Analisis Kemampuan Penalaran Ilmiah pada Pembelajaran Interactive Demonstration disertai Formative Assessment

Demara Balqis, Sentot Kusairi, Edi Supriana


Abstract: This research aims to analyze the students scientific reasoning ability in physics learning. The sample was 32 students of 10th grade in Public Senior High School 7 Malang. The instrument test is two tiers with 13 questions. The result shows that there are differences between students scientific reasoning score before and after interactive demonstration learning with formative assessment. In pretest, the students scientific reasoning scores were low, 25 students were at level of concrete reasoning and 9 students were at initial transition level. When the posttest, scientific reasoning score has increased, 10 students at concrete reasoning level, 15 students at the initial transition level, 8 students are at final transition level, and 1 student reach the level at formal reasoning level. Teacher need to give the innovative learning strategies that can improve student’s scientific reasoning. 

Abstrak: Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui kemampuan penalaran ilmiah siswa pada pembelajaran interactive demonstration disertai formative assessment. Sampel yang digunakan yaitu 34 siswa pada kelas X IPA di SMA Negeri 7 Malang. Instrumen yang digunakan berupa tes Two Tiers dengan 13 pertanyaan. Hasil penelitan menunjukkan bahwa terdapat perbedaan antara penalaran ilmiah siswa sebelum dan setelah dilakukan pembelajaran interactive demonstration disertai formative assessment. Pada saat pretest skor penalaran ilmiah siswa rendah yaitu 25 siswa berada pada tingkat penalaran konkret dan sembilan siswa berada pada tingkat transisi awal. Saat posttest skor penalaran ilmiah mengalami peningkatan yaitu 10 siswa pada tingkat penalar konkret, 15 siswa pada tingkat transisi awal, 8 siswa berada tingkat transisi akhir hingga ada seorang yang mencapai tingkat penalaran formal. Guru perlu memberikan strategi pembelajaran inovatif yang dapat memperbaiki penalaran ilmiah siswa.


scientific reasoning; interactive demonstration; formative assessment; penalaran ilmiah; interactive demonstration; formative assessment

Full Text:



Al Khawaldeh. S. A. (2013). Prediction/Discussion-Based Learning Cycle Versus Conceptual Change Text: Comparative Effects on Students’ Understanding of Genetics. Research in Science & Technological Education, 31(2), 168—183.

Bao, (2009). Learning and Scientific Reasoning. Science Education Forum, 323, 586—587.

Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Van Scotter, P., Powell, J. C., Westbrook, A. & Landes, N. (2006). The BSCS 5E Instructional Model: Origins an Effectiveness. Colorado Springs. Co: BSCS, 5, 88—98.

Chin, C., & Teou, L. Y. (2009). Using Concept Cartoons in Formative Assessment: Scaffolding Students’ Argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 31(10), 1307—1332.

Cohen. L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Reseach Methods in Education Sixth Edition. Newyork: Taylor & Francis e-Library.

Creswell, J.W. & Clark, V. L. P. (2007). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. United States of Amerika: Sage Publications, Inc.

Etkina, E., Karelina, A., Murthy, S., & Maria Ruibal-Villasenor. (2009). Using Action Research to Improve Learning and Formative Assessment to Conduct Research. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research 5, 010109.

Furtak, E. M., Hardy, I., Beinbrech, C., Shavelson, R. J., & Shemwell, J. T. (2010). A Framework for Analysing Evidence-Based Reasoning in Science Classroom Discourse. Educational Assessment, 15(3—4), 175—196.

Gayle A. Buck., & Amy E. Trauth-Nare. (2009). Preparing Teachers to Make the Formative Assessment Process Integral to Science Teaching and Learning. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20(5), 475–494

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—75.

Lawson, A. E. (2004). The Nature and Development of Scientific Reasoning: A Synthetic View. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 23, 307.

OECD. (2015). PISA 2012 Results in Focus What 15-Year-Olds Know and What They Can Do with What They Know. (Online), (, diakses tanggal 1 Mei 2018.

Nehru, N. & Syarkowi, A. (2017). Analisis Desain Pembelajaran untuk Meningkatkan Literasi Sains Berdasarkan Profil Penalaran Ilmiah. WAPFI (Wahana Pendidikan Fisika), 2(1), 20—24.

Shofiyah, N., Supardi, Z. A. I., & Jatmiko, B. (2013). Mengembangkan Penalaran Ilmiah (Scientific Reasoning) Siswa melalui Model Pembelajaran 5E pada Siswa Kelas X SMAN 15 Surabaya. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 2(1), 83—87.

Tella, A. (2008). Teacher Variables as Predictors of Academic Achievement of Primary School Pupils Mathematics. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 1(1).

Tytler, R. (2007). Re-Imagining Science Education Engaging Students in Science for Australia’s Future. Australia: ACER.

Wenning, C. J. (2010). Levels of Inquiry: Using Inquiry Spectrum Learning Sequences to Teach Science. Journal of Physics Teacher Education Online, 5(4), 11—19.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2020 Demara Balqis, Sentot Kusairi, Edi Supriana

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

JPtpp is accredited “Rank 2” as a scientific journal under the decree of the Directorate General of Research Enhancement and Development, Ministry of Research, Technology, and Higher Education, dated October 24, 2018, No: 30/E/KPT/2018, effective for five years from Volume 3 Issue 1, 2018 until Volume 7 Issue 8, 2022.

Jurnal Pendidikan: Teori, Penelitian, & Pengembangan

Journal Of Education

Graduate School Of Universitas Negeri Malang

Lisensi Creative Commons

JPtpp is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License