Development and Implementation of Students' Scientific Argumentation Skills Test in Acid-Base Chemistry

Abstract

This study aimed to develop and validate Scientific Argumentation Skills Test (SAST) and investigate the 11th-grade students' performance in scientific argumentation skills on acid-base chemistry. The research design used was research and development, followed by descriptive research. Research and development were carried out to obtain an instrument of SAST, and descriptive research was used to describe students' argumentation skills in acid-base chemistry. Participants in this study were 328 11th-grade students of state high schools in East Java, Indonesia. The research and development of SAST consisted of five steps, namely literature review, items development, expert judgment, pilot project, and finalization of instruments. Expert judgment involved three chemistry education experts, while the pilot project involved 151 students, and the identification of students' scientific argumentation skills involved 177 students. Data about expert assessments, student responses to the pilot project, and student answers to the application of SAST were analyzed descriptively. The SAST produced in the research and development steps consisted of parts A (10 items) and part B (7 items), with Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficients of 0.888 and 0.758. The students' performance in scientific argumentation skills showed that the average score of students' performance to determine the argument's components was 80.53% (excellent category). The average score of students' performance to write an argument was 55.42% (moderate category). The implication of the study that the students' scientific argumentation skills must be explicitly trained in learning.

Application of the Argument-Driven Inquiry Learning Model in Stimulating Students' Scientific Argumentation Skills on Acid-Base Material

“…At the first level, students can only submit a claim without providing evidence and reasons to support the claim that has been stated in the answer choices. To make a claim, students do not need to think critically, but students only need to recognize, remember, understand, classify, and apply their knowledge (Parlan et al, 2020). The second level of argumentation already provides evidence and reasons to support a claim but does not provide a rebuttal.…”

Connected learning: An approach for teaching nature of science aspects and argumentation components

“…However, according to Lam et al (2018), the major challenge students may probably face in their argumentative writing is their ability to organize and formulate their arguments. For instance, most students find it challenging to explain why a piece of evidence can support a particular claim (Parlan et al, 2020; Walker et al, 2019). Lammers et al (2019) also found that most students find it challenging to understand the rhetorical meaning of qualifiers, and hence, they do not use a qualifier in their conclusion of an argument.…”

Implementasi Instrumen Asesmen Argumentasi Ilmiah Materi Laju Reaksi

“…Namun, sedikit literatur yang tersedia tentang studi pengembangan tes argumentasi ilmiah dan survei ketrampilan argumentasi siswa terutama pada kimia. Instrumen dalam kimia saat ini ada untuk kesetimbangan kimia, asam basa, dan hidrolisis garam Parlan et al, 2020). Belum ada penelitian untuk mengembangkan instrumen argumentasi tentang laju reaksi dan menyelidiki kemampuan argumentasi siswa pada topik tersebut.. Untuk itu, penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengembangkan tes argumentasi ilmiah yang valid dan reliabel pada laju reaksi dan menginvestigasi keterampilan argumentasi ilmiah siswa.…”

“…Hasil juga menunjukkan bahwa siswa belum terampil dalam menjelaskan mengapa bukti dapat mendukung klaim. Temuan ini sejalan dengan penelitian Sadler (2004), Sampson & Clark (2009), dan Parlan et al (2020). Ketika mereka memberikan bukti yang tidak tepat, maka penjelasan yang dibangun tidak berkesinambungan dengan klaim yang dinyatakan.…”