Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Using the SEE-SEP Model to Analyze Upper Secondary Students’ Use of Supporting Reasons in Arguing Socioscientific Issues

  • Published:
Journal of Science Education and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To achieve the goal of scientific literacy, the skills of argumentation have been emphasized in science education during the past decades. But the extent to which students can apply scientific knowledge to their argumentation is still unclear. The purpose of this study was to analyse 80 Swedish upper secondary students’ informal argumentation on four socioscientific issues (SSIs) to explore students’ use of supporting reasons and to what extent students used scientific knowledge in their arguments. Eighty upper secondary students were asked to express their opinions on one SSI topic they chose through written reports. The four SSIs in this study include global warming, genetically modified organisms (GMO), nuclear power, and consumption. To analyse students’ supporting reasons from a holistic view, we used the SEE-SEP model, which links the six subject areas of sociology/culture (So), environment (En), economy (Ec), science (Sc), ethics/morality (Et) and policy (Po) connecting with three aspects, knowledge, value and personal experience (KVP). The results showed that students used value to a greater extent (67%) than they did scientific knowledge (27%) for all four SSI topics. According to the SEE-SEP model, the distribution of supporting reasons generated by students differed among the SSI topics. Also, some alternative concepts were disclosed in students’ arguments. The implications for research and education are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aikenhead GS (1985) Collective decision making in the social context of science. Sci Educ 69(4):453–475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albe V (2007) When scientific knowledge, daily life experience, epistemological and social considerations intersect: students’ argumentation in group discussions on a socio-scientific issue. Res Sci Educ 38:67–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albe V (2008) Students’ positions and considerations of scientific evidence about a controversial socioscientific issue. Sci Educ 17:805–827

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science (1990) Science for all Americans. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang SN, Chiu MH (2008) Lakatos’ scientific research programmes as a framework for analysing informal argumentation about socio-scientific issues. Int J Sci Educ 30:1753–1773

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang Rundgren SN, Rundgren CJ (2010) SEE-SEP: from a separate to a holistic view of socioscientific issues. Asia-Pac Forum Sci Learn Teach 11(1), Article 2

  • Chang SN, Yeung YY, Cheng MH (2009) Ninth graders’ learning interests, life experiences and attitudes towards science and technology. J Sci Educ Technol 18(5):447–457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colucci-Gray L, Camino E, Barbiero G, Gray D (2006) From scientific literacy to sustainable literacy: an ecological framework for education. Sci Educ 90:227–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickinson HD (1998) Evidence-based decision-making: an argumentative approach. Int J Med Inf 51:71–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dos Santos WP (2009) Scientific literacy: a Freirean perspective as a radical view of humanistic science education. Sci Educ 93:361–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Driver R, Newton P, Osborne J (2000) Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Sci Educ 84:287–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekborg M (2008) Opinion building on a socioscientific issue: the case of genetically modified plants. J Biol Educ 42(2):60–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fensham PJ (2008) Complexity theory: its relevance to science education, ASERA Conference. Brisbane

  • Fleming R (1986) Adolescent reasoning in socio-scientific issues, part I: social cognition. J Res Sci Teach 23:677–687

    Google Scholar 

  • Grace MM, Ratcliffe M (2002) The science and values that young people draw upon to make decisions about biological conservation issues. Int J Sci Educ 24:1157–1169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jallinoja P, Aro AR (2000) Does knowledge make a difference? The association between knowledge about genes and attitudes. J Health Commun 5:29–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiménez-Aleixandre MP, Pereiro-Muñoz C (2002) Knowledge producers or knowledge consumers? Argumentation and decision making about environmental management. Int J Sci Educ 24:1171–1190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly G, Crawford T, Green J (2001) Common task and uncommon knowledge: dissenting voices in the discursive construction of physics across small laboratory groups. Linguist Educ 12:135–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keselman A, Kaufman DR, Patel VL (2004) “You can exercise your way out of HIV” and other stories: the role of biological knowledge in adolescents’ evaluation of myths. Sci Educ 88:548–573

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolstø SD (2001) Scientific literacy for citizenship: tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientific issues. Sci Educ 85:291–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolstø SD (2006) Patterns in students’ argumentation confronted with a risk-focused socio-scientific issue. Int J Sci Educ 28:1689–1716

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kortland K (1996) An STS case study about students’ decision making on the waste issue. Sci Educ 80:673–689

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis J, Leach J (2006) Discussion on socio-scientific issues: the role of scientific knowledge. Int J Sci Educ 28:1267–1287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lpf 94 (1994) Curriculum for the non-compulsory school system, Lpf 94–english version. Utbildningsförlaget, Stockholm

    Google Scholar 

  • Means ML, Voss JF (1996) Who reasons well? Two studies of informal reasoning among children of different grade, ability, and knowledge levels. Cognit Instruct 14:139–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millar R, Osborne J (1998) Beyond 2000: science education for the future. King’s College School of Education, London

    Google Scholar 

  • MOE (1998) 1–9 grades curriculum guidelines. Ministry of Education, Taipei

    Google Scholar 

  • Newton P, Driver R, Osborne J (1999) The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. Int J Sci Educ 21:553–576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patronis PT, Potari D, Spiliotopoulou V (1999) Students’ argumentation in decision-making on a socio-scientific issue: Implications for teaching. Int J Sci Educ 21:745–754

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ratcliffe M (2003) Science education for citizenship: teaching socio-scientific issues. McGrawHill Education, Berkshire

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler T (2004) Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: a critical review of research. J Res Sci Teach 41:513–536

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler TD (2009) Socioscientific issues in science education: labels, reasoning, and transfer. Cultural Stud Sci Educ 4:697–703

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler TD, Donnelly LA (2006) Socioscientific argumentation: the effects of content knowledge and morality. Int J Sci Educ 28(12):1463–1488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler TD, Fowler SR (2006) A threshold model of content knowledge transfer for socioscientific argumentation. Sci Educ 90:986–1004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler TD, Zeidler DL (2005) Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making. J Res Sci Teach 42:112–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler TD, Barab SA, Scott B (2007) What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry? Res Sci Educ 37:371–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simonneaux L (2001) Role-play or debate to promote students’ argumentation and justification on an issue in animal transgenesis. Int J Sci Educ 23(9):903–927

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simonneaux L, Simonneaux J (2009) Students’ socioscientific reasoning on controversies from the viewpoint of education for sustainable development. Cultural Stud Sci Educ 4:657–687

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A, Kahneman D (1981) The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211:453–458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uebersax JS (1987) Diversity of decision-making models and the measurement of interrater agreement. Psychol Bull 101:140–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler DL, Keefer M (2003) The role of moral reasoning and the status of socioscientific issues in science education: philosophical, psychological and pedagogical considerations. In: Zeidler DL (ed) The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education. Kluwer Academic Press, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler DL, Walker KA, Ackett WA, Simmons ML (2002) Tangled up in views: beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific dilemmas. Sci Educ 86:343–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler DL, Sadler TD, Simmons ML, Howes EV (2005) Beyond STS: a research-based framework for socioscientific issues education. Sci Educ 89:357–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zohar A, Nemet F (2002) Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. J Res Sci Teach 39:35–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, Karlstad University, 651 88, Karlstad, Sweden

    Nina Christenson & Hans-Olof Höglund

  2. Department of Chemistry and Biomedical Sciences, Karlstad University, 651 88, Karlstad, Sweden

    Shu-Nu Chang Rundgren

Authors
  1. Nina Christenson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shu-Nu Chang Rundgren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hans-Olof Höglund
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shu-Nu Chang Rundgren.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Christenson, N., Chang Rundgren, SN. & Höglund, HO. Using the SEE-SEP Model to Analyze Upper Secondary Students’ Use of Supporting Reasons in Arguing Socioscientific Issues. J Sci Educ Technol 21, 342–352 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9328-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9328-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation