PROPORTION: CLAIM, REBUTTAL AND BACKING DATA BASED ON TEACHER QUESTIONS AS REASONING INDICATOR OF PROBLEM BASED LEARNING IN HIGHSCHOOL SYSTEM REPRODUCTIONS

S. Widoretno, S. Dwiastuti, S. Sajidan

Abstract

The reseach purpose is to compare learning proportion of the students based on arguments to learners Claim which is supported by facts, data and theories between conventional learning and PBL as the answers for teacher questions. Research Procedure began with 4 times biology teachers discussion workshops to compile PBL learning plan to be used on treatment class. 61 participants with 30 in control class and 31 in treatment class. Reasoning calculation based on arguments during communication in form of the answers to teacher questions. Basic Grouping of Learning is : Claim Rebuttal (CR), Claim Data (CD), Claim Backing (CB) and Claim (C). Results indicates that: C decreases during PBL learning; CB increases during PBL; CD  doesn’t exhibit real change during PBL. PBL utilization needs the readiness and competence of the teachers which influences the reasoning quality of the learners.

Keywords

Claim; Claim rebuttal; Claim Backing; PBL; arguments; reasoning

Full Text:

PDF

References

Acar, Ö., Patton, B. R., & White, A. L. (2015). Prospective Secondary Science Teachers’ Argumentation Skills and the Interaction of These Skills with Their Conceptual Knowledge. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(9), 8.

Allen, D., & Tanner, K. (2003). Approaches to cell biology teaching: learning content in context—problem-based learning. Cell Biology Education, 2(2), 73–81.

Argote, L., & Miron-Spektor, E. (2011). Organizational learning: From experience to knowledge. Organization Science, 22(5), 1123–1137.

Berland, L. K., & Hammer, D. (2012). Framing for scientific argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(1), 68–94.

Ford, M. J. (2012). A dialogueic account of sense-making in scientific argumentation and reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 30(3), 207–245.

Garcia-Mila, M., Gilabert, S., Erduran, S., & Felton, M. (2013). The effect of argumentative task goal on the quality of argumentative discourse. Science Education, 97(4), 497–523.

Giannakos, M. N., Doukakis, S., Pappas, I. O., Adamopoulos, N., & Giannopoulou, P. (2015). Investigating teachers’ confidence on technological pedagogical and content knowledge: an initial validation of TPACK scales in K-12 computing education context. Journal of Computers in Education, 2(1), 43–59.

Govier, T. (2013). A practical study of argument. Cengage Learning. Retrieved from https://www.google.com/books?hl=id&lr=&id=nUMWAAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR3&dq=support+to+low+claim+as+argument++in+problem+based+learning&ots=xgcf00--aQ&sig=LeRPsejUGRfHMhFInOFwEk26iZg

Harris, J. B., & Hofer, M. J. (2011). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in action: A descriptive study of secondary teachers’ curriculum-based, technology-related instructional planning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(3), 211–229.

Harris, J., & Hofer, M. (2016). Planning for Deep Learning Using TPACK-based Learning Activity Types. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (Vol. 2016, pp. 4832–4839). Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/172101/proceedings_172101.pdf

Hung, W. (2016). All PBL Starts Here: The Problem. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 10(2), 2.

Jonassen, D. H., & Hung, W. (2015). All problems are not equal: implications for problem-based learning. Essential Readings in Problem-Based Learning: Exploring and Extending the Legacy of Howard S. Barrows, 17–41.

Kim, M., & Roth, W.-M. (2014). Argumentation as/in/for dialogueical relation: A case study from elementary school science. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 9(4), 300–321.

Opfer, V. D., & Pedder, D. (2011). Conceptualizing teacher professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 376–407.

Osborne, J. (2010). Arguing to learn in science: The role of collaborative, critical discourse. Science, 328(5977), 463–466.

Özgelen, S. (2012). Students’ science process skills within a cognitive domain framework. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 8(4), 283–292.

Reed, C., & Rowe, G. (2005). Translating Toulmin diagrams: Theory neutrality in argument representation. Argumentation, 19(3), 267–286.

Simonneaux, L. (2007). Argumentation in Science Education: An Overview. In Argumentation in science education (pp. 179–199). Springer. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2_9

Tan, O.-S. (2007). Problem-based learning pedagogies: psychological processes and enhancement of intelligences. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 6(2), 101–114.

Tawfik, A. A., Trueman, R. J., & Lorz, M. M. (2013). Designing a PBL environment using the 3C3R method. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 4(1). Retrieved from http://scholarworks.dlib.indiana.edu/journals/index.php/ijdl/article/view/3151

Turiman, P., Omar, J., Daud, A. M., & Osman, K. (2012). Fostering the 21 st Century Skills through Scientific Literacy and Science Process Skills. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 59, 110–116.

Widoretno, S., Ramli, M., Ariyanto, J., Santoso, S., Atika, G. A., & others. (2016). The Role of Lesson Study to Improve Posing Question Skills of Teacher and Students in Problem Based Learning. In Proceeding of International Conference on Teacher Training and Education (Vol. 1). Retrieved from http://www.jurnal.fkip.uns.ac.id/index.php/ictte/article/view/7637

DOI: https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v5i2.7182

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Bookmark and Share