Adolescent reasoning in socio‐scientific issues, part I: Social cognition

Fleming, Reg

doi:10.1002/tea.3660230803

Cited by 118 publications

(82 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Zeidler and Schafer (1984) reported that comprehension of science, positive attitudes, and a strong commitment toward a particular issue were all positively related to the level of moral reasoning college students used to make social judgments. Fleming (1986a) found that adolescents primarily viewed science and technology based issues in ways that stressed the social aspects of the issue. On the relatively rare occasions when adolescents used nonsocial cognition, their reasoning focused on their perceptions of scientists as finders and keepers of "true" facts (Fleming, 1986b).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understandings of the nature of science and decision making on science and technology based issues

2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:The purpose of this investigation was to explicate the role of the nature of science in decision making on science and technology based issues and to delineate factors and reasoning associated with these types of decisions. Twenty-one volunteer participants purposively selected from the faculty of geographically diverse universities completed an open-ended questionnaire and follow-up interview designed to assess their decision making on science and technology based issues. Participants were subsequently placed in one of two groups based upon their divergent views of the nature of science as assessed by a second open-ended questionnaire and follow-up interview. Profiles of each group's decision making were then constructed, based on participants' previous responses to the decision making questionnaire and follow-up interviews. Finally, the two groups' decisions, decision influencing factors, and decision making strategies were compared. No differences were found between the decisions of the two groups, despite their disparate views of the nature of science. Participants in both groups based their decisions primarily on personal values, morals/ethics, and social concerns. While all participants considered scientific evidence in their decision making, most did not require absolute "proof," even though many participants held absolute conceptions of the nature of science. Overall, the nature of science did not figure prominently in either group's decisions. These findings contrast with basic assumptions of current science education reform efforts and call for a re-examination of the goals of nature of science instruction. Developing better decision making skills-even on science and technology based issues-may involve other factors, including more value-based instruction and attention to intellectual/moral development.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understandings of the nature of science and decision making on science and technology based issues

2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bu çalışma, son yıllarda yurt genelinde yapılmış ve yapılması planlanan nehir tipi Sosyo-bilimsel konular hakkında çok çeşitli araştırmalar (örneğin, Sadler, 2004;Sadler & Fowler, 2006;Fleming, 1986, Kolstø, 2001a, Patronis, Potari, & Spiliotopoulou, 1999 yapılmış olmakla birlikte bu çalışmanın konusu olan sosyo-bilimsel bir konu olan HES'lerle ilgili değişik gruplardan insanların görüşlerinin incelenmesi gibi çalışmalara rastlanmamıştır.…”

Section: Yorum Ve Tartışmaunclassified

Sosyo-bilimsel Bir Konu Olan Hidroelektrik Santraller (HES) Hakkında Karar Verilirken Kullanılan İrdeleme Şekillerinin İncelenmesi

Öztürk¹,

Leblebicioğlu²

2015

Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen Ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-The purpose of this study was to determine reasoning modes of different groups of people while they were making a decision about Hydroelectric Power Plants (HPP). Twenty people from each group (member of environmental organizations, local people, distant people) and 7 officials participated in the study. Data were collected by a questionnaire which consisted of general knowledge about HPP, its advantages and disadvantages, and a question asking if they think that construction of HPP should be terminated or not. Coding scheme in Liu, Lin, and Tsai (2010) was applied. Reasoning modes were coded into four categories: ecological, scientifictechnological, socio-economical, and ethical-esthetical. Most of the participants decided on terminating the construction of HPP and their reasoning modes were mostly socio-economical and ecological. Ethical-esthetical and scientific-technological reasoning were less. The people who decided on continuing HPP mostly reasoned from socio-economical and scientific-technological modes. Ethical-esthetical reasoning was rare and ecological reasoning was less than the other group.

show abstract

“…Toplumu oluşturan tüm bireyler günümüzde yenilenebilir enerji kaynakları, nükleer enerji, genetiği değiştirilmiş organizma (GDO), küresel ısınma gibi bilimsel konular ile daha fazla ilgilenmekte (Fleming, 1986;Zeidler, Walker, Ackett & Simmons, 2002) hatta bu konular ile ilgili karar verme ya da iddiada bulunma durumunda kalabilmektedirler (Özdemir, 2014). Genellikle etik, ahlaki veya yasal ikilemler içeren ve üzerinde kesin bir fikir birliği bulunmayan bu tartışmalı olgular Sosyo-Bilimsel Konular (SBK) olarak tanımlanmaktadır (Kolsto, 2001a;Nielsen, 2012;Sadler & Zeidler, 2004;Sadler, 2004;Sadler, Amirshokoohi, Kezampouri & Allspaw, 2006;Walker & Zeidler, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

“…SBK, doğası gereği karmaşık, açık-uçlu, çoğunlukla tartışmalı, kesin cevabı olmayan ve sosyal yaşamda bir anlamı/önemi olan bilimsel konulardır (Topçu, 2015). SBK olarak adlandırılan bu bilimsel konular sadece belirli alanlarda uzmanlıkları olan bilim insanlarının değil tüm insanlığın dikkatini üzerine çeken konulardır (Zeidler, Walker, Ackett & Simmons, 2002;Fleming, 1986). Nitekim toplumun SBK ile ilgili istekliliği ve hevesi mevcut SBK kapsamında ilgili tartışmaların genişlemesine ve yeni konuların ortaya çıkmasına sebep olmaktadır (Sadler, 2004).…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

How Gifted Students Reach Decisions in Socio-Scientific Issues? Warrants, Information Sources and Role of Media

Öztürk¹,

Eş²,

Turgut³

2017

IOJES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this research, it was aimed to investigate the decisions of gifted students regarding particular socio-scientific issues with their warrants and information sources on those decisions. The research was qualitative in nature and the participants were 36 (21 male, 15 female) elementary school students who had training at Sinop Science and Art Centre. The data source of the research was a written from consisted nine open ended questions regarding four socio-scientific issues and the data obtained were analysed by content analysis technique. The findings of the study revealed that students concluded differently in different socio-scientific issues with varying warrants and considered media as the primary information source in that process. Media was followed by authority, education and social environment as other information sources. Based on those results, it was proposed to develop instructional activities for Science and Art Centres aiming the integration of media literacy with socio-scientific issues.© 2017 IOJES. All rights reserved Keywords: 1 Socio-scientific issues, media, gifted student, science education Extended Summary PurposeIn today's world, individuals are more interested in socio-scientific issues such as renewable energy sources, nuclear energy, genetically modified organisms and climate change since they are required to make decisions about them. However, socio-scientific issues consist of ethical, moral or legal dilemma and cannot be easily agreed on. They are naturally complex, open-ended, and mostly controversial and individuals need multiple sources of information in order to make decisions about them. For this reason, socio-scientific issues and the process of decision making about them are important subjects in science education. The related literature confirms that importance and many research focused on socio-scientific issues in various contexts. However, majority of related research are seemed intensified on teacher candidates whereas there is lack of studies at lower levels such as middle school. For these reasons in this research, it was aimed to investigate the decisions of gifted students regarding particular socio-scientific issues with their warrants and information sources on those decisions. MethodThe target group of the study was determined as gifted students since they are individuals who have a high potential of being scientists or choosing the careers with intensive scientific knowledge. They are candidates of those who can produce solutions to the world-wide socio-scientific problems in their future life. So, the participants of the study were 36 (21 male, 15 female) gifted middle school students studying in Sinop Science and Art Centre. The data source of the research was a form developed by the researchers 1 Corresponding author's address: Nurhan ÖZTÜRK,

show abstract

Adolescent reasoning in socio‐scientific issues, part I: Social cognition

Cited by 118 publications

References 8 publications

Understandings of the nature of science and decision making on science and technology based issues

Understandings of the nature of science and decision making on science and technology based issues

Sosyo-bilimsel Bir Konu Olan Hidroelektrik Santraller (HES) Hakkında Karar Verilirken Kullanılan İrdeleme Şekillerinin İncelenmesi

How Gifted Students Reach Decisions in Socio-Scientific Issues? Warrants, Information Sources and Role of Media

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About