Advertisement

Teachers and Socioscientific Issues – An Overview of Recent Empirical Research

  • Jan Alexis NielsenEmail author
Chapter
  • 24 Downloads
Part of the Contemporary Trends and Issues in Science Education book series (CTISE, volume 52)

Abstract

The inclusion of socioscientific issues (SSI) in science teaching is often beset by a range of challenges – hereunder lack of time, teachers’ unfamiliarity with SSIs, and lack of assessment methods. This chapter provides an updated overview of recent peer-reviewed publications on pre- and in-service teachers’ relation to SSI. The identified literature indicates that there are (still) issues concerning how best to include SSI aspects into teacher education. We are yet to identify a good practice for inducting prospective teachers into teaching SSI consistently – i.e. not just an auxiliary activity done with one class or cohort. Further, both for including SSI in teacher education and for including SSI in science teaching there are (still) fundamental challenges concerning how to assess students’ learning in SSI-teaching. In particular, some work needs to be done to aide teachers in making operational the learning goals that can be at play in SSI-teaching.

Keywords

Socioscientific issues Teachers Pre-service science teachers Assessment 

References

  1. Belova, N., Dittmar, J., Hansson, L., Hofstein, A., Nielsen, J. A., Sjöström, J., & Eilks, I. (2017). Cross-curricular goals and raising the relevance of science education. In K. Hahl, K. Juuti, J. Lampiselkä, A. Uitto, & J. Lavonen (Eds.), Cognitive and affective aspects in science education research: Selected papers from the ESERA 2015 conference (pp. 297–307). Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cebesoy, U. B., & Oztekin, C. (2016). Relationships among Turkish pre-service science teachers’ genetics literacy levels and their attitudes towards issues in genetics literacy. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 15(2), 159–172.Google Scholar
  3. Christenson, N., Gericke, N., & Rundgren, S. N. C. (2017). Science and language teachers’ assessment of upper secondary students’ socioscientific argumentation. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(8), 1403–1422.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9746-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cinici, A. (2016). Balancing the pros and cons of GMOs: Socio-scientific argumentation in pre-service teacher education. International Journal of Science Education, 38(11), 1841–1866.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1220033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dolin, J., Nielsen, J. A., & Tidemand, S. (2017). Evaluering af naturfaglige kompetencer. Acta Didactica Norge, 11(3), 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Es, H., Mercan, S. I., & Ayas, C. (2016). A new socio-scientific issue for Turkey: Life with nuclear. Turkish Journal of Education, 5(2), 47–59.  https://doi.org/10.19128/turje.92919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Evagorou, M., & Puig, B. (2017). Engaging elementary school pre-service teachers in Modeling a Socioscientific issue as a way to help them appreciate the social aspects of science. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 5(2), 113–123.  https://doi.org/10.18404/ijemst.99074.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Evagorou, M., Albe, V., Angelides, P., Couso, D., Chirlesan, G., Evans, R. H., et al. (2014a). Preparing preservice science teachers to teach socio-scientific (SSI) argumentation. Science Teacher Education, 69, 39–47.Google Scholar
  9. Evagorou, M., Guven, D., & Mugaloglu, E. (2014b). Preparing elementary and secondary pre-service teachers for everyday science. Science Education International, 25(1), 68–78.Google Scholar
  10. Forbes, C. T., & Davis, E. A. (2008). Exploring preservice elementary teachers’ critique and adaptation of science curriculum materials in respect to socioscientific issues. Science & Education, 17(8–9), 829–854.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-007-9080-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Genel, A., & Topcu, M. S. (2016). Turkish preservice science teachers’ socioscientific issues-based teaching practices in middle school science classrooms. Research in Science & Technological Education, 34(1), 105–123.  https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2015.1124847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Harlen, W. (2007). Assessment of learning. London: Sage Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
  13. Kilinc, A., Demiral, U., & Kartal, T. (2017a). Resistance to dialogic discourse in SSI teaching: The effects of an argumentation-based workshop, teaching practicum, and induction on a preservice science teacher. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(6), 764–789.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kilinc, A., Kelly, T., Eroglu, B., Demiral, U., Kartal, T., Sonmez, A., & Demirbag, M. (2017b). Stickers to facts, imposers, democracy advocators, and committed impartialists: Preservice science teachers’ beliefs about teacher’s roles in socioscientific discourses. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(2), 195–213.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9682-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kutluca, A. Y., & Aydin, A. (2017). Changes in pre-service science teachers’ understandings after being involved in explicit nature of science and socioscientific argumentation processes. Science & Education, 26(6), 637–668.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-017-9919-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lazarowitz, R., & Bloch, I. (2005). Awareness of societal issues among high school biology teachers teaching genetics. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14(5–6), 437–457.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-005-0220-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Leden, L., Hansson, L., & Redfors, A. (2017). From black and white to shades of grey. A longitudinal study of teachers’ perspectives on teaching sociocultural and subjective aspects of science. Science & Education, 26(5), 483–511.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-017-9920-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lee, H., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Choi, K. (2006). Korean science teachers’ perceptions of the introduction of socio-scientific issues into the science curriculum. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 6(2), 97–117.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14926150609556691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nielsen, J. A. (2009). Structuring students’ critical discussions through processes of decision-making on socio-scientific controversies. Revista de Estudos Universitários, 35(2), 139–165.Google Scholar
  20. Nielsen, J. A. (2010). Functional roles of science in socio-scientific discussions. In I. Eilks & B. Ralle (Eds.), Contemporary science education – Implications from science education research about orientations, strategies and assessment (pp. 83–96). Aachen: Shaker.Google Scholar
  21. Nielsen, J. A., & Dolin, J. (2016). Evaluering mellem mestring og præstation. [Assessment between mastery and performance]. MONA, 2016(1), 51–62.Google Scholar
  22. Nielsen, J. A., Tidemand, S., & Dolin, J. (2018). Transforming assessment research: Recommendations for future research. In J. Dolin & R. Evans (Eds.), Transforming assessment: Through an interplay between practice, research and policy (pp. 279–290). Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ozturk, A. (2017). An investigation of prospective science teachers’ socio-scientific argumentation processes in terms of metacognition: A causal-comparative study. Pegem Egitim Ve Ogretim Dergisi, 7(4), 547–582.  https://doi.org/10.14527/pegegog.2017.020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ozturk, N., & Yilmaz-Tuzun, O. (2017). Preservice science Teachers’ epistemological beliefs and informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues. Research in Science Education, 47(6), 1275–1304.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9548-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pitiporntapin, S., & Srisakuna, S. (2017). Case studies of the development of science teachers’ practices of Socio-Scientific Issue (SSI)-based teaching through a professional development. Program, 10(1), 56–66.Google Scholar
  26. Sadler, T. D., Amirshokoohi, A., Kazempour, M., & Allspaw, K. M. (2006). Socioscience and ethics in science classrooms: Teacher perspectives and strategies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 353–376.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Simonneaux, L., & Simonneaux, J. (2009). Students’ socio-scientific reasoning on controversies from the viewpoint of education for sustainable development. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 4(3), 657–687.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-008-9141-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Steffen, B., & Hossle, C. (2017). Assessing students’ performances in decision-making: Coping strategies of biology teachers. Journal of Biological Education, 51(1), 44–51.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2016.1156012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sund, P. (2016). Discerning selective traditions in science education: A qualitative study of teachers’ responses to what is important in science teaching. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11(2), 387–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tidemand, S., & Nielsen, J. A. (2017). The role of socioscientific issues in biology teaching: From the perspective of teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 39(1), 44–61.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1264644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ural Keles, P., & Aydin, S. (2017). Class teacher candidates’ opinions on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO). Journal of Education and Practice, 8(12), 145–150.Google Scholar
  32. Yapicioglu, A. E., & Kaptan, F. (2017). A mixed method research study on the effectiveness of Socioscientific issue-based instruction. Egitim Ve Bilim-Education and Science, 42(192), 113–137.  https://doi.org/10.15390/eb.2017.6600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education, 89(3), 357–377.  https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Science EducationUniversity of CopenhagenCopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations