INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Page 4334

www.rsisinternational.org

Perceptions of Science Trainee Teachers on Collaborative Learning

towards Critical Thinking Skills: A Conceptual Paper

Yee Kin Chia

, Samri Chongo, Noraini Lapawi

Institute of Teacher Education Penang Island Campus, Malaysia

Corresponding Author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.910000356

Received: 17 October 2025; Accepted: 23 October 2025; Published: 12 November 2025

ABSTRACT

Twenty first century science education prioritises student centred pedagogies that cultivate collaboration and

critical thinking. Anchored in Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory (1978), particularly the zone of proximal

development and the mediating role of language and tools, this conceptual paper proposes a framework for

how collaborative learning nurtures critical thinking cognitive skills together with dispositions such as open

mindedness, intellectual humility, and truth seeking among preservice science teachers. The framework rests

on positive interdependence, promotive interaction, individual accountability, and structured reflection, and it

advances three pathways. First, dialogic exchange within the zone of proximal development surfaces and

resolves misconceptions and strengthens reasoning. Second, task interdependence elicits metacognitive

monitoring and justification through scaffolded assistance. Third, role rotation and peer feedback normalise

evidence seeking dispositions and support the internalisation of regulatory talk. Gender is treated as a

contextual lens that shapes participation and discourse, and equitable roles and argumentation protocols are

proposed to mitigate imbalance. From this framework follow design principles for initial teacher education,

including the use of authentic and ill structured problems, explicit scripting of discourse moves such as claim,

evidence, and reasoning, rubric guided assessment of skills and dispositions, and sequenced activities that

consolidate gains over time. The paper concludes with a research agenda to test the framework using validated

measures and equity sensitive designs.

Keywords: Collaborative Learning, Critical Thinking Cognitive Skills, Critical Thinking Dispositions,

Science Education

INTRODUCTION

In the 21st century, education has shifted from traditional methods focused on rote memorisation to student-

centred approaches that promote critical thinking, communication and collaboration skills (Fadhilawati et al.,

2023). Collaborative learning, a powerful strategy for enhancing knowledge acquisition and higher-order

thinking, encourages students to engage actively with peers, exchange ideas and refine their understanding

(Kavita, 2024). Also, research has shown that collaborative learning increases students’ attitudes and

motivation towards science learning, while also enhances their ability to transfer knowledge and generate new

ideas in real-world problems (Loes & Pascarella, 2017). Thus, collaborative learning could help in fostering

critical thinking skills, providing a structured way for students to explore complex concepts and apply

scientific reasoning in collaborative settings.

Critical thinking, an essential skill for science education, is crucial for understanding scientific concepts and

solving complex problems. Studies indicate that students with strong critical thinking skills perform better

academically and are more adapted at solving complex scientific problems (Ramdani et al., 2022). Critical

thinking skills involve critical thinking cognitive skill, the mental processes required for effective reasoning,

problem-solving and decision-making. These skills include interpretative analysis, inference, evaluation,

explanation and self-regulation which help to process information systematically, make sound judgements and

improve reasoning abilities. (Echiverri, 2024; Fikriyati et al., 2022). On the other hand, critical thinking

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Page 4335

www.rsisinternational.org

dispositions are another part of critical thinking which refer to the attitudes, habits of mind and personal traits

that support effective critical thinking, ensuring a balanced and well-reasoned judgement (Santos, 2017). These

include confidence, open mindset, fairness and objectivity, scepticism and systematically (Echiverri, 2024;

Fikriyati et al., 2022).

Research indicates that collaborative learning promotes critical thinking by encouraging students to question

assumptions, articulate thoughts and consider diverse perspectives (Hsu, 2021). Thus, research indicates that

students who engage in collaborative learning activities like group discussions and peer teaching enhance

analytical and reasoning skills, thereby improving academic performance and problem-solving abilities

(Isnawati et al., 2020).

An important dimension of critical thinking skills development in collaborative contexts is gender. Research

has shown that gender can influence learning preferences, communication styles, and participation patterns in

group-based settings (Gilligan, 1982; Chai et al., 2021). In science education, studies report mixed findings:

some indicate that female pre-service teachers exhibit stronger verbal reasoning and reflection in collaborative

learning, while male counterparts may demonstrate greater confidence in problem-solving tasks (Tan & Karim,

2021). These differences highlight the need to examine whether perceptions of collaborative learning as a

pathway to critical thinking skills development vary by gender.

A. Research Objectives

1. To determine the perceived contribution of collaborative learning to critical-thinking cognitive skills

and dispositions among preservice science teachers

2. To determine whether mean perceived contributions differ by gender.

3. To determine whether critical thinking dispositions mediate the relationship between collaborative

learning and reasoning quality.

4. To model which collaborative features predict critical thinking skills and dispositions after controlling

for relevant covariates.

B. Research Questions

1. What are the mean levels of the perceived contribution of collaborative learning to critical thinking

cognitive skills and to critical thinking dispositions?

2. Do these mean perceived contributions differ by gender?

3. Do critical thinking dispositions mediate the relationship between collaborative learning and reasoning

quality?

4. Which collaborative features predict critical thinking skills and dispositions, controlling for relevant

covariates?

LITERATURE REVIEW

Collaborative learning can enhance engagement and higher order outcomes, but effects depend on task design,

discourse scripting and individual accountability (Johnson & Johnson, 1991; Kirschner, Oliver, M., et al.

2023). In science education, peer interaction, social presence and authentic inquiry can support achievement,

yet benefits are contingent on assessment quality and facilitation rather than universal (Garrison, Anderson, &

Archer, 2000; Qureshi, Khaskheli, Qureshi, Raza, & Yousufi, 2023). Strong guidance and scaffolding matter,

because minimal guidance risks cognitive overload and uneven participation in novice groups (Kirschner et al.,

2006). These patterns align with sociocultural views that emphasise guided interaction, while reminding us that

social presence is a prerequisite but not a guarantee of rigorous inquiry (Vygotsky, 1978; Garrison et al.,

2000).

Empirically, the link between collaborative learning and critical thinking is generally positive but modest, and

is sensitive to dosage, structure and context (Loes & Pascarella, 2017). Dispositions such as openness and

confidence improve under structured peer feedback, but gains are typically smaller than for cognitive skills,

which signals the need for explicit discourse norms and formative rubrics (Loes & Pascarella, 2017). For pre

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Page 4336

www.rsisinternational.org

service teachers, capacity building requires more than exposure; targeted professional development and clear

collaboration scripts produce stronger and more durable effects (Qureshi et al., 2023; Vygotsky, 1978).

On gender, differences are usually small and design dependent; responsive scaffolding and equitable turn

taking tend to narrow gaps rather than magnify them (Loes & Pascarella, 2017; Vygotsky, 1978). Future

studies should report intervention dose, specify collaboration scripts and accountability mechanisms, and use

multi measure outcomes with moderators such as duration, social presence, and gender to identify when and

why collaborative learning improves critical thinking in science (Garrison et al., 2000; Loes & Pascarella,

2017).

Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework of this study illustrates the interrelationship between collaborative learning,

interaction, critical thinking skills and dispositions, and the quality of science learning among pre-service

teachers. This model is grounded in Vygotsky’s Social Constructivism Theory (1978), which posits that

learning occurs through social interaction and the co-construction of knowledge. Within collaborative settings,

learners are exposed to diverse ideas that promote negotiation of meaning and the development of higher-order

thinking processes (Saleem et al., 2021; Wibowo et al., 2025). Applied examples show that virtual lab and

simulation contexts create interactive, collaborative spaces in which meaning is negotiated and higher order

reasoning is practised; similarly, Scratch based tasks can surface misconceptions and guide conceptual change

through peer discussion (Lee & Chongo, 2025; Lim & Chongo, 2025; Chia et al., 2023; Ming et al., 2023).

Thus, collaborative learning is positioned as the pedagogical arena in which social interaction is organized and

meaning is negotiated, providing a clear bridge to the subsequent account of dialogue, cooperation, and shared

problem solving.

Collaborative learning provides a pedagogical platform that engages learners in dialogue, cooperation, and

shared problem-solving, creating an environment conducive to joint intellectual effort (Johnson & Johnson,

1991; Bruffee, 1995). Through cooperative structures, students assume responsibility not only for their own

learning but also for the collective understanding of the group. This shared accountability encourages positive

interdependence and individual accountability, two conditions shown to enhance academic achievement and

reasoning (Laal & Ghodsi, 2012).

Interaction acts as the mediating process that connects collaborative learning with the development of critical

thinking. In interactive discourse, learners articulate arguments, justify claims, and respond to counter-

perspectives, practices that refine cognitive reasoning and foster reflective judgment (Hsu, 2021)).

Interactional quality, rather than frequency alone, determines how effectively collaborative activities stimulate

deeper levels of reasoning. Research demonstrates that dialogic interaction nurtures analytical skills,

hypothesis testing, and the ability to evaluate evidence critically (Loes & Pascarella, 2017; Qureshi et al.,

2023).

Through these interactions, critical thinking cognitive skills such as interpretation, analysis, inference,

evaluation, explanation, and self-regulation are activated and refined (Echiverri, 2024; Fikriyati et al., 2022).

Simultaneously, critical thinking dispositions, including open-mindedness, confidence, intellectual curiosity,

and fairness, are cultivated through sustained collaboration and constructive feedback (Ekici, 2017; Hamzah et

al., 2024).Students engaged in well-structured collaborative learning tasks tend to demonstrate higher

perseverance, empathy, and willingness to reassess assumptions, aligning with the traits of strong critical

thinkers (Santos, 2017).

When both cognitive and dispositional dimensions of critical thinking are developed, learners exhibit a deeper

comprehension of scientific concepts and enhanced capacity for evidence-based reasoning. This leads to

measurable improvements in the quality of science learning, characterized by conceptual understanding,

metacognitive awareness, and the ability to transfer scientific reasoning to real-world contexts (García-

Carmona, 2023; Muhibbuddin et al., 2023). Furthermore, the integration of collaborative inquiry with

reflective dialogue promotes sustained intellectual engagement and professional growth among pre-service

science teachers (Mandikonza, 2022).

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Page 4337

www.rsisinternational.org

As depicted in Fig. 1, the proposed framework conceptualizes the pathway.

Fig. 1 Conceptual framework

This framework underscores that collaborative learning indirectly enhances the quality of science education by

mediating social interaction processes that strengthen both the cognitive and affective domains of critical

thinking. Future empirical studies could validate this framework through structural modeling to confirm the

mediating influence of interaction on science learning outcomes. This conceptual paper proposes to explore the

perceptions of science trainee teachers towards collaborative learning in developing critical thinking skills,

with a specific focus on the potential differences in perceptions based on gender. Understanding these

perceptions will provide insights into how teacher education programs can design more inclusive and effective

collaborative learning experiences to nurture critical thinking skills competencies across diverse learner

profiles.

METHODOLOGY

A. Research Design

This article adopts a conceptual model building design rather than an empirical survey, while articulating a

quantitative pathway for future testing. Our aim is to theorise how specific collaborative task features,

structured discourse, individual accountability, and feedback cycles shape two outcomes in science education,

namely critical thinking cognitive skills and critical thinking dispositions. We integrate sociocultural accounts

of guided participation and the Community of Inquiry tradition to explain the mechanisms that move

interaction from social presence to disciplined reasoning, and we specify testable propositions and scope

conditions under which effects should strengthen or attenuate (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2000; Vygotsky,

1978). In doing so, we follow guidance for high quality conceptual contributions. We emphasise construct

clarity, internal coherence, parsimony balanced with explanatory fertility, and practical usefulness for future

empirical testing (MacInnis, 2011; Jaakkola, 2020). We also reconcile supportive and cautionary evidence by

arguing that collaborative learning yields stronger gains when explicit scaffolding is present, while minimally

guided approaches risk overload and uneven participation in novice groups (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark,

2006; Hmelo Silver, Duncan, & Chinn, 2007). A brief prospective testing plan is outlined to show how the

model could be operationalised in subsequent studies without eclipsing its primary theoretical contribution.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Page 4338

www.rsisinternational.org

B. Sampling

Sampling is outlined to show how the proposed model can be subjected to empirical testing without eclipsing

its theoretical contribution. Accordingly, we define the target population, articulate the sampling logic, and

specify reporting principles that enable rigorous tests while preserving the paper’s conceptual focus (Jaakkola,

2020; MacInnis, 2011).

The intended population comprises approximately 300 pre-service science teachers enrolled in the Bachelor of

Education (PISMP) across three Institute of Teacher Education Malaysia (IPGM) campuses. This setting is

theoretically appropriate because trainees are routinely exposed to collaborative learning strategies, making it a

relevant context in which links between collaborative task features and critical thinking can be observed in

early-career science education (Loes & Pascarella, 2017). For a subsequent empirical test, a stratified

purposive approach across campuses and gender would be adopted; with n ≈ 300, statistical power is adequate

to detect small to medium group differences and multivariate effects at α = .05 (Cohen, 1988).

C. Research Instruments

The research instrument used in this study is a questionnaire. The questionnaire for this study is adapted from

Echiverri, L. L. (2024) and is divided into two sections representing the two sub-constructs of critical thinking.

Section A measures Critical Thinking Cognitive Skills (CTCS-10), while Section B assesses Critical Thinking

Dispositions. Section A: CTCS-10 contains five dimensions which are Interpretative Analysis, Inference,

Evaluation, Explanation and Self-Regulation, with 2 items each dimension, resulting in 10 items in Section A.

Whereas, Section B: CTD-10 contains five dimensions which are Confidence, Open Mindset, Fairness and

Objectivity, Skepticism and Systematicity, with 2 items each dimension, resulting in 10 items in Section B.

Overall, the questionnaire consists of 20 items and the participants will respond using a 5-point Likert scale

ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree). Furthermore, the reliability of the instrument was

previously tested by Echiverri (2024), who reported a strong reliability with a Cronbach’s alpha value of

0.859, indicating that the instrument is consistent.

Table 1 Survey Instrument

Critical Thinking Cognitive Skills (CTCS)

I can correlate information gained with solving concepts and strategies.

I use abstract ideas to interpret the information effectively.

I can identify and ensure the needed elements to draw reasonable conclusions.

I consider relevant information to deduce the consequences flowing from evidence, judgments, beliefs,

opinions, or other forms of representation.

I verify the referential and supportive evidence.

I re-check each solving step and re-reviewing identified information.

I draw conclusions based on logical reasons, supported by attaching evidence.

I present well-reasoned explanations for the statement, descriptions, questions, or other forms of

representation.

I can self-consciously monitor my cognitive activities, the elements used in those activities, and the

results produced.

A10

I can apply solutions and use gained strategies to solve problems.

Critical Thinking Dispositions (CTD)

I think I can get through any complicated problem.

I persevere in handling difficult situations and challenges.

I am trying to understand how the unknown thing works.

I continually look for pieces of information related to solving a problem.

I evaluate either my opinion or others' opinions fairly.

I willingly accept the proven truth, though having a different opinion.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Page 4339

www.rsisinternational.org

When I see the world, I see it with a questioning mind.

Although something is already set firmly, I have questions about it.

When I solve or judge a problem, I utilize a collection of data by organizing it systematically.

B10

I am able to collect various factual evidence and then work out the differences, similarities or rules.

D. Data Collection

Data collection is framed as a prospective pathway for empirically testing the proposed model without

displacing the primary theoretical contribution. We outline how measures of critical thinking cognitive skills

and critical thinking dispositions could be operationalised among pre service science teachers while

maintaining rigor, transparency, and ethical practice (Jaakkola, 2020; MacInnis, 2011).

A secure online survey platform such as Google Forms may be used to administer a structured questionnaire

across multiple IPGM campuses. Online administration enables rapid deployment, automated data handling,

and reduced administrative burden, but it also requires attention to coverage and nonresponse issues (Evans &

Mathur, 2005; Bethlehem, 2010). To mitigate coverage error, invitation lists should be drawn from official

program rosters and access should be device agnostic. The invitation will include a plain language statement

describing purpose, eligibility, estimated completion time, and contact information.

E. Prospective Analysis Plan

Analyses would begin with data screening for missingness, outliers, and assumptions. Descriptive statistics

will be reported for each construct and subscale: sample size (n), mean, standard deviation, standard error, 95

percent confidence intervals via t based limits, minimum, maximum, skewness, and kurtosis. Internal

consistency indices (Cronbach’s alpha ) will also be presented. Intercorrelations among CTCS and CTD with

their dimensions will be reported with 95 percent confidence intervals. To examine gender differences across

correlated outcomes, a MANOVA followed by adjusted univariate tests is appropriate; effect sizes with

confidence intervals should be reported. The structural part of the model can be tested via multiple regression

or path analysis/SEM. Power analysis should inform sample size planning, and reporting should include effect

sizes beyond p values (Cohen, 1988; Lakens, 2013).

CONCLUSION

This study highlights that science trainee teachers perceive that collaborative learning has its impact on

developing critical thinking skills effectively from the aspects of critical thinking cognitive skills and critical

thinking dispositions. Various approaches which include group investigation, inquiry-based learning and

online communities of practice have positively influenced the critical thinking skills among science trainee

teachers. However, effective and proper guidelines of implementation should be given to teachers, which help

in ensuring better preparation for future educators in fostering critical thinking among students.

REFERENCES

1. Abbas, S., Wirda Az Umangap, & Amin, A. M. (2023). Collaborative Group Investigation and Self

Efficacy on Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Critical Thinking Skills. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains Indonesia,

11(1), 1–11.

2. Abu-Baker, M. I. K., Abu-Zaid, M. K. S., Alsawalqah, H., Al-Shamayleh, Y., & Al-Shboul, B. (2019).

The Impact of the Implementation of Capability Maturity Model Integration on User Satisfaction: Case

Study on Software Companies in Jordan. Journal of Software, 14(7), 293–311.

https://doi.org/10.17706/jsw.14.7.293-311

3. Alsaleh, N. J. (2020). Teaching Critical Thinking Skills: Literature Review. Turkish Online Journal of

Educational Technology - TOJET, 19(1), 21–39.

4. Bethlehem, J. (2010). Selection bias in web surveys. International Statistical Review, 78(2),161–188

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-5823.2010.00112.x

5. Bruffee, K. A. (1995). Sharing our toys: Cooperative learning versus collaborative learning. Change,

27(1), 12–18.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Page 4340

www.rsisinternational.org

6. Chai, C. S., Koh, J. H. L., & Teo, Y. H. (2021). Gender differences in STEM learning outcomes: A

Southeast Asian perspective. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 30(1), 15–27.

7. Chia, Y. K., Lim, S. H., Kiew, S. P., Koo, R. K. R., Lau, I. Z. W., Ling, Y. R., Chongo, S., & Lapawi,

N. (2023). Overcoming students’ misconception on Moon Phases: A classroom action research.

International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Research and Studies, 3(6), 375–379.

8. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

9. Echiverri, L. L. (2024). Second Language Learning Motivation and Cooperative Learning: Does it

Enhance ESL Chinese Students Critical Thinking? In Conference Proceedings. The Future of

Education 2024.

10. Ekici, D. I. (2017). The Effects of Online Communities of Practice on Pre-Service Teachers’ Critical

Thinking Dispositions. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(7),

3801–3827. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00759a

11. Evans, J. R., & Mathur, A. (2005). The value of online surveys. Internet Research, 15(2), 195–219.

https://doi.org/10.1108/10662240510590360

12. Fadhilawati, D., Malahayati, E. N., & Suyitno. (2023). Transforming 21st Century Education Through

Integration of 6Cs and Digital Technologies in Classroom Learning: A Case Study in Higher

Education. Novateur Publications, 114–135.

13. Fikriyati, A., Agustini, R., & Suyatno, S. (2022). Pre-service Science Teachers’ Critical Thinking

Dispositions and Critical Thinking Skills. Www.atlantis-Press.com, 627, 176–181.

https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.211229.028

14. García‐Carmona, A. (2023). Scientific Thinking and Critical Thinking in Science Education . Science

& Education, 34, 227–245.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-023-00460-5

15. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment:

Computer Conferencing in Higher Education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87–105.

16. Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Harvard

University Press.

17. Hamzah, N., Zakaria, N., Ariffin, A., & Rubani, S. N. K. (2024). The Effectiveness of Collaborative

Learning in Improving Higher Level Thinking Skills and Reflective Skills. Journal of Advanced

Research in Applied Sciences and Engineering Technology, 42(1), 191–198.

https://doi.org/10.37934/araset.42.1.191198

18. Hmelo Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem

based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational

Psychologist, 42(2), 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520701263368

19. Hsu, Y.-C. (2021). An Action Research in Critical Thinking Concept Designed Curriculum Based on

Collaborative Learning for Engineering Ethics Course. Sustainability, 13(5), 2621.

https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052621

20. Isnawati, Ibrahim, M., Tjandrakirana, Suyidno , Rusmansyah , & Kusuma, A. E. (2020). The effect of

collaborative based science learning model on enhancing students’ critical thinking skills and

responsibility. ProQuest, 1422(1), 012–026. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1422/1/012026

21. Jaakkola, E. (2020). Designing conceptual articles: Four approaches. AMS Review, 10, 18–26.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-020-00161-0

22. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1991). Cooperation in the classroom. Interaction Book Company.

23. Kavita, A. D. (2024). A Survey Of Collaborative Learning Perpectives Among Efl Senior High School

Students. Doctoral dissertation, Universitas Islam Indonesia.

https://dspace.uii.ac.id/handle/123456789/50392

24. Laal, M., & Ghodsi, S. M. (2012). Benefits of collaborative learning. Procedia - Social and Behavioral

Sciences, 31, 486–490.

25. Lakens, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: A practical

primer for t tests and ANOVAs. European Journal of Social Psychology,43(6),859–869.

https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2009

26. Loes, C. N., & Pascarella, E. T. (2017). Collaborative learning and critical thinking: Testing the link.

The Journal of Higher Education, 88(5), 726–753. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2017.1291257

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Page 4341

www.rsisinternational.org

27. Lee, M. X., & Chongo, S. (2025). Effectiveness of virtual lab on Year 5 students’ achievement and

motivation in the topic of electricity. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social

Science, 9(7), 2040–2046. https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.20 25.907000169

28. Lim, K. J. K., & Chongo, S. (2025). The impact of computer-based simulation on primary students’

achievement and interest in learning Earth’s rotation and revolution. International Journal of Research

and Innovation in Social Science, 9(8), 1184–1193

29. Loes, C. N., & Pascarella, E. T. (2017). Collaborative Learning and Critical Thinking: Testing the

Link. The Journal of Higher Education, 88(5), 726–753.

https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2017.1291257

30. Mandikonza, C. (2022). Collaborative learning experiences and development of capabilities among

first-year pre-service teachers learning Cell Biology concepts. Social Sciences & Humanities Open,

5(1), 100254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2022.100254

31. MacInnis, D. J. (2011). A framework for conceptual contributions in marketing. Journal of Marketing,

75(4), 136–154. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.75.4.136

32. Ming, S. K. H., Chongo, S., & Lapawi, N. (2023, March 25–26). Using Scratch to increase students’

achievement and motivation toward solar system. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference

on Business Studies and Education (ICBE) (Vol. 44).

33. Muhibbuddin, M., Wiwit Artika, & Cut Nurmaliah. (2023). Improving Critical Thinking Skills

Through Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS)-Based Science. International Journal of Instruction,

16(4), 283–296. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2023.16417a

34. Petrescu, A.-M. A., Gorghiu, G., & Draghicescu, L. M. (2018). The Advantages of Collaborative

Learning in Science Lessons. LUMEN Proceedings, 2, 326–333.

https://doi.org/10.18662/lumproc.icsed2017.36

35. Qureshi, M. A., Khaskheli, A., Qureshi, J. A., Raza, S. A., & Yousufi, S. Q. (2023). Factors affecting

students’ learning performance through collaborative learning and engagement. Interactive Learning

Environments, 31(4), 2371–2391. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1884886

36. Ramdani, D., Susilo, H., Suhadi, & Sueb. (2022). The Effectiveness of Collaborative Learning on

Critical Thinking, Creative Thinking, and Metacognitive Skill Ability: Meta-Analysis on Biological

Learning. European Journal of Educational Research, 11(3), 1607–1628.

37. Rosa-ut, J., Zen Markniel, S. B., Rosa-ut, S. B., & D. Gabule, M. J. L. (2024). Collaborative Learning

in Science Courses: Exploring Students’ Learning Experiences.

http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.14456. .66563

38. Saleem, A., Kausar, H., & Deeba, F. (2021). Social Constructivism: A New Paradigm in Teaching and

Learning Environment. Perennial Journal of History (PJH), 11(11), 403–421.

39. Santos, L. (2017). The Role of Critical Thinking in Science Education. Journal of Education and

Practice, 8(20).

40. Siemens, G. (2022). Equity in AI-assisted learning: Designing unbiased adaptive systems. Educational

Technology Research & Development, 70(2), 341–358.

41. Tan, K. Y., & Karim, N. (2021). Gendered patterns in Malaysian primary science achievement.

Malaysian Journal of Education Studies, 12(1), 45–60.

42. Vong, S. A., & Kaewurai, W. (2017). Instructional model development to enhance critical thinking and

critical thinking teaching ability of trainee students at regional teaching training center in Takeo

province, Cambodia. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 38(1), 88–95.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kjss.2016.05.002

43. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: Development of Higher Psychological Processes. In JSTOR.

Harvard University Press.

44. Wibowo, S., Wangid, M. N., & Firdaus, F. M. (2025). The relevance of Vygotsky’s constructivism

learning theory with the differentiated learning primary schools. Journal of Education and Learning

(EduLearn) , 19(1), 431–440.