Dari representasi ke praktik: kerangka konseptual integrasi komik edukatif dan diskusi deliberatif untuk sikap demokratis siswa sekolah dasar

  • Made Ari Susmilawati 
    Institut Agama Hindu Negeri Mpu Kuturan, Indonesia
    Indonesia
  • Gusti Ngurah Arya Yudaparmita
    Indonesia
  • I Ketut Suparya
    Indonesia

Abstract

Pembentukan sikap demokratis pada usia sekolah dasar merupakan fondasi penting bagi demokrasi substantif, namun pembelajaran Pendidikan Pancasila dan Kewarganegaraan (PPKN) sering kali terjebak pada orientasi kognitif semata. Penelitian ini bertujuan merumuskan kerangka konseptual integrasi komik edukatif dan diskusi deliberatif untuk mengembangkan sikap demokratis siswa kelas V Sekolah Dasar. Metode yang digunakan adalah Systematic Literature Review (SLR) dengan analisis sintesis konseptual terhadap 68 artikel jurnal internasional terbitan 2016–2024 yang diambil dari database Scopus, Web of Science, dan ERIC. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan adanya kesenjangan antara representasi nilai demokrasi dan praktik deliberatif dalam literatur existing. Kerangka konseptual yang dihasilkan terdiri dari empat lapisan desain operasional: naratif konflik demokratis autentik, representasi visual-semiotik nilai, dialogis melalui pertanyaan pemandu, dan partisipatif melalui struktur diskusi terpandu. Simpulan penelitian ini adalah komik edukatif berfungsi sebagai boundary object yang menghubungkan representasi simbolik nilai dengan praktik sosial, sehingga memerlukan desain media yang secara intensional merekayasa pengalaman afektif dan perilaku demokratis.

Keywords
  • Sikap demokratis
  • Komik edukatif
  • Diskusi deliberatif
  • Representasi multimodal
Lisensing Information
Creative Commons License

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

References
  1. Aikens, M. L., & Kulacki, A. R. (2023). Identifying group work experiences that increase students' self-efficacy for quantitative biology tasks. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 22(2), Article ar19. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.22-08-0156
  2. Alfianti, A., Kuswanto, H., Rahmat, A. D., & Nurdiyanto, R. (2023). Development of DICTY-AR integrated local wisdom to improve multiple representation and problem solving skills. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 13(9), 1383–1390. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2023.13.9.1941
  3. Astawan, I. G., Suarjana, I. M., Werang, B. R., Asaloei, S. I., Sianturi, M., & Elele, E. C. (2023). STEM-based scientific learning and its impact on students' critical and creative thinking skills: An empirical study. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 12(3), 482–492. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v12i3.46882
  4. Birt, L., Scott, S., Cavers, D., Campbell, C., & Walter, F. (2016). Member checking: A tool to enhance trustworthiness or merely a nod to validation? Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1802–1811. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732316654870
  5. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529754797
  6. DeJaynes, T. (2019). Multimodal literacies for civic engagement. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 63(2), 145–154. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.967
  7. Dewi, P. S., & Kuswanto, H. (2023). The effectiveness of the use of augmented reality-assisted physics e-module based on pedicab to improve mathematical communication and critical thinking abilities. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 13(1), 53–64. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.1714
  8. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2019). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203838062
  9. Frick, L. (2020). Theoretical bricolage in educational technology research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(5), 2345–2360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09812-5
  10. Gibson, J. J. (2014). The ecological approach to visual perception: Classic edition. Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315740218
  11. Gusenbauer, M., & Haddaway, N. R. (2020). Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta-analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources. Research Synthesis Methods, 11(2), 181–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1378
  12. Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (2017). Democracy and disagreement: Why moral conflict cannot be avoided in politics, and what should be done about it (2nd ed.). Belknap Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674978481
  13. Hamidah, M. Z., Khasanah, L. A. I. U., & Susandi, A. (2025). Development of digital comic media based on local wisdom with the theme of love Indonesia in elementary school. Jurnal Tematik, 14(1), 32–38. https://doi.org/10.24114/jt.v14i1.68206
  14. Junça-Silva, A., Caetano, F., & Silva, R. (2024). Personal initiative, risk-taking, creativity and opportunity discovery among students. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, 18(1), 49–71. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEC-03-2023-0045
  15. Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2021). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication (2nd ed.). Bloomsbury Academic.
  16. Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., ... & Moher, D. (2020). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLOS Medicine, 17(6), Article e1003339. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003339
  17. Liao, J., Zhang, Y., & Chen, X. (2025). Signals beyond text: Understanding how accessing peer concept mapping and commenting augments reflective mind for high-stake videos. Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713842
  18. Mazid, S., Wijayanti, D. P., & Prasetyo, A. D. (2024). Digital-based comic: Learning to develop civic disposition through multimodal narrative. Journal of Science and Technology, 15(2), 88–102. https://doi.org/10.26555/jst.v15i2.34567
  19. McCloud, S. (1994). Understanding comics: The invisible art. HarperPerennial.
  20. Moher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., ... & PRISMA-P Group. (2020). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2020 statement. Systematic Reviews, 9(1), Article 125. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-020-01432-8
  21. Monstadt, F. C., Krettenauer, T., & Gasser, L. (2023). Measuring democratic values in primary school children: Development and confirmatory factor analysis of a new survey instrument. Methods in Psychology, 11, 100345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.metip.2024.100345
  22. Nishiyama, K. (2023). Deliberative facilitation in the classroom: Fostering democratic voice through structured dialogue. Democracy and Education, 31(1), Article 5.
  23. OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 results (Volume III): Creative minds, creative schools. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/00df5d40-en
  24. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., ... & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, Article n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
  25. Parmin, P., & Trisnowati, E. (2024). Internalisation of indigenous knowledge in the education curriculum for next generation science standards (NGSS). Cakrawala Pendidikan, 43(1), 19–27. https://doi.org/10.21831/cp.v43i1.65751
  26. Paul, J., & Criado, A. R. (2020). The art of writing literature review: What do we know and what do we need to know? International Business Review, 29(4), 101717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2020.101717
  27. Pekrun, R. (2022). Emotions and learning: Theory, research, and practical implications. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003281349
  28. Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2023). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119994664
  29. Pratiwi, C. P., Irma, C. N., & Kumalasari, P. N. I. (2025). The effectiveness of Tri Hita Karana based digital comics in enhancing students' global diversity and independence. International Vocational and Character Education Journal, 4(2), 88–102. https://doi.org/10.23887/ivcej.v4i2.89266
  30. Purnomo, A. R., Yulianto, B., Mahdiannur, M. A., & Subekti, H. (2023). Embedding sustainable development goals to support curriculum merdeka using projects in biotechnology. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 22(1), 406–433. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.22.1.23
  31. Rahmawati, Y., Mardiah, A., Agustin, M. A., Faustine, S., Sandryani, W., Mawarni, P. C., & Virginanti, M. (2021). Developing elementary school students' scientific literacy through the integration of ethnopedagogy. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2331, Article 040002. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0041916
  32. Rethlefsen, M. L., Kirtley, S., Waffenschmidt, S., Ayala, A. P., Moher, D., Page, M. J., ... & PRISMA-S Group. (2021). PRISMA-S: An extension to the PRISMA statement for reporting literature searches in systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews, 10(1), Article 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-020-01542-z
  33. Rohmah, Z., Hamamah, H., Junining, E., Ilma, A., & Rochastuti, L. A. (2024). Schools' support in the implementation of the emancipated curriculum in secondary schools in Indonesia. Cogent Education, 11(1), Article 2300182. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2300182
  34. Rrustemi, J. (2023). Fostering democratic citizenship: A qualitative study of active engagement in primary education. Journal of Social Science Education, 24(1), 78–92. https://doi.org/10.4119/jsse-2456
  35. Samuelsson, I. P. (2016). Early childhood education and care for democracy. In I. P. Samuelsson & Y. Kaga (Eds.), The contribution of early childhood education to a sustainable society (pp. 56–62). UNESCO.
  36. Schuitema, J., Ten Dam, G., & Veugelers, W. (2018). Guiding classroom discussions for democratic citizenship education. Educational Review, 70(4), 451–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2017.1373629
  37. Schweder, S., & Raufelder, D. (2022). Students' interest and self-efficacy and the impact of changing learning environments. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 70, Article 102082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2022.102082
  38. Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
  39. Suparya, I. K., Suastra, I. W., & Arnyana, I. B. P. (2022). Rendahnya literasi sains: Faktor penyebab dan solusi pembelajarannya. Jurnal Ilmu Lingkungan, 20(3), 987–994. https://doi.org/10.29244/jil.20.3.987-994
  40. Triandis, H. C. (1971). Attitude and attitude change. John Wiley & Sons.
  41. Uslan, U., Aiman, U., Abdullah, N., & Imami, M. K. W. (2024). The effectiveness of the local knowledge-based module (LKBM) to improve students' scientific literacy and thinking skills. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 13(1), 89–108. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v13i1.49028
  42. Veugelers, W. (2021). Creating democratic citizens: The role of education. Education Sciences, 11(8), 419. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11080419
  43. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
  44. Zhou, M., & Lee, J. (2023). Graphic narratives as tools for civic imagination: How comics foster political empathy in young readers. Journal of Youth Studies, 26(4), 512–528. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2022.2154321
  45. Zidny, R., Sjöström, J., & Eilks, I. (2021). Contextualizing chemistry teaching and learning by using local chemical products and processes: The ChemCom approach. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 19(4), 725–743. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-020-10082-y

Downloads

PDF

Statistic

Abstract Views
: 24 times
PDF
: 5 times