Effect of Web-Based Simulation on Indonesian High School Students' Scientific Argumentatio, Study notes of Technology

Download Effect of Web-Based Simulation on Indonesian High School Students' Scientific Argumentatio and more Study notes Technology in PDF only on Docsity! International Journal on Social and Education Sciences Volume 1, Issue 1, 2019 ISSN: 2688-7061 (Online) 16 Relationship between Analytical Thinking Skill and Scientific Argumentation Using PBL with Interactive CK 12 Simulation Riki Perdana Yogyakarta State University, Indonesia, rikifisika95@gmail.com Jumadi Jumadi Yogyakarta State University, Indonesia Dadan Rosana Yogyakarta State University, Indonesia Abstract: This study was conducted in order to analyze the relation between analytical thinking skill and scientific argumentation in physics learning. The study was conducted with the interactive CK 12 simulation about optics. The sample of the study consists of 28 randomly selected students in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. The data was collected using pre and post-test after learning in the class. Data was analyzed with descriptive statistic instruments along with t-test, MANOVA test and Correlation Analysis. Research findings show that analytical thinking skill and scientific argumentation of the students are rather low. Problem based learning with web based simulation can enhance student’s scientific argumentation and analytical thinking skill. Also, the correlation analysis conducted to determine the relationship between analyses analytical thinking skill and scientific argumentation. The results indicate that there is a statistical significant relationship between the analytical thinking skill and scientific argumentation. Keywords: Analytical thinking, Scientific argumentation Introduction The thinking ability of students in Indonesia is still in the low category. Based on the results of the 2012 PISA survey Indonesian students were only in 64 positions from 65 countries in terms of mathematical and scientific abilities (OECD, 2012). Results that were not much different in 2015, Indonesian students were in 60th position from 74 countries (OECD, 2015). These results indicate that the ability of Indonesian students in the field of mathematics and science is currently lacking. There are several factors that cause student achievements are still low. Haiti conducted a meta-analysis to find out the biggest causes that affect student achievement. From the findings, it can be concluded that the biggest factor that influences student achievement is the teacher's ability with effect size 1.62 (Haiti, 2017). But at this time many found that the ability of teachers in Indonesia to manage classes was not good. Even, Perdana, Sutrisno and Mahmuda (2016) found that all teachers who were participants experienced misconceptions and were didaktogenic in understanding physics. Based on interviews with several physics teachers, it was found that the application of technology in learning is still rarely applied. Using technology in learning has given positive impact for the students and teachers.. The students’ conceptual understanding as well as interest was increased, the college mentors earned valuable teaching and mentoring experience and the teacher enjoyed more one-on-one time as well as assistance with students when study using online physics lab (Gryczka, Klementowicz, Sharrock, & Montclare, 2016). Using technology such videos is very useful for establishing concepts, understanding course content and increasing general knowledge in physics learning (Chen, Wei, & Li2016). Beside that, learning with game environment can increase student’s motivation and willingness to learn (Borrego, Fernández, Blanes, & Robles, 2017). Technology in learning can be effective in supporting student inquiry learning ( Williams, Nguyen, & Mangan, 2017). So, using technology in this era must be done by all the school. Learning with technology can increase student achievement in 21st century skills. Qian and Clark (2016) found that a game-based learning approach might be effective in facilitating students’ 21st century skill development. A strong body of evidence suggests that online learning are spaces in which a variety of 21st International Journal on Social and Education Sciences (IJonSES) 17 Century Skills can be fostered (Sourmelis, Ioannou, & Zaphiris, 2017). But, although teachers see the impact of technology for teaching and learning, they require more guidance on what constitutes 21st-century skills and how to effectively integrate technology (O'Neal, Gibson, & Cotten, 2017). In this paper, we only discussed about two 21st-century skills, there are scientific argumentation and analytical thinking skill student after study using physics on line learning. To support applying technology in 21st century learning, there are several learning model that can be used effectively such as PjBl, PBL, and Inquiry Learning Model. Project-Based Learning (PjBL) is an innovative approach to learning that teaches a multitude of strategies critical for success in the twenty-first century (Bell, 2010). Learning in the online PBL had a significant effect on increasing the critical thinking skills whereas this is one of the 21st-century skills. Inquiry-based learning activities using social network and cloud computing is appropriate for application to real practice and helps student to develop the knowledge and skills that they will require to achieve success in the information age (Thaiposri & Wannapiroon, 2015). In this paper, we use problem based learning using online simulation to increase student ability in scientific argumentation and analytical thinking skill. The relationship between these skills was discussed. Literature Review Analytical Thinking Skill Analytical thinking skill was very necessary to be used in working as well as daily life in the 21st century by students (Paziotopoulos & Kroll, 2004). Analytical thinking involves a further element of inquiry and situations with less well-defined parameters and outcomes and its necessary when an ambiguous situation requires the learner to identify or create a problem to solve (Robbins, 2011). It is a part of the problem solving process, considered essential for providing the skills required to prepare children for a more complex life and work environment in 21st century (Thaneerananon, Triampo, & Nokkaew, 2016). Analytical thinking involves abilities to (1) take apart a problem and understand its parts, (2) explain the functioning of a system, the reasons why something happens, or the procedures of solving a problem, (3) compare and contrast two or more things, or (4) evaluate and critique the characteristics of something (Sternberg, 2006). Scientific Argumentation One important practice that helps shape the nature of scientific knowledge, is argumentation (Sampson, & Blanchard, 2012). Students’ poor argumentation has become a concern in science education (Acar, Turkmen, & Roychoudhury, 2010). So as a learning goal, argumentation is viewed as an essential scientific practice (Mc Neill, & Knight, 2013). Research on students’ scientific argumentation has thus shifted in focus from identifying and teaching decontextualized skills of argument that students ‘‘lack,’’ to exploring the contexts in which students do and do not engage in argumentation (Berland, & Hammer, 2012). The quality of scientific argumentation is given in Table 1. Table 1. Quality of Scientific Argumentation (Erduran, Simon, & Osborne, 2004) Quality Characteristic of argumentation Level 1 Argumentation consists of arguments that are a simple claim versus a counter-claim or a claim versus a claim Level 2 Argumentation has arguments consisting of a claim versus a claim with either data, warrants or backings but do not contain any rebuttals Level 3 Argumentation has arguments with a series of claims or counter-claims with either data, warrants or backings with the occasional weak rebuttal Level 4 Argumentation shows arguments with a claim with a clearly identifiable rebuttal. Such an argument may have several claims and counter-claims Level 5 Argumentation displays an extended argument with more than one rebuttal Toulmin (1958) specify the components in scientific argumentation from data to a conclusion or knowledge claim. The main components identified are:  Data: these are the facts that those involved in the argument appeal to in support of their claim.  Claim: this is the conclusion whose merits are to be established.  Warrants: these are the reasons (rules, principles, etc.) that are proposed to justify the connections between the data and the knowledge claim, or conclusion. International Journal on Social and Education Sciences (IJonSES) 20 Table 6. Average Score Gained from the Analytical Thinking Skill Variable Model Mean N Std Deviation Std. Error Mean Pretest 22.92 27 14.294 2.751 Posttest 46.06 27 19.775 3.806 According to Table 6, the average score of the participants are all below 50. According to the scale, in order to claim using PBL with web based simulation was effective (medium significantly) to increase analytical thinking skills students. A Multivariate Analysis of Variance was conducted in order to determine whether or not there is a significant difference between scientific argumentations level and analytical thinking skill, the results of which are shown in Table 7, Table 8 and Table 9. Table 7. Levene’s Test of Equality of Error Variances Model F df1 df2 Sig Pretest 6.963 2 78 .002 Posttest 4.431 2 78 .015 According to Table 7, there is statistically significant difference between pretest and posttest scores of student achievements (scientific argumentation and analytical thinking). For posttest, using PBL with web based simulation p=0.015<0.05 and pretest with p=0.002<0.05. Table 8 shows the significant difference between pretest and posttest PBL with web based simulation. Table 8. Multivariate Test Effect F dF Sig Intercept Pillai’s Trace 3.366E2a 77.000 <.001 Wilks Lambda 3.366E2a 77.000 <.001 Hotelling’s Trace 3.366E2a 77.000 <.001 Roy’s largest Root 3.366E2a 77.000 <.001 Variable Pillai’s Trace 7.033 156.000 <.001 Wilks Lambda 7.699a 154.000 <.001 Hotelling’s Trace 8.358 152.000 <.001 Roy’s largest Root 17.152b 78.000 <.001 According to Table 8, there is statistically significant difference pretest and posttest score with PBL using web based simulation (p<0.05) about scientific argumentation, analytical thinking and student achievement. Based on the results, the most significant variable are described it shown in Table 9. Table 9. The Most Significant Variable Model Variable 1 Variable 2 Mean difference Pretest Analytical thinking Scientific argumentation 9.95 Posttest (PBL with web based simulation) Scientific argumentation Analytical thinking 0.42 According Table 9, mean difference score of analytical thinking skill to scientific argumentation is 9.95. It shows that pretest of analytical thinking skill is better than scientific argumentation. PBL with web based simulation can effectively to increase student scientific argumentation skill more than analytical thinking skill (Mean difference=0.42). The relationship between scientific argumentation and analytical thinking skills of the participants was examined. Correlation analysis is shown in Table 10. According to Table 10, there is significant relationship between scientific argumentation level and analytical thinking skills (p=0.029<0.05). Table 10. Relationship between Scientific Argumentation Level and Analytical Thinking Skills Variable n r p scientific argumentation level 27 0.421 0.029 analytical thinking skills 27 Discussion and Conclusion International Journal on Social and Education Sciences (IJonSES) 21 This study, which aimed at determining the relationship between analytical thinking skill and scientific argumentation level of high school students, was conducted with the pretest and posttest score. One of the most important research findings suggest that scientific argumentation levels of participants that are in the sample are rather low. This finding is in line with other research results which analyze scientific argumentation level. Aydeniz and Ozdilek (2015) showed that majority of participants (teachers) lacked an adequate understanding of science and scientific argumentation. Many of participants that did not provide any genuine support for an explanation when give scientific argumentation (Sampson, & Blanchard, 2012). It can be happen because teacher had difficulty applying the reasoning component of argumentation to classroom practice, and found designing argumentation questions to be challenging (Mc Neill, & Knight, 2013). Findings show that using PBL with web based simulation is effective to enhance student’s scientific argumentation and analytical thinking skill. This finding is similar with the study results of Wang (2014) Iordanou and Constantinou (2015), Acar and Patton (2016), Akpinar, Ardac, and Amuce (2015), Spires (2015) indicate that web base learning effective to enhance student’s scientific argumentation and analytical thinking skill. The Correlation Analysis conducted to determine relationship between scientific argumentation skill and analytical thinking skill students. Research findings suggest that there is a significant relationship between scientific argumentation skill and analytical thinking skill students. This finding is in line with the study results of Sourmelis, Ioannou, and Zaphiris (2017), Lundström, Hamfelt, and Nilsson (2005) Weng, Lin, and She (2017), Andersson (2016), Van Eemeren, de Glopper, Grootendorst, and Oostdam (2015), Wagemans (2016), Kuhar and Jeznik (2018) indicate that there is a significant relationship between scientific argumentation and analytical thinking skill. Finally, according to the findings, it can be asserted that the scientific argumentation levels and analytical thinking skill the participants are rather low. To enhance these skills, teachers can use PBL with web based simulations in the classroom. In addition, the relationship between scientific argumentation skill and analytical thinking skill can be found in web based simulation learning environment as 21st century skills. Recommendations For the future research, can use others model and web site simulation to enhance 21st century skills and examine the relationship between them. Acknowledgements This study was supported by Physics Education, Graduate School Program, Yogyakarta State University. References Acar, O., Turkmen, L., & Roychoudhury, A. (2010). Student difficulties in socio‐scientific argumentation and decision‐making research findings: Crossing the borders of two research lines. International Journal of Science Education, 32(9), 1191-1206. Acar, O., & Patton, B. R. (2016). Examination of learning equity among prospective science teachers who are concrete, formal and postformal reasoners after an argumentation-based inquiry course. Australian Journal of Teacher Education (Online), 41(2), 69. Akpinar, Y., Ardac, D., & Amuce, N. E. (2015). Computer versus computer and human support in an argumentation-based science learning environment. Journal of Online Learning Research, 1(2), 137-161. Andersson, E. (2016). Producing and Consuming the Controversial–A Social Media Perspective on Political Conversations in the Social Science Classroom. JSSE-Journal of Social Science Education, 15(1), 6-16. Aydeniz, M., & Ozdilek, Z. (2015). Assessing Pre-Service Science Teachers' Understanding of Scientific Argumentation: What Do They Know about Argumentation after Four Years of College Science?. Science Education International, 26(2), 217-239. Barber, W., King, S., & Buchanan, S. (2015). Problem Based Learning and Authentic Assessment in Digital Pedagogy: Embracing the Role of Collaborative Communities. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 13(2), 59-67. Bell, S. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future. The Clearing House, 83(2), 39- 43. International Journal on Social and Education Sciences (IJonSES) 22 Berland, L. K., & Hammer, D. (2012). Framing for scientific argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(1), 68-94. Borrego, C., Fernández, C., Blanes, I., & Robles, S. (2017). Room escape at class: Escape games activities to facilitate the motivation and learning in computer science. JOTSE, 7(2), 162-171. Buyukozturk, S., Cakmak, E., Kilic, A., Ozcan, E., Karadeniz, S. & Demirel, F. (2010). Scientific Research Methods. Ankara: Pegem Publications. Cant, R. P., & Cooper, S. J. (2017). Use of simulation-based learning in undergraduate nurse education: An umbrella systematic review. Nurse Education Today, 49, 63-71. Chen, B., Wei, L., & Li, H. (2016). Teaching complicated conceptual knowledge with simulation videos in foundational electrical engineering courses. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 6(3). Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin's argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science education, 88(6), 915-933. Gryczka, P., Klementowicz, E., Sharrock, C., & Montclare, J. K. (2016). Interactive online physics labs increase high school students’ interest. JOTSE, 6(3), 166-187. Gunawan, A., Fiarni, C., & Lawalata, G. (2015). Business Process Learning System With Real-time Simulation Approach. Hattie, J. (2017). Hattie’s 2017 Updated List of Factors Insfluencing Student Achievement. Available at: http://www.evidencebasedteaching.org.au/hatties-2017-updated-list/ Hmelo-Silver CE. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educ Psychol Rev 16(3):235–266. Iordanou, K., & Constantinou, C. P. (2015). Supporting use of evidence in argumentation through practice in argumentation and reflection in the context of SOCRATES learning environment. Science Education, 99(2), 282-311. Kuhar, M., & Jeznik, K. (2018). Effects of Group Discussion Attachment Styles and Facilitation on the Quality of Deliberation. Social Research: Journal of General Social Issues, 27(2), 281-303. Lundström, J. E., Hamfelt, A., & Nilsson, J. F. (2005). Argumentation as a Metacognitive Skill of Passing Acceptance-A Case Study from a Scientific Dispute. Mc Neill, K. L., & Knight, A. M. (2013). Teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge of scientific argumentation: The impact of professional development on K–12 teachers. Science Education, 97(6), 936-972. O'Neal, L. J., Gibson, P., & Cotten, S. R. (2017). Elementary school teachers' beliefs about the role of technology in 21st-century teaching and learning. Computers in the Schools, 34(3), 192-206. Paziotopoulos, A. and Kroll, M. (2004). Hooked on thinking. Journal of The Reading Teacher. 57 (7), 672- 677. Perdana, R., Sutrisno, L., & Mahmuda, D. (2016). Describing Physics Teachers Didaktogenic Deskripsi about Force and Motion. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran, 5(9). Qian, M., & Clark, K. R. (2016). Game-based Learning and 21st century skills: A review of recent research. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 50-58. Robbins, J. K. (2011). Problem solving, reasoning, and analytical thinking in a classroom environment. The Behavior Analyst Today, 12(1), 41. Sampson, V., & Blanchard, M. R. (2012). Science teachers and scientific argumentation: Trends in views and practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(9), 1122-1148. Savery, J. R. (2015). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. Essential readings in problem-based learning: Exploring and extending the legacy of Howard S. Barrows, 9, 5-15. Sourmelis, T., Ioannou, A., & Zaphiris, P. (2017). Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games (MMORPGs) and the 21st century skills: A comprehensive research review from 2010 to 2016. Computers in Human Behavior, 67, 41-48. Spires, H. A. (2015). Digital Game‐Based Learning. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 59(2), 125-130. Sternberg, R. J. (2006). The rainbow project: Enhancing the SAT through assessments of analytical, practical, and creative skills. Intelligence, 34, 321–350. Sundström, M., & Sigrell, A. (2011). The doughnut fallacy as deliberative failure. Cogency: Journal of reasoning and argumentation, 3(1), 147-171. Thaneerananon, T., Triampo, W., & Nokkaew, A. (2016). Development of a Test to Evaluate Students' Analytical Thinking Based on Fact versus Opinion Differentiation. International Journal of Instruction, 9(2), 123-138. Thaiposri, P., & Wannapiroon, P. (2015). Enhancing students’ critical thinking skills through teaching and learning by inquiry-based learning activities using social network and cloud computing. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 2137-2144. Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.