This study, aiming at developing attitudes towards human rights through socioscientific issues in science courses, was designed as an action research. The study covers 28-week implementation on 26 8th grade students. Data were collected through printed documents, human rights attitude scale (HRAS), unstructured observation, and teacher and student diaries. Qualitative data of the study were analyzed via content analysis. Statistical analysis was carried out for the change in HRAS scores. Study findings indicated that students developed understanding and attitude towards many human rights within the scope of first, second and third generation rights in science courses through practices based on socioscientific issues. HRAS scores increased at a significant rate as well. Moreover, it was also stated that problems of meaning-making, suggesting ideas which do not comply with human rights and insisting were encountered.

This study was designed as a collaborative action research, aimed to develop secondary school 8th graders' argumentation skills through socioscientific issues (SSI) in science course. The participants of the research were comprised of 26 eight graders. In the study, an action plan which had lasted 27 weeks was implemented. The data was collected by means of written documents related to the argumentation skills, unstructured observations, teacher and student diaries. The data was analyzed using content analysis. The study results showed that at the end of the implementation, all students were able to create arguments that were comprised of components of claim, warrant, evidence, counter claim-warrantand rebuttal. Also, in the process of development of argumentation skills, some problems both related to the components of argumentation skills and learning-teaching variables were observed. Thisresearch is significant in terms of presenting information regarding regulations to be made for the development of argumentation skills through SSI in science course and problems that may be encountered in this process, forimplementation processof collaborative action research.

This study attempts to investigate through causal-comparative research whether socio-scientific argumentation processes of prospective science teachers (PSTs) who had high and low socio-scientific argumentation skills differed from each other in terms of metacognition. The research was conducted with a total of 45 PSTs, 24of whom had high socio-scientific argumentation skills, and 21 had low socio-scientific argumentation skills. Data were gathered using qualitative and quantitative methods. Research results indicated that the PSTs with high socio-scientific argumentation skills displayed more metacognitive behaviors when compared to the PSTs with low socio-scientific argumentation skills and that they used more metacognitive strategies with regard to many components such as planning, decision-making, evaluation, monitoring, and organizing. Furthermore, a statistically significant difference was detected between the scores of the PSTs' metacognitive awareness skills in favor of the PSTs with high socio-scientific argumentation skills. These results demonstrated that the two groups with different socio-scientific argumentation skills differed from each other in terms of metacognition and that the PSTs with high socio-scientific argumentation skills were better in regard with metacognition.

Purpose: Human rights education is vital for democratic societies. For an effective human rights education, teachers need to have an in-depth comprehension regarding human rights in the first place. Accordingly, this study aimed to develop, implement and evaluate the Human Rights Curriculum Based on Socioscientific issues as Part of the Environmental Education Course (HRCSEC) for pre-service primary school teachers (PPSTs). Method: This study was designed as a quasi-experimental study with non-equivalent pre-test/post-test control group. The participants of the study include 77 PSPTs

No abstract