Students’ Integrated Science Process Skills and Argumentation in Basic Natural Science Lecture

Authors

  • Findiyani Ernawati Asih Universitas Negeri Surabaya
  • Dian Novita Universitas Negeri Surabaya
  • Ivan Ashif Ardhana IAIN Tulungagung

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.23887/jpp.v55i1.35979

Keywords:

Integrated science process skills, Argumentation, Debate, Basic Natural Science

Abstract

Rapid technological developments allow social studies students to practice i-SPS through practicum methods. This study aims to analyze the integrated science process skills (i-SPS) and the arguments of social studies students. i-SPS through demonstration methods and virtual experiments using pHET simulations, while arguments through debate activities involving the pro group (pseudoscience view) and the contra group (scientific view). The design of this research is a mixed method. The qualitative aspect analyses the i-SPS learning achievement of social studies students who use the rotating learning method. In contrast, the quantitative aspect is the correlation test between the i-SPS with pHET and argumentation. The mean score of i-SPS based on pHET is 83.46, i-SPS based on the demonstration is 55, while the average argumentation score is 77.88. The results of the nonparametric correlation test obtained that rcount 0.175 is more minor than rtable 0.404. So there is no correlation between i-SPS with pHET and argumentation. About 75% of social studies students have the i-SPS combination category, which is not balanced according to pHET and arguments. I-SPS-PHET students do not affect their arguments. Several factors can influence the argumentation of social students, such as experiences about phenomena, information in the digital era, and the characteristics of debates involving extended groups of pros and cons.

References

Aada, K. (2019). Teaching in a Multicultural and Demanding Society. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ), 10(4). https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol10no4.3.

Abdullah, M. Y., Abu-Bakar, N. R., & M.H., M. (2012). Student’s Participation in Classroom:What Motivates Them to Speak Up? Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.08.199.

Ahmad, S. S., Shaari, M. F., Hashim, R., & Kariminia, S. (2015). Conducive Attributes of Physical Learning Environment at Preschool Level for Slow Learners. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.08.138.

Aktamis, H., & Yenice, N. (2010). Determination Of The Science Process Skills And Critical Thinking Skill Levels. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.502.

Ambross, J., Meiring, L., & Blignaut, S. (2014). The Implementation and Development of Science Process Skills in the Natural Sciences: A Case Study of Teachers’ Perceptions. Africa Education Review, 11(3), 459–474. https://doi.org/10.1080/18146627.2014.934998.

Amdany, P., Sularmi, S., & Sriyanto, M. I. (2018). Learning Motivation of Slow Learner in Elementary School. Social, Humanities, and Educational Studies (SHEs): Conference Series, 1(1), 613–618. https://doi.org/10.20961/shes.v1i1.23506.

Anggriani, A., Sarwi, S., & Masturi, M. (2020). The Effectiveness of Guided Discovery in Distance Learning to Improve Scientific Literacy Competencies of Primary School Students. Journal of Primary Education, 9(5), 454–462. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpe.v9i4.42600.

Arantika, J., Saputro, S., & Mulayani, S. (2019). Effectiveness of guided inquiry-based module to improve science process skills Effectiveness of guided inquiry-based module to improve science process skills. International Conference on Mathematics and Science Education, 0–6. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1157/4/042019.

Arslan, A. (2014). Transition between Open and Guided Inquiry Instruction. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Science, 141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.05.071.

Asad, M. M., Gul, J., & Lashari, M. A. (2020). Digital Skills and Literacy among Prospective Teachers of Sukkur Pakistan: A Conceptual Framework. ICTASE, 1(1), 27–36. https://doi.org/10.31098/ictase.v1i1.18.

Atkin, D. J., Hunt, D. S., & Lin, C. A. (2015). Diffusion Theory in the New Media Environment: Toward an Integrated Technology Adoption Model. Mass Communication and Society, 18(5), 623–650. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2015.1066014.

Aydogdu, B. (2015). The investigation of science process skills of science teachers in terms of some variables. Educational Research and Reviews, 10(5).

Bertram, C., Weiss, Z., Zachrich, L., & Ziai, R. (2021). Artificial intelligence in history education. Linguistic content and complexity analyses of student writings in the CAHisT project (Computational assessment of historical thinking). Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100038.

Bervell, B., & Arkorful, V. (2020). LMS-enabled blended learning utilization in distance tertiary education: establishing the relationships among facilitating conditions, voluntariness of use and use behaviour. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-0183-9.

Brooman, S., & Darwent, S. (2014). Measuring the beginning: a quantitative study of the transition to higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 39(9), 1523–1541. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2013.801428.

Cakir, N. ., & Sarikaya, M. (2010). An Evaluation Of Science Process Skills Of The Science Teaching Majors. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.370.

Castillo, M. (2013). The Scientific Method: A Need for Something Better? American Journal of Neuroradiology, 34(9). https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A3401.

Cedillo, J. A., M.A., F., Gomez, & Sanchez. (2019). Actions to be taken in Mexico towards education 4.0 and society 5.0. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), 8(4). https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v8i4.20278.

Clausen, J. M., Borthwick, A. C., & Rutledge, D. (2021). Collaborative research and use of Q methodology to understand technology infusion in teacher preparation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69(3), 1617–1639. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-10018-3.

Dong, K., Dong, X., Jiang, Q., & Zhao, J. (2021). Assessing energy resilience and its greenhouse effect: A global perspective. Energy Economics, 104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105659.

Fadlelmula, F. K., Cakiroglu, E., & Sungur, S. (2015). Developing a structural model on the relationship among motivational beliefs, self-regulated learning strategies, and achievement in mathematics. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(6), 1355–1375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9499-4.

Faize, F. A., Husain, W., & Nisar, F. (2018). A critical review of scientific argumentation in science education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(1), 475–483. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/80353.

Fukuda, K. (2020). Science, technology and innovation ecosystem transformation toward society 5.0. International Journal of Production Economics, 220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.07.033.

Gabriel, V. O., Panisson, A. R., Bordini, R. H., Adamatti, D. F., & Billa, C. Z. (2020). Reasoning in BDI Agents Using Toulmin’s Argumentation Model. Theoretical Computer Science, 805. https://doi.org//10.1016/j.tcs.2019.10.026.

Gregory, R. P. (2022). The effect of atmospheric greenhouse gases on firm value and firm size distribution. Journal of Cleaner Production, 358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131751.

Gultepe, N., & Kilic, Z. (2015). Effect of Scientific Argumentation on the Development of Scientific Process Skills in the Context of Teaching Chemistry. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.12973/ijese.2015.234a.

Gürgil, F. (2018). A Study on Social Studies Teacher Candidates’ Perception of Science, Scientific Research and Scientists. International Journal of Progressive Education, 14(3), 141–160. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2018.146.10.

Hassanien, R. H. E., Ibrahim, M. M., Ghaly, A. E., & Abdelrahman, E. N. (2022). Effect of photovoltaics shading on the growth of chili pepper in controlled greenhouses. Heliyon, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e08877.

Hayden, L. A., Whitley, M. A., Cook, A. L., Dumais, A., Silva, M., & Scherer, A. (2015). An exploration of life skill development through sport in three international high schools. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 7(5), 759–775. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2015.1011217.

He, L., Xue, B., Wang, B., Liu, C., & Porras, D. G. R. de. (2022). Impact of high, low, and non-optimum temperatures on chronic kidney disease in a changing climate, 1990–2019: A global analysis. Environmental Research, 212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2022.113172.

He, W., Zhang, L., & Yuan, C. (2022). Future air temperature projection in high-density tropical cities based on global climate change and urbanization – a study in Singapore. Urban Climate, 42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2022.101115.

Hodosyová, M., Útla, J., Vanyová, M., Vnuková, P., & Lapitková, V. (2015). The Development of Science Process Skills in Physics Education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.184.

Hu, C.-C., Lin, C.-W., Hu, C.-P., Keshebo, D. L., & Huang, S.-H. (2022). Carbon dioxide enrichment of PDMS/PSf composite membranes for solving the greenhouse effect and food crisis. Journal of CO2 Utilization, 61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcou.2022.102011.

Humaira, S. A., & Hurriyah, I. A. (2018). Students ’ perspectives towards self-directed learning out of classroom. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 145, 7–11. https://doi.org/10.2991/iconelt-17.2018.2.

Kim, H. S., & Oh, E. G. (2018). Scaffolding Argumentation in Asynchronous Online Discussion: Using Students’ Perceptions to Refine a Design Framework. International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design, 8(2), 29–43. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJOPCD.2018040103.

Kivunja, C. (2015). Unpacking the Information, Media, and Technology Skills Domain of the New Learning Paradigm. International Journal of Higher Education, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v4n1p166.

Kuala, S. (2020). Implementation of Technology-based Guided Inquiry to Improve TPACK among Prospective Biology Teachers. International Journal of Instruction, 13(2), 33–44. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.1323a.

Lo, J.-H., Lai, Y.-F., & Hsu, T.-L. (2021). The Study of AR-Based Learning for Natural Science Inquiry Activities in Taiwan’s Elementary School from the Perspective of Sustainable Development. Sustainability, 13(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116283.

Maison, Darmaji, Astalini, Kurniawan, D. A., & Indrawati, P. S. (2019). Science process skills and motivation. Humanities and Social Sciences Reviews, 7(5), 48–56. https://doi.org/10.18510/hssr.2019.756.

Maison, M., Haryanto, H., Ernawati, M. D. W., Ningsih, Y., Jannah, N., Puspitasari, T. O., & Putra, D. S. (2020). Comparison of student attitudes towards natural sciences. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 9(1), 54–61. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v9i1.20394.

Margunayasa, I. G., Dantes, N., Marhaeni, A. A. I. N., & Suastra, I. W. (2019). The Effect of Guided Inquiry Learning and Cognitive Style on Science Learning Achievement. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 737–750. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12147a.

Mason, G. (2020). Higher education, initial vocational education and training and continuing education and training: where should the balance lie? Journal of Education and Work, 33(7–8), 468–490. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2020.1755428.

O’Neal, M. A. (2016). Lichenometric dating: Science or pseudo-science?–Comment to the paper published by Osborn, McCarthy, LaBrie, and Burke, Quaternary Research 83 (2015), 1–12. Quaternary Research, 86(2). https://doi.org//10.1016/j.yqres.2016.05.007.

Ogunmokun, O. A., Unverdi-Creig, G. I., Said, H., Avci, T., & Eluwole, K. K. (2020). Consumer Well-Being through Engagement and Innovation in Higher Education: A conceptual Model and Research Propositions. Journal of Public Affairs, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2100.

Osborn, G., McCarthy, D., LaBrie, A., & Burke, R. (2015). Lichenometric dating: Science or pseudo-science? Quaternary Research, 83(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yqres.2014.09.006.

Ozturk, A., & Doganay, A. (2019). Development of Argumentation Skills through Socioscientific Issues in Science Course: A Collaborative Action Research. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.17569/tojqi.453426.

Ping, I. L. L., Halim, L., & Osman, K. (2020). Explicit Teaching of Scientific Argumentation as an Approach in Developing Argumentation Skills, Science Process Skills and Biology Understanding. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 19(2). https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/20.19.276.

Prassida, G. F., & Asfari, U. (2022). A conceptual model for the acceptance of collaborative robots in industry 5.0. Procedia Computer Science, 197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2021.12.118.

Puspita., L. (2019). Pengembangan modul berbasis keterampilan proses sains sebagai bahan ajar dalam pembelajaran biologi Module development based on science process skills as teaching materials in biological learning. Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan IPA, 5(1), 79–87. https://doi.org/10.21831/jipi.v5i1.22530.

Rahayu, S., Bambut, K. E. N., & Fajaroh, F. (2020). Do different discussion activities in developing scientific argumentation affect students’ motivation in chemistry? Cakrawala Pendidikan, 39(3), 679–693. https://doi.org/10.21831/cp.v39i3.32228.

Reyes, V. C., Reading, C., Doyle, H., & Gregory, S. (2017). Integrating ICT into teacher education programs from a TPACK perspective: Exploring perceptions of university lecturers. Computers and Education, 115, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.07.009.

Rizaldi, D. R., Nurhayati, E., & Fatimah, Z. (2020). The Correlation of Digital Literation and STEM Integration to Improve Indonesian Students’ Skills in 21st Century. International Journal of Asian Education, 1(2), 73–80. https://doi.org/10.46966/ijae.v1i2.36.

Sadaf, A., & Johnson, B. L. (2017). Teachers’ Beliefs About Integrating Digital Literacy Into Classroom Practice: An Investigation Based on the Theory of Planned Behavior. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 33(4), 129–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2017.1347534.

Sánchez-Cruzado, C., Santiago Campión, R., & Sánchez-Compaña, M. T. (2021). Teacher digital literacy: The indisputable challenge after covid-19. Sustainability (Switzerland). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041858.

Servitri, M. O., & Trisnawaty, W. (2018). The Development of Inquiry Science Worksheet to Facilitate the Process Skills. Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn), 12(4), 575–580. https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v12i4.8937.

Sharma, M., Luthra, S., Joshi, S., & Kumar, A. (2021). Implementing challenges of artificial intelligence: Evidence from public manufacturing sector of an emerging economy. Government Information Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101624.

Singh, B. (2019). Character education in the 21st century. Journal of Social Studies (JSS), 15(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.21831/jss.v15i1.25226.

Songsil, W., Pongsophon, P., Boonsoong, B., & Clarke, A. (2019). Developing scientific argumentation strategies using revised argument-driven inquiry (rADI) in science classrooms in Thailand. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 5(7). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41029-019-0035-x.

Subali, B., Kumaidiac, Aminah, N. S., & Sumintono, B. (2019). Student achievement based on the use of scientific method in the natural science subject in elementary school. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 8(1), 39–51. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v8i1.16010.

Wahyuningsih, S., Pudyaningtyas, A. R., Nurjanah, N. E., Dewi, N. K., Hafidah, R., Syamsuddin, M. M., & Sholeha, V. (2020). the Utilization of Loose Parts Media in Steam Learning for Early Childhood. Early Childhood Education and Development Journal, 2(2), 1. https://doi.org/10.20961/ecedj.v2i2.46326.

Wulandari, I. G. A. A. (2020). Implementation of the 2013 Curriculum Based on a Scientific Approach (Case Study at SD Cluster II Kintamani). International Journal of Elementary Education, 4(3), 422–430. https://doi.org/10.23887/ijee.v4i3.28172.

Xu, Y., & Cui, G. (2021). Influence of spectral characteristics of the Earth’s surface radiation on the greenhouse effect: Principles and mechanisms. Atmospheric Environment, 244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2020.117908.

Yang, X., Zhang, M., Kong, L., Wang, Q., & Hong, J. C. (2020). The Effects of Scientific Self-efficacy and Cognitive Anxiety on Science Engagement with the “Question-Observation-Doing-Explanation” Model during School Disruption in COVID-19 Pandemic. Journal of Science Education and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09877-x.

Yildiz, C., & Yildiz, T. G. (2021). Exploring The Relationship Between Creative Thinking And Scientific Process Skills Of Preschool Children. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100795.

Zee, M., & Koomen, H. M. Y. (2016). Teacher Self-Efficacy and Its Effects on Classroom Processes, Student Academic Adjustment, and Teacher Well-Being. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 981–1015. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626801.

Downloads

Published

2022-04-20

How to Cite

Asih, F. E., Novita, D., & Ardhana, I. A. (2022). Students’ Integrated Science Process Skills and Argumentation in Basic Natural Science Lecture . Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Pengajaran, 55(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.23887/jpp.v55i1.35979

Issue

Vol. 55 No. 1 (2022): APRIL 2022

Section

Articles

License

Authors who publish with Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pengajaran agree to the following terms:
  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. (See The Effect of Open Access)