Kajian Argumentasi Mahasiswa dalam Isu Sosial-Kimia: Pendekatan Socio -Scientific Issues
The Study of Students' Argumentation on Socio-Chemical Issues: A Socio-Scientific Issues Approach
-
Klaudia Ensriana Norlasty Bambut(1*)
Program Studi Pendidikan Kimia, Universitas Nusa Cendana, Indonesia Jln. Adisucipto Penfui, Kupang, NTT, Indonesia
-
Jeni Maria Tangpen(2)
Program Studi Pendidikan Kimia, Universitas Nusa Cendana, Indonesia Jln. Adisucipto Penfui, Kupang, NTT, Indonesia
(*) Corresponding Author
Abstract
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis tingkat argumentasi mahasiswa dalam merespons isu sosial kimia (Socio-Scientific Issue/SSI) menggunakan pendekatan kuantitatif deskriptif. Sampel terdiri dari 75 mahasiswa Pendidikan Kimia FKIP Undana (semester 4-6) yang dipilih melalui teknik klaster. Instrumen utama berupa soal argumentasi tertulis berbasis SSI (validitas tinggi ; reliabilitas 0.795). Jawaban mahasiswa selanjutnya dianalisis menggunakan rubrik Level of Argumentation. Hasil analisis menunjukkan bahwa distribusi tingkat argumentasi membentuk pola piramida terbalik, dengan mayoritas mahasiswa (32%) berada pada level 2 (mampu menyusun argumentasi yang mengandung claim dan data), selanjutnya level 3 (28%), level 1 (18,7%), level 4 (13,3%), dan level 5 (8%). Secara komponen, claim muncul dalam seluruh respons (100%), data pada 82,7%, warrant (52%), backing (27,3%), dan rebuttal hanya pada 14,7% mahasiswa. Temuan ini menunjukkan bahwa sebagian besar mahasiswa berada pada tingkat argumentasi yang rendah dengan struktur yang masih sederhana dan minim. Dominasi claim dan data tanpa warrant, backing, dan rebuttal mencerminkan keterbatasan berpikir kritis dan reflektif. Perlu adanya strategi pembelajaran berbasis SSI dan dialog argumentatif untuk mengembangkan keterampilan berpikir kritis dan literasi sains yang lebih mendalam.
Downloads
References
F. Yaman and B. Hand, "Examining pre-service science teachers’ development and utilization of written and oral argument and representation resources in an argument-based inquiry environment," Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 948–968, Aug. 2022, doi: 10.1039/d2rp00152g.
C. Cigdemoglu, H. O. Arslan, and A. Cam, "Argumentation to foster pre-service science teachers’ knowledge, competency, and attitude on the domains of chemical literacy of acids and bases," Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 288–303, 2017, doi: 10.1039/c6rp00167j.
Sibel. Erduran and Marilar. Aleixandre, Argumentation in science education : perspectives from classroom-based research. Springer, 2007.
D. Cross, G. Taasoobshirazi, S. Hendricks, and D. T. Hickey, “Argumentation: A strategy for improving achievement and revealing scientific identities,” Int J Sci Educ, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 837–861, May 2008, doi: 10.1080/09500690701411567.
E. B. Van Lacum, M. A. Ossevoort, and M. J. Goedhart, “A teaching strategy with a focus on argumentation to improve undergraduate students’ ability to read research articles,” CBE Life Sci Educ, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 253–264, Jun. 2014, doi: 10.1187/cbe.13-06-0110.
M. Bathgate, A. Crowell, C. Schunn, M. Cannady, and R. Dorph, “The Learning Benefits of Being Willing and Able to Engage in Scientific Argumentation,” Int J Sci Educ, vol. 37, no. 10, pp. 1590–1612, Jul. 2015, doi: 10.1080/09500693.2015.1045958.
E. Altun and T. Ozsevgec, “Making Argumentation-Based Learning and Teaching Happen: Exploring the Development of Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Argumentation Competencies,” Sci Educ (Dordr), 2025, doi: 10.1007/s11191-024-00612-1.
L. Guilfoyle, J. Hillier, and N. Fancourt, "Students’ argumentation in the contexts of science, religious education, and interdisciplinary science-religious education scenarios," Res. Sci. Technol. Educ., vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 759–776, 2023, doi: 10.1080/02635143.2021.1947223.
A. Beniermann, L. Mecklenburg, and A. Upmeier Zu Belzen, “Reasoning on controversial science issues in science education and science communication,” Educ Sci (Basel), vol. 11, no. 9, Sep. 2021, doi: 10.3390/educsci11090522.
M. Aydeniz and A. Dogan, "Exploring the impact of argumentation on pre-service science teachers’ conceptual understanding of chemical equilibrium," Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 111–119, 2016, doi: 10.1039/c5rp00170f.
J. P. Walker, A. G. Van Duzor, and M. A. Lower, “Facilitating Argumentation in the Laboratory: The Challenges of Claim Change and Justification by Theory,” J Chem Educ, vol. 96, no. 3, pp. 435–444, Mar. 2019, doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00745.
Y. Herlanti, "Analisis argumentasi mahasiswa pendidikan biologi pada isu sociosainfik konsumsi genetically modified organism (GMO)," J. Pendidik. IPA Indones., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–8, 2014. [Online]. Available: http://journal.unnes.ac.id/nju/index.php/jpii
C. Sudarini et al., "Profil level argumentasi topik hujan es di Surabaya pada mahasiswa FMIPA Universitas Negeri Surabaya," J. Ilm. Pendidik. Profesi, vol. 1, no. 1, 2022, doi: 10.58706/jipp.
W. Kartika Sari and E. I. Nada, “Analisis kemampuan argumentasi ilmiah mahasiswa pendidikan kimia pada pembelajaran daring,” National Conference of Islamic Natural Science, vol. 1, no. 1, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://proceeding.iainkudus.ac.id/index.php/NCOINS/article/view/53/21
A. N. Taufik, L. Berlian, A. Iman, and R. Tarisa, "Profil kemampuan argumentasi lisan berbasis socioscientific issues mahasiswa pendidikan IPA pada mata kuliah mikrobiologi," PENDIPA J. Sci. Educ., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 832–838, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://ejournal.unib.ac.id/index.php/pendipa
K. E. N. Bambut and S. Rahayu, "The patterns of discussion in teaching argumentation skills in chemistry learning," in AIP Conf. Proc., vol. 2215, Apr. 2020, Art. no. 050003, doi: 10.1063/5.0000529.
D. W. Johnson and R. T. Johnson, "Energizing learning: The instructional power of conflict," Educ. Res., vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 37–51, Jan. 2009, doi: 10.3102/0013189X08330540.
P. J. Friedrichsen, T. D. Sadler, K. Graham, and P. Brown, “Design of a socio-scientific issue curriculum unit: Antibiotic resistance, natural selection, and modeling,” Int. J. Des. Learn., vol. 7, no. 1, Feb. 2016, doi: 10.14434/ijdl.v7i1.19325.
Y. Herlanti, "Analisis argumentasi mahasiswa pendidikan biologi pada isu sociosainfik konsumsi genetically modified organism (GMO)," J. Pendidik. IPA Indones., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–8, 2014. [Online]. Available: http://journal.unnes.ac.id/nju/index.php/jpii
D. C. Owens, T. D. Sadler, and P. Friedrichsen, “Teaching Practices for Enactment of Socio-scientific Issues Instruction: an Instrumental Case Study of an Experienced Biology Teacher,” Res Sci Educ, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 375–398, Apr. 2021, doi: 10.1007/s11165-018-9799-3.
F. A. Nurrahmah and E. Nawawi, "Pengembangan lembar kerja peserta didik (LKPD) berbasis green chemistry pada praktikum laju reaksi di laboratorium SMA," J. Beta Kim., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 24–33, May 2023, doi: 10.35508/jbk.v3i1.11258.
H. Y. Ho et al., “Above- and below-average students think differently: Their scientific argumentation patterns,” Think Skills Creat, vol. 34, Dec. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2019.100607.
M. Berndt, F. M. Schmidt, M. Sailer, F. Fischer, M. R. Fischer, and J. M. Zottmann, “Investigating statistical literacy and scientific reasoning & argumentation in medical-, social sciences-, and economics students,” Learn Individ Differ, vol. 86, Feb. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101963.
K. J. Sagmeister, C. W. Schinagl, S. Kapelari, and P. Vrabl, “Students’ Experiences of Working With a Socio-Scientific Issues-Based Curriculum Unit Using Role-Playing to Negotiate Antibiotic Resistance,” Front Microbiol, vol. 11, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.577501.
T. S. Hancock, P. J. Friedrichsen, A. T. Kinslow, and T. D. Sadler, “Selecting Socio-scientific Issues for Teaching: A Grounded Theory Study of How Science Teachers Collaboratively Design SSI-Based Curricula,” Sci Educ (Dordr), vol. 28, no. 6–7, pp. 639–667, Sep. 2019, doi: 10.1007/s11191-019-00065-x.
D. L. Zeidler and B. H. Nichols, "Socioscientific issues: Theory and practice," J. Elem. Sci. Educ., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 49–58, Mar. 2009, doi: 10.1007/bf03173684.
S. Ban and S. N. D. Mahmud, "Research and trends in socio-scientific issues education: A content analysis of journal publications from 2004 to 2022," Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 15, Art. no. 11841, Aug. 2023, doi: 10.3390/su151511841.
N. E. Bodé, J. M. Deng, and A. B. Flynn, “Getting Past the Rules and to the WHY: Causal Mechanistic Arguments When Judging the Plausibility of Organic Reaction Mechanisms,” J Chem Educ, vol. 96, no. 6, pp. 1068–1082, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00719.
W. Martini, A. Widodo, A. Qosyim, M. A. Mahdiannur, and B. Jatmiko, "Improving undergraduate science education students’ argumentation skills through debates on socioscientific issues," J. Pendidik. IPA Indones., vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 428–438, Sep. 2021, doi: 10.15294/jpii.v10i3.30050.
J. Osborne, S. Erduran, and S. Simon, “Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science,” J Res Sci Teach, vol. 41, no. 10, pp. 994–1020, Dec. 2004, doi: 10.1002/tea.20035.
B. B. Schwarz, Y. Neuman, and S. Biezuner, “Two wrongs may make a right ... If they argue together!,” Cogn Instr, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 461–494, 2000, doi: 10.1207/S1532690XCI1804_2.
E. M. Nussbaum and O. V. Edwards, "Critical questions and argument stratagems: A framework for enhancing and analyzing students’ reasoning practices," J. Learn. Sci., vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 443–488, Jul. 2011, doi: 10.1080/10508406.2011.564567.
T. D. Sadler, “Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research,” J. Res. Sci. Teach., vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 513–536, May 2004, doi: 10.1002/tea.20009.
M. Bächtold, G. Pallarès, K. De Checchi, and V. Munier, “Combining debates and reflective activities to develop students’ argumentation on socioscientific issues,” J Res Sci Teach, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 761–806, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.1002/tea.21816.
C. Viehmann, J. M. F. Cárdenas, and C. G. R. Peña, "The use of socioscientific issues in science lessons: A scoping review," Sustainability, vol. 16, no. 14, Art. no. 5827, Jul. 2024, doi: 10.3390/su16145827.
H. A. Yacoubian and R. Khishfe, “Argumentation, critical thinking, nature of science and socioscientific issues: a dialogue between two researchers,” Int J Sci Educ, vol. 40, no. 7, pp. 796–807, May 2018, doi: 10.1080/09500693.2018.1449986.
J. Johnson, A. Z. Macalalag, and J. Dunphy, "Incorporating socioscientific issues into a STEM education course: Exploring teacher use of argumentation in SSI and plans for classroom implementation," Discip. Interdiscip. Sci. Educ. Res., vol. 2, no. 1, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.1186/s43031-020-00026-3.
K. N. Hosbein, M. A. Lower, and J. P. Walker, “Tracking Student Argumentation Skills across General Chemistry through Argument-Driven Inquiry Using the Assessment of Scientific Argumentation in the Classroom Observation Protocol,” J Chem Educ, vol. 98, no. 6, pp. 1875–1887, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c01225.
S. Rahayu, K. E. N. Bambut, and F. Fajaroh, "Do different discussion activities in developing scientific argumentation affect students’ motivation in chemistry?," Cakrawala Pendidik., vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 679–693, Oct. 2020, doi: 10.21831/cp.v39i3.32228..
T. Demircioglu, M. Karakus, and S. Ucar, “Developing Students’ Critical Thinking Skills and Argumentation Abilities Through Augmented Reality–Based Argumentation Activities in Science Classes,” Sci Educ (Dordr), vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 1165–1195, Aug. 2023, doi: 10.1007/s11191-022-00369-5.
S. F. Tomo, M. A. Uron Leba, and Y. R. Tinenti, “Implementasi Pendekatan Saintifik untuk Meningkatkan Hasil Belajar pada Materi Kesetimbangan Kimia,” Jurnal Beta Kimia, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 19–26, Apr. 2024, doi: 10.35508/jbk.v4i1.15035.
U. Betul Cebesoy and S. N. Chang Rundgren, “Embracing socioscientific issues-based teaching and decision-making in teacher professional development,” Educ Rev (Birm), vol. 75, no. 3, pp. 507–534, 2023, doi: 10.1080/00131911.2021.1931037.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Copyright is retained by the authors, and articles can be freely used and distributed by others.
