penelitian natiralistik

1. MAGISTER PENDIDIKAN BIOLOGI
FPMIPA - UPI
UNIVERSITAS PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA
Nuryani Y. Rustaman
nuryanirustaman@upi.edu
NATURALISTIC INQUIRY:
Authentic Experience

2. KEMAMPUAN KLASIFIKASI LOGIS ANAK?
(Studi tentang kemampuan
abstraksi & inferensi anak usia SD
dari Kelompok Budaya Sunda)
Fraenkel, J.R., Wallen, N.E., & Hyun, H.H. (2012). How to Design and Evaluate Research in
Education. Eight edition. New York: McGraw-Hill International Edition

3. Kemampuan Klasifikasi (Logis)?
 Klasifikasi logis: Proses dan Produk
 Pengertian Klasifikasi?  Strategi berpikir
yang melibatkan proses mental yang terekspresikan
melalui aktivitas manual (berdasarkan hasil
pengamatan tentang perbedaan, persamaan dan
antarhubungan) dan verbal (alasan pengelompokan).
 Klasifikasi & Generalisasi  rational power
 Mengapa penting?
 Bagaimana diungkap?

4. Logical Classification
(Good, 1977; Phillips & Phillips, 1985)
1. Inklusi Kelompok – IK (Class Inclusion)
2. Alternatif Klasifikasi – AK (Alternative
Classification)
3. Klasifikasi Ulang – KU (Reclassification)
4. Klasifikasi Matriks – KM (Matrices
Classification)
Phillips & Phillips (LG1 - LG8) : Classification & Ordering
Philips, D G., & Philips, D. R. (1985). The Structures of Thinking: Elaboration, Evaluation and Applications
of Piaget’s Model of Intellectual Development. 4th ed. Iowa: The Science Education Center.
University of Iowa.

5. Logical Classification 
Himpunan (dalam matematika)
1. Tiap “Himpunan” ada anggotanya
2. Tidak ada himpunan yang kosong
3. Can be operated  can be done by pupils who are
in operational intellectual development stage.
(mature, reversible)
4. Operation  related to activities: mentally (for
formal operational) & physically (for concrete
operational).

6. Seriasi, Kategorisasi &
Klasifikasi (Good, 1977)
 SERIASI (Ordering)  kontinum
 KATEGORISASI (categorization)  deskrit
 KLASIFIKASI (classification)  deskrit
Klasifikasi: Classificatory Skills (Okey et al., 1982)
 Klasifikasi BINER (ya/tidak berdasarkan ciri-ciri
yang teramati)
 Klasifikasi Bertingkat (ada hierarki)  bersistem

7. Classificatory Ability?
 Knowledge of /about Classification
 Classificatory Skills
 Ways of Classification
 Abstraction & inferences (inductive, deductive)
 It is needed to form classificatory system, which has
hierarchy (can’t be found in Folk Classification).
 Has partner “generalization” as rational power

8. Merencanakan dan Melakukan
Penelitian Naturalistic Inquiry
1. The main instrument is the researcher.
2. Can be supported by additional instruments.
3. NO rigid procedure or strict format design.
4. Specific Terms: additional research questions,
assertion, triangulation, saturated, data sources,
main data, coding, EMIC, transferability, parti-
cipatory observer, data reduction, data analysis &
data collection, retrieve the extreme subjects. . .
5. Validity? Reliability?
Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (1984). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New
Methods. London: Sage Publications

9. Hasil Studi Kemampuan Klasifikasi
Logis Anak dari Kel. Budaya Sunda
1. IK < KM < KU < AK [Usia: 8 – 8-9 – 9-10 - ?]
2. Usia muda: warna  bentuk
3. Cara: induktif  deduktif  campuran
4. Gender: girls  warna; boysmotif/bentuk
5. Latar belakang (TK, keluarga) & hobby koleksi
turut membentuk kemampuan klasifikasi logis
(lebih awal)
6. S1 & Dosen cenderung tidak membimbing
putra/i belajar

10. Research Findings & Discussion
about Children Classificatory Ability
& The Sequence of Appearance
 Sylvia Opper (tanpa tahun) di Malaysia:
 KU < KM < IK < AK [Usia: 11 - ?]
 Phillips & Phillips (1981); Phillips &
Phillips (1985) di USA:
 IK < KU < AK < KM
 Rustaman (1990) di Indonesia:
IK < KM < KU < AK [Usia: 8 – 8-9 – 9-10 - ?]

11. Merencanakan dan Melakukan
Penelitian Naturalistic Inquiry
1. The main instrument is the researcher.
2. Can be supported by additional instruments.
3. NO rigid procedure or strict format design.
4. Specific Terms: additional research questions,
assertion, triangulation, saturated, data sources,
main data, coding, EMIC, transferability, parti-
cipatory observer, data reduction, data analysis &
data collection, retrieve the extreme subjects. . .
5. Validity? Reliability?
Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (1984). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New
Methods. London: Sage Publications

12. Merencanakan dan Melakukan
Penelitian Naturalistic Inquiry (2)
4. Specific Terms:
a. additional research questions: questions added during
data collection and data analysis
b. Assertion: “reinforcement” like
c. Triangulation: conduct check and recheck
d. Saturated: no more hesitation
e. data sources: person/informant, document, information
f. main data: real data from triangulation results
g. Coding: giving/labeling code to certain subjects
h. EMIC: consider important or meaningful for other
researchers
Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (1984). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New
Methods. London: Sage Publications

13. Merencanakan dan Melakukan
Penelitian Naturalistic Inquiry (3)
4. Specific Terms:
a. …, b. …, c. triangulation, d. saturated, e. data sources,
f. main data, g. coding, h. EMIC,
i. transferability: can be transfered (?)
j. participatory observer: observer should be involved
k. data reduction: reduce the un-important data
l. data analysis & data collection: taken at the same time,
m. retrieve the extreme subjects :  for in depth study.
Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (1984). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New
Methods. London: Sage Publications

17. Klasifikasi Ulang (KU)

18. Klasifikasi Ulang (KU)

19. Klasifikasi Ulang (KU)

20. Klasifikasi Ulang (KU)

21. Klasifikasi Matriks (KM)

23. LANJUTAN TENTANG
PENELITIAN/RESEARCH

24. SKEMA PENCAPAIAN ILMU & TEKNOLOGI
Transfer of
Technology
(S-1)
Adaptation
(S-2)
Innovation
(S-3)
Invention Discovery
Pengalihan
Rekacipta
Pembaruan
Pengungkapan
Penyesuaian
Research Value?
Mien A. Rifai

25. Sphere of Concepts: Purposes, Questions, Objectives
Deductive questions Inductive questions
Objective purpose Subjective purpose
Value neutral Value involved
Confirmation Understanding
Explanatory Exploratory
Sphere of Concrete Processes (Experiential Sphere)
Numeric data Narrative
Structured/Close-ended Open-ended
Preplanned design Emergent design
Statistical analysis Thematic analysis
Probability sample Purposive sample
Multidimensional Continuum
of Research Projects (1)
QUANTITATIVE QUALITATIVE

26. Sphere of Inferences and Explanations
Deductive inference Inductive inference
“Objective” inferences “Subjective” inferences
Value neutral Value rich
Politically noncommittal Transformative
Ethic representation Emic representation
Nomothetic Ideographic
QUANTITAIVE QUALITATIVE
Multidimensional Continuum
of Research Projects (2)

27. CHALLENGES TO and CRITIQUES
of POSITIVISM (2)
(4) Positivism has at least two consequences that are both
repugnant and unfounded: Determinism & Reductionism.
(5) Positivism has produced research with human respondents
that ignores their humanness, a fact that has not only ethical
but also validity implications.
(6) Positivism falls short of being able to deal with
emergent conceptual/empirical formulations from a
variety of fields.
(7) Positivism rests upon at least five assumptions that are
increasingly difficult to maintain.

28. CHALLENGES TO and CRITIQUES of POSITIVISM (3)
(7) Positivism rests upon at least five assumptions that are
increasingly difficult to maintain. The five assumptions:
 An ontological assumption of a single, tangible reality “out there” that
can be broken apart into pieces capable of being studied
independently; the whole is simply the sum of the parts.
 An epistemological assumption about the possibility of separation of
the observer from the observed—the knower from the known.
 An assumption of the temporal and contextual independence of
observations, so that what is true at one time and place may, under
appropriate circumstances (such as sampling) also be true at another
time and place.
 An assumption of LINEAR causality; there are no effects without causes
and no causes without effects.
 An axiological assumption of value freedom, that the methodology
guarantees that the results of an inquiry are essentially free from the
influence of any value system (bias)

29. THE POSTPOSITIVIST ERA (1)
Paralleling the five points of the dichotomy (of natural and
human sciences), we can summarize this post-empiricist
account of natural of science as follows:
1. In natural science data is not detachable from theory,
for what count as data are determined in the light of
some theoretical interpretation, and the facts
themselves have to be reconstructed in the light of
interpretation.
2. In natural science theories are not models externally
compared in nature t a hypothetico-deductive
schema, they are the way the facts themselves are
seen.
3. . . .

30. THE POSTPOSITIVIST ERA (2)
Paralleling the 5 points of the dichotomy (of natural and human
sciences), we can summarize this post-empiricist account of
natural of science as follows:
3. In natural science the law-like relations asserted of
experience are internal, because what we count as facts
are constituted by what the theory says about their
interrelations with one another.
4. The language of natural science is irreducibly
metaphorical and inexact, and formalizable only at the
cost of distortion of the historical dynamics of scientific
development and of the imagi-native reconstructions in
terms of which nature is interpreted by science.
5. Meaning in natural science are determined by teory; they
are understood by theoretical coherence rather than by
correspondence with facts

31. THE POSTPOSITIVIST ERA (3)
 Objective reality has become very relative indeed!
 Positivism is atomistic, the new paradigm is
structural.
 Positivism establishes meaning operationally, the
new paradigm establishes meaning inferentially.
 Positivism sees its central purpose to be prediction,
the new paradigm is concerned with understanding.
 Positivism is deterministic and bent to certainty, the
new paradigm is probabilistic and speculative.

32. THE POSTPOSITIVIST PARADIGMS
(Heron, 1981)
(1) The argument from the nature of research:  if the
basic model for research behavior is that of “intelligent–
self direction”, then the same model must be applied to
the respondents.
(2) The argument from intentionality. Respondents’
intention =/= researchers’ (higher order) intentions.
(3) The argument from language. Language formation is
interpreted by Heron as an as an archetype of inquiry itself.
(4) The argument from an extended epistemology.
(5) The argument from axiology
(6) The moral and political argument.

33. THE POSTPOSITIVIST PARADIGMS
(Heron, 1981) (2)
(3) The argument from language. Language formation is
interpreted by Heron as an as an archetype of inquiry itself.
(4) The argument from an extended epistemology.
(5) The argument from axiology.
(6) The moral & political argument. Research in the
conventional sense usually exploits people. Heron asserts, for
knowledge is power that can be used against the people from
whom the knowledge was generated. The “new paradigm”
avoids some