<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hidayati Maghfiroh</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Siti Zubaidah</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Susriyati Mahanal</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hendra Susanto</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Chang, C. Y.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE GENETICS LITERACY AND REASONING TEST: A TOOL FOR EXPLORING GLOBAL GENETICS ISSUES</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">genetics literacy</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">instrument validation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Rasch analysis</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">science education</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">scientific reasoning</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2025</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">June/2025</style></date></pub-dates></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">24</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">continuous</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">So far, instruments to measure genetic literacy that encompass global genetic issues are limited. In addition, instruments that assess practical knowledge and comprehensively evaluate genetic literacy skills have yet to be developed. Therefore, this research aimed to develop, validate, and improve an instrument based on a new conceptual framework of genetic literacy across grades. Six stages were conducted based on construct modeling to establish the Genetics Literacy and Reasoning Test. In the development process, numerous sources of evidence were collected, including evaluation from an expert panel to examine face validity, a pilot study to ensure comprehension, and testing involving 250 pre-service biology teachers. The results showed that the Genetics Literacy and Reasoning Test generally has good quality regarding dimensionality, reliability and separation, item fit, person–item mapping, and other data collected from interviews. This study highlights the importance of developing reliable and valid instruments to evaluate students’ genetic literacy and recommends it as a valuable tool for research and practice.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">3</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">465-487</style></section></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Baskoro Adi Prayitno</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Duran Corebima</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Herawati Susilo</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Siti Zubaidah</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Murni Ramli</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">CLOSING THE SCIENCE PROCESS SKILLS GAP BETWEEN STUDENTS WITH HIGH AND LOW LEVEL ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">inquiry-based learning</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">INSTAD</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">science process skills</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">STAD</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2017</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">April/2017</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://oaji.net/articles/2017/987-1497156674.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">16</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Continuous</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Science Process Skills (SPSs) are fundamental skills to mastering science. To nurture students' SPS, inquiry based learning and student-center activities may work effectively. This study aims at analyzing: How Inquiry-based Learning and Student Team Achievement Division (INSTAD) affects science process skills compared with inquiry-based learning, Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD), and conventional learning method. The participants were 136 grade 7 students from 27 public middle schools in Surakarta, Indonesia. They were divided into 68 students with higher academic (HA) achievement and 68 students with lower academic (LA) achievement. A nonequivalent control group design with pretest and posttest were applied to get data on SPSs using a sort of essay test. The result indicates that: (1) While the outcomes of INSTAD and inquiry-based learning are comparable, they are significantly different compared with the outcomes of STAD and conventional learning. (2) Students in HA group have higher SPS than students in LA groups. (3) INSTAD, on an equal level with inquiry-based learning, significantly increases the students’ SPSs. Compared with other three methods, INSTAD was confirmed the most effective in closing the science process skills gaps between students in HA group and LA group.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">266-277</style></section></record></records></xml>