This study aims to determine the differences in the argumentation ability of students in high school with different accreditation ratings. The method used is a survey with an ex post facto research design and a sample selection technique using purposive sampling. The results of the student's argumentative ability test were analyzed statistically with the ANOVA test with a significance level of 5% and the data from interviews and teacher questionnaires were analyzed descriptively. The results showed that the argumentation ability of students in schools with accreditation ratings A was significantly different from those with accreditation ratings B and C. In addition, the argumentation ability of students in schools with accreditation rating B was significantly different from those with accreditation rating C. In conclusion, the average value of argumentation ability of students in high school with accreditation ratings of A, B and C on the subject matter of Animalia has a significant difference.
Keywords: Accreditation, Animalia, Argumentation, Scientific Approach
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.