Literature review: a snapshot of research on the argumentation of bibliometric analysis in the period 2015-2023

Literature review: a snapshot of research on the argumentation of bibliometric analysis in the period 2015-2023

Автор: Mulyani A., Hartono H., Subali B.

Журнал: International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education @ijcrsee

Рубрика: Original research

Статья в выпуске: 2 т.12, 2024 года.

Бесплатный доступ

Argumentation has an important role in science education. One of the aims of science education is to develop argumentation skills as a basis for building scientific characterization. The role of argumentation in science education is one of the research topics that has received a lot of attention from academics. The purpose of this study was to analyze the research trend of argumentation in science education from 2015-2023. The research method used preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses and network meta-analyses, or PRISMA for short, which consists of identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion. The articles analyzed were obtained using the publish or perish search engine from Scopus and Google Scholar, as many as 340 articles from a total search of 1013 articles. The analysis was conducted using content analysis and bibliometric using VOSviewer, which was reviewed based on network visualization, overlay visualization, and density visualization. The results were analyzed based on country of origin, research area, research method, research subject, research instrument, learning intervention, and argumentation type. The conclusion of this study shows that argumentation skills are one of the important topics in research that are linked with several other variables in science education and have received attention from researchers in recent years. Recommendations for future argumentation research should identify the characteristics of argumentation types and their relationship with teaching materials, learning models, and assessments in science education.

Еще

Argumentation skills, science education, bibliometric analysis, prisma, vosviewer

Короткий адрес: https://sciup.org/170206414

IDR: 170206414   |   DOI: 10.23947/2334-8496-2024-12-2-451-465

Список литературы Literature review: a snapshot of research on the argumentation of bibliometric analysis in the period 2015-2023

  • Abdullah, K. H. (2022). Publication trends in biology education: a bibliometric review of 63 years. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 19(2), 465-480. https://tused.org/index.php/tused/article/view/1190
  • Admoko, S., R J, M. N., Hariyono, E., & Madlazim. (2021). Bibliometric profile of science education research on argumentation and the contribution of Indonesia. Advances in Engineering Research, 209(Ijcse), 502-509. https://www.atlantis-press. com/proceedings/ijcse-21/125966505
  • Arruda, H., Silva, E. R., Lessa, M., Proenga, D., & Bartholo, R. (2022). VOSviewer and bibliometrix. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 110(3), 392-395. https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2022.1434
  • Cankaya, O., & Aydogan, N. (2022). The relationship between argumentation skills and cognitive flexibility of pre-service science teachers. Asian JournalofEducation and Training, 8(2), 51-59. https://doi.org/10.20448/edu.v8i2.3963
  • Chalkiadaki, A. (2018). A systematic literature review of 21st century skills and competencies in primary education. International Journal of Instruction, 11 (3), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.1131a
  • Chen, H. T., Wang, H. H., Lu, Y. Y., Lin, H. S., & Hong, Z. R. (2016). Using a modified argument-driven inquiry to promote elementary school students' engagement in learning science and argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 38(2), 170-191. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1134849
  • Cheng, P., Tang, H., Dong, Y., Liu, K., Jiang, P., & Liu, Y. (2021). Knowledge mapping of research on land use change and food security: A visual analysis using citespace and vosviewer. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, i8(24). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182413065
  • Dede, E., & Ozdemir, E. (2022). Mapping and performance evaluation of mathematics education research in Turkey: A bibliometric analysis from 2005 to 2021. Journal ofPedagogical Research. https://doi.org/10.33902/jpr.202216829
  • Dewi, P. S., Widodo, A., Rochintaniawati, D., & Prima, E. C. (2021). Web-Based Inquiry in Science Learning: Bibliometric Analysis. Indonesian Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4(2), 191-203. https://doi.org/10.24042/ijsme. v4i2.9576
  • Erduran, S. (2007). Methodological foundations in the study of argumentation in science classrooms. In S. Erduran & M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education (pp. 47-69). Springer, Science and Technology Education Library. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2
  • Erduran, S., Guilfoyle, L., Park, W., Chan, J., & Fancourt, N. (2019). Argumentation and interdisciplinarity: reflections from the Oxford Argumentation in Religion and Science Project. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, i(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0006-9
  • Erduran, S., Ozdem, Y., & Park, J. Y. (2015). Research trends on argumentation in science education: a journal content analysis from 1998-2014. InternationalJournalofSTEMEducation, 2(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-015-0020-1
  • Faize, F. A., Husain, W., & Nisar, F. (2018). Acritical review of scientific argumentation in science education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and TechnologyEducation, 14(1), 475-483. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/80353
  • Gonzalez-Howard, M., McNeill, K. L., Marco-Bujosa, L. M., & Proctor, C. P. (2017). 'Does it answer the question or is it French fries?': an exploration of language supports for scientific argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 39(5), 528-547. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1294785
  • Grooms, J., Sampson, V., & Enderle, P. (2018). How concept familiarity and experience with scientific argumentation are related to the way groups participate in an episode ofargumentation. February, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21451
  • Gultepe, N., & Kilic, Z. (2015). Effect of scientific argumentation on the development of scientific process skills in the context of teaching chemistry. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 10(1), 111-132. https://eric. ed.gov/?id=EJ1060989
  • Henderson, J. B., McNeill, K. L., Gonzalez-Howard, M., Close, K., & Evans, M. (2018). Key challenges and future directions for educational research on scientific argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(1), 5-18. https://doi. org/10.1002/tea.21412
  • Heng, L. L., Surif, J., & Seng, C. H. (2015). Malaysian students' scientific argumentation: Do groups perform better than individuals? International Journal ofScience Education, 37(3), 505-528. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.995147
  • Higgins, J. P. T., Thomas, J., Chandler, J., Cumpston, M., Li, T., Page, M. J., & Welch, V. A. (2019). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews oflnterventions (2nd ed., Vol. 2). The Cochrane Collaboration and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  • Ilma, A. Z., Wilujeng, I., Widowati, A., Nurtanto, M., & Kholifah, N. (2023). A systematic literature review of STEM education in Indonesia (2016-2021): Contribution to improving skills in 21st century learning. Pegem Egitim ve Ogretim Dergisi, 13(2), 134-146. https://doi.org/10.47750/pegegog.13.02.17
  • Kilinc, A., Demiral, U., & Kartal, T. (2017). Resistance to dialogic discourse in SSI teaching: The effects of an argumentation-based workshop, teaching practicum, and induction on a preservice science teacher. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(6), 764-789. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21385
  • Kleemola, K., Hyytinen, H., & Toom, A. (2022). The Challenge of Position-Taking in Novice Higher Education Students' Argumentative Writing. FrontiersinEducation, 7(May), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.885987
  • Lazarou, D., Sutherland, R., & Erduran, S. (2016). Argumentation in science education as a systemic activity: An activity-theoretical perspective. International Journal of Educational Research, 79, 150-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2016.07.008
  • Lee, M. H., Wu, Y. T., & Tsai, C. C. (2009). Research trends in science education from 2003 to 2007: A content analysis of publications in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 3i(15), 1999-2020. https://doi. org/10.1080/09500690802314876
  • Lin, T.-C., Lin, T.-J., & Tsai, C.-C. (2014). Research trends in science education from 2008 to 2012: A systematic content analysis of publications in selected journals. International Journal ofScience Education, 36(8), 1346-1372. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/09500693.2013.864428
  • Lin, T.-J., Lin, T.-C., Potvin, P., & Tsai, C.-C. (2019). Research trends in science education from 2013 to 2017: A systematic content analysis of publications in selected journals. International Journal ofScience Education, 41(3), 367-387. https:// doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1550274
  • Liu, Q. T., Liu, B. W., & Lin, Y. R. (2019). The influence of prior knowledge and collaborative online learning environment on students' argumentation in descriptive and theoretical scientific concept. International Journal ofScience Education, 41(2), 165-187. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1545100
  • McNeill, K. L., González-Howard, M., Katsh-Singer, R., & Loper, S. (2016). Pedagogical content knowledge of argumentation: Using classroom contexts to assess high-quality PCK rather than pseudoargumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(2), 261-290. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21252
  • McNeill, K. L., GonzÁlez-Howard, M., Katsh-Singer, R., & Loper, S. (2017). Moving beyond pseudoargumentation: teachers' enactments of an educative science curriculum focused on argumentation. Science Education, 101(3), 426-457. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21274
  • McNeill, K. L., Katsh-Singer, R., González-Howard, M., & Loper, S. (2016). Factors impacting teachers' argumentation instruction in their science classrooms. International Journal ofScience Education, 38(12), 2026-2046. https://doi.org/10.10 80/09500693.2016.1221547
  • Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. In British Medical Journal (Vol. 339, Issue 7716, pp. 332-336). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj. b2535
  • Moon, A., Stanford, C., Cole, R., & Towns, M. (2017). Analysis of inquiry materials to explain complexity of chemical reasoning in physical chemistry students' argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(10), 1322-1346. https:// doi.org/10.1002/tea.21407
  • Muhammad, U. A., Fuad, M., Ariyani, F., & Suyanto, E. (2022). Bibliometric analysis of local wisdom-based learning: Direction for future history education research. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 11 (4), 2209-2222. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v11i4.23547
  • Namdar, B., & Shen, J. (2016). Intersection of argumentation and the use of multiple representations in the context of socio-scientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 38(7), 1100-1132. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.20 16.1183265
  • Nordin, N. A. H. M. (2022). A bibliometric analysis of computational mapping on publishing teaching science engineering using VOSviewer application and correlation. Indonesian Journal of Teaching in Science, 2(2), 127-138. https://ejournal.upi. edu/index.php/IJoTis/article/view/47038
  • Osborne, J. F., Henderson, J. B., MacPherson, A., Szu, E., Wild, A., & Yao, S. Y. (2016). The development and validation of a learning progression for argumentation in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(6), 821-846. https:// doi.org/10.1002/tea.21316
  • Ozçinar, H. (2015). Scaffolding computer-mediated discussion to enhance moral reasoning and argumentation quality in pre-service teachers. JournalofMoralEducation, 44(2), 232-251. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240.2015.1043875
  • Pabuccu, A., & Erduran, S. (2017). Beyond rote learning in organic chemistry: the infusion and impact of argumentation in tertiary education. International Journal of Science Education, 39(9), 1154-1172. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2 017.1319988
  • Putri, W. E., Sunarno, W., & Marzuki, A. (2021). Analysis of the students' argumentative skills of senior high school in covid-19 pandemic using problem based learning in static fluid. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 7(3), 335-343. https://doi. org/10.29303/jppipa.v7i3.735
  • Rodrigues-Silva, J., & Alsina, Á. (2023). Systematic review about students' conceptions of engineering accessed through drawings: Implications to STEAM education. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education, 11 (2), 199-211. https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2023-11-2-199-211
  • Sandoval, W. A., Enyedy, N., Redman, E. H., & Xiao, S. (2019). Organising a culture of argumentation in elementary science. International Journal ofScience Education, 4i(13), 1848-1869. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1641856
  • Sengul, O., Enderle, P. J., & Schwartz, R. S. (2020). Science teachers' use of argumentation instructional model: linking PCK of argumentation, epistemological beliefs, and practice. International Journal of Science Education, 42(7), 1068-1086. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1748250
  • Short, R. A., Van der Eb, M. Y., & McKay, S. R. (2020). Effect of productive discussion on written argumentation in earth science classrooms. JournalofEducationalResearch, 113(1), 46-58. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2020.1712314
  • Silber-Varod, V., Eshet-Alkalai, Y., & Geri, N. (2019). Tracing research trends of 21st-century learning skills. In British Journal of Educational Technology (Vol. 50, Issue 6, pp. 3099-3118). Blackwell Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12753
  • Simonovic, N. (2021). Teachers' key competencies for innovative teaching. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering andEducation, 9(3), 331-345. https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2021-9-3-331-345
  • Suwandi, T., Rahmat, A., Jamil, M. W., & Nurkhalishah, S. (2023). Research trends on biology digital modules: A bibliometric analysis. Biosfer, 16(1), 13-24. https://doi.org/10.21009/biosferjpb.31361
  • Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The uses ofargument, updated edition (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  • Ubaidillah, M., Marwoto, P., Wiyanto, W., & Subali, B. (2023). Problem solving and decision-making skills for ESD: A bibliometric analysis. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education, 11 (3), 401-415. https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2023-11 -3-401-415
  • van Laar, E., van Deursen, A. J. A. M., van Dijk, J. A. G. M., & de Haan, J. (2020). Determinants of 21st-century skills and 21st-century digital skills for workers: a systematic literature review. SAGE Open, 10(1), 1-14. https://doi. org/10.1177/2158244019900176
  • Wang, J., & Buck, G. A. (2016). Understanding a high school physics teacher's pedagogical content knowledge of argumentation. Journal ofScience TeacherEducation, 27(5), 577-604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-016-9476-1
  • Yilmaz, Y. O., Cakiroglu, J., Ertepinar, H., & Erduran, S. (2017). The pedagogy of argumentation in science education: science teachers' instructional practices. International Journal of Science Education, 39(11), 1443-1464. https://doi.org/10.10 80/09500693.2017.1336807
Еще
Статья научная
QR-код для установки приложения SciUp Наведите камеру и скачайте бесплатное приложение SciUp