Fostering Multidimensional Thinking in Chemistry Education through an Integrated Challenge-Based, Socioscientific, and Counterargumentation Learning Model

The development of multidimensional thinking encompassing critical thinking skills, creative thinking skills, and caring thinking dispositions is increasingly recognized as an important goal of contemporary science education. However, there are still limited learning models that empirically integrate these three dimensions of thinking within a coherent pedagogical framework. This study aimed to test the effectiveness of the Challenge-Socioscientific Issues-Counterargumentation (CHASICA) learning model compared to the Problem-Based Learning (PBL) model in chemistry learning in high schools. This study used a quasi-experimental pretest–posttest control group design involving 300 high school students. Data were collected using validated instruments to measure critical thinking skills, creative thinking skills, and caring thinking dispositions, then analyzed using multivariate and univariate analyses of covariance, controlling for students' prior abilities. The analysis results showed a significant multivariate effect of the learning models, with large effect sizes and consistent superiority of the CHASICA learning model across all dimensions of multidimensional thinking. These findings provide empirical support for the importance of integrating authentic challenges, socioscientific issues (SSI) approach, and argumentation practices in science/chemistry learning and contribute to the development of learning designs that encourage critical, creative, and socially responsible scientific thinking. The study contributes a theoretically grounded instructional model that bridges cognitive and ethical dimensions of science learning, offering implications for curriculum design in 21st-century science education.