23

METACOGNITION AND SOCIAL ATTITUDES PATTERNS OF LEARNERS THROUGH THINK ALOUD PAIR PROBLEM SOLVING

B. Arifah1,2, N. Hindarto1*, S. E. Nugroho1 1Natural Sciences Education Study Program, Postgraduate Program of Semarang State University

2Madrasah Aliyah Negeri Dolopo, Madiun, Indonesian

*Email: nathanhindarto@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT

Metacognition and social attitudes need to be developed in learning at school. This study aims to

analyze the pattern of metacognition, social attitudes, the relationship between metacognition

patterns and social attitudes towards mastering concept. The benefits of this study were to obtain

the pattern of metacognition, social attitudes, analyze the relationship between metacognition

patterns and social attitudes towards mastering concept, and contribute in developing learning

strategies and curriculum of physics. The data were obtained through the Think Aloud Pair

Problem Solving, interviews, self-assessment of metacognition and social attitudes, and written

tests. This study used mixed method with concurrent embedded strategy. The subjects were the

students of class X MAN Dolopo in the academic year 2014/2015 by using snow ball technique.

The results showed that there were three patterns of metacognition and social attitudes in the

process of problem solving. They were metacognition pattern of Expert Problem Solving,

Hypothetic Problem Solving, and Primitive Problem Solving. All metacognition patterns have

honest attitude. The cooperative attitude showed the different results among these patterns. The

Expert Problem Solving metacognition pattern can be a problem solver and a good listener, while

Hypothetic Problem Solving and Primitive Problem Solving metacognition patterns have not been

able to act as a good listener. The Expert Problem Solving and Hypothetic Problem Solving

metacognition patterns showed the environmental awareness. In mastering concept, it’s defined

by metacognition and social attitudes together, so that learners with Expert Problem Solving

metacognition pattern have the best ability in mastering concept.

Keywords - Metacognition, social attitudes, think aloud pair problem solving

Introduction

Metacognition is interpreted by most

researchers as thinking about cognition. Lee,

et al. (2009), Tok, et al. (2010), Sendurur, et

al. (2011), and Young & Fry (2008) explains

that students with high academic

achievement using metacognitive strategies

better than students with less academic

achievement and metacognition is important

in solving the problems of daily life or jobs.

A social attitude (Yuliani, et al. (2013)) is an

awareness of the person of someone who

can influence to the social environment.

Social interaction experienced by

individuals can influence to the behavior of

each individual as a member of society

(Azwar, 2013: 30). Learners also showed

creativity in responding to questions at the

time of the think-aloud (Nugroho, 2010: 97-

110).

Based on the information of the physics

teacher in MAN Dolopo explain that the

learning method used is does not make all

learners are active and difficulty to solving

problems. The situation of temperature and

heat material in the curriculum of SMA/MA

with standards competency is applying heat

concepts and principles of energy

conservation in various energy changes.

Learning of temperature and heat are

presented with practical and discussion as

well as presenting problems associated with

daily life.

Based on the description above can be

concluded that relevance for development of

metacognition and social attitudes. The

problem that arises is what kind of learning

that is capable of guarding metacognition

development and social attitudes. The

pattern of metacognition and social attitudes

description can help to explain the state of

24

metacognition and social attitudes of

learners. This study aimed to analyze the

pattern of metacognition, analyzing social

attitudes (honest, cooperation and caring

attitude of the environment), and analyze the

relationship between metacognition and

social attitudes with mastery concepts of

Think-Aloud Pair Problem Solving

(TAPPS). The benefits of this study were to

obtain the pattern of metacognition, social

attitudes, analyze the relationship between

metacognition patterns and social attitudes

towards mastering concept, and contribute in

developing learning strategies and

curriculum of physics.

Theoretical Review Think Aloud Pair

Problem Solving

Tapps is a method used to reveal the

thinking of learners with words. The learners

can work in pairs where one as a problem

solver express with words in process of

thinking and the other as the listener to

explore of thought problem solver with a

question (Pate, 2009). The patterns of

problem solving based on the conclusions

are Intuitive Problem Solving, Problem

Solving Primitive, Hypothetic Problem

Solving, and Expert Problem Solving

(Yulianto, et al., 2013).

Metacognition

Metacognition is awareness and regulation

of thinking processes or knowledge of

learners and arrangements that belongs

learners on learning activities and their

thinking. There are two basic components of

metacognition in problem solving that is

metacognition knowledge and awareness of

self-regulation (Lee, et. Al, 2009). Flavell

explains that metacognition is cognition

about cognition. Metacognition plays an

important role in many types of cognitive

activities such as communicating

information, problem solving, social

cognition, and so on (Schunk, 2012: 400).

Declarative knowledge is the learners know

the information that is required to express a

given problem. Procedural knowledge is the

knowledge of a person to do something that

is needed in the troubleshooting process.

Conditional knowledge is knowledge related

to when and why to use a strategy,

technique, and specific methods to solve the

problem. Monitoring comprehension

(Monitoring) is the skill of identifying the

problem and check the information that is

learners to know and unknown. Planning is a

skill to illustrate the problem, planning

processes, and equipment needed to resolve

the problem. Evaluation is decided the

solution to a problem and analyze the

performance and effectiveness of the

strategies used (Rompayon, et al. (2010),

Kelly & Irene (2010), Pate & Miller (2011)).

Social Attitudes

The character cannot be formed

automatically but developed in during time

and continuous in learning process. The

integration of character education in science

learning fostering scientific attitude of

students is responsibility, honesty,

cooperation, self-confidence, curiosity, and

creative (Musyarofah, et al., 2013). A social

attitude (Yuliani, et al. (2013)) is an

awareness of the person of someone who

can influence the social environment.

Honest is the behavior that is based on an

attempt to make himself as a person who

always trustworthy in expression, action,

and jobs. Cooperation is working together

with others to achieve common goals by

sharing tasks and helping outright.

Concerned the environment is the attitude

and action to prevent the damage and to

develop measures to repair the damage to

the surrounding environment.

Research Methods

This study used mixed method concurrent

embedded strategy. The qualitative method

was done by recording students doing their

25

TAPPS and interviewed them. Meanwhile,

the quantitative method was done by doing

the metacognition self-assessment, social

attitudes self-assessment, and the written test

of the concept’s mastery. The subject on the

qualitative method of this study weren’t

randomly chosen. They were chosen by

using the snowball methods.

Results and Discussion Results

The first result of this study showed that

there are three kinds of metacognition

patterns; they are expert, hypothetic and

primitive problem solving.

Expert Problem Solving Metacognition

Pattern

Subject of the study did monitoring in

understanding the problems given. The

important information that the subject got

from the understanding step was used to find

the involved facts and concepts. Planning

was done by making plan in making

hypothesis based on the facts and concepts.

Moreover, planning in tested the hypothesis

which was formed and deciding the solution

by correlated it to fact and concept of

temperature and heat. Planning needs

metacognition knowledge. Monitoring in the

finishing process was more like monitoring

the finishing steps which has been thought

of before. Evaluating was used to decide

whether the finishing step was enough or

should be repeated again.

The evaluating activity was shown from the

students’ activity in checking their answers,

like recounting their answers everywhere

else, checking the involved concepts, and

the formula being used. Checking their

answers started with understanding the

problems, until deciding the final solution,

but without planning. The subjects realized

that evaluating need to do so that won’t be

any concepts left. The subjects knew that by

recounting they will know if there’s an error

in the formula, units, and in the process of

counting itself. The realization that the

subjects have is a declarative and

conditional knowledge. The next evaluating

activity that the subject did was deciding the

solution after they did checking.

: Metacognition skill

: Cognitive Process

Hypothetic Problem Solving

Metacognition Pattern

Hypothetic problem solving metacognition

pattern is a bit similar to the expert problem

solving metacognition pattern. The

difference lays on the monitoring step. In

hypothetic problem solving, the subjects

Figure 1 Expert Problem Solving Metacognition

Pattern

Figure 2 Thinking Process of Expert Problem Solving

Metacognition Pattern

26

didn’t do monitoring process. The subjects

did the evaluating process, but they couldn’t

find any error and didn’t correct their

answers. The subjects felt unsure about the

solution that they’ve taken. Subjects who

have hypothetic problem solving

metacognition pattern used problem solving

metacognition pattern in solving the second

problem which required counting. Based on

the interview results, most of the subjects

actually knew that solution has to be proved

by mathematical counting, but they said

“how do we count it?” it showed that the

subjects didn’t do the planning process

before they solve the problems.

Primitive Problem Solving Metacognition

Pattern

In primitive problem solving metacognition

pattern, at first the subjects tried to

understand the problems by continuously

reading until they got the important

information from the problems. Just like the

other two metacognition patterns,

monitoring was used to identify knowledge

which was needed to comprehend and solve

the problems. The subjects knew about the

facts and concepts which were related to the

problems but didn’t know which concepts

that could help them solve the problems.

This pattern didn’t get through the planning

process because the decision of the solution

was directly derived from the facts. The

subjects thought about the appropriate

concept of temperature and heat but couldn’t

explain it specifically. So, actually the

subjects have had the declarative

knowledge, but they couldn’t do the

reflection process. Besides, monitoring

towards the finishing steps hasn’t be done by

them. The subjects also didn’t do the

evaluating process. Furthermore, the

subjects with this metacognition pattern

have had the procedural knowledge but the

subjects couldn’t explain it specifically.

Subjects with the primitive problem solving

metacognition pattern didn’t feel sure about

their own solution.

Figure 3 Hypothetic Problem Solving Metacognition Pattern

Figure 5 Primitive Problem Solving Metacognition

Pattern

Figure 4 Thinking Process of Hypothetic Problem

Solving Metacognition Pattern

: Metacognition Skill

: Cognitive Process

27

: Metacognition Skill

: Cognitive Process

Social Attitudes

The second result of this study is social

attitudes. The subjects tried to convey what

is thought to provide a solution of the given

problem according to capabilities. The

subjects tried to answer own problems

without asking to partner. All subjects of

Metacognition Pattern with Expert Problem

Solving, the Pattern of Metacognition

Hypothetic Problem solving and Primitive

Problem Solving trying to express

understanding, revealing the knowledge, and

provide clarity in answering.

The Cooperation each of subject shown in

the Figure, shows the same results when it

acts as a problem solver but showed

different results when it acts as a listener.

All active subjects reveal is thought to

resolve the issue when acting as a problem

solver.

The attitude of the students care about the

environment can be seen from the

explanation learners to expressing the

solution of a problem in acts as a problem

solver. Based on the data analysis that is

subjects of Expert Problem Solving and

Hypothetic Problem Solving Metacognition

Pattern discussion of energy-efficient

thinking when expressing the solution of

these problems. The subjects of Primitive

Problem Solving Metacognition pattern not

consider energy efficient when solving

problems. These findings indicate that the

pattern of metacognition has a role in the

growth to energy-saving ideas. The analysis

of self-assessment showed similar results

with the analysis of Tapps.

Figure 6 Thinking Process of Primitive Problem

Solving Metacognition Pattern

Figure 7 Relationships between Metacognition Pattern

and Honesty through TAPPS

Figure 8 Relationships between Metacognition Pattern

and Cooperation through TAPPS

Figure 9 Relationships between Metacognition Pattern

and Environmental Concern through TAPPS

28

The Relationship between Metacognition

and Social Attitudes towards the Mastery of

Concepts

The third result of this study is relationship

between metacognition and social attitudes

towards the mastery of concepts.

29%

71%

Metacognition and Social Attitudes

Other Factors

There is a positive relationship between

metacognition with social attitudes of

learners. Mastery of concepts students 29%

determined by metacognition and social

attitudes together, and 71% is determined by

other factors as shown in Figure 10.

Discussion

Metacognition Pattern

The Metacognition pattern of Expert

Problem Solving is a pattern that is able to

reflect on metacognition. Lawson (1995:

112) explains that someone in early of

adulthood and old able to think reflectively,

describing the provisional estimates, and

conclude. Expert Problem Solving is a

problem-solving pattern that is determines

the solution of the conclusions obtained

from hypothesis testing (Yulianto, et al.,

2013). Jonassen and Grabowski explained

that someone is reflective more likely to

concentrate on the relevant information, are

able to understand and interpret texts, and be

able to solve problems and make decisions

(Santrock, 2013: 156).

The activity of Metacognition can improve

the achievement of learners (Schunk, 2012:

404). Subjects with Metacognition Pattern of

Expert Problem Solving have confidence

when expressing solution. There is a strong

correlation between problem solving and

metacognition that learners with the highest

level of metacognition making it a success in

problem solving (Gok, 2010). Pate and

Miller (2011) explains that the learners

should have the knowledge to do the

planning, monitoring, and evaluation.

The Metacognition pattern of Hypothetic

Problem Solving is a metacognition pattern

that uses metacognitive strategies when

solving the problem but does not perform

monitoring during the process of resolving

the problem and not able to determine and

correct errors in evaluating the activity. To

understand the problem, the subjects have

the same pattern with Metacognition pattern

of Expert Problem Solving, but there are

differences when determining solutions.

The third pattern is Primitive Problem

Solving. Primitive Problem Solving is a

pattern that does not use metacognitive

strategies when solving problems due to

incomplete knowledge. The other findings

that can be seen from subjects with

metacognition pattern of Primitive Problem

Solving still found mistaken concept.

Primitive Problem Solving a problem-

solving process that draws the conclusion of

the preliminary data (Yulianto, et al., 2013).

Honesty

Based on Figure 7, honest attitude in

expressing what he has in mind are owned

by third pattern of metacognition. It means

that honest attitude does not have correlation

with metacognition. The results of the data

analysis showed that the average self-

assessment of honest attitude in the three

patterns of metacognition showed different

results. Honest attitude formation may be

through various means such as foster

scientific attitude in learning at school. The

Figure 10 The concept mastery of learners are

determined by metacognition and social attitudes of

learners together and other factors

29

learners try to do assignment without

cheating to friends (Musyarofah, et al.,

2013).

Cooperation

The learners work together to solve a

problem can improve the interaction

between learners and communicate. The

formation of a positive attitude can be

developed through learning that emphasizes

working together in a group. According to

Hechman and Kautz (2013), the character is

a skill not an innate characteristic that is

formed through in family and social

environments like school so that the

characters can be changeable and can be

changed.

The subjects of Expert Problem Solving

Metacognition Pattern can cooperate well.

The subjects of Expert Problem Solving

Metacognition Pattern always actively to ask

for provoke problem solver in order to

reveal thought to resolve the problem. The

subjects of Metacognition pattern of Expert

Problem Solving never cut explanations

problem solver and always to pay attention

to every explanation expressed by the

problem solver.

The subjects of Hypothetic Problem Solving

Metacognition have an attitude of

cooperation with Metacognition Pattern of

Expert Problem Solving but the subject of

Hypothetic Problem Solving Metacognition

tends to be quiet as a listener. The subjects

do not actively provide questions for

provoke problem solver to give expression

thinking. While the subject of Primitive

Problem Solving Pattern is active as a

problem solver but it tend to inactive as a

listener.

Based on the data analysis above it can be

seen that a good subject is acting as a

problem solver may not necessarily be a

good listener. When the subject as a listener,

the subjects are required to provide

questions that can provoke problem solver

reveal is thought to build knowledge.

Contrary, the subjects acts as a good listener

and problem solver.

The subjects of Expert Problem Solving

Metacognition can cooperate better as

compared with subjects of another

metacognition pattern. A person's ability to

solve problems illustrates the thinking

ability (Yulianto, et al., 2013). The Results

of this study contradict previous studies that

the thinking ability is negatively correlated

to the cooperate ability (Hartono, et al.,

2013). It is also found in research results

(Syaniyyah 2014) there is a negative

correlation between the cooperate ability

with the results of studying physics.

The cooperation attitude can observed from

the results of previous studies is the attitude

of collaboration when students doing

practicum. The practical aspect of

cooperation in the ability of those observed

in previous studies is coordinating skills in

working groups. According to Nurnawati, et

al., 2012, coordination skills in co-operation

is an action that set the task group could be

resolved and directed. The attitude of

cooperation observed in this study is likely

the communication and exchange

information skills. The Communication

skills include the ability to ask, answer the

question, and express opinions. The skills of

share information include giving an

explanation or clarification of information

material. If these skills do not appear in

working pairs then the task has been given

will not be resolved properly (Nurnawati, et

al., 2012).

Environmental concern

The Pattern of Expert Problem Solving have

an attitude of concern of the environment is

higher than the others of metacognition

patterns and the subjects of Primitive

Problem Solving has the lowest

environmental concern attitude. Because of

the subject of Expert Problem Solving

pattern have a lot of experience.

30

According to Mulyani there is a correlation

between educations, environmental

knowledge with attitudes towards

environmental management. The person

knowledge will makes that person has an

attitude. The attitude of person will develop

an interest. The interest has affected a

person's behavior manifestation (Khanafiyah

& Yulianti, 2013).

The Relationship between Metacognition

and Social Attitudes towards the Mastery of

Concepts

Metacognition give effect to the process of

thinking in solving problems. The

correlation results showed a positive

relationship between metacognition and

concept mastery. These results are related

with research results including Lee, et al.

(2009) and Gok (2010) explain that

metacognition is an important factor solving

physics problems. Metacognition is a key

element to achieve the critical thinking

(Magno (2010) and Kelly & Irene (2010)).

There is existence of powerful relationship

between metacognitive knowledge and

student outcome by solving problems which

are indicated by an increase of the student

test results after learning to develop

metacognition (Cikmiyah & Lewis, 2012,

Nulhakim, 2013, and Diella, 2014). Flavell

describes metacognition abilities play an

important role in cognitive activities,

including solving problems (Schunk, 2012:

400).

Based on the data analysis, there is

relationship positively between social

attitudes and concepts mastery. These results

are consistent with the statement of the

implementation of character education in

secondary schools will help improve the

academic achievement of students

(Berkowitz & Bier, 2005 and Chasanah, et

al., 2014).

The success of students in problem solving

is influenced by several factors. The

performance of a person in solving depends

on effort, cognitive, and character (Heckman

& Kautz, 2013: 13). Bandura stated that self-

efficacy, motivation, and school climate will

greatly affect the achievement of learners

(Santrock, 2013: 534).

Conclusions and Recommendations

Conclusions

Metacognition pattern found in research that

is the pattern of Metacognition Expert

Problem Solving, Metacognition pattern of

Hypothetic Problem Solving, and

Metacognition pattern of Primitive Problem

Solving. The entire metacognition pattern

that is shows metacognition skills are

needful in solving problem process. And the

pattern of metacognition gives an idea of the

importance of metacognition in problem

solving and metacognition conditions of

learners. A subject with Metacognition

Pattern of Expert Problem Solving has

effectively problem solving skills when

compared with the other two patterns of

metacognition.

All the subjects of this research of the three

patterns of metacognition have honest

attitude based on the indicators. The subject

of Metacognition Pattern of Expert Problem

Solving has the ability to work as a problem

solver and listener. The subjects of

Metacognition Pattern of Hypothetic

Problem Solving and Metacognition Pattern

of Primitive Problem Solving lack as a

listener. The attitude of concerned about the

environment can be observed on

Metacognition Pattern of Expert Problem

Solving and Hypothetic Problem Solving, so

metacognition makes a person to have an

attitude of care for the environment.

Metacognition and social attitudes has

positively correlated with the mastery of

concepts. The concept mastery of learners

are determined by metacognition and social

attitudes of learners together and other

factors, so that the learners with

Metacognition Pattern of Expert Problem

31

Solving has the best mastery of concepts

between the others two of metacognition

patterns.

Recommendations

Based on conducted the research then

recommendations that can be given as

follows.

1. The teachers should be develop learning

strategies so that the learners with

Metacognition pattern of Primitive Problem

Solving and Metacognition pattern of

Hypothetic Problem Solving can improve the

metacognition and social attitudes.

2. Learning in groups to solve problems that

have been used in order to be modified to

suit the needs of learners who have

Metacognition pattern of Primitive Problem

Solving and Metacognition pattern of

Hypothetic Problem Solving in order to

achieve the Metacognition pattern Expert

Problem Solving.

Bibliography

Azwar, S. 2013. Sikap Manusia: Teori dan

Pengukurannya. Edisi ke 2,

Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Berkowitz, M. W. & Bier, M. C. 2005.

“What Work In Character and

Integrity Education: A Report for

Policy Makers and Opinion

Leaders”. Character Education

Partnership, University of Missouri-

St. Louis.

Chasanah, A., Solihatin, E., & Martono, A.

2014. “Peranan Guru PKN dalam

Membentuk Karakter Disiplin

Siswa”. Jurnal PPKN UNJ Online,

2(4): 1-9.

Chikmiyah, C. & Sugiarto, B. 2012.

“Relationship Between

Metacognitive Knowledge and

Student Learning Outcomes Through

Cooperative Learning Model Type

Think Pair Share On Buffer Solution

Matter”. Unesa Journal of Chemical

Education, 1(1): 55-61.

Diella, D. 2014. “Hubungan Kemampuan

Metakognisi dengan Keterampilan

Berpikir Kritis dan Sikap Ilmiah

Siswa Kelas XI pada Materi Sistem

Ekskresi Manusia”. Tesis. Bandung:

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.

Gok, T. 2010. “The General Assesment of

Problem Solving Processes and

Metacognition in Physics

Education”. Eurasian Journal of

Physics and Chemistry Education,

2(2): 110-122.

Hartono, Rusilowati, A., & Wiyanto. 2013.

“Faktor-faktor yang Mempengaruhi

Pengembangan Trisula Kompetensi”,

Unnes Science Education Journal,

2(2): 344-348.

Heckman, J. J. & Kautz, T. 2013. “Fostering

and Measuring Skill: Interventions

that Improve Character and

Cognition”, Institute for Study of

Labor (IZA) Econstor.

Khanafiyah, S. & Yulianti, D. 2013. “Model

Problem Based Instruction pada

Perkuliahan Fisika Lingkungan

untuk Mengembangkan Sikap

Kepedulian Lingkungan”, UNNES,

JPFI, 9: 35-42.

Kelly, Y. L. Ku. & Irene, T. Ho. 2010.

“Metacognitive Strategies That

Enhance Critical Thinking”.

Metacognition Learning, Springer

Science and Business Media, 5(6):

251-267.

Lawson, A. E. 1995. Science Teaching and

The Development of Thinking.

California: Wadsworth Publishing

Company.

Lee, C. B., Teo, T., & Bergin, D. 2009.

“Children’s Use of Metacognition in

Solving Everyday Problems: An

Initial Study from an Asian Context”.

The Australian Educational

Researcher, 36(3): 89-102.

Magno, C. 2010. “The Role of

Metacognitive Skills in Developing

Critical Thinking”. Metacognition

Learning, 5(5): 137-156.

32

Musyarofah, Hindarto, N., & Mosik. 2013.

“Pendidikan Karakter Terintegrasi

dalam Pembelajaran IPA Guna

Menumbuhkan Kebiasaan Bersikap

Ilmiah”. Unnes Physics Education

Journal, 2(2).

Nugroho, S. E. 2010. “Analisis Epistemologi

Konsep Kelistrikan dan Kemagnetan

pada Mahasiswa Calon Guru Fisika”.

Disertasi. Bandung: Sekolah

Pascasarjana, Universitas Pendidikan

Indonesia.

Nulhakim, L. 2013. “Analisis Keterampilan

Metakognisi Siswa yang

Dikembangkan Melalui

Pembelajaran Berbasis Masalah pada

Materi Kelarutan dan Hasil Kali

Kelarutan”. Tesis. Bandung:

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.

Nurniawati, E., Yulianti, D., & Susanto, H.

2012. “Peningkatan Kerjasama Siswa

SMP Melalui Penerapan

Pembelajaran Kooperatif Pendekatan

Think Pair Share”. Unnes, UPEJ (1).

Pate, M. L. 2009. “Effects of Metacognitive

Instructional Strategies in Secondary

Career and Technical Education

Courses”. Graduate Theses and

Dissertations. Iowa State University.

Pate, M. L. & Miller, G. 2011. “Effects of

Think-Aloud Pair Problem Solving

on Secondary-Level Students’

Performance in Career and Technical

Education Courses”. Journal of

Agricultural Education, 52(1): 120-

131.

Rompayon, P., Tambunchong, C.,

Wongyounoi, S., & Dechsri, P. 2010.

“The Development of Metacognitive

Inventory to Measure Students’

Metacognitive Knowledge Related to

Chemical Bonding Conceptions”.

Paper Presented at International

Association for Educational

Assessment (IAEA), Bangkok:

Srinakharinwirot University.

Santrock, J. W. 2013. Psikologi Pendidikan.

Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media

Group.

Schunk, D. H. 2012. Learning Theories.

Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Sendurur, E., Sendurur, P., Mutlu, N., &

Baser, V. G. 2011. “Metacognitive

Awareness of Pre-Service Teachers”.

International Journal on New Trends

in Educationand Their Implicaions,

2(4): 102-107.

Syaniyyah, A. 2014. “Hubungan

Kemampuan Bekerjasama dengan

Hasil Belajar Fisika Kelas X SMA

Negeri 12 Semarang pada

Pembelajaran Hukum Ohm”. Skripsi.

Semarang: FMIPA, Universitas

Negeri Semarang.

Tok, H., Ozgan, H., & Dos, B. 2010.

“Assessing Metacognitive

Awareness and Learning Strategies

as Positive Predictors for Success in

a Distance Learning Class”. Mustafa

Kemal University Journal of Social

Sciences Institute, 7(14): 123-134.

Young, A. & Fry, J. D. 2008.

“Metacognitive Awareness and

Academic Achievement in College

Student”. Journal of the Scholarship

of Teaching and Learning, 8(2): 1-

10.

Yuliani, N. M., Suhandana, G. A., &

Natajaya, N. 2013. “Pengaruh

Implementasi Model Pembelajaran

Kooperatif GI Berbasis Masalah

Kontekstual Terhadap Hasil Belajar

IPS dan Sikap Sosial pada Siswa

Kelas IV SD Saraswati Tabanan”. e-

Journal Program Pascasarjana

Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha, 4.

Yulianto, E., Nugroho, S. E., & Marwoto, P.

2013. “Perkembangan Pola

Pemecahan Masalah Anak Usia

Sekolah dalam Memecahkan

Permasalahan Ilmu Pengetahuan

Alam”, Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika

Indonesia, 9(1): 151-162.