Enhancing Critical Thinking Ability and Learning Achievement through a Science, Technology, and Society (STS) Approach for Grade-10 Biology on the Topic of the Chemistry Basis of Life
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study aimed to 1) compare the critical thinking ability of students before and after applying the Science, Technology, and Society (STS) learning approach, and
2) compare students’ academic achievement on the topic "Chemistry Basis of Life" with the 70% criterion. The sample group consisted of 40 Grade-10 students from Phadungnaree School in the first semester of the 2024 academic year, selected using cluster sampling. Research instruments included: 1) six STS-based lesson plans over 18 hours, evaluated as highly appropriate (mean scores = 4.31–4.33, S = 0.54–0.58); 2) a Critical Thinking Test comprising 12 situational scenarios with 30 multiple-choice items (difficulty = 0.40–0.73, discrimination = 0.20–0.47, reliability = 0.82); and 3) an Academic Achievement Test with 40 multiple-choice items (difficulty = 0.43–0.73, discrimination = 0.23–0.43, reliability = 0.76). Data were analyzed using mean, standard deviation, percentage, One-Sample t-test, and Normalized Gain (<g>). The results revealed that: 1) students’ critical thinking ability significantly improved after STS learning, with an overall normalized gain (<g>) score of 0.58, which is considered a moderate level. When analyzing the improvement in each subskill of critical thinking, it was found that all aspects showed a moderate level of gain. The <g> descending order were as follows: comprehension (<g> = 0.66), identifying assumptions (<g> = 0.63), deductive reasoning (<g> = 0.62), evaluating arguments (<g> = 0.52), and drawing inferences (<g> = 0.49). And 2) students’ academic achievement was significantly higher than the 70% criterion at the .05 significance level. The findings suggest that STS-based learning enhances both critical thinking and academic performance. It is recommended that future studies explore its integration with problem-solving, creativity, and teamwork development to support diverse learners and promote real-world application of scientific knowledge.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Aikenhead, G. S. (2005). Science-based occupations and the science curriculum: Concepts of evidence. International Journal of Science Education, 27(3), 269–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069042000323756
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. Longmans, Green.
Boesdorfer, S. B., & Lorsbach, A. (2014). Assessing the STS approach in science education: Benefits and challenges. Science Educator, 23(1), 1–9.
Bybee, R., & Landes, N. M. (1990). Science for life and living: An elementary school science program from Biological Sciences Improvement Study (BSCS). American Biology Teacher, 52(2), 92–98.
Carin, A. A. (1997). Teaching modern science (7th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Cavas, P. (2011). Factors affecting the motivation of Turkish primary students for science learning. Science Education International, 22(1), 31–42.
Facione, P. A. (2015). Critical thinking: What it is and why it counts. Insight Assessment.
Herrity, J. (2023). The importance of training employees: 11 benefits. Indeed.
Kowtrakul, S. (2016). Educational psychology (12th ed.). Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University Press.
Lomsombut, J. (2017). The study of learning outcomes through the teaching activities based on Science, Technology, and Society (STS) approach on the topic of the human body among Grade 6 students. Master’s Thesis. Mahasarakham: Rajabhat Mahasarakham University.
Ministry of Education. (2022). Guidelines for assessment and evaluation in primary and secondary education. Bangkok: Ministry of Education.
Mulyanti, S., Halim, A., Murniati, S., Ilyas, S., Syukri, M., & Mursal, M. (2021). The impact of the science technology society (STS) approach on critical thinking ability and student learning outcomes. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1882(1), 012026. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1882/1/012026
National Institute of Educational Testing Service (Public Organization). (2023). Summary of the Ordinary National Educational Test (O-NET) results for Grade 12, academic year 2022.
National Institute of Educational Testing Service (Public Organization). Retrieved March 2023 from https://www.niets.or.th/th/content/view/25620
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2008). Critical thinking: The nuts and bolts of education. Optometric Education, 33(3), 88–91.
Phadungnaree School. (2023). Self-assessment report (SAR) for the academic year 2023. Thailand.
Pimchan, O., & Samranwanit, W. (2014). The study of students' understanding of the nature of science in Grade 9 through learning about life and the environment using the Science, Technology, and Society (STS) approach and identifying the nature of science. KKU Science Journal, 42(4), 748–760.
Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x
Saputri, W. D., Harahap, F., & Rosita, N. T. (2021). The effect of STS (Science-Technology-Society) learning model on students’ critical thinking skills. Journal of Educational Science and Technology, 7(2), 155–161. https://doi.org/10.26858/est.v7i2.20319
Soodsane, D. (2018). Supplementary potential process about critical thinking of learners in the 21st century with consistent natural science. Bangkok: Office of the Basic Education Commission Ministry of Education. [in Thai]
Office of the Basic Education Commission. (n.d.). Guidelines for learning assessment and evaluation (pp. 22–23). Retrieved May 8, 2025, from https://sgs.bopp-obec.info/menu/data/ระเบียบงานวัดผล.pdf
Office of the Education Council Secretariat, Ministry of Education. (2014). Guidelines for the development of Thai education in preparation for the 21st century. Bangkok: Prikwarn Graphic Co., Ltd.
Office of the National Education Commission. (2006). Creative thinker: Educational management manual for who has a talent of high-level thinking skills. Bangkok: Ratanapornchai. [in Thai]
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Wattanakasiwich, P., & Ananta, S. (2010). Scientific reasoning ability and attitude toward physics of first-year students. Chiang Mai University Journal of Natural Sciences, 9(2), 223–233.
Watson, G., & Glaser, E. M. (1964). Watson-Glaser critical thinking appraisal manual. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace & World.
Yager, R. E., & Tamir, P. (1993). STS approach: Reasons, intentions, accomplishments, and outcomes. Science Education, 77(6), 637–658. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730770603PhilPapers+1ERIC+1
Yager, R. E. (1996). Science/Technology/Society as Reform in Science Education. State University of New York Press.
Yager, R. E., & Akçay, H. (2008). Comparison of student learning outcomes in middle school science classes with an STS approach and a typical textbook-dominated approach. RMLE Online, 31(7), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1940/4476
Yager, R. E., & Akcay, H. (2008). Comparison of student learning outcomes in STS-based and textbook-based science education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 4(1), 13–20. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75304
Yager, R. E., & Akçay, H. (2010). The impact of a science/technology/society teaching approach on student learning in five domains. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19(6), 602–611. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-010-9226-7
Yuenyong, C., & Yuenyong, J. (2007). Grade 1 to 6 Thai students’ existing ideas about energy. ICASE Science Education International, 18(4), 289–298.