Yanti Herlant
DIS KUSI ISU SOSIOSAINTIFIK MELALUI JEJARING SOSIAL “ FACEBOOK ”
4. Peran moderator
Pada pelaksanaan diskusi, setiap sesi moderator memberikan standpoint, menilai kualitas argumen, memanggil partisipan (mention) yang belum aktif, dan memfokuskan permasalahan. Contoh tindakan moderator dapat dilihat pada Tabel 5.
Tabel 5. Tindakan Moderator pada Diskusi Isu Sosiosaintifik
Tindakan moderator Contoh
Memberikan standpoint "Perlukah IPB mengumumkan nama merk Susu Formula dan Makanan Bayi yang terkontaminasi E. sakazakii didasarkan pada hasil penelitian Sri Estuningsih 2006? “
Menilai kualitas argument
Record point anda, 14.12-15.10= Cuda Lupita4, Anisa Lina Anggraeni=1, Murti MSari=1, Lianda Shasyli=3,Nuri Shabania=6, Muhammad Fuad Fahrudin=1, Endah Lestari=2,Reny Pujiati Sakhi=5, Azkiah Rahmi=1, Alie Akbar=1, @rosihananwar= 2, arifa=1, Dini=1
Memanggil partisipan
menarik Endah Lestari, menyinggung gugatan Bapak David yang dimenangkan pengandilan, mungkin kubu kontra bisa menanggapi??? kita tunggu saja, bagaimana komentar dari Adjie Pratama, Ichi Ajjah Dech, Novia Btari Krishnamuty, Disa Fajriah Arifin, BebHilaliyah Hilda Ningsih, dan ani!!
Memfokuskan permasalahan
Kita beralih ke bakteri ataupun mikroba secara umum ya!!! Mana yang lebih banyak, bakteri yang merugikan atau bakteri yang bersahabat?
siip, Sekarang. Closing statement, terhadap hasil ekplorasi ES!!!
PENUTUP
Facebook dapat dijadikan sebagai media diskusi isu sosiosaintifik. Diskusi isu sosiosaintifik melalui facebook memberikan peluang untuk meningkatkan keterampilan berargumentasi dengan syarat harus memperhatian hal-hal berikut yaitu penyelenggaraan sesi diskusi, penggunaan rubrik menilai keterampilan berargumentasi dengan sistem minus point, pengaturan aturan-aturan diskusi, dan peranan moderator dalam memfasilitasi diskusi isu sosiosaintifik.
DAFTAR PUSTAKA
Aleixandre MPJ, Rodri´Guez AB, Duschl RA. 2000. “Doing the Lesson” or “Doing Science”: Argument in High School Genetics. Science Education, 84(6):757-792 .
Bosman L, Zagenczyk T. 2011. Revitalize Your Teaching: Creative Approaches to Applying Social Media in the Classroom. White, B., King, I., & Tsang, P. (Eds). Social Media Tools and Platforms in Learning Environtment. London: Springer.
Brusell E, Cimino C. 2009. Investigating the Impact of Weekly Weblog Assignments on the Learning Environment of a Secondary Biology Course. Technology & Social Media (Special Issue, Part 1), 15(2).
Chang SN, Chiu MH. 2008. Lactos’s Scientific Research: Programmes as a Framework for Analysing Informal Argumentation about Sosio-scientific Issues. International Journal of Science Education, 30 (17):1753-1773.
Cowan J. 2002. Plus/Minus Marking: a method of assessment worth considering. The Higher Education Academy. Tersedia secara online di: http://jisctechdis.ac.uk [Akses 6 Febuari 2014]
Cross D, Taasoobshirazi G, Hendricks S, Hickey, DT. 2008. Argumentation: a Strategy for improving achievement and revealing scientific identities. International Journal of Science Education, 30(6), 837-861.
Dawson V, Venville GJ. 2009. High School Student’s Informal Reasoning and Argumentation about Biotechnology: An Indicator of Science Literacy?. International Journal of Science Education, 31(11): 1412-1445.
DeBoer GE. 1991. A history of Ideas in Science Education. New York: Teacher College Press.
Erduran S, Ardac D. Guzel BY. 2006. Learning to Teach Argumentation: Case Studies Secondary Science Teachers. Eurasia Journal of Matematics Science and Teachnology Eduacation. 2(2):1-12
Freeley AJ, Steinberg DL. 2009. Argumentation and Debate. Miami: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Girle RA. 1991. Dialogue and the Teaching of Reasoning. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 23 (1):45–
55.
Hakyolu H, Bekiroglu FO. 2011. Assessment of Students’ Science Knowledge Levels and Their Involvement with Argumentation. International Journal for Cross-Disciplinary Subjects in Education (IJCDSE), 2(1): 264-270.
Harris R. Ratcliffe M. 2005. Socio-scientific Issues of Exploratory Talk-What Can be Learned from School
Involved in a ‘Collapsed Day Project’?. The Curriculum Journal. 16(4): 439-453.
Inch ES, Warnick B, Endres D. 2006. Critical Thinking and Communication: The Use of Reason in Argument. Boston: Pearson Education Inc.
Khun D, Udell W. 2003. The Development of argumentation Skill. Child Development, 74(5): 1245-1260.
Lee CK. 2008. A Proposed Instructional Model Using Socioscientific Issues to Illustrate the Nature of Science (NOS-SSI Instructional Model). Tersedia online di http://aracte.org. [Unduh 3 Maret 2011] Lewis SE. 2003. Issue-Based Teaching in Science Education. American Institute of Biological Sciences.
Tersedia online di http://www.actionbioscience.org. [Unduh 3 Juni 2012]
Marrero ME, Mensah FMM. 2010. Socioscientific Decision Making the Ocean: The Case Study of 7th Grade Life Science Students. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 14(1).
Mc Neill KL. 2009. Teachers’ Use of Curriculum to Support Students in Writing Scientific Arguments to Explain Phenomena. Journal of Science Education 93, 223-268. Tersedia online di http://interscience.wiley.com [Unduh 3 Juni 2012]
Nuangchalern P. 2010. Engaging Students to Perceive Nature of Science Though Socioscientific Issue-Based Instruction. European Journal of Social Science. 13(1): 34-37.
Osborne J, Eduran S, Simon J. 2005. “The role of argument in Developing Science Literacy”. K. Boesma, M. Goedhart, O. De Jong, & H. Eijkelhof [Eds]. Research and Quality of Science Education. Dordrecht, Nederlands: Spinger.
Osborne J. 2005. The Role of argument in Science Education. K. Boesma, M. Goedhart, O. De Jong, & H. Eijkelhof [Eds]. Research and Quality of Science Education. Dordrecht, Nederlands: Spinger. Ragupathi W. 2011. Facebook for Teaching and Learning. Technology in Pedagogy, 1. Tersedia online di
http://www.cdtl.nus.edu.sg. [Unduh 18 April 2013]
Robert R, Gott R. 2009. A framework for Practical Work, Argumentation, and Scientific Literacy. G.Cakmaci, MF Tafsar [Eds]. a Collection of papers presented at ESERA 2009 Conference.
Contemporary Science Education Research: Scientific Literacy and Social Aspects of Science. pp. 99–105. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
Sadler TD. 2011. Socio-scientific Issues in The Clasroom: Teaching, Learning, & Research. Dordrecht: Springer.
Sadler TD, Zeidler DL. 2004. The Morality of Sosioscientific Issues: Construal and resulution on genetic engineering dillemas. Journal of Science Education 88:4-27. Tersedia online di http://interscience.wiley.com. [Unduh 3 Juni 2012]
Serrano MJH. 2011. Progressing the Social Dimension Toward the Collaborative Construction of Knowledge in 2.0 Learning Environments: A Pedagogical Approach. White, B., King, I., & Tsang, P. (Eds). Social Media Tools and Platforms in Learning Environtment. London: Springer.
Toulmin SE. 2003. The Uses of Argument. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Wahyudi R. 2011. Naik 13 Juta, Pengguna Internet Indonesia 55 Juta Orang. Tersedia online di http://tekno.kompas.com [Unduh 18 April 2013]
Yager RE. 1996. Science Technology Society as Reform in Science Education. New York: State University of New York Press. Tersedia online di http://books.google.co.id
Zeidler DL, Sadler TD, Simmons ML, Howets SE. 2005. Beyond STS: A Research-Based Framework for Socioscientific Issues Education. Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Tersedia online di http://faculty.education.ufl.edu. [Unduh 12 April 2012]
