Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 422

International Conference on Progressive Education (ICOPE 2019)

Analysis of Students Inquiry Skills in Senior High

School Though Learning Based on the Hierarchy of
Inquiry Model

Evi Elisanti Baskoro Adi Prayitno

Educational Staff Science Education, Postgraduate Program
Universitas Duta Bangsa (UDB) Universitas Sebelas Maret (UNS)
Surakarta, Indonesia Surakarta, Indonesia
[email protected] [email protected]

Ratu Betta Rudibyani Ryzal Perdana

Faculty of Teacher Traning and Education Educational Science, Doctoral Program
Universitas Lampung Universitas Sebelas Maret (UNS)
Lampung, Indonesia Surakarta, Indonesia
[email protected] [email protected]

Sajidan K. F. Nuri Wulandari

Science Education, Postgraduate Program Teacher, SMA Negeri 7 Kediri
Universitas Sebelas Maret (UNS) Kediri, Indonesia
Surakarta, Indonesia
[email protected]

Abstract—The study aims to analyze students inquiry skills in

senior high school through the learning based-on the Hierarchy I. INTRODUCTION
of Inquiry Model. The research with purposive sampling The process of learning science can increase curiosity,
technique. Participants in this study sample were grade XI involve active learning, improve understanding through
students of the 2016-2017 Academic Year State High School. The problem solving so that it encourages students to carry out
subjects of this study sample were 234 students. The instruments
scientific inquiry [23]. [2] States that biology is a science part
used weretests level of inquiry and observation sheets of
of science contains the nature of science. Learning biology is a
independent skills consisting of 40 questions. The results of this
study indicate that discovery learning is 79.26% with criteria
change in behavior of students who emphasize the nature of
skilled, inteactive demonstration of 74.13% with criteria that are science built on scientific methods or processes, scientific
sufficiently skilled, inquiry lesson of 52.42% is less skilled, the products, scientific attitudes. Scientific method or process is a
inquiry laboratory consisting of the guided inquiry laboratory is definite step in observing, investigating a problem. Scientific
44.36%, bounded laboratory inquiry for 36.47%, free laboratory products include facts, principles, theory and law.
inquiry for 34.36% overall with less skilled skills, real work Biology as one of the science subjects that can be used as
applications at 33.81%, less skilled, and hypotetical inquiry
an excellent medium for nature to train various skills of
30.55% with very poor skills. The conclusions of this study
indicate that using the learning model of level of inquiry can
students. Through scientific phenomena, students can practice
train students' skills with the maximum ability to sharpen their skills and involve students in conducting investigations such as
skills and skills to reach that level in order to achieve better or identifying problems, formulating questions and hypotheses,
higher criteria. This is very necessary so that students are planning and carrying out experiments, collecting data,
accustomed to exploring the potential in high-level thinking presenting results, and drawing conclusions on scientific
because with accustomed to high-level thinking, students will phenomena [12], [18]. These skills have a positive impact on
have high cognitive skills and independence in student learning students on the scientific process, scientific attitudes in
producing reconstruction of meaning, important scientific
Keywords: analysis of students, inquiry skills, Hierarchy of products in the competencies of students so that the
Inquiry Model development of students' potential can be explored, grown and
formed well.

Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Atlantis Press SARL.

This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license -http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. 409
 Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 422

One effort in presenting Biology as a product and the of students inquiry skills in senior high school through learning
process of discovery or investigation with an-based learning based-on the hierarchy of inquiry model.
model inquiry. This is in line with the statement [13], [5], [11]
which states that inquiry is a multifaceted activity involving II. METHODS
observation and questions, examination of sources of
information, searching and investigating to find out what seen This research was conducted using qualitative descriptive
and needed identification and used critical thinking, analytical method with purposive sampling technique. Participants in the
as well as logical and considering alternative explanations study sample were all students of grade XI in one of the high
based-on inquiry strategies combine questions and active schools in Kediri which amounted to 234 students. Porposive
involvement to learn students to use active, continuous, and sampling technique. The instrument used was the test level of
based on one's knowledge skills involving exploration, inquiry and the observation sheet of independent skills
questioning, making discoveries and testing of the invention to consisting of 40 questions. Students' skills are shown at each
find a new understanding [20], [16]. level level with student level inquiry grading instruments.
Students' skills are interpreted according to categories with the
The inquiry learning by Wenning (2005a) known as criteria as shown in Table 1 as follows.
learning Hierarchy of inquiry. Level of learning activities
inquiry sequentially based on the intelligence of the intellectual
TABLE I. INTERPRETATION OF SKILLS INVOLVING STUDENTS
is also the controller. Thelevel inquiry is related to 1) learning
discovery; 2) interactive demonstration; 3) inquiry lesson; 4) Category Interpretation
inquiry laboratory consists of guided inquiry laboratory, 0,00%-30,00% Very less skiled
bounded inquiry laboratory, free inquiry laboratory; 5) real 31,00%-54,00% Less skilled
worllication application; 6) hypothetical inquiry [28]. There are 55,00%-74,00% Sufficiently skilled
six types of intellectual process skills found at each stage of
75,00-89,00% Skilled
Levels of Inquiry, namely rudimentary skills, basic skills,
intermediate skills, integrated skills, culminating skills, and 90,00-100,00% Highly skilled
advanced [26]. The use of stages and series of levels of inquiry
can apply inquiry exercises by training different intellectual
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
abilities. So that students' mental skills can be improved [30],
[20]. Conducting tests of independent skills aims to find out how
much students master the levels in the inquiry. Assessment
Students can explore skills and skills to develop thinking instruments aslevel are inquiry students'used to assess the
habits and critical reasoning skills, intellectual skills, actively results of theskills test inquiry. The students 'self-sufficient
engage and be effective in scientific processes, solve problems skills are shown at each level with the 40 students' level of
scientifically, question conventional wisdom, and be able to inquiry assessment instruments. The results of the analysis of
find strong evidence supporting their arguments [6], [21]. students' self-test skills are presented in Table 1 and Figure 1 as
Students can formulate their own findings confidently with the follows.
learning model. Students' skills are expected to grow and
develop and be more productive [9], [11]. This has until now
been felt to make a big problem in biology learning. Biology TABLE II. RESULT OF ANALYSIS ON THE TEST OF STUDENTS INQUIRY
SKILLS FOR GRADE XI IN SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL.
learning in senior high schools is still emphasized mastery of
concepts, not yet trained in the basic skills of science in Hierarki of inquiry/ Level of
Persentase Interprestasi
students, for example the skills of self-reliance. The lack of inquiry
inquiry skills can not be separated from the learning model Discovery learning 79,26% Skilled
Sufficiently
used so far. Teachers still dominate in learning Biology. The Inteactive Demonstration 74,13%
skilled
reality of the problem description above shows that the Biology Inquiry Lesson 52,42% Less skilled
learning process has not been carried out optimally andsteps Inquiry Laboratory :
must be found that the rightto improve the biology learning Guided Inquiry Laboratory 44.36% Less skilled
process. Appropriate efforts to improve the learning process by Bounded Inquiry Laboratory 36.47% Less skilled
applying learning models applying the learning model level of Free Inquiry Laboratory 34.36% Less skilled
inquiry or the level of self-activity. Based on the above Real work applications 33.81% Less skilled
background it is necessary to conduct a study entitled analysis Hypotetical inquiry 30.55% Very less skilled

410
 Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 422

Fig. 1. Histogram result of of Analysis on the Test of Students Inquiry Skills for Grade XI in Senior High School.

Based on Table 1 and Figure 1 shows that the results of the teacher to conduct an investigation making it easier for students
independent skills test were given to one of the upper grade XI to know what they can do with instructions given by the
schools in Kediri. The results of percentage achievement are teacher [14].
shown in each level with the following gains: 1) discovery
learning at 79.26%, 2) inteactive demonstration at 74.13%, 3) Skills related to students at the level of Discovery learning
inquiry lesson at 52.42%, 4) inquiry laboratory consisting of have the highest value, namely criteria skilled. This is because
at the level of discovery learning, many teachers provide
guided inquiry laboratory for 44.36%, bounded inquiry
laboratory at 36.47%, free inquiry laboratory at 34.36%, 5) real questions that are guiding and directing to guide students in
work applications at 33.81% , 6) hypotetical inquiry 30.55%. constructing student knowledge. Students are much trained in
Based on the results of students' inclined skill test, it can be inquiry skills observing, formulating concepts, interpreting or
seen that the results of level 1 discovery learning are skilled, estimating, making conclusions, communicating results, and
level 2 inteactive demonstration is quite skilled, level 3 inquiry classifying results. Antisis students conduct investigations to
lesson has a less skilled level, level 4 inquiry laboratory look for relationships between variables that have been found
consisting of guided inquiry laboratory, bounded inquiry from level discovery learning [28],[19]. Learning at the level
laboratory and, free inquiry laboratory as a whole is less Discovery learning peserta didik lebih focus terlibat aktif
skilled, level 5 real work applications are less skilled and level dalam Learning at the level of Discovery learning more
6 hypotetical inquiry is less skilled. focused learners are actively involved in developing
knowledge, students can find concepts and connect facts that
Level of inquiry learning intellectual intelligence that is exist in science so that indirectly students' cognitive abilities
owned is needed starting from discovery learning to will increase. Teachers using the Discovery learning model
hypothetical Inquiry because the thought process is needed to have reached this level well [26].
control an investigation. The involvement of the teacher
controller to students. Learning discovery learning is almost The skills associated with students at the Interactive
entirelyactivities. inquiry within the control of teachers' demonstration level have a value that is not too high, which is
Teachers dominate more learning activities.learning quite skilled. This is because at the Interactive level the
hypothetical inquiry where theactivities inquiry as a whole are demonstration of students has been trained in independent
submitted to students. Students dominate learning and the skills predicting, explaining, estimating, collecting data and
teacher as a companion, and oversee learning activities [11]. processing data, formulating and revising explanations based
on logic and evidence and recognizing and analyzing
The all indicators of independent skills in each level are alternative learning models. This happens because teachers
trained so that students have good abilities. This shows that experience difficulties in managing time so that the learning
students 'ability to emerge during the learning process using process at the interactive demonstration level is less than
levels of inquiry is relatively good which has a positive impact optimal. Interactive demonstration activities include
on students' ability to reflect [11]. The ability of students to demonstrations carried out by the teacher regarding
participate in the levels of inquiry that have the highest score is experiments that take place interactively, predicting and
level discovery learning, at this level the teacher still provides explaining (how things can happen) from students [28]. Skills
material before the student conducts an investigation and the involving students at the Interactive level demonstration of
teacher still directs many students in carrying out the students can develop cognitive abilities and problem solving
experiment. At this level students are still much guided by the students can develop through questions given by the teacher

411
 Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 422

based on the tools shown because the teacher's learning model classified as less skilled [23], [1]. So that students are less able
determines the cognitive abilities and thinking skills of to solve problems in laboratory investigations students are less
students. The level of interactive demonstration of students can actively involved in the learning process. The skills associated
be known by giving questions about the learning activities that with students at the inquiry laboratory level (guided inquiry
have been carried out or used by the teacher in daily learning. laboratory, bounded inquiry laboratory , free inquiry laboratory
Skills involving students at the Interactive level of ) are expected to reach a level well with the teacher providing
demonstration are expected to reach a level well with the the skills training to the maximum so that the level of
teacher providing the skills training to the fullest so that independence and inquiry skills of students can increase higher
students are more highly skilled in thinking [15]. [25], [28].
The skills associated with students at the Inquiry lesson Students with the lowest score of the real work applications
level have a low value, which is less skilled. This is because at level are less skilled. This is because at the level of real work
the Inquiry lesson level students are not trained in independent applications students lack training in competent skills
skills measuring, collecting and recording data, making tables collecting, evaluating and interpreting data from various
of observations, planning experiments, using mathematics and sources, communicating logical arguments based on evidence,
technology and explaining relationships. Inquiry lesson level scientific evidence, making and maintaining decisions. Real
skills, student inquiry abilities have decreased. This is because work applications that require high level skills in
students are less able to maximize their ability to act as the implementation, because at this level students are asked to
party that controls learning according to the provisions at the solve real world problems, real-world applications are similar
inquiry lesson level. In the measurements taken the results to project-based solutions [26], [27]. In the real world the
obtained 52.42%, which means the ability of students already application of locus of control is almost entirely played by
meet the criteria of intermediate skills, so that teachers can use students, because students organize and manipulate activities
inquiry learning in accordance with the character of the individually, while the role of the teacher here is an indirect
material to be taught. Learning at the Inquiry level encourages guide to directing students [28]. The measurement results were
students to act scientifically in the investigation of a 33.81% with less skilled interpretations which meant that
phenomenon as well as a scientist. in inquiry studies students students were unfamiliar and less skilled in using real world
are asked to control and manipulate activities to achieve application models so that they still needed further training to
learning goals so that they indirectly play an important role in reach that level.
inquiry [28]. Students are asked to think hard to find learning
goals with scientific inquiry and gather as much information as Skills related to hypothetical inquiry levels are the highest
possible to draw conclusions and to be directed so that they can level of the demand spectrum of by [28] at the advanced level
be applied in daily life [3], [4]. Learning inquiry lessons students are required to conduct pure investigations which
emphasizes thinking through scientific inquiry. The students' means that investigations are carried out to acquire new
skills involved in the Inquiry lesson level are expected to reach knowledge for themselves rather than focus on general
a level that is good with the teacher giving the skills training to knowledge. At this level, the teacher acts as a companion and
the fullest so that students are more skilled in thinking [15]. the locus of control is fully held by students because students at
this level are students who have high cognitive levels [28]. The
Students' skills at the Inquiry laboratory level have low skills associated with students who have the lowest score,
scores, which are less skilled. This is due to the fact that at the namely the level of hypothetical inquiry, are very less skilled.
laboratory level students are less trained in creative skills This is because at the hypothetical inquiry level students
measuring with tools, building empirical laws on the basis of lacking in trained skills synthesize complex hypothetical
evidence, logic, designing experiments and doing. because the explanations, analyze and evaluate scientific arguments,
teacher reduces the intensity in giving questions guiding generalize predictions through a process of deduction, revise
students in forming concepts, students have difficulty in hypotheses and predictions based on new evidence and solve
carrying out investigative activities [27], [29]. Students' skills real life problems [22], [24]. The role of the teacher in the
at the Inquiry laboratory level were divided into 3 types based learning process has been greatly reduced even here students
on their level of ability and control, including guided inquiry are required to conduct investigations independently. Starting
laboratory at 44.36%, bounded inquiry laboratory at 36.47%, from designing experiments to be carried out to conducting
free inquiry laboratory at 34.36%, Skills involving students as a experiments by students themselves [25], [28]. Students
whole at the inquiry laboratory level. inferior ability is low, this experience difficulties when designing experiments and
is because the teacher reduces the intensity in giving questions students also experience difficulties when drawing a concept
guiding students in forming concepts, students have difficulty because there are differences between theories and the results
in carrying out investigative activities [6], [10]. Students are of observations from the experiments conducted. At this level
less independent in designing and developing experiments and students need more time than previous levels. Students are not
can analyze data according to the investigation. Laboratory accustomed to using hypothetical inquiry level models so that
investigations here not only mean studying in the laboratory they need to be trained more optimally to hone their skills and
but also emphasizing how students can relate the concepts they skills to reach that level in order to achieve better or higher
already know to the results of their investigations [17],[7]. In criteria. This is very necessary so that students are accustomed
laboratory investigations, students are faced with complex to exploring the potential in high-level thinking because with
problems that require high mental processes but the fact is that accustomed to high-level thinking, students will have high
students' overall skills in the Inquiry laboratory level are cognitive abilities [27].

412
 Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 422

IV. CONCLUSION [14] Lederman, N. G, Lederman, J. S., & Antink, A. 2013. Nature of science
and scientific inquiry as contexts of learning science and achievement of
The results of the study can be concluded that the analysis scientific literacy. International Journal of Education in Mathematics,
of students inquiry skills in senior high school through learning Science and Technology, 1(3), pp 138-147.
based-on the hierarchy of inquiry model. The result research of [15] Maria, B., Marjan, G., An, L., Parappilly, M. B., Siddiqui, S., Zadnik,
1) discovery learning shows at 79.26%, 2) inteactive M. G., & Shapter, J. 2013 An Inquiry-Based Approach to Laboratory
Experiences : Investigating Students â€TM Ways of Active Learning.
demonstration at 74.13%, 3) inquiry lesson is 52.42%, 4) Jounal of innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 21(5), pp
inquiry laboratory consisting of guided inquiry laboratory of 42–53.
44.36%, bounded inquiry laboratory of 36.47%, free inquiry [16] Mokiwa, H. O. 2014 Inquiry-Based Teaching in Physical Science :
laboratory of 34.36%, 5) real work applications of 33.81% , 6) Teachers ’ Instructional Practices and Conceptions. Mediterranean
hypotetical inquiry 30.55%. The use of the level of inquiry Journal of Social Sciences, 5(23), 1074–1082.
learning model can train students' full-fledged skills to hone http://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n23p1074
their skills and skills to reach that level in order to achieve [17] Mäeots, M., Pedaste, M., & Sarapuu, T. 2008. Transforming students’
better or higher criteria. This is very necessary so that students inquiry skills with computer-based simulations. In 8th IEEE
International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, pp 1–5
are accustomed to exploring the potential in high-level thinking July. Santander, Spain. doi:10.1109/ICALT.2008.239.
because with accustomed to high-level thinking, students will [18] National Research Council of American (NRC). 1996. National science
have high cognitive skills and independence in student education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
learning. [19] Nline, O., Jackson, J., & Wenning, C. J. 2010. Levels of Inquiry: Using
inquiry spectrum learning sequences to teach science," Journal of
Physics Teacher Education 5(4), pp 11-20.
REFERENCES
[20] Nline, O., Malone, K., & Wenning, C. J. 2007. Assesing Inquiry Skills
[1] Aydın, G. 2016. Impacts of Inquiry-Based Laboratory Experiments on as a Component of: Scientific Literacy," Journal of Physics Teacher
Prospective Teachers ’ Communication Skills, Internasional Online Education 4(2), pp 1-32.
Journal of Educational Sciences, 8(38), pp 49–61.
[21] Nuangchalerm, P .2017. Inquiry-Based Learning in China: Lesson
[2] Carin, Arthur A. & Robert B. Sund. 1989. Teaching science through Learned for School Science Practices. Journal Asian Social Science.
discovery. Columbus: Charless E. Merrill Publishing Company, Abell & 10(13), pp 64-71. http://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v10n1p64.
Howell Company
[22] Ødegaard, M., Haug, B., Mork, S. M., & Sørvik, G. O. 2014. Challenges
[3] Chen, H. T., Wang, H. H., Lin, H. S., Lawrenz, F. P., & Hong, Z. R. and Support When Teaching Science Through an Integrated Inquiry and
2014. Longitudinal Study of an After-school, Inquiry-based Science Literacy Approach. International Journal of Science Education, 36(18),
Intervention on Low-achieving Children’s Affective Perceptions of pp 2997–3020. http://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.942719
Learning Science. International Journal of Science Education, 36(13), pp
[23] Pedaste M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., Jong, T. De, Zacharia, Z. C., &
2133–2156. http://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.910630
Tsourlidaki, E. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning : Definitions
[4] Dobber, M., Zwart, R, Tanis, M., & vanOers, B. 2017 Literature review: and the inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review, 14, pp 47–61.
The role of the teacher in inquiry-based education. Educational Research https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003
Review, 22, pp 194-214 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.002
[24] Suardana, I. nyoman, Redhana, I. wayan, Sudiatmika, A. A. I. A. R., &
[5] Hanauer, D. I. 2009. Active Assessment: Assessing Scientific Inquiry, Selamat, I. nyoman. 2018. Students ’ Critical Thinking Skills in
Mentoring in Academia and Industry 2, DOI 10.1007/978-0-387-89649- Chemistry Learning Using Local Culture-Based 7E Learning Cycle
6 2, ?C Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009 Model. International Journal of Instruction, 11(2),pp 399–412
[6] Aydın, G. 2016. Impacts of Inquiry-Based Laboratory Experiments on [25] Suduc, A., Bizoi, M., & Gorghiu, G. 2015. Inquiry Based Science
Prospective Teachers ’ Communication Skills, Internasional Online Learning in Primary Education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral
Journal of Educational Sciences, 8(38), pp 49–61. Sciences, 205(5), 474–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.09.044
[7] Carin, Arthur A. & Robert B. Sund. 1989. Teaching science through [26] Sutman, F.X, Schmuckler, J.S & Woodfield, J.D. 2008. The Science
discovery. Columbus: Charless E. Merrill Publishing Company, Abell & Quest: Using Inquiry/Discovery to Enhance Student Learning, San
Howell Company Francisco. Jossey-Bass
[8] Chen, H. T., Wang, H. H., Lin, H. S., Lawrenz, F. P., & Hong, Z. R. [27] Strippel, C. G., & Sommer, K. 2015. Teaching Nature of Scientific
2014. Longitudinal Study of an After-school, Inquiry-based Science Inquiry in Chemistry: How do German chemistry teachers use labwork
Intervention on Low-achieving Children’s Affective Perceptions of to teach NOSI. International Journal of Science Education, 37(18), pp
Learning Science. International Journal of Science Education, 36(13), pp 2965–2986. http://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1119330
2133–2156. http://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.910630
[28] Trna, J., Trnova, E., an Sobor, J. 2012 Implementation of Inquiry-Based
[9] Dobber, M., Zwart, R, Tanis, M., & vanOers, B. 2017 Literature review: Science Education in Science Teacher Training. Journal of Education
The role of the teacher in inquiry-based education. Educational Research and Instructional Studies in the World. 2(4), pp 1-36
Review, 22, pp 194-214 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.002
[29] Van Uum, M. S. J., Verhoeff, R. P., & Peeters, M. 2017 Inquiry-based
[10] Hanauer, D. I. 2009. Active Assessment: Assessing Scientific Inquiry, science education: scaffolding pupils’ self-directed learning in open
Mentoring in Academia and Industry 2, DOI 10.1007/978-0-387-89649- inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 0(0), pp 1–21.
6 2, ?C Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009 http://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1388940
[11] Hofstein, A. V. I., Nahum, T. L., & Shore, R. 2001. Assessment of the [30] Wenning, C. J. 2004. Levels of inquiry : Hierarchies of pedagogical
learning environment of inquiry-type laboratories in high school practices and inquiry processes. Journal of Physics Teacher Education
chemistry, pp 193–207 Online, pp 175–176
[12] Kluge, A. 2014 Combining Laboratory Experiments with Digital Tools [31] Wenning, C. J. 2005. Implementing inquiry-based instruction in the
to Do Scientific Inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, science classroom : A new model for solving the improvement-of-
36(13), pp 2157–2179. http://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.916456 practice problem. Journal of Physics Teacher Education Online, 2(4),pp
[13] Kukkonen, J. E., Kärkkäinen, S., Dillon, P., & Keinonen, T. 2014 The 9–15
Effects of Scaffolded Simulation-Based Inquiry Learning on Fifth- [32] Wenning, C. J. 2012. Levels of inquiry : Using inquiry spectrum
Graders’ Representations of the Greenhouse Effect. International Journal learning sequences to. J. Phys. Tchr. Educ., 5(1), pp 11–20
of Science Education, 36(3), 406–424.
[33] Wenning, C. J., Ed, D., Khan, M. A., Lecturer, S., Khan, A., &
http://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.782452
Secondary, H. 2011. Levels of Inquiry Model of Science Teaching :

413
 Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 422

Learning sequences to lesson plans. Journal of Physics Teacher [35] Yee, M. H., Yunos, J., Othman, W., Hassan, R., Tee, T. K., &
Education 6(2), pp 17–20. Mohaffyza, M. 2015. ScienceDirect Disparity of Learning Styles and
[34] Wenning, C. J., Teacher, P., & Coordinator, E. 2007. Assessing inquiry Higher Order Thinking Skills among Technical Students. Procedia -
skills as a component of scientific literacy. Journal of Physics Teacher Social and Behavioral Sciences, 204(11), pp 143–152.
Education Online, 1, pp 21–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.08.127

414