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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Understanding the Nature of Science (NoS) for Elementary School

Students Based on Gender

Julia Anis Handayani^1*, Candra Tri Utami², Tia Citra Bayuni³, Aan Yuliyanto⁴

^1,2,3,4Elementary School Teacher Education, Universitas Pelita Bangsa, Indonesia

*Corresponding Author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.91100397

Received: 26 November 2025; Accepted: 04 December 2025; Published: 12 December 2025

ABSTRACT

This research examines elementary school students' understanding of the Nature of Science (NoS) based on

gender. The purpose of this study is to identify and analyse the level of understanding of male and female

students regarding NoS concepts, which are an important foundation in science learning. This study uses a

descriptive quantitative approach with a survey method to obtain students' understanding of NoS. The

sampling technique was carried out through purposive sampling by considering certain characteristics relevant

to the research objectives. The research sample consisted of upper elementary school students in the West Java

region. The research instrument was a questionnaire containing 47 positive and negative statements with a

Likert scale based on the components of NoS, namely scientific knowledge, scientific process, and scientific

attitude, which had been developed through literature review and expert validation to explore students'

understanding of various aspects of NoS. The results showed that male students obtained an average score of

66, while female students obtained an average score of 65. The difference between these figures was very

small, indicating that there was no significant difference in NoS understanding between male and female

students. These findings show that NoS understanding is not determined by gender. This study has limitations

because it only focused on one region, so the results do not reflect the broader situation. Therefore, further

research is recommended to be conducted with a larger geographical coverage and considering other categories

such as interests, place of residence, class level, profession and other categories. With a broader research

coverage, a more comprehensive reprecentation of students' understanding of NoS in Indonesia is expected to

be obtained.

Keywords: Elementary School Students, Gender, Nature of Science

INTRODUCTION

Survey data from the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) conducted in 2015

shows that Indonesian students' science scores ranked 44th out of 47 countries surveyed. TIMSS is a project

developed by the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA), which has

been a pioneer in international comparative studies since 1995, focusing on evaluating the mathematics and

science skills of students in grades 4 and 8, although in 2015 data was only collected from grade 4 elementary

school students. TIMSS is conducted periodically every four years, with questionnaires covering aspects of

students' home and school life, including basic demographic information, home environment, school climate,

and self-perception and attitudes towards mathematics and science learning. Indonesia has been involved since

2003 until 2015, with scores continuing to decline (Hamzah, 2023). These results indicate that students'

mastery of concepts and understanding in the field of science is still weak. One of the factors contributing to

these low achievements is students' lack of understanding of the Nature of Science (NoS).

Understanding NoS is a standard for passing science education before entering the next level (Amador-

Rodríguez et al., 2021; Dogan & Abd-El-Khalick, 2008). NoS helps students understand how science and

scientists work, as well as how scientific knowledge is generated, proven, and influenced. Understanding NoS

is important because it can improve science literacy when dealing with various problems, especially those

related to socio-scientific issues, so that logical solutions can be found (McComas, 2015).

Page 5027

www.rsisinternational.org

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Recognising the urgency of NoS at the elementary school level provides a strong foundation for further study

on the level of student understanding in the early stages of formal education. Understanding NoS from an early

age is expected to equip students to develop better scientific literacy at the next level of education (Adibelli-

Sahin & Deniz, 2017; Almeida et al., 2023). NoS explains how a person acquires knowledge and understands

scientific concepts correctly through orderly steps to produce appropriate findings (Lorsbach et al., 2019). This

will ultimately empower students to think critically, make appropriate decisions, and engage with science

issues in everyday life.

Given the importance of understanding NoS, it is necessary to conduct research to reveal the level of

understanding of NoS, especially among elementary school students. Through this research, educators and

policymakers can determine the current state of students' understanding of NoS. The data obtained will help

identify areas that need improvement in learning, thereby providing a basis for developing more appropriate

curricula and teaching strategies (Jiang & McComas, 2014; Yanuar & Widodo, 2020). For example, if a gap in

understanding is found, the concept of NoS can be better integrated into science lessons so that students not

only know scientific facts but also understand how science works as an investigative process and its role in

society. With this research, the level of students' understanding of NoS can be determined through appropriate

measurement tools. This study aims to determine the level of elementary school students' understanding of

NoS based on gender. Although in several studies, no differences in cognitive abilities based on gender were

found (Adiastuty et al., 2020; Hisanah et al., 2025; Siswati et al., 2016). This study remains important to

provide an empirical description of the profile of elementary school students' understanding of NoS. It is hoped

that the results of this study can be used as a reference in designing more optimal and planned science learning

strategies to improve students' understanding of NoS.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Nature of Science

In science education, students are not only required to master scientific concepts and facts, but also to

understand how scientific knowledge is formed. This understanding is known as the Nature of Science (NoS).

NoS plays an important role because it provides an overview that science is an investigative process involving

evidence, creativity, and is influenced by various social and cultural factors (Atakan & Akçay, 2022).

Understanding NoS not only helps students comprehend the content of science, but also scientific ways of

thinking and working. Understanding NoS helps students appreciate the beauty of nature and the role of

science in improving human life. Thus, NoS is not merely scientific knowledge, but also a way to understand

and appreciate the surrounding environment (Widodo, 2021).

Fig 1. The major elements of NOS appropriate for inclusion in science instruction, arranged in three related

clusters (McComas, 2015)

.

Page 5028

www.rsisinternational.org

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

NoS continues to attract the attention of experts, leading to differing opinions. Some experts divide NoS into

several components, including empirical base, tentative theories and law, socio-cultural embeddedness,

creativity, scientific method, and subjectivity (McComas, 2015). Others argue that NoS consists of empirical

base, tentative theories and law, socio-cultural embeddedness, creativity, scientific method, and subjectivity

(Lederman et al., 2002); empirical basis, tentative, theories and law, socio-cultural embeddedness, creativity,

scientific method, subjective, cannot answer all questions, science and technology are not the same, and

distinction between observation and inference (Alshamrani, 2008); empirical basis, tentative, socio-cultural

embeddedness, creativity, scientific method, subjective, cannot answer all questions (Jiang & McComas,

2014); tentative, theories and law, socio-cultural embeddedness, creativity, scientific method, subjective,

distinction between observation and inference (Temel et al., 2018).

However, science essentially comprises three components, namely scientific knowledge, scientific process, and

scientific attitude, each of which has its own characteristics (Widodo, 2021). The relationship between these

components can be seen in Table 1.

Table 1 The Relationship Between The Nature Of Science From A Component Point Of View And Its Nature

Of Science

Characteristic

Science

Component

Tentative

Subjective

Empirical

Scientific Method

Limitations

Social Culture

Knowledge



Process



Attitude

Table 1 shows that science encompasses not only scientific knowledge, but also the ways or methods of

acquiring that knowledge, known as the scientific process. In addition, there is also the aspect of scientific

attitude, namely the values and behaviours required in acquiring scientific knowledge. Thus, scientific

knowledge is the result produced by scientists and is referred to as science as a product, while the method of

acquiring knowledge is referred to as science as a process, and the values or attitudes that support the

acquisition of knowledge are known as scientific attitudes (Kapsala et al., 2022).

Based on the table, it can be seen that scientific knowledge has four characteristics, including tentative,

subjective, empirical, and socio-cultural. Furthermore, the scientific process has two characteristics, including

scientific methods and limitations, while scientific attitudes only have one characteristic, namely using

scientific methods. These three components with six characteristics form the core of NoS (Cahyana, 2025;

Hayati Rahayu et al., 2019; Tursinawati & Widodo, 2019). These six characteristics form the basis for the

development of a measuring instrument aimed at determining students' understanding of NoS. By including

indicators for each characteristic in the instrument, researchers can assess the extent to which elementary

school students understand the important aspects of NoS. The process of developing this instrument includes

the preparation of questions that represent each characteristic.

METHODOLOGY

Research Design

This study utilised a quantitative method with a survey type of research aimed at obtaining information

regarding the understanding of NoS among elementary school students based on gender. Data was obtained

directly from respondents through a research instrument in the form of a questionnaire distributed via Google

Forms. This study utilised descriptive statistical analysis to describe the understanding of NoS among

elementary school students based on gender.

Page 5029

www.rsisinternational.org

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Population and Sample

The population in this study were elementary school students in West Java, Indonesia. The sample in this study

consisted of 74 upper-grade elementary school students, comprising 37 female students and 37 male students.

The data collection technique used was purposive sampling, which was selected based on specific

considerations and objectives (Widodo et al., 2019). The consideration for selecting these students was that

they had already begun to learn about the scientific process, simple experiments, and how science works in

everyday life, making them suitable for measuring NoS indicators. At the upper grade level, students are

already in the concrete operational stage towards the formal stage, so they are able to understand concepts,

make logical assessments, and respond to research instruments in the form of questionnaires and tests more

accurately. This research was conducted by providing NoS instruments in the form of questionnaires to the

sample through Google Forms distributed by teachers at school. From these statements, students were asked to

respond according to their understanding.

Research Instruments

Instrument development through three stages. The first stage involved conducting a literature review of NoS

components from various experts by comprehensively examining the literature. The literature obtained NoS

components including scientific knowledge (scientific products), scientific processes (scientific methods) and

scientific attitudes (Widodo, 2021). The instrument was in the form of a questionnaire with 47 items in the

form of statements developed from three components and seven characteristics/properties of NoS. The

statements developed were positive and negative in nature, using a 4-point Likert scale, namely (1) Strongly

disagree, (2) Disagree, (3) Agree, (4) Strongly agree. This scoring applies if the statement is positive; if the

statement is negative, the opposite applies. In the second stage, the questionnaire items were developed and

tested by experts. In the third stage, the NoS instrument was tested on primary school students. In this trial,

respondents reviewed the content and language format, then reviewed the validity and reliability of the

statement items. The validity and reliability of the instrument were measured using SPSS, which showed that

the statement items were valid with r_calculated> r_table(0.2242). The reliability calculation showed that the r_calculated

(0.66) > 0.60. Table 2 below is the NoS comprehension questionnaire grid.

Table 2 Nos Questionnaire

Component

Knowledge

Aspect

Item

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Amount

Tentative

6

Subjective

Empiric

7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12

13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19

20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25

7

Social culture

6

Scientific method

Limitations

26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32

33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39

40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47

7

Process

7

Scientific method

8

Attitude

47

Amount

Data Analysis Techniques

Analysis of respondents' responses obtained through questionnaires was carried out in several steps. First, the

questionnaire results were grouped based on negative and positive statements, then scored and totalled. After

that, the total score was converted into a percentage scale so that it could be compared between aspects. The

percentages obtained were then analysed descriptively by adjusting them to the predetermined assessment

categories, namely very good, good, enough, bad and very bad. The assessment categories can be seen in Table

Page 5030

www.rsisinternational.org

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Further analysis was conducted by describing the scores obtained by students in understanding NoS based on

gender. The scores are described, summarised, and linked to previous research conducted by other researchers.

Table 3 Percentage Of Criteria For Understanding Science

Percentage (%)

Criteria

84 – 100

Very Good

68 – 83

52 – 67

36 – 51

< 36

Good

Enough

Bad

Very Bad

(Jumanto & Widodo, 2018)

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This survey research was conducted simultaneously on male and female elementary school students. The

following are the results of the NoS comprehension study based on gender. Based on the results of the

Kolmogorov-Smirnov normality test, the data has a significance value of 0.200, so it can be concluded that the

data is normally distributed. This indicates that further analysis using parametric tests, such as the independent

samples t-test, can be carried out appropriately.

The results of the descriptive analysis show that the average NoS comprehension score for male students is

122.77, while female students have an average of 121.10. In terms of numbers, male students appear to have

slightly higher comprehension scores than female students, but the difference is relatively small. The standard

deviation of the two groups is also almost the same, so that the variation in data between groups does not show

any significant differences. Furthermore, the results of the independent samples t-test show that the

significance value (Sig. 2-tailed) is 0.270, which is greater than the α = 0.05 limit. This means that there is no

statistically significant difference between the levels of NoS comprehension of male and female students. This

finding is reinforced by a mean difference value of 1.671, which is still within the confidence interval range

that crosses zero, indicating that the difference is not inferentially meaningful.

Overall, despite minor differences in average scores, the analysis shows that gender does not significantly

affect students' understanding of the Nature of Science (NoS). Thus, both male and female students

demonstrate a relatively equal level of understanding of NoS. For further clarification, aspects of students' NoS

are presented in Table 4 in percentage form.

Table 4 Percentage Nature Of Science

Percentage (%)

Category

Female

66

Criteria

Enough

Male

68

Criteria

Good

Scientific

method

Knowledge

Amount

65

Enough

66

Enough

Based on Table 4, which shows primary school students' understanding of the NoS by gender, it can be seen

that both male and female students show relatively similar patterns of understanding in most aspects of NoS.

The results of the study indicate that the empirical aspect is the aspect of NoS that is most easily understood by

students, regardless of gender. This is in line with research (Suratmi & Widodo, 2021) which shows that

empirical results are one of the most valuable components. This can be explained because science learning in

primary schools is still dominated by observation activities, simple experiments, and the use of concrete

evidence (Nugraheny & Widodo, 2021). These types of activities help students understand that science is based

on observational data.

Conversely, aspects such as tentative and subjective require an abstract understanding of the nature of

scientific knowledge and how a person influences the scientific process. Meanwhile, socio-cultural aspects and

limitations are often underemphasised in learning, and the limitations of the scientific method are difficult to

understand without repeated investigative experience (Hardianty, 2015).

The finding that the differences between male and female students are very small supports previous research

that understanding NoS at the primary school level is more influenced by learning experiences than by

biological characteristics or gender. Small differences in scientific attitude scores are also within reasonable

limits and do not show a significant influence. This shows that both female and male students only understand

some aspects of NoS. This finding is in line with research conducted on elementary school students, which

shows that the level of understanding of NoS is still in the enough category (Tursinawati & Widodo, 2019). It

is undeniable that students' understanding of NoS equips them with essential skills in science. This becomes

particularly relevant when students encounter everyday situations, including socio-scientific issues related to

scientific concepts. In this context, basic skills in science education will naturally support students to use their

scientific reasoning consistently (Khishfe, 2017).

Referring to the data obtained, even though they are in the same range, there are differences in the percentage

of students' understanding of NoS based on gender. These differences in the characteristics of male and female

students can be one of the factors in the acquisition of NoS understanding, even though the differences are not

significant. As stated, factors such as misunderstandings, classroom rules, students' prior knowledge, and

teachers' experiences can contribute to these differences (Hacieminoglu, 2014). Furthermore, other studies

have found that teachers' understanding of NoS has an impact on their students' understanding of NoS

(Kinskey, 2023; Widodo et al., 2019).

However, the findings of this study confirm that there is no difference in NoS understanding between male and

female students in West Java. This is in line with studies conducted in different regions such as Kalimantan,

West Nusa Tenggara, and Sulawesi, which show similar results that there are no significant differences in NoS

understanding based on gender. These findings indicate that both male and female students have relatively

equal opportunities and abilities in understanding NoS concepts. These results also reinforce the view that

learning environment factors, learning quality, and access to learning resources have a greater influence than

gender differences themselves (Jufri et al., 2025; Setya Novanto et al., 2021; Utami & Anitra, 2020). Thus,

efforts to improve NoS understanding should focus on improving learning strategies and equitable educational

support. As mentioned, there is a relationship between teaching styles and strategies in improving student

learning outcomes (Go & Quicho, 2023).

Science education in schools, especially at the elementary level, requires a clearly designed approach that is

linked to real-world contexts because NoS concepts will be more effectively understood if taught through

Page 5032

www.rsisinternational.org

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

explicit and reflective learning, rather than implicitly by simply providing experiences of scientific activities

(William F. McComas, 2017). Through specific interventions, elementary school teachers can improve

understanding of NoS through explicit and reflective approaches (Chaiyabang & Thathong, 2014). This

reflective approach emphasizes that understanding of NoS must be taught directly, rather than assumed to arise

automatically during the learning process. Developments in the form of scientific history stories and the use of

laboratories can be supportive in helping students understand how science works (Anane & Lomotey, 2023),

and integrating technology-based learning can enhance critical and collaborative thinking in science

understanding (Savira & Bahij, 2025; Tursinawati & Widodo, 2019). Another way to strengthen NoS in

students is through discussion activities, investigative experiments, and uncovering socio-scientific issues (Adi

& Widodo, 2018). For this reason, facilities and infrastructure are one of the elements needed to support

students' understanding of NoS (Cahyana, 2025). Thus, improving the quality of science learning should focus

on strengthening these aspects, not on gender differences among students.

CONCLUSION

Understanding NoS plays an important role in science learning in elementary school, as it helps students

recognize how scientific knowledge, scientific processes, and scientific attitudes are constructed, validated,

and used in everyday life. This understanding not only supports the mastery of scientific concepts, but also

fosters scientific thinking, reasoning skills, and problem-solving skills. The results of the study show that there

is no difference in understanding NoS between male and female students. This finding indicates that each

gender has relatively equal opportunities and abilities in understanding NoS concepts. The absence of gender-

based differences also confirms that the ability to understand NoS is not inherent in certain biological

characteristics but is more influenced by the learning experiences gained by students. Furthermore, these

results reinforce the view that learning environment factors, the quality of learning strategies, teaching styles,

and the availability of learning resources have a much greater influence than student gender. Therefore, efforts

to improve NoS understanding should focus on strengthening the quality of learning, teachers' understanding

of NoS, and equal access to learning facilities and infrastructure. With improvements in these factors, students'

understanding of NoS can increase more evenly and sustainably.

The results of this study have important implications for science education in primary schools, particularly in

the development of understanding of NoS. The finding that empirical aspects and scientific methods are easier

for students to understand shows that learning based on concrete activities and simple experiments has had a

positive impact. However, the low level of understanding of tentative, subjective, socio-cultural aspects and

limitations confirms that abstract concepts in NoS are still not being taught explicitly. Therefore, teachers need

to design learning that not only focuses on practical activities, but also provides space for discussion,

reflection, and scientific case studies that show how scientific knowledge can change, be influenced by the

scientist's background, and be closely related to the socio-cultural context. Investigative activities that

highlight the imperfection of data are also important for students to understand the limitations of the scientific

method. Furthermore, as no significant differences were found between male and female students, teachers can

apply the same learning strategies without the need for gender-based differentiation. Learning should

emphasise the development of scientific processes, scientific attitudes, and critical reasoning that can

strengthen the overall understanding of NoS for all students. These results also encourage schools and

policymakers to provide support in the form of teacher training and the provision of experimental facilities that

can enrich the science learning experience.

REFERENCES

1. Adi, Y. K., & Widodo, A. (2018). Pemahaman Hakikat Sains Pada Guru dan Siswa Sekolah Dasar.

Edukasi Journal, 10(1), 55–72. https://doi.org/10.31603/EDUKASI.V10I1.1831

2. Adiastuty, N., Waluya, S. B., Junaedi, I., Masrukan, M., & Putri, C. M. (2020). Prosiding Seminar

Nasional Pascasarjana Pengaruh Gaya Kognitif dan Gender Terhadap Kemampuan Berpikir Kreatif

Matematis Siswa. 756–764. http://pps.unnes.ac.id/pps2/prodi/prosiding-pascasarjana-unnes

3. Adibelli-Sahin, E., & Deniz, H. (2017). Elementary teachers’ perceptions about the effective features of

explicit-reflective nature of science instruction. International Journal of Science Education, 39(6), 761–

Page 5033

www.rsisinternational.org

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

790. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1308035

4. Almeida, B., Santos, M., & Justi, R. (2023). Aspects and Abilities of Science Literacy in the Context of

Nature of Science Teaching. Science and Education, 32(3), 567–587. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-

022-00324-4

5. Alshamrani, S. M. (2008). Context, Accuracy, and Level of Inclusion of NAture of Science Concepts in

Current High School Physics Textbooks. In A dissertation in partial fulfillment of the requirements for

the degee of Doctor of Philosopy in Curriculum & Instruction.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2012.05.050

6. Amador-Rodríguez, R., Adúriz-Bravo, A., Valencia-Cobo, J. A., Reinoso-Tapia, R., & Delgado-

Iglesias, J. (2021). Prospective primary teachers’ views on the nature of science. Journal of Technology

and Science Education, 11(2), 403–418. https://doi.org/10.3926/JOTSE.1271

7. Anane, N. M., & Lomotey, V. A. (2023). Perceptions of the Impact Of Availability and Utilisation of

Laboratory Facilities On Science Teacher-Trainees’ Knowledge and Attitudes Toward Improvisation In

Science. Advanced Journal of STEM Education, 1(1), 51–60.

https://doi.org/10.31098/AJOSED.V1I1.1568

8. Atakan, M., & Akçay, B. (2022). Representation of Changes about Nature of Science in Turkish Middle

School Science Textbooks. Science & Education 2022 33:3, 33(3), 551–580.

https://doi.org/10.1007/S11191-022-00403-6

9. Cahyana, C. (2025). Understanding the Nature of Science for Elementary School Students in Rural,

Suburban, and Urban Areas. Advanced Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), 1–12.

https://doi.org/10.31098/ajosed.v3i1.2990

10. Chaiyabang, M. K., & Thathong, K. (2014). Enhancing Thai Teacher’s Understanding and Instruction of

the Nature of Science. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 563–569.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.258

11. Dogan, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2008). Turkish grade 10 students’ and science teachers’ conceptions

of nature of science: A national study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(10), 1083–1112.

https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20243

12. Go, A. N., & Quicho, R. F. (2023). Perceived Teachers’ Teaching Styles and Motivated Strategies for

Learning of Year 1 and Year 2 Students in Cita Hati Christian Senior High School, Surabaya Indonesia.

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), VII(2454), 1175–1189.

https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS

13. Hacieminoglu, E. (2014). In-service Teachers’ Perceptions Regarding their Practices Related to

Integrating Nature of Science: Case Study. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 1268–1273.

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SBSPRO.2014.01.381

14. Hamzah, A. M. (2023). Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) as A

Measurement for Student Mathematics Assessment Development. 12 Waiheru, 9(2), 189–196.

https://doi.org/10.47655/12waiheru.v9i2.144

15. Hardianty, N. (2015). Nature of Science : Bagian Penting Dari Literasi Sains. Prosiding Simposium

Nasional Inovasi Dan Pembelajaran Sains 2015 (SNIPS 2015), 2015(Snips), 441–444.

16. Hayati Rahayu, A., Sebelas April Sumedang, S., Angkrek Situ No, J., Ari Widodo Pendidikan Biologi,

S., & Pendidikan Matematika dan Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam, F. (2019). Understanding of Nature of

Science Pre-Service Students and Elementary School Teachers in the Digital Age. Formatif: Jurnal

Ilmiah Pendidikan MIPA, 9(2), 161–172. https://doi.org/10.30998/FORMATIF.V9I2.3251

17. Hisanah, N., Koeshandayanto, S., & Sulur, S. (2025). Eksplorasi Literasi Sains Berdasarkan Perbedaan

Gender pada Materi Besaran dan Pengukuran Kelas X SMA. JIIP - Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Pendidikan, 8(1),

760–770. https://doi.org/10.54371/jiip.v8i1.6572

18. Jiang, F., & McComas, W. F. (2014). Analysis of Nature of Science Included in Recent Popular Writing

Using Text Mining Techniques. Science and Education, 23(9), 1785–1809.

https://doi.org/10.1007/S11191-014-9703-0

19. Jufri, A. W., Nirmala, S. A., Munib, M., & Dewi, E. S. (2025). Pengetahuan Hakikat Sains (Nature of

Sains - NoS) Siswa SMP Negeri dan SMP Islam: Tinjauan Berdasarkan Gender. Bioscientist : Jurnal

Ilmiah Biologi, 13(1), 30. https://doi.org/10.33394/bioscientist.v13i1.14530

20. Jumanto, J., & Widodo, A. (2018). Pemahaman Hakikat Sains oleh Siswa Dan Guru SD di Kota

Surakarta. Jurnal Komunikasi Pendidikan, 2(1), 20–31. https://doi.org/10.32585/JKP.V2I1.61

Page 5034

www.rsisinternational.org

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

21. Kapsala, N., Galani, A., & Mavrikaki, E. (2022). Nature of Science in Greek Secondary School Biology

Textbooks. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 12(2). https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.1309

22. Khishfe, R. (2017). Consistency of nature of science views across scientific and socio-scientific

contexts. International Journal of Science Education, 39(4), 403–432.

https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1287976

23. Kinskey, M. (2023). The Importance of Teaching Nature of Science: Exploring Preservice Teachers’

Views and Instructional Practice. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 34(3), 307–327.

https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2022.2100730;JOURNAL:JOURNAL:USTE20;WGROUP:STRING:

PUBLICATION

24. Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of Nature of Science

Questionnaire: Toward Valid and Meaningful Assessment of Learners’ Conceptions of Nature of

Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497–521.

https://doi.org/10.1002/TEA.10034;REQUESTEDJOURNAL:JOURNAL:10982736;PAGE:STRING:A

RTICLE/CHAPTER

25. Lorsbach, A. W., Meyer, A. A., & Arias, A. M. (2019). The Correspondence of Charles Darwin as a

Tool for Reflecting on Nature of Science. Science & Education 2019 28:9, 28(9), 1085–1103.

https://doi.org/10.1007/S11191-019-00080-Y

26. McComas, W. F. (2015). The Nature of Science & the Next Generation of Biology Education. The

American Biology Teacher, 77(7), 485–491. https://doi.org/10.1525/ABT.2015.77.7.2

27. Nugraheny, D. C., & Widodo, A. (2021). Jurnal Visipena Pengaruh Penerapan Model Pembelajaran.

Jurnal Visipena, 12(1), 111–123.

28. Savira, D. L., & Bahij, A. Al. (2025). The Effect of Augmented Reality-Based Learning Media on

Collaboration and Critical Thinking Skills of Fifth Grade Students in Human Circulatory System Topic

at SD Muhammadiyah 12 Pamulang. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social

Science, 9(3s), 5412–5418. https://ideas.repec.org/a/bcp/journl/v9y2025i3sp5412-5418.html

29. Setya Novanto, Y., Djudin, T., Yani, A., Basith, A., & Murdani, E. (2021). Kemampuan Pemahaman

Konsep Ipa Pada Siswa SekolahDasar Berdasarkan Gender. Jurnal Pendidikan Dasar Indonesia, 43–46.

30. Siswati, B. H., Susilo, H., & Mahanal, S. (2016). Pengaruh Gender terhadap Keterampilan Metakognitif

dan Pemahaman Konsep Peserta Didik IPA dan Biologi di Malang. In Pros. Semnas Pend. IPA

Pascasarjana UM (Vol. 1, pp. 748–755).

31. Suratmi, & Widodo, A. (2021). Penerapan Model Pembelajaran NoS Untuk Meningkatkan Pemahaman

NoS Siswa Sekolah Dasar. Jurnal Cakrawala Pendas, 7(2), 215–223.

32. Temel, S., Şen, Ş., & Özcan, Ö. (2018). The development of the nature of science view scale (NOSvs) at

university level. Research in Science and Technological Education, 36(1), 55–68.

https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2017.1338251

33. Tursinawati, T., & Widodo, A. (2019). Pemahaman Nature of Science (NoS) Di Era Digital: Perspektif

Dari Mahasiswa PGSD. Jurnal IPA & Pembelajaran IPA, 3(1), 1–9.

https://doi.org/10.24815/jipi.v3i1.13294

34. Utami, C., & Anitra, R. (2020). Jurnal Kependidikan : Kemampuan Pemahaman Konsep Siswa

Berdasarkan Gender pada Pembelajaran Realistic Mathematics Education Berbantuan Alat Peraga

PANDU Program Studi Pendidikan Guru Sekolah Dasar , Departemen PGSD , STKIP Singkawang

Corresponding Author. 6(3), 475–489.

35. Widodo, A. (2021). Pembelajaran Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam: Dasar-Dasar Untuk Praktik. UPI Press.

36. Widodo, A., Jumanto, J., Adi, Y. K., & Imran, M. E. (2019). Pemahaman Hakikat Sains (NOS) oleh

Siswa dan Guru Sekolah Dasar. Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan IPA, 5(2), 237–247.

https://doi.org/10.21831/jipi.v5i2.27294

37. William F. McComas. (2017). Understanding how science works: the nature of science as the

foundation for science teaching and learning. School Science Review, 98(365), 71–76.

38. Yanuar, Y., & Widodo, A. (2020). Pengaruh Desain Pembelajaran Berbasis Nature of Science terhadap

Pemahaman Siswa Sekolah Dasar. Jurnal Inspirasi Pendidikan, 11(1), 10–18. http://dx.doi.org/

Page 5035

www.rsisinternational.org