Beyond the Classroom: Exploring the Impact of Technology-, Culture-, and Daily Routine-Based Socioscientific Issues on Pre-service Primary Teachers’ Decisions and Argumentation

Nejla Atabey; Mustafa Sami Topçu

doi:10.17275/per.26.53.13.4

Beyond the Classroom: Exploring the Impact of Technology-, Culture-, and Daily Routine-Based Socioscientific Issues on Pre-service Primary Teachers’ Decisions and Argumentation

Abstract

This study investigates pre-service primary teachers’ (PPTs’) decision-making processes, the factors influencing these decisions, and the extent to which they can defend their decisions in a qualified manner within the context of culture-based socioscientific issues (SSIs), and daily routine–based SSIs, in addition to technology-based SSIs. Hydroelectric power plants were chosen for a technology-based SSI, tying cloth to trees as a culture-based SSI, and using facial cleansing gels as a daily routine–based SSI. This study used a qualitative descriptive design, which is suitable for describing phenomena in relatively new or underexplored areas, allowing the integration of qualitative interpretations with simple quantitative indicators such as frequencies of factors influencing decisions. In the context of this design, data were collected through written forms in which 25 PPTs explained and defended their decisions regarding SSI scenarios developed by the researchers. The data were analyzed inductively to identify factors influencing PPTs’ decisions and deductively to examine argumentation qualities. The findings indicate that PPTs were able to make clear decisions in technology-based SSI but showed indecision in culture-based and daily routine–based SSIs. Supportive decisions were frequently observed for technology and daily routine–based SSIs, whereas culture-based SSIs often resulted in decisions favoring discontinuation of the tradition. Additionally, the factors influencing decisions and the quality of justifications varied depending on the SSI context, particularly in cultural and daily routine–based issues. These results suggest that culture and daily routine–based SSIs should be incorporated more frequently to develop individuals’ decision-making and argumentation skills.

Keywords

technology-based SSI, daily routine–based SSI, decision making, argumentation quality, culture-based SSI

Ethical Statement

Ethical committee approval for this study was obtained from the university where the study was conducted, with document date and number: 05.06.2023-95155.

References

Acar, O., Turkmen, L., and Roychoudhury, A. (2010). Student difficulties in socio‐scientific argumentation and decision‐making research findings: Crossing the borders of two research lines. International Journal of Science Education, 32(9), 1191-1206.
Aglarci Özdemir, O., Özer Aker, F., and Han-Tosunoglu, C. (2024). Analysing the evolution of argumentation quality among pre-service biology teachers amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Biological Education, 1-19.
Altun, E., Ozsevgec, T. (2025). Making argumentation-based learning and teaching happen: exploring the development of pre-service science teachers’ argumentation competencies. Science & Education 34, 4057–4106.
Anisa, Widodo, A., Riandi, and Muslim. (2023). Students’ argumentation in science lessons: How effective is rebuttal analysis framework in representing the complexity of classroom argumentation?. Science and Education, 32(3), 669-687.
Arslan, H. O., & Durak, B. (2024). Pre-service science teachers’ evaluations of alternative perspectives on socio-scientific issues: Stem cell and cloning technologies. Teaching and Teacher Education, 141, 1-15.
Atasoy, Ş. (2018). Öğretmen adaylarının yaşam alanlarına göre yerel sosyobilimsel konularla ilgili informal muhakemeleri [Student teachers' informal reasoning of local socioscientific issues according to the living places]. Journal of Science Teaching, 6(1), 60-72.
Aydeniz, M., and Gürçay, D. (2013). Assessing quality of pre-service physics teachers’ written arguments. Research in Science and Technological Education, 31(3), 269-287.
Ayton, D. (2023). Qualitative descriptive research. In D. Ayton, T. Tsindos, & D. Berkovic (Eds.), Qualitative research: A practical guide for health and social care researchers and practitioners. Monash University Library.
Bodur, G., and Şenyuva, E. (2013). Relationship between university students’ views about hydroelectric power plants and attitudes toward environment. Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education, 2(4), 27-38.
Cavagnetto, A. R. (2010). Argument to foster scientific literacy: A review of argument interventions in K–12 science contexts. Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 336-371.

Cėspedes, J. E. S., Velazco, E. H. B., and Roncancio, J. D. R. (2022) Students' perceptions and attitudes towards renewable energy Sources. Journal of Namibian Studies, 32, 226-238
Cresswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design choosing among five approaches.Second edition. Sage Publications
Christenson, N., Chang Rundgren, S. N., and Höglund, H. O. (2012). Using the SEE-SEP model to analyze upper secondary students’ use of supporting reasons in arguing socioscientific issues. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21, 342-352.
Dawson, V.M., Venville, G. (2010). Teaching strategies for developing students’ argumentation skills about socioscientific issues in high school genetics. Research Science Education 40, 133–148
Dewi, R. K., Rahayu, S., Muntholib, M., and Sumarni, W. (2025). Critical thinking skills of prospective chemistry teachers in chemistry learning with Ethno-Socio-Scientific issues integrated inquiry. Eclética Química, 50.
dos Santos, W. L. P. (2014). Debate on global warming as a socio-scientific issue: science teaching towards political literacy. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 9, 663-674.
Dworkin, S. L. (2012). Sample size policy for qualitative studies using in-depth interviews. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41(6), 1319-1320.
Eilks, I., Marks, R., and Stuckey, M. (2018). Socio-scientific issues as contexts for relevant education and a case on tattooing in chemistry teaching. Educación química, 29(1), 9-20.
Eggert, S., and Bögeholz, S. (2010). Students' use of decision‐making strategies with regard to socioscientific issues: An application of the Rasch partial credit model. Science Education, 94(2), 230-258.
Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPing into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin’s Argument Pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915–933.
Fan, Y. C., Wang, T. H., and Wang, K. H. (2020). Studying the effectiveness of an online argumentation model for improving undergraduate students' argumentation ability. Journal of Computer ASSIted Learning, 36(4), 526-539.
Fang, S. C., Hsu, Y. S., and Lin, S. S. (2019). Conceptualizing socioscientific decision making from a review of research in science education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17, 427-448.
Foulk, J. A., Friedrichsen, P. J., and Sadler, T. D. (2020). Science in socio-scientific issues. The Science Teacher, 87(7), 35-39.
Guérin, L. (2019). Socio-scientific issues and citizenship education: from theory to the classroom. Itdb Inter-und Transdisziplinäre Bildung, 1, 57-64.
Gutierez, S. B. (2015). Integrating socio-scientific issues to enhance the bioethical decision-making skills of high school students. International Education Studies, 8(1), 142-151.
Helvacı, S. C. (2021). Examining the approaches of prospective science teachers to environmental ethics and environmental problem solutions in the environmental stories they developed. [Conference presentation abstract]. EJER Congress, Aksaray, Türkiye.
Hogan, K., and Maglienti, M. (2001). Comparing the epistemological underpinnings of students' and scientists' reasoning about conclusions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 38(6), 663-687.
Honig, S. E., Dunkin, R., Ball, T., & Hunter, L. (2025). Adapting undergraduate Biology to include science practices by teaching students to generate scientific explanations. Journal of Biological Education, 59(2), 374–389.
Jumini, S., Parmin, P., Samputri, A. V., and Hamzah, H. (2024). Analysis of students' problem-solving abilities in learning with an ethnoscience-based socio-scientific ıssues (ssı) approach. Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika dan Keilmuan 10(1), 36-46.
Karasmanaki, E., and Tsantopoulos, G. (2019). Exploring future scientists' awareness about and attitudes towards renewable energy sources. Energy Policy, 131, 111-119.
Ke, L., Sadler, T.D., Zangori, L. et al. (2021). Developing and using multiple models to promote scientific literacy in the context of socio-scientific issues. Science & Education, 30, 589–607
Khishfe, R. (2024). Nature of science conceptions and argumentation skills in different socioscientific contexts. International Journal of Science Education, 1-26.
Kozłowska, A., and Czapla, M. (2023). Anthropomorphizing nature as a tool for environmental education. opinions of pedagogy students in the context of represented environmental ethics. Studia Ecologiae et Bioethicae, 21(3), 55-68.
Ladachart, L and Ladapa Ladachart, L. (2021). Preservice biology teachers’ decision-making and informal reasoning about culture-based socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 43(5), 641-671.
Lee, Y. C. (2007). Developing decision-making skills for socio-scientific issues. Journal of Biological Education, 41(4), 170-177.
Lee, Y. C., and Grace, M. (2012). Students' reasoning and decision making about a socioscientific issue: A cross‐context comparison. Science Education, 96(5), 787-807
Lieber, L., & Graulich, N. (2022). Investigating students’ argumentation when judging the plausibility of alternative reaction pathways in organic chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 23(1), 38-54.
Macalalag Jr, A. Z., Johnson, J., and Lai, M. (2020). How do we do this: Learning how to teach socioscientific issues. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 15(2), 389-413.
Mason, M. (2010). Sample size and saturation in PhD studies using qualitative interviews. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 11(3) [Article No. 8].
Mcneil, L. A. (2021). Using Claim-Evidence-Reasoning (CER) in an Undergraduate Chemistry Class: An Exploration of CER Construction and Race Gender and Status [Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia].
McNeill, K.L., and Krajcik, J. (2011). Supporting grade 5–8 students in constructing explanations in science: The claim, evidence and reasoning framework for talk and writing. Boston, MA: Pearson Education
McNeill, K. L., Lizotte, D. J., Krajcik, J., and Marx, R. W. (2006). Supporting students' construction of scientific explanations by fading scaffolds in instructional materials. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 153-191.
McNeill, K. L., and Martin, D. M. (2013). Claims, evidence and reasoning. In Froschauer, L. (Ed.), A year of inquiry: A data collection for elementary educators (pp. 170-175). Arlington, VA: Science Teachers Association Press
Miklós, A. (2014). Environmental attitudes and ecological anthropocentrism: a new challenge in environmental higher education. The Journal of Education, Culture, and Society, 5(1), 28-40.
Ministry of National Education (2018). Science Course Curriculum. https://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/Dosyalar/201812312311937-FEN%20B%C4%B0L%C4%B0MLER%C4%B0%20%C3%96%C4%9ERET%C4%B0M%20PROGRAMI2018.pdf
Namdar, B., Aydin, B., and Raven, S. (2020). Preservice Science Teachers' Informal Reasoning about Hydroelectric Power Issue: The Effect of Attitudes towards Socio-Scientific Issues and Media Literacy. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 6(4), 551-567.
Narayanti, P. S., Pranajaya, S. A., Sucianti, I., Rifky, S., and Hajerina, H. (2024). Values Education In The Era Globalization: Preparing Students to Face an Increasingly Competitive World. International Journal of Teaching and Learning, 2(3), 615-626.
National Research Council. (1995). National science education standards. National Academies Press.
Nida, S., and Eilks, I. (2018). Genetically vs. Non-Genetically Modified Rice: A Socio-scientific Issue for Transformative Education. In I. Eilks, S. Markic and B. Ralle (Eds.), Building bridges across disciplines (pp. 225-230).
Nielsen, J. A. (2013). Delusions about evidence: on why scientific evidence should not be the main concern in socioscientific decision making. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education 13 (4), 373–385.
O’Connor, C., & Joffe, H. (2020). Intercoder reliability in qualitative research: Debates and practical guidelines. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 1-13.
Okatan, A. (2021, April 29). Hidroelektrik santrallerinde sürdürülebilirlik sağlayan proje: MİLHES [Project providing sustainability in hydroelectric power plants: MİLHES.]. https://bilimgenc.tubitak.gov.tr/makale/hidroelektrik-santrallerinde-surdurulebilirlik-saglayan-proje-milhes
Oulton, C., Dillon, J., & Grace, M. M. (2004). Reconceptualizing the teaching of controversial issues. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 411–423.
Öztürk, S., and Leblebicioğlu, G. (2015). Investigation of reasoning modes in making a decision about hydroelectric power plants which is a socio-scientific issue. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(2), 1-33.
Paul, R., and Elder, L. (2003). The thinker’s guide to understanding the Foundation for ethical reasoning. The Foundation for Critical Thinking.
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. (2009). Situated learning in science education: socio‐scientific issues as contexts for practice. Studies in Science Education, 45(1), 1-42.
Sadler, T. D., Chambers, F. W., and 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., and Zeidler, D. L. (2005). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 112-138.
Sadler, T. D., and Zeidler, D. L. (2004). The morality of socioscientific issues: Construal and resolution of genetic engineering dilemmas. Science Education, 88(1), 4-27.
Shamos, M. H. (1995). The myth of scientiﬁc literacy. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Sakmen, G., Genç, M., and Arslan, H. Ö. (2020). Views of 6th grade students about organ donation as a socioscientific issue. Uludag University Faculty of Education Journal, 33(2), 346-371.
Saribas, D., and Çetinkaya, E. (2021). Pre-service teachers’ analysis of claims about COVID-19 in an online course. Science and Education, 30(2), 235-266.
Seixas, B. V., Smith, N., & Mitton, C. (2017). The qualitative descriptive approach in international comparative studies: Using online qualitative surveys. International Journal of Health Policy and Management, 7(9), 778.
Stolz, M., Witteck, T., Marks, R., & Eilks, I. (2013). Reflecting socio-scientific issues for science education coming from the case of curriculum development on doping in chemistry education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 9(4), 361-370.
Topçu, M. S., & Atabey, N. (2017). The effect of socioscientific issues based field trips on elementary school students' argumentation quality. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 6(1), 68-84.
Topçu, M. S., Yılmaz-Tüzün, Ö., & Sadler, T. D. (2011). Turkish preservice science teachers’ informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues and the factors influencing their informal reasoning. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22(4), 313-332.
Tsai, C. Y. (2018). The effect of online argumentation of socio-scientific issues on students' scientific competencies and sustainability attitudes. Computers & Education, 116, 14-27
Whitehead, A. N. (1967). The aims of education. New York: Free P.
Yaman, M., and Haşıl, F. (2018). The evaluation of hydroelectric power plant practices in turkey from the environmental perspective. International Journal of Afro-Eurasian Research, 3(5), 145-156.
Zeidler, D. L., Herman, B. C., & Sadler, T. D. (2019). New directions in socioscientific issues research. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(1), 1-9.
Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., and Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research‐based framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education, 89(3), 357-377.
Zeidler, D. L., & Nichols, B. H. (2009). Socioscientific issues: Theory and practice. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(2), 49-58.
Zhao, G., Zhao, R., Li, X., Duan, Y., and Long, T. (2023). Are preservice science teachers (PSTs) prepared for teaching argumentation? Evidence from a university teacher preparation program in China. Research in Science and Technological Education, 41(1), 170-189.
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

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Basic Training (Other)

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Nejla Atabey ^*
0000-0001-8710-3595
Türkiye

Mustafa Sami Topçu
0000-0001-5068-8796
Türkiye

Publication Date

July 3, 2026

Submission Date

January 18, 2026

Acceptance Date

March 24, 2026

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Volume: 13 Number: 4

DOI

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.26.53.13.4

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA73LW92YR

APA

Atabey, N., & Topçu, M. S. (2026). Beyond the Classroom: Exploring the Impact of Technology-, Culture-, and Daily Routine-Based Socioscientific Issues on Pre-service Primary Teachers’ Decisions and Argumentation. Participatory Educational Research, 13(4), 151-172. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.26.53.13.4

AMA

1.Atabey N, Topçu MS. Beyond the Classroom: Exploring the Impact of Technology-, Culture-, and Daily Routine-Based Socioscientific Issues on Pre-service Primary Teachers’ Decisions and Argumentation. PER. 2026;13(4):151-172. doi:10.17275/per.26.53.13.4

Chicago

Atabey, Nejla, and Mustafa Sami Topçu. 2026. “Beyond the Classroom: Exploring the Impact of Technology-, Culture-, and Daily Routine-Based Socioscientific Issues on Pre-Service Primary Teachers’ Decisions and Argumentation”. Participatory Educational Research 13 (4): 151-72. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.26.53.13.4.

EndNote

Atabey N, Topçu MS (July 1, 2026) Beyond the Classroom: Exploring the Impact of Technology-, Culture-, and Daily Routine-Based Socioscientific Issues on Pre-service Primary Teachers’ Decisions and Argumentation. Participatory Educational Research 13 4 151–172.

IEEE

[1]N. Atabey and M. S. Topçu, “Beyond the Classroom: Exploring the Impact of Technology-, Culture-, and Daily Routine-Based Socioscientific Issues on Pre-service Primary Teachers’ Decisions and Argumentation”, PER, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 151–172, July 2026, doi: 10.17275/per.26.53.13.4.

ISNAD

Atabey, Nejla - Topçu, Mustafa Sami. “Beyond the Classroom: Exploring the Impact of Technology-, Culture-, and Daily Routine-Based Socioscientific Issues on Pre-Service Primary Teachers’ Decisions and Argumentation”. Participatory Educational Research 13/4 (July 1, 2026): 151-172. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.26.53.13.4.

JAMA

1.Atabey N, Topçu MS. Beyond the Classroom: Exploring the Impact of Technology-, Culture-, and Daily Routine-Based Socioscientific Issues on Pre-service Primary Teachers’ Decisions and Argumentation. PER. 2026;13:151–172.

MLA

Atabey, Nejla, and Mustafa Sami Topçu. “Beyond the Classroom: Exploring the Impact of Technology-, Culture-, and Daily Routine-Based Socioscientific Issues on Pre-Service Primary Teachers’ Decisions and Argumentation”. Participatory Educational Research, vol. 13, no. 4, July 2026, pp. 151-72, doi:10.17275/per.26.53.13.4.

Vancouver

1.Nejla Atabey, Mustafa Sami Topçu. Beyond the Classroom: Exploring the Impact of Technology-, Culture-, and Daily Routine-Based Socioscientific Issues on Pre-service Primary Teachers’ Decisions and Argumentation. PER. 2026 Jul. 1;13(4):151-72. doi:10.17275/per.26.53.13.4

27707

Creative Commons Atıf 4.0 International Lisance

download?token=eyJhdXRoX3JvbGVzIjpbXSwiZW5kcG9pbnQiOiJqb3VybmFsIiwib3JpZ2luYWxuYW1lIjoicGVyIHNjb3B1cyBpc3RhdHRpc3Rpay5wbmciLCJwYXRoIjoiOTg5Ni9mN2E1LzU3ZDcvNmEyMmIyZmFlMGJkYjYuMDUyNjIyMDMucG5nIiwiZXhwIjoxNzgwNjYyNTM5LCJub25jZSI6IjcxYzczMjhhOTdkOWYxM2ExZjE2NWExYjQyMzMyOWJhIn0.g4uvJoi6Oy8W0gRoUNW-d5FO9m4u30pEA0l1h8DwzSE

Beyond the Classroom: Exploring the Impact of Technology-, Culture-, and Daily Routine-Based Socioscientific Issues on Pre-service Primary Teachers’ Decisions and Argumentation

Abstract

Keywords

Ethical Statement

References

Details

Primary Language

Subjects

Journal Section

Authors

Publication Date

Submission Date

Acceptance Date

Published in Issue

DOI

IZ

Cite