Students’ understandings of nature of science and their arguments in the context of four socio-scientific issues (original) (raw)
Related papers
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2012
The study investigated the relationship of high school students' understandings about nature of science (NOS) aspects and their argumentation skills in relation to two controversial socioscientific issues. The study was conducted in five schools selected from different geographical areas in Beirut, Lebanon. Participants were 219 grade 11 students. Students in all the schools were administered a survey that consisted of two scenarios that addressed the controversial socioscientific issues about genetically modified food and water fluoridation. The two scenarios were followed by questions relating to argumentation and NOS. The study used a mixed methods approach where quantitative and qualitative measures were employed. Analysis involved participants' views of the target NOS aspects (subjective, tentative, and empirical) and their argumentation components (argument, counterargument, and rebuttal). The Pearson analyses showed strong correlations between the counterargument, compared to argument and rebuttal, and the three NOS aspects. Further, the chi-square analyses showed significant differences in participants' argumentation skills and NOS understandings between the two scenarios. Qualitative data from questionnaires and interviews further confirmed these findings. Two central implications for the teaching of NOS and argumentation skills were discussed in terms of highlighting the role of counterarguments and considering contextual factors that involve issue exposure and familiarity, prior content knowledge, and personal relevance. ß
Student conceptualizations of the nature of science in response to a socioscientific issue
International Journal of Science Education, 2004
This study investigates student conceptualizations of the nature of science (NOS) and how students interpret and evaluate conflicting evidence regarding a socioscientific issue. Eighty-four high school students participated in the study by reading contradictory reports about the status of global warming and responding to questions designed to elicit ideas pertinent to the research goals. A subsample of 30 students was interviewed in order to triangulate data from the written responses. Data were analyzed using a qualitative methodological approach. The participants displayed a range of views on three distinct aspects of NOS: empiricism, tentativeness, and social embeddedness. Findings indicate that interpretation and evaluation of conflicting evidence in a socioscientific context is influenced by a variety of factors related to NOS such as data interpretation and social interactions including individuals' own articulation of personal beliefs and scientific knowledge. Implications for science teaching and learning are discussed.
Multiple Views of the Nature of Science and Socio-Scientific Issues
2000
The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationships between students' conceptions of the nature of science and their reactions to evidence that challenged their beliefs about socio-scientific issues. The study used 248 students from 9th and 10th grade general science classes, 11th and 12th grade honors biology, honors science, and physics classes, and senior level college preservice science education classes. Students responded to questions aimed at revealing their epistemological views of the nature of science and their belief convictions on selected socio-scientific issues. A smaller subset of students was selected based on varying degrees of belief convictions about the socio-scientific issues and selected students paired to discuss their reasoning related to those issues while being exposed to anomalous data and information from each other and in response to epistemological probes of an interviewer. A qualitative design that entailed the derivation of taxonomic categories through discourse analysis utilizing samples of fallacious reasoning, conceptions of science, and sample performance of thought as a result of dialogic interaction was utilized. Additionally, appropriate nonparametric tests were performed to examine whether paired discourse resulted in changing belief convictions. By engaging students in discourse on socio-scientific issues, this study was aimed at elucidating how students' conceptions of the nature of science are reflected in their dialogic reasoning on moral and ethical issues. Taxonomic categories and samples of thought are presented and discussed, and implications for science education are addressed. (Contains 31 references.
International Journal of Science Education, 2018
The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast between two theoretical frameworks for addressing nature of science (NOS) and socioscientific issues (SSI) in school science. These frameworks are critical thinking (CT) and argumentation (AR). For the past years, the first and second authors of this paper have pursued research in this area using CT and AR as theoretical frameworks, respectively. Yacoubian argues that future citizens need to develop a critical mindset as they are guided to (1) practice making judgments on what views of NOS to acquire and (2) practice making decisions on SSI through applying their NOS understandings. Khishfe asserts that AR is an important component of decision making when dealing with SSI and the practice in AR in relation to controversial issues is needed for informed decision making. She argues that AR as a framework may assist in the development of more informed understandings of NOS. In this paper, the authors delve into a dialogue for (1) elucidating strengths and potential of each framework, (2) highlighting challenges that they face in their research using the frameworks in question, (3) exploring the extent to which the frameworks can overlap, and (4) proposing directions for future research.
Tangled up in views: Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific dilemmas
Science Education, 2002
The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationships between students' conceptions of the nature of science and their reactions to evidence that challenged their beliefs about socioscientific issues. This study involved 41 pairs of students representing “critical cases” of contrasting ethical viewpoints. These 82 students were identified from a larger sample of 248 students from 9th and 10th grade general science classes, 11th and 12th grade honors biology, honors science, and physics classes, and upper-level college preservice science education classes. Students responded to questions aimed at revealing their epistemological views of the nature of science and their belief convictions on a selected socioscientific issue. The smaller subset of students was selected based on varying degrees of belief convictions about the socioscientific issues and the selected students were then paired to discuss their reasoning related to the issue while being exposed to anomalous data and information from each other and in response to epistemological probes of an interviewer. Taxonomic categories of students' conceptions of the nature of science were derived from the researchers' analysis of student responses to interviews and questionnaires. In some instances, students' conceptions of the nature of science were reflected in their reasoning on a moral and ethical issue. This study stimulated students to reflect on their own beliefs and defend their opinions. The findings suggest that the reactions of students to anomalous socioscientific data are varied and complex, with notable differences in the reasoning processes of high school students compared to college students. A deeper understanding of how students reason about the moral and ethical context of controversial socioscientific issues will allow science educators to incorporate teaching strategies aimed at developing students' reasoning skills in these crucial areas. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Sci Ed86:343–367, 2002; Published online in Wiley Interscience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI 10.1002/sce.10025
Beliefs in the Nature of Science and Responses to Socioscientific Issues
This study investigates student conceptualizations of the nature of science (NOS) and how students interpret and evaluate conflicting evidence regarding a socioscientific issue. Eighty-four high school students participated in the study by reading contradictory reports about the status of global warming and responding to questions designed to elicit ideas pertinent to the research goals. A subsample of 30 students was interviewed in order to triangulate data from the written responses. Data were analyzed using a qualitative methodological approach. The participants displayed a range of views on three distinct aspects of NOS: empiricism, tentativeness, and social embeddedness. Findings indicate that interpretation and evaluation of conflicting evidence in a socioscientific context is influenced by a variety of factors related to NOS such as data interpretation and social interactions including individuals' own articulation of personal beliefs and scientific knowledge. Implications for science teaching and learning are discussed.
2003
This study was designed to determine how students' engagement in a learning and debate activity on a current scientific controversy influences their understanding of the nature of science and, in turn, informs their decision-making on the issue. Two high school science classrooms, totaling 38 students from 9th through 12th grade, participated in the Internet-based unit on the topic of genetically modified foods. The unit, including introductory discussions on the nature of science, a video on the controversy of genetically modified foods, a series of online activities that presented multiple perspectives of the controversy, and follow-up interviews, took place over seven consecutive 1.5 hour period blocks. The study utilized qualitative procedures to analyze students' views on the nature of science as expressed through their answers to online and interview questions and a final classroom debate. Each student conversational turn in the debate was analyzed for references to supporting evidence and instances of moral and fallacious reasoning. While students did not make explicit reference to conceptual understandings of the nature of science in the classroom debate, the issue-based activity was successful as a pedagogical approach to facilitate and reveal students' conceptions of science. The students' answers to online questions reflected conceptions of the tentative, creative, subjective, and social aspects of science. Their high level of engagement throughout the unit supported the students' positive affective verbal response to the Internet-based, scaffolded learning environment and subject matter content. Findings from the analysis of students' mastery of the subject matter of genetic engineering and their reference to subject matter knowledge and evidence in the classroom debate suggest that NOS centered discussions should coincide with in-depth learning activities on the subject matter content of the controversy. Taxonomic categories and samples of thought are presented and discussed, and implications for science education are addressed. Research Question 1: What features of a web-based learning environment are effective for engaging students in learning and debate activities on the nature of science and current socioscientific controversies? There were three sub-questions guiding this portion of the data analysis, focusing on instructional design attributes, subject matter content, and the pedagogical structure of the debate activity. They are as follows: Research Question 1A: Were the instructional design attributes (e.g. scaffolding tools, navigation, and user interface) effective in scaffolding students through the learning treatment? Research Question IB: How did students' understanding of the subject matter of genetically modified foods develop or change through the course of the learning treatment? Research Question 1C: How did students utilize evidence claims or GMF subject matter knowledge (SMK) in formulating and presenting their arguments for the classroom debate? Research Question 2: How does students' engagement in a web-based learning environment on a current socioscientific controversy elicit, reveal, and develop their conceptual understanding of the nature of science? Research Question 3: What is the nature of the relationships that exist, if any, between students' understanding of the nature of science and their reasoning used to make decisions on a current socioscientific controversy? Research Design This exploratory case study, in its entirety, occurred in six phases as subsequently described.
The influence of argumentation on understanding nature of science
2016
The aim in conducting this study is to explore the effects of argumentation on pre-service science teachers’ views of the nature of science. This study used a qualitative case study and conducted with 20 pre-service science teachers. Data sources include an open-ended questionnaire and audio-taped interviews. According to pretest and posttest scores, 3 participants were selected for gathering qualitative data and follow-up interviews. Analyses of the findings revealed that the argumentation based instruction was effective in 2 of 3 participants’ views of the nature of science. According to the results, 2 aspects of the nature of science were the most developed aspects of the nature of science assessed in this study; the social and cultural and the creative and imaginative nature of science. These findings highlight the need for teacher preparation programs to incorporate argumentation based instruction that promotes the development of the nature of science views. © Author(s)
International Journal for Cross-Disciplinary Subjects in Education, 2018
Advancement in science and technology calls for enabling students making informed decisions in the context of socio-scientific issues (SSI). This study aimed at exploring the efficacy of teaching science through SSI-based argumentation for improving grade-IX students' argumentation skills with particular focus on the quality and complexity of argumentation. A pre-experiment; pre-post-test design was employed. All of the grade-IX students (n= 44) of biology group in an urban public school of Karachi, Pakistan were recruited as a sample. After being taught a unit of eight lessons (45-minutes each) on genetics, students were explicitly engaged in oral and written argumentation for further four sessions (45-minutes each). Data were collected through writing frames before, and after the intervention to gather evidence on progress, students have made in SSI-based argumentation. The data were analysed for complexity and quality of argumentation using the pre-defined analytical frameworks. The findings indicated an overall improvement in complexity of students argumentation with significant difference (Wilcoxon W = 553; Z =-4.94; p < 0.01). The magnitude of difference fell in the category of large effect (r = 0.80). Similarly, a significant difference (Wilcoxon W = 528; Z =-5.00; p < 0.01) was observed in the quality of students' argumentation with a large (r = 0.832) effect size. Moreover, a model of teaching and learning science through SSI-based argumentation has also been developed.