Scientific argumentation of biology students on genetic recombination: Insights from conceptual understanding analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30862/jri.v6i2.143Keywords:
Genetic recombination, Toulmin’s argumentation pattern, misconceptionsAbstract
Undergraduates still struggle to make high-quality scientific arguments on complex biological topics such as genetic recombination. To construct a scientific argument, students must use evidence and reasoning grounded in scientific concepts. However, research on how well an argument's structure represents the accuracy of a student's conceptual understanding remains limited. This study looked at the structure of students' scientific arguments, their conceptual understanding of genetic recombination, and the relationship between these aspects. A convergent mixed-methods design with 123 undergraduate biology students used in this study. We combined the results obtained from analyzing the written answers to the two tasks using Toulmin’s Argumentation Pattern (TAP) and the conceptual understanding categories. The students' arguments were at level 2 (64%), which shows a relatively low-level of argumentation, and conceptual understanding was mainly based on misconceptions (60%). Students with conceptual understanding reached argumentation Levels 3–5, whereas those with partial understanding or misconceptions did not reach Levels 4–5. However, some students with misconceptions also achieved Level 3. Conceptual accuracy thus appears to enable high-level argumentation, yet well-structured arguments can still rest on misconceptions, so argument structure should be complemented by direct verification of conceptual understanding.
Downloads
References
Acar, Ö. (2014). Scientific reasoning, conceptual knowledge, & achievement differences between prospective science teachers having a consistent misconception and those having a scientific conception in an argumentation-based guided inquiry course. Learning and Individual Differences, 30, 148–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2013.12.002
Amin, A. M., Adiansyah, R., & Hujjatusnaini, N. (2022). Conceptual knowledge and argumentation skills of biology students in animal physiology courses. Edubiotik: Jurnal Pendidikan, Biologi Dan Terapan, 7(1), 23–35. https://doi.org/10.33503/ebio.v7i01.1380
Anisa, A., Widodo, A., Riandi, R., & Muslim, M. (2019). Genetics in socio scientific issues: Measuring rebuttal abilities in scientific argumentation. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1280(3), 032002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1280/3/032002
Anwar, Y., Susanti, R., & Ermayanti. (2019). Analyzing scientific argumentation skills of biology education students in general biology courses. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1166, 012001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1166/1/012001
Arter, M., & Keeney, S. (2024). Divergence and conservation of the meiotic recombination machinery. Nature Reviews Genetics, 25(5), 309–325. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41576-023-00669-8
Azzahra, A. N., & Kartikawati, E. (2023). Misconception analysis of biology education students using diagnostic three tier test on genetics material. Proceedings Series on Social Sciences & Humanities, 13, 200–207. https://doi.org/10.30595/pssh.v13i.905
Berkle, Y., Schmitt, L., Tolzin, A., Janson, A., Wambsganss, T., Leimeister, J. M., & Leuchter, M. (2023). Measuring university students’ ability to recognize argument structures and fallacies. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1270931. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1270931
Cahyani, D., Gloria, R. Y., & Roviati, E. (2024). Analysis of scientific argumentation skills of prospective biology teacher students in inquiry-oriented laboratory activities. Biosfer: Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi, 17(1), 243–256. https:// doi.org/10.21009/biosferjpb.34021
Carroll, D. (2013). Genetic recombination. In brenner’s encyclopedia of genetics: Second Edition (pp. 277–280). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-374984-0.00627-6
Chattopadhyay, A. (2005). Understanding of genetic information in higher secondary students in Northeast India and the implications for genetics education. Cell Biology Education, 4(1), 97–104. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.04-06-0042
Choirunisa’, N., Susanto, H., & Zubaidah, S. (2024). Barrier in mastering knowledge of genetic concepts in college students. In H. Habiddin, H. Suwono, & N. Farida (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Mathematics and Science Education (ICoMSE 2023) (Vol. 852, pp. 160–172). Atlantis Press SARL. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-38476-275-0_14
Fakhriyah, F., Rusilowati, A., Nugroho, S. E., Saptono, S., Ridlo, S., Mindyarto, B., & Susilaningsih, E. (2022). The scientific argumentative skill analysis reviewed from the science literacy aspect of pre-service teacher. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), 11(4), 2129. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v11i4.22847
Fauziah, A. N. M., Hendratmoko, A. F., Mahdiannur, M. A., Ermawan, M. Z. F., Suwandi, E., & Ratri, S. Y. (2024). The relationship between critical thinking and scientific argumentation in science learning. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 13(2), 239-254. https://doi.org/10.15294/pwqxcp96
Gazali, F., Rahayu, S., Munzil, M., & Wonorahardjo, S. (2024). Profile of the first year student’s argumentation skills on general chemistry courses at a public university in West Sumatera: A preliminary study. E3S Web of Conferences, 481, 04004. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202448104004
Georgiou, M., Mavrikaki, E., Halkia, K., & Papassideri, I. (2020). Investigating the impact of the duration of engagement in socioscientific issues in developing greek students’ argumentation and informal reasoning skills. American Journal of Educational Research, 8(1), 16–23. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-8-1-3
Giri, V., & Paily, M. U. (2020). Effect of scientific argumentation on the development of critical thinking. Science & Education, 29(3), 673–690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00120-y
Green, N. L., Hinshaw, M., Martensen, C., Narasimhan, M., & Tobgay, T. (2015). GAIL: A genetics argumentation inquiry learning system. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 1353, 97–101. https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1353/paper_01.pdf
Gürel, C., & Süzük, E. (2017). Pre-service physics teachers’ argumentation in a model rocketry physics experience. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 17(1), 83–84. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2017.1.0042
Herak, R., Mahanal, S., Zubaidah, S., & Novianti, V. (2025). Exploring misconceptions in biology learning: A systematic literature review. Salud, Ciencia y Tecnología, 5, 1743. https://doi.org/10.56294/saludcyt20251743
Huang, C.-J., Chang, S.-C., Chen, H.-M., Tseng, J.-H., & Chien, S.-Y. (2016). A group intelligence-based asynchronous argumentation learning-assistance platform. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(7), 1408–1427. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2015.1016533
Jewaru, A. A. L., Parno, P., Nasikhudin, N., Kusairi, S., & Latifah, E. (2023). Exploration of students’ scientific argumentation ability on thermodynamics through authentic PBL with STEM approach and formative assessment. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2569(1), 050011. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0112509
Jimenez, P. C., Alred, A. R., & Dauer, J. M. (2024). Describing undergraduate students’ reasoning and use of evidence during argumentation about socioscientific issues systems. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1371095. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1371095
Kalas, P., O’Neill, A., Pollock, C., & Birol, G. (2013). Development of a meiosis concept inventory. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 12(4), 655–664. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-10-0174
Korunes, K. L., & Noor, M. A. F. (2017). Gene conversion and linkage: Effects on genome evolution and speciation. Molecular Ecology, 26(1), 351–364. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.13736
Krell, M., Garrecht, C., & Minkley, N. (2024). Preservice biology teachers’ socioscientific argumentation: Analyzing structural and content complexity in the context of a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 22(1), 121–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-023-10364-z
Kundariati, M., Susilo, H., & Balqis, B. (2024). An investigation into prospective biology teachers’ scientific argumentation: Have they mastered it? AIP Conference Proceedings, 3106(1), 030001. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0214951
Li, X., Wang, W., & Li, Y. (2022). Systematically reviewing the potential of scientific argumentation to promote multidimensional conceptual change in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 44(7), 1165–1185. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2070787
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 of Science Education, 41(2), 165–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1545100
Ma, N., Guo, J.-H., & Sun, Y.-F. (2025). Evaluating scientific argumentation ability: A framework based on scientific argumentation maps. International Journal of Science Education, 48(10), 1419-1438. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2025.2462796
Machová, M., & Ehler, E. (2023). Secondary school students’ misconceptions in genetics: Origins and solutions. Journal of Biological Education, 57(3), 633–646. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2021.1933136
Menendez, D., Donovan, A. M., Mathiaparanam, O. N., Klapper, R. E., Yoo, S. H., Rosengren, K. S., & Alibali, M. W. (2024). The role of visual representations in undergraduate students’ learning about genetic inheritance. Education Sciences, 14(3), 307. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14030307
Mi, S., Lu, S., & Bi, H. (2020). Trends and foundations in research on students’ conceptual understanding in science education: a method based on the structural topic model. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 19(4), 551–568. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/20.19.551
Murphy, P. K., Greene, J. A., Allen, E., Baszczewski, S., Swearingen, A., Wei, L., & Butler, A. M. (2018). Fostering high school students’ conceptual understanding and argumentation performance in science through quality talk discussions. Science Education, 102(6), 1239–1264. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21471
Myers, R. B., Millman, B., & Noor, M. A. F. (2014). Genetics and evolution: An iOS application to supplement introductory courses in transmission and evolutionary genetics. G3 Genes|Genomes|Genetics, 4(5), 779–781. https://doi.org/10.1534/g3.114.010215
Naovalia, R., Amin, M., & Suwono, H. (2021). the effectiveness of research-based learning improves student arguments about genetic codes and genetic mutations. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2330, 030049. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0043447
Nugroho, A. A., Sajidan, S., Suranto, S., & Masykuri, M. (2023). Analysis of students argumentation skills in biotechnological socioscientific issue for designing innovative learning. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2751(1), 100002. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0143258
Ogan-Bekiroglu, F., & Eskin, H. (2012). Examination of the relationship between engagement in scientific argumentation and conceptual knowledge. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10(6), 1415–1443. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-012-9346-z
Ojo, A. T. (2024). Examination of secondary school students’ conceptual understanding, perceptions, and misconceptions about genetics concepts. Pedagogical Research, 9(1), em0185. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/14095
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
Ozcan, T., Yildirim, O., & Ozgur, S. (2012). Determining of the university freshmen students’ misconceptions and alternative conceptions about mitosis and meiosis. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 3677–3680. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.126
Perveen, S., Yasmeen, N., Hafeez, K., & Akhtar, F. (2025). Recombination and evolution. In T. A. Bhat, A. R. Shakoori, & J. M. Al-Khayri (Eds.), Molecular genetics, structures, mechanisms, and functions: Volume 2: Applications and exploring the nucleus (pp. 121–156). Apple Academic Press.
Rahayu, D. P., Wiyarsi, A., & Utami, A. (2022). Eksplorasi keterampilan argumentasi ilmiah mahasiswa melalui media sosial: topik kasus bioteknologi. Jurnal Pendidikan MIPA, 12(3), 859–867. https://doi.org/10.37630/jpm.v12i3.703
Raina, V. B., Jessop, A., & Greene, E. C. (2025). Biochemical mechanisms of genetic recombination and DNA repair. Annual Review of Biochemistry, 94(1), 161–193. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-biochem-083024-113931
Ramadhan, M. J., Zubaidah, S., & Munzil, M. (2026). Scientific argumentation abilities among undergraduate biology students: An analysis using the toulmin’s argument pattern (TAP) Framework. Jurnal Paedagogy, 13(1), 52–64. https://doi.org/10.33394/jp.v13i1.18465
Rawe, N., Zubaidah, S., & Susanto, H. (2025). Revealing argumentation skills of high school students in biology learning through toulmin argumentation pattern. Prisma Sains: Jurnal Pengkajian Ilmu Dan Pembelajaran Matematika Dan IPA IKIP Mataram, 13(2), 294-305. https://doi.org/10.33394/j-ps.v13i2.14837
Rodríguez Gil, S. G., Fradkin, M., & Castañeda-Sortibrán, A. N. (2019). Conceptions of meiosis: misunderstandings among university students and errors. Journal of Biological Education, 53(2), 191–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2018.1469531
Rusmana, A. N., Rachmatullah, A., Nuraeni, E., & Ha, M. (2021). The genetics conceptual understanding of indonesian and united states undergraduate biology students. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 7(1), 197–225. https://doi.org/10.1163/23641177-bja10024
Sadler, T. D., & Fowler, S. R. (2006). A threshold model of content knowledge transfer for socioscientific argumentation. Science Education, 90(6), 986–1004. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20165
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
Sands, D., & Kozelková, K. (2025). Conceptual approaches to teaching. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2950(1), 012006. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2950/1/012006
Setiono, P., Yuliantini, N., Wurjinem, W., & Anggraini, D. (2021). Kemampuan argumentasi ilmiah mahasiswa melalui penerapan model pembelajaran project based learning. ELSE (Elementary School Education Journal): Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran Sekolah Dasar, 5(1), 101-111. https://doi.org/10.30651/else.v5i1.7039
Smith, M. K., & Knight, J. K. (2012). Using the genetics concept assessment to document persistent conceptual difficulties in undergraduate genetics courses. Genetics, 191(1), 21–32. https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.111.137810
Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The uses of argument (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. Cambridge Core. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840005
von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Case studies of how students’ argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 101–131. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20213
Waluyo, L., & Rahardjanto, A. (2022). The understanding of male and female students on the basic concepts of evolution. JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), 8(1), 51–57. https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v8i1.18636
Wright, L. K., Cortez, P., Franzen, M. A., & Newman, D. L. (2022). Teaching meiosis with the DNA triangle framework: A classroom activity that changes how students think about chromosomes. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 50(1), 44–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.21583
Yang, R. (2022). An empirical study of claims and qualifiers in ESL students’ argumentative writing based on Toulmin model. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 7(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-022-00133-w
Zahra, F., Zubaidah, S., Mahanal, S., & Astriani, M. (2021). The improvement of students’ argumentation skills through Remap-NHT learning model. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2330(1), 030036. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0043291
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Muhammad Taqiyuddin Hilali, Siti Zubaidah, Sofia Ery Rahayu (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
