Pre-service Science Teachers’ Nature of Science Understandings’ Influence on Their Socioscientific Argumentation Quality

AYDIN, ABDULLAH; KUTLUCA, Ali Yiğit

Pre-service Science Teachers’ Nature of Science Understandings’ Influence on Their Socioscientific Argumentation Quality

Ali Yiğit KUTLUCA, (Aydın Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi)

Abdullah AYDIN (Kastamonu Üniversitesi)

İlköğretim Online (elektronik)

11 4

Yıl: 2018 Cilt: 17 Sayı: 2 Sayfa Aralığı: 642 - 657 Metin Dili: İngilizce İndeks Tarihi: 13-02-2020

Pre-service Science Teachers’ Nature of Science Understandings’ Influence on Their Socioscientific Argumentation Quality

Öz:

The purpose of this study is to investigate pre-service science teachers’ (PSTs’) nature of science(NOS) understandings’ influence on their socioscientific argumentation quality. This study was conductedwith 12 participants whom were chosen with maximum variation sampling method among 27 PSTs. Theclass of the participants was chosen by basic random sampling method. This study, which contains bothqualitative and quantitative processes, is an explanatory mixed method in which quantitative data are usedin more detail than qualitative data. For this study, which lasted 11 weeks in total, three groups with fourparticipants in each were formed. Presentations, whole-class discussions and small group discussions weremade for participants to learn fundamental knowledge about the NOS and socioscientific argumentation;and to have them basic argumentation formation skills. Qualitative and quantitative data analyses indicatethat understanding (low, medium, high) of the NOS impacts socioscientific argumentation quality. Ourresults also indicate that superior understanding of the NOS also predicts socioscientific argumentationquality.

Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Eğitim, Eğitim Araştırmaları

Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Bilimin Doğası Anlayışlarının Sosyobilimsel Argümantasyon Kaliteleri Üzerindeki Etkisi

Öz:

Bu araştırmanın amacı; fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının bilimin doğası anlayışlarının sosyobilimsel argümantasyon kaliteleri üzerindeki etkisini incelemektir. Araştırma, Türkiye’deki bir devlet üniversitesinde öğrenim gören 27, üçüncü sınıf fen bilgisi öğretmen adayının içinden amaçlı örnekleme yöntemlerinden maksimum çeşitlilik örnekleme yöntemi kullanılarak seçilen 12 katılımcıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir. Hem nicel hem de nitel süreçleri içeren bu çalışma, nicel verilerin nitel verilere göre daha ayrıntılı olarak kullanıldığı açıklayıcı karma yöntem aracılığıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırmaya dâhil olan tüm katılımcıların bilimin doğası ve sosyobilimsel argümantasyon konusunda temel bilgilere ve temel argüman oluşturma becerilerine sahip olabilmeleri için bu konular hakkında sunumlar, sınıf tartışmaları ve küçük grup tartışmaları yapılmıştır. Nitel ve nicel veri analizlerinin sonunda; bilimin doğası anlayışlarının sosyobilimsel argümantasyon kalitesini anlamlı olarak etkilediği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Buna göre, bilimin doğası anlayışları geliştikçe sosyobilimsel argümantasyon kalitesinin de yükseldiği ortaya çıkmıştır

Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Eğitim, Eğitim Araştırmaları

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık

Abd-El-Khalick, F.,& Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 665–701.
Albe, V. (2008). When scientific knowledge, daily life experience, epistemological and social considerations ıntersect: students’ argumentation in group discussion on a socio-scientific ıssue.Research in Science Education, 38, 67-90.
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (2001). Designs for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority. (ACARA, 2014). The Australian curriculum: Science. http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au. Accessed 19 November 2016
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, 352–377.
Cresswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. New Jersey: Pearson.
Dawson, V. M.,& Venville, G. (2010). Teaching strategies for developing students’ argumentation skills about socioscientific issues in high school genetics. Research in Science Education, 40, 133-148.
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, 915-933.
Frenkel, J. R.,& Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: McGrawHill International Edition.
Herman, B. C. (2015). The influence of global warming science views and sociocultural factors on willingness to mitigate global warming. Science Education, 99, 1-38.
Khishfe, R. (2012a). Nature of science and decision making. International Journal of Science Education,34(1), 67–100.
Khishfe, R. (2012b). Relationship between nature of science understandings and argumentation skills: A role for counterargument and contextual factors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(4), 489-514.
Khishfe, R. (2012c). Transfer of nature of science understandings into similar contexts: Promisesand possibilities of an explicit reflective approach. International Journal of Science Education, 35(17), 2928–2953.
Khishfe, R. (2014). Explicit nature of science and argumentation ınstruction in the context of socioscientific issues: an effect on student learning and transfer. International Journal of Science Education, 36(6), 974-1016.
Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge. UK: Cambridge University Press.
Kuhn, D. (2010). Teaching and learning science as argument. Science Education, 94(5), 810-824.
Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 497–521.
Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Ed.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 831–880). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Liu, S. Y., Lin, C. S., & Tsai, C. C. (2011). College students’ scientific epistemological views and thinking patterns in socioscientific decision making. Science Education, 95, 497–517.
Mason, L., & Boscolo, P. (2004). Role of epistemological understanding and interest in interpreting a controversy and in topic-specific belief change. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 103–128.
Mason, L., & Scirica, F. (2006). Prediction of students’ argumentation skills about controversial topics by epistemological understanding. Learning and instruction, 16, 492–509.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications
National Research Council. NRC (2013). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
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., Chambers, F. W., & Zeidler, D.L. (2004). Student conceptualisations of the nature of science in response to a socio-scientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 387–409.
Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 112-138.
Sadler, T. D., & Fowler, S. R. (2006). A threshold model of content knowledge transfer for socioscientific argumentation. Science Education, 90,986-1004.
Salvato, E., & Testa, I. (2012). Improving students’ use of content knowledge when dealing with SocioScientific Issues: the case of a physics-based inter-vention. Quaderni di Ricerca in Didattica, 3, 15- 36.
Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2006). The development and validation of the nature of science as argument questionnaire (NSAAQ). Paper presented at the National Association of Research in Science
Teaching (NARST). San Francisco. Sampson, V.,& Clark, D. (2011). A comparison of the collaborative scientific argumentation practices of two high and two low performing groups. Research in Science Education, 41, 63-97.
Schommer-aikins, M.,& Hutter, R. (2002). Epistemological beliefs and thinking about everyday controversial issues. The Journal of Psychology, 136(1). 5-20
Simon, S. (2008). Using Toulmin’s argument pattern in the evaluation of argumentation in school science. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 31(3), 277–289.
Sullivan, L. E. (2009). The Sage glossary of the social and behavioral sciences. New York: Sage.
Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Walker, K. A.,& Zeidler, D. L. (2007). Promoting discourse about socioscientific issues through scaffolded inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1387–1410.
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.
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, 343-367.
Zembal-Saul, C. (2009). Learning to teach elementary school science as argument. Science Education, 93(4), 687–719.

APA	KUTLUCA A, AYDIN A (2018). Pre-service Science Teachers’ Nature of Science Understandings’ Influence on Their Socioscientific Argumentation Quality. , 642 - 657.
Chicago	KUTLUCA Ali Yiğit,AYDIN ABDULLAH Pre-service Science Teachers’ Nature of Science Understandings’ Influence on Their Socioscientific Argumentation Quality. (2018): 642 - 657.
MLA	KUTLUCA Ali Yiğit,AYDIN ABDULLAH Pre-service Science Teachers’ Nature of Science Understandings’ Influence on Their Socioscientific Argumentation Quality. , 2018, ss.642 - 657.
AMA	KUTLUCA A,AYDIN A Pre-service Science Teachers’ Nature of Science Understandings’ Influence on Their Socioscientific Argumentation Quality. . 2018; 642 - 657.
Vancouver	KUTLUCA A,AYDIN A Pre-service Science Teachers’ Nature of Science Understandings’ Influence on Their Socioscientific Argumentation Quality. . 2018; 642 - 657.
IEEE	KUTLUCA A,AYDIN A "Pre-service Science Teachers’ Nature of Science Understandings’ Influence on Their Socioscientific Argumentation Quality." , ss.642 - 657, 2018.
ISNAD	KUTLUCA, Ali Yiğit - AYDIN, ABDULLAH. "Pre-service Science Teachers’ Nature of Science Understandings’ Influence on Their Socioscientific Argumentation Quality". (2018), 642-657.

APA	KUTLUCA A, AYDIN A (2018). Pre-service Science Teachers’ Nature of Science Understandings’ Influence on Their Socioscientific Argumentation Quality. İlköğretim Online (elektronik), 17(2), 642 - 657.
Chicago	KUTLUCA Ali Yiğit,AYDIN ABDULLAH Pre-service Science Teachers’ Nature of Science Understandings’ Influence on Their Socioscientific Argumentation Quality. İlköğretim Online (elektronik) 17, no.2 (2018): 642 - 657.
MLA	KUTLUCA Ali Yiğit,AYDIN ABDULLAH Pre-service Science Teachers’ Nature of Science Understandings’ Influence on Their Socioscientific Argumentation Quality. İlköğretim Online (elektronik), vol.17, no.2, 2018, ss.642 - 657.
AMA	KUTLUCA A,AYDIN A Pre-service Science Teachers’ Nature of Science Understandings’ Influence on Their Socioscientific Argumentation Quality. İlköğretim Online (elektronik). 2018; 17(2): 642 - 657.
Vancouver	KUTLUCA A,AYDIN A Pre-service Science Teachers’ Nature of Science Understandings’ Influence on Their Socioscientific Argumentation Quality. İlköğretim Online (elektronik). 2018; 17(2): 642 - 657.
IEEE	KUTLUCA A,AYDIN A "Pre-service Science Teachers’ Nature of Science Understandings’ Influence on Their Socioscientific Argumentation Quality." İlköğretim Online (elektronik), 17, ss.642 - 657, 2018.
ISNAD	KUTLUCA, Ali Yiğit - AYDIN, ABDULLAH. "Pre-service Science Teachers’ Nature of Science Understandings’ Influence on Their Socioscientific Argumentation Quality". İlköğretim Online (elektronik) 17/2 (2018), 642-657.