Contribution of critical thinking, science process skills towards learning outcomes based on gender

International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE)
Vol. 12, No. 4, December 2023, pp. 1985~1993
ISSN: 2252-8822, DOI: 10.11591/ijere.v12i4.24927  1985
Journal homepage: http://ijere.iaescore.com
Contribution of critical thinking, science process skills towards
learning outcomes based on gender
Supratman1
, Siti Zubaidah2
, Muhammad Rafi’i Ma’arif Tarigan3
, Suhartini Azis4
1
Biology Education Department, Samawa University, Sumbawa Besar, Indonesia
2
Biology Education Department, Universitas Negeri Malang, Malang, Indonesia
3
Biology Education Department, Universitas Islam Negeri Sumatera Utara, Medan, Indonesia
4
Biology Education Department, Universitas Muhammadiyah Bulukumba, Bulukumba, Indonesia
Article Info ABSTRACT
Article history:
Received Oct 11, 2022
Revised Sep 14, 2023
Accepted Sep 28, 2023
The purpose of this study is to ascertain importance of scientific reasoning
and process abilities to students’ learning outcomes based on gender
differences. This type of research uses the kind of correlation research. This
research was carried out for one semester a sample of 104 students studying
biology in senior high schools in Sumbawa, Indonesia, with a total of 55
female and 49 male students. In this study, multiple-choice examinations
were used to assess the students’ science process skills as well as their
critical thinking abilities and learning outcomes. The findings the results of
the multiple regression analysis demonstrate that the scientific method and
critical thinking abilities are strongly correlated effectively children learn,
depending on the gender difference. The importance of critical thinking
abilities’ positive effects on learning outcomes of the female students was
81.60% and towards the learning results of the male students was 59.1. The
usefulness of the science process skill in terms of practical contribution
variable towards the learning results of the female students was 4.5%, and
the male students were 20.6%. This means that the average simultaneous is
classified as high. However, science process skills' contribution to learning
results is relatively low. The research finding shows that the science process
skills have a low effective contribution towards students’ learning results
based on gender differences, needs to be a serious concern. That is,
implementing the appropriate learning models to enhance the development
of science process abilities.
Keywords:
Critical thinking
Gender
Learning outcomes
Science process
This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA license.
Corresponding Author:
Supratman
Biology Education Department, Samawa University
Unter Iwes, Sumbawa, West Nusa Tenggara 84316, Indonesia
Email: supratman.sep1984@gmail.com
1. INTRODUCTION
In the last few decades, there have been many research reports on the correlation between critical
thinking skills, science process skills, metacognitive skills, and learning results. However, the results of the
research investigating the correlation between two predictor variables simultaneously, namely critical
thinking skills and science process skills, towards learning results have not been revealed. The correlational
study between critical thinking skills and learning results found a significant correlation between critical
thinking skills and learning results based on levels of education [1], [2]. Another researches also reported a
significant correlation between critical thinking skills and learning results based on different learning models
[3]–[5]. Other research that uses learning results as the criterion variable was conducted [6], [7]. This
research reported that metacognitive skills significantly correlated with students’ biology learning results.

 ISSN: 2252-8822
Int J Eval & Res Educ, Vol. 12, No. 4, December 2023: 1985-1993
1986
Arisoy and Aybek [8] also found that students with good critical thinking skills strongly contributed to their
learning results.
Correlational research between science process skills and students’ learning results found a
significant correlation between science process skills and students’ learning outcomes in science learning [9],
[10]. Other research on the contribution of science process skills towards learning results was conducted [11],
which indicated that science process skills had a high contribution towards students’ learning results.
Academic achievement, in this case, students’ cognitive learning results, is one of the critical variables that
should be taught to students because it is closely related to learning styles [12]. On the other hand, the
research by Mazana, Montero, and Casmir [13] found that statistically, there was a significant correlation
between students’ attitudes and their learning achievement through the implementation of specific learning
models. Kamba et al. [14] found that there was a correlation between the level of students’ science process
skills and their attitudes toward science learning.
In connection with the various research findings, learning results become one of the focuses of this
research. Learning results are the students’ abilities after receiving a learning experience [15]. Uge, Neolaka,
and Yasin [16] divided learning results into three types, namely skills and habits, knowledge, and guidance.
Shuja et al. [17] also stated that independent learning is strongly related to students’ academic achievement.
Akbari and Sahibzada [18] said that students with high self-confidence might make more efforts to achieve
better learning results than those with low confidence and low motivation to learn.
Learning results are the impacts a person obtains after learning activities, including changes in
knowledge, attitudes, and skills in the learning [19]. Learning results play an essential role in achieving the
students’ future success. Lack of attention to students’ academic achievement can decrease students’ learning
results [20]. Research by Tran [21] pointed out that students’ learning results can be improved by improving
their motivating students. The students’ low involvement in learning is thought to be one of the factors
causing the students’ common learning results [22]. Learning processes that involve cognition include
receiving external stimuli by sensory, storing and processing the stimulants in the brain to become
information, which can be retrieved to solve problems [23]. Learning results can be helpful feedback for
teachers in implementing the learning process to determine whether or not a diagnosis, placement, or
guidance for students are necessary [24].
In addition to learning results, critical thinking skills also have an essential role in ensuring quality
education and students’ learning success [25]. Critical thinking is one of the crucial factors contributing to
improving students’ academic achievement [26]. Critical thinking today is an educational outcome highly
appreciated by the entire spectrum of education, especially in higher and professional education. Many
research results have suggested the importance of designing educational strategies based on learning styles to
improve students’ critical thinking skills. In addition to critical thinking skills, student learning styles are
important factors that play a fundamental role in the problem-solving process in the learning [27]. Students
can conduct an evaluation and observe every problem comprehensively, so they are ready to face global
competition with good critical thinking skills [28]. Utami et al. [29] stated that empowering students’ critical
thinking skills in every learning process is required.
An important factor that can affect the improvement of students’ learning results is students’ science
process skills. Students’ science process skills can be empowered by practicing scientific problem-solving to
find information independently [30]. Science process skills are essential in improving students’ thinking
process in the learning [30]. Improving students’ science process skills is primarily determined by the
student’s efforts to realize and understand the science and technology field’s development [31]. Science
process skills play an essential role in scientists and everyone who should master these skills to solve
everyday problems. Science process skills are cognitive and psychomotor skills used in issue-solving,
problem identification, data collection, transformation, interpretation, and communication [32].
In this research, the indicators of integrated science process skills include; identifying variables,
interpreting data, formulating hypotheses, providing operational definitions, and conducting experiments
[33]. Science process skills are defined as skills that help to learn, find ways and methods to do investigations
and research, increase lifelong learning, make students active, increase students’ responsibilities and
understanding of practical studies, increase students’ sense of responsibility for their learning [34], [35].
Science process skills are a learning process used to solve scientific problems using scientific methods.
Science process skills are tools for identifying problems, formulating hypotheses about issues, making valid
predictions, identifying and defining variables, and designing experiments to test hypotheses [36].
Research on the correlation between gender differences and critical thinking skills has been widely
reported. For example, research by several researchers [37]–[39] revealed that there was a significant
difference in critical thinking skills between male students and female students. In addition, research on
science process skills based on gender differences by Zubaidah et al. [40] found a significant difference in
science process skills between female and male students at implementing different learning strategies.

Int J Eval & Res Educ ISSN: 2252-8822 
Contribution of critical thinking, science process skills towards learning outcomes … (Supratman)
1987
Darmaji et al. [41] in the research on the contribution of critical thinking skills and science process skills
based on gender reported that the critical thinking skills of female students were better than those of male
students. In contrast, the science process skills of male students in learning tended to be better than those of
female students [42]. Bećirović [43] found a strong correlation between students' motivation and learning
results based on gender differences in biology learning.
Based on the results of the previous research, this research aims at showing the contribution of
critical thinking skills and science process skills towards students’ learning results based on gender
differences in biology learning of senior high schools in Sumbawa, Indonesia. What has been updated in this
research is that there have been many research results related to correlation tests related to science process
skills, metacognitive skills, and other 21st-century skills variables. However, correlation research that
simultaneously uses two predictor variables, namely skills critical thinking and scientific process skills on
learning outcomes, has never been revealed; this has become a renewal in this research. The study’s
contribution is by looking at the relationship between the two predictor variables and the measured variables.
2. RESEARCH METHOD
This correlational research investigates the multiple contributions of critical thinking and science
process skills to students’ learning results based on gender differences. In this research, critical thinking and
science process skills are used as the predictor variables, while learning results are used as the criterion
variable. The population of this research was all students of class X in the even semester of the academic year
in biology learning. The total samples of this research were 104 students, consisting of 49 male students and
55 female students. The sampling technique used is random sampling. The samples were distributed to
different schools, namely Senior High School 1 Moyo Utara, Senior High School 1 Moyo Hulu, Senior High
School 1 Lape, and Senior High School 1 Alas. The four schools were located in different districts and sub-
districts in Sumbawa, Indonesia.
This research was carried out for six months using specific learning models. The research data were
collected using an essay test of 20 question items. The essay test was administered two weeks after the
posttest to obtain data about the student’s critical thinking skills, science process skills, and learning results.
Zubaidah et al. [40] stated the critical thinking skills were measured by referring to the rubric developed with
the indicators focus, reason, inference, clarity, and overview. The indicators of the integrated science process
skills in this research included; identifying variables, interpreting data, formulating hypotheses, providing
operational definitions, and conducting experiments [44].
The normality and homogeneity of the data were analyzed using Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. After
that, the hypothesis testing was carried out using multiple regression analysis with a significance level of 5%
to determine the contribution of critical thinking skills and science process skills toward students’ learning
results based on gender differences. Before the instrument was used, it had been initially tested for its validity
and reliability through empirical validation. The results of the validity and reliability test using the Cronbach
alpha formula for critical thinking skills were declared valid and reliable with a significance value of (0.01)
and a reliability value of (0.90). Similarly, the science process skill test was also declared valid and reliable.
The data analysis in this research uses multiple regression analysis (ANOVA) using SPSS 23.0 for Windows.
3. RESULTS
3.1. The contributions of critical thinking skills and science process skills toward the learning results
of male students
The results of the ANOVA analysis in Table 1 show a significant correlation between critical
thinking skills and science process skills towards the learning. The results of the analysis show that male
students have an Fcount=142.410 with a significance level (0.000). The data in Table 2 are the regression
equation between critical thinking skills and science process skills towards the learning results of male
students, with the regression equation of Y =13.566 - 0.870X1 + 0.057X2. The results of the multiple
regression in Table 3 show that the (R) value between the critical thinking skills and science process skills
toward the retention of male students is 0.928. The practical contribution value in Table 4 shows that the
simultaneous contributions of critical thinking are 81.60%. While the contribution value to science process
skills is 4.5% in explaining the learning outcomes of male students.

 ISSN: 2252-8822
1988
Table 1. ANOVA on the correlation between critical thinking skills and science process skills, and male
students’ learning outcomes
ANOVAa
Model Sum of squares df Mean square F Sig.
1 Regression 3530.999 2 1765.499 142.410 .000b
Residual 570.274 46 12.397
Total 4101.273 48
Table 2. Regression coefficient of male students
Coefficientsa
Model Unstandardized coefficients Standardized coefficients
Beta T Sig.
B Std. Error
(Constant) 13.566 3.427 3.959 .000
1 CriticalMan .870 .062 .883 14.071 .000
ScienceMan .057 .041 .087 1.388 .172
Table 3. Multiple regression of male students
Model summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the estimate
1 .928a
.861 .855 3.52097
Table 4. Contribution of critical thinking skills and science process skills to male students’ learning outcomes
Variable Relative contribution (%) Effective contribution (%)
X1 (Critical thinking skills) 94.80 81.60
X2 (Science process skills) 5.2 4.5
Total 100 86.10
3.2. The contribution of critical thinking and science process skills to female students’ learning results
The results of the ANOVA analysis in Table 5 show that the value of Fcount=102.172 with a
significance level (0.000). This means that there is a significant correlation between critical thinking skills
and science process skills in the learning results of female students. The regression coefficient value in
Table 6 indicates that the regression equation is Y=15.309–0.719X1+0.182X2.
Table 5. ANOVA on the correlation between critical thinking, science process skills, and female students’
learning outcomes
ANOVAa
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 2613.442 2 1306.721 102.172 .000b
Residual 665.050 52 12.789
Total 3278.492 54
Table 6. Regression coefficient of female students
Coefficientsa
Model Unstandardized coefficients Standardized coefficients
Beta T Sig.
B Std.Error
(Constant) 15.309 4.485 3.413 .001
1 CriticalMan .719 .076 .692 9.405 .000
ScienceMan .182 .044 .306 4.156 .000
The results of multiple regression analysis in Table 7 show that the (R) value is 0.893. This means
there is a significant correlation between critical thinking skills and science process skills toward the learning
results. Table 8 shows that the simultaneous contribution of critical thinking and science process skills in
explaining the learning results of the female students is 59.1%. While the science process skills of 20.6% in
explaining the learning outcomes of female students.

1989
Table 7. Multiple regression of female students
Model summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the estimate
1 .893a
.797 .789 3.57623
Table 8. Contribution of critical thinking and science process skills to female students’ learning outcomes
Variable Relative contribution (%) Effective contribution (%)
X1 (Critical thinking skills) 74.18 59.1
X2 (Science process skills) 25.82 20.6
Total 100 79.7
4. DISCUSSION
The multiple regression analysis results show a significant correlation between critical thinking skills
and science process skills towards students’ learning results based on gender differences in biology learning.
The results of the analysis on the simultaneous contribution of the two predictor variables towards the criterion
variable, in this case, critical thinking skills and science process skills towards students’ learning results indicate
that the simultaneous contribution value in both male and female students in explaining students’ learning
results is categorized as very high criteria. The results of the multiple regression analysis (Tables 1 and 5) show
that the value of Fcount in male students is 142.410 with a significance level (0.000). Similarly, the value of Fcount
in female students is 102.172 with a significance level of (0.000).
The results of this analysis indicate a significant correlation between critical thinking skills and science
process skills towards the students’ learning results based on gender differences. This finding is in line with the
research results by Muhan and Nasrudin [45], which reported that critical thinking skills had a significant
correlation with student learning results. Other research findings related to the criterion variable, in this case,
found that there was a significant correlation between metacognitive skills and student learning results at the
implementation of certain learning models [46]–[48]. Fuad et al. [4] also reported no significant correlation
between critical thinking skills and student self-efficacy in the performance of certain learning models.
However, there was a significant difference between students' critical thinking skills and learning results based
on differences in education levels.
Previous research findings related to the correlation between science process skills and learning
results found that there was a significant correlation between science process skills and student learning
results in science learning [10], [49], [50]. Another research conducted by Kamba et al. [14] found a
significant correlation between science process skills and students’ attitudes toward implementing different
learning strategies. However, the research results Darmaji et al. [41] found no significant correlation between
critical thinking skills and science process skills viewed based on gender differences. Achieving optimal
science process skills requires a combination of high-order thinking skills, one of which is the critical
thinking skills [14]. Critical thinking skills have a statistically positive predictive effect on science process
skills [51]. Implementing integrated learning models can be a recommendation to improve the students’
science process skills and academic achievement [52].
The results of multiple regression analysis (Tables 2 and 6) show that the regression equation is
Y=13.566–0.870X1+0.057X2with the contribution value of 86.10% in explaining the learning results of male
students. The correlation coefficient (R) value is 0.928. In addition, the results of the multiple regression
analysis show that the equation is Y=55.726–0.143X1+ 0.51X2, with a contribution value of 79.7% in
explaining the learning results of female students with a correlation coefficient value (R) of 0.893. Based on
the simultaneous contribution value of each variable based on gender, it can be explained that critical
thinking and science process skills have a very high contribution value toward the students’ learning results.
This finding is in line with the research results Bahri and Corebima [46], reporting that learning motivation
and metacognitive skills have a very high contribution value towards the students’ learning results at the
implementation of different learning models. Other research conducted by Kristiani et al. [53] reported that
metacognitive skills and scientific attitudes significantly contribute to students’ academic achievement.
Furthermore, Adiansyah et al. [54] also stated that metacognitive skills and motivation significantly
contribute to students’ retention in biology learning.
Correlational research compares students’ personality factors’ relative contribution to their academic
achievements based on learning strategies. The results of the multiple regression analysis showed that the
personality test has a strong effective contribution towards improving students’ learning results. Yanuarti and
Rosmayanti [55] also examined the correlation between students’ motivation, independent learning, and
academic achievement. Pintrich examined students’ self-efficacy, intrinsic value, anxiety tests, and self-
regulation. The results of the correlation analysis showed that self-efficacy, inherent value, anxiety value, and
self-regulation positively correlate with students’ learning results at the implementation of different learning

 ISSN: 2252-8822
1990
strategies. Panadero [56] stated that characterizing self-regulated learning as an adjustment of one’s cognitive
activities and processes to the demands of certain learning situations can be continually done.
The findings of this research also indicate that critical thinking skills have a very highly effective
contribution toward students’ learning results based on gender differences (Tables 4 and 8). These results
follow the research results by previous researchers [57]–[59] stated that there is a difference in critical
thinking skills based on gender between male and female students where the critical thinking skills of the
female students are higher than those of the male students. Kumar and James [60] explained that female
students have more developed argumentation skills than male students. Songsil et al. [61] stated that in the
social aspect, women can deal with more complex problems than men, and women have a good level of
prudence, flexible thinking, and self-confidence. Other research findings also showed no significant
difference in critical thinking skills between males and females despite several research reports stating that
females are superior to males in critical thinking skills [58].
The analysis results indicate that science process skills are relatively low in learning results based on
gender differences. The simultaneous contribution value of science process skills in female students is higher
than in male students. However, regarding critical thinking skills, it is found that the essential contribution of
thinking skills toward learning results in male students is more significant than in female students. This
finding is in line with the research by Ramdani et al. [62], which reported that science process skills have a
significant effect on gender differences. Other research by Dahlia et al. [42] found a significant difference in
science process skills between male and female students. Female students have a higher contribution value in
achieving science process skills than male students [63]. Using scientific methods in scientific processes can
help teachers conduct scientific work practices [64], [65]. Based on this theoretical study, it can be explained
that using scientific activities in science learning can improve students’ science process skills.
Previous research findings showed the low effective contribution of science process skills towards
students’ learning results are likely due to several factors, including the students’ learning motivation and
attitude, which were not optimal [46]. Kristiani et al. [53] stated that the low contribution of students’
learning results is likely due to the students’ low motivation and attitudes in carrying out science learning
activities. Zulirfan et al. [66] also stated that students with good science process skills will achieve better
learning results. On the other hand, science process skills are defined as a learning process used to solve
problems effectively using scientific methods [67]. Students who can push their learning activities properly
will guarantee the continuity of their earnings and provide direction to the learning activities to achieve the
learning goals [68]. Based on these theoretical facts, it can be explained that the soft science process skills in
this research might be caused by internal and external factors, especially related to students’ learning
motivation and attitudes during the learning process.
5. CONCLUSION
The average simultaneous relation relating critical thinking abilities to the outcomes of learning is
classified as high, but the gift of science process skills towards learning results is relatively low. The research
finding, which shows that the science process skills have a low effective contribution towards students’
learning results based on gender differences, needs to be a serious concern, that is implementing the
appropriate learning models to enhance the acquisition of science process abilities. The analysis results on the
effective each predictor variable’s contribution to the criterion variable indicate that the capacity for critical
thought of male students have a higher practical contribution value towards students’ learning results than
those of female students. In comparison, the science process skills of the female students have a higher
practical contribution value towards the students’ learning results than those of the male students. The
functional contribution value of science process skills is often poor for both male and female students.
REFERENCES
[1] J. Siburian, A. D. Corebima, Ibrohim, and M. Saptasari, “The correlation between critical and creative thinking skills on cognitive
learning results,” Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, vol. 2019, no. 81, pp. 99–114, 2019, doi: 10.14689/ejer.2019.81.6.
[2] E. Anggraeny and S. Khongput, “Teachers’ Teachers’ perceptions and practices of critical thinking instruction in Indonesian
senior high schools: a case study,” Teflin Journal, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 1–26, 2022, doi: 10.15639/teflinjournal.v33i1/1-26.
[3] A. Fitriani, S. Zubaidah, H. Susilo, and M. H. I. Al Muhdhar, “The correlation between critical thinking skills and academic
achievement in biology through problem based learning-predict observe explain (PBLPOE),” International Journal of Learning,
vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 170–176, 2020, doi: 10.18178/IJLT.6.3.170-176.
[4] N. M. Fuad, S. Zubaidah, S. Mahanal, and E. Suarsini, “Improving junior high schools’ critical thinking skills based on test three
different models of learning,” International Journal of Instruction, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 101–116, 2017, doi:
10.12973/iji.2017.1017a.
[5] Supratman, S. Zubaidah, A. D. Corebima, and Ibrohim, “The effect size of different learning on critical and creative thinking
skills of biology students,” International Journal of Instruction, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 187–206, 2021, doi: 10.29333/iji.2021.14311a.

1991
[6] M. Y. Afoan and A. D. Corebima, “The correlation of metacognitive skills and learning results toward students’ retention of
biology learning: students learning only to pass examinations,” Educational Process: International Journal, vol. 7, no. 3,
pp. 171–179, 2018, doi: 10.22521/edupij.2018.73.1.
[7] L. Naimnule and A. D. Corebima, “The correlation between metacognitive skills and critical thinking skills toward students’
process skills in biology learning,” Journal of Pedagogical Research, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 122–134, 2018.
[8] B. Arisoy and B. Aybek, “The effects of subject-based critical thinking education in mathematics on students’ critical thinking
skills and virtues*,” Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, vol. 2021, no. 92, pp. 99–120, 2021, doi:
10.14689/ejer.2021.92.6.
[9] Zainuddin et al., “The correlation of scientific knowledge-science process skills and scientific creativity in creative responsibility
based learning,” International Journal of Instruction, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 307–316, 2020, doi: 10.29333/iji.2020.13321a.
[10] E. Karademir and U. Ulucinar, “Examining the relationship between middle school students’ critical reading skills, science
literacy skills and attitudes: a structural equation modeling,” Journal of Education in Science, Environment and Health, vol. 3,
no. 1, pp. 29–29, 2016, doi: 10.21891/jeseh.275669.
[11] S. N. Kane, A. Mishra, and A. K. Dutta, “Preface: International Conference on Recent Trends in Physics (ICRTP 2016),” Journal
of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 755, no. 1, 2016, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/755/1/011001.
[12] M. J. Z. Abidin, A. A. Rezaee, H. N. Abdullah, and K. K. B. Singh, “Learning styles and overall academic achievement in a
specific educational system,” International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, vol. 1, no. 10, pp. 143–152, 2011.
[13] M. Y. Mazana, C. S. Montero, and R. O. Casmir, “Investigating students’ attitude towards learning mathematics,” International
Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 207–231, 2018, doi: 10.29333/iejme/3997.
[14] A. H. Kamba, A. A. Giwa, I. A. Libata, and G. T. Wakkala, “The relationship between science process skills and student attitude
toward physics in senior secondary school in Aliero metropolis,” African Educational Research Journal, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 107–
113, 2018, doi: 10.30918/aerj.63.18.038.
[15] Sulasih, A. Suparmi, and Sarwanto, “Profile of student critical thinking ability on static fluid concept,” Journal of Physics:
Conference Series, vol. 909, no. 1, 2017, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/909/1/012060.
[16] S. Uge, A. Neolaka, and M. Yasin, “Development of social studies learning model based on local wisdom in improving students’
knowledge and social attitude,” International Journal of Instruction, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 375–388, 2019, doi:
10.29333/iji.2019.12323a.
[17] A. Shuja, I. A. Qureshi, D. M. Schaeffer, and M. Zareen, “Effect of m-learning on students’ academic performance mediated by
facilitation discourse and flexibility,” Knowledge Management and E-Learning, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 158–200, 2019, doi:
10.34105/j.kmel.2019.11.009.
[18] O. Akbari and J. Sahibzada, “Students’ self-confidence and its impacts on their learning process,” American International
Journal of Social Science Research, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–15, 2020, doi: 10.46281/aijssr.v5i1.462.
[19] Y. Yusnaeni, A. D. Corebima, H. Susilo, and S. Zubaidah, “Creative thinking of low academic student undergoing search solve
create and share learning integrated with metacognitive strategy,” International Journal of Instruction, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 245–
262, 2017, doi: 10.12973/iji.2017.10216a.
[20] R. Nazempour, H. Darabi, and P. C. Nelson, “Impacts on students’ academic performance due to emergency transition to remote
teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic: A financial engineering course case study,” Education Sciences, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 1–
14, 2022, doi: 10.3390/educsci12030202.
[21] V. D. Tran, “Does cooperative learning increase students’ motivation in learning?” International Journal of Higher Education,
vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 12–20, 2019, doi: 10.5430/ijhe.v8n5p12.
[22] G. Maheshwari, “Factors affecting students’ intentions to undertake online learning: an empirical study in Vietnam,” Education
and Information Technologies, vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 6629–6649, 2021, doi: 10.1007/s10639-021-10465-8.
[23] O. E. Backsanskij and E. A. Dergacheva, “Cognitive processes of the brain and learning theory,” Proceedings of the International
Scientific Conference “Far East Con” (ISCFEC 2020), 2020, vol. 128, pp. 66–70, doi: 10.2991/aebmr.k.200312.010.
[24] A. S. Munna and M. A. Kalam, “Teaching and learning process to enhance teaching effectiveness: literature review,”
International Journal of Humanities and Innovation (IJHI), vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1–4, 2021, doi: 10.33750/ijhi.v4i1.102.
[25] P. J. A. C. van der Zanden, E. Denessen, A. H. N. Cillessen, and P. C. Meijer, “Fostering critical thinking skills in secondary
education to prepare students for university: teacher perceptions and practices,” Research in Post-Compulsory Education, vol. 25,
no. 4, pp. 394–419, 2020, doi: 10.1080/13596748.2020.1846313.
[26] R. Nur’azizah, B. Utami, and B. Hastuti, “The relationship between critical thinking skills and students learning motivation with
students’ learning achievement about buffer solution in eleventh grade science program,” Journal of Physics: Conference Series,
vol. 1842, no. 1, pp. 1–9, 2021, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1842/1/012038.
[27] F. Shirazi and S. Heidari, “The relationship between critical thinking skills and learning styles and academic achievement of
nursing students,” Journal of Nursing Research, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 1–7, 2019, doi: 10.1097/jnr.0000000000000307.
[28] A. Halim, Ngadimin, Soewarno, Sabaruddin, and A. Susanna, “Improvement of high order thinking skill of physics student to
prepare human resources in order to faced of global competition in ASEAN economic community,” Journal of Physics:
Conference Series, vol. 1116, no. 3, pp. 1–7, 2018, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1116/3/032009.
[29] B. Utami, R. M. Probosari, S. Saputro, Ashadi, and M. Masykuri, “Empowering critical thinking skills with problem solving in
higher education,” Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 1280, no. 3, 2019, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1280/3/032047.
[30] I. Damopolii, V. T. Botutihe, and J. H. Nunaki, “The contribution of science process skill towards students cognitive achievement
through guided inquiry-based learning,” Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 1317, no. 1, pp. 1–6, 2019, doi:
10.1088/1742-6596/1317/1/012184.
[31] A. Sideri and M. Skoumios, “Science process skills in the Greek primary school science textbooks,” Science Education
International, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 231–236, 2021, doi: 10.33828/sei.v32.i3.6.
[32] V. Sönmez, “Association of cognitive, affective, psychomotor and intuitive domains in education, Sönmez model,” Universal
Journal of Educational Research, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 347–356, 2017, doi: 10.13189/ujer.2017.050307.
[33] S. Oktavia and U. P. Dewi, “Description of integrated science process skills in physics education students in convex mirror
practicum,” Formatif: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan MIPA, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 103–114, 2020, doi: 10.30998/formatif.v10i2.5036.
[34] Suryanti, W. Widodo, and W. Budijastuti, “Guided discovery problem-posing: An attempt to improve science process skills in
elementary school,” International Journal of Instruction, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 75–88, 2020, doi: 10.29333/iji.2020.1336a.
[35] J. O. Manes, A. Calimlim, and E. Nalupa-Farin, “Acquisition of science process skills of junior high school students among
private schools of Olongapo city,” East African Scholars Journal of Education, Humanities and Literature, vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 146–
159, 2022, doi: 10.36349/easjehl.2022.v05i06.002.
[36] B. K. Temiz, “Assessing skills of identifying variables and formulating hypotheses using scenario-based multiple-choice
questions,” International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–15, 2020, doi: 10.21449/ijate.561895.

 ISSN: 2252-8822
1992
[37] S. Marni, M. Aliman, S. Suyono, R. Roekhan, and T. Harsiati, “Students’ critical thinking skills based on gender and knowledge
group,” Journal of Turkish Science Education, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 544–560, 2020, doi: 10.36681/tused.2020.44.
[38] Mawaddah, A. Ahmad, and M. Duskri, “Gender differences of mathematical critical thinking skills of secondary school
students,” Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 1088, 2018, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1088/1/012054.
[39] I. Shubina and A. Kulakli, “Critical thinking, creativity and gender differences for knowledge generation in education,” Literacy
Information and Computer Education Journal, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 3086–3093, 2019, doi: 10.20533/licej.2040.2589.2019.0405.
[40] S. Zubaidah, A. D. Corebima, S. Mahanal, and Mistianah, “Revealing the relationship between reading interest and critical
thinking skills through remap GI and remap jigsaw,” International Journal of Instruction, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 41–56, 2018, doi:
10.12973/iji.2018.1124a.
[41] D. Darmaji, A. Astalini, D. A. Kurniawan, and W. A. Putri, “Science process skills and critical thinking ability assessed from
students’ gender,” Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika Indonesia, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 83–95, 2022, doi: 10.15294/jpfi.v18i1.30534.
[42] I. Dahlia Yuliskurniawati, N. Ika Noviyanti, W. Rosyadah Mukti, S. Mahanal, and S. Zubaidah, “Science process skills based on
genders of high school students,” Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 1241, no. 1, 2019, doi: 10.1088/1742-
6596/1241/1/012055.
[43] S. Bećirović, “The relationship between gender, motivation and achievement in learning English as a foreign language,”
European Journal of Contemporary Education, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 210–220, 2017, doi: 10.13187/ejced.2017.2.210.
[44] M. B. Panjaitan and A. Siagian, “The effectiveness of inquiry based learning model to improve science process skills and
scientific creativity of junior high school students,” Journal of Education and e-Learning Research, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 380–386,
2020, doi: 10.20448/journal.509.2020.74.380.386.
[45] L. A. Muhan and H. Nasrudin, “The correlation analysis between critical thinking skills and learning outcomes through
implementation of guided inquiry learning models,” Jurnal Pendidikan Sains (JPS), vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 33–41, 2021, doi:
10.26714/jps.9.1.2021.33-41.
[46] A. Bahri and A. D. Corebima, “The contribution of learning motivation and metacognitive skill on cognitive learning outcome of
students within different learning strategies,” Journal of Baltic Science Education, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 487–500, 2015, doi:
10.33225/jbse/15.14.487.
[47] L. T. Antika, “The relationship between metacognition skills with the student’s achievement: the implementation of reading-
concept Map-Think Pair Share (Remap TPS) model,” Jurnal Pena Sains, vol. 5, no. 1, p. 19, 2018, doi: 10.21107/jps.v5i1.3629.
[48] Winarti, S. E. Ambaryani, and H. Putranta, “Improving learners’ metacognitive skills with self-regulated learning based problem-
solving,” International Journal of Instruction, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 139–154, 2022, doi: 10.29333/iji.2022.1528a.
[49] S. Ilma, M. H. I. Al-Muhdhar, F. Rohman, and M. Saptasari, “The correlation between science process skills and biology
cognitive learning outcome of senior high school students,” JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 55–64,
2020, doi: 10.22219/jpbi.v6i1.10794.
[50] S. Samputri, “Science process skills and cognitive learning outcomes through discovery learning models,” European Journal of
Education, vol. 6, no. 12, pp. 181–189, 2020, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.3678615.
[51] Darmaji, D. A. Kurniawan, Astalini, R. Perdana, Kuswanto, and M. Ikhlas, “Do a science process skills affect on critical thinking
in science? Differences in urban and rural,” International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), vol. 9,
no. 4, pp. 874–880, 2020, doi: 10.11591/ijere.v9i4.20687.
[52] F. Prafitasari, S. Sukarno, and M. Muzzazinah, “Integration of critical thinking skills in science learning using blended learning
system,” International Journal of Elementary Education, vol. 5, no. 2, p. 434, 2021, doi: 10.23887/ijee.v5i3.35788.
[53] N. Kristiani, H. Susilo, F. Rohman, and D. C. Aloysius, “The contribution of students’ metacognitive skills and scientific attitude
towards their academic achievements in biology learning implementing Thinking Empowerment by Questioning (TEQ) learning
integrated with inquiry learning (TEQI),” International Journal of Educational Policy Research and Review, vol. 2, no. 9,
pp. 113–120, 2015, doi: 10.15739/IJEPRR.020.
[54] R. Adiansyah, A. M. Amin, A. Ardianto, and A. Yani, “Metacognitive skill profile of biology education students at institute of
teachers’ education in South Sulawesi, Indonesia,” JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 150–158, 2022,
doi: 10.22219/jpbi.v8i2.20732.
[55] H. Yanuarti and D. Rosmayanti, “The relationship between students’ motivation and their learning achievement,” PROJECT
(Professional Journal of English Education), vol. 1, no. 6, p. 783, 2019, doi: 10.22460/project.v1i6.p783-788.
[56] E. Panadero, “A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research,” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 8,
pp. 1–28, 2017, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00422.
[57] D. E. Sari, I. Hindun, N. Mahmudati, F. J. Miharja, and A. Fauzi, “Are male and female students different in high-order thinking
skills?” JPI (Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia), vol. 9, no. 1, p. 42, 2020, doi: 10.23887/jpi-undiksha.v9i1.17575.
[58] R. Perdana, Budiyono, Sajidan, and Sukarmin, “Analysis of Student critical and creative thinking (CCT) skills on chemistry: a
study of gender differences,” Journal of Educational and Social Research, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 43–52, 2019, doi: 10.2478/jesr-2019-
0053.
[59] S. P. Kawuryan, S. A. Sayuti, and Aman, “Critical thinking among fourth grade elementary school students: A gender
perspective,” Cakrawala Pendidikan, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 211–224, 2022, doi: 10.21831/cp.v41i1.44322.
[60] R. Kumar.R and R. James, “Evaluation of critical thinking in higher education in Oman,” International Journal of Higher
Education, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 33–43, 2015, doi: 10.5430/ijhe.v4n3p33.
[61] W. Songsil, P. Pongsophon, B. Boonsoong, and A. Clarke, “Developing scientific argumentation strategies using revised
argument-driven inquiry (rADI) in science classrooms in Thailand,” Asia-Pacific Science Education, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–22,
2019, doi: 10.1186/s41029-019-0035-x.
[62] A. Ramdani, A. W. Jufri, Gunawan, M. Fahrurrozi, and M. Yustiqvar, “Analysis of students’ critical thinking skills in terms of
gender using science teaching materials based on the 5e learning cycle integrated with local wisdom,” Jurnal Pendidikan IPA
Indonesia, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 187–199, 2021, doi: 10.15294/jpii.v10i2.29956.
[63] D. Darmaji, A. Astalini, D. A. Kurniawan, and E. F. S. Rini, “Gender analysis in measurement materials: Critical thinking ability
and science processing skills,” Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Fisika Al-Biruni, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 113–128, 2022, doi:
10.24042/jipfalbiruni.v11i1.11509.
[64] Supeno, S. Astutik, and A. D. Lesmono, “Pre-service science teachers’ understanding of scientific method for studying local
environmental issues,” IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, vol. 485, no. 1, 2020, doi: 10.1088/1755-
1315/485/1/012033.
[65] N. Indrilla, “The effectiveness of scientific approach and contextual teaching and learning approach in teaching writing,” Lingua
Cultura, vol. 12, no. 4, p. 405, 2018, doi: 10.21512/lc.v12i4.4452.

1993
[66] Z. Zulirfan, M. Rahmad, Y. Yennita, N. Kurnia, and M. S. Hadi, “Science Process Skills and Attitudes toward Science of Lower
Secondary Students of Merbau Island: A Preliminary Study on The Development of Maritimebased Contextual Science Learning
Media,” Journal of Educational Sciences, vol. 2, no. 2, p. 90, 2018, doi: 10.31258/jes.2.2.p.90-99.
[67] S. Yamtinah, M. Masykuri, M. Ashadi, and A. Shidiq, “An Analysis of Students’ Science Process Skills in Hydrolysis Subject
Matter Using Testlet Instrument,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Teacher Training and Education 2017 (ICTTE
2017), 2017, vol. 158, pp. 101–110, doi: 10.2991/ictte-17.2017.36.
[68] L. Darling-Hammond, L. Flook, C. Cook-Harvey, B. Barron, and D. Osher, “Implications for educational practice of the science
of learning and development,” Applied Developmental Science, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 97–140, 2020, doi:
10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791.
BIOGRAPHIES OF AUTHORS
Supratman is a lecturer in the Biology Education Department, Faculty of
Mathematics and Sciences Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Samawa,
Indonesia. His research interest includes biology education, media and learning resource,
critical thinking, metacognitive skills, local wisdom and student dan century skills. He can be
contacted at email: supratman@universitas-samawa.ac.id; supratman.sep1984@gmail.com.
Siti Zubaidah is a professor in the Biology Department, Faculty of Mathematics
and Sciences, Universitas Negeri Malang, Indonesia. Her research interests include biology
education, critical thinking, metacognitive skills, local wisdom and student attitudes. She can
be contacted at email: siti.zubaidah.fmipa@um.ac.id.
Muhammad Rafi’i Ma’arif Tarigan is a lecturer in the Biology Education
Department, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Islam Negeri Sumatera
Utara, Indonesia. His research interest includes biology education, media and learning
resources, taxonomy, ecology, ethnobotany, and local wisdom. Now, he focuses on Nepenthes
taxonomy and ecology and has conducted research on Nepenthes pitcher plants in the forest of
the islands of Java, Kalimantan, Sulawesi and Sumatra in Indonesia. He can be contacted at
email: rafiimagister8@gmail.com, mhdrafiimaariftarigan@uinsu.ac.id.
Suhartini Azis is a lecturer in the Biology Education Department, Faculty of
Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Muhammadiyah Bulukumba, Indonesia. Her
research interests include biology education, media and learning resources, ethnobotany, local
knowledge and local wisdom. She can be contacted at email: suhartini.albio@gmail.com.
Mhd. Rafi’i Ma’arif Tarigan is a lecturer in the Biology Education
Department, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Islam Negeri
Sumatera Utara.. His research interest includes biology education, media and learning
resources, taxonomy, ecology, ethnobotany, and local wisdom. Now, he focuses on
Nepenthes taxonomy and ecology and has conducted research on Nepenthes pitcher
plants in the forest of the islands of Java, Kalimantan, Sulawesi and Sumatra in
Indonesia. Affiliation:Department of Biology Education, Faculty of Teacher Training
and Education, Universitas Islam Negeri Sumatera Utara, Indonesia. . He can be
contacted at: mhdrafiimaariftarigan@uinsu.ac.id

Contribution of critical thinking, science process skills towards learning outcomes based on gender

More Related Content

Similar to Contribution of critical thinking, science process skills towards learning outcomes based on gender (20)

More from International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE) (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Contribution of critical thinking, science process skills towards learning outcomes based on gender