Socioscientific issues (SSI) are often used to facilitate students’ engagement in multiple scientific practices such as decision-making and argumentation, both of which are goals of STEM literacy, science literacy, and integrated STEM education. Literature often emphasizes scientific argumentation over socioscientific argumentation, which involves considering social factors in addition to scientific frameworks. Analyzing students’ socioscientific arguments may reveal how students construct such arguments and evaluate pedagogical tools supporting these skills. In this study, we examined students’ socioscientific arguments regarding three SSI on pre- and post-assessments in the context of a course emphasizing SSI-based structured decision-making. We employed critical integrative argumentation (CIA) as a theoretical and analytical framework, which integrates arguments and counterarguments with stronger arguments characterized by identifying and refuting counterarguments. We hypothesized that engaging in structured decision-making, in which students integrate multidisciplinary perspectives and consider tradeoffs of various solutions based upon valued criteria, may facilitate students’ development of integrated socioscientific arguments. Findings suggest that students’ arguments vary among SSI contexts and may relate to students’ identities and perspectives regarding the SSI. We conclude that engaging in structured decision-making regarding personally relevant SSI may foster more integrated argumentation skills, which are critical to engaging in information-laden democratic societies.

RESUMENLa salud y la salud pública están dominadas por un pensamiento hegemónico, que tiene como centro la atención a la enfermedad y no la protección de la salud, hegemonía que más recientemente ha colocado a la salud en el mercado, incorporado la concepción de que es escenario privilegiado para la acumulación y reproducción de capital. Se analizan temas como el derecho a la salud, la determinación social de la salud y la atención primaria de salud, para demostrar su simplificación por el pensamiento hegemónico. Se propone impulsar un pensamiento contrahegemónico que asuma los planteamientos de la Medicina Social y la Salud Colectiva latinoamericanas, haciendo de la salud un espacio para la lucha por un nuevo Estado y una nueva sociedad.Palabras clave: salud, salud pública, Medicina Social, Salud Colectiva, pensamiento contrahegemónico. ABSTRACTHealth and the public health are dominated by an hegemonic thought focused on the care to disease rather than on the health protection. This hegemony has recently placed health into the market by introducing the concept of a privileged scenario for capital accumulation and reproduction. This article analyzed topics such as the right to health, the social determinants of health and the primary health care, in order to prove how these topics are simplified by the hegemonic thought. It also suggested that a counter-hegemonic thought should be encouraged, which will take the

Background Although pollinators play an integral role in human well-being, their continued global decline reflects the need to provide and evaluate general pollinator knowledge to promote their conservation. Enhancing learners’ understanding of the complexity inherent in pollination systems within the science classroom may help them make more informed decisions regarding pollinator conservation actions. By measuring conceptual understanding of pollination systems, science educators can identify learners’ knowledge needs and inform their teaching in science classrooms. Based on previously developed theoretical frameworks describing pollination systems knowledge, we created and evaluated a new instrument to assess pollination systems and conservation actions knowledge. The Pollination Systems Knowledge Assessment (PSKA) is a multiple-true–false instrument containing 18 question stems and 70 accompanying T–F items encompassing three organizational components of pollination knowledge regarding (1) plant structures, (2) pollinator structures and behaviors, and (3) pollination systems function and pollinator conservation. Results We refined the PSKA based on expert discussions, think-aloud interviews, and pilot testing before and after presenting a wild pollinator conservation unit within a postsecondary science literacy course. The PSKA elucidated learners’ misconceptions and revealed discriminating items from the three organizational components of pollination systems knowledge. Conclusions The PSKA may aid educators in exploring learners’ conceptual understanding, identifying areas of misconceptions, and refining educational programming aimed at improving learners’ pollination systems knowledge.

No abstract