Exploring Preservice Science Teachers’ Socioscientific Reasoning Competence

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 33 Sayı: 4, 938 - 951, 11.10.2025

Süleyman Çite , Ahmet Ünal , Selçuk Şahingöz

https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.1797620

Öz

Purpose: Contemporary science education standards underscore the importance of scientific literacy. To this end, science education researchers have been discussing what scientific literacy entails in a globalized world. A recent approach defines scientific literacy not only as the ability to comprehend and apply science concepts but also as the competence to construct arguments about complex, science-based societal issues. This requires scientifically literate individuals to go beyond science concepts and examine societal issues from multiple perspectives, such as economic, social, and ethical, a practice known as socioscientific reasoning. Undoubtedly, developing students' socioscientific reasoning depends on having science teachers who are themselves competent socioscientific reasoners. In this respect, this study aims to document the socioscientific reasoning competencies of preservice science teachers through open-ended tasks incorporating societal issues.
Design/Methodology/Approach: To assess preservice science teachers’ socioscientific reasoning competencies, an open-ended response task with two different socioscientific scenarios was designed and administered to 76 third and fourth year teacher candidates. Responses were analyzed with using inductive analysis method. Through constant comparison method, the responses of students were categorized into three level competency.
Findings: The results show that while preservice teachers understood the complexity of these societal issues, their reasoning was naive in approaching the issues from the perspectives of different stakeholders, appreciating the need for further inquiry, and skeptically examining the issue.
Highlights: The study concludes with implications for preservice science teacher education programs.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Socioscientific issues , Preservice Science Teachers , Socioscientific reasoning

Fen Bilimleri Öğretmen Adaylarının Sosyobilimsel Muhakeme Becerileri

Öz

Çalışmanın amacı: Çağdaş fen öğretim standartları, bilimsel okuryazarlığın önemini vurgulamaktadır. Fen eğitimi araştırmacıları, küreselleşen bir dünyada bilimsel okuryazarlığın ne anlama geldiğini tartışmaktadır. Yakın tarihli bir yaklaşım, bilimsel okuryazarlığı yalnızca bilimsel kavramları anlama ve uygulama becerisi olarak değil, aynı zamanda karmaşık, bilim temelli toplumsal konular hakkında argümanlar oluşturma yetkinliği olarak tanımlar. Bu, bilimsel olarak okuryazar bireylerin yalnızca bilimsel kavramlarla sınırlı kalmayıp; ekonomik, sosyal ve etik gibi farklı açılardan toplumsal sorunları incelemelerini gerektirir ki bu uygulama “sosyobilimsel muhakeme” olarak adlandırılır. Hiç kuşkusuz, öğrencilerin sosyobilimsel muhakeme becerilerini geliştirebilmeleri, bu konuda yetkin fen öğretmenlerinin varlığına bağlıdır. Bu bağlamda, bu çalışma fen bilimleri öğretmen adaylarının sosyobilimsel muhakeme yeterliklerini sosyobilimsel sorunları içeren açık uçlu sorular aracılığıyla ortaya koymayı amaçlamaktadır.
Materyal ve Yöntem: Fen bilimleri öğretmen adaylarının sosyobilimsel muhakeme yeterliklerini değerlendirmek amacıyla, iki farklı sosyobilimsel senaryoyu içeren açık uçlu bir ölçme aracı tasarlanmış ve 3. ve 4. sınıfta öğrenim gören 76 öğretmen adayına uygulanmıştır. Yanıtlar, tümevarımsal analiz yöntemi kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Sürekli karşılaştırma yöntemi aracılığıyla, öğrencilerin yanıtları üç yeterlik düzeyine kategorize edilmiştir.
Bulgular: Sonuçlar, öğretmen adaylarının sosyobilimsel konuların karmaşıklığını anladıklarını, ancak farklı paydaşların bakış açılarından soruna yaklaşma, daha fazla araştırmaya duyulan ihtiyacı takdir etme ve konuyu sorgulayıcı bir şekilde inceleme konularında muhakemelerinin oldukça yüzeysel olduğunu göstermektedir.
Önemli Vurgular: Çalışma, fen öğretmeni yetiştirme programları için çıkarımlarla (önerilerle) sona ermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Sosyobilimsel konular , Fen bilimleri öğretmen adayları , Sosyobilimsel muhakeme becerileri

Kaynakça

• Fowler, S. R., Zeidler, D. L., & 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
• Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
• Ha, H., Park, W., & Song, J. (2023). Preservice elementary teachers’ socioscientific reasoning during a decision-making activity in the context of COVID-19. Science & Education, 32, 1869-1886. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00359-7
• Herman, B. C., Newton, M. H., & Zeidler, D. L. (2020). Impact of place-based socioscientific issues instruction on students’ contextualization of socioscientific orientations. Science Education, 105, 585-627. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21618
• Karahan, E., & Roehrig, G. H., (2017). Secondary school students’ understanding of science and their socioscientific reasoning. Research in Science Education 47 (4): 755–782. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9527-9
• Kinslow, A. T., Sadler, T. D., & Nguyen, H. T. (2019). Socio-scientific reasoning and environmental literacy in a field-based ecology class. Environmental Education Research, 25(3), 388-410. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2018.1442418
• Kolstø, S.D., Paulsen, V.H., & Mestad, I. (2024). Critical thinking in the making: students’ critical thinking practices in a multifaceted SSI project. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 19, 499-530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-024-10217-3
• Ministry of National Education [MoNE] (2024). Science course curriculum for primary and lower secondary schools. MoNE Publications, Ankara.
• National Research Council (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academy of the Sciences.
• Newton, M. H., & Zeidler, D. L. (2020). Developing socioscientific perspective taking. International Journal of Science Education, 42(8), 1302-1319. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1756515
• Öztürk, N., & Roehrig, G. H. (2025). Effects of an integrated STEM unit designed around socioscientific issues on middle schools students’ socioscientific reasoning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 23, 1493-1518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-024-10517-8
• Patronis, T., Potari, D., & Spiliotopoulou, V. (1999). Students’ argumentation in decision making on a socio-scientific issue: Implications for teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 745–754. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006999290408
• Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21368
• Roberts, D. A., & Bybee, R. W. (2014). Scientific literacy, science literacy, and science education. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 545–558). New York, NY: Routledge.
• Romine, W. L., Sadler, T. D., & Kinslow, A. T. (2017). Assessment of scientific literacy: Development and validation of the quantitative assessment of socio-scientific reasoning (QuASSR). Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54 (2): 274–295. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21368
• Romine, W. L., Sadler, T. D., Dauer, J. M., & Kinslow A. T. (2020). Measurement of socio-scientific reasoning (SSR) and exploration of SSR as a progression of competencites. International Journal of Science Education, 42(18), 2981-3002. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1849853
• Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 513–536. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20009
• Sadler, T., & Zeidler, D. (2005). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42 (1), 112–138. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20042
• Sadler, T. D., Barab, S., & 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
• Sadler, T., D., & Zeidler, D., L. (2009). Scientific literacy, PISA, and socioscientific discourse: Assessment for progressive aims of science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 46 (8): 909–921. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20327
• Sadler, T. D., Klosterman, M. L., & Topcu, M. S. (2011). Learning science content and socio-scientific reasoning through classroom explorations of global climate change. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socio-scientific issues in the classroom: Teaching, learning and research (pp. 45–77). Springer.
• Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Tüzüngüç, B., Doğan, Ö., & Han Tosunoğlu, Ç. (2021). Adaptation of socio-scientific reasoning scale to Turkish: A validity and reliability study. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 20 (79), 106-1078. https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.763534
• Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2010). An inclusive view of scientific literacy: Core issues and future directions of socioscientific reasoning. In Linder, C., Östman, L., Roberts, D. A., Wickman, P., Ericksen, G. & MacKinnon, A. (Eds). Exploring the Landscape of Scientific Literacy. (pp. 176-192). Taylor & Francis: New York.
• Zeidler, D., L., Herman, B. C., Ruzek, M., Linder, A., & Lin., S. (2013). Cross-cultural epistemological orientations to socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 50 (3): 251–283. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21077
• Zeidler, D.L., & Sadler, T.D. (2023). Exploring and expanding the frontiers of socioscientific issues: Crossroads and future directions. In N. G. Lederman, D.L. Zeidler, & J.S. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education, Volume III (pp. 899-929). Routledge.
• 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008