•  
  •  
 

Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan IPA

Keywords

keterampilan berargumentasi, POGIL, isu-isu sosiosaintifik, ikatan kimia, argumentation skills, POGIL, socioscientific issues, chemical bonding

Document Type

Article

Abstract

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menguji pengaruh pembelajaran POGIL berkonteks SSI terhadap kualitas argumentasi siswa kelas X. Rancangan penelitian adalah mixed-methods. Data kuantitatif berupa tingkat kualitas argumentasi siswa yang diperoleh melalui instrumen tes keterampilan berargumentasi. Data kualitatif berupa hasil wawancara siswa tentang sikap siswa terhadap SSI dan argumentasi siswa pada proses pembelajaran. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa terdapat perbedaan keterampilan berargumentasi antara siswa yang dibelajarkan dengan POGIL berkonteks SSI dengan siswa yang dibelajarkan dengan POGIL dan konvensional. Pembelajaran POGIL berkonteks SSI lebih efektif dalam membelajarkan keterampilan berargumentasi siswa dibandingkan dua kelas lainnya berdasarkan nilai rata-rata kualitas argumentasi.

The effect of POGIL with socioscientific issues context for high school argumentation skills quality in chemical bonding

Abstract

The aim of the study was to examine the influence of POGIL with SSI context on the quality of high school students argumentation. The research design was mixed-methods. Quantitative data in the form of level of students' argumentation quality collected by instrument of argument skills. Qualitative was the students' transcript of interview about their attitude toward SSI and their argumentation in process of learning.The results showed that there was a difference in the skills of argumentation between the students who taught with the POGIL with SSI context and the students taught by POGIL and conventional instruction. POGILS with SSI context was more effective in teaching students' argumentation skills compared to the other classes based on the average score of student argumentation.

First Page

31

Last Page

44

Page Range

31-44

Issue

1

Volume

5

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.21831/jipi.v5i1.20890

Source

https://journal.uny.ac.id/index.php/jipi/article/view/20890

References

Acar, O., Turkmen, L., & Roychoudhury, A. (2010). Student difficulties in socio"scientific argumentation and decision"making research findings: Crossing the borders of two research lines. International Journal of Science Education, 32(9), 1191-1206. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690902991805

Amanda, N. A. (2014). Identifikasi kesulitan siswa kelas X SMA Negeri 1 Boyolangu Tulungagung dalam memahami materi larutan elektrolit dan nonelektrolit. Universitas Negeri Malang.

Asterhan, C. S. C., & Schwarz, B. B. (2007). The effects of monological and dialogical argumentation on concept learning in evolutionary theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 626-639. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.626

Bell, P. (2005). The school science laboratory: Considerations of learning, technology, and scientific practice. Seattle: University of Washington.

Bell, P., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: designing for learning from the web with KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 797-817. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006900412284

Bilgin, I. (2009). The effects of guided inquiry instruction incorporating a cooperative learning approach on university students' achievement of acid and bases concepts and attitude toward guided inquiry instruction. Scientific Research and Essay, 4(10), 1038-1046. Retrieved from http://www.academicjournals.org/sre

Bricker, L. A., & Bell, P. (2008). Conceptualizations of argumentation from science studies and the learning sciences and their implications for the practices of science education. Science Education, 92(3), 473-498. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20278

Burek, K. (2012). The impact of socioscientific issues based-curriculum involving environmental outdoor education for fourth grade students. University of South Florida. Retrieved from http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/3997

de Vries, E., Lund, K., & Baker, M. (2002). Computer-mediated epistemic dialogue: Explanation and argumentation as vehicles for understanding scientific notions. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(1), 63-103. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1101_3

Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin's Argument Pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915-933. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20012

Evagorou, M., & Osborne, J. (2013). Exploring young students' collaborative argumentation within a socioscientific issue. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(2), 209-237. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21076

Fauziyah, N. (2016). Identifikasi letak kesulitan dan faktor yang mempengaruhi kesulitan belajar belajar siswa kelas X IPA SMA Negeri 4 Malang pada materi ikatan kimia. Universitas Negeri Malang.

Hanson, D. M. (2006). Instructor's guide to process-oriented guided-inquiry learning. New York, N.Y.: Stony Brook University.

Hasanah, U. (2015). Pengaruh metode inkuiri terbimbing terhadap hasil belajar dan keterampilan bernalar ilmiah (scientific reasoning skiil) siswa sekolah menengah kejuruan (SMK) kompetensi keahlian kimia analisis pada meteri kimia analisis terapan. Universitas Negeri Malang. Retrieved from http://karya-ilmiah.um.ac.id/index.php/disertasi/article/view/39060

Heng, L. L., Surif, J., & Seng, C. H. (2015). Malaysian students' scientific argumentation: Do groups perform better than individuals? International Journal of Science Education, 37(3), 505-528. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.995147

Hornstra, L., Denessen, E., Bakker, J., van den Bergh, L., & Voeten, M. (2010). Teacher attitudes toward dyslexia: Effects on teacher expectations and the academic achievement of students with dyslexia. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43(6), 515-529. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219409355479

Kakisako, M., Nishikawa, K., Nakano, M., Harada, K. S., Tatsuoka, T., & Koga, N. (2016). Stepwise inquiry into hard water in a high school chemistry laboratory. Journal of Chemical Education, 93(11), 1923-1928. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00217

Kean, E., & Middlecamp, C. (1985). Panduan belajar kimia dasar. ( trans. A. . Pudjaatmaka, Ed.). Jakarta: Gramedia.

Kuhn, D., & Udell, W. (2003). The development of argument skills. Child Development, 74(5), 1245-1260. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00605

Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310

Lewis, J., & Leach, J. (2006). Discussion of socio-scientific issues: The role of science knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 28(11), 1267-1287. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500439348

Lin, T. C., Lin, T. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2014). Research trends in science education from 2008 to 2012: A systematic content analysis of publications in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.864428

National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press.

NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. The National Academies Press.

Ni'mah, F. (2016). Keefektifan model pembelajaran inkuiri semi terbuka (coupled inquiry) dan inkuiri terbimbing (guided inquiry) dalam mengembangkan literasi sains siswa SMA Kelas XI pada materi kimia. Universitas Negeri Malang.

Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994-1020. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20035

Pratiwi, Y. N. (2016). Pengaruh socioscientific issue (SSI) sebagai konteks pembelajaran kooperatif pada materi laju reaksi terhadap pemahaman konsep, keterampilan berpikir kritis, dan keterampilan berargumentasi siswa. Universitas Negeri Malang. Retrieved from http://karya-ilmiah.um.ac.id/index.php/disertasi/article/view/50389

Puspaningtari, W. (2015). Analisis kesulitan peserta didik Sekolah Menengah Kejuruan (SMK) Negeri 1 Lumajang dalam memahami materi ikatan kimia. Universitas Negeri Malang.

Rennie, L. J., & Goodrum, D. (2007). Australian school science education National Action Plan 2008-2012, Volume 2. Background research and mapping. Commonwealth of Australia.

Rundgren, S.-N. C. (2010). How does background affect attitudes to socioscientific issues in Taiwan? Public Understanding of Science, 20(6), 722-732. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662509359998

Rusdiana, I. (2010). Identifikasi kesulitan belajar dan pemahaman konsep siswa dalam materi ikatan kimia kelas X semester 1 SMA Negeri 6 Malang. Universitas Negeri Malang. Retrieved from http://karya-ilmiah.um.ac.id/index.php/kimia/article/view/5525

Şen, Ş., Yilmaz, A., & Geban, Ö. (2016). The effect of Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) on 11th Graders' conceptual understanding of electrochemistry. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 17(2). Retrieved from https://www.eduhk.hk/apfslt/v17_issue2/sen/index.htm#con

ÅžimÅŸek, P., & Kabap?nar, F. (2010). The effects of inquiry-based learning on elementary students' conceptual understanding of matter, scientific process skills and science attitudes. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 1190-1194. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.170

Venville, G. J., & Dawson, V. M. (2010). The impact of a classroom intervention on grade 10 students' argumentation skills, informal reasoning, and conceptual understanding of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(8), 952-977. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20358

von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Case studies of how students' argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 101-131. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20213

Walker, L., & Warfa, A.-R. M. (2017). Process oriented guided inquiry learning (POGIL®) marginally effects student achievement measures but substantially increases the odds of passing a course. PLOS ONE, 12(10), e0186203. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186203

Yahaya, J. M., Nurulazam, A., & Karpudewan, M. (2016). College students' attitudes towards sexually themed science content: a socioscientific issues approach to resolution. International Journal of Science Education, 38(7), 1174-1196. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1174349

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

Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education, 89(3), 357-377. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20048

Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students' 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

Download

Share

COinS