• Bain, A., Houghton, S., Sah, F.B., & Carroll, A. (1992). An evaluation of the application of interactive video for teaching social problem-solving to early adolescents. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 19(3), 92-99.
• Becker, B.J. (1989). Gender and science achievement: A re analysis of studies from two meta-analyses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26(2), 141-169.
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural science (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Curriculum Development Centre. (1999). Huraian Sukatan Pelajaran Sains KBSM Tingkatan 3 Edisi Sekolah Bestari (Integrated Curriculum for Secondary School: Form 3 Science Syllabus, Smart School Edition). Kuala Lumpur: Curriculum Development Centre, Ministry of Education.
• Curriculum Development Centre (CDC). (2002). Integrated Curriculum for Secondary Schools: Curriculum Specifications Science Form 2. Kuala Lumpur: Curriculum Development Centre, Ministry of Education, Malaysia.
• Ferguson, G.A., & Takane, Y. (1989). Statistical analysis in psychology and education. NY: McGraw-Hill Publishing Co.
• Freedman, M.P. (1997). Relationship among laboratory instruction, attitude toward science and achievement in science knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(4), 343-357.
• Gardner, P.L. (1975a) Attitudes to science: A review. Studies in Science Education, 2, 1-41.
• Germann, P.J. (1988). Development of the attitude toward science in school assessment and its use to investigate the relationship between science achievement and attitude toward science in school. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(8), 689-703.
• Glass, G.V., & Hopkins, K.D. (1996). Statistical methods in education and psychology (3rd ed.). London: Allyn and Bacon.
• Gray, J. (1996). The use of assessment to compare institutions. In H. Goldstein & T. Lewis (Eds.), Assessment: Problems, developments and statistical issues (pp. 121-133). New York: John Wiley and Sons.
• Harvey, T.J., & Edwards, P. (1980). Children’s expectations and realisation of science. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 50, 74-76.
• Hinkle, D.E., Wiersma, W., & Jurs, S.G. (1998). Applied statistics for the behavioural sciences. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co..
• Institute of Electrical Engineers. (1994). Views of science among students, teachers, and parents. London: Institute of Electrical Engineers.
• Jegede, O.J., Okebukola, P.A., & Ajewole, G.A. (1991). Computers and the learning of biological concepts: Attitudes and achievement of Nigerian students. Science Education 75(6), 701-706.
• Johnson, S. (1987). Gender differences in science: Parallels in interest, experience and performance. International Journal of Science Education, 9, 467-481.
• Jovanovic, J., & King, S.S. (1998). Boys and girls in the performance-based science classroom: Who's doing the performing? American Educational Research Journal, 35(3), 477-496.
• Kahle, J.B., & Lakes, M.K. (1983). The myth of equality in science classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(2), 131-140.
• Kraemer, H.C., & Thiemann, S. (1987). How many subjects? Statistical power analysis in research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
• Kulik, J.A. (2003). Effects of using instructional technology in elementary and secondary schools: What controlled evaluation studies say. Arlington, Virginia: SRI International.
• Kulik, C.C., & Kulik, J.A. (1991). Effectiveness of computerbased instruction: An updated analysis. Computers in Human Behaviour, 7(1-2), 75-94.
• Lewis, S. (2003). Enhancing teaching and learning of science through use of ICT: Methods and materials. School Science Review, 84 (309), 41-51.
• Lowery, L.F. (1967). An experimental investigation into the attitudes of fifth grade students towards science. School Science and Mathematics, 67, 569-579.
• Martin, M.O., Mullis, I.V.S., Gonzalez, E. J., Gregory, K. D., Smith, T. A., Chrostowski, S.J., Garden, R. A., & O'Connor K. M. (2000). TIMSS 1999 International Science Report. Chesnut Hill, MA: International Study Center, Lynch School of Education, Boston College.
• Ministry of Education Malaysia. (1997). Education in Malaysia. KL: Ministry of Education Malaysia.
• Nuttall, D. (1971). Administrator's manual for Science Attitude Questionnaire. Slough: NFER.
• Oliver, J.S., & Simpson, R.D. (1988). Influences of attitude toward science, achievement, motivation, and science self-concept on achievement in science: A longitudinal study. Science Education, 72, 143-155
• Ong, E.T. (2004). The character of ‘smart science teaching’ in Malaysian schools and its effects on student attitudes, process skills, and achievement. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Cambridge, UK.
• Ong, E.T., & Ruthven, K. (2002). Reliability and validity of a Malay version instrument on attitudes towards science. Journal of Science and Mathematics Education in Southeast Asia, 25(1), 48-65.
• Ormerod, M.B., Rutherford, M., & Wood, C. (1989). Relationships between attitudes to science and television viewing among pupils aged 10 to 13+. Research in Science and Technological Education, 7(1), 75- 84.
• Osborne, J., Driver, R., & Simon, S. (1998). Attitudes to science: Issues and concerns. School Science Review, 79(288), 27-33.
• Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049- 1079.
• Oskamp, S. (1977). Attitudes and opinions. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
• Reynolds, D., Treharne, D., & Tripp, H. (2003). ICT – the hopes and the reality. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(2), 151-167.
• Schibeci, R.A. (1984). Attitudes to science: An update. Studies in Science Education, 11, 26-59.
• School Division. (2002). Laporan pemantauan kolaboratif pelaksanaan projek rintis sekolah bestari tahun 2001 (Collaborative Monitoring Report on Smart School Pilot Project Implementation Year 2001). KL: Ministry of Education, Malaysia.
• Smart School Project Team. (1997a). Smart School Flagship Application: The Malaysian Smart School – A conceptual blueprint. Kuala Lumpur: Ministry of Education.
• Smart School Project Team. (1997b). The Malaysian Smart School: Implementation Plan. Kuala Lumpur: Ministry of Education.
• Styles, B. (2006). Educational research versus scientific research. Research Intelligence, 95, 7-9.
• Turpin, T.J. (2000). A study of the effects of an integrated, activitybased science curriculum on student achievement, science process skills, and science attitudes. Unpublished EdD dissertation, University of Louisiana at Monroe, USA.
• Weinburgh, M.H. (1995). Gender differences in student attitudes toward science: A meta-analysis of the literature from 1970-1991. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(4), 387-398.
• Wideen, M.F. (1975). Comparison of student outcomes for science – a process approach and traditional science teaching for third, fourth, fifth, and sixth grade classes: A product evaluation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 12(1), 31-39.
• Yalcinalp, S., Geban, O., & Ozkan, I. (1995). Effectiveness of using computer-assisted supplementary instruction for teaching the mole concept. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(10), 1083-1095.
• Yager, R.E., & Penick, J.E. (1984). What students say about science teaching and science teachers? Science Education, 68(2), 143-152.
• Yager, R.E., & Penick, J.E. (1986). Perceptions of four age groups toward science classes, teachers, and the value of science. Science Education, 70(4), 355-363

APA

Ong, E.-T., & Ruthven, K. (2009). The Effectiveness of Smart Schooling on Students’ Attitudes Towards Science. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 5(1), 35-45. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75255

Vancouver

Ong ET, Ruthven K. The Effectiveness of Smart Schooling on Students’ Attitudes Towards Science. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2009;5(1):35-45. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75255

AMA

Ong ET, Ruthven K. The Effectiveness of Smart Schooling on Students’ Attitudes Towards Science. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2009;5(1), 35-45. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75255

Chicago

Ong, Eng-Tek, and Kenneth Ruthven. "The Effectiveness of Smart Schooling on Students’ Attitudes Towards Science". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2009 5 no. 1 (2009): 35-45. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75255

Harvard

Ong, E.-T., and Ruthven, K. (2009). The Effectiveness of Smart Schooling on Students’ Attitudes Towards Science. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 5(1), pp. 35-45. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75255

MLA

Ong, Eng-Tek et al. "The Effectiveness of Smart Schooling on Students’ Attitudes Towards Science". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 5, no. 1, 2009, pp. 35-45. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75255