Differences in Scientific Argumentation Skills of Preservice Physics Teachers in Written and Oral Contexts: A Case Study of Video-Based Microteaching Learning
DOI:
10.29303/jpft.v10i`1.7277Published:
2024-06-30Issue:
Vol. 10 No. `1 (2024): January-JuneKeywords:
Video-Based Learning, Case Study, Microteaching, Preservice Physics Teacher, Scientific ArgumentationArticles
Downloads
How to Cite
Downloads
Metrics
Abstract
This study aims to analyze the profile of scientific argumentation skills of preservice physics teachers in the context of written case studies and oral presentations through video-based microteaching learning. Data was collected from 15 preservice physics teachers participating in a microteaching course. Qualitative analysis of argumentation components (claim, reason, evidence, rebuttal, conclusion) revealed significant differences in argumentation skills between the two contexts. In written case studies, students demonstrated a relatively good ability to present evidence. However, they needed to improve in formulating claims and reasons. Meanwhile, in oral presentations, there was a significant increase in all components of argumentation, particularly claims, reasons, rebuttals, and conclusions. These findings have important implications for developing more effective microteaching learning to improve the scientific argumentation skills of preservice physics teachers.
References
Boettcher, F., & Meisert, A. (2011). Argumentation in science education: A model-based framework. Science & Education, 20, 103-140.
Brückmann, M., Duit, R., Tesch, M., Fischer, H., Kauertz, A., Reyer, T., ... & Labudde, P. (2007). The potential of video studies in research on teaching and learning science. In Contributions from science education research (pp. 77-89). Springer Netherlands.
Cetin, P. S. (2014). Explicit argumentation instruction to facilitate conceptual understanding and argumentation skills. Research in Science & Technological Education, 32(1), 1–20.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.
Darmaji, D., Astalini, A., Kurniawan, D. A., & Triani, E. (2022). The effect of science process skills of students argumentation skills. Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan IPA, 8(1), 78-88.
Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312.
Erduran, S., & Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. (Eds.). (2007). Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research. Springer Science & Business Media.
Faize, F. A., Husain, W., & Nisar, F. (2017). A critical review of scientific argumentation in science education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(1), 475-483.
Fischer, H. E., & Neumann, K. (2012). Video analysis as a tool for understanding science instruction. In Science education research and practice in Europe (pp. 115-139). Brill.
Forsythe, M. E., Criswell, B. A., Arias, A. M., Ellis, J. A., Escalada, L., Johnson, H. J., ... & Parker, M. E. (2022). The framework for analyzing video in science teacher education (FAVSTE). Journal of Science Teacher Education, 33(6), 621–640.
Gunawan, G., Harjono, A., Herayanti, L., & Husein, S. (2019). Problem-based learning approach with supported interactive multimedia in physics course: Its effects on critical thinking disposition. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 7(4), 1075-1089.
Gunawan, G., Harjono, A., Nisyah, M. A., Kusdiastuti, M., & Herayanti, L. (2020). Improving Students' Problem-Solving Skills Using Inquiry Learning Model Combined with Advance Organizer. International Journal of Instruction, 13(4), 427-442.
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Erduran, S. (2007). Argumentation in science education: An overview. Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research, 3-27.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Sage publications.
Olson, J. K., Bruxvoort, C. N., & Vande Haar, A. J. (2016). The impact of video case content on preservice elementary teachers’ decision‐making and conceptions of effective science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(10), 1500-1523.
Osborne, J. (2010). Arguing to learn in science: The role of collaborative, critical discourse. Science, 328(5977), 463–466.
Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994–1020.
Roth, K. J. (2009). Using video studies to transform science teaching and learning: results from the STeLLA professional development program. The power of video studies in investigating teaching and learning in the classroom, 225-242.
Sampson, V., & Gerbino, F. (2010). Two Instructional Approaches for Teaching Argumentation in Science: Their Impact on the Quality of Students' Written Arguments. Science Education, 94(3), 459-488.
Sampson, V., & Gerbino, F. (2010). Two instructional models that teachers can use to promote & support scientific argumentation in the biology classroom. The American Biology Teacher, 72(7), 427-431.
Simonneaux, L. (2007). Argumentation in science education: An overview. Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from Classroom-Based Research, 179-199.
Tiberghien, A., & Sensevy, G. (2012). The nature of video studies in science education: Analysis of teaching & learning processes. In Science education research and practice in Europe (pp. 141-179). Brill.
Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The uses of argument (updated ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., & Snoeck Henkemans, F. (2002). Argumentation: Analysis, evaluation, presentation. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Wenning, C. J. (2007). Assessing inquiry skills as a component of scientific literacy. Journal of Physics Teacher Education Online, 4(2), 21-24.
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35-62.
Author Biographies
Gunawan Gunawan, (SCOPUS ID: 57205026913) Program Studi Pendidikan Fisika, Universitas Mataram
SCOPUS ID: 57196089897
Lovy Herayanti, Universitas Pendidikan Mandalika
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Gunawan Gunawan, Lovy Herayanti
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika dan Teknologi (JPFT) agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International License (CC-BY-SA License). This license allows authors to use all articles, data sets, graphics, and appendices in data mining applications, search engines, web sites, blogs, and other platforms by providing an appropriate reference. The journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions and will retain publishing rights without restrictions.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika dan Teknologi (JPFT).
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
