• Ambrose, B. S., Shafer, P. S., Steinberg, R. N., & McDermott, L. (1999). An investigation of student understanding of single-slit diffraction and double-slit diffraction. American Journal of Physics, 67(2), 146 – 155. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.19210.
• Armagan, F. Ö., Sagır, S. U., & Çelik, A. Y. (2009). The effects of students’ problem solving skills on their understanding of chemical rate and their achievement on this issue. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, 2678–2684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.473.
• Assefa, S. (2016). Impact of Conceptual Change Approach on Conceptual Knowledge, Procedural Knowledge and Knowledge Transfer. Staff and Educational Development International, 20(1), 15–37.
• Bennett, J. (2003). Context-based approaches to the teaching of science. In: Teaching and Learning of Science (pp. 99-122). London, UK: Continuum.
• Bowden, J., Dall’Alba, G., Martin, E., Laurillard, D., Marton, F., Master, G., Ramsden, P., Stephanau, A., & Walsh, E. (1992). Displacement, velocity, and Frames of reference: Phenonemographic studies of students’ understanding and some implications for teaching and assessment. American Journal of Physics, 60(3), 262 – 269. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.16907.
• Center for Occupational Research and Development (CORD). (1999). Teaching Science Contextually: The Cornerstone of Tech Prep. Waco, Texas: CORD Communications.
• Clement, J. (1982). Students’ preconceptions in introductory mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 50(1), 66 – 71. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.12989.
• Cohen J. (1988).Statistical power analysis for the behavioral science (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2001). Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics, 69(9), 970 – 977. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1374249.
• Demirci, N., Duman, İ., & Şekercioğlu, A. (2015). University Students’ Difficulties and Misconceptions on Rolling, Rotational Motion and Torque Concepts. International Journal on New Trends in Education and their Implications, 6(1), 46 – 54.Fraenkel, J.R & Wallen, N. E. (1996). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: McGraw Hill Inc.
• Docktor, J. L., Dornfeld, J., Frodermann, E., Heller, K., Hsu, L., Jackson, K. L., … Yang, J. (2016). Assessing student written problem solutions: A problem-solving rubric with application to introductory physics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12, 010130. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010130.
• Docktor, J. L., Strand, N. E., Mestre, J. P., & Ross, B. H. (2015). Conceptual problem-solving in high school physics. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 11, 020106. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.11.020106.
• Dufresne, R. J., Gerace, W. J., Hardiman, P. T., & Mestre, J. P. (1992). Constraining Novices to Perform Expertlike Problem Analyses: Effects on Schema Acquisition. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(2), 307 -331.
• Gerace, W. J., & Beatty, I. D. (2005). Teaching vs. Learning: Changing Perspectives on Problem-solving in Physics Instruction. An invited talk at the 9th Common Conference of the Cyprus Physics Association and Greek Physics Association: Developments and Perspectives in Physics - New Technologies and Teaching of Science. Nicosia, Cyprus, Feb 4-6, 2005.
• Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-students survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64-74. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18809.
• Hardiman, P. T., Dufresne, R., J., & Mestre, J. P. (1989). The relation between problem categorization and problem-solving among novices and experts. Memory & Cognition, 17, 627-638.
• Heller, P., Keith, R., & Anderson, S. (1992). Teaching problem-solving through cooperative grouping. Part 1: Group versus individual problem-solving. American Journal of Physics, 60, 627 - 636. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.17117.
• Kim, E., & Pak, S. J. (2002). Students do not overcome conceptual difficulties after solving 1000 traditional problems. American Journal of Physics, 70(7), 759 – 765. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1484151.
• Knight, R. D. (2002). An instructor’s guide to introductory physics. Addison Wesley, San Francisco.
• Larkin, J. H. (1981). Cognition of learning physics. American Journal of Physics, 49, 534. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.12667.
• Lea, S. M. (1994). Comparing problem-solving performance of physics students in inquire-based and traditional introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 62, 627–633.
• Leonard, W. J., Dufresne, R. J., & Mestre, J. P. (1996). Using qualitative problem-solving strategies to highlight the role of conceptual knowledge in solving problems. American Journal of Physics. 64(12), 1495-1503. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18409.
• Lubben, F., Bennett, J., Hogarth, S. & Robinson, A. (2005). A systematic review of the effects of context-based and Science-Technology-Society (STS) approaches in the teaching of secondary science on boys and girls, and on lower-ability pupils. In: Research Evidence in Education Library. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London.
• Lye, H., Fry, M., & Hart, C. (2001). What does it mean to teach physics ‘in context’: A first case study. Australian Science Teachers, 48(1), 16-22.
• Mashood, K. K., & Singh, V. A. (2015). Rotational kinematics of a rigid body about a fixed axis: development and analysis of an inventory. European Journal of Physics, 36, 045020. https://doi.org/10.1088/0143-0807/36/4/045020.
• Mazur, E. (1992). Qualitative vs. quantitative thinking: Are we teaching the right thing? Optics and Photonics news, 3, 38.
• Mazur, E. (1997). Peer instruction - A user’s manual. Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
• McCormick, R. (1996). Instructional methodology. In P. J. Williams & A. P. Williams (Eds.), Technology education for teachers (pp. 63–92). Melbourne: Macmillan.
• McCormick, R. (1997). Conceptual and procedural knowledge. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 7(1–2), 141–159. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008819912213.
• McDermott, L. (1984). Students’ conceptions and problem-solving in mechanics. Physics Today, 37(7), 24 – 32.
• McDermott, L. (1991). What we teach and what is learned – Closing the gap. American Journal of Physics, 59(4), 301-315. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.16539.
• McDermott, L. C., Rosenquist, M. L., & van Zee, E. H. (1987). Student difficulties in connecting graphs and physics: Examples from kinematics. American Journal of Physics, 55(6), 503-513. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.15104.
• McDermott, L. C., Shaffer, P. S., & the Physics Education Group at the University of Washington (2002). Tutorials in Introductory Physics. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
• Mestre, J. P. (1994). Cognitive aspects of learning and teaching science. In S.J. Fitzsimmons & L.C. Kerpelman (Eds.), Teacher enhancement for elementary and secondary science and mathematics: Status, issues and problems (pp.3-1 – 3-53). Washington, DC: National Science Foundation (NSF 94 – 80).
• Mihret, Z. (2014). An investigation of students’ approaches to problem-solving in physics courses. International Journal of Chemical and Natural Science, 2(1), 77-89.
• Ministry of Education. (2010). Physics Student Textbook: Grade 11. Malaysia: Pearson Education Limited.
• Moelter, M. J., Hoellwarth, C. & Knight, R. D. (2005). A direct comparison of conceptual learning and problem-solving ability in traditional and studio style classrooms. Am. J. Phys., 73, 459 - 462.
• Mualem, R., & Eylon, B.S. (2007). “Physics with a smile” – Explaining phenomena with a qualitative problem-solving strategy. The Physics Teacher, 45(3), 158 – 163. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2709674.
• Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem-solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
• Panprueksa, K. (2012). Development of Science Instructional Model Emphasizing Contextual Approach to Enhance Analytical Thinking and Application of Knowledge for Lower Preparatory School Students (Unpublished Doctoral thesis), Srinakharinwirot University, Bangkok.
• Peşman, H. (2012). Method-Approach Interaction: The Effects of Learning Cycle Vs Traditional and Contextual Vs Non-Contextual Instruction on 11th Grade Students’ Achievement in and Attitudes Towards Physics (Unpublished Doctoral thesis), Middle East Technical University, Turkey.
• Peşman, H., & Özdemir, Ö. F. (2012) Approach–Method Interaction: The role of teaching method on the effect of context-based approach in physics instruction. International Journal of Science Education, 34(14), 2127-2145. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.700530.
• Rayner, A. (2005). Reflections on context-based science teaching: A case study of physics students for physiotherapy. Poster presented at the annual UniServe Science Blended Learning Symposium Proceedings. Sydney, Australia, 169-172, September 30, 2005.
• Redish, E. F. (2005). Changing student ways of knowing: What should our students learn in a physics class? To be published in proceedings of World view on physics education 2005: Focusing on change, New Delhi. Retrieved from http://www.physics.umd.edu/perg/papers/redish/IndiaPlen.pdf.
• Reif F., & Scott, L. (1999). Teaching scientific thinking skills: Students and computers coaching each other. American Journal of Physics, 67(2), 819 – 831. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.19130.
• Reif, F., & Heller, J. I. (1982). Knowledge structure and problem-solving in physics. Educational Psychologist, 17(2), 102 – 127. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461528209529248.
• Selçuk, G. S., Çalışkan, S., & Erol, M. (2008). The Effects of Problem-solving Instruction on Physics Achievement, Problem-solving Performance and Strategy Use. Latin American Journal Physics Education, 2(3), 151 – 166.
• Shishigu, A., Bashu B., Tesfaw, B., & Gadisa, S. (2016). The Effect of Problem Based Learning (PBL) Instruction on Students’ Motivation and Problem-solving Skills of Physics. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 13(3), 857-871. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00647a.
• Shishigu, A., Hailu, A., & Anibo, Z. (2017). Problem-Based Learning and Conceptual Understanding of College Female Students in Physics. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(1), 145-154. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/78035.
• Taasoobshirazi, G., & Carr, M. (2008). A review and critique of context-based physics instruction and assessment. Educational Research Review, 3(2), 155-167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2008.01.002.
• Trowbridge, D., & McDermott, L. (1981). Investigation of student understanding of the concept of acceleration in one dimension. American Journal of Physics, 49(3), 242 – 253. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.12525.
• Walsh, L. (2009). A phenomenographic study of introductory physics students: Approaches to problem-solving and conceptualization of knowledge (Doctorate Thesis), Dublin Institute of Technology, Dublin. https://doi.org/10.21427/D73598.
• Walsh, L. N., Howard, R. G., & Bowe, B. (2007). Phenomenographic study of students’ problem-solving approaches in physics. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 3, 020108. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.3.020108.
• Wilson, J. D., & Buffa, A. J. (2002). College Physics (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Young, H. D., Freedmand, R. A., Dandin, T. R., & Lewis, A. (1999). Sears and Zemansky’s University Physics (10th ed.). New York, Addison Wesley.
• Yu, K. C., Fan, S. C., & Lin, K. Y. (2014). Enhancing students’ problem-solving skills through context-based learning. International of Science and Mathematics Education, 12, 64-78.
• Zhu, Z. (2007). Gender differences in mathematical problem solving patterns: A review of literature. International Education Journal, 8(2), 187-203.

APA

Eshetu, F., & Assefa, S. (2019). Effects of Context-Based Instructional Approaches on Students’ Problem-Solving Skills in Rotational Motion. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(2), em1665. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/102283

Vancouver

Eshetu F, Assefa S. Effects of Context-Based Instructional Approaches on Students’ Problem-Solving Skills in Rotational Motion. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2019;15(2):em1665. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/102283

AMA

Eshetu F, Assefa S. Effects of Context-Based Instructional Approaches on Students’ Problem-Solving Skills in Rotational Motion. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2019;15(2), em1665. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/102283

Chicago

Eshetu, Fikadu, and Shimeles Assefa. "Effects of Context-Based Instructional Approaches on Students’ Problem-Solving Skills in Rotational Motion". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2019 15 no. 2 (2019): em1665. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/102283

Harvard

Eshetu, F., and Assefa, S. (2019). Effects of Context-Based Instructional Approaches on Students’ Problem-Solving Skills in Rotational Motion. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(2), em1665. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/102283

MLA

Eshetu, Fikadu et al. "Effects of Context-Based Instructional Approaches on Students’ Problem-Solving Skills in Rotational Motion". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 15, no. 2, 2019, em1665. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/102283