Pola Penggunaan Evidence dalam Teks Argumentasi Peserta Didik Berdasarkan Kerangka Claim, Evidence dan Reasoning
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58230/4y4q5y61Keywords:
Teks Argumentasi, Evidence, Kerangka CER, Literasi Kritis, Pembelajaran Bahasa.Abstract
Kemampuan menulis teks argumentasi merupakan salah satu kompetensi krusial dalam literasi abad ke-21. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis pola penggunaan bukti (evidence) dalam teks argumentasi peserta didik dengan menggunakan kerangka Claim, Evidence, and Reasoning (CER). Penelitian ini menggunakan metode Systematic Literature Review (SLR) dengan pendekatan kualitatif deskriptif. Data diperoleh melalui penelusuran literatur pada basis data akademik utama, yakni Scopus, ERIC, dan Google Scholar, untuk rentang waktu publikasi 2015–2024. Melalui tahapan identifikasi dan penyaringan, sebanyak 35 artikel empiris yang memuat analisis sampel teks argumentasi peserta didik terpilih untuk dikaji. Kriteria inklusi meliputi studi empiris yang telah ditelaah sejawat (peer-review) dan berfokus pada analisis teks argumentasi jenjang sekolah menengah dan pendidikan tinggi, sementara artikel konseptual, opini, atau studi yang tidak memuat analisis data tekstual dieksklusi. Sintesis literatur dilakukan dengan mengekstraksi temuan dari berbagai studi tersebut, yang kemudian dikategorikan berdasarkan tingkat relevansi bukti, jenis sumber yang digunakan, serta kedalaman penalaran. Berdasarkan kriteria sintesis tersebut, hasil penelitian menunjukkan tiga pola utama penggunaan evidence oleh peserta didik: (1) Pola Bukti Tunggal Tanpa Relevansi, di mana peserta didik menyajikan klaim yang diikuti satu fakta acak tanpa penalaran; (2) Pola Bukti Anekdotal, yang sangat bergantung pada pengalaman pribadi alih-alih data empiris; dan (3) Pola Bukti Terintegrasi, di mana peserta didik mampu menyajikan data statistik maupun kutipan otoritatif yang dijembatani dengan penalaran (reasoning) yang kohesif. Temuan ini mengindikasikan bahwa sebagian besar peserta didik sudah mampu merumuskan klaim, namun masih mengalami beban kognitif dalam menyeleksi dan mengintegrasikan evidence yang valid. Diperlukan intervensi pedagogis berupa perancah (scaffolding) khusus dalam mengevaluasi sumber bukti.
Downloads
References
Berland, L. K., & Reiser, B. J. (2009). Making sense of argumentation and explanation. Science Education, 93(1), 26–55. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20286
Cavagnetto, A. R. (2010). Argument to foster scientific literacy: A review of argument intervention in K-12 science contexts. Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 336–371.
Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2010). Supporting argumentation through students’ questions: Case studies in science classrooms. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(2), 230–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400903530036
Cho, K. L., & Jonassen, D. H. (2002). The effects of argumentation scaffolds on argumentation and problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02505022
Clark, D. B., & Sampson, V. (2007). Personally seeded discussions to scaffold online argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 29(3), 253–277.
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
Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287–312.
Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38(1), 39–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260208560187
Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin's argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915–933. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20012
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., Rodríguez, A. B., & Duschl, R. A. (2000). “Doing the lesson” or “doing science”: Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757–792.
Kementerian Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknologi. (2022). Capaian pembelajaran mata pelajaran Bahasa Indonesia fase A–F. Badan Standar, Kurikulum, dan Asesmen Pendidikan.
Keraf, G. (2007). Argumentasi dan narasi. Gramedia Pustaka Utama.
Kholida, I., Suryani, I., & Abrar, M. (2025). Integrating the CER framework in argumentative writing to foster logical thinking and evidence-based reasoning. Scaffolding: Jurnal Pendidikan Islam dan Multikulturalisme, 7(1), 955–974. https://doi.org/10.37680/scaffolding.v7i1.9263
Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge University Press.
Kuhn, D., & Crowell, A. (2011). Dialogic argumentation as a vehicle for developing young adolescents' thinking. Psychological Science, 22(4), 545–552. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611402512
Mahsun. (2014). Teks dalam pembelajaran bahasa Indonesia kurikulum 2013. Rajawali Pers.
McNeill, K. L. (2011). Elementary students' views of explanation, argumentation, and evidence, and their abilities to construct arguments over the school year. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(7), 793–823.
McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2012). Supporting grade 5–8 students in constructing explanations in science: The claim, evidence, and reasoning framework for talk and writing. Pearson.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
Nussbaum, E. M. (2008). Collaborative discourse, argumentation, and learning: Preface and literature review. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(3), 345–359.
Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994–1020.
Ryu, S., & Sandoval, W. A. (2012). Improvements to elementary children's epistemic understanding from sustained argumentation. Science Education, 96(3), 488–526.
Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513–536. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20009
Sampson, V., & Clark, D. B. (2008). Assessment of the ways students generate arguments in science education: Current perspectives and recommendations for future directions. Science Education, 92(3), 447–472.
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
Sandoval, W. A., & Millwood, K. A. (2005). The quality of students' use of evidence in written scientific explanations. Cognition and Instruction, 23(1), 23–55.
Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2–3), 235–260.
Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The uses of argument (Updated ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Zembal-Saul, C., McNeill, K. L., & Hershberger, K. (2013). What's your evidence? Engaging K–5 children in constructing explanations in science. Pearson.
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35–62.
