Profil Kemampuan Argumentasi Lisan Berbasis Socioscientific Issues Mahasiswa Pendidikan IPA pada Mata Kuliah Mikrobiologi

A. Taufik, Liska Berlian, Atep Iman, Risa Tarisa
{"title":"Profil Kemampuan Argumentasi Lisan Berbasis Socioscientific Issues Mahasiswa Pendidikan IPA pada Mata Kuliah Mikrobiologi","authors":"A. Taufik, Liska Berlian, Atep Iman, Risa Tarisa","doi":"10.33369/pendipa.6.3.832-838","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to determine the profile of students' oral argumentation skills based on Socioscientific Issues in the Microbiology course. This type of research is a descriptive study in order to obtain an overview of the quality of oral arguments of sixth semester students. The sampling technique used was purposive sampling, totaling 37 students of science class 2017. The instruments used were audio recordings and anecdotal notes. The assessment of the quality of students' oral arguments is based on the Toulmin's Argumentation Pattern (TAP) pattern which consists of claim, data, warrant, backing, and rebuttal elements. The results showed that science students had the quality of oral argumentation which was still at level 1 where student arguments only consist of simple claims with opposing claims obtaining a percentage of 12%,, level 2 had a percentage rate of 88% while level 3%, level 4% and level 5% of 0% means scientific argumentation ability science students are still relatively low. This finding will be the basis for researchers to evaluate the learning program that has been applied in the Microbiology course and become the basis for further research related to learning strategies in improving the oral argumentation skills of prospective science teachers.","PeriodicalId":52822,"journal":{"name":"Pendipa","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pendipa","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33369/pendipa.6.3.832-838","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This study aims to determine the profile of students' oral argumentation skills based on Socioscientific Issues in the Microbiology course. This type of research is a descriptive study in order to obtain an overview of the quality of oral arguments of sixth semester students. The sampling technique used was purposive sampling, totaling 37 students of science class 2017. The instruments used were audio recordings and anecdotal notes. The assessment of the quality of students' oral arguments is based on the Toulmin's Argumentation Pattern (TAP) pattern which consists of claim, data, warrant, backing, and rebuttal elements. The results showed that science students had the quality of oral argumentation which was still at level 1 where student arguments only consist of simple claims with opposing claims obtaining a percentage of 12%,, level 2 had a percentage rate of 88% while level 3%, level 4% and level 5% of 0% means scientific argumentation ability science students are still relatively low. This finding will be the basis for researchers to evaluate the learning program that has been applied in the Microbiology course and become the basis for further research related to learning strategies in improving the oral argumentation skills of prospective science teachers.
对微生物学研究生科学教育的口头辩论能力进行分析
本研究旨在以微生物学课程的社会科学议题为基础,探讨学生的口头辩论技巧。这种类型的研究是一种描述性研究,以获得第六学期学生口头辩论质量的概述。抽样方法为目的抽样,共选取2017级理科生37名。使用的工具是录音和轶事笔记。对学生口头辩论质量的评估基于图尔敏论证模式(TAP)模式,该模式由主张、数据、保证、支持和反驳元素组成。结果表明,理科生的口头论证质量仍处于1级,学生的论证仅由简单的主张组成,反对主张的百分比为12%,2级的百分比为88%,而3%,4%和5%的0%的水平表明理科生的科学论证能力仍然较低。这一发现将成为研究人员评估微生物学课程中应用的学习计划的基础,并成为进一步研究提高未来科学教师口头论证技能的学习策略的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信