Sosyobilimsel Konular ve Öğretmenler: Türkiye’deki Tezlere Yönelik Bir Sistematik Literatür İncelemesi

Öz

Sosyobilimsel konular günlük hayatta birçok kez karşımıza çıkan, tartışmalı ve karmaşık konulardır. Bu konular hem sosyal hem de bilimsel ikilemleri içinde barındıran, eleştirel düşünme ve muhakeme yapabilmeyi gerektiren konulardır. Bu çalışmanın amacı son 10 yıl içerisinde Türkiye’de sosyobilimsel konulara yönelik öğretmenlerle ve öğretmen adaylarıyla yapılmış olan yüksek lisans ve doktora tezlerini sistematik olarak incelemektir. Sistematik literatür incelemesinden faydalanılan bu çalışmada, belirlenen özel kriterler doğrultusunda 2010-2020 yılları içerisinde Türkiye’de yayınlanmış olan, öğretmen ve öğretmen adayları ile gerçekleştirilmiş sosyobilimsel konulara yönelik 49 adet yüksek lisans ve doktora tezi incelenmiştir. Çalışmaların büyük çoğunluğunun yüksek lisans seviyesinde ve öğretmen adaylarıyla gerçekleştiği görülmüştür. Sosyobilimsel konuların öğretimine yönelik görüşler, özyeterlik çalışmaları ve argümantasyon tabanlı öğrenme ile ilgili yapılan çalışmaların çoğunlukta olduğu tespit edilmiştir. En fazla içerik analizi ve betimsel analiz yöntemleriyle analiz yapıldığı ve en fazla kullanılan ölçme aracının görüşme formu olduğu belirlenmiştir. Öğretmenlerin çoğunlukla bu konuların öğretimine yönelik yeterli bilgi ve öz yeterliğe sahip olmadığı bu nedenle de sınıf içerisine bu konuları taşımadıkları görülmüştür. Öğretmenlere bu konuların öğretimine yönelik hizmet içi eğitimlerin verilmesi, öğretmen adaylarına da etkili eğitimlerin verilmesi önerilebilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• sosyobilimsel konular
• öğretmen eğitimi
• öğretmenler
• öğretmen adayları

Socioscientific Issues and Teachers: A Literature Review for Theses in Turkey

Abstract

Socioscientific issues are controversial and complex issues that we encounter many times in daily life. These issues are hosts in both social and scientific dilemmas are issues that require to make critical thinking and reasoning. The aim of this study in the last 10 years, master's and doctoral dissertations made with teachers and for teachers socioscientific issues in Turkey is to examine systematically. In this study imposed on a systematic literature review, in determining the specific criteria in accordance of 2010-2020, which was published in Turkey, teachers and teacher candidates was carried out with for socioscientific issues 49 master's and doctoral dissertations are examined. It has been observed that most of the studies were conducted at the graduate level and with teacher candidates. It has been observed that the majority of studies on the teaching of socioscientific issues, self-efficacy studies and argumentation-based learning are. It was determined that the analysis was mostly made by content analysis and descriptive analysis methods and the most used measurement tool was the interview form. It has been observed that teachers mostly do not have sufficient knowledge and self-efficacy for teaching these subjects, therefore they do not carry these subjects into the classroom. It can be suggested to provide teachers with in-service training for teaching these subjects and effective training for teacher candidates.

Keywords

• socioscientific issues
• Teacher education
• Teachers
• preservice teachers

Kaynakça

1. Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2003). Socioscientific issues in pre-college science classrooms: The primacy of learners‟ epistemological orientations and views of nature of science. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning in socioscientific issues and discourse in science education (pp. 41–61). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
2. Akşit, A. C. A. (2011). The views of primary education pre-service teachers' on socioscientific issues and their perspectives on the teaching of these issues. Unpublished master thesis, Ege University, Institute of Social Sciences İzmir. It was obtained from http://tez2.yok.gov.tr/.
3. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1997). Writing narrative literature reviews. Review of General Psychology, 3, 311-320.
4. Bem, D. J. (1995). Writing a review article for Psychological Bulletin. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 172-177.
5. Chan, K.W. & Elliott, R.G.(2004).Relational analysis of personal epistemology and conceptions about teaching and learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(8), 817–831.
6. Cross R. T. & Price R. F.(1996).Science Teachers‟ Social Conscience and the Role of Controversial Issues in the Teaching of Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(3),319-333.
7. Dawson V.(2001). Addressing Controversial Issues in Secondary School Science. Australian Science Teachers‟ Journal, 47(4), 38-45.
8. Dawson, V. M. & Venville, G. (2010). Teaching strategies for developing students’ argumentation skills about socioscientific ıssues in high school genetics. Research in Science Education, 40, 133-148.

9. Day, S. P., & Bryce, T. G. K. (2011). Does the discussion of socio-scientific issues require a paradigm shift in science teachers‟ thinking? International Journal of Science Education, 33, 1675–1702.
10. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287–312.
11. Gayford, C. (2002). Controversial environmental issues: a case study for the professional development of science teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 1191–1200.
12. Gözüm, A. İ. C. (2015). Determining the socio-scientific attitudes and cognitive structures of the preschool, primary and science teachers in terms of self-efficacies in science education: Kars province sample. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Samsun. It was obtained from http://tez2.yok.gov.tr/
13. Hart, C. (2001). Doing a literature search: A comprehensive guide for the social sciences. London: Sage.
14. Hashweh, M. Z.(1996). Effects of science teachers' epistemological beliefs in teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 1, 47-63.
15. Holbrook, J., & Rannikmae, M. (2007). The nature of science education for enhancing scientific literacy. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1347-1362.
16. Huberman, A. M., & Miles, M. B. (1994). Data management and analysis methods. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 428-444). London, UK: Sage Publications.
17. Kılınç, A., Bahceci, D., Eroglu, B., Demiral, U., Yildirim, K., Kartal, T., Gorgulu, O., Afacan, O., Demirci, P., Sonmez, A. (2012). Science Teachers‟ Views about Teaching Socioscientific Issues: Understandings, Experiences and Suggestions. Paper presented at NARST 2012 Congress, IN, USA.
18. Kilinc, A., Kelly, T., Eroglu, B., Demiral, U., Kartal, T., Sonmez, A., & Demirbag, M. (2017). Stickers to facts, imposers, democracy advocators, and committed impartialists: Preservice science teachers’ beliefs about teacher’s roles in socioscientific discourses. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(2), 195-213.
19. Kolstø, S. D. (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial SSI. Science Education, 85, 291–310.
20. Kolsto, S. O. (2006). Patterns in students‟ argumentation confronted with a risk-focused socio-scientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 28(14),1689-1716.
21. Lazarowitz, R., & Bloch, I. (2005). Awareness of societal issues among high school biology teachers teaching genetics, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14(5-6), 437-457.
22. Lee H., Abd-EI-Khalick F., & Choi K.(2006). Korean science teachers' perceptions of the introduction of socio-scientific issues into the science curricuium. Canadian Journal of Science,6(2), 97–117.
23. 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(3), 497–517.
24. Lumpe, A.T., Haney, J.J., & Czerniak, C.M.(1998). Science teacher beliefs and intentions to implement science-technology-society (STS) in the classroom. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 9(1), 1-24.
25. Maor, D. & Taylor, P.C. (1995). Teacher epistemology and scientific inquiry in computerised classroom environments. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 839-854.
26. MOE (2013). Book of Science Education. It was obtained from “http://www.meb.gov.tr/2013-2014-egitim-ogretim-yili-elektronik-ortamda-hizmete-sunulan-ilk-ve-orta-ogretim-ders-kitaplari/duyuru/6319 “.
27. Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction—what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474-496.
28. Olafson L. & Schraw G.(2006). Teachers‟ beliefs and practices within and across domains. International Journal of Educational Research, 45, 71–84.
29. Owens, D. C., Sadler, T. D., & Friedrichsen, P. (2019). Teaching practices for enactment of socio-scientific issues instruction: An instrumental case study of an experienced biology teacher. Research in Science Education, 1-24.
30. Ratcliffe, M. & Grace, M.(2003). Science education for citizenship: teaching socio-scientific issues.maidenhead: Open University Press.
31. Sadler, T.D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 4, 513–536.
32. Sezer, K. (2017). Determination of the self-sufficiency and attitudes of science teachers who are non-assigned and assigned about socio-scientific issues. Unpublished master thesis, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Samsun. It was obtained from http://tez2.yok.gov.tr/.
33. Siddaway, A. (2014). What is a systematic literature review and how do I do one. University of Stirling, 1, 1-13.
34. Solomon, J. (1989). Discussing nuclear power. Physics Education, 24, 344-347.
35. Sönmez, A. (2015). Investigation of the relationships between science teachers' epistemological belief systems and their teaching of socioscientific issues. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Abant İzzet Baysal University, Bolu. It was obtained from http://tez2.yok.gov.tr/.
36. Toy, B. Y., & Tosunoğlu, N. G. (2007). Sosyal bilimler alanındaki araştırmalarda bilimsel araştırma süreci, istatistiksel teknikler ve yapılan hatalar. Gazi Üniversitesi Ticaret ve Turizm Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, (1), 1-20.
37. Yılmaz-Tüzün, Ö. & Topçu, M. S., (2008) Relationships among preservice science teachers' epistemological beliefs, epistemological world views, and self-efficacy beliefs. International Journal of Science Education, 30, p.65-85.
38. Zeidler, D. L.(2003) The role of moral reasoning and discourse on socioscientific issues in science education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
39. Zeidler, D. L. (2014). Socioscientific Issues as a Curriculum Emphasis. In Norman G. Lederman & Sandra K. Abell (Eds), Handbook of Research on Science Education Vol II (pp. 697-726). Routhledge, New York.
40. 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.
41. Zeidler, D. L., & Kahn, S. (2014). It's debatable!: Using socioscientific issues to develop scientific literacy K-12. NSTA press.
42. Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Applebaum, S., & Callahan, B. E. (2009). Advancing reflective judgment through socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 74-101.
43. 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.