International Journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Frequency: 12
line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 11, Issue 7 (July 2024), Pages: 149-159

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

Fostering critical thinking in science education: Exploring effective pedagogical models

 Author(s): 

 Sigit Sujatmika *, Mohammad Masykuri, Baskoro Adi Prayitno, Sutarno Sutarno

 Affiliation(s):

 Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia

 Full text

  Full Text - PDF

 * Corresponding Author. 

  Corresponding author's ORCID profile: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8832-2394

 Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2024.07.016

 Abstract

In the digital age, accessing information has both advantages and disadvantages. It is crucial to analyze available data before making decisions. Critical thinking (CT) skills are vital in mitigating the negative impacts of misleading information. This was exemplified during the COVID-19 pandemic, which caused emotional distress in society and other harmful effects. Educators should aim to develop CT skills in students from a young age, incorporating them into various subjects, including science education. This research aims to investigate trends in CT research over the past decade, identify instructional models that facilitate CT, and evaluate the efficacy of these models in enhancing CT abilities. The search focused on research articles on CT in science education at the K-12 level. The PRISMA model was followed, and the Science Direct, Taylor and Francis, Springer, Wiley Online Library, and ERIC databases were utilized. The results suggest a significant increase in research related to CT over the past decade. Eighteen articles that met our established criteria were identified and included. These findings demonstrate that STEM, inquiry-based learning, problem-based learning, cooperative learning, and predict-observe-explain (POE) instructional models are suitable for fostering CT. These models exhibit characteristics that promote the development of CT skills in the learning process. However, when selecting the most appropriate instructional model, it is important to consider learning objectives, subject matter, student characteristics, and contextual elements within the learning environment.

 © 2024 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords

 Critical thinking, Science education, Instructional models, COVID-19 pandemic, Research trends

 Article history

 Received 16 September 2023, Received in revised form 14 January 2024, Accepted 8 July 2024

 Acknowledgment 

We would like to express our profound gratitude to the Indonesian Ministry of Education and LPPM Universitas Sebelas Maret for their generous financial support and the gracious provision of essential research facilities. Their unwavering support has played a pivotal role in enabling the successful execution of our research initiatives and the subsequent publication of our research articles.

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

 Citation:

 Sujatmika S, Masykuri M, Prayitno BA, and Sutarno S (2024). Fostering critical thinking in science education: Exploring effective pedagogical models. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 11(7): 149-159

 Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

 Fig. 1 Fig. 2

 Tables

 Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 

----------------------------------------------   

 References (52)

  1. Alpizar D, Vo T, French BF, and Hand B (2022). Growth of critical thinking skills in middle school immersive science learning environments. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 46: 101192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101192   [Google Scholar]
  2. Anggraeni DM, Prahani B, Suprapto N, Shofiyah N, and Jatmiko B (2023). Systematic review of problem based learning research in fostering critical thinking skills. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 49: 101334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101334   [Google Scholar]
  3. Arici F, Yildirim P, Caliklar Ş, and Yilmaz RM (2019). Research trends in the use of augmented reality in science education: Content and bibliometric mapping analysis. Computers and Education, 142: 103647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103647   [Google Scholar]
  4. Barak M (2017). Science teacher education in the twenty-first century: A pedagogical framework for technology-integrated social constructivism. Research in Science Education, 47: 283-303. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-015-9501-y   [Google Scholar]
  5. Barrows HS (1996). Problem‐based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1996: 3-12. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.37219966804   [Google Scholar]
  6. Boling EC, Hough M, Krinsky H, Saleem H, and Stevens M (2012). Cutting the distance in distance education: Perspectives on what promotes positive, online learning experiences. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(2): 118-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.11.006   [Google Scholar]
  7. Bollen L, Van Kampen P, Baily C, and De Cock M (2016). Qualitative investigation into students’ use of divergence and curl in electromagnetism. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12(2): 020134. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.020134   [Google Scholar]
  8. Castro R (2019). Blended learning in higher education: Trends and capabilities. Education and Information Technologies, 24(4): 2523-2546. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09886-3   [Google Scholar]
  9. Chen HL and Wu CT (2023). A digital role-playing game for learning: Effects on critical thinking and motivation. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(5): 3018-3030. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1916765   [Google Scholar]
  10. Duran M and Dökme I (2016). The effect of the inquiry-based learning approach on student's critical-thinking skills. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 12(12): 2887-2908. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.02311a   [Google Scholar]
  11. Dwyer CP, Hogan MJ, Harney OM, and Kavanagh C (2017). Facilitating a student-educator conceptual model of dispositions towards critical thinking through interactive management. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65: 47-73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9460-7   [Google Scholar]
  12. Ennis RH (2018). Critical thinking across the curriculum: A vision. Topoi, 37: 165-184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-016-9401-4   [Google Scholar]
  13. Ernst J and Monroe M (2004). The effects of environment‐based education on students' critical thinking skills and disposition toward critical thinking. Environmental Education Research, 10(4): 507-522. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350462042000291038   [Google Scholar]
  14. Fitriani A, Zubaidah S, Susilo H, and Al Muhdhar MHI (2020). PBLPOE: A learning model to enhance students' critical thinking skills and scientific attitudes. International Journal of Instruction, 13(2): 89-106. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.1327a   [Google Scholar]
  15. Forawi SA (2016). Standard-based science education and critical thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 20: 52-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.02.005   [Google Scholar]
  16. Fung DCL, To H, and Leung K (2016). The influence of collaborative group work on students’ development of critical thinking: The teacher’s role in facilitating group discussions. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 11(2): 146-166. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554480X.2016.1159965   [Google Scholar]
  17. Giri V and Paily MU (2020). Effect of scientific argumentation on the development of critical thinking. Science and Education, 29(3): 673-690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00120-y   [Google Scholar]
  18. Griffin P, McGaw B, and Care E (2012). Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills. Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2324-5   [Google Scholar]
  19. Gunduz N and Hursen C (2015). Constructivism in teaching and learning; Content analysis evaluation. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191: 526-533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.640   [Google Scholar]
  20. Hacioğlu Y and Gülhan F (2021). The effects of STEM education on the students’ critical thinking skills and STEM perceptions. Journal of Education in Science Environment and Health, 7(2): 139-155. https://doi.org/10.21891/jeseh.771331   [Google Scholar]
  21. Henriksen D, Henderson M, Creely E, Ceretkova S, Černochová M, Sendova E, and Tienken CH (2018). Creativity and technology in education: An international perspective. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 23: 409-424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9380-1   [Google Scholar]
  22. Hong JC, Hsiao HS, Chen PH, Lu CC, Tai KH, and Tsai CR (2021). Critical attitude and ability associated with students’ self-confidence and attitude toward “predict-observe-explain” online science inquiry learning. Computers and Education, 166: 104172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104172   [Google Scholar]
  23. Kearney M, Treagust DF, Yeo S, and Zadnik MG (2001). Student and teacher perceptions of the use of multimedia supported predict–observe–explain tasks to probe understanding. Research in Science Education, 31: 589-615. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013106209449   [Google Scholar]
  24. Kristiyanto W, Gunarhadi, and Indriayu M (2020). The effect of the science technology society and the quantum teaching models on learning outcomes of students in the natural science course in relation with their critical thinking skills. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching, 7(1): 177-191.   [Google Scholar]
  25. Lamb R, Firestone J, Schmitter-Edgecombe M, and Hand B (2019). A computational model of student cognitive processes while solving a critical thinking problem in science. The Journal of Educational Research, 112(2): 243-254. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2018.1514357   [Google Scholar]
  26. Lin WL and Shih YL (2022). Developmental trends of different creative potentials in relation to adolescents’ critical thinking abilities. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 43: 100979. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100979   [Google Scholar]
  27. Mafarja N and Zulnaidi H (2022). Relationship between critical thinking and academic self-concept: An experimental study of reciprocal teaching strategy. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 45: 101113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101113   [Google Scholar]
  28. Manassero-Mas MA and Vázquez-Alonso Á (2022). An empirical analysis of the relationship between nature of science and critical thinking through science definitions and thinking skills. SN Social Sciences, 2: 270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-022-00546-x   [Google Scholar]
  29. Marin LM and Halpern DF (2011). Pedagogy for developing critical thinking in adolescents: Explicit instruction produces greatest gains. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 6(1): 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2010.08.002   [Google Scholar]
  30. Marthaliakirana AD, Suwono H, Saefi M, and Gofur A (2022). Problem-based learning with metacognitive prompts for enhancing argumentation and critical thinking of secondary school students. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(9): em2148. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12304   [Google Scholar]
  31. Mater NR, Haj Hussein MJ, Salha SH, Draidi FR, Shaqour AZ, Qatanani N, and Affouneh S (2022). The effect of the integration of STEM on critical thinking and technology acceptance model. Educational Studies, 48(5): 642-658. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2020.1793736   [Google Scholar]
  32. Niu L, Behar-Horenstein LS, and Garvan CW (2013). Do instructional interventions influence college students’ critical thinking skills? A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 9: 114-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2012.12.002   [Google Scholar]
  33. Oliveras B, Márquez C, and Sanmartí N (2013). The use of newspaper articles as a tool to develop critical thinking in science classes. International Journal of Science Education, 35(6): 885-905. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.586736   [Google Scholar]
  34. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, and Moher D (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. International Journal of Surgery, 88: 105906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.105906   [Google Scholar] PMid:33789826
  35. Pahrudin A, Alisia G, Saregar A, Asyhari A, Anugrah A, and Susilowati NE (2021). The effectiveness of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics inquiry learning for 15-16 years old students based on K-13 Indonesian curriculum: The impact on the critical thinking skills. European Journal of Educational Research, 10(2): 681-692. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.10.2.681   [Google Scholar]
  36. Palmer D (1995). The POE in the primary school: An evaluation. Research in Science Education, 25: 323-332. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02357405   [Google Scholar]
  37. Piawa CY (2010). Building a test to assess creative and critical thinking simultaneously. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2): 551-559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.062   [Google Scholar]
  38. Ristanto R, Sabrina A, and Komala R (2022). Critical thinking skills of environmental changes: A biological instruction using guided discovery learning-argument mapping (GDL-AM). Participatory Educational Research, 9(1): 173-191. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.22.10.9.1   [Google Scholar]
  39. Rodrigues SJ (2014). Environmental education: A propose of high school. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116: 231-234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.199   [Google Scholar]
  40. Rose J (2020). The mortal coil of COVID-19, fake news, and negative epistemic postdigital inculcation. Postdigital Science and Education, 2(3): 812-829. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-020-00192-7   [Google Scholar] PMCid:PMC7527670
  41. Siew NM and Mapeala R (2017). The effects of thinking maps-aided problem-based learning on motivation towards science learning among fifth graders. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 16(3): 379-394. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/17.16.379   [Google Scholar]
  42. Sinaga P, Setiawan W, and Liana M (2022). The impact of electronic interactive teaching materials (EITMs) in e-learning on junior high school students’ critical thinking skills. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 46: 101066. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101066   [Google Scholar]
  43. Sujatmika S, Irfan M, Ernawati T, Wijayanti A, Widodo S, Nurdiyanto H, and Rahim R (2019). Designing e-worksheet based on problem-based learning to improve critical thinking. In the 1st International Conference on Science and Technology for an Internet of Things, Yogyakarta, Indonesia. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.19-10-2018.2281282   [Google Scholar]
  44. Sujatmika S, Widyawati A, Ernawati T, and Hastuti PW (2022). Gambier's product (Uncaria gambir Roxb.) as learning material to enhance critical thinking. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2600(1): 050003. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0112224   [Google Scholar]
  45. Sukendro S, Habibi A, Khaeruddin K, Indrayana B, Syahruddin S, Makadada FA, and Hakim H (2020). Using an extended technology acceptance model to understand students’ use of e-learning during COVID-19: Indonesian sport science education context. Heliyon, 6: e05410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05410   [Google Scholar] PMid:33195843 PMCid:PMC7644906
  46. Tarafdar M, Pullins EB, and Ragu‐Nathan TS (2015). Technostress: Negative effect on performance and possible mitigations. Information Systems Journal, 25(2): 103-132. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12042   [Google Scholar]
  47. Thompson CC (2019). Advancing critical thinking through learning issues in problem-based learning. Medical Science Educator, 29: 149-156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-018-00649-2   [Google Scholar] PMid:34457462 PMCid:PMC8368909
  48. Trilling B and Fadel C (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  49. Van Laar E, Van Deursen AJ, Van Dijk JA, and De Haan J (2017). The relation between 21st-century skills and digital skills: A systematic literature review. Computers in Human Behavior, 72: 577-588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.010   [Google Scholar]
  50. Wang HH, Chen HT, Lin HS, Huang YN, and Hong ZR (2017). Longitudinal study of a cooperation-driven, socio-scientific issue intervention on promoting students’ critical thinking and self-regulation in learning science. International Journal of Science Education, 39(15): 2002-2026. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1357087   [Google Scholar]
  51. Yuan SP, Liao HC, Wang YH, and Chou MJ (2014). Development of a scale to measure the critical thinking disposition of medical care professionals. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 42(2): 303-311. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2014.42.2.303   [Google Scholar]
  52. Zhang K and Aslan AB (2021). AI technologies for education: Recent research and future directions. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2: 100025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100025   [Google Scholar]