How to cite:

Ellis Mardiana Panggabean. (2022). Effectiveness of Using

Conceptualized Acqusition with Open Ended Quessisted Model to

Improve Student's Critical Thinking Ability. Journal Eduvest. Vol (2):

724-734

E-ISSN:

2775-3727

Published by:

https://greenpublisher.id/

Eduvest – Journal of Universal Studies

Volume 2 Number 4, April, 2022

p- ISSN 2775-3735- e-ISSN 2775-3727

EFFECTIVENESS OF USING CONCEPTUALIZED ACQUSITION WITH

OPEN ENDED QUESSISTED MODEL TO IMPROVE STUDENT'S

CRITICAL THINKING ABILITY

Ellis Mardiana Panggabean

Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, University of Muhammadiyah

North Sumatra, Indonesia

Email: [email protected]

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Received:

March, 26

2022

Revised:

April, 16

2022

Approved:

April, 18

2022

In learning activities that are oriented to the needs and abilities

of students, it is necessary to provide a variety of learning

situations that are adequate for the material which is

presented and this should be tailored to the abilities and

characteristics of students. This study aims to describe the

effectiveness of conceptualized acquisition with open ended

question-assisted model in improving critical thinking ability of

students. The research design is the control group of pre-test

post-test to the students of mathematics education program

at Muhammadiyah University in North Sumatra. Based on the

results of data analysis, it is found that the critical thinking

ability of students who are taught with Conceptualized

Acquisition with Open Ended Question-Assisted Model is better

than the critical thinking ability of students who are taught

with conventional learning model on lectures of Algebra

Structure II and Conceptualized Acquisition with Open Ended

Question-Assisted Model are effective in improving the critical

thinking ability of students in the lecture of Algebra Structure

II.

KEYWORDS

Effectiveness, Conceptualized Acquisition, Open-Ended

Question, Assisted Model, Critical Thinking Ability

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons

Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International

 
Ellis Mardiana Panggabean  
 
Effectiveness of Using Conceptualized Acqusition with Open Ended Quessisted Model 
to Improve Student's Critical Thinking Ability     725 
INTRODUCTION 
 
  The  Course  of  Algebra  Structure  II  is  one  of  the  subjects  in  the  field  of  pure 
mathematics  expertise  in  the  curriculum  of  mathematics  education  study  program.  The 
characteristics of algebra structures have a strict and concise axiomatic deductive structure, 
loaded with abstract concepts both on definition and theorem (Hijriati & Mardiana, 2014).  
Because it is loaded with abstract concepts, the algebra structure is difficult to learn 
and also difficult to teach. The research findings of Dubinsky et al (in Mardiana, 2014) 
which is supported by Lajoie show that the understanding of students upon concepts in 
abstract algebra is far from satisfactory. Abstract algebra is still difficult to digest by most 
students. Furthermore, many lecturers have difficulty in teaching abstract algebra.  
One of the learning models that can help students of all ages develop and strengthen 
their  understanding  of  concepts  and  practice  critical  thinking,  in  the  lesson  is  the 
conceptualized acquisition model (Schulz, Dehghani, & Stadelmann, n.d.). This model is 
also useful for giving students experience with scientific methods. Especially, it is also the 
experience with testing hypotheses, the experiences that are often difficult to give in the 
fields of matter other than science. This is supported by Bruning (in Eggen & Kauchak, 
2012:  239)  that  "Conceptualized  Acquisition  activities  can  be  used  to  enhance 
metacognition and self-regulation of students."  
The  activities  of  Conceptualized  Acquisition  can  be  used  to  improve  the 
metacognition and self-regulation of students. Metacognition is the awareness of students 
about and control of their mental processes. Developing metacognitive abilities in students 
is important. Because, it can contribute to self-regulation, namely the conscious use on 
mental strategy of a person is designed to improve learning and thinking. Students who are 
self-disciplined are responsible for the progress of their learning to meet the demands of 
the task. Learning Activities of Conceptualized Acquisition can build self- regulation of 
students because the activities emphasize a lot of critical thinking.  
The  findings  of  (Panggabean,  n.d.)  show  the  application  of  conceptualized 
acquisition  model  influences  the  math  concept  of  students.  While  (Ratnaningsih, 
Hermanto, & Kurniati, 2019) finds, there is improvement of critical and creative thinking 
ability of students after applying the conceptualized acquisition model. Furthermore, it is 
recommended that to increase the critical and creative thinking with the conceptualized 
acquisition model should be combined with other learning model so that the achievement 
of ability can be achieved maximally (Fuad, Zubaidah, Mahanal, & Suarsini, 2017).  
(Lindeman, 2018) defines the conceptual acquisition as an inquiry on the number 
of  attributes  that  can  be  used  to  distinguish  samples  and  non-samples  from  different 
categories. In learning with this conceptualized acquisition model, the teacher shows the 
sample and non sample of a concept that he or she imagines (Kim, 2020). While students 
hypothesize what the probability of the concept might be, analyzing their hypotheses by 
looking at samples and non-samples, and ultimately coming up to the concept in question. 
To assess thinking processes and reasoning of students, it needs strategies that 
encourage  students  to  communicate  completion  in  writing,  mathematical  statements, 
diagrams or combinations of both  One of the strategies that can be used by lecturers is the 
open ended question.  
Open-ended  questions  require  students  do  not  only  provide  answers  but  more 
importantly show the completion process (Romli & Riyadi, 2018). Students are not only 
given  the  opportunity  to  show  the  level  of  understanding  but  also  communicate 
mathematically. As stated by Heddens & Speer in (Rohid & Rusmawati, 2019) that "Open-
ended question is a technique that can be used effectively in the assessment of mathematics 
learning and is very useful in assessing student thinking". Through the questions like these, 

Eduvest – Journal of Universal Studies

Volume 2 Number 4, April 2022

726 http://eduvest.greenvest.co.id

they are asked to answer questions by explaining, drawing graphs, showing or by proving.

Variations of answers are desirable and there are not two answers in the class will be exactly

the same (Capano, Howlett, Jarvis, Ramesh, & Goyal, 2020).

The need for open-ended questions which is considered to be applied in

mathematics learning is as follow; 1) The desire to make mathematics learning more

challenging. The success in challenging activities gives students concrete trust and this will

increase their desire to work further in mathematics; 2) It needs activities that encourage

autonomy and independence of students as a mathematical thinker. If students believe they

have control over learning, they will set a higher standard for next learning. This will make

them more responsible for what they do; 3) Preventing overuse of yes/no factual answers

that often limit critical thinking opportunities.

The Conceptualized Acquisition model is designed to help students achieve two

types of learning objectives, namely (1) Building and developing their understanding of

concepts; (2) Developing their critical thinking skills. In learning with this model, the

lecturer demonstrates the sample and non sample of a concept that he or she imagines.

While students hypothesize about what the probability of the concept might be, analyzing

their hypotheses by looking at samples and non-samples, and ultimately coming up to the

intended concept. This analysis follows the simple rule that all samples must describe the

concept and none of the non- samples can illustrate the concept.

Four essential steps in planning for the learning with the conceptualized acquisition

model are as shown below.

Figure 1. Planning Conceptualized Acquisition Learning

Identifying the topic is the first phase in planning the learning planning process

with the conceptualized acquisition model. In this phase, the initial ability of students is

one of the factors to be considered. When creating a plan, learning goals need to be very

clear. Objectives will guide the mind of selecting a sample. The learning objectives for the

Conceptualized Acquisition model include helping students develop and build concepts

and relations between the concepts. Also, it provides critical thinking exercises by forming

and testing hypotheses. Selecting samples and non-samples in principle is to help students

develop and enrich their understanding. Samples should be arranged so that students get as

much as possible critical thinking practice. In sorting the samples, they do not always have

to be nested in samples and non-samples. Two or even three positive samples can be given

Selecting

Samples and

Non Samples

Sorting

Samples and

Non Samples

Determin

ing

Learning

Objective

Identifying

Planning for the

Learning with

Conceptualized

Acquisition model

Ellis Mardiana Panggabean

Effectiveness of Using Conceptualized Acqusition with Open Ended Quessisted Model

to Improve Student's Critical Thinking Ability 727

in sequence then it is followed by two or more non-samples.

To make it easier to assess thinking processes and reasoning of students, the

guidance should encourage communicating the resolution strategies in writing,

mathematical statements, diagrams or combinations of both. Describe the data which is

shown by the graph.

Critical thinking skills can result from the ability to form valid generalizations,

explanations, predictions, hypotheses and comparisons. It is also generated from the ability

to accept the validity of a statement as well as the ability to receive irrelevant information.

Accordingly, Appelbaum (in Budiman, 2014) states that the development of critical

thinking in mathematics can be done by doing activities such as comparing, making

contradictions, inductions, generalizing, sorting, classifying, proving, linking, analyzing,

evaluating and making patterns, coupled continuously.

Fisher (in Whardani, 2012) emphasizes indicators of critical thinking skills,

including: (1) Stating the truth of questions or statements; (2) Analyzing questions or

statements; (3) Thinking logically; (4) Sorting, for example temporally, logically, causally;

(5) Classifying, for example, the idea of objects; (6) Deciding, for example, whether there

is sufficient evidence; (7) Predicting (includes justifying prediction); (8) Making theory;

(9) Understanding others and himself. While Glazer (in Budiman) uses 3 indicators of

critical thinking, namely: (1) Proof is the ability to prove a statement deductively (using

theories that have been studied previously); (2) Generalization is the ability to produce

patterns of problems that are encountered for a broader category; (3) Problem solving is

the ability to identify the discovered, asked elements, and to check the adequacy of the

necessary elements in the problems, to construct mathematical models and to solve them,

and to check the results or answers.

The phases in applying the Concept Acquisition with Open ended Questions Model

can be seen in the following table:

Table 1 the Phases of Implementation on Conceptualized Acquisition with Open

Ended Question model

Phase

Descriptions

Phase 1: Introduction

Phase 2: Samples dan

Formulating

Hypotheses

Phase 3: Cycle of

Analysis

Phase 4: Closing and

Application

Lecturer introduces the learning topic and how the

activities will be performed.

Students are given a sample (or perhaps two

samples) and are non samples, and with an open

ended question, lecturer asks students to hypothesize

the possibility of designation for the concept based

on the initial sample and non- sample.

With open ended questions, additional samples and

non samples are provided. Students are asked to

remove the existing hypotheses and add new

hypotheses based on new samples (and non-

samples).

A single hypothesis is separated and defined. Also,

additional samples are analyzed by definition

Eduvest – Journal of Universal Studies

Volume 2 Number 4, April 2022

728 http://eduvest.greenvest.co.id

RESEARCH METHOD

This is an experimental research of Control Group Pre-test Post-test Design. The

independent variables in this study are the use of Conceptualized Acquisition of open ended

question-assisted model on the lecture of algebra structure II with Ring material, Ring

characteristics, Ring Classification and Sub Ring. The dependent variables in this research

are the improvement on critical thinking ability of students. The study is conducted in the

odd semester in the 2015/2016 academic year.

The study population is the students of fifth (V) semester in Mathematics Education

Program of FKIP-UMSU. Of the 8 classes, there are 2 randomly selected classes as the

study sample. One class that becomes experimental class is VB and the other that becomes

control class is VA. The experimental class is treated with conceptualized acquisition of

open ended question-assisted model while control class by using conventional learning

model. Before and after the learning, the initial test and the final test are done.

The design in this study is presented as in table 2 below.

Tabel 2. The design in this study

Class

Pre-test

Treatment

Post-test

Experiment

Control

Information:

O1 = Initial test (pre test) for experimental class and control class.

O2 = End test

X1 = Treatment of learning with the conceptualized acquisition model. X2 = Treatment of

conventional learning.

The implementation of this study consists of the phase of preparation,

implementation and results analysis. The study is designed for each class in 7 meetings.

Post test is held at the 8th meeting. The data which is required in this study is the data about

critical thinking ability of students. The learning tools that are needed: (1) The teaching

materials of Algebra Structure II ie Ring, Ring characteristics, Ring Classification, Sub

Ring; (2) Unit of Lecture Course (SAP) on Conceptualized acquisition model; (3) Test on

Critical Thinking Ability of Student.

The technique of data collection is a test technique. This test is an essay for 5

questions that aims to measure critical thinking ability of students on mathematics with the

indicators that are mentioned in the theoretical framework.

The collected data is analyzed descriptively and inferentially. Descriptive analysis is

used to describe critical thinking ability of student by using Conceptual Acquisition of

Open Ended Question-Assisted Learning and critical thinking ability of students by using

Conceptualized Acquisition of Open Ended Question-Assisted Learning.

The technique of data analysis in this research is t-test. This test is used to describe

the difference on critical thinking ability of students with the conceptualized acquisition of

Open Ended Question-Assisted model and critical thinking ability of students with

conventional model.

The indicators that show that Conceptualized Acquisition Open Ended Question-

Assisted learning is effective are the test result data on critical thinking ability of students

is better than critical thinking ability of students using conventional model. The

improvement on critical thinking ability of students is calculated by gain score (N-gain).

The N-gain test is formulated as follows.

Ellis Mardiana Panggabean

Effectiveness of Using Conceptualized Acqusition with Open Ended Quessisted Model

to Improve Student's Critical Thinking Ability 729

Information:

< g > = normalized gain

Tf = post test score

Ti = pre test score

SI = ideal score / maximum score

The gain interpretation of normalized score can be seen in table 3 below:

Table 3. Interpretation of normalized score

The Gain normalized

Value <g>

Criteria

 0,70

0,30  (<g>) ˂ 0,69

˂ 0,30

High Midle Low

(Hake, 1999)

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

The analysis results of the pre tests on both groups show the mean and standard

deviation are as in table 4 below.

Table 4. The mean and standard deviation of the pre tests on both groups

Group

Mean

Standar Deviasi

Control

8,8461

9,9645

Experiment

8,875

9,9670

The variance similarity test is done before the selection of the appropriate t test

formula. The analysis result on pre tests of experimental group and control group is

obtained that F value is 0.9998. The value of F (0.9998) < F critical value (1.71), means

there is no variant difference between both groups. Then the mean of the two samples are

compared. The hypothesized formula:

Ho: μ1 = μ2, or the mean of both groups are the same.

Ha: μ1 = μ2, or the mean of both groups are different.

From the calculation results with the help of microsoft excel, it is obtained t count

equal to 0.989771 while t-critical is 1.98 with the significance level of 0.05. Since t count

< t critical then Ha is rejected means there is no difference between the mean of the

experimental group and the control group.

Normality test is conducted to find out whether the research data is normally

distributed by using Kolmogorov Smirnov and Shapiro Wilk test with the following results.

Table 5. Tests of Normality

Kolmogorov-Smirno

Shapiro-Wilk

Statistic

Sig.

Statistic

Sig.

FT_Value

.092

.089

.980

.231

Lilliefors Significance Correction

Table 5 shows that the significance values of (p) Kilmogorov Smirnov are 0.089

and 0.231, both are greater than 0.05, so it can be concluded that the data is normally

distributed. The results of this analysis are also confirmed by Figure 2 QQ plot as follow.

Eduvest – Journal of Universal Studies

Volume 2 Number 4, April 2022

730 http://eduvest.greenvest.co.id

Figure 2 QQ plot from

The picture above shows that the data points are located along the diagonal line

forming the left and right symmetric lines. This indicates that the research data is normally

distributed.

The variance homogeneity test is conducted to find out whether the two study data

groups have the same or equal variances (characteistics) with the provision if p > 0.05,

Table 6 Test of Homogeneity of Variances

Levene Statistic

df1

df2

Sig.

.476

.862

Table 6 shows that the value of significance (p) = 0.862 is greater than 0.05. This

means that both groups of data have the same variances. In other words, both groups of

data have the same characteristics.

Different test is done to find out whether the two data groups are different or not

with one sample t-test with the results, it can be seen in table 7 as follows.

Table 7. One-Sample Statistics

Mean

Std. Deviation

Std. Error

Mean

51.2500

67.1250

19.03943

18.04153

3.01040

2.85262

The table shows that the mean value of class A = 51.25 and class B = 67.12. This

shows that the average UAS value of group A is different from group B. Furthermore, to

know whether the difference is significant or not, it can be seen from further test in table 8

below.

Table 8 One-Sample Test

Test Value = 0

Sig. (2-tailed)

Mean

Difference

95% Confidence

Interval of the Difference

Lower

Upper

17.024

.000

51.25000

45.1609

57.3391

23.531

.000

67.12500

61.3550

72.8950

Table 8 shows that the significance value (p) = 0.000 is less than 0.05. This shows

that the UAS score of Group A and the UAS score of group B are significantly different.

To find out whether the mean of experimental group is better than the mean of

control group, the following hypotheses are formulated.

Ellis Mardiana Panggabean

Effectiveness of Using Conceptualized Acqusition with Open Ended Quessisted Model

to Improve Student's Critical Thinking Ability 731

Ho: μ1 < μ2, or the mean of group A is less than the mean of group B.

Ha: μ1 ≥ μ2, or the mean of group A is more than or equal to the mean of group B.

With the help of mocrosoft exel, it is obtained the value of t arithmetic = 0.00013.

Price of t table at df = 78 at the 0.05 significance level is 1.4571.

Because t < t0.05 then the hypothesis is accepted. In other words, the average critical

thinking ability of students with conceptualized acquisition of open ended question-assisted

model is better than the average thinking ability of students with conventional model.

To know the improvement of critical thinking ability of experiment class and

control class, data analysis on gain index of each class is done. The Data Analysis on Gain

Index is based on data analysis on initial and final tests. The gain which is referred to in

this study is normalized gain of which the gain index of each class as in table 9 below.

Table 9. the gain index of each class

Group

Gain Index

control

0,4692

Experiment

0,6426

Based on the above table, it is clear that the average normalized gain on critical

thinking ability of experimental class students is different from the average normalized gain

of the control class. Based on the criteria which is previously mentioned, this increase is

included in the ‘moderate’ criterion. This means that after the learning takes place, there is

a significant increase in critical thinking ability of students in the experimental group and

the control class. Although both are ‘moderate’, but the normalized gain of the

experimental class is better than the average normalized gain of the control class. The

difference is 0.1734. This means that the conceptualized acquisition of open ended

question-assisted model is effective in improving critical thinking ability of students.

Learning activities with the Conceptualized Acquisition model indeed emphasizes

critical thinking. Beginning in the first phase in which the lecturer presents a set of data to

the students (Nusantari, Abdul, Damopolii, Alghafri, & Bakkar, 2021). Each set of sample

and non sample data concept is presented separately. To the students, it is explained that

there is only one idea (concept) which is shown by positive samples (Falloon, 2019). The

task of the students is to develop a hypothesis about the characteristics of the concept.

Students will compare and contrast the samples that contain the characteristics (attributes)

of the concept and the samples that do not contain the attributes of the concept(Li, Eigen,

Dodge, Zeiler, & Wang, 2019). Then they are asked to name the concept and declare the

rules or definitions of the concept according to these attributes(Barricelli, Casiraghi, &

Fogli, 2019). The hypothesis which is constructed by them has not been confirmed until

the next phase.

In the second phase, students test the concept by identifying additional examples

of both positive and negative. Thus, students will focus on these attributes.Then the

students hypothesize possible appellations for concepts, analyze hypotheses and test

hypotheses to obtain a single hypothesis (Scheel, Tiokhin, Isager, & Lakens, 2021). Based

on that, the students make their own samples. Next lecturers and students together compose

the attributes of the intended concept. Then the concept is defined and the characteristics

of the concept are identified. The concepts can be linked to related concepts (Granstrand &

Holgersson, 2020).

The next phase, the lecturer asks the students to analyze the strategies that are

carried out in the conceptualized acquisition. Each student can describe the pattern what he

is doing. In this phase, students are encouraged to share and to explain the thinking process

that they use to arrive at their answers.

Eduvest – Journal of Universal Studies

Volume 2 Number 4, April 2022

732 http://eduvest.greenvest.co.id

The above activities are included in the inquiry activities. Beginning with

categorization process then testing the hypothesis and ending with the evaluation process

of the steps that are undertaken during the conceptualized acquisition process. Indirectly,

lecturers and students perform learning activities with scientific method, it is a pattern of

thought that emphasizes the submission of questions, develops hypotheses to answer

questions, and tests the hypothesis with the data.

As it is stated by (Bisra, Liu, Nesbit, Salimi, & Winne, 2018) the conceptualized

acquisition model can be an effective tool for introducing students to the inquiry process

because it does not take much time to complete a lesson. Students can see that the whole

process is unfolding in one learning activity. However, it does not give a fully valid picture

of the inquiry process because the lecturer provides all the data about the samples and non-

samples. However, this can be an effective way to introduce students with an inquiry before

they conduct their own actual inquiry research.

During the above conceptual activities, the lecturer also develops metacognitive

ability within the learner. Metacognition is the awareness of students about and control of

their mental processes because it can contribute to self-regulation, namely the conscious

use of a person upon mental strategy which is designed to improve learning and thinking.

Students who are self-disciplined are responsible for the progress of their learning to meet

the demands of the task. The Activities of Conceptual Learning can build self-regulation

of students because the activities emphasize a lot of critical thinking. As it is stated by

Bruning, "The activities of Conceptual Acquisition can be used to improve the

metacognition and the self-regulation of students."

Another thing that makes this learning is interesting is the questions that are asked.

The types of questions that are asked and the sequence of questions that attract the attention

of students strengthen the important things and encourage the occurrence of reflection. To

improve the investigation ability of students, it uses the opening questions from the

lecturers. This will stimulate students to create their own questions. The questions are

placed in a sequence. The sequence of questions is chosen so that the question stimulates

the earnings of ideas as much as possible, ranging from simple questions to those that

require deeper thinking. The learning activity by asking questions like this would be, as

(Martin & Collie, 2019) "the dynamics of asking questions and acceptance in questioning

and answering questions are the central to learning and for achieving effective

teaching."Another finding in this study is that most students are right in terms of expressing

the truth of a statement. But they are less able to provide logical arguments. It is necessary

to keep in mind that in providing logical arguments, it would require the ability to link the

concepts in mathematics. This disability is shown by the students who participates the

lectures of algebra structure II.

The ability of students in proving is also very inadequate. According to the

researchers, on the ability to prove this, it is already contained the ability to analyze

questions. If it is further studied, it must be admitted that the learning that has been done in

all courses in the mathematics education program does not require or familiarize the

students to prove the theorems of mathematics. This condition causes the students to be

weak in terms of proving. Related to this, researchers suggest to do research on how to

develop the ability of students in terms of proving. Through this study, overall, it can be

said that learning by using Conceptualized Acquisition of Open Ended Question-assisted

learning is quite effective in improving critical thinking ability of students in the lectures

of Algebra Structure II.

 
Ellis Mardiana Panggabean  
 
Effectiveness of Using Conceptualized Acqusition with Open Ended Quessisted Model 
to Improve Student's Critical Thinking Ability     733 
CONCLUSION 
 
Based on the study results and discussion previously, it can be concluded that the 
critical thinking ability of students who are taught with conceptualized acquisition of 
open ended question-assited models is better than the critical thinking ability of students 
who are taught with conventional learning model on the lectures of Algebra Structure II 
and conceptualized acquisition  of  open  ended  question-assited  models  is  effective in 
improving critical thinking ability of students in the lectures of Algebra Structure II.  
Some things that require to be suggested, (1) The teaching learning process needs 
to be oriented to the needs and the ability of students, in this activity, lecturers need to 
provide adequate learning situations for the material which is presented and adjust it with 
the ability and the characteristics of students. The  characteristics of students are very 
important to know because it influences the learning  process; (2) It is needed further 
research to analyze the ability of students in proving the theorems in mathematics and the 
research on how to develop the ability of students in proving theorems of mathematics. 
 
REFERENCES 
 
Barricelli, Barbara Rita, Casiraghi, Elena, & Fogli, Daniela. (2019). A survey on digital 
twin: Definitions, characteristics, applications, and design implications. IEEE Access, 
7, 167653–167671. 
Bisra, Kiran, Liu, Qing, Nesbit, John C., Salimi, Farimah, & Winne, Philip H. (2018). 
Inducing self-explanation: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(3), 
703–725. 
Capano, Giliberto, Howlett, Michael, Jarvis, Darryl S. L., Ramesh, M., & Goyal, Nihit. 
(2020). Mobilizing policy (in) capacity to fight COVID-19: Understanding variations 
in state responses. Policy and Society, 39(3), 285–308. 
Falloon, Garry. (2019). Using simulations to teach young students science concepts: An 
Experiential Learning theoretical analysis. Computers & Education, 135, 138–159. 
Fuad,  Nur  Miftahul,  Zubaidah,  Siti,  Mahanal,  Susriyati,  &  Suarsini,  Endang.  (2017). 
Improving  Junior  High  Schools’  Critical  Thinking  Skills  Based  on  Test  Three 
Different Models of Learning. International Journal of Instruction, 10(1), 101–116. 
Granstrand, Ove, & Holgersson, Marcus. (2020). Innovation ecosystems: A conceptual 
review and a new definition. Technovation, 90, 102098. 
Hijriati,  Emma,  &  Mardiana,  Rina.  (2014).  Pengaruh  ekowisata  berbasis  masyarakat 
terhadap perubahan kondisi ekologi, sosial dan ekonomi di Kampung Batusuhunan, 
Sukabumi. Jurnal Sosiologi Pedesaan, 2(3), 146–159. 
Kim, Deoksoon. (2020). Learning language, learning  culture: Teaching language to the 
whole student. ECNU Review of Education, 3(3), 519–541. 
Li, Hongyang, Eigen, David, Dodge, Samuel, Zeiler, Matthew, & Wang, Xiaogang. (2019). 
Finding  task-relevant  features  for  few-shot  learning  by  category  traversal. 
Proceedings  of  the  IEEE/CVF  Conference  on  Computer  Vision  and  Pattern 
Recognition, 1–10. 
Lindeman, Taylor J. (2018). The Best Ways to Increase Reading Comprehension Skills for 
Middle School English Language Learners. 
Martin,  Andrew  J.,  &  Collie,  Rebecca  J.  (2019).  Teacher–student  relationships  and 
students’  engagement  in  high  school:  Does  the  number  of  negative  and  positive 
relationships with teachers matter? Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(5), 861. 
 

Eduvest – Journal of Universal Studies

Volume 2 Number 4, April 2022

734 http://eduvest.greenvest.co.id

Nusantari, Elya, Abdul, Aryati, Damopolii, Insar, Alghafri, Ali Salim Rashid, & Bakkar,

Bakkar Suleiman. (2021). Combination of Discovery Learning and Metacognitive

Knowledge Strategy to Enhance Students’ Critical Thinking Skills. European Journal

of Educational Research, 10(4), 1781–1791.

Panggabean, Ellis Mardiana. (n.d.). Effectiveness of the Use on the Conceptualized

Acqusition with Open Ended Question-Assisted Model to improve Critical Thinking

Ability of Students In the Lecture of Algebra Structure II.

Ratnaningsih, N., Hermanto, R., & Kurniati, N. S. (2019). Mathematical communication

and social skills of the students through learning assurance relevance interest

assessment and satisfaction. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1360(1), 12032.

IOP Publishing.

Rohid, Nabrisi, & Rusmawati, Retno Danu. (2019). Students’ Mathematical

Communication Skills (MCS) in Solving Mathematics Problems: A Case in

Indonesian Context. Anatolian Journal of Education, 4(2), 19–30.

Romli, S., & Riyadi, B. (2018). Designing students’ worksheet based on open-ended

approach to foster students’ creative thinking skills. Journal of Physics: Conference

Series, 948(1), 12050. IOP Publishing.

Scheel, Anne M., Tiokhin, Leonid, Isager, Peder M., & Lakens, Daniël. (2021). Why

hypothesis testers should spend less time testing hypotheses. Perspectives on

Psychological Science, 16(4), 744–755.

Schulz, M., Dehghani, F., & Stadelmann, C. (n.d.). PULM MED, 13: 4. 18. Eggen BJL,

Raj D, Hanisch UK, Boddeke HWGM (2013) Microglial phenotype and adaptation.

J NEUROIMMUNE PHARM, 8 (4): 807-23. 19. Ellrichmann G, Lukas C, Schulz-

Schaeffer WJ, et al (2013) Rapid progressive Dementia: Encephalitis or

Encephalopathy? KLIN NEUROPHYSIOL, 44 (3): 213-218. System, 34(3), 186–

197.