___

• Adey, P., & Csapó, B. (2012). Developing and assessing scientific reasoning. In B. Csapó & G. Szabo, Framework for diagnostic assessment of science (pp. 17-49). Budapest: Nemzeti Tankonyvkiado. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271588892
• Aini, N., Juniati, D., & Siswono, T. Y. E. (2020). High school students’ discourse markers using skills in writing descriptive essays: A qualitative study. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 8(3), 1113-1124. http://dx.doi.org/10.17478/jegys.768023
• Aksu, M., Berberoğlu, G., & Paykoç, F. (1991). Investigation logical thinking according to certain variables. Searches in Education I. Symposium Proceedings (pp. 291-294), Istanbul: Kültür Publications.
• American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS]. (1990). Science for all Americans. Oxford University Press.
• Ash-Shiddieqy, M. H., Suparmi, A., & Sunarno, W. (2018, April). The effectiveness of module based on guided inquiry method to improve students’ logical thinking ability. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1006, 012001. IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1006/1/012001
• Atabey, N., & Topçu, M. S. (2017). The development of a socioscientific issues based curriculum unit for middle school students: Global warming issue. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 5(3), 153-170.
• Atabey, N., Topçu, M. S., & Çiftçi, A. (2018). The investigation of socioscientific issues scenarios: A content analysis research. OPUS-International Journal of Society Researches, 9(16), 1968-1991. https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.474224
• Aydın, F., & Silik, Y. (2020). An investigation of how pre-service elementary school teachers relate socioscientific issues in the scope of learning outcomes of 2017 science education curriculum (Grade 3 and 4). Inonu University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 21(2), 740-756. https://doi.org/10.17679/inuefd.648944
• Aydın, Ö., & Kaptan, F. (2014). Effect of argumentation on metacognition and logical thinking abilities in science-technology teacher candidate education and opinions about argumentation. Journal of Educational Sciences Research, 4(2) 163-188.
• Aygün, Ş., Atalay, N., Kılıç, Z., & Yaşar, S. (2016). The development of a 21st century skills and competences scale directed at teaching candidates: Validity and reliability study. Pamukkale University Journal of Education, 40, 160-175.
• Bakırcı, H., Artun, H., Şahin, S., & Sağdıç, M. (2018). Investigation of opinions of seventh grade students about socioscientific issues by means of science teaching based on common knowledge construction model. Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 6(2), 207-237. https://doi.org/10.14689/issn.2148 - 2624.1.6c2s10m
• Baser, M. (2007). The contribution of learning motivation, reasoning ability and learning orientation to ninth grade international program students’ understanding of mitosis and meiosis [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Middle East Technical University.
• Berk, L. E. (2013). Çocuk gelişimi (B. Onur. ve A. Dönmez, Çev.). İmge Yayınevi.
• Bermudez, G. M., & Lindemann-Matthies, P. (2020). “What matters is species richness” high school students’ understanding of the components of biodiversity. Research in Science Education, 1(29), 2159-2187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9767-y
• Bitner, B. L. (1991). Formal operational reasoning modes: Predictors of critical thinking abilities and grades assigned by teachers in science and mathematics for students in grades nine through twelve. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(3), 265- 274.
• Borges, K. S., Menezes, C. S., & Fagundes, L. C. (2017, October). The use of computational thinking in digital fabrication projects a case study from the cognitive perspective. In 2017 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (pp. 1-6). IEEE. https://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/FIE.2017.8190654
• Bossér, U., & Lindahl, M. (2019). Students’ positioning in the classroom: A study of teacher-student interactions in a socioscientific issue context. Research in Science Education, 49(2), 371-390. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9627-1
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2014). Manual of data analysis for social sciences (20th ed.). Pegem Akademi.
• Bybee, R. W., & Sund, R. B. (1990). Piaget for educators (2nd ed.). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.
• Can, A. (2019). Quantitative data analysis in scientific research process with SPSS (7th Ed.). Pegem Akademi.
• Carson, K., & Dawson, V. (2016). A teacher professional development model for teaching socioscientific issues. Teaching Science, 62(1), 28-35.
• Cavallo, A. M. (1996). Meaningful learning, reasoning ability, and students’ understanding and problem solving of topics in genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(6), 625-656. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098- 2736(199608)33:6<625::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-Q
• Chen, L., & Xiao, S. (2020). Perceptions, challenges and coping strategies of science teachers in teaching socioscientific issues: A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 32(2021), 100377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100377
• Cian, H. (2020). The influence of context: comparing high school students’ socioscientific reasoning by socioscientific topic. International Journal of Science Education, 42(9), 1503-1521. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1767316
• Croker, S., & Buchanan, H. (2011). Scientific reasoning in a real-world context: The effect of prior belief and outcome on children’s hypothesis-testing strategies. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 29, 409-424. https://doi.org/10.1348/026151010X496906
• Dauer, J. M., Lute, M., & Straka, O. (2017). Indicators of informal and formal decisionmaking about a socioscientific issue. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 5(2), 124-138. https://doi.org/10.18404/ijemst.05787
• Dawson, V., & Carson, K. (2017). Using climate change scenarios to assess high school students’ argumentation skills. Research in Science ve Technological Education, 35(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2016.1174932
• Dawson, V., & Venville, G. J. (2009). High‐school Students’ Informal Reasoning and Argumentation about Biotechnology: An indicator of scientific literacy?. International Journal of Science Education, 31(11), 1421-1445. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690801992870
• Dawson, V., & Venville, G. (2013). Introducing high school biology students to argumentation about socioscientific issues. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 13(4), 356-372. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2013.845322
• Denison, S., & Xu, F. (2014). The origins of probabilistic inference in human infants. Cognition, 130(3), 335-347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.12.001
• Ding, L. (2018). Progression trend of scientific reasoning from elementary school to university: a large-scale cross-grade survey among Chinese students. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(8), 1479-1498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9844-0
• Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<287::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2- A
• Drummond, C., & Fischhoff, B. (2017). Development and validation of the scientific reasoning scale. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 30, 26-38. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.1906
• Eastwood, J. L., Sadler, T. D., Zeidler, D. L., Lewis, A., Amiri, L., & Applebaum, S. (2012). Contextualizing nature of science instruction in socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 34(15), 2289-2315. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.667582
• Erlina, N., Susantini, E., & Wasis. (2018). Common false of student’s scientific reasoning in physics problems. IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1108(2018), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1108/1/012016
• Eskandar, F. A., Bayrami, M., Vahedi, S., & Ansar, V. A. A. (2013). The effect of instructional analogies in interaction with logical thinking ability on achievement and attitude toward chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(4), 566-575. https://doi.org/10.1039/C3RP00036B
• Fah, L. Y. (2009). Logical thinking abilities among form 4 students in the interior division of Sabah, Malaysia. Journal of Science and Mathematics Education in Southeast Asia, 32(2), 161-187.
• Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS, (Third edition). Sage Publications.
• Fiteriani, I., Diani, R., Hamidah, A., & Anwar, C. (2021). Project-based learning through STEM approach: Is it effective to improve students’ creative problemsolving ability and metacognitive skills in physics learning? IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1796(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1796/1/012058
• Global Challenge Insight Report. (2016). The future of jobs (Employment, Skills and Workforce Strategy for the Fourth Industrial Revolution). http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Future_of_Jobs.pdf
• Guey, C. C., Cheng, Y. Y., & Shibata, S. (2010). A triarchal instruction model: integration of principles from Behaviorism, Cognitivism, and Humanism. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 105-118.
• Gulacar, O., Overton, T., & Bowman, C. (2013). A closer look at the relationships between college students’ cognitive abilities and problem solving in stoichiometry. Eurasian Journal of Physics and Chemistry Education, 5(2), 144-163.
• Güler, Z. (2010). The relationship among elementary students? test scores of level determination exam, course achievements, science processing skills and logical thinking skills [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Abant İzzet Baysal University.
• Gustafsson, B., & Ohman, J. (2013). DEQUAL: A tool for investigating deliberative qualities in students’ socioscientific conversations. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 8(2), 319-338. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijese.2013.208a
• Gutierez, S. B. (2015). Integrating socioscientific issues to enhance the bioethical decision making skills of high school students. International Education Studies, 8(1), 142-151. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v8n1p142
• Hacıömeroğlu, E. S., & Hacıömeroğlu, G. (2018). Examining prospective teachers’ logical reasoning ability: The longeot’s test of cognitive development. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 9(3), 413-448. https://doi.org/10.16949/turkbilmat.370326
• Hofstein, A., Eilks, I., & Bybee, R. (2011). Societal issues and the importance for contemporary science education a pedagogical justification and the state of the art in Israel, Germany and the USA. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(6), 1459-1483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9273-9
• Ibrahim, B., Ding, L., Mollohan, K. N., & Stammen, A. (2016). Scientific reasoning: theory evidence coordination in physics-based and non-physics-based tasks. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 20(2), 93-105. https://doi.org/10.1080/10288457.2015.1108570
• Jho, H., Yoon, H. G., & Kim, M. (2014). The relationship of science knowledge, attitude and decision making on socioscientific issues: The case study of students’ debates on a nuclear power plant in Korea. Science & Education, 23(5), 1131-1151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-013-9652-z
• Johnson, M. A., & Lawson, A. E. (1998). What are the relative effects of reasoning ability and prior knowledge on biology achievement in expository and inquiry classes? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(1), 89-103. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199801)35:1<89::AID-TEA6>3.0.CO;2-J
• Kalypso, I., & Constantinou, P. C. (2014). Developing preservice teachers’ evidence based argumentation skills on socioscientific issues. Learning and Instruction, 34, 42-57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.07.004
• Karpudewan, M., & Roth, W. M. (2018). Changes in primary students’ informal reasoning during an environment-related curriculum on socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(3), 401-419. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9787-x
• Khishfe, R. (2014). Explicit nature of science and argumentation instruction in the context of socioscientific issues: An effect on student learning and transfer. International Journal of Science Education, 36(6), 974-1016. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.832004
• Kılıç, D. (2009). The relationship among students’ understanding of genetics concepts, reasoning ability and meaningful learning orientation [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Hacettepe University.
• Kim, M., Anthony, R., & Blades, D. (2014). Decision making through dialogue: A case study of analyzing preservice teachers’ argumentation on socioscientific issues. Research in Science Education, 44(6), 903-926. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165- 014-9407-0
• Kinskey, M., & Zeidler, D. (2021). Elementary preservice teachers’ challenges in designing and implementing socioscientific issues-based lessons. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 32(3), 350-372. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2020.1826079
• Kinslow, A. T., Sadler, T. D., & Nguyen, H. T. (2019). Socioscientific reasoning and environmental literacy in a field-based ecology class. Environmental Education Research, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2018.1442418
• Klosterman, M. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2010). Multilevel assessment of scientific content knowledge gains associated with socioscientific issues based instruction. International Journal of Science Education, 32(8), 1017-1043. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690902894512
• Knight, A. M., & McNeill, K. L. (2015). Comparing students’ individual written and collaborative oral socioscientific arguments. International Journal of Environmental ve Science Education, 10(5), 623-647. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijese.2015.258a
• Koerber, S., Mayer, D., Osterhaus, C., Schwippert, K., & Sodian, B. (2015). The development of scientific thinking in elementary school: A comprehensive inventory. Child Development, 86(1), 327-336. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12298
• Kolstø, S. D. (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientifıc issues. Science Education, 85(3), 291-310. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.1011
• Koray, Ö., & Azar, A. (2008). An analysis of high school students’ problem solving and logical thinking abilities in terms of gender and preferred field. Kastamonu Education Journal, 16(1), 125-136. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/kefdergi/issue/49101/626572
• Ladachart, L., & Ladachart, L. (2021). Preservice biology teachers’ decision-making and informal reasoning about culture-based socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 43(5), 641-671. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.1876958
• Lawson, A. E., & Renner, J. W. (1975). Relationships of science subject matter and developmental levels of learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 12(4), 347-358. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660120405
• Lazonder, A. W., & Janssen, N. (2021). Development and initial validation of a performance-based scientific reasoning test for children. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 68(2021) 100951, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100951
• Lazonder, A. W., Janssen, N., Gijlers, H., & Walraven, A. (2021). Patterns of development in children’s scientific reasoning: results from a three-year longitudinal study. Journal of Cognition and Development, 22(1), 108-124. https://doi.org/10.1080/15248372.2020.1814293
• Lenz, L., & Wicox, M. K. (2012). Issue oriented science: Using socioscientific issues to engage biology students. The American Biology Teacher, 74(8), 551-556. https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2012.74.8.4
• Levinson, R. (2006). Towards a theoretical framework for teaching controversial socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 28(10), 1201- 1224. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600560753
• Lewis, J., & Leach, J. (2006). Discussion of socioscientific issues: The role of science knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 28(11), 1267-1287. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500439348
• Lin, Y. R., & Hung, J. F. (2016). The analysis and reconciliation of students’ rebuttals in argumentation activities. International Journal of Science Education, 38(1), 130- 155. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1134848
• Mahanal, S., Zubaidah, S., Sumiati, I. D., Sari, T. M., & Ismirawati, N. (2019). RICOSRE: A learning model to develop critical thinking skills for students with different academic abilities. International Journal of Instruction, 12(2), 417-434. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12227
• Marczyk, G., DeMatteo, D., & Festinger, D. (2005). Essentials of research design and methodology. John Wiley & Sons.
• Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2005). Primary school science and technology lesson (6th, 7th and 8th grades) curriculum. Ministry of National Education.
• Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2013). Primary education institutions (primary schools and secondary schools) science lesson (3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 grades) curriculum. Ministry of National Education.
• Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2018). Primary and secondary schools science course (3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th grades) curriculum. Ministry of National Education.
• National Research Council. (2012). A Framework for k-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13165
• National Research Council. (2014). Developing assessments for the next generation science standards. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18409
• Newcombe, N. R., Möhring, W., & Frick, A. (2018). How big is many? Development of spatial and numerical magnitude understanding. A. Henik, & W. Fias (Eds), Heterogeneity of function in numerical cognition in (p.157-176). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-811529-9.00009-1
• Nugraha, M. G., Utari, S., Saepuzaman, D., & Nugraha, F. (2018). Redesign of students’ worksheet on basic physics experiment based on students’ scientific process skills analysis in Melde’s law. Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1013(2018), 012038. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1013/1/012038
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD]. (2019). PISA 2018 assessment and analytical framework. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/b25efab8-en
• Osterhaus, C., Koerber, S., & Sodian, B. (2020). The Science-P Reasoning Inventory (SPR-I): measuring emerging scientific-reasoning skills in primary school. International Journal of Science Education, 42(7), 1087-1107. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1748251
• Ottander, K., & Simon, S. (2021). Learning democratic participation? Meaning-making in discussion of socioscientific issues in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 43(12), 1895-1925. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.1946200
• Owens, D. C., Petitt, D. N., Lally, D., & Forbes, C. T. (2020). Cultivating water literacy in STEM education: Undergraduates’ socioscientific reasoning about sociohydrologic issues. Water, 12(10), 2857, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12102857
• Özcan, C., & Gücüm, B. (2020). Comparison of some countries in world scale in science education. Turkish Journal of Educational Studies, 7(2), 208-225. https://doi.org/10.33907/turkjes.637960
• Özcan, C., & Kaptan, F. (2020). Investigation of the studies on socioscientific issues between 2008-2017. Journal of Muallim Rıfat Faculty of Education, 2(1), 16-36.
• Pallant, J. (2017). SPSS kullanma kılavuzu. Çev: Sibel Balcı ve Berat Ahi (2. baskı), Anı Yayıncılık.
• Pelch, M. A., & McConnell, D. A. (2017). How does adding an emphasis on socioscientific issues influence student attitudes about science, its relevance, and their interpretations of sustainability?. Journal of Geoscience Education, 65(2), 203-214. https://doi.org/10.5408/16-173.1
• Presley, M. L., Sickel, A. J., Muslu, N., Merle-Johnson, D. B., Witzig, S. B., İzci, K., & Sadler, T. D. (2013). A framework for socioscientifıc issues based education. Science Educator, 22(1), 26-32.
• Proudfoot, D. E., & Kebritchi, M. (2017). Scenario-based e learning and stem education: A qualitative study exploring the perspectives of educators. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education, 5(1), 7-18. https://doi.org/10.5937/IJCRSEE1701007P
• Ramirez-Villarin, L. J. (2020). The relationship between place attachment and socioscientific reasoning among high school students in puerto rico after negotiation with local and foreign socioscientific issues [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. College of Engineering and Science of Florida Institute of Technology.
• Rebello, C. M., Barrow, L. H., & Rebello, N. S. (2013). Effects of argumentation scaffolds on student performance on conceptual physics problems. In Physics Education Conference Proceedings (pp. 293-296).
• Roadrangka, V., Yeany, R. H., & Padilla, M. J. (1983, April). The construction and validation of group assessment of logical thinking (GALT). In 56th Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Dallas, Texas.
• Romine, W. L., Sadler, T. D., Dauer, J. M., & Kinslow, A. (2020). Measurement of socioscientific reasoning (SSR) and exploration of SSR as a progression of competencies. International Journal of Science Education, 42(18), 2981-3002. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1849853
• Saad, M. I. M., Baharom, S., & Mokhsein, S. E. (2017). Scientific reasoning skills based on socioscientific issues in the biology subject. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 4(3), 13-18. https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2017.03.003
• Sadler, T. D. (2009). Situated learning in science education: Socioscientific issues as context for practice. Journal of Studies in Science Education, 45(1), 1-42. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260802681839
• Sadler, T. D., Foulk, J. A., & Friedrichsen, P. J. (2017). Evolution of a model for socioscientific issue teaching and learning. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 5(2), 75-87. https://doi.org/10.18404/ijemst.55999
• Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2009). Scientific literacy, PISA, and socioscientific discourse: Assessment for progressive aims of science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(8), 909-921. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20327
• Salami, I. A. (2021). Primary mathematics operations for logical thinking and socioeconomic development. International Journal of New Trends in Arts, Sports & Science Education (IJTASE), 10(5), 287-296.
• Senemoğlu, N. (2011). From developmental learning and teaching theory to practice. Gazi Press.
• Sert-Çıbık, A. (2006). The effect of project based learning approach to the logical thinking ability and attitude of students in science lesson [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Çukurova University.
• Shea, N. A., Duncan, R. G., & Stephenson, C. (2015). A tripart model for genetics literacy: Exploring undergraduate student reasoning about authentic genetics dilemmas. Research in Science Education, 45, 485-507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-014-9433-y
• Soylu H. (2006). The effect of gender and reasoning ability on the students’ understanding of ecological concepts and attitude towards science [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Middle East Technical University.
• Stefanova, Y., Minevska, M., & Evtimova, S. (2010). Scientific literacy: Problems of science education in Bulgarian school. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 19, 113-118.
• Suephatthima, B., & Faikhamta, C. (2018). Developing students’ argument skills using socioscientific issues in a learning unit on the fossil fuel industry and its products. Science Education International, 29(3), 137-148. https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v29.i3.2
• Tajudin, N. M., & Chinnappan, M. (2015). Exploring relationship between scientific reasoning skills and mathematics problem solving. In M. Marshman, V. Geiger, & A. Bennison (Eds.), Mathematics education in the margins. Proceedings of the 38th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, (pp. 603-610). Sunshine Coast: MERGA.
• Tomas, L., & Ritchie, S. M. (2015). The challenge of evaluating students’ scientific literacy in a writing to learn context. Research in Science Education, 45, 41-58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-014-9412-3
• Topçu, M. S. (2015). Socioscientific issues and their teaching. Pegem Akademi.
• Tsai, C. Y. (2018). The effect of online argumentation of socioscientific issues on students’ scientific competencies and sustainability attitudes. Computers & Education, 116, 14-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.08.009
• Tsai, C. Y., & Jack, B. M. (2019). Antecedent factors influencing ethic-related social and socioscientific learning enjoyment. International Journal of Science Education. 41(9), 1139-1158. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1595215.
• Vanderstoep, S. W., & Johnston, D. D. (2009). Research methods for everyday life: Blending qualitative and quantitative approaches. Jossey-Bass Publishers.
• Woolley, J. S., Deal, A. M., Green, J., Hathenbruck, F., Kurtz, S. A., Park, T. K. H., Pollock, S. V., Transtrum, M. B., & Jensen, J. L. (2018). Undergraduate students demonstrate common false scientific reasoning strategies. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 27(2018), 101-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2017.12.004
• World Health Organization [WHO]. (2005). Modern food biotechnology, human health and development: An evidence- based study. http://www.who.int/foodsafety/publications/modern-food biotechnology/en/
• Yahaya, J. M., Nurulazam, A., & Karpudewan, M. (2016). College students’ attitudes towards sexually themed science content: A socioscientific issues approach to resolution. International Journal of Science Education, 38(7), 1174-1196. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1174349
• Yazıcıoğlu, Ö., & Pektaş, M. (2019). A comparison of the middle school science programmes in Turkey, Singapore and Kazakhstan. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 11(2), 143-150.
• Yenilmez A., Sungur S., & Tekkaya C., (2006). Students’ achievement in relation to reasoning ability, prior knowledge and gender. Research in Science & Technological Education, 24(1), 129-138. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635140500485498
• Zeidler, D. L. (2014). Socioscientific issues as a curriculum emphasis: Theory, research and practice. In: N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 697-726). Routledge.
• Zeidler, D. L., Herman, B. C., & Sadler, T. D. (2019). New directions in socioscientific issues research. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(11), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0008-7
• Zeidler, D. L., & Nichols, B. H. (2009). Socioscientific issues: Theory and practice. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(2), 49-58. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173684
• Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Applebaum, S., & Callahan, B. E. (2009). Advancing reflective judgment through socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 74-101. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20281
• Zo’bi, A. S. (2014). The effect of using socioscientific issues approach in teaching environmental issues on improving the students’ ability of making appropriate decisions towards these issues. International Education Studies, 7(8), 113-123. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v7n8p113