Open AccessProfile of Argumentation Skills using Toulmin’s Argumentation Pattern (TAP) in Senior High School Students in Biology Learning: Preliminary Research
Author(s) -
Anita Anita,
Afandi Afandi,
Andi Besse Tenriawaru,
D A Putra
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
journal of physics. conference series
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.21
H-Index - 85
eISSN - 1742-6596
pISSN - 1742-6588
DOI - 10.1088/1742-6596/1842/1/012065
Subject(s) - rebuttal , argumentation theory , warrant , argument (complex analysis) , mathematics education , psychology , creativity , function (biology) , biology , social psychology , epistemology , political science , philosophy , biochemistry , evolutionary biology , financial economics , economics , law
The skills needed in the 21 st century, including critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity, can be developed through argumentation skills. The method used is descriptive quantitative, with a sample size of 102 students. Student argument analysis refers to Toulmin’s Argumentation Pattern (TAP), which contains aspects of claim, grounds, warrant, backing, and rebuttal. This study aims to describe the profile of the students’ argumentation skills of class XII science at Senior High School 1 Sungai Pinyuh on the structure and function of cells in the reproductive system. The results showed that the students’ argumentation skills had a percentage of 64.8% with enough category. The percentage of each aspect, namely the claim was in excellent category (95.25%), grounds was in enough category (59.25%), warrant was in good category (70.5%), backing was in enough category (56%), and rebuttal was in less category (42.75%). This study also showed the percentage level of student argumentation, namely the percentage of students categorized as level 1 at 1.96%, level 2 at 29.41%, level 3 at 68.63%, level 4 at 0%, and level 5 at 0%. The students’ argumentation skills categorized as enough and were at levels 1, 2, and 3. Empowering through appropriate learning models and strategies.