Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making

The purpose of this study is to contribute to a theoretical knowledge base through research by examining factors salient to science education reform and practice in the context of socioscientific issues. The study explores how individuals negotiate and resolve genetic engineering dilemmas. A qualitative approach was used to examine patterns of informal reasoning and the role of morality in these processes. Thirty college students participated individually in two semistructured interviews designed to explore their informal reasoning in response to six genetic engineering scenarios. Students demonstrated evidence of rationalistic, emotive, and intuitive forms of informal reasoning. Rationalistic informal reasoning described reason‐based considerations; emotive informal reasoning described care‐based considerations; and intuitive reasoning described considerations based on immediate reactions to the context of a scenario. Participants frequently relied on combinations of these reasoning patterns as they worked to resolve individual socioscientific scenarios. Most of the participants appreciated at least some of the moral implications of their decisions, and these considerations were typically interwoven within an overall pattern of informal reasoning. These results highlight the need to ensure that science classrooms are environments in which intuition and emotion in addition to reason are valued. Implications and recommendations for future research are discussed. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 42: 112–138, 2005     

Turkish Preservice Science Teachers’ Informal Reasoning Regarding Socioscientific Issues and the Factors Influencing Their Informal Reasoning

The purpose of the study is to explore Turkish preservice science teachers’ informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues and the factors influencing their informal reasoning. The researchers engaged 39 preservice science teachers in informal reasoning interview and moral decision-making interview protocols. Of the seven socioscientific issues, three issues were related to gene therapy, another three were related to human cloning, and one was related to global warming. The data were analyzed using an interpretive qualitative research approach. The characteristic of informal reasoning was determined as multidimensional, and the patterns of informal reasoning emerged as rationalistic, emotive, and intuitive reasoning. The factors influencing informal reasoning were: personal experiences, social considerations, moral-ethical considerations, and technological concerns.     

Associations Between Attitudes Towards Science and Children’s Evaluation of Information About Socioscientific Issues

Science educators are typically dismayed by the failure of students to use relevant scientific knowledge when reasoning about socioscientific issues. Except for the well-documented association between having more knowledge about a topic and a tendency to use that knowledge, the influences on students’ evaluation of information in socioscientific issues are not well understood. This study presents an initial investigation into the associations between upper elementary students’ attitudes towards science and their evaluation of information about a socioscientific issue. We surveyed the science attitudes of 49 sixth grade students and then asked them to evaluate information about a socioscientific issue (alternative energy use). Positive attitudes were associated with a more scientific approach to evaluating information in the task. When trying to make judgments, students with generally positive attitudes towards science were more likely to attend to scientific information than other sources. Scientific information, nonetheless, served a variety of socially oriented goals in students’ evaluations. These findings warrant further research on the relationship between science attitudes and reasoning about socioscientific issues and support the argument for connecting school science more clearly with everyday concerns.     

Socioscientific issues in science education: labels, reasoning, and transfer

This paper provides a critical analysis of some of the issues raised in Simonneaux and Simonneaux’s analysis of socioscientific reasoning among a group of university level students negotiating three socioscientific issues. I first discuss the labels used to reference approaches in science education that prioritize socially relevant issues and the science related to these issues. I draw distinctions between approaches labeled science-technology-society (STS), the socioscientific issues framework, and les questions socialement vives (socially acute questions), which Simonneaux and Simonneaux introduce. Next, I discuss ways in which Simonneaux and Simonneaux’s use socioscientific reasoning as an analytic construct varies with respect to its initial conceptualization. The primary distinctions include linguistic inconsistencies and the conceptual differences these language choices confer, expansion of the construct to subsume a broader range of practices, and issues related to unit of analysis (i.e., applying socioscientific reasoning as an analytic resource for assessing individual practice vs. group patterns). Finally, the issue of transfer of socioscientific reasoning is addressed. When considering the extent to which and how students leverage experiences and practice relative to the exploration of one socioscientific issue to inform their negotiation of another, I suggest that researchers and practitioners consider the distinction between the content of arguments advanced and underlying reasoning patterns. The tension between embedding science in meaningful, specific contexts and promoting forms of scientific literacy applicable to diverse, socially-relevant issues emerges as an important point of emphasis for educators interested in the socioscientific issues (or socially acute questions) movement.

Secondary School Students’ Understanding of Science and Their Socioscientific Reasoning

Research in socioscientific issue (SSI)-based interventions is relatively new (Sadler in Journal of Research in Science Teaching 41:513–536, 2004; Zeidler et al. in Journal of Research in Science Teaching 46:74–101, 2009), and there is a need for understanding more about the effects of SSI-based learning environments (Sadler in Journal of Research in Science Teaching 41:513–536, 2004). Lee and Witz (International Journal of Science Education 31:931–960, 2009) highlighted the need for detailed case studies that would focus on how students respond to teachers’ practices of teaching SSI. This study presents case studies that investigated the development of secondary school students’ science understanding and their socioscientific reasoning within SSI-based learning environments. A multiple case study with embedded units of analysis was implemented for this research because of the contextual differences for each case. The findings of the study revealed that students’ understanding of science, including scientific method, social and cultural influences on science, and scientific bias, was strongly influenced by their experiences in SSI-based learning environments. Furthermore, multidimensional SSI-based science classes resulted in students having multiple reasoning modes, such as ethical and economic reasoning, compared to data-driven SSI-based science classes. In addition to portraying how participants presented complexity, perspectives, inquiry, and skepticism as aspects of socioscientific reasoning (Sadler et al. in Research in Science Education 37:371–391, 2007), this study proposes the inclusion of three additional aspects for the socioscientific reasoning theoretical construct: (1) identification of social domains affecting the SSI, (2) using cost and benefit analysis for evaluation of claims, and (3) understanding that SSIs and scientific studies around them are context-bound.     

Preservice Science Teachers’ Epistemological Beliefs and Informal Reasoning Regarding Socioscientific Issues

This study investigated preservice elementary science teachers’ (PSTs) informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues (SSI), their epistemological beliefs, and the relationship between informal reasoning and epistemological beliefs. From several SSIs, nuclear power usage was selected for this study. A total of 647 Turkish PSTs enrolled in three large universities in Turkey completed the open-ended questionnaire, which assessed the participants’ informal reasoning about the target SSI, and Schommer’s (1990) Epistemological Questionnaire. The participants’ epistemological beliefs were assessed quantitatively and their informal reasoning was assessed both qualitatively and quantitatively. The findings revealed that PSTs preferred to generate evidence-based arguments rather than intuitive-based arguments; however, they failed to generate quality evidence and present different types of evidence to support their claims. Furthermore, among the reasoning quality indicators, PSTs mostly generated supportive argument construction. Regarding the use of reasoning modes, types of risk arguments and political-oriented arguments emerged as the new reasoning modes. The study demonstrated that the PSTs had different epistemological beliefs in terms of innate ability, omniscient authority, certain knowledge, and quick learning. Correlational analyses revealed that there was a strong negative correlation between the PSTs’ certain knowledge and counterargument construction, and there were negative correlations between the PSTs’ innate ability, certain knowledge, and quick learning dimensions of epistemological beliefs and their total argument construction. This study has implications for both science teacher education and the practice of science education. For example, PST teacher education programs should give sufficient importance to training teachers that are skillful and knowledgeable regarding SSIs. To achieve this, specific SSI-related courses should form part of science teacher education programs.     

Developing Character and Values for Global Citizens: Analysis of pre-service science teachers’ moral reasoning on socioscientific issues

Character and values are the essential driving forces that serve as general guides or points of reference for individuals to support decision-making and to act responsibly about global socioscientific issues (SSIs). Based on this assumption, we investigated to what extent pre-service science teachers (PSTs) of South Korea possess character and values as global citizens; these values include ecological worldview, socioscientific accountability, and social and moral compassion. Eighteen PSTs participated in the SSI programs focusing on developing character and values through dialogical and reflective processes. SSIs were centered on the use of nuclear power generation, climate change, and embryonic stem cell research. The results indicated that PSTs showed three key elements of character and values, but failed to apply consistent moral principles on the issues and demonstrated limited global perspectives. While they tended to approach the issues with emotion and sympathy, they nonetheless failed to perceive themselves as major moral agents who are able to actively resolve large-scale societal issues. This study also suggests that the SSI programs can facilitate socioscientific reasoning to include abilities such as recognition of the complexity of SSIs, examine issues from multiple perspectives, and exhibit skepticism about information.     

Preservice Science Teachers’ Informal Reasoning about Socioscientific Issues: The influence of issue context

The purpose of the current study is to explicitly test the extent to which issue contexts affect the informal reasoning processes engaged in by individuals. In order to address the research question framing this study, we engaged 39 Turkish preservice science teachers (PSTs) in interviews designed to elicit argumentation related to multiple socioscientific scenarios. Three scenarios related to gene therapy, another three related to human cloning, and the final scenario related to global warming. The data were analyzed using an interpretive qualitative research approach. Our work builds on a framework initially proposed by Toulmin in 1958 Toulmin, S. 1958. The uses of argument, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  [Google Scholar]. This study has provided new evidence related to informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific issues (SSI). At the sample level, there was strong consistency in informal reasoning quality among varying socioscientific scenarios. However, finer‐grained analyses indicated a greater level of variability in the informal reasoning practices of individual PSTs. These results support previous conclusions that suggest context dependence for informal reasoning related to SSI. This study provides an initial picture of the reasoning practices of preservice teachers as opposed to science learners. The results indicate that teachers, at least those in this Turkish setting, would benefit from learning experiences that support their own informal reasoning practices as well as their ability to foster development of these practices among their students. We encourage the field to continue the investigation of SSI as contexts for education particularly as it relates to the education of teachers.     

The impact of a classroom intervention on grade 10 students' argumentation skills,informal reasoning,and conceptual understanding of science

The literature provides confounding information with regard to questions about whether students in high school can engage in meaningful argumentation about socio‐scientific issues and whether this process improves their conceptual understanding of science. The purpose of this research was to explore the impact of classroom‐based argumentation on high school students' argumentation skills, informal reasoning, and conceptual understanding of genetics. The research was conducted as a case study in one school with an embedded quasi‐experimental design with two Grade 10 classes (n = 46) forming the argumentation group and two Grade 10 classes (n = 46) forming the comparison group. The teacher of the argumentation group participated in professional learning and explicitly taught argumentation skills to the students in his classes during one, 50‐minute lesson and involved them in whole‐class argumentation about socio‐scientific issues in a further two lessons. Data were generated through a detailed, written pre‐ and post‐instruction student survey. The findings showed that the argumentation group, but not the comparison group, improved significantly in the complexity and quality of their arguments and gave more explanations showing rational informal reasoning. Both groups improved significantly in their genetics understanding, but the improvement of the argumentation group was significantly better than the comparison group. The importance of the findings are that after only a short intervention of three lessons, improvements in the structure and complexity of students' arguments, the degree of rational informal reasoning, and students' conceptual understanding of science can occur. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 47: 952–977, 2010     

Exploring preservice elementary teachers’ critique and adaptation of science curriculum materials in respect to socioscientific issues

The work presented here represents a preliminary effort undertaken to address the role of teachers in supporting students’ learning and decision-making about socioscientific issues (SSI) by characterizing preservice elementary teachers’ critique and adaptation of SSI-based science curriculum materials and identifying factors that serve to mediate this process. Four undergraduate preservice elementary teachers were studied over the course of one semester. Results indicate that the teachers navigated multiple learning goals, as well as their own subject-matter knowledge, informal reasoning about SSI, and role identity, in their critique and adaptation of SSI-oriented science instructional materials. Implications for science teacher education and the design of curriculum materials in respect to SSI are discussed.     

What Do Students Gain by Engaging in Socioscientific Inquiry?

The question of what students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry is addressed in two ways. First, relevant literature is surveyed to build the case that socioscientific issues (SSI) can serve as useful contexts for teaching and learning science content. Studies are reviewed which document student gains in discipline specific content knowledge as well as understandings of the nature of science. SSI are also positioned as vehicles for addressing citizenship education within science classrooms. Although the promotion of citizenship goals seems widely advocated, the specifics of how this may be accomplished remain underdeveloped. To address this issue, we introduce socioscientific reasoning as a construct which captures a suite of practices fundamental to the negotiation of SSI. In the second phase of the project, interviews with 24 middle school students from classes engaged in socioscientific inquiry serve as the basis for the development of an emergent rubric for socioscientific reasoning. Variation in practices demonstrated by this sample are explored and implications drawn for advancing socioscientific reasoning as an educationally meaningful and assessable construct.     

Students’ Socioscientific Reasoning and Decision-making on Energy-related Issues—Development of a measurement instrument

The concept of energy is one key component of science education curricula worldwide. While it is still being taught in many science classrooms from a mainly conceptual knowledge perspective, the need to frame the concept of energy as a socioscientific issue and implement it in the context of citizenship education and education for sustainable development, is getting more and more explicit. As we will be faced with limited fossil fuels and the consequences of global climate change in the future, students have to be supported in becoming literate citizens who are able to reach informed energy-related decisions. In this article, we focus on students’ reasoning and decision-making processes about socioscientific energy-related issues. In more detail, we developed a paper-and-pencil measurement instrument to assess secondary school students’ competencies in this domain. The functioning of the measurement instrument was analysed with a sample of 850 students from grades 6, 8, 10 and 12 using item response theory. Findings show that the measurement instrument functions in terms of reliability and validity. Concerning student ability, elaborate reasoning and decision-making was characterised by the use of trade-offs and the ability to weigh arguments and to reflect on the structure of reasoning and decision-making processes. The developed measurement instrument provides a complement for existing test instruments on conceptual knowledge about the concept of energy. It aims to contribute to a change in teaching about energy, especially in physics education in the sense of education for sustainable development.     

Supporting Students’ Learning and Socioscientific Reasoning About Climate Change—the Effect of Computer-Based Concept Mapping Scaffolds

Climate change is one of the most challenging problems facing today’s global society (e.g., IPCC 2013). While climate change is a widely covered topic in the media, and abundant information is made available through the internet, the causes and consequences of climate change in its full complexity are difficult for individuals, especially non-scientists, to grasp. Science education is a field which can play a crucial role in fostering meaningful education of students to become climate literate citizens (e.g., NOAA 2009; Schreiner et al., 41, 3–50, 2005). If students are, at some point, to participate in societal discussions about the sustainable development of our planet, their learning with respect to such issues needs to be supported. This includes the ability to think critically, to cope with complex scientific evidence, which is often subject to ongoing inquiry, and to reach informed decisions on the basis of factual information as well as values-based considerations. The study presented in this paper focused on efforts to advance students in (1) their conceptual understanding about climate change and (2) their socioscientific reasoning and decision making regarding socioscientific issues in general. Although there is evidence that “knowledge” does not guarantee pro-environmental behavior (e.g. Schreiner et al., 41, 3–50, 2005; Skamp et al., 97(2), 191–217, 2013), conceptual, interdisciplinary understanding of climate change is an important prerequisite to change individuals’ attitudes towards climate change and thus to eventually foster climate literate citizens (e.g., Clark et al. 2013). In order to foster conceptual understanding and socioscientific reasoning, a computer-based learning environment with an embedded concept mapping tool was utilized to support senior high school students’ learning about climate change and possible solution strategies. The evaluation of the effect of different concept mapping scaffolds focused on the quality of student-generated concept maps, as well as on students’ test performance with respect to conceptual knowledge as well as socioscientific reasoning and socioscientific decision making.     

The Interface of Opinion,Understanding and Evaluation While Learning About a Socioscientific Issue

Scientific literacy is an important goal for science education, especially within controversial socioscientific issues. In this study, we analysed 143 students' research reports about stem cell research (SCR) for how they addressed specific source evaluation criteria provided within the assignment. We investigated students' opinions about SCR, how they used the evaluation criteria to evaluate online sources and whether the evaluation criteria and/or the specific sources influenced their opinion and/or understanding of SCR. We found that most of the students supported some form of SCR and reported that their sources were credible and contained more factual information than opinions. Students critiqued the language of the authors, as well as status in their respective fields, along with the content within each source. Additionally, students reported that their sources influenced their content knowledge, but had little influence regarding their SCR opinions. Through this work, we present a new working model and suggest the need for additional research about the understudied interface of opinion, understanding and evaluation within the context of important socioscientific issues. Students' opinions and content knowledge, located at the model's centre, influence and are influenced by the research topic, the sources used, the evaluation criteria and the evaluation of the sources that students use to provide evidence for claims.     

The role of socioscientific issues in biology teaching: from the perspective of teachers

ABSTRACT

Previous research has documented that students who engage with socioscientific issues can acquire some of the complex competences and skills typically related to scientific literacy. But an emerging field of research on science teachers’ understanding and use of socioscientific issues, has documented that a range of challenges hinders the uptake of socioscientific issues. In this study, we investigated the interpretation and implementation of socioscientific issues among Danish biology teachers. We conducted five in-depth group interviews and validated the emergent themes from the teachers’ talk-in-interaction by distributing a questionnaire. Our findings suggest that the participating teachers generally harbour a content-centred interpretation of socioscientific issues which manifests itself in at least three separate ways. First, the teachers generally use socioscientific issues as a vehicle to teach factual biological content. Second, the teachers emphasised mastery of factual content in their assessment. Third, the teachers tended to reduce socioscientific issues to specific biological contents in a way may preclude students from engaging with the real socioscientific issue. Our findings are particularly significant for science educators, policy-makers and curriculum designers, as we argue that key aspects of this content-centred interpretation may be a coping strategy used to navigate a divided curriculum.     

Risk and school science education

In this paper I consider a role for risk understanding in school science education. Grounds for this role are described in terms of current sociological analyses of the contemporary world as a ‘risk society’ and recent public understanding of science studies where science and risk are concerns commonly linked within the wider community. These concerns connect with support amongst many science educators for the goal of science education for citizenship. From this perspective scientific literacy for decision making on contemporary socioscientific issues is central. I argue that in such decision making, risk understanding has an important role to play. I examine some of the challenges its inclusion in school science presents to science teachers, review previous writing about risk in the science education literature and consider how knowledge about risk might be addressed in school science. I also outline the varying conceptions of risk and suggest some future research directions that would support the inclusion of risk in classroom discussions of socioscientific issues.     

Cross‐cultural epistemological orientations to socioscientific issues

The purpose of this investigation was to examine, from a cross‐cultural perspective, students' epistemological patterns of reasoning about socioscientific issues (SSI), and to identify potential interactions of cultural and scientific identity. Mediating factors associated with students' argumentation and discourse about SSI, as well as the public's understanding of science, has been identified as an important area of investigation in the field of science education. This mixed‐methods design included over 300 students from Jamaica, South Africa, Sweden, Taiwan, and the United States. Students responded to instruments designed to assess their epistemological conceptualizations and justifications related to distributive justice, allocation of scarce medical resources, and epistemological beliefs over five dimensions related to scientific knowledge. Four iterations of a coding scheme produced over 97% inter‐rater agreement for four independent coders. Results indicate there is a consistent trend toward epistemological congruity across cultures within inductively derived themes of: (1) Fairness; (2) Pragmatism; (3) Emotive Reasoning; (4) Utility; and (5) Theological Issues. Moreover, there were no discernable differences in terms of how students from these countries presented their beliefs on the sub‐categories of each of the five major categories. It appears that students displayed a high degree of congruence with respect to how they frame their reasoning on this SSI as well as their justifications for their epistemological beliefs. There were statistically significant differences regarding the ability to raise scientifically relevant questions among countries. Commonalities as well as distinguishing characteristics in epistemological orientations are compared and contrasted and connections to a model of socioscientific reasoning with implications for research and pedagogy are discussed. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 50:251–283, 2013     

Relationships among informal learning environments,teaching procedures and scientific reasoning ability

Informal learning experiences have risen to the forefront of science education as being beneficial to students' learning. However, it is not clear in what ways such experiences may be beneficial to students; nor how informal learning experiences may interface with classroom science instruction. This study aims to acquire a better understanding of these issues by investigating one aspect of science learning, scientific reasoning ability, with respect to the students' informal learning experiences and classroom science instruction. Specifically, the purpose of this study was to investigate possible differences in students' scientific reasoning abilities relative to their informal learning environments (impoverished, enriched), classroom teaching experiences (non-inquiry, inquiry) and the interaction of these variables. The results of two-way ANOVAs indicated that informal learning environments and classroom science teaching procedures showed significant main effects on students' scientific reasoning abilities. Students with enriched informal learning environments had significantly higher scientific reasoning abilities compared to those with impoverished informal learning environments. Likewise, students in inquirybased science classrooms showed higher scientific reasoning abilities compared to those in non-inquiry science classrooms. There were no significant interaction effects. These results indicate the need for increased emphases on both informal learning opportunities and inquiry-based instruction in science.     

儿童非形式推理的研究及展望

非形式推理是指个体对有争议的、结构不良的问题提出观点,并利用理由推导出该观点具有合理性的推理过程,是儿童对有争议的问题发表观点或对结构不良问题进行论证过程中的主要推理形式。儿童从三岁左右就已经具有了非形式推理能力,并且随着年龄的增长其非形式推理能力逐渐提高,当前有三种模型对儿童非形式推理的一般过程进行了解释。在今后的研究中建立新的衡量标准,对非形式推理的发生时间、发展特点和培养模式进行更为细致的研究将是研究的出发点,如何用思维倾向与智力的结合来预测个体的非形式推理活动,如何将动态加工模型纳入到双系统作用模型的体系中更好的说明非形式推理的一般过程．将是研究的重点和难点。     

Science and Language Teachers’ Assessment of Upper Secondary Students’ Socioscientific Argumentation

Researchers and policy-makers have recognized the importance of including and promoting socioscientific argumentation in science education worldwide. The Swedish curriculum focuses more than ever on socioscientific issues (SSI) as well. However, teaching socioscientific argumentation is not an easy task for science teachers and one of the more distinguished difficulties is the assessment of students’ performance. In this study, we investigate and compare how science and Swedish language teachers, participating in an SSI-driven project, assessed students’ written argumentation about global warming. Swedish language teachers have a long history of teaching and assessing argumentation and therefore it was of interest to identify possible gaps between the two groups of teachers’ assessment practices. The results showed that the science teachers focused on students’ content knowledge within their subjects, whereas the Swedish language teachers included students’ abilities to select and use content knowledge from reliable reference resources, the structure of the argumentation and the form of language used. Since the Swedish language teachers’ assessment correlated more with previous research about quality in socioscientific argumentation, we suggest that a closer co-operation between the two groups could be beneficial in terms of enhancing the quality of assessment. Moreover, SSI teaching and learning as well as assessment of socioscientific argumentation ought to be included in teacher training programs for both pre- and in-service science teachers.