Email this article Implementation of Socio-Scientific Issues inScience Learning to Improve Argumentation Skills: A Case of Space Debris Debate
Abstract
Abstract: Implementation of Socio-Scientific Issues inScience Learning to Improve Argumentation Skills: A Case of Space Debris Debate. Objectives: This study aims to assess the impact of implementing science learning with a socio-scientific issue approach and debate on space debris on scientific argumentation skills. Methods: The type of research applied was a quasi-experiment using a non-equivalent control group design. In the experimental class, learning science with debate activities on space debris within the socio-scientific issue framework was applied for four lessons, while in the control class, the usual learning was carried out by the teacher. The test data was analyzed using a t-test to determine whether the treatment had an impact on argumentation skills. Findings: Implementation of science learning with a socio-scientific issue approach and debate activities on space debris had a significant impact on scientific argumentation skills. Students defend their argument from other rebuttals by showing scientific evidence and providing scientific explanations. Conclusion: Science debate about space debris in science learning with a socio-scientific issue approach can provide a dynamic learning experience, students can provide claims accompanied by scientific evidence and reasoning that connects claims with evidence.
Keywords: science debate, socio-scientific issue, space debris, argumentation skills.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.23960/jpp.v14.i2.202482
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Acar, O., & Patton, B. R. (2016). Examination of learning equity among prospective science teachers who are concrete, formal and postformal reasoners after an argumentation-based inquiry course. Australian Journal of Teacher Education (Online), 41(2), 69–90.
Al-Ajmi, B., & Ambusaidi, A. (2022). The level of scientific argumentation skills in chemistry subject among grade 11th students: The role of logical thinking. Science Education International, 33(1), 66–74.
Anwar, Y., & Susanti, R. (2019). Analyzing scientific argumentation skills of biology education students in general biology courses. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1166(1), 12001.
Bächtold, M., Pallarès, G., De Checchi, K., & Munier, V. (2023). Combining debates and reflective activities to develop students’ argumentation on socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 60(4), 761–806.
Berndt, M., Schmidt, F. M., Sailer, M., Fischer, F., Fischer, M. R., & Zottmann, J. M. (2021). Investigating statistical literacy and scientific reasoning & argumentation in medical-, social sciences-, and economics students. Learning and Individual Differences, 86, 101963.
Capkinoglu, E., Yilmaz, S., & Leblebicioglu, G. (2020). Quality of argumentation by seventh‐graders in local socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57(6), 827–855.
Choi, A., Seung, E., & Kim, D. (2021). Science teachers’ views of argument in scientific inquiry and argument-based science instruction. Research in Science Education, 51(Suppl 1), 251–268.
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psycholigcal Bulletin, 112 (1), 155–159.
Dawson, V., & Carson, K. (2020). Introducing argumentation about climate change socioscientific issues in a disadvantaged school. Research in Science Education, 50, 863–883.
De La Paz, S., Levin, D. M., & Butler, C. (2023). Addressing an unfulfilled expectation: Teaching students with disabilities to write scientific arguments. Written Communication, 40(2), 448–481.
Demircioglu, T., Karakus, M., & Ucar, S. (2023). Developing students’ critical thinking skills and argumentation abilities through augmented reality–based argumentation activities in science classes. Science & Education, 32(4), 1165–1195.
Denny, M., Denieffe, S., & Pajnkihar, M. (2017). Using a non-equivalent control group design in educational research. SAGE Publications Ltd.
Dewi, A. I. K., Suyono, S., & Erman, E. (2023). Effectiveness of socioscientific issues (SSI) based learning to improve argumentation skills. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(1), 279–283.
Friska, R. I., Siahaan, P., & Hendayana, S. (2022). Junior high school students scientific argumentation skills on conventional biotechnology materials. Journal of Educational Sciences, 6(1), 143–157.
Garrecht, C., Reiss, M. J., & Harms, U. (2021). ‘I wouldn’t want to be the animal in use nor the patient in need’–the role of issue familiarity in students’ socioscientific argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 43(12), 2065–2086.
Guo, K., Zhong, Y., Li, D., & Chu, S. K. W. (2023). Effects of chatbot-assisted in-class debates on students’ argumentation skills and task motivation. Computers & Education, 203, 104862.
Hendratmoko, A. F., Madlazim, M., Widodo, W., Suyono, S., & Supardi, Z. A. I. (2024). Inquiry and debate in science learning: potential strategy for improving students’ scientific argumentation skills. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 12(1), 114–138.
Hendratmoko, A. F., Madlazım, M., Wıdodo, W., & Sanjaya, I. G. M. (2023). The impact of inquiry-based online learning with virtual laboratories on students’scientific argumentation skills. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 24(4), 1–20.
Iordanou, K., Kuhn, D., Matos, F., Shi, Y., & Hemberger, L. (2019). Learning by arguing. Learning and Instruction, 63, 101207.
Ivani, S., & Dutilh Novaes, C. (2022). Public engagement and argumentation in science. European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 12(3), 54.
Iwuanyanwu, P. N. (2023). When science is taught this way, students become critical friends: Setting the stage for student teachers. Research in Science Education, 53(6), 1063–1079.
Kabataş Memiş, E., & Çakan Akkaş, B. N. (2020). Developing critical thinking skills in the thinking-discussion-writing cycle: the argumentation-based inquiry approach. Asia Pacific Education Review, 21(3), 441–453.
Khairunnisa, R., & Faradillah, A. (2023). The effect of augmented reality-assisted problem-based learning on mathematical reasoning ability. Jurnal Pendidikan Progresif, 13(2), 833–846.
Khishfe, R. (2021). Explicit instruction and student learning of argumentation and nature of science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 32(3), 325–349.
Lieber, L., & Graulich, N. (2022). Investigating students’ argumentation when judging the plausibility of alternative reaction pathways in organic chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 23(1), 38–54.
Lin, Y.-R., & Wei, T.-T. (2024). The effects of students’ standpoints in argumentation regarding socio-scientific issues. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 23(1), 104–118.
Macalalag Jr, A. Z., Johnson, J., & Lai, M. (2020). How do we do this: Learning how to teach socioscientific issues. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 15(2), 389–413.
Martín-Gámez, C., & Erduran, S. (2018). Understanding argumentation about socio-scientific issues on energy: a quantitative study with primary pre-service teachers in Spain. Research in Science & Technological Education, 36(4), 463–483.
Martini, M., Widodo, W., Qosyim, A., Mahdiannur, M. A., & Jatmiko, B. (2021). Improving undergraduate science education students’ argumentation skills through debates on socioscientific issues. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 10(3), 428–438.
Münchow, H., Richter, T., von der Mühlen, S., & Schmid, S. (2019). The ability to evaluate arguments in scientific texts: Measurement, cognitive processes, nomological network, and relevance for academic success at the university. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 501–523.
Muntholib, M., Munadhiroh, A., Setiawan, N. C. E., & Yahmin, Y. (2021). High school students’ scientific argumentation on chemical equilibrium. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2330(1).
Nurtamara, L., & Widyastuti, D. A. (2023). The Improving evidence-based argumentation on socioscientific issues through problem-based learning in science students. Biosfer: Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi, 16(2), 439–446.
Owens, D. C., & Sadler, T. D. (2024). Socio‐scientific issues instruction for scientific literacy: 5E Framing to enhance teaching practice. School Science and Mathematics, 124(3), 203–210.
Özdem Yilmaz, Y., Cakiroglu, J., Ertepinar, H., & Erduran, S. (2017). The pedagogy of argumentation in science education: science teachers’ instructional practices. International Journal of Science Education, 39(11), 1443–1464.
Rosliana, R., & Suyanto, S. (2022). Analysis of Argumentation Contents in the High School Biology Textbook: A Discourse Analysis on the Topic of the Respiratory System. Jurnal Pendidikan Progresif, 12(2), 464–476.
Walker, J. P., Van Duzor, A. G., & Lower, M. A. (2019). Facilitating argumentation in the laboratory: The challenges of claim change and justification by theory. Journal of Chemical Education, 96(3), 435–444.
Yamamoto, T., Kamiyama, S., Tanaka, T., & Yamaguchi, E. (2022). Primary school students’ difficulties in writing arguments: Identifying challenges and opportunities for science teaching. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 21(3), 445–461.
Yıldız-Feyzioğlu, E., & Kıran, R. (2022). Investigating the relationships between self-efficacy for argumentation and critical thinking skills. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 33(5), 555–577.
Zaroh, I., Muntholib, M., & Joharmawan, R. (2022). Implementasi instrumen asesmen argumentasi ilmiah materi laju reaksi. Orbital: Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia, 6(1), 78–90.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2024 Jurnal Pendidikan Progresif
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
View My Stats
The copyright is reserved to The Jurnal Pendidikan Progresif that is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.