Email this article The Role of Argument-Based Science Inquiry Learning Model to Improve Scientific Argumentation Ability
), Syihabuddin Syihabuddin(2), Dadang Anshori(3), Andoyo Sastromiharjo(4)
| 
Country:
(1) Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Indonesia
(2) Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Indonesia
(3) Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Indonesia
(4) Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Indonesia
Corresponding Author
The Role of The Argument Based Science Inquiry (Absi) Learning Model To Improve Scientific Argumentation Ability. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine the role of the argument-based science inquiry (ABSI) learning model in improving scientific argumentation skills. Methods: The quasi-experimental method used in this study was a one group pretest posttest design. The population in this study were high school students in the city of Bandung with a sample of two classes selected by cluster random sampling with a total of 100 students. Findings: The results of the study confirm that the ABSI learning model has a very significant effect on students' scientific argumentation skills. The improvement can be seen in the depth, organization, and accuracy scientific argumentation. Conclusion: Students' argumentation skills increase because they are trained to organize thoughts completely, scientifically, and systematically.
Keywords: argument-Based Science Inquiry (ABSI) learning model, Scientific argumentation ability, critical thinking ability.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.23960/jpp.v12.i3.202223
Afshar, H. S., Movassagh, H., & Arbabi, H. R. (2017). The interrelationship among critical thinking, writing an argumentative essay in an L2 and their subskills. Language Learning Journal, 45(4), 419–433. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2017.1320420
Campbell, Y. C., & Filimon, C. (2018). Supporting the Argumentative Writing of Students in Linguistically Diverse Classrooms: An Action Research Study. RMLE Online, 41(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/19404476.2017.1402408
Casas-Quiroga, L., & Crujeiras-Pérez, B. (2020). Epistemic operations performed by high school students in an argumentation and decision-making context: Setrocia’s alimentary emergency. International Journal of Science Education, 42(16), 2653–2673. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1824300
Ford, M. J. (2012). A Dialogic Account of Sense-Making in Scientific Argumentation and Reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 30(3), 207–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2012.689383
Gibson, K. (2008). Analogy in scientific argumentation. Technical Communication Quarterly, 17(2), 202–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572250701878868
González-Howard, M., McNeill, K. L., Marco-Bujosa, L. M., & Proctor, C. P. (2017). ‘Does it answer the question or is it French fries?’: an exploration of language supports for scientific argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 39(5), 528–547. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1294785
Hadianto, D., Damaianti, V. S., Mulyati, Y., & Sastromiharjo, A. (2021). Enhancing scientific argumentation skill through partnership comprehensive literacy. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2098(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2098/1/012015
Hadianto, Daris, S. Damaianti, V., Mulyati, Y., & Sastromiharjo, A. (2022). Effectiveness of Literacy Teaching Design Integrating Local Culture Discourse and Activities to Enhance Reading Skills. Cogent Education, 9(1), 0–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2016040
Jones, L. (2014). Developing deaf children’s conceptual understanding and scientific argumentation skills: A literature review. Deafness and Education International, 16(3), 146–160. https://doi.org/10.1179/1557069X13Y.0000000032
Jönsson, A. (2016). Student performance on argumentation task in the Swedish National Assessment in science. International Journal of Science Education, 38(11), 1825–1840. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1218567
Kuhn, D., Hemberger, L., & Khait, V. (2016). Dialogic argumentation as a bridge to argumentative thinking and writing / La argumentación dialógica como puente para el pensamiento y la escritura argumentativa. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 39(1), 25–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/02103702.2015.1111608
Lin, T. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2017). Developing instruments concerning scientific epistemic beliefs and goal orientations in learning science: a validation study. International Journal of Science Education, 39(17), 2382–2401. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1384593
Lugli, L. (2015). Debatable Truths: What Buddhist Argumentation Reveals about Critical Thinking. Contemporary Buddhism, 16(2), 371–400. https://doi.org/10.1080/14639947.2015.1026150
Malpique, A., & Veiga-Simão, A. M. (2016). Argumentative writing by junior high school students: discourse knowledge and writing performance / Escritura argumentativa en alumnos de secundaria: conocimiento sobre el discurso y rendimiento en la escritura. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 39(1), 150–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/02103702.2015.1111609
Mao, L., Liu, O. L., Roohr, K., Belur, V., Mulholland, M., Lee, H. S., & Pallant, A. (2018). Validation of Automated Scoring for a Formative Assessment that Employs Scientific Argumentation. Educational Assessment, 23(2), 121–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2018.1427570
Marble, M. (1986). A critical thinking heuristic for the argumentative composition. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 16(1–2), 67–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/02773948609390738
Mercan, F. Ç. (2012). Epistemic Beliefs about Justification Employed by Physics Students and Faculty in Two Different Problem Contexts. International Journal of Science Education, 34(9), 1411–1441. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.664794
Muis, K. R. (2007). The role of epistemic beliefs in self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 42(3), 173–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520701416306
Noroozi, O., & Hatami, J. (2019). The effects of online peer feedback and epistemic beliefs on students’ argumentation-based learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 56(5), 548–557. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2018.1431143
Noroozi, O., Hatami, J., Bayat, A., van Ginkel, S., Biemans, H. J. A., & Mulder, M. (2020). Students’ online argumentative peer feedback, essay writing, and content learning: does gender matter? Interactive Learning Environments, 28(6), 698–712. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1543200
Shemwell, J. T., & Furtak, E. M. (2010). Science classroom discussion as scientific argumentation: A study of conceptually rich (and poor) student talk. Educational Assessment, 15(3), 222–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2010.530563
Stark, R., Puhl, T., & Krause, U. M. (2009). Improving scientific argumentation skills by a problem-based learning environment: Effects of an elaboration tool and relevance of student characteristics. Evaluation and Research in Education, 22(1), 51–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500790903082362
Villarroel, C., Garcia-Mila, M., Felton, M., & Miralda-Banda, A. (2019). Effect of argumentative goals in the quality of argumentative dialogue and written argumentation / Efecto de la consigna argumentativa en la calidad del diálogo argumentativo y de la argumentación escrita. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 42(1), 37–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/02103702.2018.1550162
Voss, J. F., & Van Dyke, J. A. (2001). Argumentation in Psychology: Background Comments. Discourse Processes, 32(2–3), 89–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853x.2001.9651593
No supplementary information available.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
View My Stats