext: research
issues and findings”, dalam D. H. Jonassen (Ed)Handbook of Research
Sondang R Manurung, 2013
Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Dengan Media Hiperteks Berdasarkan Skema Pemecahan
Masalah Berintikan Argumentasi Toulmin
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu
174
on Educational Communications and Technology, (2nd ed), 605–620.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Shapiro, A. M., & Niederhauser, D.S. (in press). Learning from Hypertext:
Research Issues and Findings, dalam D. Jonassen (Ed.)Handbook of
Research for Educational Communications and Technology, (2nd ed),
MacMillon
Shulman, L.S. (1986). “Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching.
Educational Researcher, 15 (2), 4-14.
Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. (2006). “Learning to Teach Argumentation;
Research and Development in the Science Classroom. International
Journal of Science Education, 28(2-3), 235-260
Siregar, N., Rustaman, N. Y. & Hidayat, E.M. (1995).Studi Penerapan Pedagogi
Materi Subjek dalam Penulisan Buku Teks MIPA untuk
Mengembangkan Keterampilan Intelektual Mahasiswa FPMIPA IKIP
Bandung.Penelitian IKIP Bandung: Tidak dipublikasikan.
Siregar, N. (1998). Penelitian Kelas: Teori, Metodologi, dan Analisis. Bandung:
IKIP Bandung Press
Siregar, N. (2000). Penelitian Kelas dan Penelitian Pendidikan: Suatu Tinjauan
Epistemologi. Mimbar Pendidikan
Siregar, N., & Dahar, R.W. (2000). “Pedagogi Materi Subyek: Suatu Upaya untuk
Meletakkan Dasar keilmuan dari PBM”. Makalah pada Seminar Staf
Dosen FPMIPA UPI.
Siregar, N., Kurnia., & Setiawan, Setiawan, W. (2009) . Pedagogi E-Learning:
Antar-Muka Pembaca Sebagai Dasar. Penelitian FPMIPA UPI. Tidak
dipublikasikan.
Smith, D. C.,& Neale, D. (1991). “The Construction of Subject Matter Knowledge
in Primary Science Teaching”, dalam J. Brophy (Ed.) Advances in
Research on Teaching, 2. London: JAI Press.
Smith, J. B., Weiss, S. F., & Ferguson, G. J. (1987). “A Hypertext Writing
Environment and Its Cognitive Basis”, dalam Proceedings of Association
forComputing Machinery‟s Hypertext.Tersedia: http//:www.acm.com.
[10 Mei 2010]
Spillane, J. P. (2000).“A Fifth Grade Teacher‟s Reconstruction of Mathematics
and Literacy Teaching: Exploring Interactions among Identity, Learning,
and Subject Matter”, Elementary School Journal , 100(4), 273-307.
Sondang R Manurung, 2013
Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Dengan Media Hiperteks Berdasarkan Skema Pemecahan
Masalah Berintikan Argumentasi Toulmin
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu
175
Spiro, R., & Jehng, J. (1990). “Cognitive Flexibility and Hypertext: Theory and
Technology for The Non-Linear and Multi-Dimensional Traversal of
Complex Subject Matter”, dalam Nix,D &Spiro, R. (Eds.), Cognition,
Education, Multimedia: Exploring Ideas in High Technology, 163-205.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Spiro, R. J., Feltovich, P. J., Jacobson, M. J., & Coulson, R. L. (1991). “Cognitive
Flexibility, Constructivism and Hypertext:Random Access Instruction for
Advanced Knowledge Acquisitionin Ill-Structured Domains”. Tersedia:
http://phoenix.sce.fct.unl.pt/simposio/Rand_Spiro.htm. [23 April 2012]
Tobin, Kenneth G.; Capie, William (1981) The Development and Validation of a
Group Test of Logical Thinking. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 41 (2), 413-423
Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The Uses of Argument.Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Van Dijk,T. & Kintsch,M. (1984). Strategis of Discourse Comprehension.New
York: Academic Press
Van Driel, J. H.,& Verloop, N. (2002). “Experienced Teachers Knowledge of
Teaching and Learning of Models and Modelling in Science Education”.
International Journal of Science Education, 24, 1255-1272.
Walton, D., & Reed, C. (2005). “Argumentation Schemes and Enthymemes”,
Synthese: An International Journal for Epistemology, Methodology and
Philosophy of Science, 145: 339-370.
Wenning, C. J. & Wenning, R. E. (2006). “A generic model for inquiry-oriented
lab inpostsecondary introductory physics”. Journal of Physics Teacher
Education Online.3(3). 24-33. Available at: http://www.phy.ilstu. edu/jpteo
Whitaker, R. J. (1983). “Aristotle is not dead: Student Understanding of
Trajectory Motion”. American Journal of Physics, 51(4), 352-357.
Widodo, W. (2010). Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran ‘MiKiR” pada
Perkuliahan Fisika Dasar untuk Meningkatkan Keterampilan Generik
Sains dan Pemecahan Mahasiswa Calon Guru SMK Program Keahlian
Tata Boga. Disertasi pada SPs UPI. Tidak dipublikasikan.
Sondang R Manurung, 2013
Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Dengan Media Hiperteks Berdasarkan Skema Pemecahan
Masalah Berintikan Argumentasi Toulmin
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu
176
Zohar, A.,& Nemet, F. (2002). “Fostering Students‟ Knowledge and
Argumentation Skills through Dilemmas in Human Genetics”.Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 25, 689–725.
Sondang R Manurung, 2013
Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Dengan Media Hiperteks Berdasarkan Skema Pemecahan
Masalah Berintikan Argumentasi Toulmin
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu