Identifying mediating factors of moral reasoning in science education

Abstract

The purpose of this research was to examine how science content knowledge, moral reasoning ability, attitudes, and past experiences mediate the formation of moral judgments on environmental dilemmas. The study was conducted in two phases using environmental science majors and nonscience majors of college age. Phase One determined if environmental science majors exhibited higher levels of moral reasoning on nontechnical environmental social issues than on general social issues and examined the extent to which possible mediating factors accounted for differences in moral reasoning. Phase Two was qualitative in nature, the purpose of which was to observe and identify trends in conversations between subjects as to how certain mediating factors are revealed as people form moral judgments. The framework on which this study was constructed incorporates a progressive educational position; a position that views science education as being interdisciplinary, and a social means to a social end.

Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socioscientific issues education

“…The authors suggested in very clear terms that moral development is a factor of interest when assessing decision-making strategies on SSI. Their research findings also provided supporting evidence for earlier work that revealed explicit links between college students' levels of moral reasoning and decision making on SSI irrespective of their science content knowledge level of sophistication (Zeidler & Schafer, 1984).…”

“…Several researchers have corroborated the importance of this perspective in the context of SSI (Korpan et al, 1997;, 2005Zeidler & Schafer, 1984). For example, Sadler and Zeidler (2005) not only concluded that individuals may rely on emotions for the resolution of SSI, but that informal reasoning based on emotion was often equivalent to strictly cognitive approaches to decision making in terms of logical constructs such as internal consistency and coherence.…”

“…Once this distinction is made, it exposes a more robust conceptualization of the complex relationship that exists between moral reasoning and action and has implications for decisions related to pedagogy. For example, researchers point out that the role of affect and emotions in moral functioning had been overlooked in past research, and that the particular realm of one's life being considered (e.g., family, school, peers, workplace, intimate relationships) plays a normative role in moral decision making and character formation (Berkowitz, 1997(Berkowitz, , 1998Nucci, 1989Nucci, , 2001Turiel, 1998;Zeidler & Schafer, 1984, Zeidler et al, 2002.…”

“…situated cognition) contributing to socioscientific decision making in order to perceive the significance of affect. Zeidler and Schafer (1984) produced some of the first empirical evidence suggesting the importance of emotions in the resolution of SSI. Although a priori notions of morality drove their research design consistent with a Kohlbergian perspective, qualitative analyses of dyadic interviews led the authors to postulate the significance of emotional reactions to controversial environmental issues.…”

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

“…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.…”