1. Anderson, L.W., Krathwohl, D.R., Airasian, P.W., Cruikshank, K.A., Mayer, R.E., Pintrich, P.R., Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York, Longman. 2. Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (2002). Understandings of the Nature of Science and Decision Making on Science and Technology Based Issues. Wiley Interscience, 352–377. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10063 3. Chua Yan Piaw. (2014). Ujian Regresi, Analisis Faktor Dan Analisis SEM. Mc Graw Hill Education. 4. Comstock, G. (2001). Ethics and genetically modified foods. Food Ethics, 183–202. 5. Crowe, A., Dirks, C., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2008). Biology in Bloom : Implementing Bloom ’ s Taxonomy to Enhance Student Learning in Biology. Life Sciences Education, 7, 368–381.https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.08 6. Darus, Z. (2012). Status Pencapaian Malaysia dalam TIMSS dan PISA : Satu Refleksi. Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia. 7. Hogan, K. (2002). Small Groups â€TM Ecological Reasoning While Making an Environmental Management Decision. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(4), 341–368. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10025 8. King, Patricia M.; Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing reflective judgment: Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults. ossey-Bass, 350 Sansome Street, San Francisco. 9. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. The Guilford Press New York London. 10. KPM. (2012). Dasar Pendidikan Kebangsaan. Perpustakaan Negara Malaysia. Retrieved from http://www.moe.gov.my/userfiles/file/BUKU DASAR.pdf 11. Morris, H. (2014). Socioscientific Issues and Multidisciplinarity in School Science Textbooks. International Journal of Science Education, 36(7). https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.848493 12. Mueller, M. P., & Zeidler, D. L. (2010). Moral – Ethical Character and Science Education : EcoJustice Ethics Through Socioscientific Issues ( SSI ). In D.J Tippins et. al. (Ed.), Cultural Studies & Environmentalism (Vol. 3, pp. 105–128). © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3929-3 13. Neber, H., & Schommer-Ai,.H. (2010). Self-regulated Science Learning with Highly Gifted Students : The role of cognitive , Self-regulated Science Learning with Highly Gifted Students : the role of cognitive , motivational , epistemological ,. High Ability Studies, (March 2013), 37–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598130220132316 14. Perry, William G., J. (1979). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. Jossey-Bass Publishers, 350 Sansome St., San Francisco, CA 94104; Tel: 415-433-1767,. 15. Piaget, J. (1976). Piaget â€TM s Theory. Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1976. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-46323-5_2 16. Sadler, T. D. (2009). Situated learning in science education: socio‐scientific issues as contexts for practice. Studies in Science Education (Vol. 45). https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260802681839 17. Sadler, T. D. (2011). Turkish Preservice Science Teachers ’ Informal Reasoning Regarding Socioscientific Issues and the Factors Influencing Their Informal Reasoning, 313–332. 18. Sadler, T. D., & Donnelly, L. a. (2006). Socioscientific Argumentation: The effects of content knowledge and morality. International Journal of Science Education, 28(12), 1463–1488. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600708717 19. Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). The significance of content knowledge for informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: Applying genetics knowledge to genetic engineering issues. Science Education, 89(1), 71–93. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20023 20. Sekaran, U. (2010). Research Methods For Business A Skill Building Approach. Journal of Education for Business Book Review, (March 2015), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.1993.10117635 21. Shuell, T. J. (1986). Cognitive Conceptions of Learning. Review of Educational Research, 56(4), 411–436. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543056004411 22. Tal, R., & Hochberg, N. (2003). Assessing High Order Thinking of Students Participating in The “Wise” Project in Israel. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 29, 69–89. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-491X(03)00016-6 23. Tsai, C. (2010). Relationships between student scientific epistemological beliefs and perceptions of constructivist learning environments. Educational Research, (February 2015), 37–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/001318800363836 24. Walker, K. A., & Zeidler, D. L. (2007). Promoting discourse about socioscientific issues through scaffolded inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1387–1410. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690601068095 25. Zainudin, A. (2015). Research Methology & Data Analysis. UiTM Press. 26. Zeidler, D. L. (2016). STEM education: A deficit framework for the twenty first century? A sociocultural socioscientific response. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-014-9578-z 27. Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Applebaum, S., & Callahan, B. E. (2009). Advancing reflective judgment through Socioscientific Issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 74–101. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20281 28. Zeidler, M. D., Ph, D., Howes, E., Ph, D., Ferron, J., Ph, D., … Ph, D. (2009). College Students ‟ Use of Science Content During Socioscientific Issues Negotiation : Impact of Evolution Understanding and Acceptance by Samantha R . Fowler A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of P. 29. Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering Students â€TM Knowledge and Argumentation Skills Through Dilemmas in Human Genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008