Journal of Physics: Conference Series

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS

Promoting students’ argumentation skill through development science

teaching materials based on guided inquiry models
To cite this article: A Hakim et al 2020 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 1521 042117

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 194.5.0.177 on 23/05/2020 at 13:21

International Conference on Mathematics and Science Education 2019 (ICMScE 2019) IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1521 (2020) 042117 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1521/4/042117

Promoting students’ argumentation skill through

development science teaching materials based on guided
inquiry models

A Hakim1,2*, I Sahmadesti1 and S Hadisaputra2

1
Magister Program of Science Education, Universitas Mataram, Jl. Majapahit No. 62,
Lombok 83125, Indonesia
2
Chemistry Education Study Program, Universitas Mataram, Jl. Majapahit No. 62,
Lombok 83125, Indonesia
*
corresponding author’s email: [email protected]

Abstract. Argumentation skills are an important practice in science in the 21st century to
develop analytic skills and engage in arguments that can construct scientific explanations,
develop critical thinking skills and evaluate alternatives. Science learning with guided inquiry
model is able to facilitate students in learning to argue. However, good learning must be
supported by good teaching materials. So the purpose of this research is to develop junior high
school science teaching materials to improve students' argumentation skills. This research uses
the Research and Development (R & D) method which was adapted from Borg & Gall. The
parameters used to determine the quality of teaching materials developed are validity and
practicality. The validity and practicality of the teaching materials developed were analyzed
using Aiken's V. The results of the feasibility test based on the results of expert validation were
obtained by Aiken's V of 0.75 with valid criteria, while the practicality test results based on
teacher and student responses obtained Aiken's V scores in a row 0.84 (very practical) and 0.80
(practical). In addition, the developed teaching material includes indicators to promoting
students' argumentation skills such as claims, evidence, reasoning, and rebuttal. In conclusion,
the teaching materials developed includes the criteria for developing quality products that are
valid and practical.

1. Introduction
The paradigm shift in the 21st century from the use of the behavioristic approach to being constructivist
and the application of the 2013 curriculum at every level of education, requires the use of teaching
materials and learning devices, as well as strategies or learning models that can develop Higher Order
Thinking Skills (HOTS) students' in the learning process [1,2]. The government has provided science
teaching materials in the form of K-13 teaching books to be applied at every level of education to train
students develop HOTS. However, the applied K-13 science teaching book does not provide good
learning models and methods. This causes learning to be monotonous because teachers will be more
likely to teach using the models and teaching methods they like without considering the suitability of
the material and character of the students. In addition, the textbook is still oriented towards material
content and is seen to lack training in HOTS, especially students’ argumentation skill. The same as
books sourced from publishers.

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
International Conference on Mathematics and Science Education 2019 (ICMScE 2019) IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1521 (2020) 042117 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1521/4/042117

The results of a previous survey by TIMMS (Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study)
and PIRLS (Progress in International Reading Literacy Study) showed reasoning ability or giving
reasons as many as 40% of students were in the low category and as many as 60% of Indonesian learners
reached the low category. Most of the arguments of students in the form of statements that contain a
little supporting reasons [3,4]. Students have problems connecting data to support their arguments [5].
Argumentation skills was still less trained in science learning [6]. The observation results also found
that students still tend to assume that science lessons are difficult to understand, and students are less
trained to learn independently so can't to present their arguments scientifically. This causes the science
learning outcomes of junior high school students in Mataram on average less than or equal to the
Minimum achieved Criteria (KKM), which is 75. Previous research shows that based on the theory of
complete learning, a student is considered to have finished learning if he is able to complete, mastery
competencies or achieve learning objectives at least 65% of all learning goals. Meanwhile, the class was
said to have succeeded in achieving completeness if at least 85% of the total number of students in the
class had achieved individual completeness [7].
The ability of students to master the concept can be seen from the learning outcomes [8,9].
Meanwhile, the level of students’ argumentation skill is influenced by the ability of these students in
mastering the concept of learning. The scientific arguments can be used to improve students'
understanding of scientific concepts. The students’ argumentation skill is very important to be trained
in science learning so that students have logical reasons, clear views, and rational explanations of things
learned [10].
In addition, critical thinking skills have a positive effect on student argumentation. Argumentation
plays an important role in developing critical thinking patterns and adding deep understanding of ideas
[11,12]. A new idea put forward by someone shows that the person is able to understand and can argue
correctly or not. So the basis for argumentative opinions is thinking, logical and realistic explanations
of things learned [13,14].
However, good learning must be supported by good learning models. Science learning with guided
inquiry model is able to facilitate students in learning to argue [15,16]. Stages of guided inquiry learning
models include: orientation, formulating problems and hypotheses, collecting data individually or in
groups, testing hypotheses and formulating conclusions [17]. These stages are in line with the scientific
approach, namely the approach that trains the scientific attitude of students. The integration of
approaches and learning models emphasizes the cooperative learning activities of students [18-22].
Based on the description above, it is necessary to develop science teaching materials on the topic of
material classification and changes for grade VII students of junior high school. It is caused by teaching
materials used in schools that are subject to research are still limited to science textbooks from publishers
so students lack reference in looking for additional material, in terms of material not packed with
scientific approach or constructivism learning models such as guided inquiry so students are not
accustomed to be active and independent in learning, as well the textbook is still oriented towards
material content and is seen to lack training in HOTS, especially students’ argumentation skill so
students can't to present their arguments scientifically. This research focuses on development of teaching
materials based on guided inquiry models to promoting students’ argumentation skill on indicators
claims, evidence, reasoning, and rebuttal which is logical, coherent, solid, and easily understood in
accordance with the 2013 curriculum, competencies in syllabus, and students' thinking development.

2. Methods
This research is a development research (Research and development / R & D) aimed at developing a
product in the form of a science teaching book for junior high school students on material classification
and changes. This research was conducted at Mataram public Middle School. The development model
used is the development model of Borg & Gall which consists of 3 steps, namely research and
information collecting, planning and developing preliminary form of product [23]. The validation
subject consists of a team of experts and practitioners. The expert team is lecturer in Master of Science
education at the University of Mataram and a practitioner by a science subject teacher. While the

2
International Conference on Mathematics and Science Education 2019 (ICMScE 2019) IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1521 (2020) 042117 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1521/4/042117

subjects of the trial are limited to junior high school students in the Mataram City area of West Nusa
Tenggara Province, Indonesian. Limited trials were carried out on 15 students of class VII SMP in
Mataram. The data obtained from the validation are in the form of quantitative and qualitative data. The
formula used to calculate Content Validity (V) is the Aiken's formula. Aiken's V statistics are formulated
as follows [24]:
V =∑ 𝑠/[n(c-1)] (1)

With s, that is the number given by the appraiser minus the lowest validation score, c, which is the
highest validity score, and n, the number of validators. Furthermore the value of content validity
obtained is confirmed by the evaluation criteria as follows: (1) 0.00-0.20 it can be classified in a very
less valid category; (2) 0.21-0.40 then it can be classified in the less valid category; (3) 0.41-0.60 then
it can be classified in a fairly valid category; (4) 0.61-0.80 then it can be classified in the valid category;
and (5) 0.81-1.00 then it can be classified in a very valid category.

3. Result and Discussion

Data collection is the basis for the development phase. Research and information collecting is done
through (1) analysis of needs and competencies, (2) analysis of students, (3) analysis of learning devices
and (4) literature study. In the needs analysis and competencies carried out by analyzing the curriculum
used, facilities and infrastructure, so based on that it can be determined what is needed. Curriculum
analysis finds the learning process lacking in billing indicators at a higher level of thinking. Then the
student analysis shows that students are poorly trained in the learning process that emphasizes 21st
century skills and has an impact on students' curiosity towards science learning. Previous research has
shown that curiosity has a positive impact on learning outcomes [25].
The analysis of learning devices carried out by analyzing the devices used in learning including
learning resources and supporting devices such as lesson plans (RPP) and student worksheet (LKPD).
Based on the results of the analysis note that the application of lesson plans is less effective in learning
such as learning steps that tend to be non-operational and are routine activities so there is no specification
of the learning steps according to their character subject matter or student development.
Furthermore, Literature studies are carried out by referring to theories that are in accordance with the
problem and the results of the initial analysis, and also the study of the results of previous studies that
are related so that they can be used as conclusions in deciding which products will be developed.
The planning stage is the design stage to support the supporting parts and the format of guided
inquiry-based teaching material. The stages of the guided inquiry learning model used in this study are
(1) student orientation to the problem; (2) organizing students to formulate problems; (3) formulating a
hypothesis; (4) collecting data; (5) testing hypotheses; and (6) make conclusions [26].
Meanwhile, the indicator of students’ argumentation skill applied in teaching materials consists of
(1) Claim, is the answer to a question / problem or to identify an argument, criticism of an argument,
and conceptual understanding; (2) Evidence, is a supporting data or information that supports a claim
that comes from sources that can be observed in the same way by anyone and features are constantly
observed. Data must be appropriate and sufficient to support the claim; (3) Reasoning, is an explanation
of how the evidence supports the claim and invites or convinces others that the evidence used can support
the claim; and (4) Rebuttal, describing alternative explanations or providing counter evidence. Rebuttal
can also be interpreted as evidence that negates or disagrees with the rebuttal [27].
The stage of developing the preliminary form of product is a summative evaluation in which the
products produced are then validated by experts in the field of education. The validity aspect relates to
two things, namely: (1) the learning devices developed are based on strong theoretical rationality, and
(2) there is internal consistency [28]. In this research the validation was conducted by three experts in
the field of education. Parts of validated products include formats, contents, language, presentations,
and innovation. The results of the validation can be seen in Table 1.

3
International Conference on Mathematics and Science Education 2019 (ICMScE 2019) IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1521 (2020) 042117 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1521/4/042117

Table 1. Instructional Materials Validation Test Results

Value
No. Aspect
V1 V2 V3
1. Format 10 11 11
2. Contents 40 35 40
3. Language 13 13 15
4. Presentation 12 10 15
5. Innovation 15 15 16
Average 0.75
Category Valid
Table 1 shows that the value of the average content validity is 0.75, meaning that the teaching materials
developed have met the eligible criteria for use. Previous research also shows that teaching materials
that meet the eligibility criteria of the validator can be used in the learning process [29-30]. Trials are
part of assessing the practicality of learning devices developed. Data on practical results obtained
include teacher responses and student responses. Data from teacher response can be seen in Table 2.
Table 2. Practical Test Results Based on Teacher's Response
Value
No. Aspect
P1 P2 P3
1. Format 12 13 14
2. Contents 45 42 43
3. Language 13 13 15
4. Presentation 14 12 15
5. Innovation 17 17 18
Average 0.84
Category Very practical
Table 2 shows that the average practicality value of 0.84, meaning that the teaching materials developed
are very practical to be applied in science learning in junior high school. This is supported by the results
of descriptive analysis of observational data that shows that teachers are excited to carry out the teaching
and learning process using the developed teaching materials. The teacher is excited about using this
teaching material caused by the researcher first communicates the teaching material to the teacher so
that in the implementation the teacher already knows the flow of learning in general, not awkward, and
confused. Other practical data was obtained from the response of 15 students. The results of the
assessment showed a different level of practicality, in sampled school 1 obtained Aiken's V score of
0.89 with a very practical category, in sampled school 2 Aiken's V score of 0.79 with practical categories
and in sampled school 3 obtained Aiken's V score of 0.72 with a practical category. The results of the
assessment can be seen in table 3.
Table 3. Practical Test Results Based on the Response of Students

No. School name Value Average Category

1. Sample school 1 0.89
2. Sample school 2 0.79 0.80 Practical
3. Sample school 3 0.72

4
International Conference on Mathematics and Science Education 2019 (ICMScE 2019) IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1521 (2020) 042117 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1521/4/042117

The difference in the practicality criteria of teaching materials in each school is in accordance with the
results of the researchers' initial observations that students in sample school 1 have often carried out
learning activities such as group discussions and practicums using a guided inquiry model compared to
students on sample school 2 and 3.
Science teaching materials that contain indicators of students’ argumentation skill are then
implemented through a guided inquiry learning model. A guided inquiry learning model in teaching
materials can attract the attention of students due to the approach used is the scientific approach,
approach that trains the scientific attitude of students. The integration of approaches and learning models
emphasizes the cooperative learning activities of students. The students’ argumentation skill can be
developed by cooperative learning through discussion activities in the learning process [31]. The
discussion process can facilitate students to build scientific arguments by giving other students the
opportunity to argue and to reject opinions that are considered incompatible with the concept of science
[32-33]. Through argumentation, students are cognitively directly involved in solving problems,
developing explanations based on scientific evidence, and communicating their ideas. Those way
students will be motivated in learning [34].
The test results are the same as previous studies showing that the use of inquiry-based teaching
materials by teachers and students obtain practical responses in learning [35]. This is supported by the
results of descriptive analysis of the learning process using science teaching materials that contain
indicators of students' argumentation skills. Students become active and independent throughout the
learning process, especially in delivering scientific arguments that include claims and evidence. This is
caused by the context of the material and practical activities in teaching materials that have been adjusted
to the daily lives. The success of the learning process occurs when students truly understand what they
are learning (deep learning) so that they are able to apply it in everyday life [36]. Teacher creativity is
very necessary to be able to create interesting learning activities [37]. Learning is strongly influenced
by several components such as learning materials or devices and classroom settings [38].
In the third stage, revisions and improvements to product development were also carried out based
on suggestions and comments from experts, teachers and students. Improved suggestions and comments
are shown in Table 4.
Table 4. Suggestions and comments

No. Assessment Suggestions and comments

1 Validator The material description on teaching materials does not need to be presented too
dense.
The inquiry stage on the investigation sheet must be clear at each meeting by
giving an activity number.
The background, color, and design on the outer cover of the teaching material
are replaced to make it look attractive.
The format and design of writing on teaching materials need to be considered.
Data needs to be searched which are presented in the form of current, interesting,
and orientation to daily life..
The presentation of data in tables is made easier for students to understand.
The language used in teaching materials must be adjusted to the ability of users,
namely students and teachers.
2 Teacher Time allocation needs to be considered in each learning activity.
The indicator argues for the sub-elements, compounds, and mixtures need to be
added.
3 Students Difficulty in answering questions in teaching materials, because it requires a lot
of explanation in answering.
Pictures on teaching materials are not HD quality.

5
International Conference on Mathematics and Science Education 2019 (ICMScE 2019) IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1521 (2020) 042117 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1521/4/042117

The fourth stage, systematic reflection and documentation is a stage that can be done at each subsequent
stage. At this stage documentation is carried out at the end of each procedure at each stage of
development. Furthermore, design specifications are carried out and articulate the relationship with the
established frame of mind so as to produce final conclusions on the quality of the teaching materials
developed.

4. Conclusion
Science teaching materials on the topic of material classification and changes for grade VII students of
junior high school have been produced by adapting the development of Borg and Gall. Teaching material
developed follows the stages of the inquiry learning model, which is to formulate problems, formulate
hypotheses, collect data, test hypotheses, and make conclusions. In addition, the developed teaching
material includes indicators to promoting students' argumentation skills such as claims, evidence,
reasoning, and rebuttal. The parameters used to determine the quality of teaching materials developed
are validity and practicality. The validity and practicality of the teaching materials developed were
analyzed using Aiken's V. The results of the feasibility test based on the results of expert validation were
obtained by Aiken's V of 0.75 with valid criteria, while the practicality test results based on teacher and
student responses obtained Aiken's V scores in a row 0.84 (very practical) and 0.80 (practical). In
conclusion, the teaching materials developed includes the criteria for developing quality products that
are valid and practical for promoting students’ argumentation skill.

5. References
[1] BSNP 2010 Paradigma Pendidikan Nasional Abad XXI Jakarta: BSNP
[2] Binkley M Erstad O, Herman J, Raizen S, Ripley M, Miller-Ricci M and Rumble M 2012 Defining
twenty-first century skills Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills 17-66
[3] Kelly G J and Takao A 2002 Epistemic levels in argument: An analysis of university
oceanography students' use of evidence in writing Science education 86 3 314-342
[4] Azmy M K, Purwoko A A and Hadisaputra S 2018 The development of chemistry teaching
materials in the form of handouts based PBL in class XI IPA Madrasah Aliyah (Ma) Kediri
district IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education 8 3 71-73
[5] Hakim A and Jufri A W 2017 Applications of isolation and structure elucidation of secondary
metabolites in natural product chemistry laboratory Book Chapter in Advances in Chemistry
Research, NOVA Publisher New York
[6] Cetin P S 2014 Explicit argumentation instruction to facilitate conceptual understanding and
argumentation skills Research in Science & Technological Education 32 1 1-20
[7] Sunarto W, Sumarni W and Suci E 2008 Hasil belajar kimia siswa dengan model pembelajaran
metode think pair share dan metode ekspositori Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan Kimia Universitas
Negeri Semarang 2 1 244-249
[8] Ningsih Y C, Purwoko A A and Hadisaputra S 2018 Development of learning-based pogil
(process oriented guided inquiry learning) to improve mastery of base student concept of acid
base material in senior high school IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education 8 3 04-
06
[9] Kurniawan A D 2013 Metode inkuiri terbimbing dalam pembuatan media pembelajaran biologi
untuk meningkatkan pemahaman konsep dan kreativitas siswa SMP Jurnal Pendidikan IPA
Indonesia 2 1 8-11
[10] Heng L L, Surif J and Seng C H 2014 Individual versus group argumentation: Student’s
performance in a malaysian context International Education Studies 7 7 109-124
[11] Deane P and Song Y 2014 A case study in principled assessment design: Designing assessments
to measureand support the development of argumentative reading and writing skills
Psicología Educativa 20 2 99-108

6
International Conference on Mathematics and Science Education 2019 (ICMScE 2019) IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1521 (2020) 042117 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1521/4/042117

[12] Noviyani M, Kusairi S and Amin M 2017 Penguasan konsep dan kemampuan berargumentasi
siswa smp pada pembelajaran ipa dengan inkuiri berbasis argumen Jurnal Pendidikan: Teori,
Penelitian, dan Pengembangan 2 7 974-978
[13] Keraf and Gorys 2010 Argumentasi dan Narasi Jakarta: PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama
[14] Ogreten B 2014 Examining the effectiviness of science teaching based on argumentation Journal
of Turkish Science Education 1 11 75-100
[15] Senjaharmini A D, Jufri W A and Jamaluddin 2019 Efektivitas bahan ajar IPA berbasis inkuiri
terbimbing (BAIPAIT) untuk meningkatkan kemampuan berargumentasi peserta didik Jurnal
Pijar MIPA 14 2 1-5
[16] Seprianingsih D, Jufri W A and Jamaluddin 2017 Pengembangan perangkat pembelajaran biologi
berbasis inkuiri terbimbing (PPBIT) dalam meningkatkan kemampuan berargumentasi siswa
Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA (JPPIPA) 3 2
[17] Sanjaya W 2013 Strategi Pembelajaran Berorientasi Standar Proses Pendidikan Jakarta:
Kencana Prenada Media Grup Kencana
[18] Hartono R 2014 Ragam Model Mengajar yang Mudah Diterima murid Yogyakarta: DIVA Press
[19] Wildan W, Hakim A, Siahaan J and Anwar Y A S 2019 A stepwise inquiry approach to improving
communication skills and scientific attitudes on a biochemistry course International Journal
of Instruction 12 4 407-422
[20] Yustiqvar M, Gunawan G and Hadisaputra S 2019 Analisis Penguasaan Konsep Siswa yang
Belajar Kimia Menggunakan Multimedia Interaktif Berbasis Green Chemistry Jurnal Pijar
Mipa 14 3 135-140
[21] Andayani Y, Hadisaputra S and Hasnawati H 2018 Analysis of the Level of Conceptual
Understanding Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1095
[22] Hakim A, Liliasari, Kadarohman A and Syah Y M 2016 Improvement of student critical thinking
skills with the natural product mini project laboratory learning Indonesian Journal of
Chemistry 16 3 315-321
[23] Sukmadinata and Syaodih N 2013 Metode Penelitian Pendidikan Bandung: PT Remaja
Rosdakarya
[24] Azwar S 2013 Reliabilitas dan Validitas Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar
[25] Ameliah H, Munawaroh I, Muchyidin M A 2016 Pengaruh keingintahuan dan rasa percaya diri
siswa terhadap hasil belajar matematika kelas VII MTs negeri kota Cirebon Eduma 5 1 9-21
[26] Sanjaya W 2013 Strategi Pembelajaran Berorientasi Standar Proses Pendidikan Jakarta:
Kencana Prenada Media Grup Kencana
[27] McNeill K L 2011 Elementary student’s views of explanation, arrgumentation, and evidence, and
their abilities to construct arguments over the school year Journal of Research in Science
Teaching 48 7 793-823
[28] Plomp T and Nieveen N 2013 Educational Design Research, Part A: An Introduction Enschede,
Netherlands: Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development (SLO)
[29] Farda J, Binadja U A and Purwanti E 2016 validitas pengembangan bahan ajar IPA bervisi SET
Journal of Primary Education 5 1 36-41
[30] Amin and Kholiqul A 2016 Analisis bahan ajar modul statistika pada program studi pendidikan
matematika IKIP PGRI Bojonegoro Jurnal Edutama 7 6 1-9
[31] Acar O 2008 Argumentation skills and conceptual knowledge of undergraduate students in a
physics by inquiry class Doctoral dissertation: The Ohio State University
[32] Ihsan M S, Ramdani A and Hadisaputra S 2019 Efektivitas model blended learning dalam
pembelajaran kimia untuk meningkatkan kemampuan berpikir kritis peserta didik Jurnal
Pijar Mipa 14 2 84-87
[33] Llewellyn 2013 Teaching High Scholl Science Through Inquiry and Argumentation USA: Corwin
[34] Kaya E, Erduran S and Cetin P S 2012 Discourse, argumentation, and science lessons: Match or
mismatch in high school students’ perceptions and understanding? Mevlana International
Journal of Education (MIJE) 2 3 1–32

7
International Conference on Mathematics and Science Education 2019 (ICMScE 2019) IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1521 (2020) 042117 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1521/4/042117

[35] Hasanah J, Jamaluddin and Prayitno H G 2019 Bahan Ajar IPA Berbasis Inkuiri Terstruktur untuk
Meningkatkan Literasi Sains Peserta Didik SMP Jurnal Pijar MIPA 14 2 1-7
[36] Toharudin U, Hendrawati S and Rustaman H A 2011 Membangun Literasi Sains Peserta Didik
Bandung: Humaniora
[37] Pribadi B A 2009 Model Desain Sistem Pembelajaran Jakarta: PT. Dian Rakyat
[38] Auliah A 2018 Indonesian teachers’ perceptions on green chemistry principles: a case study of a
chemical analyst vocational school In Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1028

Acknowledgments
Financially supported by PNBP Pascasarjana Universitas Mataram tahun 2019 is gratefully
acknowledged.