Exploration of students' scientific argumentation ability on thermodynamics through authentic PBL with STEM approach and formative assessment

Abstract

Students' ability in scientific argumentation is very important to improve the skills needed in studying physics, especially thermodynamics. However, students' scientific argumentation skills in thermodynamics are still not optimal because they seem abstract. Authentic learning is needed where thermodynamic phenomena occur in our lives. Meanwhile, authentic problem based learning (aPBL)-STEM solutions with formative assessment to overcome low scientific arguments are still rare. This study aims to explore students' scientific argumentation skills on the subject of Thermodynamics through aPBL-STEM with Formative Assessment. This study uses a mixed method with embedded experimental design and research samples were 33 students of class XI science in Waikabubak, Indonesia. The instrument used is the Thermodynamics' Scientific Argumentation Test in the form of 5 essay test items with a reliability of 0.728. Quantitative analysis based on pretest and posttest data using Wilcoxon test, N-gain, and effect size. Qualitative data on variations in student answers, results of interviews and observations, were analyzed by reducing data, coding, and conclusions. The results of students' answers are categorized into five levels of scientific argumentation, namely very weak, weak, strong enough, strong, and very strong. The results showed that there was a significant increase in students' scientific argumentation skills, with N-gain = 0.51 (medium category), and effect size = 2.84 (strong category). The average level of students' scientific arguments is strong enough. In addition, students still have difficulty in determining the work on the system, analyzing PV graphs, the efficiency of Carnot engine, and understanding the entropy concept. In future research, it is better to train students specifically to write the rebuttal component and add to the control class.