When Scientific Knowledge, Daily Life Experience, Epistemological and Social Considerations Intersect: Students’ Argumentation in Group Discussions on a Socio-scientific Issue

Research in Science Education (Impact Factor: 1.34). 01/2007; 38(1):67-90. DOI: 10.1007/s11165-007-9040-2


Socio-scientific issues in class have been proposed in an effort to democratise science in society. A micro-ethnographic approach
has been used to explore how students elaborate arguments on a socio-scientific controversy in the context of small group
discussions. Several processes of group argumentation have been identified. Students’ arguments were elaborated from scientific
data, common ideas and epistemological and strategic considerations. Students’ social interactions influenced the patterns
of argumentation elaborated within the group discussions. Implications of this study for the teaching of socio-scientific
issues in class are discussed.

84 Reads
  • Source
    • "Bu sebeple, öğrencilerin sosyobilimsel konular hakkında karar verme süreçleri birçok araştırmacı tarafından incelenmiş olup incelenmeye de devam etmektedir. Yapılan birçok araştırmaya göre sosyobilimsel konuları temel alan öğrenme ortamlarının öğrencilerin fen kavramlarını anlamalarını ilerlettiği (Klosterman ve Sadler, 2010), öğrenmeyi daha ilgi çekici hâle getirdiği (Albe, 2008; Zeidler, Sadler, Applebaum ve Callahan, 2009), öğrenme için ek bir motivasyon sağladığı (Parchmann ve ark., 2006), öğrencilerin epistemolojik gelişimlerini pozitif yönde etkilediği (Zeidler et al., 2009) ve fene karşı öğrencilerin tutumlarını pozitif yönde etkilediği (Lee ve Erdogan, 2007) tespit edilmiştir. "

    Full-text · Dataset · Jan 2016
  • Source
    • "Informed decision-making about SSI is viewed as one of the most important parts of scientific literacy, which is the ultimate aim of science education in schools (Sadler and Zeidler 2005). Research shows that SSI-based learning environments improve students' science content knowledge (Klosterman and Sadler 2010), interest in science learning (Albe 2008; Zeidler et al. 2009), motivation for science learning (Parchmann et al. 2006), epistemological development in science (Zeidler et al. 2009), and attitudes toward science (lee and erdogan 2007). The SSI research community has mainly used SSI as a research context in terms of two aspects. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: ABSTRACT Background: Despite a growing body of research and curriculum reforms including socioscientific issues (SSI) across the world, how preservice science teachers (PST) or in-service science teachers can teach SSI in science classrooms needs further inquiry. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to describe the abilities of PSTs to teach SSI in middle school science classrooms, and the research question that guided the present study is: How can we characterize Turkish PSTs’ SSI-based teaching practices in middle school science classrooms (ages 11–14)? Sample: In order to address the research question of this study, we explored 10 Turkish PSTs’ SSI-based teaching practices in middle school science classrooms. A purposeful sampling strategy was used, thus, PSTs were specifically chosen because they were ideal candidates to teach SSI and to integrate SSI into the science curricula since they were seniors in the science education program who had to take the field experience courses. Design and method: The participants’ SSI teaching practices were characterized in light of qualitative research approach. SSI-based teaching practices were analyzed, and the transcripts of all videotape recordings were coded by two researchers. Results: The current data analysis describes Turkish PSTs’ SSI-based teaching practices under five main categories: media, argumentation, SSI selection and presentation, risk analysis, and moral perspective. Most of PSTs did not use media resources in their lesson and none of them considered moral perspective in their teaching. While the risk analyses were very simple and superficial, the arguments developed in the classrooms generally remained at a simple level. PSTs did not think SSI as a central topic and discussed these issues in a very limited time and at the end of the class period. Conclusions: The findings of this study manifest the need of the reforms in science education programs. The present study provides evidence that moral, media, argumentation, risk analysis, and pedagogical aspects of SSI-based instruction should be incorporated into educational courses designed for the Turkish teacher education programs such as the science teaching methods course. When we find ways to improve PSTs or science teachers’ SSI teaching practices in terms of these components, we can provide useful information for curriculum developers, policy-makers, and science educators in Turkey and other countries, that are facing similar problems. We believe that this study would initiate more investigative and exploratory studies toward this goal.
    Full-text · Article · Jan 2016 · Research in Science and Technological Education
  • Source
    • "For example, science knowledge, which is highly regarded as a key component in decision-making, does not play a role in decision-making in nuclear energy issue(Jho et al., 2014) whereas it is linked to dependence on rational thinking in biomedical issues(Sadler, 2004; Sadler and Zeidler, 2005b). This indicates that his/her decision-making differ according to the socio-cultural context, orientation toward individual or society, and way of discussion(Albe, 2008b). Such problems are still being discussed even though a gigantic number of studies have been conducted until now. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study aims to investigate the definition of and factors in decision on socio-scientific issues and to analyze the standards for the quality of decision-making, based on the review of studies in socio-scientific issues. This study analyzed 147 articles published in journals of the social science citation index, and the research method was followed by taxonomy analysis and analytic induction. The results showed that many of the studies did not explicitly articulate the decision-making and only dealt with a specific element of the process, not as a whole. Decision-making was categorized into the steps of identification, option, criteria, information, survey, choice, and review. In terms of the factors, the literature tackled diverse things: science knowledge, nature of science, type of issue, discussion type, belief & values, and culture. This study examined the relationship between the factors and each element of decision-making. Among the relationships, only six kinds were shown as relevant and most of factors were connected to survey. With regard to the standards, the literature relied upon balance, justification and multiplicity since many of the studies made use of Toulmin-based argumentation. This study gives some implications for standards for decision-making regarding the nature of risk and uncertainty.
    Full-text · Article · Oct 2015
Show more