Sosyobilimsel Konulara Dayalı Fen, Teknoloji ve Toplum Eğitiminin Öğretmen Adaylarının Fen Okuryazarlık Seviyelerine Etkisinin İncelenmesi

Abstract

Bu çalışmada, Fen, Teknoloji ve Toplum dersinde sosyobilimsel konularda gerçekleştirilmiş Fen, Teknoloji ve Toplum (FTT) eğitiminin, 83 fen bilgisi öğretmen adayının fen okuryazarlık düzeylerine ve sosyobilimsel konulara yönelik tutumlarına etkisi incelenmiştir. Araştırmanın deseni nicel araştırma yöntemlerinden zayıf deneysel desen türüne giren tek gruplu ön test –son test desendir. Veri toplama araçları olarak “Fen Okuryazarlık Testi” ve “Sosyobilimsel Konulara Yönelik Tutum Ölçeği” kullanılmıştır. Araştırmadaki veriler, 2018-2019 eğitim-öğretim yılı bahar döneminde toplanmıştır. Çalışmada 14 ayrı sosyobilimsel konuya yönelik problem durumları ve olası çözüm önerileri tasarlanmış ve 15 hafta süren uygulamalar sonuca ulaştırılmıştır. Verilerin analizinde, bağımlı örneklem t-testi kullanılmış ve iki değişken arasındaki ilişkinin yüksek düzeyde, doğrusal ve pozitif yönde anlamlı olduğu gözlenmiştir. Araştırma sonucunda gerçekleştirilen tüm uygulamaların öğretmen adaylarının fen okuryazarlıkları ve sosyobilimsel konulara yönelik tutumlarında olumlu yönde değişikliklere neden olduğu gözlenmiştir.

Keywords

• Bilim
• teknoloji ve toplum
• fen okuryazarlığı
• sosyobilimsel konular
• sosyobilimsel konulara yönelik tutum

Investigation of the Effects of Science, Technology and Society (STS) Education Based On Socioscientific Issues on Pre-Service Teachers’ Science Literacy Levels

Abstract

In the present study, the effect of Science, Technology and Society (STS) education conducted on socioscientific issues in “Science, Technology and Society” lesson on 83 pre-service science teachers’ science literacy levels and attitudes towards socioscientific issues was examined. The design of the research is a single-group pre-test-post-test design, which is one of the quantitative research methods, which is a weak experimental design. Problem situations and possible solution suggestions for fourteen different socioscientific issues were designed and this implication that lasted 15 weeks were concluded. “Science Literacy Test” and “Attitude Scale towards Socioscientific Issues” was used as a data collection tool in the study. The data in the research were collected in the spring semester of the 2018-2019 academic year. The dependent sample t-test was used and it was observed that the relationship between the two variables was high level linear and positive in the analysis of the research. As a result of the research, it has been observed that all the implications carried out have caused positive changes in the science literacy and attitudes of the pre-service teachers towards socioscientific issues.

Keywords

• Science, technology and society
• Science
• technology and Society
• Scientific Literacy
• Socioscientific issues

References

1. Albe, V., (2008). When scientific knowledge, daily life experience, epistemological and social considerations intersect: Students’ argumentation in group discussions on a socioscientific issue. Research in Science Education, 38(1), 67–90. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9040-2.
2. Bacanak, A., (2002). A study about the evaluation of the science student teachers' scientific literacy and application of science-technology-society course (MSc. Thesis), Karadeniz Technical University, Institute of Science, Trabzon.
3. Baltacı, S., (2013). Pre-service science teachers teaching efficacy beliefs about a socioscientific issue (GM foods) and the relationships between efficacy beliefs and epistemological beliefs (Unpublished MSc. Thesis), Abant İzzet Baysal University, Institute of Education Sciences, Bolu.
4. Benek, İ., (2019). Examination of the effect of socioscientific STEM’s activities on students’ attitudes and 21st century skills, Istanbul University, Cerrahpaşa Graduate Educatıon Instıtute, Istanbul.
5. Birdal, H.A., & İnaltekin, T., (2019). The effect of argument-based learning applications on the development of pre-service science teachers’ student comprehension knowledge about socioscientific issues, EKEV Akademi Dergisi, 23(80), 263-301.
6. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E.K., Akgün, Ö.E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F., (2010). Scientific research methods. Ankara: Pegem Publishing.
7. Demirci, M., & Yüce, Z., (2018). Experimental planning on teaching of biotechnology and genetic engineering for 8th grade students. Journal of Sakarya University Faculty of Education, (35), 87-108.
8. Ercan, O., Ural, E., & Tekbıyık, A., (2015). Pre-service teachers’ attitudes towards nuclear energy and the effect of Fukushima nuclear disaster on their attitudes. The International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Invention, 2(11), 1669-1678.

9. Gardner, G., & Jones, G., (2011). Perceptions and practices: Biology graduate teaching assistants’ framing of a controversial socioscientific issue, International Journal of Science Education, 33(8), 1031-1054.
10. Genç, M.N., (2020). An examination of assessment and evaluation activities in a Turkish eighth-grade science textbook, according to ınternational student assessment science literacy proficiency levels (PISA) (Unpublished MSc. Thesis), Yıldız Technical University, Institute of Science, Istanbul.
11. Gülhan, F., (2012). The investigation about the effect of argumentation on socioscientific issues in scientific literacy for eighth grade students, tendency in the argumentation, decision making skills and science-social problems of sensitivity (Unpublished MSc. Thesis), Marmara University, Institute of Education Sciences, Istanbul.
12. Howitt, D., & Cramer, D., (2011). Introduction to SPSS statistics in psychology: for version 19 and earlier. Pearson.
13. Huyugüzel-Çavuş, P.H., (2009). The investigation of elementary teachers? Science and technology literacy and their competence in science teaching (PhD Thesis), Dokuz Eylül University, Institute of Education Sciences, Izmir.
14. Jiménez-Aleixandre, M.P., & Erduran, S., (2007). Argumentation in science education: An overview. In Argumentation in science education, 3-27. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2_1.
15. Kaya, M., (2019). The effect of socio- scientific issue based science education on 7 th grade students’ scientific literacy and environmental literacy levels (Unpublished MSc. Thesis), Mersin University Institute of Education Sciences, Mersin.
16. Klosterman, M.L., Sadler, T.D., & Brown, J., (2012). Science teachers’ use of mass media to address socioscientific and sustainability issues, Research in Science Education, 42(1), 51-74.
17. Kocabaş, Ö., (2004). The effect of science technology society course to the science student teachers and the student teacher's attitude about science technology society (STS) course (MSc. Thesis), Gazi University, Institute of Education Sciences, Ankara.
18. Kolstø, S.D., (2006). Patterns in students’ argumentation confronted with a risk focused socioscientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 28(14), 1689–1716. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600560878.
19. Levinson, R., (2006). Towards a theoretical framework for teaching controversial socioscientific issues, International Journal of Science Education, 28(10), 1201-1224.
20. Lind, D.A., Marchal, W.G., & Wathen, S.A., (2006). Basic statistics for business & economics. Boston: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
21. Mayers, A., (2013). Introduction to statistics and SPSS in psychology. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
22. McKillup, S., (2011). Statistics explained: An introductory guide for life scientists. Cambridge University Press.
23. Ministry of National Education-MoNE, (2013). Elementary science course curriculum and guide. Ankara: Board of Education and Discipline. URL (Available date: 27.05.2021) http://ttkb.meb.gov.tr/program2.aspx?islem=1&kno=213.
24. Nielsen, J.A., (2012). Science in discussions: An analysis of the use of science content in socioscientific discussions. Science Education, 96(3), 428-456. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21001.
25. OECD, (2019). What can students do in science? PISA 2018 results (Vol.I): What students know and can do (s.111-117), in Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en.
26. Ökkeşoğulları, E., (2021). Examination of mental qualities and attitudes on 8th grade students to socioscientific topics (Unpublished MSc. Thesis), Tokat Gaziosmanpaşa University, Institute of Education Sciences, Tokat.
27. Pedretti, E., (1999). Decision making and STS education: Exploring scientific knowledge and social responsibility in schools and science centers through an issues-based approach. Journal of School Science and Mathematics, 99(4), 174-181.
28. Qin, W., & Brown, J.L., (2007). Public reactions to information about genetically engineered foods: Effects of information formats and male/female differences. Public Understanding of Science 16(4), 471–488.
29. Ratcliffe, M., & Grace, M., (2003). Science education for citizenship: Teaching socioscientific issues. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
30. 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. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9030-9.
31. Sadler, T.D., (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513-536.
32. 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.
33. Sıbıç, O., (2017). Pre-service science teachers’ views towards socioscıentific issues and socioscientific issue based instruction (Unpublished MSc. Thesis), Institute of Science, Yıldız Technical University, Istanbul.
34. Tabachnick, B.G., Fidell, L.S., & Ullman, J.B., (2007). Using multivariate statistics (Vol.5). Boston, MA: Pearson.
35. Topçu, M.S., (2015). Socioscientific issues and teaching. Ankara: Pegem Publishing.
36. Topçu, M.S., & Atabey, N., (2017). The effect of socioscientific ıssues based field trips on elementary school students’ argumentation quality. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 6(1), 68-84.
37. Topçu, M.S., Muğaloğlu, Z.E., & Güven, D., (2014). Socioscientific issues in science education. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14(6), 2327-2348.
38. Topçu, M.S., (2010). Development of attitudes towards socioscientific issues scale for undergraduate students. Evaluation & Research in Education, 23(1), 51-67.
39. Topçu, M.S., Sadler, T.D., & Yilmaz-Tuzun, O., (2010). Pre-service science teachers’ informal reasoning about socioscientific issues: The influence of issue context. International Journal of Science Education, 32(18), 2475-2495. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903524779
40. Tunç Şahin, C., & Say, Ö., (2010). Investigation of scientific literacy levels of elementary students. Zonguldak Karaelmas University ZKU, Journal of Social Sciences, 6(11), 223–240.
41. Turgut, H., (2005). The effect of constructivist design application on prospective science teachers' scientific literacy competence improvement at the dimensions of nature of science and science-technology-society interaction (MSc. Thesis), Yıldız Technical University, Institute of Social Science, Istanbul.
42. Walker, K.A., & Zeidler, D.L., (2007). Promoting discourse about socioscientific issues through scaffolded inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1387-1410, doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690601068095.
43. Wilcox, R., (2011). Modern statistics for the social and behavioural sciences: A practical introduction. CRC press.
44. Wu, Y.T., & Tsai, C.C., (2011). High school students' ınformal reasoning regarding a socioscientific issue, with relation to scientific epistemological beliefs and cognitive structures. International Journal of Science Education, 33(3), 371- 400. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903505661.
45. Yalaki, Y., (2014). What is the status of science, technology, society, environment (STSE) education in Turkey? Cito Education: Theory and Practice, 26, 27-36.
46. Yavuz-Topaloğlu, M., & Balkan-Kıyıcı, F., (2017). The effect of hydroelectric power plants trip on students' conceptual understandings, Mersin University (MEÜ) Journal of Faculty of Education, 13(3), 1151-1172. doi:https://doi.org/10.17860/mersinefd.332502.
47. Yolagiden, C., (2017). Examination of the relationship between prospective teacher's attitudes towards science learning skills, science literacy and social scientific issues (Unpublished MSc. Thesis), Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University, Institute of Education Sciences, Kahramanmaraş.
48. Zan Yörük, N., (2008). Effects of science, technology, society and environment (STSE) approach teaching chemistry with using the 5E learning model (PhD Thesis), Institute of Science, Hacettepe University, Ankara.
49. 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. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10025.
50. Zohar, A., & Nemet, F., (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35–62. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008.