Abstract
Sociomoral discourse, argumentation, and debate are necessary elements in a socioscientific issues-centered classroom. While these factors are fundamental in realizing a socioscientific issues (SSI) curriculum, related pedagogical factors, such as a commitment to inquiry, enacting opportunities for the cultivation of character, and conceptualizing the role of the nature of science (NOS) are consistent with progressive views of science teaching and scientific literacy (Sadler & Zeidler, 2009; Zeidler & Sadler, 2010). Further, classroom research has demonstrated that a fully enacted SSI approach to science education becomes a transformative process for participating students and their teacher. Successful transformation occurs when the teacher-centered approach shifts to a student-centered classroom and the science curriculum becomes issues-driven. Further, the results of this shift may be said to be transformative when students’ discovery of scientific concepts emerges out of socioscientific issues.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2006). Socioscientific issues in pre-college science classrooms. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning and discourse on socioscientific issues in science education (pp. 41–61). Dordrecht: Springer.
Applebaum, S., Zeidler, D., & Chiodo, K. L. (2010). Using socioscientific issues as context for teaching concepts and content. In R. E. Yager (Ed.). Science for resolving issues/problems. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press: (pp. 147–163).
Baxter Magolda, M. B. (1999). Creating contexts for learning and self-author(s)ship: Constructive-developmental pedagogy. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
Council on Competitiveness. (2005). National innovation initiative summit and report: Thriving in a world of challenge and change. Washington, DC: Council on Competitiveness.
Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Bristol, PA: Open University Press.
Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science & Education, 84(3), 287–312.
Fensham, P. J. (2009). Real world contexts in PISA science: Implications for context-based science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(8), 884–896.
Fowler, S. R., Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2009). Moral sensitivity in the context of socioscientific issues in high school science students. International Journal of Science Teacher Education, 31(2), 279–296.
Green, T. F. (1999). Voices: The educational formation of conscience. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
Kegan, R. (1994). In over our heads: The mental demands of modern life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
King, P. M., & Baxter Magolda, M. B. (1996). A developmental perspective on learning. Journal of College Student Development, 37, 163–173.
King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing reflective judgment: Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (2002). The reflective judgment model: Twenty years of research on epistemic cognition. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 37–61). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (2004). Reflective judgment: Theory and research on the development of epistemic assumptions through adulthood. Educational Psychologist, 39(1), 5–18.
Keefer, M. W. (2003). Moral reasoning and case-based approaches to ethical instruction in science. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education (pp. 241–259). Dordrecht: Springer.
Kolstø, S. D. (2001). To trust or not to trust,…’-pupils’ ways of judging information encountered in a socio-scientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 877–901.
Kolstø, S. D. (2006). Patterns in students’ argumentation confronted with a risk-focused socio-scientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 28(14), 1689–1716.
Labaree, D. F. (2003). The peculiar problems of preparing educational researchers. Educational Researcher, 32(4), 13–22.
Mueller, M. P., & Zeidler, D. L. (2010). Moral-ethical character and science education: Ecojustice ethics through socioscientific issues (SSI). In D. Tippins, M. Mueller, M. van Eijck, & J. Adams (Eds.), Cultural studies and environmentalism: The confluence of ecojustice, place-based (science) education, and indigenous knowledge systems (pp. 105–128). New York: Springer.
Narum, J. (2008). Transforming undergraduate programs in science, technology, engineering, mathematics: Looking back and looking ahead. Liberal Education, 94(2), 12–19.
Pedretti, E. (2003). Teaching science, technology, society and environment (STSE) education: Preservice teachers’ philosophical and pedagogical landscapes. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.
Ratcliffe, M. (1997). Pupil decision-making about socioscientific issues with the science curriculum. International Journal of Science Education., 19(2), 167–182.
Ratcliffe, M., & Millar, R. (2009). Teaching for understanding of science in context: evidence from the pilot trials of the twenty first century science courses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(8), 945–959.
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. (2006). Promoting discourse and argument in science teacher education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17(4), 323–346.
Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). The significance of content knowledge for informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: Applying Genetics knowledge to genetic engineering issues. Science & Education, 89(1), 71–93.
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(8), 909–921.
Walker, K. A., & Zeidler, D. L. (2007). Promoting discourse about socioscientific issues through scaffolded inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1387–1410.
Zeidler, D. L., & Keefer, M. (2003). The role of moral reasoning and the status of socioscientific issues in science education: Philosophical, psychological and pedagogical considerations. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning and discourse on socioscientific issues in science education (pp. 7–38). Dordrecht: Springer.
Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2008). The role of moral reasoning in argumentation: Conscience, character and care. In S. Erduran & M. Pilar Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 201–216). New York: Springer.
Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, D. L. (2011). An inclusive view of scientific literacy: Core issues and future directions of socioscientific reasoning (pp. 176–192). In C. Linder, L. Ostman, & P. Wickman (Eds.), Promoting scientific literacy: Science education research in transaction. New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Applebaum, S., & Callahan, B. E. (2009). Advancing reflective judgment through socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 74–101.
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.
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(3), 343–367.
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.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix 1. SSI Units, Scientific Contexts, Systems and Concept Relationships
Appendix 1. SSI Units, Scientific Contexts, Systems and Concept Relationships
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Zeidler, D.L., Applebaum, S.M., Sadler, T.D. (2011). Enacting a Socioscientific Issues Classroom: Transformative Transformations. In: Sadler, T. (eds) Socio-scientific Issues in the Classroom. Contemporary Trends and Issues in Science Education, vol 39. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1159-4_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1159-4_16
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-1158-7
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-1159-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)