Abstract
This research project aims to investigate how students in lower secondary school experience work with socioscientific issues (SSI). The six socioscientific cases developed and used in this project are relevant according to characteristics of SSI and to the national curriculum. Approximately 1,500 students in Sweden have worked with one SSI case chosen by the teachers. A questionnaire-based instrument was used to measure the affective domain of students’ attitudes towards and interest in science before starting to work with the case and a second questionnaire after finishing a case. The second student questionnaire, measured the situational characteristics of the SSI work and perceived cognitive and affective outcomes. According to the students’ self-reported experience, all cases were interesting and related to a current issue. Most cases were equally interesting to boys and girls, the only exception was You are what you eat, which girls found more interesting than boys did. Almost all students claim that they learnt new facts, learnt to argue for their standpoint and to search and evaluate information during the work with the cases. The girls’ average scores were higher on several aspects of learning outcomes. Furthermore the students, especially the girls, perceived that the outcome of working with SSI had relevance for their future, with some cases more relevant than others. The more interesting the student found the case, the more they claimed they learnt. The students do not, however, claim that they learnt more science than during ordinary lessons.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abd-El-Khalic, F., & Lederman, N. (2000). Improving science teachers’ conceptions of nature of science: a critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 665–701.
Aikenhead, G. (2006). Science education for everyday life: evidence-based practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
Albe, V. (2008). When scientific knowledge, daily life experience, epistemological and social considerations intersect: students’ argumentation in group discussions on a socioscientific issue. Research in Science Education, 38, 67–90.
Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Razavieh, A. (1996). Introduction to research in education. Forth Worth: Harcourt Brace College Publisher.
Bartholomew, H., Osborne, J., & Ratcliffe, M. (2004). Teaching students “ideas-about-science”: five dimensions of effective practice. Science Education, 88(5), 655–682.
Bennett, J., & Lubben, F. (2006). Context-based chemistry: the Salters approach. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 999–1015.
Brotman, J. S., & Moore, F. M. (2008). Girls and science: a review of four themes in the science education literature. Journal of research in science teaching, 45(9), 971–1002.
Bryce, T., & Gray, D. (2004). Tough acts to follow: the challenges to science teachers presented by biotechnological progress. International Journal of Science Education, 26(6), 717–722.
Bulte, A. M. W., Westbroek, H. B., de Jong, O., & Pilot, A. (2006). A research approach to designing chemistry education using authentic practices as contexts. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 1063–1086.
Dori, Y. J., Tal, R. T., & Tsaushu, M. (2003). Teaching biotechnology through case studies–can we improve higher order thinking skills of nonscience majors? Science Education, 87(6), 767–793.
Ekborg, M. & Ottander, C. (2010). Working with socioscientific issues – students’ and teachers’ experience. In: Socio-cultural and Human Values in Science and Technology Education. Proceedings of XIV IOSTE Symposium, Bled Slovenia, 13–18 June 2010 http://files.ecetera.si/IOSTE/XVI_IOSTE_Conference_%20PROCEEDINGS_(2.nov.2010).pdf
Ekborg, M., Ideland, M., & Malmberg, C. (2009). Science for life – a conceptual framework for construction and analysis of socioscientific cases. NorDiNa, 5, 35–46.
Ekborg, M., Nyström, E., & Ottander, C. (2010). Teachers and SSI in Sweden. In M. F. Taşar & G. Çakmakcı (Eds.), Contemporary science education research: preservice and inservice teacher education (pp. 253–262). Ankara, Turkey: Pegem Akademi.
EU (2007). Science Education NOW: A Renewed Pedagogy for the Future of Europe. Retrieved August 3, 2008, from http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/report-rocard-on-science-education_en.pdf
Gray, S. D., & Bryce, T. (2006). Socioscientific issues in science education: implications for the professional development of teachers. Cambridge Journal of Education, 36(2), 171–192.
Jarman, R., & McClune, B. (2007). Developing scientific literacy: using news media in the classroom. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Jensen, B. B., & Schnack, K. (1997). The action competence approach in environmental education. Environmental Education Research, 3(2), 163–178.
Klosterman, M. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2010). Multi-level assessment of scientific content knowledge gains associated with socioscientific issues-based instruction. International Journal of Science Education, 32(8), 1017–1043.
Kobala, T., & Glynn, S. (2007). Attitudinal and Motivational Constructs in Science Learning. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 75–102). Mahwah, New Jersey: LEA Publishers.
Lindahl, B. (2003). Lust att lära naturvetenskap och teknik? En longitudinell studie om vägen till gymnasiet. [Pupils’ responses to school science and technology? A longitudinal study of pathways to upper secondary school.] Doctoral thesis. (Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis)
Lyons, T. (2006). Different countries same science classes: students’ experiences of school science in their own words. International Journal of Science Education, 28(6), 591–613.
Millar, R. & Osborne, J. (Eds.). (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. (London: King’s College London, School of Education)
Newton, P., Driver, R., & Osborne, J. (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 553–576.
Osborne, J. & Dillon, J. (2008). Science Education in Europe: Critical reflections. A report to the Nuffield foundation. Retrieved August 1, 2008, from http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/fileLibrary/pdf/Sci_Ed_in_Europe_Report_Final.pdf
Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: review of the literature and its implication. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049–1079.
Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argument in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994–1020.
Oscarsson, M., Jidesjö, A., Karlsson, K. G., & Strömdahl, H. (2009). Science in society or science in school: Swedish secondary school science teachers’ beliefs about science and science lessons compare to what their students want to learn. NorDiNa, 5, 18–34.
Penick, J. E. (2003). Integrated science: why teaching “science” is better than a discipline-centered approach. Science Education International, 4(1), 14–16.
Ratcliffe, M., & Grace, M. (2003). Science education for citizenship. teaching socioscientific issues. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Rickinson, M. (2001). Learners and learning in environmental education: a critical review of the evidence. Environmental Education Research, 7(3), 207–316.
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 Erbaum.
Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: a critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513–536.
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, 353–376.
Sadler, T. D., Barab, S. A., & Scott, B. (2007). What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry? Research in Science Education, 37(4), 371–391.
Schreiner, C., & Sjøberg, S. (2007). Science education and youth’s identity construction - two incompatible projects? In D. Corrigan, J. Dillon, & R. Gunstone (Eds.), The Re-emergence of values in the science curriculum. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2–3), 235–260.
Skolverket, [The national agency for education]. (2000). Syllabuses for the compulsory school. Retrieved October 17, 2008, from, http://www.skolverket.se/sb/d/493/a/1303
Skolverket, [The national agency for education]. (2005). Naturorienterande ämnen. NU03. Nationella utvärderingen av grundskolan 2003. Ämnesrapport till Rapport 252. Stockholm: Skolverket
Skolverket, [The national agency for education]. (2007). PISA 2006 - svenska femtonåringars förmåga att förstå, tolka och reflektera – naturvetenskap, matematik och läsförståelse. (Rapport 306) Stockholm: Skolverket. Retrieved October 1, 2008, from, http://www.sisc.se/Materiel/Instrument.pdf
Winberg, M. & Lindahl, B. (2008). Science for Life - development of a multi-concept instrument to study the impact of socioscientific issues on student interest in science. Paper presented at the NFSUN conference, Reykjavik, Iceland. Retrieved October 12, 2010, from, http://www.sisc.se/Materiel/Instrument.pdf
Winberg, M. & Lindahl, B. (2009). Working with SSI: Factors influencing emotional and cognitive outcomes. Retrieved October 12, 2010, from, http://www.sisc.se/ESERA09/MW_BL.pdf
Wu, Y.-T., & Tsai, C.-C. (2007). High school students’ informal reasoning on a socioscientific issue: qualitative and quantitative analyses. International Journal of Science Education, 29(9), 1163–1187.
Yager, S. O., Lim, G., & Yager, R. (2006). The advantages of an STS approach over a typical textbook dominated approach in middle school science. School Science and Mathematics, 106, 248–260.
Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: a research-based framework for socioscientific issues in education. Science Education, 89(3), 357–377.
Zohar, A., & Sela, D. (2003). Her physics, his physics: gender issues in Israeli advanced placement physics classes. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 245–268.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The project is funded by the Swedish Research Council and started in 2007. The research group called SISC (Science in Social Contexts) consists of Britt Lindahl and Maria Rosberg at Kristianstad University, Christina Ottander, Eva Silfver and Mikael Winberg at Umeå University, and Margareta Ekborg, Malin Ideland, Claes Malmberg and Agneta Rehn at Malmö University (www.sisc.se).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ottander, C., Ekborg, M. Students’ Experience of Working with Socioscientific Issues - a Quantitative Study in Secondary School. Res Sci Educ 42, 1147–1163 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9238-1
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9238-1