Profile of Argumentation Ability of Undergraduate Students In Chemistry Education Based On Non-Routine Problems

Abstract

This study aims to determine the profile of the argumentation ability of undergraduate chemical education students. The research was conducted by giving 3 questions based on non-routine problems. In these questions, questions are given that demand statements of claims, data, warrants, backings, qualifiers, and rebuttals. The answers of 47 students were analyzed using descriptive qualitative analysis techniques. The results of the analysis show that the students' argumentation skills are included in the type of argumentation without rebuttal. Based on the rubric of the argumentation level without rebuttal, it shows that most of the students' abilities are at level 2, namely being able to make claims, but the data, warrants, and backing used are quite good in supporting the claims. The results of the distributed questionnaires showed that most of the students had not mastered argumentation. Experiencing the rigors of thinking in working on argumentative questions makes students motivated to study further. These findings will be the basis for the need to train students' argumentation skills with various methods so as to improve students' argumentation skills.