Development and Implementation of Students' Scientific Argumentation Skills Test in Acid-Base Chemistry

Parlan Parlan, Umi Latifah, Muntholib Muntholib

Abstract


This study aimed to develop and validate Scientific Argumentation Skills Test (SAST) and investigate the 11th-grade students' performance in scientific argumentation skills on acid-base chemistry. The research design used was research and development, followed by descriptive research. Research and development were carried out to obtain an instrument of SAST, and descriptive research was used to describe students' argumentation skills in acid-base chemistry. Participants in this study were 328 11th-grade students of state high schools in East Java, Indonesia. The research and development of SAST consisted of five steps, namely literature review, items development, expert judgment, pilot project, and finalization of instruments. Expert judgment involved three chemistry education experts, while the pilot project involved 151 students, and the identification of students' scientific argumentation skills involved 177 students. Data about expert assessments, student responses to the pilot project, and student answers to the application of SAST were analyzed descriptively. The SAST produced in the research and development steps consisted of parts A (10 items) and part B (7 items), with Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficients of 0.888 and 0.758. The students' performance in scientific argumentation skills showed that the average score of students' performance to determine the argument's components was 80.53% (excellent category). The average score of students' performance to write an argument was 55.42% (moderate category). The implication of the study that the students' scientific argumentation skills must be explicitly trained in learning.

Keywords


Acid-base chemistry; Conceptual understanding; High school students; Scientific argumentation

Full Text:

PDF

References


Albe, V. (2008). When scientific knowledge, daily life experience, epistemological and social considerations intersect: Students’ argumentation in group discussions on a socio-scientific issue. Research in Science Education, 38, 67–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9040-2

Arikunto, S. (2009). Dasar-dasar evaluasi pendidikan. Bumi Aksara.

Braaten, M., & Windschitl, M. (2011). Working toward a stronger conceptualization of scientific explanation for science education. Science Education, 95(4), 639–669. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20449

Brown, N. J. S., Nagashima, S. O., Fu, A., Timms, M., & Wilson, M. (2010). A framework for analyzing scientific reasoning in assessments. Educational Assessment, 15(3), 142–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2010.530562

Chandrasegaran, A. L., Treagust, D. F., & Mocerino, M. (2007). The development of a two-tier multiple-choice diagnostic instrument for evaluating secondary school students’ ability to describe and explain chemical reactions using multiple levels of representation. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8(3), 293–307.

Choden, T., & Kijkuakul, S. (2020). Blending problem based learning with scientific argumentation to enhance students’ understanding of basic genetics. International Journal of Instruction, 13(1), 445–462.

Chowning, J. T., Griswold, J. C., Kovarik, D. N., & Collins, L. J. (2012). Fostering critical thinking, reasoning, and argumentation skills through bioethics education. PLoS ONE, 7(5), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0036791

Cooper, M. M., Kouyoumdjian, H., & Underwood, S. M. (2016). Investigating students’ reasoning about acid-base reactions. Journal of Chemical Education, 93(10), 1703–1712. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00417

Damanhuri, M. I. M., Treagust, D. F., Won, M., & Chandrasegaran, A. . (2016). High school students’ understanding of acid-base concepts : An ongoing challenge for teachers. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 11(1), 9–27. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijese.2015.284a

Delen, İ. (2017). Teaching argumentation by using facebook groups. International Journal of Instruction, 10(1), 151–168. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2017.10110a

Demiral, Ü., & Cepni, S. (2018). Examining argumentation skills of preservice science teachers in terms of their critical thinking and content knowledge levels : An example using GMOs. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 15(3), 128–151. https://doi.org/10.12973/tused.10241a

Erduran, S. (2007). Methodological foundations in the study of argumentation in science classrooms. In Argumentation in Science Education. Springer.

Frey, B. B., Ellis, J. D., Bulgren, J. A., Hare, J. C., & Ault, M. (2015). Development of a test of scientific argumentation. Electronic Journal for Research in Science & Mathematics Education, 19(4), 1–18.

Furtak, E. M., Hardy, I., Beinbrech, C., Shavelson, R. J., & Shemwell, J. T. (2010). A framework for analyzing evidence-based reasoning in science classroom discourse. Educational Assessment, 15(3), 175–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2010.530553

Grooms, J., Walker, J. O. I. P., & Al, S. E. T. (2010). Argument-driven inquiry as a way to help students learn how to participate in scientific argumentation and craft written arguments: An exploratory study. Science Education, 95(2), 217–257. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20421

Harris, R., & Ratcliffe, M. (2005). Socio-scientific issues and the quality of exploratory talk — what can be learned from schools involved in a ‘collapsed day’ project? The Curriculum Journal, 16(4), 439–453. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585170500384396

Heng, L. L., Surif, J., & Seng, C. H. (2014). Individual versus group argumentation: Student’s performance in a malaysian context. International Education Studies, 7(7), 109–124.

Katchevich, D., Hofstein, A., & Mamlok-naaman, R. (2013). Argumentation in the chemistry laboratory: Inquiry and confirmatory experiments. Research in Science Education, 317–345. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9267-9

Kimberlin, C. L., & Winterstein, A. G. (2008). Validity and reliability of measurement instruments used in research. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 65(23), 2276–2284. https://doi.org/10.2146/ajhp070364

Kollar, I., Ufer, S., Reichersdorfer, E., Vogel, F., Fischer, F., & Reiss, K. (2014). Effects of collaboration scripts and heuristic worked examples on the acquisition of mathematical argumentation skills of teacher students with different levels of prior achievement q. Learning and Instruction, 32, 22–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.01.003

Kooser, A. S., Jenkins, J. L., & Welch, L. E. (2001). Acid-base indicators: A new look at an old topic. Journal of Chemical Education, 78(11), 11–13.

Kosko, K. W., Rougee, A., & Herbst, P. (2014). What actions do teachers envision when asked to facilitate mathematical argumentation in the classroom? Math Ed Res J, 26, 459–476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-013-0116-1

McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2008). Scientific explanations: Characterizing and evaluating the effects of teachers’ instructional practices on student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 533–578.

Noviyanti, N. I., Mukti, W. R., Yuliskurniawati, I. D., Mahanal, S., & Zubaidah, S. (2019). Students’ scientific argumentation skills based on differences in academic ability. The International Seminar on Bioscience and Biological Education. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1241/1/012034

Nurramadhani, A. (2017). Argument-driven inquiry (ADI): The way to develop Junior High School student’s argumentation skills in science learning. International Conference on Mathematics and Science Education, 57(ICMSEd 2016), 128–132.

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

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2014). Critical thinking: Intellectual standards essential to reasoning sell within every domain of human thought. Journal of Developmental Education, 37(3).

Rauf, R. A. A., Rasul, M. S., Mansor, A. N., Othman, Z., & Lyndon, N. (2013). Inculcation of science process skills in a science classroom. Asian Social Science, 9(8), 47–57. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n8p47

Sampson, V., & Blanchard, M. R. (2012). Science teachers and scientific argumentation: Trends in views and practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(9), 1122–1148. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21037

Sampson, V., & Clark, D. B. (2008). Assessment of the ways students generate arguments in science education: Current perspectives and recommendations for future directions. Science Education, 92(3), 447–472. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20276

Sampson, V., & Gleim, L. (2009). Argument-driven inquiry to promote the understanding of important concepts & practices in biology. The American Biology Teacher, 71(8), 465–472.

Schleigh, S. (2014). Assessments in the arguments: Round robin journaling and white boarding provide multiple opportunities for assessing students and evaluating instruction. In Science and Children. Scilinks.

Tsai, C., Lin, C., Shih, W., & Wu, P. (2015). The effect of online argumentation upon students’ pseudoscientific beliefs. Computers & Education, 80, 187–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.018

Walter, J. G., & Barros, T. (2011). Students build mathematical theory: semantic warrants in argumentation. Educ Stud Math, 78, 323–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-011-9326-1

Wattanakasiwich, P., Taleab, P., Sharma, M. D., & Johnston, I. D. (2013). Development and implementation of a conceptual survey in thermodynamics. International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 21(1), 29–53.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.24042/tadris.v5i2.6388

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Bookmark and Share


Creative Commons License

Tadris: Jurnal Keguruan dan Ilmu Tarbiyah is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. p-ISSN 2301-7562 | e-ISSN 2579-7964