Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study investigates the association between science learning integrated with social values and elementary students’ critical thinking skills. The background of this research is based on the need to strengthen students’ critical thinking through meaningful, contextual, and inquiry-based science learning. Therefore, this study aims to examine whether a multi-component, value-integrated science learning intervention is associated with improved students’ critical thinking skills. A quasi-experimental design with a non-equivalent control group was employed, involving 50 fifth-grade students divided into experimental and control groups. The experimental group received science learning integrated with social values through inquiry, contextual learning, collaboration, problem solving, discussion, and reflection, while the control group received conventional science instruction. Data were collected using a validated critical thinking test and analyzed using N-gain and ANCOVA. The results reveal that the experimental group achieved a higher post-test mean (82.16) and N-gain (0.59) than the control group (70.32 and 0.33, respectively). ANCOVA indicates a significant association between instructional group and post-test critical thinking scores after controlling for pre-test performance (F (1,47) = 45.58, p < .001, ηp² = .492). These findings indicate that participation in the integrated intervention was associated with greater improvement in students’ critical thinking than conventional science instruction. The study contributes to science education by demonstrating the practical potential of integrating science learning, social values, and critical thinking within a multi-component instructional arrangement. However, the findings should be interpreted cautiously due to the small sample, short intervention period, and limited educational setting.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wanawati et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: