The research objective of this study was to describe the frames that students from two culturally distinct institutions used in their argumentative essays on a locally relevant environmental socioscientific issue. Participants (n = 47) were recruited from biology courses designed for pre‐service elementary teachers at both a public university and a tribal community college separated by around 80 km. Students participated in iterative writing assignments, class discussion, and small group planning activities. Each student submitted three essays (in total around 140 essays), which were analyzed for the types of claims made, the types of evidence used to support claims, and patterns of argument framing. A framing typology from the science communication discipline was used. Both cohorts used frames around accountability and compromise, but tribal college students were more likely to draw on morality frames while university students drew on economic development frames. In addition, the tribal students were less likely (58% of essays) to use scientific evidence to support their claims than the university students (96% of essays). We conclude that while frames lend them themselves to using scientific evidence, students from culturally marginalized backgrounds have an opportunity to increase their sense of agency and communicate their argumentative positions on SSIs. We recommend that educators assign WTL activities that allow students to select their own frames but encourage students to integrate scientific evidence in their essays, while also recognizing that how we define science is likely culturally biased. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 54: 195–218, 2017

Being an ecologically literate citizen involves making decisions that are based on ecological knowledge and accepting responsibility for personal actions. Using writing-to-learn activities in college science courses, we asked students to consider personal dilemmas that they or others might have in response to how human choices can impact coastal dead zones around the world. We explored how undergraduate students (42 biology and 47 elementary education majors at a 4-year college and eight Native studies majors at a tribal college in the United States) identified their ecological dilemmas after reading about aquatic hypoxia. About 30% of the 4-year college students's essays demonstrated a more ecologically literate understanding of hypoxia by the end of the study. The tribal college students improved their ecological literacy by 50%, albeit with a small sample size. Biology majors made more human-centered comments than the education majors. The Native American students often discussed trade-offs between quality of life and ecological consequences, and were classified as both human-centered and ecosystem-centered.