Abstract. Argumentation is one factor that can help improve critical thinking skills. Arguing means to defend statements with the various data, denials, evidence, and reinforcement that support the statement. The research aimed to capture the quality of argument skills by students in grade 12 high school students and in postgraduate student on social-scientific issues of cancer. Both group subjects are not in the same school or institution, chosen purposively with the subject of 39 high school students of grade 12 in one district of West Java and 13 students of Biology education postgraduate in one of University in West Java -Indonesia. The results of the quality structure of arguments in both subject groups show the same pattern, which is claim -warrant -and ground, with the quality of counterclaim aspects on the postgraduate students look better than grade 12 students. This provides an illustration that the ability in argumentation between students and teachers in the socio-scientific issue of cancer should be evaluate so that the learning process would be more refined in schools.
Genetics is one of the most important concepts in understanding Biology. Even though it is now widely applied in various socio-scientific issues, often, it also causes debate in the society, especially in the learning process. Students’ argumentation in addressing socio-scientific issues that arise can be used as an assessment to see how students think in supporting or denying their claims. Utilize the case study on 21 high school students in one of West Java public school; the study aims to see students’ rebuttal ability and the genetic concept they use to support their denial. The results showed that 34.92% students giving rebuttals, with 14.29% of them provide conceptual support that relevant to genetics, while another 47.62% students provide a general Biology conceptual support, 14.29% students provide a misconception of genetics, and 23.81% using an irrelevant concept. It shows that it is important to do the learning that supports the growth of rebuttal ability in the learning process so that students’ critical thinking ability becomes better, especially in understanding the genetic concepts in school and social life.
This study aims to reveal whether the use of a learning model Dialogical Argumentation Instructional Model (DAIM) can improve the student’s ability to argue by using the concept of genetics in maintaining opinion using socio scientific issues. The research method uses mixed method, with the number of students studied as many as 36 students and 1 Biology teacher. The socio-scientific issue rose was about the use of mutant organisms and the acceleration of evolution with the help of biotechnology on transgenic corn. The results obtained that the ability to understand material rose between 1 - 14 points; there is an increase in the complexity of the structure of argumentation to level 6, and although it is low, the use of the concept of genetics as a basis for opposing and defending opinions can be seen.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.