Abstract
In recent years, there has been growing interest in exploring argumentation about socio-scientific issues (SSI) in the classroom to improve students’ scientific literacy. Thus, this research aims to investigate how intervention based on argumentation about SSI affects secondary students’ patterns of informal reasoning and reasoning quality. The action research was conducted with 16 secondary students in which all of them were given pre-test and post-tests. The collected data were analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively. The results suggest that participants frequently relied on rationalistic informal reasoning or integrated informal reasoning patterns to solve SSI. Students’ reasoning quality also improved as there were higher frequencies of students with a higher level of reasoning quality and a significant increase in the construction of supportive argument, counterargument, rebuttal, and the total number of arguments in the two post-tests when compared to the pre-test. This study provided clear support for the potential of argumentation to improve secondary student’' scientific literacy by promoting the construction of evidence-based arguments to assist in making rational decisions when solving SSI.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
(Adapted from Lee and Grace (2010))
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
References
Albe, V., & Gombert, M. (2012). Students’ communication, argumentation, and knowledge in a citizens’ conference on global warming. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 7(3), 659–681.
Allchin, D. (2011). Evaluating knowledge of the nature of (whole) science. Science Education, 95(3), 518–542. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20432
Archila, P. A., Restrepo, S., Truscott de Mejía, A. M., & Bloch, N. I. (2022). Drama as a powerful tool to enrich socio-scientific argumentation. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-022-10320-3
Berland, L. K., & Hammer, D. (2012). Framing for scientific argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(1), 68–94. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20446
Bravo-Torija, B., & Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. (2012). Progression in complexity: Conceptualising sustainable marine resources management in a 10th grade classroom. Research in Science Education, 42(5), 5–23.
Capkinoglu, E., Yilmaz, S., & Leblebicioglu, G. (2020). Quality of argumentation by seventh-graders in local socio-scientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57(6), 827–855.
Capkinoglu, E., Cetin, P. S., & Metin Peten, D. (2021). How do pre-service science teachers evaluate the persuasiveness of a socio-scientific argument? International Journal of Science Education, 43(4), 594–623.
Capkinoglu, E., Yilmaz, S., & Leblebicioglu, G. (2019). Quality of argumentation by seventh‐graders in local socio-scientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, November, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21609
Dawson, V. M., & Venville, G. (2010). Teaching strategies for developing students' argumentation skills about socio-scientific issues in high school genetics. 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-008-9104-y
Dawson, V., & Carson, K. (2017). Using climate change scenarios to assess high school students’ argumentation skills. Research in Science and Technological Education, 35(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2016.1174932
Dawson, V., & Carson, K. (2020). Introducing argumentation about climate change socioscientific issues in a disadvantaged school. Research in Science Education, 50(3), 863–883. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9715-x
Dawson, V., & Venville, G. J. (2009). High-school students’ informal reasoning and argumentation about biotechnology: An indicator of scientific literacy? International Journal of Science Education, 31(11), 1421–1445. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690801992870
Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin’s argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915–933. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20012
Garcia-mila, M., Gilabert, S., Erduran, S., & Felton, M. (2013). The effect of argumentative task goal on the quality of argumentative discourse. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21057
Garrecht, C., Reiss, M. J., & Harms, U. (2021). “I wouldn’t want to be the animal in use nor the patient in need’–The role of issue familiarity in students” socio-scientific argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 43(12), 2065–2086.
Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Erduran, S. (2007). Argumentation in science education: An overview. In Argumentation in Science Education (pp. 3–27). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2_9
Johnson, J., Macalalag, A. Z., & Dunphy, J. (2020). Incorporating socio-scientific issues into a STEM education course: Exploring teacher use of argumentation in SSI and plans for classroom implementation. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 2(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-020-00026-3
Karpudewan, M., & Roth, W. M. (2018). Changes in primary students’ informal reasoning during an environment-related curriculum on socio-scientific issues. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(3), 401–419. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9787-x
Ke, L., Sadler, T. D., Zangori, L., & Friedrichsen, P. J. (2021). Developing and using multiple models to promote scientific literacy in the context of socio-scientific issues. Science & Education, 30(3), 589–607.
Kinslow, A. T. (2018). The development and implementation of a heuristic for teaching reflective scientific skepticism within a socio-scientific issue instructional framework (Doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri--Columbia). https://hdl.handle.net/10355/66067
Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge University Press.
Kuhn, D. (2010). Teaching and learning science as argument. Science Education, 94(5), 810–824. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20395
Kuhn, D., & Lerman, D. (2021). Yes but: Developing a critical stance toward evidence. International Journal of Science Education, 43(7), 1036–1053. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.1897897
Kuhn, D., & Moore, W. (2015). Argumentation as core curriculum. Learning: Research and Practice, 1(1), 66–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2015.994254
Lee, Y. C., & Grace, M. (2010). Conservation Students' reasoning processes in making decisions about an authentic , local socio-scientific issue : bat conservation. 2015, 37–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2010.9656216
Lin, S. S., & Mintzes, J. J. (2010). Learning argumentation skills through instruction in socioscientific issues: The effect of ability level. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(6), 993–1017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9215-6
Nielsen, J. A. (2012). Science in discussions: An analysis of the use of science content in socioscientific discussions. Science Education, 96(3), 428–256.
Nurtamara, L., & Prasetyanti, N. M. (2020). The effect of biotechology module with problem based learning in the socio-scientific context to enhance students’ socio-scientific decision making skills. International Education Studies, 13(1), 11–20.
Nussbaum, E. M. (2020). Critical integrative argumentation: Toward complexity in students’ thinking. Educational Psychologist, 56(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2020.1845173
OECD. (2019). Brunei Darussalam - Country Note - PISA 2018 Results. In PISA 2018 Results (I, II & II, pp. 1–9). OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/PISA2018_CN_BRN.pdf
Osborne, J. F., Henderson, J. B., MacPherson, A., Szu, E., Wild, A., & Yao, S. Y. (2016). The development and validation of a learning progression for argumentation in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(6), 821–846. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21316
Özdem Yilmaz, Y., Cakiroglu, J., Ertepinar, H., & Erduran, S. (2017). The pedagogy of argumentation in science education: Science teachers’ instructional practices. International Journal of Science Education, 39(11), 1443–1464. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1336807
Ozden, M. (2020). Elementary school students’ informal reasoning and its’ quality regarding socio-scientific issues. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 20(86), 61–84.
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). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Sadler, T. (2004). Moral sensitivity and its contribution to the resolution of socio-scientific issues. Journal of Moral Education, 33(3), 341–358. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305724042000733091
Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socio-scientific decision making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 112–138. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20042
Sadler, T., Barab, S., & Scott, B. (2007). What do students gain by engaging in socio-scientific inquiry? Research in Science Education, 37(4), 371–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9030-9
Sadler, T. D., Romine, W. L., & Topçu, M. S. (2016). Learning science content through socio-scientific issues-based instruction: A multi-level assessment study. International Journal of Science Education, 38(10), 1622–1635. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1204481
She, H. ‐C., Lin, H. ‐S., & Huang, L. ‐Y. (2019). Reflections on and implications of the Programme for International Student Assessment 2015 (PISA 2015) performance of students in Taiwan: The role of epistemic beliefs about science in scientific literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(10), 1309–1340. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21553
Sternäng, L., & Lundholm, C. (2011). Climate change and morality: Students’ perspectives on the individual and society. International Journal of Science Education, 33(8), 1131–1148. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.503765
Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press.
Tsai, C. Y. (2018). The effect of online argumentation of socio-scientific issues on students’ scientific competencies and sustainability attitudes. Computers and Education, 116, 14–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.08.009
UNEP (2018). SINGLE-USE PLASTICS: A Roadmap for Sustainability (Rev. ed., pp. vi; 6). https://www.unep.org/resources/report/single-use-plastics-roadmap-sustainability
Venville, G. J., & Dawson, V. M. (2010). The impact of a classroom intervention on grade 10 students' argumentation skills , informal reasoning , and conceptual understanding of science. 47(8), 952–977. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20358
Walton, D. N. (1989). Dialogue theory for critical thinking. Argumentation, 3, 169–184.
Wu, Y. T., & Tsai, C. C. (2007). High school students’ informal reasoning on a socio-scientific issue: Qualitative and quantitative analyses. International Journal of Science Education, 29(9), 1163–1187. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690601083375
Wu, Y. T., & Tsai, C. C. (2011). High school students’ informal reasoning regarding a socio-scientific issue, with relation to scientific epistemological beliefs and cognitive structures. International Journal of Science Education, 33(3), 371–400. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903505661
Young, A., Khalil, K. A., & Wharton, J. (2018). Empathy for animals: A review of the existing literature. Curator, 61(2), 327–343. https://doi.org/10.1111/cura.12257
Zeidler, D. L., Herman, B. C., & Sadler, T. D. (2019). New directions in socioscientific issues research. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(11), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0008-7
Zeidler, D. L., & Kahn, S. (2014). It’s debatable!: Using socioscientifc Issues to develop scientifc literacy, K-12. National Science Teachers Association Press. https://doi.org/10.2505/9781938946004
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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Aziz, A.A., Johari, M. The Effect of Argumentation about Socio-Scientific Issues on Secondary Students’ Reasoning Pattern and Quality. Res Sci Educ 53, 771–789 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-023-10099-5
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-023-10099-5