Situating Socio-scientific Issues in Classrooms as a Means of Achieving Goals of Science Education

  • Troy D. SadlerEmail author
Part of the Contemporary Trends and Issues in Science Education book series (CTISE, volume 39)


In considering what the science education community ought to be doing in terms of curricular and pedagogical innovations, teacher education, and research, I believe the field must consider two fundamental questions: (1) what should the goals of science education be and (2) how can these goals best be achieved? The question of what the goals of science education ought to be has been a long-standing issue. Debates on the meaning and purpose of scientific literacy have consistently explored this territory. Although the science education community is fairly united in its call to enhance scientific literacy for all students, there is considerably less agreement as to what constitutes scientific literacy. This volume does not take up the challenge of mapping out the landscape of scientific literacy; Doug Roberts’ (2007) chapter in the latest Handbook on Research in Science Education does an excellent job of summarizing and synthesizing the varied perspectives on this contentious construct.


  1. Albe, V. (2008). When scientific knowedge, daily life experience, epistemological and social considerations intersect: Students’ argumentation in group discussion on a socio-scientific issue. Research in Science Education, 38, 67–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Understandings of the nature of science and decision making on science and technology based issues. Science Education, 87, 352–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berkowitz, M. W., & Simmons, P. (2003). Integrating science education and character education. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education (pp. 117–138). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  4. Cobb, P., & Bowers, J. (1999). Cognitive and situated learning perspectives in theory and practice. Educational Researcher, 28(2), 4–15.Google Scholar
  5. DeBoer, G. E. (1991). A history of ideas in science education: Implications for practice. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  6. Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. W. (Eds.). (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  7. Eggert, S., & Bogeholz, S. (2010). Students’ use of decision-making strategies with regard to socioscientific issues: An application of the Rasch partial credit model. Science Education, 94, 230–258.Google Scholar
  8. Grace, M. (2009). Developing high quality decision-making discussions about biological conservation in a normal classroom setting. International Journal of Science Education, 31, 1464–1489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Greeno, J. G. (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning, and research. American Psychologist, 53, 5–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hodson, D. (2003). Time for action: Science education for an alternative future. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 645–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hughes, G. (2000). Marginalization of socioscientific material in science-technology-society science curricula: Some implications for gender inclusivity and curriculum reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 426–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Lewis, J., & Leach, J. (2006). Discussion of socio-scientific issues: The role of science knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 1267–1287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Members of the 2005 “Rising Above the Gathering Storm” Committee. (2010). Rising above the gathering storm, revisited: Rapidly approaching category 5. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  15. Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 729–780). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  16. Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 513–536.Google Scholar
  17. Sadler, T. D. (2009). Situated learning in science education: Socioscientific issues as contexts for practice. Studies in Science Education, 45(1), 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2009). Scientific literacy, PISA, and socioscientific Discourse: Assessment for progressive aims of science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 909–921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Staller, K. (2007). Inquiries into conversations among authors, editors and referees. Qualitative Social Work, 6(2), 137–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Tal, T., & Kedmi, Y. (2006). Teaching socioscientific issues: Classroom culture and students’ performances. Cultural Studies in Science, 1, 615–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Vazquez-Alonso, A., Manaserro-Mas, M.-A., & Acevedo-Diaz, J.-A. (2006). An analysis of complex multiple-choice science-technology-society items: Methodological development and preliminary results. Science Education, 90, 681–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Yager, R. E. (Ed.). (1996). Science/technology/society as reform in science education. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  23. Yerrick, R., & Roth, W.-M. (2005). Establishing scientific discourse communities: Multiple voices of teaching and learning research. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  24. Zeidler, D. L., & Keefer, M. (2003). The role of moral reasoning and the status of socioscientific issues in science education. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  25. 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, 357–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Zeidler, D. L., Walker, K. A., Ackett, W. A., & Simmons, M. L. (2002). Tangled up in views: Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific dilemmas. Science Education, 86, 343–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 35–62.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V.  2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Teaching and LearningUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations