Imas Maslakhatul M., Yusmaniar and Yuli Rahmawati University State of Jakarta, Jakarta
Abstract: This study aimed to analyses students’ argumentation skill in learning about polymer through life- cycle analysis and an inquiry-based approach. The study use a qualitative approach and data were derived from interviews, observations, and reflective journals. During the research, students engaged in the stories of pre-task and post-task, conducted projects, and wrote essays. The data analyzed with regard to socio- economic, moral, ecology and scientific aspects, based on Toulmin’s argumentation skills analysis (2003).
The results of the study showed that the students’ argumentation skills on socio-economic and ecological aspects through life-cycle analysis were developed during the lessons. Students faced the challenges in developing their argumentation skills on moral and scientific aspects. In addition, students engaged in life- cycle analysis of the use of paper and plastics which developed their awareness of environmental sustainability and their creativity in managing waste. In conclusion, the approach used in this study has developed students’ argumentation skills, students’ engagement, and students’ awareness of environment problems.
Keywords: Chemistry learning, Life-cycle, Students’ argumentation skills
INTRODUCTION
Based on the observation at a senior high school in August to December 2014, the students’
argumentation skills were still low. Students’ lack of argumentations skills was due to materials and scores centered learning process. Life-cycle analysis and inquiry-based learning approach were applied by Juntunen and Aksela (2014) to improve students’ argumentation skills in chemistry lesson. Social and scientific aspects of a product used in daily basis were discussed to develop students’ motivation, curiosity, and critical thinking. Therefore, a study about life-cycle analysis and inquiry-based learning approach was conducted in polymer learning at school. Polymer lesson was the chapter directly related to current issues. It was expected to stimulate students’ critical thinking in order to develop students’ argumentation skills and to boost students’ motivation in learning chemistry.
Problem identification of this research was how to apply and use the approach, and how to analyze the use of the approach. Scope of the study is the analysis of students’ argumentation skills and the effect of the approach to the students’ argumentation skills. The purpose of the study is to analyze students’
argumentation skills in polymer learning through life-cycle analysis and inquiry-based learning.
Life-Cycle Analysis
Life-cycle analysis is a technique to assess environmental impacts associated with all the stages of a product's life, materials processing or activities to measure energy flows and different chemicals (Blackburn
& Payne, 2004). Assessment of resources consumption, emission, and health related impact creates opportunity environmental improvement of product’s life-cycle (Anastas & Lankey, 2000). In chemistry perspective, life-cycle analysis is a uniting approach that combines green chemistry (Anastas & Lankey, 2000), sustainable chemistry and engineering, which are categorized as science ethics and moral awareness.
Learning through project based life-cycle product analysis is a new approach in chemistry learning (Juntunen
& Aksela 2013). This approach is students-centered, where students choose their own topics that suit their interest and ability to master the materials related to their daily life. Investigation based life-cycle analysis project related to social and science issues about a product would stimulate students to have higher order thinking (Anderson & Krathwol, 2001).
Thinking in life-cycle frame is a complex interdisciplinary science, contrast and relevant to daily life in education perspective (Sadler 2011). Students analyze the life-cycle of a product comprehensively in a multidisciplinary course to assess environmental impact of a product, examine the process of the product, and materials and energy consumed.
Inquiry-Based Learning
Inquiry-based learning (IBL) is a method to acquire knowledge through inquiry process (Hebrank, 2000), a teaching technique in which teachers involve students in learning process by posing questions, doing problem solving activity and critical thinking. IBL strategy uses constructivist approach, students are treated as the learning subject and free to formulate the definitions according to interactions among what they know and believe with phenomena, ideas, or information they have just learned. IBL strategy emphasizes discovery process and students involvement physically and mentally in the learning process, so exercises through scientific process and experiment are required.
Argumentation Skills
Argument is a statement of claim supported by data and presented to influence someone. Inch (2006) stated that argument is a set of statements of claim, supporting ideas offered for it, and effort to influence someone in the context of disagreement. Toulmin Model (Toulmin, 2003) was used in this study. This model was selected since it was the most comprehensive model to describe three arguments criteria suggested by Inch (claim, supporting claim, and effort to influence). Toulmin model of argument in Freeley (2003) noticed that good arguments will consists of six parts, they are Data (D), Claim (C), Warrants (W), Qualifiers (Q), Rebuttals (R), and Backing (B).
Toulmin’s diagram of arguments is typically described like this example in Figure 1:
Figure 1. Complete Model of Argumentation Toulmin
Variability of arguments was considered in terms of socio-economic, ethical, ecological and scientific aspects in this study. The four aspects were chosen in arguments due to the most common models of sustainable development which are usually considered to consist of economical, ecological, and socio-cultural aspects.
Tabel 1. Key concepts of the four categories (Liu et al. 2010) used in the content analysis of the data Category Key Concept
Socio-economic Cost or benefits
Ethical Opinions related to values, aesthetics or the future Ecological Effect on ecosystems, eco-friendlier products and lifestyle Scientific Natural resources, technologies, energy, materials
The intervention stage allowed students to practice their argumentation skills related to life-cycle products issues. This gave students an opportunity to develop their argumentation skills.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Qualitative study has been employed in this research. According to Cresswell (2012), qualitative study is used to understand humanity or social problems by giving comprehensive and complex description in sentences, reporting detail views from informant, and being conducted in natural setting. The purpose of this qualitative study is to get comprehensive description of certain topic from the subjects of the study.
Qualitative study is related to ideas, perceptions, opinions, or beliefs of the subjects of the study and is not measured quantitatively. The subjects of the study were 36 students of a senior high school. This study was conducted in January to April 2015.
The data of the research were collected through documentation, reflective journal, interview, and observation. Data clarification and illustration of data collection techniques were included in the table below.
Table 2. Outline of the Study
Week Activity Time
Rebuttal Backing
Warrant
Qualifier, Claim Data
At the pre-task, students were asked to have a brainstorming session about global issues. The pre-task story was used as the base to measure students’ argumentation skills. After the pre-task was completed, students’
project intervention was conducted. Life-cycle of a product was introduced to students through poster and video. Then the students could choose a product for their project. Once the intervention was completed, the presentation was done by the students. The next step was students had to write essays about their project.
Post-task was conducted after the intervention was finished. A post-task story was presented to find out the development of students’ argumentation skills. In the end, each student submitted their essay based on their own project. The essays were used to obtain final result of the students’ argumentation skills.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The group intervention with 36 students resulted in the life-cycle analysis of a plastic lunch box, paper, a shampoo bottle, and a pipe. An example of analysis in the form of a poster is presented in Figure 2.
This poster includes all the main phases of a life-cycle for a plastic lunch box and its recycled product. The students’ works included various kinds of information and data which the students proudly presented to their teacher and classmates.The arguments presented by the students in pre-task story and post-task story, and the essay were analyzed into the four categories. The findings show that all students were able to make arguments well. The life-cycle analysis project was shown to have a positive impact on the students’
argumentation skills.
Figure 2. Students’ Project
Students’ project was presented in front of their classmates and the essays were written after the presentations were done. The analysis of students’ argumentation were shown in Graphic 1 below.
1 Task preparation 15 minutes
1 Pre-task 20 minutes
1 Intervention 2 until 5 hours
2 Post-task 30 minutes
2 Debate 20 minutes
2 Essay writing 2 to 3 hours
Graphic 1. Student’s Argumentation for Each Aspect
The graphic above shows that the students’ argumentation had been developed. The total of arguments for all aspects was increased in each task. Students' thoughts are dominantly on a socio-economic aspect since it was close to their daily life.
Graphic 2. Students’ Argumentation Category Based on Toulmin Model
The graphic above shows that students' argumentation skills based on Toulmin are dominantly on claim.
Students were only able to develop their argumentation according to the standpoint only.
CONCLUSION
According to the analysis of students’ argumentation skills through life-cycle analysis and inquiry based approach in polymer learning, it can be concluded that students’ thoughts were dominantly on socio- economic aspect. They thought that way because the aspect was familiar in their daily life. Students’
argumentation was also dominantly on claim. This pointed out that students were able to develop standpoint of the main problem. The analysis shown students’ argumentation skills were developed by using this approach.
REFERENCES
Aksela, M. (2005). Supporting meaningful chemistry learning and high-order thingking through computer- assisted inquiry: A design research approach. A doctoral dissertation, University of Helsinki. Helsinki:
Unversity Print.
Albe,V. (2008). When scientific knowledge, daily life experience, epistemological and sosial considerations intersect: Student’s argumentation in group discussions on a socio-scientific issue, Res. Sci. Educ., 38, 67-90.
Anastas, P. & Lankey, R. (2000), Life-cycle assessment and green chemistry: the yin and yang of industrial ecology, Green Chem., 2, 289-295.
Anderson, L. & Krathwohl, D. (ed.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New Yok: Longman.
Blacburn, R. & Payne, J. (2004), Life-cycle analysis of cotton towels: impact of domestic laundering and recommendations for extending perionds between washing, Green Chem., 6, 59-61.
Burmeister, M & Eilks, I. (2012). An example of learning about plastics and their evaluation as a contribution to education for sustainable development in secondary school chemistry teaching.
Chemistry Education Research and Practice. 13, 93-102.
Chang, & M. H. Chiu. (2008). Lactos‟s scientific research: programmes as aframework for analysing informal argumentation about sosio-scientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, Vol.
30 No.17,pp.1753-1773.
Creswell, J. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions. London: SAGE Publications.
Edward, S. Inch, Barbara Warnick, & Danielle Endres. (2006). Critical thinking and communication: the use of reason in argument. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc. p. 9.
Erduran, S, Simon, S. & Osborn, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: developments in the application of toulmin’s argument pattern for studying science discourse. Sci. Educ., 88, 915-933.
Guba, E & Licoln, Y. (1989). Effective evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Hebrank, Mary. (2000). Why inquiry-based teaching & learning in the middle school science classroom?.
<http://www.biology.duke.edu/cibl/inquiry/ why_is_inquiry.htm>.pdf [diakses 7-11-2014 pukul 14.03 WIB]
Johnstone A.H. (2009). Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what they seem. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 7,75-83.
Juntunen, M & Aksela, M. (2014). Improvin Students’ Argumentation Skills through a Product Life-cycle Analysis Project in Chemistry Education, Chem. Educ.Res. Pract. 3,157-180.
Juntunen, M & Aksela, M. (2013). Life-cycle analysis and inquiry-based learning in chemistry teaching, Sci.
Educ. Int.,24,150-166.
Keraf, G. (2006). Diksi dan gaya bahasa. Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Utama.
Liu, S-Y, Lin, C-S, & Tsai, C-C. (2010). College students’ scientific and epistemological views and thingking patterns in socio-scientific decision making, Sci. Educ., 95,497-517.
Robert K. Yin. (1989). Case study reasearch design and methods. Washington: COSMOS Coorporation.
Sadler, T. (2011). Socio-scientific issues-based education: What we know about science education in the context of SSI. In book Sadler (ed.) Socio-scientific issues in classroom: teaching, learning and research (p.355-369) New York:Springer. ISBN:978-94-007-1158-7.
Shenton, A. (2003). Strategi for ensuring transworth hiness in qualitative research project. Education for information. 22,63-75.
Toulmin, S. (2003). The uses of argument. New York: Cambridge University Press. p.97