İlkokul Sosyal Bilgiler Dersinde Sosyo-Bilimsel Temelli Tartışmalı Konuların Etkililiği

Öz

Bu araştırma, ilkokul dördüncü sınıf öğrencilerinin Sosyal Bilgiler dersi kapsamında yer alan “Etkin Vatandaşlık” ve “Küresel Bağlantılar” öğrenme alanlarında, sosyo-bilimsel temelli tartışmalı konular aracılığıyla yürütülen öğretimin öğrencilerin etkin vatandaşlık düzeyleri ile sosyo-bilimsel konulara yönelik tutumları üzerindeki etkisini ortaya koymayı amaçlamaktadır. Araştırmada nicel araştırma yöntemlerinden ön test–son test kontrol gruplu yarı deneysel desen kullanılmıştır. Çalışma grubunu, 2024–2025 eğitim-öğretim yılında Gaziantep ilinde bulunan bir devlet okulunda öğrenim gören 54 dördüncü sınıf öğrencisi oluşturmaktadır. Veri toplama aracı olarak “Etkin Vatandaşlık Ölçeği” ve “Sosyo-Bilimsel Konulara Yönelik Tutum Ölçeği” kullanılmıştır. Araştırma programının temelini tartışmalı konulara dayalı öğretim etkinlikleri oluşturmaktadır. Uygulama süreci, ön test ve son testlerin uygulanması dâhil olmak üzere 10 hafta sürmüştür. Araştırma sonuçları, sosyo-bilimsel temelli tartışmalı konuların kullanımının öğrencilerin etkin vatandaşlık düzeyleri ile sosyo-bilimsel konulara yönelik tutumları üzerinde anlamlı ve olumlu bir etki yarattığını ortaya koymuştur. Bu bağlamda, ilkokul düzeyi öğretim içeriklerinde sosyo-bilimsel içeriklere daha fazla yer verilmesi, bu konuların öğretiminde tartışma ve argümantasyonun kullanılması önem taşımaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sosyal bilgiler
• tartışmalı konular
• sosyo-bilimsel konular
• etkin vatandaşlık
• tutum

The Effectiveness of Controversial Topics Based on Socio-Scientific Issues in Primary School Social Studies Courses

Öz

This research aims to investigate the impact of teaching socio-scientific controversial topics in the ‘Active Citizenship’ and ‘Global Connections’ learning areas of the Social Studies course on fourth-grade primary school students’ levels of active citizenship and attitudes towards these topics. The study employed a pre-test–post-test control group quasi-experimental design from quantitative research methods. The study group consisted of 54 fourth-grade students attending a state school in Gaziantep during the 2024–2025 academic year. The ‘Active Citizenship Scale’ and the ‘Attitude Scale Towards Socio-Scientific Issues’ were used as data collection tools. The research programme was based on teaching activities centred on controversial issues. The implementation process lasted 10 weeks, including the administration of pre-tests and post-tests. The research results revealed that the use of socio-scientific controversial topics had a significant and positive effect on students' levels of active citizenship and their attitudes towards socio-scientific issues. In this context, it is essential to give more space to socio-scientific content in primary school teaching content and to equip the teaching of these topics with discussion and argumentation.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Social studies
• controversial issues
• socio-scientific topics
• active citizenship
• attitudes

Kaynakça

1. Aashamar, P. N., ve Klette, K. (2023). Powerful knowledge in the social studies classroom and beyond. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 55(4), 388–408. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2023.2234427
2. Akın, S., Çalık, B., ve Engin-Demir, C. (2017). Students as change agents in the community: Developing active citizenship at schools. Educational Sciences: Theory ve Practice, 17(3), 809-834. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2017.3.0176
3. Alcaraz-Dominguez, S., & Barajas, M. (2021). Conceptualization of socioscientific issues in educational practice from a review of research in science education. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 11(6), 297–302. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2021.11.6.1521
4. Alindra, A. L., & Ana, A. (2018). Argumentation and reasoning skills in socioscientific issues. Innovation of Vocational Technology Education, 14(2), 44–54. https://doi.org/10.17509/invotec.v14i2.14343
5. Alkış-Küçükaydın, M. (2020). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının sosyo-bilimsel konulara yönelik tutumları ile sorgulama becerileri arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi. Millî Eğitim Dergisi, 49(225), 181–200.* https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/milliegitim/issue/55681/753189
6. Alkış-Küçükaydın, M., Gökbulut, Y., ve Şahinpınar, D. (2021). Çocukların sosyo-bilimsel konulara yönelik tutumları ölçeğinin geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. OPUS International Journal of Society Researches, 18(Eğitim Bilimleri Özel Sayısı), 4930-4951. https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.932976
7. Alvén, F. (2024). Controversial issues in history teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2024.2322502
8. Andersen, R. (2012). Support for democracy in cross-national perspective: The detrimental effect of economic inequality. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 30, 389–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2012.04.002

9. Asimeng‐Boahene, L. (2007). Creating strategies to deal with problems of teaching controversial issues in social studies education in African schools. Intercultural Education, 18(3), 231–242. https://doi.org/10.1080/14675980701463588
10. Ayvacı, H. Ş., Bülbül, S., ve Türker, K. (2019). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının sosyo-bilimsel konular hakkındaki tutumlarının sınıf düzeyine göre incelenmesi. Ondokuz Mayis University Journal of Education Faculty, 38(2), 17-30. https://doi.org/10.12984/egeefd.295597
11. Avaroğulları, M. (2015). Sosyal bilgiler öğretiminde tartışmalı konularla ilgili bir eylem araştırması. Education Sciences, 10(2), 139–150. https://doi.org/10.12739/NWSA.2015.10.2.1C0638
12. Berg, W., Graeffe, L., ve Holden, C. (2003). Teaching controversial issues: A European perspective. Children's Identity and Citizenship in Europe, CiCe.
13. Broderick, N. (2022). The development of primary school students’ argumentation skills through socioscientific issues. Dublin City University.
14. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç-Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö.E., Karadeniz, Ş., ve Demirel, F. (2014). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
15. Byford, J., Lennon, S., ve Russell, W. B. (2009). Teaching controversial issues in the social studies: A research study of high school teachers. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 82(4), 165-170. https://doi.org/10.3200/TCHS.82.4.165-170
16. Cansız, N. (2014). Developing preservice science teachers’ socioscientific reasoning through socioscientific issues-focused course (Doctoral dissertation, Middle East Technical University (Turkey))
17. Cian, H. (2020). The influence of context: comparing high school students’ socioscientific reasoning by socioscientific topic. International Journal of Science Education, 42(9), 1503-1521. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1767316
18. Cohen, L., Manion, L. ve Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th Edition). Routledge.
19. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (Fourth edition). New Jersey: Pearson Education.
20. Çalışkan, H. ve Uzunkol, E. (2021). Sosyal bilgiler alanı, özellikleri ve temel amaçları. V. Aktepe., M. Gündüz., N. Kurtdede Fidan ve E. Yalçınkaya (Ed.), Kuramdan uygulamaya sosyal bilgiler öğretimi içinde (s. 2-18). Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
21. Çepni, Z., ve Geçit, Y. (2020). Social studies teacher candidates’ attitudes and views regarding socio-scientific issues. International Journal of Geography and Geography Education (IGGE), 42, 133–154. https://doi.org/10.32003/igge.732782
22. Çevik-Kansu, C., ve Öksüz, Y. (2014). Developing an active citizenship scale for the fourth grade primary school students’. The Anthropologist, 18(3), 969-980. https://doi.org/10.1080/09720073.2014.11891630
23. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Kappa Delta Pi.
24. Erkol, M., ve Gül, Ş. (2020). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının sosyo-bilimsel konulara yönelik tutumları. PESA Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 6(1), 9-21. https://doi.org/10.25272/j.2149-8385.2020.6.1.02
25. Ersoy, F. (2010). Social studies teacher candidates' views on the controversial issues incorporated into their courses in Turkey. Teaching and Teacher Education,26(2), 323-334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.09.015
26. Flensner, K. K. (2020). Dealing with and teaching controversial issues–teachers’ pedagogical approaches to controversial issues in religious education and social studies. Acta Didactica Norden, 14(4), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.5617/adno.8347
27. Fowler, S. R., Zeidler, D. L., ve Sadler, T. D. (2009). Moral sensitivity in the context of socioscientific issues in high school science students. International Journal of Science Education, 31(2), 279-296. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701787909
28. Gainous, J., ve Martens, A. M. (2016). Civic education: Do liberals do it better?. Journal of Political Ideologies, 21(3), 261-279. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569317.2016.1205965
29. Gao, L., Mun, K., ve Kim, S. W. (2019). Using socioscientific issues to enhance students’ emotional competence. Research in Science Education, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09873-1
30. Gliner, J. A., Morgan, G. A., ve Leech, N. L. (2015). Uygulamada araştırma yöntemler: Desen ve analizi bütünleştiren yaklaşım. (2. Baskı). (S. Turan, Çev. Ed.). Ankara: Nobel Akademi.
31. Gürbüzkol, R., & Bakırcı, H. (2020). Fen Bilimleri Öğretmenlerinin Sosyobilimsel Konular Hakkındaki Tutum ve Görüşlerinin Belirlenmesi. Van Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(1), 870-893. https://doi.org/10.33711/yyuefd.751857
32. Haas, M. E., ve Ann-Laughlin, M. (2000). Teaching about the ımpeachment of william jefferson clinton: a sampling of u.s. middle and high school teachers. The Journal of Social Studies Research, 24(2), 31-38. https://doi.org/10.1177/235227982000024002004
33. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., ve Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). Prentice Hall Hand, M. (2008). What should we teach as controversial?A defense of the epistemic criterion. Educational Theory, 58(2), 213-228. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5446.2008.00285.x
34. Hand, M., ve Levinson, R. (2012). Discussing controversial issues in the classroom. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44(6), 614-629. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00732.x
35. Healey, R. L. (2012). The power of debate: Reflections on the potential of debates for engaging students in critical thinking about controversial geographical topics. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 36(2), 239-257. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2011.619522
36. Hess, D. (2001). Teaching students to discuss controversial public ıssues. ERIC Digest.
37. Hess, D. (2005). How do teachers’ political views influence teaching about controversial issues. Social Education, 69(1), 47-48.
38. Hess, D. (2008). Controversial issues and democratic discourse. In L. S. Levstik ve C. A. Tyson (Eds.), Handbook of research in social studies education (pp. 124–136). Routledge.
39. Hess, D. E., ve Posselt, J. (2002). How high school students experience and learn from the discussion of controversial public issues. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 17(4), 283–314. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ648745
40. Högström, P., Gericke, N., Wallin, A., ve Bergman, E. (2024). Teaching socioscientific issues: A systematic review. Science ve Education, 33(5), 1057–1084. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-024-00542-y
41. Hughes, R. E., ve Journell, W. (2023). Facilitating a controversial issues discussion in elementary school about using Indigenous sports mascots. The Social Studies, 114(5), 223-240. https://doi.org/10.1080/00377996.2023.2171352
42. Kallioniemi, A., Lalor, J., Misiejuk, D., ve Zaleskiene, I. (2009). Developing the curriculum with ngo’s. CiCe Guidelines on the Design of Higher Education Courses, 8, 1-15.
43. Kapitein, R. (2019). Discussing Terrorism with Dutch Primary-School Children. Exploring the narratives and the preferences of children in discussing terrorism in class in Dutch Primary Schools (Master's thesis).
44. Karakaş, F. (2022). The effect of socioscientific issues-based discussion activities on the attitudes of primary school teacher candidates. World Journal of Education, 12(1), 110–122. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1343240.pdf
45. Karakuş, A., ve Tangülü, Z. (2025). Sosyal bilgiler öğretmenlerinin sosyo-bilimsel konulara yönelik görüşleri. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, (73), 268-294. https://doi.org/10.21764/maeuefd.1474369
46. Karakuş, S. (2022, December). Sosyal bilgiler ders kitaplarında sosyo-bilimsel konulara yer verilme durumunun incelenmesi. Paper presented at the 5th International Academic Student Studies Congress, Türkiye.
47. Karaman-Türk, C. ve Çam, A. The effect of argumentation on middle school students’ scientific literacy as well as their views, attitudes and knowledge about socioscientific ıssues. Sci ve Educ 34, 1363–1388 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-023-00489-6
48. Kardaş-İşler, N. (2025). Dealing with controversial issues in primary school classroom interactions in social studies courses. Learning and Instruction. 96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.103799
49. Kaushik, M., Dey, A., ve Kaur, R. (2022). Promoting socioscientific issue-based science education: Finding opportunities in assessment. Eurasian Journal of Science and Environmental Education, 2(2), 80–91. https://doi.org/10.30935/ejsee/12703
50. Kerr, D., ve Huddleston, T. (2015). Living with controversy: Teaching controversial issues through education for democratic citizenship and human rights. Council of Europe
51. Kerr, D., ve Huddleston, T. (2021). Teaching controversial issues through education for democratic citizenship and human rights: Training pack for teachers. Council of Europe.
52. Khishfe, R. (2012). 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21012
53. King, J. T. (2009). Teaching and learning about controversial issues: Lessons from Northern Ireland. Theory ve Research in Social Education, 37(2), 215–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2009.10473395
54. Klaver, L.T, Guérin, L.J.F, Sins, P.H.M. ve Walma van der Molen, J.H. (2024). Sosyo-bilimsel konulara dayalı öğretimin tutumlar üzerindeki etkileri: Öğrenci kaynakları moderatör olarak. Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 117 (4), 169–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2024.2362159
55. Larsson, A., ve Lindström, N. (2020). Controversial societal issues in education: Explorations of moral, critical and didactical implications. Acta Didactica Norden, 14(4). https://doi.org/10.5617/adno.8380
56. Levinson, R. (2006). Towards a theoretical framework for teaching controversial socio‐scientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 28(10), 1201-1224. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600560753
57. Levinson, R. (2008). Promoting the role of the personal narrative in teaching controversial socio-scientific issues. Science ve Education, 17(8), 855-871. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-007-9076-8
58. Lin, A. R., Lawrence, J. F., ve Snow, C. E. (2015). Teaching urban youth about controversial issues: Pathways to becoming active and informed citizens. Citizenship, Social and Economics Education, 14(2), 103-119. https://doi.org/10.1177/2047173415600606
59. Lindström, N. (2024). Sosyal bilgiler derslerinde tartışmalı konular: değerlerin aktarılması ve eleştirel düşünmenin kolaylaştırılması. Etik ve Eğitim , 19(4), 593–611. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449642.2024.2418764
60. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı [MEB]. (2018). Sosyal bilgiler dersi öğretim programı (İlkokul ve Ortaokul 4–7. Sınıflar). Ankara: Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı.
61. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı [MEB]. (2024) Sosyal Bilgiler dersi öğretim programı (4-5-6-7-. Sınıflar). Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı.
62. Myers-Walls, J. A. (2010, January). Children and the stress of disasters and political violence. Paper presented at Development and Equity for a Global Society: Emerging Concerns for Social Work, Madras School of Social Work, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
63. National Council for the Social Studies [NCSS]. (2016). Academic freedom and the social studies teacher. Social Education (May/June), 80 (3), 186.
64. National Council for the Social Studies [NCSS]. (2022). Developing state and local social studies standards. National Council for the Social Studies. Erişim adresi https://www.socialstudies.org/current-events-response/ncss-statement-development-social-studies-standards
65. Nuangchalerm, P. (2010). Engaging students to perceive nature of science through socioscientific ıssues-based ınstruction. Online Submission, 13(1), 34-37.
66. Oulton, C., Dillon, J., ve Grace, M. M. (2004). Reconceptualizing the teaching of controversial issues. International Journal of science education, 26(4), 411-423. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000072746
67. Öntaş, T., Yıldırım, E., Egüz, Ş., ve Kaya, B. (2021). Reflections of teaching of controversial topics to the field of classroom education. Education and Science, 46(205), 161–189. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2020.9104
68. Özcan, E. (2021). İlkokul dördüncü sınıf Sosyal bilgiler dersinde tartışmalı konular bağlamında gerçekleştirilen sosyo-bilimsel konu temelli öğretimin etkisi. Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi. Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
69. Öztürk, D., ve Kuş, Z. (2019). Social studies teachers' opinions and practices regarding teaching controversial issues. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, (44(8), 15-37. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2019v44n8.2
70. Parker, W. C. (2018). Education for liberal democracy: Using classroom discussin to build knowledge and voice. American Educator, 42(4), 4–10.
71. Patrick, J. J. (2003). Teaching democracy globally, internationally, and comparatively: The 2003 guide for educators. Bloomington, IN: ERIC Clearinghouse for Social Studies/Social Science Education.
72. Piaget, J. (1970). Science of education and the psychology of the child. Viking Press.
73. Polyiem, T., Nuangchalerm, P., ve Wongchantra, P. (2011). Learning achievement, science process skills, and moral reasoning of ninth grade students learned by 7E learning cycle and socioscientific issue-based learning. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 5(10), 257-564.
74. Sadler, T. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding SSI: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science, 41(5), 513-536. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20009
75. Sadler, T. D., ve Zeidler, D. L. (2004). The morality of socioscientific issues: Construal and resolution of genetic engineering dilemmas. Science Education, 88(1), 4–27. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10101
76. Sadler, T. D., ve Zeidler, D.L. (2005). The significance of content knowledge for informal reasoning regarding SSI: Applying genetics knowledge to genetic engineering issues. Science Education, 89, 71-93. https://doi.org/10.1002/SCE.20023
77. Sadler, T. D., Barab, S. A., ve Scott, B. (2007). What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry?. Research in science education, 37(4), 371-391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9030-9
78. Sætra, E. (2021). Discussing controversial issues in the classroom: Elements of good practice. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 65(2), 345–357. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2019.1705897
79. Sel, B., ve Akgül-Çobanoğlu, F. (2025). A perspective on digital storytelling experiences of primary school teachers on teaching controversial ıssues in Turkey. The Social Studies, 116(5), 311-328. https://doi.org/10.1080/00377996.2024.2394934
80. Shapiro, S. S., Wilk, M. B., ve Chen, H. J. (1968). A comparative study of various tests for normality. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 63(324), 1343–1372. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1968.10480932
81. Stitzlein, S. M. (2024). Shaping new aims and practices of teaching controversial issues in response to conservative critics. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 44(1), 45–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-024-09961-4
82. Tammi, T., ve Rajala, A. (2018). Deliberative communication in elementary classroom meetings: Ground rules, pupils’ concerns, and democratic participation. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 62(4), 617–630. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2016.1261042
83. Tatar, Ş., ve Adıgüzel, O. C. (2019). Türkiye’de tartışmalı ve sosyo-bilimsel konular üzerine yazılan lisansüstü tezlerin eğitim bilimleri perspektifinden incelenmesi [An investigation of dissertations on controversial and socioscientific issues in Turkey from the perspective of educational sciences]. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 20(Özel Sayı), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.17494/ogusbd.583730
84. Topçu, M. S. (2011). Turkish preservice science teachers’ epistemological beliefs and informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues. Science Education International, 22(3), 195–213.
85. Topçu, M. S. (2015). Sosyo-bilimsel konular ve öğretimi. (1. Baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
86. Trochim, W. M., ve Donnelly, J. P. (2006). The research methods knowledge base Cincinnati, OH: Atomic Dog.
87. Türkmen, H., Pekmez, E., ve Sağlam, M. (2017). Fen öğretmen adaylarının sosyo-bilimsel konular hakkındaki düşünceleri. Ege Eğitim Dergisi, 18(2), 448-475. https://doi.org/10.12984/egeefd.295597
88. Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language (E. Hanfmann & G. Vakar, Eds.). MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.1037/11193-000
89. Waliaula, S. (2011). Teaching controversial issues in social studies: A critical discourse analysis of Kenyan secondary school teachers’ perceptions and practices. University of Georgia, Doctoral Dissertation
90. Yılmaz, K. (2013). Tartışmalı ve tabu konuların incelenmesi: Sosyal bilgiler öğretmenlerinin görüşleri. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 9(18), 201-225.
91. Zeidler, D. L. (2014). Socioscientific issues as a curriculum emphasis: Theory, research, and practice. In N. G. Lederman ve S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 697–726). Routledge.
92. Zorlu, E., & Ateş, S. (2024). Argümantasyon odaklı sosyal bilgiler öğretiminin öğrencilerin eleştirel düşünme ve informel muhakeme becerileri üzerine etkisi. İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 25(3), 1335–1366. https://doi.org/10.17679/inuefd.1486243