LEARNING PHYSICS WITHOUT FORMULAS :

The Effectiveness of the Implementation

at Sekolah Lentera International
Syaiful Lokan
Sekolah Lentera Internasional
(Translated from A journal of Language, Literature, Culture, and Education, POLYGLOT Vol 6 No. 1 July 2012)

Abstract

This research tried to compare the effect of teaching Physics without using formulas and
the traditional Physics instruction with formulas on the students learning outcomes, and
competence of learning transfer to real life situations of Grade 8 Lentera International
Junior High School in Jakarta. It applied the Quasi Pretest-Posttest Control Group design
with 13 students in the experimental intact group (8A) and 14 students in the control intact
group (8B) but randomly designed. The average gains of the learning outcomes and
transfer of learning competence of the experiments group were higher (but not statistically
tested) than those of the control group. It could be concluded that the teaching of Physics
without Formulas helped the students to obtain higher average gain scores in both criteria
than the traditional Physics instruction with a lot of formulas.

Keywords: instructional design, without formulas, traditional design, transfer of learning,

learning outcomes.

Introduction

In Indonesia, the importance of technology in the future of education has been realized
and anticipated. The Indonesian Education Department has specifically developed the
science curriculum as a proactive response to the rapid information growth, science,
technology, and decentralization demands. This is done to improve the relevance of the
learning program to the conditions and needs of the local community (Depdiknas, 2003).
Unfortunately, the expectation differs from the survey results and tests done by the The
International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) that has
regularly publicized research outcomes on education development in many countries. One
of IEAs projects includes surveying the development of mathematics and science subjects
of junior high school students which are published in the TIMSS (Trends in International
Mathematics and Science Study). TIMSS publication in 2007 showed the learning
outcome scores of 8th grade students in science which ranked 35th out of 49 countries. The
overall achievement of the learning outcome mean score in science of Indonesian
students is below the average median scale of 500 as specified by TIMSS. The content
domain of Indonesian students in physics is only 432, as well as the cognitive domain
mean which is below the standard of TIMSS median scores; 426 for knowledge, 425 for
applying, and 438 for reasoning (Martin 2007, 115).
Those learning outcomes are not comparable to the hard work the students have put in.
The same survey shows that 16% of students do their physics homework during school
hours up to 3 to 4 times in a week for 30 minutes each time. The percentage is higher than
the average of 13% in other countries. Besides doing homework, Indonesian students
have a positive attitude towards learning physics. Indonesia ranked first as the country
with 82% of its students having the most positive outlook on learning physics. This number
!1
is high above 52% - the average of students in the world who view learning physics as
essential (Martin, 2007).
Not only do students give the their best in learning physics, teachers also spend a
considerable amount of time to prepare the learning materials to teach physics. They
spend 92 hours in a year to do so and this makes Indonesia second to Malta as the
country with the most time in teaching preparation. Teachers in other countries spend the
average of 63 hours in preparation time (Martin, 2007).
Hard work without the satisfactory learning outcomes frustrates student. This is shown by
the low survey results of students self-esteem. Only 29% of Indonesian students stated
that they are confident in learning physics. This result is lower than that of Romania and
far below than the average result of all the countries in the world, which is 41% (Martin,
2007).
The disadvantage of students and teachers hard work is the time spent meaninglessly.
92% of the homework is submitted and 90% is marked. However, only 22% of homework
is discussed and given feedback by teachers in class. The homework given consists of
tasks to sharpen students skill to memorize and repeat information. 60% of the tasks are
to answer similar questions, while the average of other countries is 38%. 67% are spent on
reading textbooks, while the average of other countries is 35%. 38% are spent on writing
definitions, while the average of other countries is 23%. Only 5% are spent working in
groups to finish a task, while the average of other countries reaches 10% (Martin, 2007).
Meaningful learning occurs when learners construct meaning by integrating new
understanding to the prerequisite knowledge instilled in their cognitive structure (Novak,
2002). This is indicated by the students good learning outcomes and the skill to transfer
learning well.
Meaningful learning does not occur when numerous activities and cognitive variations in
class are done only to develop the ability to memorize and repeat. The root of the problem
why meaningful learning does not occur in class is because teachers as well as students
are codependent in using formulas as the only solution to solve problems (Kurki-Suonio,
1984). Junior high school students are required to memorize numerous formulas and for
kinematics alone, they need to remember at least ten formulas. This is causing students to
find it difficult to learn physics. Not only do they need to understand the physics concepts,
they also need to interpret mathematics symbols (Enrico Febrianto, 2010).
This problem in learning physics has been realized by the Indonesian Physics Olympiad
team, TOFI (Tim Olimpiade Fisika Indonesia) and this is why they started learning physics
without formulas. This method has brought them to champion several Olympiads in Asia
(OFA) and the world (OFI) every year since TOFI was founded in 1993 (Surya, 2003).
The process of learning physics without formulas done by TOFI is tried to the 8th grade
students of Sekolah Lentera Internasional and it is compared with the traditional way of
learning physics to find the effect they have on the students learning outcomes and their
ability to transfer learning. This research is done to answer the following questions:
1. Do the students who learn physics without formulas attain better learning outcomes
than those who learn Physics the traditional way?
2. Do the students who learn physics without formulas have the ability to transfer
learning better than those who learn physics the traditional way?

!2
Meaningful Learning
The main purpose of learning is to promote retention and transfer. Retention is the ability
to retain information for a period of time, and transfer is the ability to apply what is learned
to solve new problems. When students retain what they have learned, they focus on what
they did and remember in the past. An example of this is when they are expected to
rewrite the Ohms Law formula. When students transfer, they not only retain information
but are also able to apply it in a meaningful way. This way students focus more on the
future. An example is when students are asked to build an electrical circuit to maximize the
pace of electrons or when they apply the Ohms Law to explain a much more complicated
electrical circuit. According to Yokoyama (1984, 398) the obstacle that students face is
their inability to use their prior knowledge to solve new problems and this is mainly
because students are unaware of the cognitive process to apply the knowledge they have
to answer the questions given.
Based on that understanding, Mayer (2002) stated that meaningful learning occurs when
students are able to retain and transfer knowledge, while in rote learning students are only
able to retain it. The difference between rote learning and meaningful learning is not
discreet in certain stages, though it is more of a continuum condition (Sivbritt Dumbrajs,
2011).
The ability to transfer knowledge is important in learning physics. Transferring knowledge
is not just being able to answer different questions about what is taught, but students
should be able to apply the knowledge to their everyday life. Experiments are designed for
students to be able to deal with tougher situations and this is when the transferring
process occurs (Lobato 2003, 17). Retention process is crucial to meaningful learning and
problem solving when knowledge is applied to more complex and unfamiliar tasks. The
ability to answer easily indicates understanding to the basic physics concepts. Students
ability to transfer is indicated by students ability to solve problems (Krusberg 2007, 407).
Preparing learning that pays attention to students ability to transfer is an approach to
prepare students to face the future. Transferring is an active learning process (Lobato
2003, 20).
Addicted to Formulas
The learning method that teachers have been using all along is using formulas as teaching
aids and this makes students addicted to memorize formulas merely just to be able to
answer questions. This habit of memorizing formulas has become widely used not only by
students but also by teacher (Kurki-Suonio 1984, 83). In teaching, formulas are shortcuts
to solve problems and they have become a legacy that is passed on to generations by
teachers. Memorizing formulas has been a remedy because students fail to understand
the epistemology that has built the physics concepts (Hammer 2003, 54). Mathematics
may be a language derived from science, but mathematics and physics are two languages
spoken in different dialects. Physicists tend to combine physics concepts and
mathematical symbols which ultimately complicate students (Redish, 2005).
Research conducted by Speltini and Ure (2002) was done to find out students ability to
grasp concepts and their codependency to formulas. This research is done to university
students studying engineering who have learned basic physics concepts of Mechanism
and Electromagnetism. The research outcome shows that the engineering students have
not mastered the basic concepts of conservation laws. Several students solve problems by
using the conservation laws but they fail to explain the concept of the conservation laws
itself (Ure 2002, 482). Another example of how students and teachers stray from the basic
conceptual forms is the use of Newton Law. The concept that is brought forward by Isaac

!3
Newton is the law of Momentum Conservation which birthed Newtons second law: The
change of motion [of a body] is proportional to the motive force impressed; and is made in
the direction of the straight line in which that force is impressed. (Christianson 2005, 87).
Unfortunately, Newtons second law, which is very conceptual, is not taught conceptually to
students. When Newtons second law is approached mathematically, this formula appears
! F = m a assuming there are no changes in the mass and no external forces applied.
Instead of teaching Newtons concepts, teachers and textbooks only present this formula
! F = m a to students. Students will only read the questions and change the variables to
numbers that are provided without understanding the underlying concepts.
Physics instruction without formulas in Indonesia
In Indonesia, the efforts to conduct the learning of physics without taking into hostage
formulas to serve merely as tools have been started by the mentors of TOFI Yohanes
Surya. According to the research that he has done, there are several main points to
consider to make the learning of physics fun and easy (Surya, 2003) They are as follows:
1. Avoid difficult mathematics.
2. Use whole and simple numbers.
3. Do many physics experiments and demonstrations
When formulas are used as a solution to every learning process and every problem given
to students, the learning outcome is rote learning. In order to create meaningful learning,
teachers must have the courage to break the habit of formulas codependency by
transforming the learning method that they have been using all this time. Some
alternatives that teachers can do are adding experimental process in school and
constructing students understanding through discussions of the experimental results.
Physics subject, which supposed to have a broad cognitive aspect, is constrained in
formulas memorization and this is causing students to lose interest in learning physics.
Learning physics without formulas is possible to do and it has been proven by TOFI when
they won the World Physics Olympiad.

Research Method
The effectiveness of learning physics without formulas is tested on the 8th grade students
of Sekolah Lentera Internasional. The effectiveness is measured using the test scores gain
and the students ability to transfer. The physics topic chosen is kinematics because it is
part of the topic that students encounter initially in learning physics; therefore it is right for
this research.
The method used in this research is Quasi Experimental by using the pre-test and post-
test control group design. With this method the research subjects are randomly placed into
two groups. The experimental class (X1) is the group that is approached with the learning
of physics without formulas. The control class (X2) is the group that is approached with the
traditional way of learning physics
In the beginning of the meeting, every group is given a pre-test (O1, O2, dan O3) which
measures students initial understanding to the topic taught. After given a pre-test, every
group is taught lessons. The experimental class is taught lessons without formulas, while
the control group is taught lessons using formulas. The two groups are given written tests
to solve problems at the end of every lesson. This is done to compare the results of the

!4
learning outcomes of the experimental class and the control class. In the last meeting,
students are given a summative test. The complete research design is shown in table 3.1.
Table 1 Research design
Uniform Speed and Distance and Summative
Class
Linear Motion acceleration acceleration test
Experiment O1 X1 O11 O2 X1 O22 O3 X1 O33 O4

Control O1 X2 O11 O2 X2 O22 O3 X2 O33 O4

The subjects in this research are the 8th grade students of the academic year of 2010-2011
at Sekolah Lentera Internasional, a national plus school in South Jakarta that implements
Cambridge curriculum. There are a total of 27 8th grade students that are randomly put into
two classes of 8A and 8B. The 8A class is consisted of 13 students and the 8B class is
consisted of 14 students. There are 4 males students in each class.
The research is conducted in 4 meetings for each class. The entire experiment takes 4
weeks to complete with 1 meeting every week for each group. Table 3.2 shows the time
allocation of tests and learning processes.

Table 2 Time allocation.

Time (minutes)
Topic
pre-test Learning post-test

1st meeting: Uniform Linear Motion 10 25 10

2nd meeting: Speed & Acceleration 10 25 10

3rd meeting: Distance & Acceleration 10 25 10

4th meeting: Vertical movement 45

In this research, the gain of the learning outcome scores (Y1) and the ability to transfer (Y2)
are measured and they function as the dependent variables. The independent variable
measured is the learning method. The experimental class is taught using the method of
learning without formulas (X1), while the control class is taught using the method of the
traditional learning without formulas (X2).
Instructional methods with formulas
After the specific instructional objectives of the lesson are introduced, teachers explain the
natural phenomenon that demand application of what is learned. Then, the class is
informed of the formulas needed, the meaning of the symbols and how to use them in
solving problems for the particular topic.

After the formulas and the state of each variable are introduced, two problems are given to
solve together before facing a test at the end of the lesson. When the post-test is given, all
the students are given the formulas needed to solve the problems.

!5
The list of formulas needed in kinematics subject is as follows:

Table 3 Formulas given to the control group

NO TOPICS FORMULAS NOTE

1 Uniform linear motion !s = vt ! u = initial speed

! v = u + at ! v = final speed
2 Speed and acceleration
! v = u at ! a = acceleration

! v = u + at ! t = time travel

! v = u at ! s = distance travel

1
! s = ut + at 2
3 Distance and acceleration 2
1
! s = ut at 2
2

! 2as = v 2 u 2

The method of learning without formulas

When learning without formulas, students are introduced to every quantity of motion and
its unit. For instance the quantity of velocitys unit is km/hour. Students are explained that
velocity of 60 km/hour means the object reaches 60 km in distance every hour. After that,
the acceleration of 60 km/hour2 is explained that every hour the velocity is accelerated by
60 km/hour. Next, the epistemology of the physics concepts learned is explained in the
form in a dialogue. Then, the students are modeled on how to solve the two problems
together before they are given a test.

Results and Discussions

The learning outcome score gain of the experimental class is better than the gain of the
control class. The experimental class students ability to transfer is also better than that of
the control class.

The Learning Outcomes of the sub-topic Uniform Linear Motion

The learning outcome gain for the sub-topic Uniform Linear Motion of the experimental
class (43) is better than the learning outcome gain of the control class (24). The problems
given in this sub-topic post-test are not varied. The questions given are to find the amount
of distance and travel time in constant velocity or zero acceleration. In order for the
students in the experimental class and control class to be able to solve these problems
well, they just need to memorize the method of answering as modeled previously. Based

!6
on the Straight Motion Regularity post-test results, it shows that students need only short
amount of time to apply retain and transfer correctly in learning physics without formulas.
Table 4 Summary of the Learning Outcomes and the Ability to Transfer in scale 1-100
Experiment Class Control Class
No Test Topic
pre- Post- pre- Post-
Gain Gain
test test test test

1 Uniform Linear Motion 36% 79% 43% 26% 50% 24%

2 Speed and Acceleration 32% 92% 60% 10% 43% 33%

3 Distance and Acceleration 4% 70% 66% 0% 36% 36%

4 Summative Test 48% 25%

5 Transfer Test 38% 24%

Before answering questions, students in the experimental class draw or create illustrations
to help them solve problems without formulas or trying to calculate mathematically. On the
contrary to the experimental class, students in the control group use a formula or two to try
to solve a problem. They try to insert numericals into the formula.
It is shown in the research that students are encouraged to do retention in learning physics
the traditional way, as it is easier for them to memorize and insert numbers to replace the
variables given in the formula (Kurki-Suonio, 1984). The low learning outcomes of the
post-test shows that learning physics using formulas does not make students in the control
class to retain better than students in the experimental class.
The Learning Outcomes of the sub-topic Velocity and Acceleration
The learning outcome gain for the sub-topic Velocity and Acceleration of the experimental
class (60) is better than the gain of the control class (33). The problems given in the sub-
topic Velocity and Acceleration are more difficult than the problems given in the topic
Uniform linear motion. In this sub-topic, students need to analyze the motion phenomenon
for the constant acceleration or the non-uniform linear motion. The problems posed in this
sub-topic are final velocity, initial velocity, acceleration, time and vertical distance. In this
sub-topic, students not only are expected to retain but also to transfer. The problems
posed demand students to predict what happens when object movement is not horizontal
but vertical. Solving these problems in twenty-five minutes is not an easy task for the 8th
grade students. The results attained by the experimental class show otherwise. This class
has adapted to the method taught that even with problems as difficult as these they are
able to show good learning outcomes.
The learning outcomes shown by the experimental class students indicate that the method
of learning physics without formulas makes students solve problems that demand the skill
to elaborate velocity and acceleration more effectively than students who learn
traditionally.
Besides the high post-test scores, the pre-test results for the topic velocity and
acceleration show that the experimental class students (32%) have better average score
than the control class (10%). These results show that students who learn physics without
formulas have better ability to transfer. Students in the experimental class are able to use
the understanding they gain to solve new problems by implementing the concept they
!7
learned in the Straight Motion Regularity topic and then applied it meaningfully to the topic
Velocity and Acceleration, even though it is a new topic.
The Learning Outcomes of the sub-topic Distance and Acceleration
The learning outcome gain for the sub-topic Distance and Acceleration of the experimental
class (66) is better than that of the control class (33). In order for students to be able to
solve problems of distance and acceleration, they should acquire accumulated
understanding of all the kinematics concepts; uniform linear motion, velocity, and
acceleration. In solving problems for the pre-test and post-test for this topic, the
experimental class is able to adjust better to the condition of the problems and to offer
suitable solutions; on the other hand, due to the more complex problems faced by the
control class, the students experience a difficult time to use the formulas to solve the
problems. The level of difficulty increases because of the more complicated problems and
more variables involved such as distance, velocity, time, and acceleration. The
consequence of having more variables is the more complex the formulas needed.
Previously, students were using linear formula! v = u + at , and this time to answer questions
that involve distance students from the control class are demanded to use quadratic
1
equation ! s = ut + at 2 to solve the word problems given. It is very difficult for students to be
2
able to apply the formulas and to interpret the problems they are facing (E. F. Redish,
2009).
In order to anticipate the challenge that students are facing when they face difficult physics
problems, there should be a scaffolding process that Redish (1994, 46) referred to as
Global before local skills.
The Summative Test Results
The summative test results of the experimental class (48) are better than the results of the
control class (25). In the summative test the questions given are at 1st year high school
level. Students need the retention and transfer skills in order to be able to answer these
questions. Students are also expected to solve word problems that are constructed as real
as possible to the everyday life situations.
Students are facing difficulties in answering the summative test questions. The questions
given have not been done before, but they are questions about kinematics that high school
students are used to answering. Besides the challenging questions, students are expected
to be able to synthesize their understanding of the topics from start to finish. These are the
types of questions that ideally should be given to students, as they demand students to
integrate all the concepts they know instead of a stand-alone concept without integrating it
with other concepts (Ayush Gupta, 2007).
The results clearly show that the method of learning physics without formulas is effective
because it helps students to have better learning outcomes than the students in the class
that learn physics traditionally.
Students Ability to Transfer
Table 4 shows that experimental class students (38) are better in transferring than the
students in the control class. The substantial difference in the questions they encounter in
this part causes the experimental class and control class to face problems. Both classes
are not able to apply what they have learned to the other physics presentation format,
which is graphics. This finding shows that it takes more time and introduction to the

!8
concept in order to perform physics presentation changes. Moreover, the 8th grade
students are not yet skilled to interpret graphics because they have only learned algebra. It
can be concluded curriculum mapping of the subjects will help every teacher to understand
students prior knowledge when teaching.
This finding confirms the opinion that there is a hierarchy in a learning process (Gagne,
1965). What the students from the two classes experience is a problem level gap that
exceeds their understanding. Students need to be prepared in order to be able to do
transfer.
The Research Limitations
One month seems too short to do this research. Students need to learn sizable physics
topics such as kinematics in 3 sessions of 25 minutes each, which usually takes 12
sessions of 40 minutes each. The pre-test and post-test given to students are too difficult
because the problem-solving questions given on each topic and the summative test are
about kinematics which is at high school level. The transfer questions given are taken from
Cambridge questions that are usually given to 10th grade students.
Research conducted is limited only to the 8th grade students of Sekolah Lentera
Internasional. There should be more research done in other places with different social
situations to know the effectiveness of learning physics without formulas.
Conclusion and Suggestions
The research outcome indicates that learning physics without formulas is more effective in
improving students learning outcomes and their ability to transfer compared to the
traditional way of learning physics.
All physics teachers are challenged from day to day to make their students understand
natural phenomena and to solve problems. The biggest temptations for teachers are to
spoon-feed students with formula after formula and to reward them whenever they
succeed in inserting numerical to each formula even though students do not understand
the underlying concepts.
Students confidence is key to the learning process to be done enthusiastically. This can
be achieved by way of cognitive strategy variations Besson (2010, 225) stated that every
learning strategy has its own limitations; therefore it is important for teachers to use
several strategies, so students have alternative methods to understand a concept.
Students learn well when the topics taught are interesting and easy to understand and this
is why teachers need to use different learning strategies for meaningful learning to take
place (Trumper 2006, 54). Implementing varied learning methods will help students with
different learning styles to adapt and understand the concepts taught. (She 2005). To learn
physics is to reveal natural phenomena and in this process each student has his or her
own experiences. Students tend to grasp meaning more effectively when physics concepts
are taught to relate to students experience.
Students codependency on using formulas in solving problems is not only caused by the
type of questions given, but also by the inability to build the connection between physics
concepts. Redish (2007) recommended curriculum developers and teachers to understand
that students form a series of understanding during the learning process. Hence,
instructional materials such as tests should be designed to help students build the
substantial connection between physics concepts as well the connection between
qualitative and quantitative concepts. Although in reality, test questions set by teachers

!9
and National Exams are limited to certain topics without any efforts to develop the
coherence of the available topics.
It is teachers responsibility to initiate that process, thus every physics teacher must
prioritize understanding instead of just listing down facts. (Kurki-Suonio, 1984). Formulas
will only serve as a codependency if the functions do not refer to the meaning of the
experiments or the concepts that form them.
A science mindset is not always built through the change of personal science concepts to
the acceptable science concepts. It can also be built through the change of attitude in
viewing science as an effort to solve scientific problems by using a set of tools, classifying
question types, and to view scientific subjects as concept networks which are
interconnected. This change of attitude may break teachers and students addiction to
formulas.
The method of learning physics without formulas can be a solution for teachers and
students alike to view physics as a less complicated subject that is fun and interesting.

!10
 References

Ayush Gupta, Edward F. Redish, and David Hammer. "Coordination of Mathematics and
Physical Resources by Physics Graduate Students." In Proceedings of the Physics
Education Research Conference, 951, 104-107. Greensboro, NC: AIP Conference
Proceedings, 2007.

Besson, Ugo. "Calculating and Understanding: Formal Models and Causal Explanations in
Science, Common Reasoning and Physics Teaching." Sci & Educ 19 (2010):
225-257.

Christianson, Gale E. Isaac Newton Lives and Legacies. New York: Oxford University
Press, Inc., 2005.

Depdiknas. Standar Kompetensi Mata Pelajaran Fisika Sekolah Menengah Atas Dan
Madrasah Aliyah, 2003.

E. F. Redish, and A. Gupta. "Making Meaning with Math in Physics: A Semantic Analysis."
In GIREP Conf. Proc. . Leicester, UK, 2009.

Enrico Febrianto, Yana Santiaji and Ahmad Saripudin. Buku Super: Kumpulan Rumus Dan
Soal Fisika Smp Kelas 1,2,3. Jakarta: TransMedia, 2010.

Hammer, D & Elby, A. "Tapping Epistemological Resources for Learning Physics." The
Journal of the Learning Sciences 12, no. 1 (2003): 53-90.

Krusberg, Z. A. C. "Emerging Technologies in Physics Education." Journal of Science

Education and Technology 16 (2007): 401-411.

Kurki-Suonio, Kaarle. "Formula Disease, or How to Avoid Understanding Physics." In

Nordisk forkesymposium, 82-86. Aarhus universitet, siltavuorenpenger 20 D,
SF-00170 Helsinki 17, Finland, 1984.

Lobato, Joanne. "How Design Experiments Can Inform a Rethinking of Transfer and Vice
Versa." Educational Researcher 32, no. 1 (2003): 17-20.

Martin, I. V. S. Mullis and P. Foy. Timss 2007 International Science Report. Chestnut Hill,
MA 02467, United States: Lynch School of Education, Boston College, 2007.

Mayer, Richard E. "Rote Versus Meaningful Learning." Theory into practice 14, no. 4
(2002): 226-232.

Novak, Joseph D. "Meaningful Learning: The Essential Factor for Conceptual Change in
Limited or Inappropriate Propositional Hierarchies Leading to Empowerment of
Learners." In Learning, edited by Gregory J. Kelly and Richard E. Mayer, 548-571.
Florida: Wiley Periodicals, Inc, 2002.

Redish, Edward F. "The Implications of Cognitive Studies for Teaching Physics." American
Journal of Physics 62, no. 6 (1994): 796-803.

!11
________. "Problem Solving and the Use of Math in Physics Courses." In World View on
Physics Education in 2005: Focusing on Change. Delhi, 2005.

Redish, J. Tuminaro and E. F. "Elements of Cognitive Model of Physics Problem Solving:

Epistemic Games." Phys. Rev. STPER 3 (2007).

She, Hsiao Ching. "Promoting Students' Learning of Air Pressure Concepts: The
Interrelationship of Teaching Approaches and Student Learning Characteristics." The
Journal of Experimental Education 74, no. 1 (2005): 29-51.

Sivbritt Dumbrajs, Piritta Helin, Hanna Karkkainen and Tuula Keinonen. "Towards
Meaningful Learning through Inquiry." Eurasian Journal of Physics and Chemistry
Education 3, no. 1 (2011): 39-50.

Surya, Yohanes. "Olimpiade Fisika Dan Dampaknya Di Indonesia." 1-19. Karawachi:

Universitas Pelita Harapan, 2003.

Trumper, Ricardo. "Factors Affecting Junior High School Students' Interest in Physics."
Journal of Science Education and Technology 15, no. 1 (2006): 47-58.

Ure, Christina Speltini and Maria Celia Dibar. "Conservation in Physics Teaching, History
of Science and in Child Development." Science & Education 11 (2002): 475-486.

Yokoyama, Yuichiro Anzai and Tohru. "Internal Models in Physics Problem Solving."
Cognition and Instruction 1, no. 4 (1984): 397-450.

!12