The effect of argument-driven inquiry to pre-service biology teachers’ argumentation skills and metacognitive awareness in Mendelian genetics
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v10i3.36218Keywords:
argumentations, argument-driven inquiry, mendelian genetics, metacognition, TAPAbstract
In recent years, pre-service teacher education programs have recognized the importance of equipping future educators with the necessary skills such as argumentation skills and metacognitive awareness. However, the extent to these skills in ore-service biology teachers remains relatively unexplored. This study aimed to explore the effect of argument-driven inquiry on pre-service biology teachers’ argumentation skills and metacognitive awareness. This study also investigated the correlation between argumentation skills and metacognitive awareness in pre-service biology teachers. This research was conducted as quasi experiment using nonrandomized control group pretest–post-test design with two classes. One class as experiment group (N=44) which participated in series of activities in laboratory work using argument-driven inquiry, and control group (N=44) which participated in the regular laboratory activities. The laboratory work focused on the topic of mendelian genetic. This research was conducted on the second year of pre-service biology teachers in the Department of Biology Education. Data were generated by administrating pre-test and post-test on argumentation skill using open-ended question and metacognitive awareness using Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (MAI). Result showed a significant difference between experimental group and control group in argumentation skills (p value= .016) as well as in metacognitive awareness (p value = .005). However, the correlation between argumentation skills and metacognitive awareness were relatively low (r= -.119). This research findings can be used as suggestions for policy makers and educational institute to integrate argumentation skills and metacognitive awareness in designed for professional development program in teacher training program.
Downloads
References
Al-Gaseem, M., Bakkar, B., & Al-Zoubi, S. (2020). Metacognitive thinking skills among talented science education students. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 8(2), 897–904. https://doi.org/10.17478/JEGYS.707205
Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., Dipietro, M., Lovett, M. C., Norman, M. K., & Mayer, R. E. (2010). 7 Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching.
Amin, A. M., & Adiansyah, R. (2020). Identification of preservice biology teachers’ metacognitive awareness and metacognitive skills. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1511(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1511/1/012029
Archila, P. A. (2015). Using History and Philosophy of Science to Promote Students’ Argumentation: A Teaching–Learning Sequence Based on the Discovery of Oxygen. Science and Education, 24(9–10), 1201–1226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-015-9786-2
Artzt, A. F., & Armour-Thomas, E. (2001). Mathematics Teaching as Problem Solving: A Framework for Studying Teacher Metacognition Underlying Instructional Practice in Mathematics. In Metacognition in Learning and Instruction: Theory, Research and Practice. Springer.
Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Sorensen, C. (2010). Introduction to Research in Education. Wadsworth.
Buku, M. N. I., Corebima, A. D., & Rohman, F. (2016). The correlation between metacognitive skills and the critical thinking skills of the senior high school students in biology learning through the implementation of problem based learning (PBL) in Malang, Indonesia. International Journal of Academic Research and Development, 1(5), 58–63.
Choden, T., & Kijkuakul, S. (2020). Blending problem based learning with scientific argumentation to enhance students’ understanding of basic genetics. International Journal of Instruction, 13(1), 445–462. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13129a
Colthorpe, K., Mehari Abraha, H., Zimbardi, K., Ainscough, L., Spiers, J. G., Chen, H.-J. C., & Lavidis, N. A. (2017). Assessing students’ ability to critically evaluate evidence in an inquiry-based undergraduate laboratory course. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00118.2016.-The
Colthorpe, K., Sharifirad, T., Ainscough, L., Anderson, S., & Zimbardi, K. (2018). Prompting undergraduate students’ metacognition of learning: Implementing ‘meta-learning’ assessment tasks in the biomedical sciences. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(2), 272–285. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1334872
Dawson, V., & Venville, G. J. (2009). High-school students’ informal reasoning and argumentation about biotechnology: An indicator of scientific literacy? International Journal of Science Education, 31(11), 1421–1445. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690801992870
Demiral, Ü., & Çepni, S. (2018). Examining argumentation skills of preservice science teachers in terms of their critical thinking and content knowledge levels: An example using GMOs. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 15(3), 128–151. https://doi.org/10.12973/tused.10241a
Demircioglu, T., Karakus, M., & Ucar, S. (2023). Developing Students’ Critical Thinking Skills and Argumentation Abilities Through Augmented Reality–Based Argumentation Activities in Science Classes. Science and Education, 32(4), 1165–1195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00369-5
Demircioğlu, T., & Uçar, S. (2012). The Effect of Argument-Driven Inquiry on Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Attitudes and Argumentation Skills. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 5035–5039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.382
Direkci, B., Akbulut, S., Şimşek, B., Gülmez, M., & Nalçacıgil Çopur, E. (2022). Analysis of pre-service teachers’ argumentation-based academic writing process. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1040332
Erduran, S., Ardac, D., & Yakmaci-Guzel, B. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: case studies of pre-service secondary science teachers. In Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education (Vol. 2, Issue 2).
Erenler, S., & Cetin, S. (2019). Utilizing argument-driven-inquiry to develop pre-service teachers’ metacognitive awareness and writing skills. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 5(2), 628–638.
Fauzi, A., & Sa’diyah, W. (2019). The metacognition of pre-service biology teachers: awareness, skills, understanding, and practices.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911.
Gouvea, J., Appleby, L., Fu, L., & Wagh, A. (2022). Motivating and Shaping Scientific Argumentation in Lab Reports. CBE Life Sciences Education, 21(4). https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.21-11-0316
Hacker, D. J., Dunlosky, J., Graesser, A. C., Zimmerman, B. J., & Moylan, A. R. (2009). Self-Regulation from: Handbook of Metacognition in Education Routledge. 1. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203876428.ch16
Hartman, H. J. (2001). Teaching metacognitively. In Metacognition in Learning and Instruction: Theory, Research and Practice (pp. 149–172). Springer.
Hartman, H. J. (2002). Metacognition in learning and instruction: theory, research, and practice.
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Erduran, S. (2007). Argumentation in science education: An overview.
Kuvac, M., & Koc, I. (2019). The effect of problem-based learning on the metacognitive awareness of pre-service science teachers. Educational Studies, 45(5), 646–666. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2018.1509783
Lam, Y. W., & Chiu, K. F. (2018). Improving argumentative writing: Effects of a blended learning approach and gamification. 22(1), 97–118. https://dx.doi.org/10125/44583
Ling Heng, L., Surif, J., Hau Seng, C., & Hasniza Ibrahim, N. (2015). Mastery of scientific argumentation on the concept of neutralization in chemistry: A Malaysian perspective. In Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction (Vol. 12).
Luft, Julie., Bell, R. L., & Gess-Newsome, Julie. (2008). Science as inquiry in the secondary setting. NSTA Press.
Marthaliakirana, A. D., Suwono, H., Saefi, M., & Gofur, A. (2022). Problem-based learning with metacognitive prompts for enhancing argumentation and critical thinking of secondary school students. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(9). https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12304
Mason, L. (1996). An analysis of children’s construction of new knowledge through their use of reasoning and arguing in classroom discussions. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 9(4), 411–433. https://doi.org/10.1080/0951839960090404
Meichenbaum, D. (1985). Teaching thinking: A cognitive-behavioral perspective. In S. F. Chipman, J. W. Segal, & R. Glaser (Eds.), Thinking and learning skill, Vol 2: Research and open questions (Vol. 2). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Norman, E. (2020). Why metacognition is not always helpful. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01537
Palle Antonio, R. (2020). Developing students’ reflective thinking skills in a metacognitive and argument-driven learning environment developing students’ reflective thinking skills in a metacognitive and argument-driven learning environment. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 6(3), 467–483.
Payoungkiattikun, W., Intanin, A., Thongsuk, T., & Hemtasin, C. (2022). Project-based learning model to promote preservice science teachers’ metacognitive skills. Journal of Educational Issues, 8(2), 576. https://doi.org/10.5296/jei.v8i2.20282
Romero Ariza, M., Quesada Armenteros, A., & Estepa Castro, A. (2021). Promoting critical thinking through mathematics and science teacher education: the case of argumentation and graphs interpretation about climate change. European Journal of Teacher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2021.1961736
Sadler, T. D., Barab, S. A., & Scott, B. (2007). What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry? Research in Science Education, 37(4), 371–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9030-9
Sampson, V., Enderle, P., & Grooms, J. (2013). Helping students understand tHe nature of scientific argumentation so tHey can meet tHe new science standards.
Sampson, V., & Gleim, L. (2009). Argument-driven inquiry to promote the understanding of important concepts & practices in biology. American Biology Teacher, 71(8), 465–472. https://doi.org/10.1662/005.071.0805
Sampson, V., Grooms, J., & Walker, J. P. (2011). Argument-Driven Inquiry as a way to help students learn how to participate in scientific argumentation and craft written arguments: An exploratory study. Science Education, 95(2), 217–257. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20421
Sampson, V., & Schleigh, S. (2015). Scientific argumentation in biology: 30 classroom activities. In Scientific Argumentation in Biology: 30 Classroom Activities. National Science Teachers Association. https://doi.org/10.2505/9781936137275
Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7(4), 351–371. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02212307
Seixas Mello, P., Cotta Natale, C., Marzin-Janvier, P., Vieira, L. Q., & Manzoni-de-Almeida, D. (2023). Inquiry-based learning in immunology: analysis of scientific argument construction by undergraduate students in biological science and health care classes. Journal of Biological Education, 57(1), 68–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2021.1877778
Simon, S. (2008). Using Toulmin’s Argument Pattern in the evaluation of argumentation in school science. International Journal of Research and Method in Education, 31(3), 277–289. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437270802417176
Stanton, J. D., Sebesta, A. J., & Dunlosky, J. (2021). Fostering metacognition to support student learning and performance. CBE Life Sciences Education, 20(2). https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.20-12-0289
Tanner, K. D. (2012). Promoting student metacognition. CBE Life Sciences Education, 11(2), 113–120. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-03-0033
Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The uses of argument updated edition. Cambridge
Türköz, G., & Öztürk, N. (2019). Determining the argument quality of pre-service science teachers regarding to socio-scientific issues: YouTube as a source of argumentation. In Science Education International (Vol. 30, Issue 4, pp. 319–328). International Council of Associations for Science Education (ICASE). https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v30.i4.9
Veenman, M. V. J. (2011). Learning to Self-Monitor and Self-Regulate. In Handbook of Research on Learning and Instruction (pp. 197–218). Routledge.
Venville, G. J., & Dawson, V. M. (2010). The impact of a classroom intervention on Grade 10 students’ argumentation skills, informal reasoning, and conceptual understanding of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(8), 952–977. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20358
Vrugt, A., & Oort, F. J. (2008). Metacognition, achievement goals, study strategies and academic achievement: Pathways to achievement. Metacognition and Learning, 3(2), 123–146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-008-9022-4
Wess, R., Priemer, B., & Parchmann, I. (2023). Professional development programs to improve science teachers’ skills in the facilitation of argumentation in science classroom—a systematic review. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-023-00076-3
Zeidler, D. L., & Nichols, B. H. (2009). Socioscientific issues: Theory and practice. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21, 49–58.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia) agree to the following terms:
- For all articles published in JPBI, copyright is retained by the authors. Authors give permission to the publisher to announce the work with conditions. When the manuscript is accepted for publication, the authors agree to automatic transfer of the publishing right to the publisher.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- 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 acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- 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).
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
