MENYONGSONG MASYARAKAT 5.0: MENSTIMULUS KONSTRUKSI KETERAMPILAN BERAGUMENTASI PADA PEMBELAJARAN FISIKA

Viyanti Viyanti

Abstract


Pendidikan sebagai ujung tombak kemajuan bangsa seyogyanya memberikan pelayanan selaras dengan tuntutan zaman. Agar menjadi pribadi yang sukses di abad ke-21 seseorang yang hidup di abad tersebut dituntut menguasai berbagai keterampilan relevan untuk beradaptasi dan berkontribusi. Seperti diketahui bahwa perkembangan pendidikan Abad 21 dipengaruhi oleh: revolusi TIK, transisi masyarakat berpengetahuan, dan model pembelajaran baru generasi “Z”. Tren ini berdampak signifikan terhadap pergeseran paradigma pendidikan, sehingga menimbulkan kebutuhan untuk menumbuhkan kompetensi baru bagi masyarakat berpengetahuan. Terkait hal tersebut teridentifikasi keterampilan kunci yang harus dimiliki masyarakat berpengetahuan yaitu: (1) keterampilan belajar dan berpikir: connectivist, memecahkan masalah, kritis, dan reflektif; (2) keterampilan TIK: melek informasi, melek media dan melek TIK; dan (3) keterampilan hidup: keterampilan komunikasi dan kolaborasi, pengendalian diri, berkarakter, kesadaran global dan keterampilan sosial antar budaya. Mengingat kompleksitas keterampilan kunci tersebut diperlukan pendidikan sebagai pengemban peran reformatif dan transformatif yang mampu mempersiapkan masyarakat berpengetahuan untuk menguasai berbagai keterampilan yang dipersyaratkan.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Andriessen, J., Baker, M., & Suthers, D. (2003). Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computersupported collaborative learning environments. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker& D. Suthers (Eds.), Computer-supported collaborative learning series. Netherlands: Springer. Andriessen, J. (2006). Arguing to learn. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 443–460). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Baker, M. (2003). Computer-mediated argumentative interactions for the co- elaboration of scientific notions. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (Eds.), Arguing to learn: confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments (pp. 47–78). Boston: Kluwer.

Baker, M. (2009). Intersubjective and intrasubjective rationalities in pedagogical debates: Realizing what one thinks. In B. B. Schwarz, T. Dreyfus, & R. Hershkowitz (Eds.), Guided transformation of knowledge in classrooms (pp. 145–158). New York: Routledge, Advances in Learning & Instruction Series. Berland, L. K. 2008. Understanding the Composite Practice That Forms When Classrooms Take Up The Practice of Scientific Argumentation. Northwestern, Evanston, ILford, 2012: 17) Bricker, L.A. & Bell, P. 2008. Conceptualizations of Argumentation From Science Studies and The Learning Sciences and Their Implications For The Practices of Science Education. Science Education, 92 (3), 473–498.

Bricker, L.A. & Bell, P. 2008. Conceptualizations of Argumentation From Science Studies and The Learning Sciences and Their Implications For The Practices of Science Education. Science Education, 92 (3), 473–498.

Cavagnetto, A. R. 2010. Argument To Foster Scientific Literacy: A review of argument interventions in K–12 science contexts. Review of Educational Research, 80, 336– 371. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. F. 2000. Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287–312. Duschl, R., & Osborne, J. 2002. Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse. Studies in Science Education, 38, pp. 39-72.

Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. W. 2007. Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Ford, Michael J. 2012. A Dialogic Account of Sense-Making in Scientific Argumentation and Reasoning. Journal Cognition and Instruction Ford, M. J. 2008. Disciplinary Authority and Accountability in Scientific Practice and Learning. Science Education. Howe, C., McWilliams, D., & Cross, G. 2005. Chance Favours the Prepared Mind: Incubation and The Delayed Effects of Peer Collaboration. British Journal of Psychology, 97, 67-93 Jiménex-Aleixandre, M P., Rodríguez, A.B., & Duschl, R. 2000. “Doing The Lesson” or“Doing Science”: Argument in High School Genetics. Science Education. Ogreten dan Sagir, 2014: 13)

Kat Cooper, A., & Oliver‐Hoyo, M. T. (2016). Argument construction in understanding noncovalent interactions: A comparison of two argumentation frameworks. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(4), 1006–1018. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6RP00109B. Kuhn, D. 1993. Science as Argument: Implications for Teaching and Learning Scientific Thinking. Science Education, 77, 319–337. Kirschner, P. A., Buckingham-Shum, S. J., & Carr, C. S. (Eds.). (2003). Visualizing argumentation: software tools for collaborative and educational sense-making. London: Springer.

Kuhn, D. 2010. Teaching and Learning Science As Argument. Science Education.

McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. 2008. Inquiry and Scientific Explanations: Helping Students Use Evidence and Reasoning. In J. Luft, R. Bell, & J. Gess-Newsome (Eds.), Science as Inquiry in The Secondary Setting (pp. 121–134). Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association Press. Nussbaum, E. M., & Sinatra, G. M. 2003. Argument and conceptual ngagement.

Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28(3), 384 – 395.

Osborne J Erduran S and Simon S. 2004. Enhancing the Quality of Argumentation in School science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. vol 41(10) pp 994–1020. Osborne J Erduran S and Simon S. 2004. Enhancing the Quality of Argumentation in School science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. vol 41(10) pp 994–1020. Schwarz, C. 2009. Developing Preservice Elementary Teachers’ Knowledge and Practices Through Modeling-Centered Scientific Inquiry. Science Education, 93(4), 720–744

Schwarz, B. B., & Linchevski, L. 2007. The role of task design and argumentation in cognitive development during peer interaction: The case of proportional reasoning Learning and Instruction, 17 (5), 510–531

Sandoval, W. A., & Millwood, K. 2005. The quality of Students' Use of Evidence in Written Scientific Explanations. Cognition and Instruction, 23, 23e55. Sardjana, D.A, 2018. Pembelajaran Sinkron dan A Sinkron Abad 21 menyambut masyarakat 5.0. Pembelajaran-Abad-21-dan-Masyarakat-5.0-IGI-19 Maret2019- short.pdf

Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. 2006. Learning to Teach Argumentation: Research and Development in the Science Classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2–3), 235–260. Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. 2006. Learning to Teach Argumentation: Research and Development in the Science Classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2–3), 235–260. Viyanti, Cari, Widha Sunarno, Zuhdan Kun Prasetyo. (2016). Pemberdayaan Keterampilan Argumentasi Mendorong Pemahaman Konsep Siswa. Jurnal Penelitian Pembelajaran Fisika Volume 7 Nomor April 2016, hlm 34-39

Viyanti, Cari, Suparmi, Winarti, Indah Slamet Budiarti, Jeffry Handika, Fatma Widyastuti. Consistency Argued Students Of Fluid. IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 795 (2017) 012055 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/795/1/012055

Viyanti, Cari, Widha Sunarno, Zuhdan Kun Prasetyo. (2017b). The Development Rubrics Skill Argued As Alternative Assessment Floating And Sinking Materials. IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 909 (2017) 012057.doi

:10.1088/1742-6596/909/1/012057

Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2006). A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers and Education, 46(1), 71–95.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.