CRISTAL: Model Pembelajaran Inovatif Berbasis Socio-Scientific Issues dan Blended Learning untuk Meningkatkan Argumentasi Ilmiah Mahasiswa
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24252/jb.v14i1.65868Keywords:
biotechnology, blended learning, CRISTAL, scientific argumentation, SSIAbstract
This study aims to analyze the effectiveness of the CRISTAL learning model in improving students' scientific argumentation skills in biotechnology courses. The study used a quasi-experimental method with a one-group pretest-posttest design. The research subjects consisted of 38 seventh-semester students selected through purposive sampling. The instrument used was an observation sheet for scientific argumentation skills based on Toulmin's Argumentation Pattern (TAP), which includes the components of claim, data, warrant, backing, qualifier, and rebuttal. The data were analyzed using the Shapiro-Wilk test to test normality, followed by a Paired Sample t-Test and N-Gain calculation to determine the level of improvement. The results showed a significant increase in scientific argumentation skills after the application of the CRISTAL model (p < 0.001). The average N-Gain value of 0.65 was in the moderate category. The highest increase occurred in the claim (58.72%) and data (36.09%) indicators, while the lowest increase was in rebuttal (17.97%). These findings indicate that the CRISTAL model is effective in facilitating students to construct scientific arguments systematically, logically, and based on evidence. This model is recommended as an alternative learning method to develop scientific argumentation skills in biotechnology materials that contain complex scientific and social issues.
Downloads
References
Bandura, A. (1983). Model of Causality in Social Learning Theory.
Belland, B. R., Walker, A. E., Kim, N. J., & Lefler, M. (2017). Synthesizing Results From Empirical Research on Computer-Based Scaffolding in STEM Education. Review of Educational Research, 87(2), 309–344. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316670999
Boateng, G. O., Neilands, T. B., Frongillo, E. A., Melgar-Quiñonez, H. R., & Young, S. L. (2018). Best Practices for Developing and Validating Scales for Health, Social, and Behavioral Research: A Primer. Frontiers in Public Health, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149
Chen, L., & Xiao, S. (2021). Perceptions, challenges and coping strategies of science teachers in teaching socioscientific issues: A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 32, 100377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100377
Dawson, V. M., & Venville, G. (2010). Teaching Strategies for Developing Students’ Argumentation Skills About Socioscientific Issues in High School Genetics. Research in Science Education, 40(2), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-008-9104-y
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
Etikan, I. (2016). Comparison of Convenience Sampling and Purposive Sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11
Evagorou, M., & Osborne, J. (2013). Exploring young students’ collaborative argumentation within a socioscientific issue. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(2), 209–237. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21076
Faize, F. A., Husain, W., & Nisar, F. (2018). A critical review of scientific argumentation in science education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(1), 475–483. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/80353
Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001
Ghasemi, A., & Zahediasl, S. (2012). Normality Tests for Statistical Analysis: A Guide for Non-Statisticians. International Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism, 10(2), 486–489. https://doi.org/10.5812/ijem.3505
Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64–74. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18809
Mishra, P., Pandey, C., Singh, U., Gupta, A., Sahu, C., & Keshri, A. (2019). Descriptive statistics and normality tests for statistical data. Annals of Cardiac Anaesthesia, 22(1), 67. https://doi.org/10.4103/aca.ACA_157_18
Muspiroh, N., Shofiyah, S., Nada, S., & Kusmawan, U. (2024). Enhancing Students’ Scientific Argumentation Skills through STEM-Based Problem Based Learning. International Journal of Research in STEM Education, 6(1), 85–96. https://doi.org/10.33830/ijrse.v6i1.1691
Nurtamara, L., & Widyastuti, D. A. (2023). The Improving evidence-based argumentation on socioscientific issues through problem-based learning in science students. Biosfer, 16(2). https://doi.org/10.21009/biosferjpb.35534
Osborne, J. (2010). Arguing to Learn in Science: The Role of Collaborative, Critical Discourse. Science, 328(5977), 463–466. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1183944
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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20035
Pakpahan, F. H., & Saragih, M. (2022). Theory Of Cognitive Development By Jean Piaget. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2(2), 55–60. https://doi.org/10.52622/joal.v2i2.79
Putri, A. J. H., Susilowati, E., & Mulyani, S. (2025). Socio-Scientific Issue Application in the PBL Model: Is that Effective in Improving Chemical Literacy? Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan IPA, 11(1), 296–307. https://doi.org/10.21831/jipi.v11i1.77351
Sadler, T. D. . (2011). Socio-scientific issues in the classroom : teaching, learning and research. Springer.
Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). The significance of content knowledge for informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: Applying genetics knowledge to genetic engineering issues. Science Education, 89(1), 71–93. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20023
Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2009). Scientific literacy, PISA, and socioscientific discourse: Assessment for progressive aims of science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(8), 909–921. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20327
Sampson, V., & Blanchard, M. R. (2012). Science teachers and scientific argumentation: Trends in views and practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(9), 1122–1148. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21037
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. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20276
Taber, K. S. (2018). The Use of Cronbach’s Alpha When Developing and Reporting Research Instruments in Science Education. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1273–1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2
Toulmin, S. (2003). The Uses of Argument, Updated Edition.
Zeidler, D. L., & Nichols, B. H. (2009). Socioscientific issues: Theory and practice. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(2), 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173684
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Sri Mukminati Nur, Firdaus Daud, Yusminah Hala, Ryan Humardani Syam Pratomo
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with Jurnal Biotek agree to the following terms: Authors retain the copyright and grant Universitas Islam Negeri Alauddin Makassar right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share (copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material) the work for any purpose, even commercially with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in Universitas Islam Negeri Alauddin Makassar. 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 acknowledgement of its initial publication in Universitas Islam Negeri Alauddin Makassar. 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.
