Designing Science Learning Domains for 2e (Twice Exceptional) Students

2e (twice-exceptional) students are gifted and differently-abled, so they need specific learning domains according to their needs. This research aimed to design science learning domains for a 2e (gifted and blind) student to enhance his critical thinking in his special learning needs in Ankara province in Turkey in the 2020-2021 academic year's first term. Single-subject research was employed. The 2e student was ten years old. Through the application process, the 2e student argued 3D modeled Schrödinger's cat thought experiment. The main application's intervention was conducted to provide the research's internal validity since it was single-subject research. Through the intervention application, the 2e student argued 3D modeled Schrödinger's twin cats thought experiment. We noted both social dialectic argumentation processes as texts, and these texts were used as data collecting tools. Descriptive analysis was utilized to gathered data. The study showed that the 2e student could construct arguments containing claim, data, warrant, and weak rebuttals in the main application, which meant his argumentation quality level was average, so his critical thinking too. In contrast, the 2e student-constructed arguments containing claim, data, weak rebuttal, and rebuttal meant his argumentation quality level enhanced his critical thinking.

EVALUASI KUALITAS ARGUMEN PADA ARTIKEL JURNAL

Argumentasi sangat penting dalam artikel ilmiah. Oleh karena itu, penelitian ini bertujuan mengungkap kualitas argumentasi dalam artikel ilmiah pada jurnal dengan scope pendidikan bahasa Indonesia. Kualitas jurnal akan dievaluasi berdasarkan perspektif Toulmin. Evaluasi dipaparkan dalam pembagian kualitas argumentasi, struktur varian yang tampak dalam paragraf argumentasi, dan peringkat kualitas argumentasi pada jurnal terindeks sinta 2 sampai 6. Untuk mengungkap kualitas argumen tersebut, peneliti menggunakan pendekatan mixed method. Hasil temuan dari penelitian ini, pertama: secara umum kualitas argumen dalam artikel yang berfokus pada pendidikan bahasa Indonesia masih rendah. Argumen secara dominan disajikan dengan struktur P-D. Kedua, terdapat empat varian struktur argumen yang ditemukan, yaitu: P-D, P-D-J, P-D-T, dan P-D-J-T. Ketiga, kualitas argumen berdasarkan nilai rerata konversi menunjukkan jurnal terakreditasi sinta 2 memiliki kualitas masuk pada klasifikasi sedang. Sementara artikel pada jurnal terakreditasi 3, 4, 5, 6 dan tidak terakreditasi memiliki kualitas argumen tergolong pada kategori rendah.Kata kunci: kualitas argumen, wacana, perspektif toulminEVALUATING THE QUALITY ARGUMENT IN JOURNAL ARTICLESAbstrakArguments are very important in scientific articles. This study aims to reveal the quality of arguments in scientific articles in journals with the scope of Indonesian language education. The quality of the journal will be evaluated based on the Toulmin’s perspective. Evaluation is described in the division of argumentation quality, variant structure that appears in the argumentation paragraphs, and argumentation quality ratings in indexed journals 2 to 6. To reveal the quality of the arguments, the researcher uses a mixed method approach. The findings of this study are as follows. First: in general, the quality of the arguments in articles that focus on Indonesian language education is still low. The argument is predominantly presented with a P-D structure. Second, there are four variants of the argument structure found, namely: P-D, P-D-J, P-D-T, and P-D-J-T. Third, the quality of the argument based on the average conversion value shows that the Sinta 2 accredited journals have medium classification. Meanwhile, articles in accredited journals 3, 4, 5, 6 and un-accredited have the quality of their arguments in the low category.Keywords: quality of arguments, discourse, Toulmin's perspective

Improving Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Content Knowledge and Argumentation Quality through Socio-Scientific Issues-Based Modules: An Action Research Study

This paper aimed to assess improvements in content knowledge and argumentation quality of pre-service science teachers (PST) through a socio-scientific issues-based (SSI-based) module course. The study was designed as action research with 25 PSTs. Data collection instruments were an energy-related content knowledge questionnaire and video recordings. An energy-related content knowledge rubric was used to evaluate the content knowledge of PSTs, while their argumentation quality was analyzed using a video analysis inventory. The module course was completed in eight weeks. Findings showed that the SSI-based teaching modules course improved energy-related content knowledge with all PSTs increasing by a minimum of one criterion on the rubric. Although the number of arguments decreased weekly, the argumentation quality also increased. Thus, it can be inferred that SSI-based module teaching is a practical tool to teach energy-related content knowledge and argumentation qualities. The study suggests that action research can contribute to developing an effective learning environment. Further studies that include the actual practices of PSTs as they reflect and revise their learning are indicated.

Pengaruh pembelajaran POGIL berkonteks socioscientific issues terhadap kualitas keterampilan berargumentasi siswa SMA pada materi ikatan kimia

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menguji pengaruh pembelajaran POGIL berkonteks SSI terhadap kualitas argumentasi siswa kelas X. Rancangan penelitian adalah mixed-methods. Data kuantitatif berupa tingkat kualitas argumentasi siswa yang diperoleh melalui instrumen tes keterampilan berargumentasi. Data kualitatif berupa hasil wawancara siswa tentang sikap siswa terhadap SSI dan argumentasi siswa pada proses pembelajaran. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa terdapat perbedaan keterampilan berargumentasi antara siswa yang dibelajarkan dengan POGIL berkonteks SSI dengan siswa yang dibelajarkan dengan POGIL dan konvensional. Pembelajaran POGIL berkonteks SSI lebih efektif dalam membelajarkan keterampilan berargumentasi siswa dibandingkan dua kelas lainnya berdasarkan nilai rata-rata kualitas argumentasi. The effect of POGIL with socioscientific issues context for high school argumentation skills quality in chemical bonding AbstractThe aim of the study was to examine the influence of POGIL with SSI context on the quality of high school students argumentation. The research design was mixed-methods. Quantitative data in the form of level of students’ argumentation quality collected by instrument of argument skills. Qualitative was the students’ transcript of interview about their attitude toward SSI and their argumentation in process of learning.The results showed that there was a difference in the skills of argumentation between the students who taught with the POGIL with SSI context and the students taught by POGIL and conventional instruction. POGILS with SSI context was more effective in teaching students’ argumentation skills compared to the other classes based on the average score of student argumentation.

Using Socioscientific Issues to Enhance Evidence-Based Reasoning Among Middle School Students

This study investigated the implementation of a socioscientific issue curricular unit that was designed to enhance evidence-based reasoning among middle school students. Forty-three middle school students (11-12 years old; 20 males, 23 females) from a summer enrichment program operated by a non-profit organization in the northeastern United States participated in this study. The duration of this curricular unit took place over five consecutive 1-hour period blocks. The researchers utilized qualitative procedures to analyze students' abilities to engage in evidence-based reasoning and the impact it might have on students' argumentation quality on whether the air we breathe makes us sick. Comparison of the findings from pre-test and post-test indicate that students were able to use evidence-based reasoning to enhance their argumentation quality. The results from this investigation suggest that perhaps the use of socioscientific issues as a critical pedagogical tool does enhance students' abilities to engage in evidence-based reasoning.

Quality of Argumentation Models

This study investigated the effectiveness of updated argumentation quality criteria. It evaluated the scale and quality of selected argumentation models judged by the new criteria. Effectiveness concerned content validity, reliability, and practicality of the criteria. The argumentation models were regarded as possessing good quality when they featured important elements in the criteria and received high scores. Five argumentation models were purposefully selected from an argumentative writing course. The models were evaluated by three evaluators with expertise in academic writing. Analysis confirmed the effectiveness of the quality criteria and scale. It addressed all important concerns in evaluation of argumentation; evaluation scores were in accordance with each other, and the important argumentation elements carried equivalent weight. Only three of the models received a quality score of 4 on a scale of 0 (null) to 5 (highest), because they did not feature all quality elements required by the criteria. The updated framework and argumentation models can be further employed for teaching, learning and evaluating argumentation.