• Ab Kadir, M. A. (2018). An inquiry into critical thinking in the Australian curriculum: Examining its conceptual understandings and their implications on developing critical thinking as a “general capability” on teachers’ practice and knowledge. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 38(4), 533-549. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2018.1535424
• Ariel, B., Bland, M. P., & Sutherland, A. (2022). Experimental designs (1st edition). SAGE Publications Ltd.
• Ariza, M. R., Quesada Armenteros, A., & Estepa Castro, A. (2021). Promoting critical thinking through mathematics and science teacher education: The case of argumentation and graphs interpretation about climate change. European Journal of Teacher Education, 0(0), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2021.1961736
• Bencze, L., Pouliot, C., Pedretti, E., Simonneaux, L., Simonneaux, J., & Zeidler, D. (2020). SAQ, SSI and STSE education: Defending and extending “science-in-context.” Cultural Studies of Science Education, 15(3), 825-851. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-019-09962-7
• Botting, D. (2017). Toulmin’s logical types. Argumentation, 31(2), 433-449. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-016-9414-6
• Chris, B., Sackville, A., & Chew Swee, C. (2004). Identifying good practice in the use of PBL to teach computing. Innovation in Teaching and Learning in Information and Computer Sciences, 3(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.11120/ital.2004.03010003
• Dabbagh, N. (2019). Effects of PBL on critical thinking skills. In M. Moallem, W. Hung, & N. Dabbagh (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of problem‐based learning (1st ed., pp. 135-156). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119173243.ch6
• Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24(2), 97-140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791
• Downing, K. (2012). The impact of moving away from home on undergraduate metacognitive development. In H. Kloos (Ed.), Current topics in children’s learning and cognition. InTech. https://doi.org/10.5772/47944
• Drisko, J. W., & Grady, M. D. (2019). Step 3 of EBP: Part 1—Evaluating research designs. Evidence-Based Practice in Clinical Social Work, 107-122. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15224-6_6
• Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38(1), 39-72. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260208560187
• Engelmann, K., Bannert, M., & Melzner, N. (2021). Do self-created metacognitive prompts promote short- and long-term effects in computer-based learning environments? Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 16(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-021-00148-w
• Ennis, R. H. (2018). Critical thinking across the curriculum: A vision. Topoi, 37(1), 165-184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-016-9401-4
• Erduran, S. (2018). Toulmin’s argument pattern as a “horizon of possibilities” in the study of argumentation in science education. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 13(4), 1091-1099. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-017-9847-8
• Fisher, A. (2001). Critical thinking: An introduction. Cambridge University Press.
• García-Carmona, A., & Acevedo-Díaz, J. A. (2018). The nature of scientific practice and science education: Rationale of a set of essential pedagogical principles. Science & Education, 27(5-6), 435-455. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-018-9984-9
• Ghani, A. S. A., Rahim, A. F. A., Yusoff, M. S. B., & Hadie, S. N. H. (2021). Effective learning behavior in problem-based learning: A scoping review. Medical Science Educator, 31(3), 1199-1211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-021-01292-0
• Giri, V., & Paily, M. U. (2020). Effect of scientific argumentation on the development of critical thinking. Science & Education, 29, 673-690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00120-y
• Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139-152. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202
• Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2013). Partial least squares structural equation modeling: Rigorous applications, better results and higher acceptance. Long Range Planning, 46(1-2), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2013.01.001
• Hancock, T. S., Friedrichsen, P. J., Kinslow, A. T., & Sadler, T. D. (2019). Selecting socio-scientific issues for teaching: A grounded theory study of how science teachers collaboratively design SSI-based curricula. Science & Education, 28(6-7), 639-667. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00065-x
• Hernández-Ramos, J., Pernaa, J., Cáceres-Jensen, L., & Rodríguez-Becerra, J. (2021). The effects of using socio-scientific issues and technology in problem-based learning: A systematic review. Education Sciences, 11(10), 640. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11100640
• Hoffman, B., & Spatariu, A. (2008). The influence of self-efficacy and metacognitive prompting on math problem-solving efficiency. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(4), 875-893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2007.07.002
• Hursen, C. (2021). The effect of problem-based learning method supported by Web 2.0 tools on academic achievement and critical thinking skills in teacher education. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 26(3), 515-533. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-020-09458-2
• Iordanou, K. (2013). Developing face-to-face argumentation skills: Does arguing on the computer help? Journal of Cognition and Development, 14(2), 292-320. https://doi.org/10.1080/15248372.2012.668732
• Jafari, M., & Meisert, A. (2021). Activating students’ argumentative resources on socioscientific issues by indirectly instructed reasoning and negotiation processes. Research in Science Education, 51(S2), 913-934. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09869-x
• Jho, H., Yoon, H.-G., & Kim, M. (2014). The relationship of science knowledge, attitude and decision making on socio-scientific issues: The case study of students’ debates on a nuclear power plant in Korea. Science & Education, 23(5), 1131-1151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-013-9652-z
• Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Puig, B. (2012). Argumentation, evidence evaluation and critical thinking. In B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 1001-1015). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9041-7_66
• Kabataş Memiş, E., & Çakan Akkaş, B. N. (2020). Developing critical thinking skills in the thinking-discussion-writing cycle: The argumentation-based inquiry approach. Asia Pacific Education Review, 21(3), 441-453. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-020-09635-z
• Kim, M., Anthony, R., & Blades, D. (2014). Decision making through dialogue: A case study of analyzing preservice teachers’ argumentation on socioscientific issues. Research in Science Education, 44(6), 903-926. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-014-9407-0
• Ku, K., & Ho, I. (2014). Metacognitive strategies that enhance critical thinking. Metacognition and Learning, 5, 251-267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-010-9060-6
• Kuhn, D. (2018). A role for reasoning in a dialogic approach to critical thinking. Topoi, 37(1), 121-128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-016-9373-4
• Kuhn, D., Arvidsson, T. S., Lesperance, R., & Corprew, R. (2017). Can engaging in science practices promote deep understanding of them? Science Education, 101(2), 232-250. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21263
• Lin, S.-S. (2014). Science and non-science undergraduate students’ critical thinking and argumentation performance in reading a science news report. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(5), 1023-1046. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9451-7
• Lobato, E. J. C., & Zimmerman, C. (2019). Examining how people reason about controversial scientific topics. Thinking & Reasoning, 25(2), 231-255. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2018.1521870
• Magno, C. (2010). The role of metacognitive skills in developing critical thinking. Metacognition and Learning, 5(2), 137-156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-010-9054-4
• Matheson, G. J. (2019). We need to talk about reliability: Making better use of test-retest studies for study design and interpretation. PeerJ, 7, e6918. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.6918
• Mohseni, F., Seifoori, Z., & Ahangari, S. (2020). The impact of metacognitive strategy training and critical thinking awareness-raising on reading comprehension. Cogent Education, 7(1), 1720946. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2020.1720946
• Morris, L. V. (2017). Moving beyond critical thinking to critical dialogue. Innovative Higher Education, 42(5-6), 377-378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-017-9413-z
• Naganuma, S. (2017). An assessment of civic scientific literacy in Japan: Development of a more authentic assessment task and scoring rubric. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 7(4), 301-322. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2017.1323131
• Nielsen, J. A. (2013). Dialectical features of students’ argumentation: A critical review of argumentation Studies in Science Education. Research in Science Education, 43(1), 371-393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9266-x
• Nussbaum, E. M., & Sinatra, G. M. (2003). Argument and conceptual engagement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28(3), 384-395. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00038-3
• Peters, R. (1996). Jihad in classical and modern Islam: A reader. Markus Wiener Pub.
• Sadler, T. D., Barab, S. A., & Scott, B. (2007). What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry? Research in Science Education, 37(4), 371-391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9030-9
• Sadler, T. D., & Donnelly, L. A. (2006). Socioscientific Argumentation: The effects of content knowledge and morality. International Journal of Science Education, 28(12), 1463-1488. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600708717
• Seel, N. M. (2012). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research on learning. In N. M. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning (pp. 1223-1229). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_716
• Songsil, W., Pongsophon, P., Boonsoong, B., & Clarke, A. (2019). Developing scientific argumentation strategies using revised argument-driven inquiry (rADI) in science classrooms in Thailand. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 5(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41029-019-0035-x
• Streiner, D. L., Norman, G. R., & Cairney, J. (2014). Health Measurement Scales: A practical guide to their development and use. In Health Measurement Scales (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press. https://oxfordmedicine.com/view/10.1093/med/9780199685219.001.0001/med-9780199685219
• Syaiful, Huda, N., Mukminin, A., & Kamid. (2022). Using a metacognitive learning approach to enhance students’ critical thinking skills through mathematics education. SN Social Sciences, 2(4), 31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-022-00325-8
• Taber, K. S. (2015). Affect and meeting the needs of the gifted chemistry learner: Providing intellectual challenge to engage students in enjoyable learning. In M. Kahveci & M. Orgill (Eds.), Affective Dimensions in Chemistry Education (pp. 133-158). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-45085-7_7
• Tanner, K. D. (2013). Structure matters: Twenty-one teaching strategies to promote student engagement and cultivate classroom equity. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 12(3), 322-331. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-06-0115
• Thonney, T., & Montgomery, J. C. (2019). Defining critical thinking across disciplines: An analysis of community college faculty perspectives. College Teaching, 67(3), 169-176. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2019.1579700
• Valladares, L. (2021). Scientific literacy and social transformation: Critical perspectives about science participation and emancipation. Science & Education, 30(3), 557-587. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00205-2
• Vieira, R. M., & Tenreiro-Vieira, C. (2016). Fostering scientific literacy and critical thinking in elementary science education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(4), 659-680. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-014-9605-2
• von der Mühlen, S., Richter, T., Schmid, S., & Berthold, K. (2019). How to improve argumentation comprehension in university students: Experimental test of a training approach. Instructional Science, 47(2), 215-237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-018-9471-3
• Voss, J. F. (2005). Toulmin’s model and the solving of ill-structured problems. Argumentation, 19(3), 321-329. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-005-4419-6
• Wechsler, S. M., Saiz, C., Rivas, S. F., Vendramini, C. M. M., Almeida, L. S., Mundim, M. C., & Franco, A. (2018). Creative and critical thinking: Independent or overlapping components? Thinking Skills and Creativity, 27, 114-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2017.12.003
• Weng, W.-Y., Lin, Y.-R., & She, H.-C. (2017). Scaffolding for argumentation in hypothetical and theoretical biology concepts. International Journal of Science Education, 39(7), 877-897. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1310409
• Westen, D., & Rosenthal, R. (2003). Quantifying construct validity: Two simple measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(3), 608-618. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.608
• Wynn, C. T., & Okie, W. (2017). Problem-based learning and the training of secondary social studies teachers: A case study of candidate perceptions during their field experience. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 11(2), 16. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1150530
• Wynn, C. T., Ray, H., & Liu, L. (2019). The Relationship between Metacognitive Reflection, PBL, and Postformal Thinking among First-Year Learning Community Students. Learning Communities: Research & Practice, 7(2), 3. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1240095
• Xiao, S., & Sandoval, W. A. (2017). Associations between attitudes towards science and children’s evaluation of information about socioscientific issues. Science & Education, 26(3-4), 247-269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-017-9888-0
• Yacoubian, H. A., & Khishfe, R. (2018). Argumentation, critical thinking, nature of science and socioscientific issues: A dialogue between two researchers. International Journal of Science Education, 40(7), 796-807. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1449986
• Yang, X., Zhao, G., Yan, X., Chao, Q., Zhao, X., Lu, T., & Dong, Y. (2021). Pre-setting stances for students during collaborative argumentation: Parallel thinking versus adversarial thinking. Research in Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-021-10035-5
• Yore, L. D., & Treagust, D. F. (2006). Current realities and future possibilities: Language and science literacy—empowering research and informing instruction. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2-3), 291-314. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500336973
• Young, S. A., Newton, A. R., Fowler, S. R., & Park, J. (2021). Critical thinking activities in Florida undergraduate biology classes improves comprehension of climate change. Journal of Biological Education, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2021.1877785
• Zeidler, D. (2015). Socioscientific issues. In R. Gunstone (Ed.), Encyclopedia of science education (pp. 998-1003). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2150-0_314
• Zeidler, D. L. (2014). Socioscientific issues as a curriculum emphasis: Theory, research and practice. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education: Vol. II (pp. 697-726). Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
• Zenker, F. (2018). Introduction: Reasoning, argumentation, and critical thinking instruction. Topoi, 37(1), 91-92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-016-9416-x
• Zhao, N., Teng, X., Li, W., Li, Y., Wang, S., Wen, H., & Yi, M. (2019). A path model for metacognition and its relation to problem-solving strategies and achievement for different tasks. ZDM, 51(4), 641-653. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019-01067-3

APA

Marthaliakirana, A. D., Suwono, H., Saefi, M., & Gofur, A. (2022). Problem-based learning with metacognitive prompts for enhancing argumentation and critical thinking of secondary school students. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(9), em2148. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12304

Vancouver

Marthaliakirana AD, Suwono H, Saefi M, Gofur A. Problem-based learning with metacognitive prompts for enhancing argumentation and critical thinking of secondary school students. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2022;18(9):em2148. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12304

AMA

Marthaliakirana AD, Suwono H, Saefi M, Gofur A. Problem-based learning with metacognitive prompts for enhancing argumentation and critical thinking of secondary school students. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2022;18(9), em2148. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12304

Chicago

Marthaliakirana, Angsoka Dwipayana, Hadi Suwono, Muhammad Saefi, and Abdul Gofur. "Problem-based learning with metacognitive prompts for enhancing argumentation and critical thinking of secondary school students". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2022 18 no. 9 (2022): em2148. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12304

Harvard

Marthaliakirana, A. D., Suwono, H., Saefi, M., and Gofur, A. (2022). Problem-based learning with metacognitive prompts for enhancing argumentation and critical thinking of secondary school students. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(9), em2148. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12304

MLA

Marthaliakirana, Angsoka Dwipayana et al. "Problem-based learning with metacognitive prompts for enhancing argumentation and critical thinking of secondary school students". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 18, no. 9, 2022, em2148. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12304