Socioscientific Reasoning Competencies and Nature of Science Conceptions of Undergraduate Students from Different Faculties
Abstract
Understanding undergraduate students’ socioscientific reasoning (SSR) competencies and nature of science (NOS) conceptions are important for them to be informed citizens. Therefore, in this study, SSR competencies and NOS conceptions of 169 undergraduate students from five different faculties were investigated through survey research methodology. The descriptive analysis of the participants’ scores indicated that their SSR competencies and NOS conceptions were at a moderate level. The participants struggled most with the dimensions of skepticism and inquiry in SSR and with the dimension of methods and methodological rules in NOS. However, they obtained better scores in perspective-taking in SSR and socio-institutional systems in NOS. When the differences among the faculties were investigated, science students were found to have significantly lower scores on both SSR and NOS. Conversely, health science and engineering students got better scores on both. Finally, there was no significant relationship between SSR and NOS scores of participants. The differences in participants’ scores were discussed based on the differences in the curriculums of faculties and implications that were provided for educators. To develop SSR competencies and NOS conceptions of undergraduate students, different departments can collaborate by offering courses from different perspectives to other departments.References
Akerson, V. L., Abdâ€Elâ€Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Influence of a reflective explicit activityâ€based approach on elementary teachers' conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(4), 295-317.
Akgün, S. (2018). University students’ understanding of nature of science (Unpublished master’s thesis). Boğaziçi University, İstanbul.
Allchin, D. (2011). Evaluating knowledge of the nature of (whole) science. Science Education, 95(3), 518-542.
Barab, S. A., Sadler, T. D., Heiselt, C., Hickey, D., & Zuiker, S. (2007). Relating narrative, inquiry, and inscriptions: Supporting consequential play. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(1), 59-82.
Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Understandings of the nature of science and decision making on science and technology based issues. Science Education, 87(3), 352-377.
Bell, R. L., Matkins, J. J., & Gansneder, B. M. (2011). Impacts of contextual and explicit instruction on preservice elementary teachers' understandings of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(4), 414-436.
Cooper, C. B. (2011). Media literacy as a key strategy toward improving public acceptance of climate change science. BioScience, 61(3), 231-237.
Erduran, S., & Dagher, Z. R. (2014). Reconceptualizing nature of science for science education: Scientific knowledge, practices and other family categories. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
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.
Hall, T. E., Engebretson, J., O’Rourke, M., Piso, Z., Whyte, K., & Valles, S. (2017). The need for social ethics in interdisciplinary environmental science graduate programs: Results from a nation-wide survey in the United States. Science and Engineering Ethics, 23(2), 565-588.
Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2014). New directions for nature of science research. In Michael R Matthews (Eds.), International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching (pp. 999-1021). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Kaya, E., & Erduran, S. (2016). From FRA to RFN, or how the Family Resemblance Approach can be transformed for science curriculum analysis on nature of science. Science & Education, 25(9), 1115-1133.
Kaya, E., Erduran, S., Akgün, S., & Aksöz, B. (2017). Nature of Science in Teacher Education: A Holistic Approach. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 11(2), 464-501.
Khishfe, R. (2012). Nature of science and decision-making. International Journal of Science Education, 34(1), 67-100.
Khishfe, R., & Abdâ€Elâ€Khalick, F. (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiryâ€oriented instruction on sixth graders' views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551-578.
Khishfe, R., Alshaya, F. S., BouJaoude, S., Mansour, N., & Alrudiyan, K. I. (2017). Students’ understandings of nature of science and their arguments in the context of four socio-scientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 39(3), 299-334.
Kinslow, A. T., Sadler, T. D., & Nguyen, H. T. (2019). Socio-scientific reasoning and environmental literacy in a field-based ecology class. Environmental Education Research, 25(3), 388-410.
Kober, N. (2015). Reaching Students: What Research Says About Effective Instruction in Undergraduate Science and Engineering. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Kolstø, S. D. (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientific issues. Science Education, 85(3), 291-310.
Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire (VNOS): Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497–521.
Lederman, N. G., Antink, A., & Bartos, S. (2014). Nature of science, scientific inquiry, and socio-scientific issues arising from genetics: A pathway to developing a scientifically literate citizenry. Science & Education, 23(2), 285-302.
Manske, J. (2013). Teaching Controversial Science: Where Values and Science Converge. International Journal of Science in Society, 4(1).
Matthews, M. R. (2012). Changing the focus: From nature of science (NOS) to features of science (FOS). In M.S. Khine (Eds.), Advances in Nature of Science Research (pp. 3-26). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
McDonald, C. V. (2010). The influence of explicit nature of science and argumentation instruction on preservice primary teachers' views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(9), 1137-1164.
[NAS] National Academy of Sciences. 2007. Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
National Research Council. (2011). Promising practices in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education: Summary of two workshops. National Academies Press.
OECD. (2007). PISA 2006: Science competencies for tomorrow’s world. Paris: OECD.
Owens, D. C., Herman, B. C., Oertli, R. T., Lannin, A. A., & Sadler, T. D. (2019). Secondary science and mathematics teachers’ environmental issues engagement through socioscientific reasoning. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(6), 1-27.
Parker, L. C., Krockover, G. H., Lasher-Trapp, S., & Eichinger, D. C. (2008). Ideas about the nature of science held by undergraduate atmospheric science students. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 89(11), 1681-1688.
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, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Romine, W. L., Sadler, T. D., & Kinslow, A. T. (2017). Assessment of scientific literacy: Development and validation of the Quantitative Assessment of Socioâ€Scientific Reasoning (QuASSR). Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(2), 274-295.
Ryder, J., Leach, J., & Driver, R. (1999). Undergraduate science students' images of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(2), 201-219.
Sadler, T. D. (2004). Moral and ethical dimensions of socioscientific decision-making as integral components of scientific literacy. The Science Educator, 13, 39 – 48.
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.
Sadler, T. D. (Ed.). (2011). Socio-scientific issues in the classroom: Teaching, learning and research (Vol. 39). Springer Science & Business Media.
Sadler, T. D., Chambers, F. W., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). Student conceptualizations of the nature of science in response to a socioscientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 387–409
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.
Vhurumuku, E. (2010). The impact of explicit instruction on undergraduate students' understanding of the Nature of Science. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(1), 99-111.
Walker, K. A., & Zeidler, D. L. (2003). Students' understanding of the nature of science and their reasoning on socioscientific issues: a web-based learning inquiry. Paper presented at the annual meeting for the National Association of Research in Science Teaching.
Witzig, S. B., Halverson, K. L., Siegel, M. A., & Freyermuth, S. K. (2013). The interface of opinion, understanding and evaluation while learning about a socioscientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 35(15), 2483-2507.
Zeidler, D. L. (2014). STEM education: A deficit framework for the twenty first century? A sociocultural socioscientific response. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11(1), 11-26.
Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A researchâ€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.
