Development of Grade 11 Students’ the 21st Century Skills about Critical Thinking in Learning about Reproduction of Flowering Plants through Science Technology and Society (STS) Approach
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This research aimed to enhance Grade 11 students’ 21st century skills about critical thinking in learning about reproduction of flowering plants through Science Technology and Society (STS) Approach. Methodology regarded interpretive paradigm. The participants of this study were 45 Grade 11 students consisted of 29 females and 16 males (aging between 16-17 yours old) in a large sized urban public high school located in the northeastern of Thailand. The STS reproduction unit consisted of 5 lesson plans (7 hours) aligned with each stage of Yuenyong (2006) STS approach. Students’ critical thinking abilities were interpreted via participant observations, students’ worksheets, and informal interviews. The data analysis aimed to categorize students' abilities align with Nakmanurak (1994) structured framework of critical thinking. This structured framework comprising seven steps: 1) identifying the problem, 2) collecting information, 3) evaluating the credibility of information sources, 4) identifying relevant information, 5) formulating hypotheses, 6) drawing conclusions, and 7) evaluating the process and outcomes. Findings revealed that the majority of students held good ability of critical thinking. Even though students could share their ability thinking in the same ability, they had different levels of ability in each element.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Aikenhead, G.S. (1994). What is STS teaching?. (Solomon, J. &Aikenhead, G., Eds.), STS education: International perspectives on reform. New York: Teachers College Press, 47-59.
Aryowong, N. (2011). Scientific literacy of grade 12 student through teaching and learning about genetic. Degree of Master of Education Thesis in Science Education Graduate School Khon Kaen University. Bassham, G., Irwin, W., Nardone, H. & Wallace, M.J. (2011). Critical Thinking. 4thed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Attapan, N. and Yuenyong, C. (2019). Explicit Nature of Science in the STS Contact Lens “Big Eyes” Unit. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1340 (1), 012066
Bellanca, J. & Brandt, R. (2011).21st century skills: Rethinking how students learn. (Panit, W & Jittaruek, A.(translated). Bangkok: Openworlds.
Ennis, R.H. (1987). A taxonomy of critical thinking dispositions and abilities. In J. Baron & R. Sternberg (Eds.), Teaching thinking skills: Theory and practice. (pp. 9-26). New York: W.H. Freeman.
Ennis, R. H. (2016). Critical thinking across the curriculum: A vision. TOPOI: An International Review of Philosophy DOI:10.1007/s11245-016-9401-4.
Facione, P. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction.” Available as a download on the Insight Assessment website, under Resources.
Fisher, A. & Scriven, M. (1997). Critical thinking: Its definition and assessment. Point Reyes, CA: Edgepress.
Griffthes, A.J.F. (2003). Community Based Biology. Canada: University of British Columbia.
Hudgins, B.B., & Edelman, S. (1988). Children’s thinking in physic science. Journal of Education Reserch, 88, 15-26.
Jumpatong, S. and Yuenyong, C. (2018). Developing the STS sound pollution unit for enhancing students’ applying knowledge among science technology engineering and mathematics. AIP Conference Proceedings. 1923, 030023-1 – 030023-7.
Kitroongrueng, P. (2010). The development of an instructional model using case based learning based on science of teaching to enhance student teachers’ critical thinking. Doctor of Education Thesis in Department of Curriculum and Instruction Graduate School Silpakorn University.
Lazarowitz, R., &Penso, S. (1992). High school students’ difficulties in learning biology concepts. Journal of Biological Education, 26(3), 215-224.
Nakmanulack, P. (1994). Development of Learning Model for Enhancing Pre-Service Teacher’ Critical Thinking. Chulalongkorn University: Bangkok
Nongkhunsarn, A., Yuenyong, C., Tupsai, J., and Sranamkam, T. (2019). Grade 11 Student’s Mental Model of Fluid and Analytical Thinking in Science Teaching Through Science Technology and Society (STS) Approach. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1340 (1), 012043
Office of the National Education Commission. (2003). Synopsis of the National Scheme of Education of B.E. (2002-2016) (2nd ed.), Bangkok: Office of the National Education Commission.
Osborne, J. & Collins, S. (2001). Pupils' views of the role and value of the science curriculum. International Journal of Science Education, 23(5), 441-467.
Osman, K., Abdul Hamid, S.H., and Hassau, A. (2009). “Standard Setting: Inserting Domain of the 21th Century Thinking Skills into the Existing Science Curriculum in Malaysia. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 234-241.
Phonhan, A. (2011). Grade 10 students’ learning achievement and decision making ability about homeostasis based on Yuenyong (2006) science technology and society (STS)approach. Degree of Master of Education Thesis in Science Education Graduate School Khon Kaen University.
Ruksapukdee, P. (2012). Matayomsuksa 6 students’ decision-making ability and achievement about genetics and DNA technology in science learning through science technology and society (STS) approach. Degree of Master of Education Thesis in Science Education Graduate School Khon Kaen University.
Suparee, M., and Yuenyong, C. (2021). Enhancing Grade 11 Students’ Learning and Innovation Skills in the STS Electric Unit. Asia Research Network Journal of Education, 1 (2), 96-113
Thipruetree, S. (2012). Problem solving ability and science learning achievement about genetic and biotechnology of Mathayomsuksa IV students taught through science technology and society (STS approach). Degree of Master of Education Thesis in Science Education Graduate School Khon Kaen University.
Volman, M. (2004). Critical thinking as a citizenship competence: Teaching strategies, Learning and Instruction, 14, 359-379.
Waisalong, P. (2012). Students’ understanding of the nature of science by using science technology and society (STS) approach in biodiversity. Degree of Master of Education Thesis in Science Education Graduate School Khon Kaen University.
Wongsila, S. and Yuenyong, C. (2019). Enhancing Grade 12 Students’ Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving Ability in Learning of the STS Genetics and DNA Technology Unit. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 7(2), 215-235.
Yuenyong, C. (2006). Teaching and Learning about Energy: Using STS approach. Doctor of Education Thesis in Science Education Graduate School Kasetsart University
Yuenyong, C. and Narjaikaew, P. (2009). Scientific literacy and Thailand science education. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education,4(3), 335-349.
Yuenyong, C. (2013). Enhancing Scientific Literacy in Thailand. Global Studies of Childhood, 3(1): 86 – 98
Yuenyong, C. (2017). Enhancing Thai Students’ Thinking Skills about Energy issues: Influence of Local Values. Chemistry: Bulgarian Journal of Science Education, 26 (3): 363 – 376
Zeidan, A. (2010). The Relationship between grade 11 Palestinian attitudes toward biology and their perceptions of the biology learning environment. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8, 783-800.
Zoller, U. (1993). Lecture and learning: are they compatible? Maybe for LOCS: unlikely for HOCS, Journal of Chemical Education, 70, 195-197.
Zoller, U., Dori, Y. & Lubezky, A., (2002). Algorithmic, LOCS and HOCS (chemistry) exam questions: performance and attitudes of college students, International Journal of Science Education, 24, 185-203.