Student Argumentation Research Articles

Difficulties in Analyzing the Arguments of Educational University Students and how to overcome them

이 연구에서는 논증도 작성하기를 통해 논증분석 양상과, 탐색한 양상에 근거하여 논증분석을 할 때의 어려움 요인을 탐색한 다음, 그 극복 방안을 제시했다. 연구 결과를 요약하여 결론을 제시하면 다음과 같다. 첫째, 논증분석 양상은‘결론과 보충 설명의 혼동, 결론과 이유․근거의 혼동, 주논증과 부논증의 병용, 논증분석 방법의 혼동’으로 드러났다. 둘째, ‘결론과 보충 설명의 혼동’과 관련하여 탐색된 어려움 요인은‘맥락의 활용’,‘결론과 이유․근거의 혼동’과 관련해서는‘인과관계 파악’,‘주논증과 부논증의 병용’과 관련해서는‘주논증과 부논증의 구분’,‘논증분석 방법의 혼동’과 관련해서는‘논증분석 방법’이다. 따라서 국어교육을 통해서‘맥락의 활용, 인과관계 파악, 주논증과 부논증 구분, 논증분석 방법의 훈련이 지속적이고 체계적으로 시행되어야 한다.In this study, we explored the aspects of the analysis and the difficult factors of argument analysis by preparing the argument, and then suggest ways to overcome them. Summarizing the results of the study, the following conclusions are presented: First, the aspects of the argument analysis were revealed as ‘confusion of conclusion and supplementary explanation, confusion of conclusion and reason, combination of main argument and by-argument, and confusion of argument analysis methods. Second, ‘the confusion of conclusion and explanation’, the challenging factors explored in relation to ‘the use of context’, ‘causal identification’ with respect to ‘the use of conclusions and reasons’, ‘distinction between main and by-discussion’ with respect to ‘the combination of main argument’, and ‘confusion in argument analysis methods’. Therefore, through Korean language education, ‘the use of context, the identification of causality, the distinction between main and minor arguments, and the training of method of argument analysis’ should be carried out continuously and systematically.

Tracking Student Argumentation Skills across General Chemistry through Argument-Driven Inquiry Using the Assessment of Scientific Argumentation in the Classroom Observation Protocol

Current research suggests that students often fail to focus equally on the three aspects of scientific argumentation (cognitive, epistemic, and social) when they are given an opportunity to engage in argumentation. This study examined student argumentation within a two-semester general chemistry laboratory sequence at East Carolina University to explore how the three aspects of argumentation change over time with repeated exposure through the Argument-Driven Inquiry (ADI) instructional model for laboratory instruction. Video recordings of group argumentation across five investigations were transcribed and coded using the Assessment of Scientific Argumentation in the Classroom (ASAC) observation protocol. A positive increase was seen in the total ASAC scores for each of the experiments. A significant increase was seen within each of the three subcategories of the ASAC observation protocol, cognitive, epistemic, and social, over the two-semester sequence. These results support the idea that increased opportunities to engage in argumentation improves an essential scientific practice.

The correlation between scientific argumentation with viruses learning outcomes of senior high school student

This study aims to determine the correlation between ability of scientific argumentation and learning outcomes of students on the virus topic with the research subjects were X IPA students in SMA Negeri 1 Indralaya Utara 2018/2019 (n = 47). This type of research is quantitative descriptive with the correlation method. This study used two data collection techniques is written test and observation. The result showed that students learning was 49% very good, 15% good, 17% sufficient, and 19% less. The results of writing scientific argumentation of students are 9% excellent, 11% good, 21% sufficient, 26% less, and 33% very poor. The average scientific argumentation of students based on Toulmin's Argument Pattern (TAP) is 100% of students able to submit a claim, 5% able to submit data, 77% able to convey a warrant, 6% able to convey backing, 7% able to convey rebuttal and 3% able to convey qualifer with the quality of scientific argumentation in general at level 2. The results of the correlation test of scientific argumentation include writing argumentation and TAP with learning outcomes is 0,311 it is means a low correlation. Based on the results showed a correlation between the ability of scientific argumentation with learning outcomes of class x students in SMA Negeri 1 Indralaya Utara

Writing about the past: the impact of different authentic instructional material on students’ argument writing in history

Recent research has repeatedly raised the question of how the authenticity of learning material affects learning outcomes. This question is particularly important for history education: researchers continue to debate whether teachers should use historians’ authentic working material (e.g., multiple primary sources and historical accounts) or less and inauthentic material which has been revised for different and potentially didactical reasons (e.g., material from historical culture and history textbooks). We conducted a quasi-experimental study to examine whether authentic material promotes the quality of students’ written historical arguments. Eleventh- and 12th-grade students (N = 161) were given instructional materials representing different degrees of domain-specific authenticity in three experimental conditions: the authentic condition (print documents: primary sources and historical accounts), the less authentic condition (audio documents: written original documents spoken by actors), and the inauthentic condition (a history textbook: chapters based on original documents) to work with. They were further instructed to answer a historical question in an argument-writing task using the material at hand. We assessed the quality of the students’ written historical arguments based on a coding scheme and by rating the texts, and measured students’ perception of domain-specific authenticity. The results indicate that the historical arguments of students in the authentic experimental condition were of higher quality than in both other conditions. However, there were also differences in how students experienced and worked with the given materials. We discuss these findings with regard to the authenticity of the instructional material and its presentation format, in multiple documents or a single document, in the context of history education.

“Is It Valid or Not?”: Pre-Service Teachers Judge the Validity of Mathematical Statements and Student Arguments

There is a wide recognition that reasoning abstractly, constructing arguments, or critiquing arguments should be an important educational goal in the mathematical experiences of all students in the standards for school mathematics. Seeing these standards as an essential element for developing deep mathematical understanding; however, call for a strong knowledge of proof for teachers. Thus, the purpose of this study is to investigate how pre-service middle school teachers (PSMTs) decide whether a presented mathematical statement is true or false and how they verify student arguments presented for these statements. 50 PSMTs participated in the study. Individual interviews were conducted with 7 PSMTs to further delve into the verification processes of the PSMTs. The results of the study demonstrated that meeting the expectations of the current standards is not an easy feat by documenting that most of the PSMTs struggled with evaluating mathematical tasks and constructing arguments.

Profile of Argumentation Skills using Toulmin’s Argumentation Pattern (TAP) in Senior High School Students in Biology Learning: Preliminary Research

The skills needed in the 21st century, including critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity, can be developed through argumentation skills. The method used is descriptive quantitative, with a sample size of 102 students. Student argument analysis refers to Toulmin’s Argumentation Pattern (TAP), which contains aspects of claim, grounds, warrant, backing, and rebuttal. This study aims to describe the profile of the students’ argumentation skills of class XII science at Senior High School 1 Sungai Pinyuh on the structure and function of cells in the reproductive system. The results showed that the students’ argumentation skills had a percentage of 64.8% with enough category. The percentage of each aspect, namely the claim was in excellent category (95.25%), grounds was in enough category (59.25%), warrant was in good category (70.5%), backing was in enough category (56%), and rebuttal was in less category (42.75%). This study also showed the percentage level of student argumentation, namely the percentage of students categorized as level 1 at 1.96%, level 2 at 29.41%, level 3 at 68.63%, level 4 at 0%, and level 5 at 0%. The students’ argumentation skills categorized as enough and were at levels 1, 2, and 3. Empowering through appropriate learning models and strategies.

Student Argumentation Work Sample Sorting Task and Teachers’ Evaluations of Arguments

To support teachers in implementing ambitious reform efforts, professional developers and teacher educators need to know more about teachers’ thinking about argumentation. Specifically, there is a need to understand more about teachers’ views and evaluations of students’ mathematical arguments as they play out in practice. In this article, we share a tool developed to elicit teachers’ pre- and postevaluations of students’ mathematical arguments on a problem-solving task. We discuss the design of the tool and provide evidence of its utility. Our findings indicate that the tool can be used to (a) identify changes in teachers’ evaluations of student mathematical arguments over time and (b) inform the design of professional learning experiences.

The implementation of Argument Driven Inquiry (ADI) learning model to improve scientific argumentation skills of high school students

This study aims to describe the implementation of the ADI learning model on physics learning of Newton’s laws, the skills of scientific argumentation of students after learning, and the patterns of scientific argumentation students. This research method used explanatory sequential mixed method design. Data collection methods used in this study were tests, documentation and observation. This research was conducted in Surabaya, East Java, Indonesia. Eighty-five of ten grade students on three classes and one teacher participated in this study. This study applied a scientific argumentation level framework developed by Erduran to determine the level of scientific argumentation skills that can be achieved by students. The results showed that ADI learning model was carried out very well for 3 classes with an average percentage of feasibility for Science Classes 1, 2, and 3 as a whole involving 86.67%, 87.08%, and 88.75%. Scientific arguments of students show a significant increase, with a significance of n-gain values obtained in the medium category. The pattern of changes in the skills of scientific argumentation of students from levels 1 and 2 in the pre-test increased to levels 3 and 4 in the post-test. The reason for the skills of scientific argumentation of students is in accordance with the scientific argumentation skills verbally. Based on these results it can be concluded that the application of the ADI learning model improve scientific argumentation skills of students.

The scientific argumentation profile of annular solar eclipse phenomenon June 21st 2020 of physics undergraduate student in Universitas Negeri Surabaya

Arguments play an important role in determining how strong an understanding of science is. Training and increasing the level of student argumentation can be done in various ways, including by teaching students to argue about natural phenomena around such as the phenomenon of an annular solar eclipse. On Sunday, June 21, 2020, there will be an annular solar eclipse that will pass across parts of Indonesia. In responding to this phenomenon, the perception of the people or citizens of Indonesia is very diverse. Therefore, further research is needed. This research aims to describe and analyze the comprehension and scientific argumentation profile of Annular Solar Eclipse Phenomenon June 21st 2020 of Physics Undergraduate Student in Universitas Negeri Surabaya. This research was conducted with a descriptive qualitative research method and the data analyzed by using an observer rubric adapted of Toulmin’s argumentation pattern. Seventy respondents Physics Undergraduate Student, class of 2017, from Universitas Negeri Surabaya were involved in this study using a questionnaire and interview. The result showed that physics students had a fairly good knowledge and understanding related to the phenomenon of the annular solar eclipse, meanwhile, the subject’s ability in providing scientific argument is at the level of providing claims and evidence, but weak warrant. Subjects will not be able to explain their scientific arguments if they are not supported by the knowledge they have. Therefore, it can be recommended that physics students can improve their understanding of the concept of an annular solar eclipse through a process of argumentation.

LEITURAS DO MARANHÃO: UMA PROPOSTA DE ENSINO DE LITERATURA A PARTIR DE TEXTOS DE AUTORES MARANHENSES EM UMA ESCOLA DE ENSINO MÉDIO DE TIMON (MA)

Este trabalho tem por objetivo apresentar os resultados efetivos advindos do Projeto de Extensão Leituras do Maranhão: uma proposta de ensino de Literatura a partir de textos de autores maranhenses em uma escola de Ensino Médio de Timon (MA). O desenvolvimento deste projeto abrange o período de 01 de setembro de 2016 a 31 de agosto de 2017 e ele objetiva ampliar, por meio da leitura e interpretação de textos poéticos de autores maranhenses, o poder de argumentação crítica oral e escrita de alunos do 2º ano do Ensino Médio de uma escola estadual pertencente ao município de Timon – MA. A justificativa para a execução do projeto é que, por estar localizada entre dois estados brasileiros (Maranhão e Piauí), a cidade de Timon demonstra pouca identidade com a cultura maranhense. Como consequência desta localização geográfica, os alunos timonenses secundaristas revelam conhecer mais sobre a cultura do Piauí do que a do Maranhão. A metodologia de trabalho adotada volta-se para a prática de ensino de literatura visando a formação do pensamento crítico do aluno.

Analysis of Problem Solving on the Argumentation Ability of Students Under the Topic of Dynamic Electricity

This study aims to determine student problem solving on students’ argumentation skills under the topic of dynamic electricity. Design in this research is descriptive-qualitative and using a case study design with 34 undergraduate students who were selected using purposive sampling technique. The data was obtained through an essay test which consisted of 3 questions using the right arguments. The results of this research show that the percentage level of argumentation categories sequentially increases in each category. For category 1 it is 6%, category 2 is 24%, category 3 is 26% and category 4 is 44%. The results of the student's argumentation show that their argumentation ability is still relatively low, which is below 50%.

Exploring the impact of the framing of a laboratory experiment on the nature of student argumentation

Research on student argumentation in chemistry laboratories has mainly focused on evaluating the quality of students’ arguments and analyzing the structure of such arguments (i.e. claims, evidence, and rationale). Despite advances in these areas, little is known about the impact of activity framing on the nature of student argumentation in laboratory settings. In this research study, we analyzed the arguments generated by college organic chemistry students working on a substitution reaction experiment that was framed in two distinct ways: predict-verify and observe-infer. The arguments constructed by students in their post-laboratory reports under each laboratory frame were characterized by paying attention to both domain-specific and domain-general features. Our analysis revealed significant differences in the chemical concepts and ideas that students under the two conditions invoked, as well as in the level of integration, specificity, alignment, and type of reasoning observed within and across different argument components. Our findings highlight the importance of paying attention to how experiments are framed in terms of the goals, procedures, information, and tools available to students as these decisions can have a major impact on the nature of the claims students make, their use of evidence, and the approach to reasoning that they follow.

A thematic content analysis of rhetorical and dialectical argumentation studies in science education

The aim of this study was to investigate the studies of rhetoric and dialectical argumentation stuides published in four leading academic journals in the field of science education through thematic content analysis method. For this purpose, 34 articles, which are in accordance with the examination criteria, were determinedby content analysis method. The studies were examined considering the following themes: “aim”, “features of sample”, “subject”, “data collection and analysis method”, “argumentation process”, and “result”. Results revealed that majority of the studies were conducted according to rhetorical argumentation (n=26, %76) and that the studies with dialectic argumentation (n=8, %24) were fewer. Moreover, it has been shown that the mostof studies were conducted to analyze student argumentation and to improve students' argumentation skills. It was seen that the sample size is usuallysmallin the argumentation studies. In addition, it was determined that the qualitative and mixed methods were mostly used in the studies and argumentation was mostly applied on science topics and concepts rather than socioscientific issues. Results showed that various rubrics or argumentative indicators were used to evaluate the argumentation process in most of the studies. In addition, in some rhetorical studies, it has been observed that new argumentation elements are added to adapt argumentation models to science education. It is suggested that in the future studies, dialectical argumentation studies that determine the role of teacher in the argumentation process and studies on the socioscientific topics with larger samples will fill the gap in this area.

Analysis of scientific argument of vocational high school students on the topic of substance change

This study aims to see the ability of scientific argumentation of chemical analysis vocational high school students on the topic of changing the form of substances. This research is a qualitative descriptive study. The instrument used was a four-level multiple choice test with a validity value of 97% and a reliability of 0.83 consisting of 20 items related to the concept of changing the form of a substance. The research subjects were 173 vocational high school students majoring in chemical analysis. The results showed that the proportion of the ability of class X, XI and XII students in providing scientific arguments was 56%, 56% and 52%, respectively. These results are supported by students’ conceptual understanding of topics that change the form of substances, namely students who understand well at 34.77%; misconception error 1 of 16.16%; misconception error 2 was 8.99%; misconception error 3 is 15.84% and those who do not understand the concept are 24.25%. From the results of the study it can be ignored that students have low scientific argumentation skills due to students’ low conceptual understanding of the topic of changing the form of substances.

Kumpulan Soal Argumentasi Berpola Claim, Data, Warrant (CDW)

This study aims to find out the effectiveness of product collection of items about argumentation pattern claim, data, and warrant against the arguments of students in the subjects of biology respiratory system material at SMA IX Negeri 2 Jambi City. This research uses ADDIE model (Analysis, Desaign, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation). Data collection methods used in this research are interview methods, questionnaires, and tests. The results showed the development of a collection of questions in sma negeri 2 jambi school with 10 questions and 6 respondents who gave pretest and posttest questions, then got a pretest result of 1.23 and a posttest average score of 3.75. Based on t paired test sample t tests obtained sig. (2-tailed) of 0.000< 0.05 then H0 rejected and Ha received, there is an influence on the collection of points of argumentation on the ability of students argumentation in SMA Negeri 2 Jambi City. In conclusion, the product of a collection of argument-patterned claims, data, and warrants (SDW) developed influenced the argumentation of students in the subjects of respiratory system material biology at SMA IX Negeri 2 Jambi City.
 Keywords: Arguments, Problem Sets, Claim Patterns, Data, Warrant (CDW)

Pengembangan Lembar Kerja Peserta Didik (LKPD) Berpola Claim, Data, Warrant (Cdw) untuk Meningkatkan Kemampuan Argumentasi Siswa

This study aims to develop student worksheets (LKPD) patterned claim, data, warrant (CDW) on human respiratory system material and find out how teachers respond and student responses and the effect of using LKPD on student argumentation ability. The development model used in this research is addie development model consisting of 5 stages, namely analysis, planning, development, implementation and evaluation. The development of this LKPD uses due diligence based on expert validation of materials and validation of media experts, as well as teacher response and student response. Data analysis techniques used are qualitative and quantitative data analysis. The results of both validators state that LKPD is worthy of testing. Furthermore, the results of the teacher's response also stated that the LKPD is feasible in the trial with a score of 93%. Then the results of the odd and even group student response were obtained from kappa test of 0.673 with high category and correlation test of 0.806 with very strong category. This means that the two groups of students have been in touch and agreed to state that LKPD is worthy of trial. In conclusion, students can understand the problem of claims, data, warrant (CDW) arguments judging by the score of the paired sample t test of 0.000 which means that there is an influence of the use of student worksheets (LKPD) on students' argumentation ability.
 Keywords: Claim, Data, Warrant (CDW), Student Worksheet (LKPD), Argumentation Ability.

PENGGUNAAN ALAT PRAKTIKUM MESIN ATWOOD BERBASIS ARDUINO TERHADAP HASIL BELAJAR DAN KETERAMPILAN ARGUMENTASI MAHASISWA PENDIDIKAN FISIKA PADA MATA PRAKTIKUM MEKANIKA TAHUN AKADEMIK 2017/2018

Abstract: The results of the presurvey conducted at the Laboratory of Physics Education, University of Muhammadiyah Metro that there is an arduino-based atwood machine practicum tool that has been made by Rohmah (2017) and has been validated with good accuracy but this tool has not been used in learning and has several advantages one of which is automatic detect the time needed for objects to move, so that the tool can work well and can be used to find out learning outcomes and argumentation skills. The research subjects were 12 students of Muhammadiyah Metro University physics education. Data collection instruments use student worksheets and test questions. The results showed that the use of arduino-based atwood machine practicum tools could affect the learning outcomes and argumentation skills of physics education students. Learning outcomes were calculated using a t-test with a significance level of 5%, so the results showed that thit abel t table was 5.66 ≥ 2.07, thus rejecting hypothesis H0 and accept H1: (there is a difference between the pretest and posttest scores) the disputes are 21.61. Then for student argumentation skills obtained an average percentage value of 83.33% from three aspects, namely claim, evidence and reasoning. Suggestions for readers, can be used as reference media for atwood machine practicum tools in learning with different materials and other learning methods.

Penerapan Model PBL berbasis Outdoor Study dalam Peningkatan Keterampilan Berpikir Kritis & Kemampuan Argumentasi Siswa

This study aims to determine the effect of the application of the PBL learning model to the improvement of critical thinking skills and the ability to argue students of SMA Negeri 1 Salem class X even semester� 2018/2019 on the concept of environmental pollution. The research method used is quasi-experimental. The study was conducted in two meetings. Learning activities are divided into two parts, namely learning activities outside the classroom (outdoor study) during the PBL 1-3 phase and learning in the classroom during the PBL 4-5 phase. The results showed� the application of the PBL model based on outdoor study was carried out well� there was an increase in the score of students' critical thinking skills at a pretest score of 18.9 to a posttest of 23.69� the ability of student argumentation in the average experimental class is at level 2, meaning that students already have the ability to submit claims or opinions built by students based on their knowledge and students are able to provide reasons or data to support the claim statement. Control class argumentation ability is at level 1� the positive response of students to learning PBL models based on outdoor studies is 89.4% with very strong criteria.

PENERAPAN PENDEKATAN CONTEXTUAL TEACHING AND LEARNING (CTL) UNTUK MENINGKATKAN KEMAMPUAN MENULIS ARGUMENTASI MAHASISWA CALON GURU

<p>Abstract<br />The purpose of this research was to improve the writing ability of argumentation of STKIP Melawi students.<br />The method used in this research was quasi experimental method with nonequivalent control group design.<br />The results of this study were 1) the average pretest of students' argumentation ability of control class was<br />54,94, while posttes 57,20, while experimental class got pretest average value 51,44, and posttes 80,04; 2)<br />There was no significant difference in the ability to write argumentation on pretest tests between the control<br />group and experimental group, whereas in the posttest there was a significant difference in the ability to write<br />argumentation between the control group and the experimental group.<br />Keywords: the writing ability of argumentation, quasi experimental method, nonequivalent control<br />group design, pretes, posttes.</p>

Using Historical Scientific Controversies to Promote Undergraduates' Argumentation.

The Covid-19 pandemic is the reason why humanity is paying more attention to the importance of regular and rigorous handwashing. Interestingly, in the nineteenth century, regular and rigorous handwashing was a key (and controversial) solution proposed by the Hungarian obstetrician Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis to cut drastically cases of puerperal fever. The purpose of this study was to provide evidence that the case of Semmelweis and puerperal fever—a crucial historical scientific controversy—can be used as a springboard to promote university student argumentation. Our study was inspired by the fact that the Organization for Economic and Cooperative Development (OECD) stressed that more efforts and resources should be invested in promoting argumentation as an essential component for scientifically literate citizens in twenty-first century societies. However, nowadays, argument and debate are virtually absent from university science education. The data was derived from 124 undergraduates’ (64 females and 60 males, 15–30 years old) written responses and audio and video recordings in a university biology course in Colombia. The findings show that the articulation of this historical controversy with decision-making, small-group debate, and whole-class debate activities can be useful for promoting undergraduates’ argumentation. This study contributes to the development of a research-based university science education that can inform the design of an argumentation curriculum for higher education.