VARIASI ARGUMEN SAKSI DALAM PEMBELAJARAN MENULIS ILMIAH BAGI MAHASISWA

Antonius Nesi, Subyantoro Subyantoro, Rahayu Pristiwati

Abstract


ABSTRAK: Salah satu karakteristik artikel ilmiah ialah adanya variasi argumen sebagai bentuk pertanggungjawaban ilmiah seorang penulis terhadap isi artikelnya. Argumen dapat dikatakan berhasil apabila sebuah pernyataan dapat dibentengi dengan aneka alasan dan bukti (argumen yang variatif). Melalui konstruksi argumen yang variatif, pembaca dapat diyakinkan bahwa masalah yang diangkat terselesaikan secara ilmiah. Artikel ini menelaah variasi ‘argumen saksi’ dalam pembelajaran menulis ilmiah bagi mahasiswa. Teori dasar yang digunakan ialah model argumen saksi Douglas Walton. Variasi argumen saksi sebagai acuan dasar untuk pembelajaran menulis ilmiah dianggap urgen mengingat argumen saksi ternyata bukan hanya berwujud argumen pendapat ahli saja sebagaimana selama ini dibuat kebanyakan penulis, tetapi masih terdapat jenis argumen lain untuk membentengi pernyataan posisi. Artikel ini menggunakan pendekatan studi kepustakaan, yakni telaah dokumen dan literatur-literatur yang relevan. Berdasarkan hasil telaah ditemukan tiga hal. Pertama, dalam pembelajaran menulis ilmiah dapat dibuat variasi argumen pendapat ahli dalam wujud argumen pendapat ahli 1, argumen pendapat ahli 2, dan argumen pendapat ahli 3. Selanjutnya, sebagai bentuk persuasi dapat ditambahkan argumen analogi dan argumen penalaran praktis. Kedua, dalam pembelajaran menulis ilmiah, argumen fakta-hipotesis dapat dibuat variasinya berupa argumen pendapat ahli 1, argumen pendapat ahli 2, argumen pendapat ahli 3, argumen preseden, dan argumen pengecualian. Ketiga, bentuk variasi lain untuk argumen penalaran praktis, yakni argumen analogi, argumen preseden, argumen pendapat ahli 1, dan argumen pendapat ahli 2. Melalui konstruksi argumen yang variatif, artikel yang dihasilkan mahasiswa memenuhi kepatutannya (bereputasi).

KATA KUNCI: Argumen saksi; menulis ilmiah; mahasiswa; pembelajaran

 

 VARIATIONS OF ‘WITNESS ARGUMENTS’ IN LEARNING SCIENTIFIC WRITING FOR STUDENTS ABSTRACT: One of the characteristics of scientific articles is that there are variations in arguments as a form of a writer's scientific accountability for the contents of the article. An argument can be said to be successful if a statement can be fortified with various reasons and evidence (varied arguments). Through the construction of varied arguments, readers can be convinced that the issues raised are scientifically resolved. This article examines the variation of 'witness argument' in teaching scientific writing for students. The basic theory used is Douglas Walton's witness argument model. The variety of witness arguments as a basic reference for learning to write scientifically is considered urgent considering that witness arguments are not only in the form of expert opinion arguments as so far made by most authors, but there are still other types of arguments to fortify position statements. The article uses a literature study approach, which is a study of relevant documents and literatures. Based on the results of the study found three things. First, in scientific writing learning, variations of expert opinion arguments can be made in the form of expert opinion arguments 1, expert opinion arguments 2, and expert opinion arguments 3. Furthermore, as a form of persuasion, analogy arguments and practical reasoning arguments can be added. Second, in the study of scientific writing, fact-hypothesis arguments can be varied in the form of expert opinion arguments 1, expert opinion arguments 2, expert opinion arguments 3, precedent arguments, and exception arguments. Third, other forms of variation for practical reasoning arguments, namely analogy arguments, precedent arguments, expert opinion arguments 1, and expert opinion arguments 2. Through varied argument construction, an article fulfills its merit (reputable).

KEYWORDS: Witness argument; scientific writing; student; learning


References


Ambon, Y. E. (2018). Pengembangan Buku Ajar Menulis Argumentasi Tentang Model-Model Argumentasi dalam Penulisan Artikel Jurnal. Tesis. Yogyakarta: Universitas Sanata Dharma Yogyakarta. http://repository.usd.ac.id/31204/2/161232014_full.pdf

Beigman Klebanov, B., Stab, C., Burstein, J., Song, Y., Gyawali, B., & Gurevych, I. (2016). Argumentation: Content, Structure, and Relationship with Essay Quality. Proceedings of the Third Workshop on Argument Mining, 2, 70–75. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/w16-2808

Dirjenbelmawa. (2019). Publikasi Karya Ilmiah Program Sarjana, Program Magister, dan Program Doktor. Pub. L. SE No. B/323/B.B1/SE/2019. Jakarta Kemdikbudristekdikti

Keraf, G. (2007). Narasi dan Argumentasi (12th ed.). PT Gramedia Pustaka Utama.

Lavery, M. R., Bostic, J. D., Kruse, L., Krupa, E. E., & Carney, M. B. (2020). Argumentation Surrounding Argument-Based Validation: A Systematic Review of Validation Methodology in Peer-Reviewed Articles. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 39(4), 116–130. https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12378

Lida, U. M., & Zulaeha, I. (2017). Pola Penalaran Dalam Karangan Argumentasi Pada Siswa Tahap Operasi Formal. Indonesian Language Education and Literature, 3(1), 45. https://doi.org/10.24235/ileal.v3i1.1570

Lubis, A. H. (2020). The argumentation structure of research article ‘findings and discussion’ sections written by Non-native English speaker novice writers: a case of Indonesian undergraduate students. Asian Englishes, 22(2), 143–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/13488678.2019.1669300

Macagno, F., & Walton, D. (2018). Practical Reasoning Arguments: A Modular Approach. Argumentation, 32(4), 519–547. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-018-9450-5

Macpherson, A. C. (2016). A Comparison of Scientists’ Arguments and School Argumentation Tasks. Science Education, 100(6), 1062–1091. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21246

Mestika, Z. (2004). Metode Penelitian Kepustakaan. Yayasan Obor Indonesia.

Pristiwati, R. (2013). Better Teaching and Learning (Btl) Untuk Meningkatkan Pengajaran Profesional Dan Pembelajaran Bermakna Mahasiswa. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan Unnes, 30(1), 124240. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpp.v30i1.5667

Rybacki, K. &; Rybacki, R. J. (2012). Advocacy and Opposition: An Introduction to Argumentation (7th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.

Syaifudin, A., & Pratama, H. (2013). Pengembangan Buku Teks Menulis Argumentasi. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan, 30, 1–10.

Van Lacum, E. B., Ossevoort, M. A., & Goedhart, M. J. (2014). A teaching strategy with a focus on argumentation to improve undergraduate students’ ability to read research articles. CBE Life Sciences Education, 13(2), 253–264. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-06-0110

Von der Mühlen, S., Richter, T., Schmid, S., & Berthold, K. (2019). How to improve argumentation comprehension in university students: experimental test of a training approach. Instructional Science, 47(2), 215–237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-018-9471-3

Walton, D. (2006). Fundamentals of Critical Argumentation. Camdrige University Press.

Walton, D. (2013). Method of Argumentation. Camdrige University Press.

Zhou, H., Song, N., Cheng, H., & Wang, X. (2019). Argument ontology for describing scientific articles: A statistical study based on articles from two research areas. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 56(1), 855–857. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.204




DOI: https://doi.org/10.25134/fon.v18i1.4739



Copyright (c) 2022 Fon: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Fon: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia

e-ISSN 2614-7718 | p-ISSN 2086-0609

 Creative Commons License

View My Stats

Jl. Cut Nyak Dien No. 36A Cijoho-Kuningan

Pos. 45513 | [email protected]