Bu çalışmanın amacı, bugüne kadar önerilen sosyobilimsel konuların öğretim modellerini inceleyerek sosyobilimsel konuların öğretimi için daha kapsayıcı ve bütünsel bir pedagojik model ortaya konulmasıdır. Bu doğrultuda öncelikle sosyobilimsel konuların doğası, fen eğitimindeki yeri, literatürde yer alan öğretim modelleri ve sosyobilimsel konuların öğretimini etkileyen faktörler incelenerek öğretim için kullanılabilecek pedagojik bir model önerisi sunulmuştur. Ortaya konulan bu model, etkili bir sosyobilimsel konular öğretim sürecine dair öğretmenin sahip olması gereken bilgi alanlarını ve bu alanlara dair yeterlilikleri tanımlamaktadır. Bu model ve bileşenleri, bu alanda öğretmen yeterliliklerini ortaya koymayı amaçlayan araştırmalarda, bu alana dair enstrüman geliştirme çalışmalarında, öğretmenlerin sosyobilimsel konulardaki yeterliliklerinin zamanla nasıl değiştiğini gözlemleme süreçlerinde kullanılabilir.
The aim of this study is to suggest a more comprehensive and holistic pedagogical model for teaching socioscientific issues by examining various teaching models to date. In this respect, firstly, the nature of socioscientific issues, in science education, teaching models in the literature, and the factors affecting socioscientific issues teaching were examined, and then a pedagogical model was presented that could be used in socioscientific issues teaching. This presented model describes the domain of knowledge and competencies required by the teacher for an effective socioscientific issues teaching. This model and its components can be used in examining teacher competencies for socioscientific issues teaching, in instrument development studies in this field, and in the process of observing how teachers’ socioscientific issues teaching competencies change over time.
AAAS. (1989). Project 2061: Science for all Americans. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Aikenhead, G. S. (2006). Science education for everyday life: Evidence-based practice. Teachers College Press.
Aikenhead, G. S. (1992). The integration of STS into science education. Theory into Practice, 31(1), 27- 35.
Albe, V. (2008). Students’ positions and considerations of scientific evidence about a controversial socioscientific issue. Science & Education, 17(8-9), 805-827.
Aydın, S., & Boz, Y. (2012). Fen öğretmen eğitiminde pedagojik alan bilgisi araştırmalarının derlenmesi: Türkiye örneği. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 12, 479-505.
Barab, S. A., Sadler, T. D., Heiselt, C., Hickey, D., & Zuiker, S. (2007). Relating narrative, inquiry, and inscriptions: Supporting consequential play. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(1), 59-82.
Barrett, S. E., & Nieswandt, M. (2010). Teaching about ethics through socioscientific issues in physics and chemistry: Teacher candidates’ beliefs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 380–401. Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (1994). Respect for autonomy, nonmaleficence, beneficence, justice. Beuchamp T. L., & Childress J. F. (Eds), Principles of biomedical ethics (4th ed.) (pp.120-394). New York: Oxford University Press.
Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Understandings of the nature of science and decision making on science and technology based issues. Science Education, 87(3), 352-377.
Bennett, J., & Lubben, F. (2006). Context-based chemistry: The Salters approach. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 999-1015.
Dawson, V. (2001). Addressing controversial issues in secondary school science. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 47(4), 38.
Dawson, V. M., & Venville, G. (2010). Teaching strategies for developing students’ argumentation skills about socioscientific issues in high school genetics. Research in Science Education, 40(2), 133-148.
Day, S. P., & Bryce, T. G. (2011). Does the discussion of socio- scientific issues require a paradigm shift in science teachers’ thinking? International Journal of Science Education, 33(12), 1675-1702.
Dori, Y. J., Tal, R., & Tsaushu, M. (2003). Teaching biotechnology through case studies-can we improve higher order thinking skills of nonscience majors? Science Education, 87, 767-793. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10081
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.
Eilks, I. (2010, September). Making chemistry teaching relevant and promoting scientific literacy by focusing on authentic and controversial socio-scientific issues. Presentation at the annual meeting of the society for didactics in chemistry and physics, Potsdam, Germany.
Ekborg, M., Ottander, C., Silfver, E., & Simon, S. (2013). Teachers’ experience of working with socio-scientific issues: A large scale and in depth study. Research in Science Education, 43(2), 599- 617.
Evagorou, M., & Osborne, J. (2013). Exploring young students’ collaborative argumentation within a socioscientific issue. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(2), 209-237.
Fleming, R. (1986). Adolescent reasoning in socio-scientific issues, part I: Social cognition. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23(8), 677-687.
France, B., Mora, H. A., & Bay, J. L. (2012). Changing Perspectives: Exploring a pedagogy to examine other perspectives about stem cell research. International Journal of Science Education, 34(5), 803-824.
Friedrichsen, P. J., Sadler, T. D., Graham, K., & Brown, P. (2016). Design of a socio-scientific issue curriculum unit: Antibiotic resistance, natural selection, and modeling. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 7(1).
Grace, M. (2009). Developing high quality decision-Making discussions about biological conservation in a normal classroom setting. International Journal of Science Education, 31(4), 551-570.
Gray, D. S., & Bryce, T. (2006). Socio-scientific issues in science education: implications for the professional development of teachers. Cambridge Journal of Education, 36(2), 171-192.
Keefer, M. W. (2003). Moral reasoning and case-based approaches to ethical instruction in science. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.
Khishfe, R. (2012). Nature of science and decision-making. International Journal of Science Education, 34(1), 67-100.
Klosterman, M. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2010). Multi-level Assessment of Scientific Content Knowledge Gains Associated with Socioscientific Issues-based Instruction. International Journal of Science Education, 32(8), 1017-1043.
Kolstø, S. (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientific issues. Science Education, 85, 291–310.
Krajcik, J., McNeill, K. L., & Reiser, B. J. (2008). Learning-goals- driven design model: Developing curriculum materials that align with national standards and incorporate project-based pedagogy. Science Education, 92(1), 1-32.
Lee, H., & Witz, K. G. (2009). Science teachers’ inspiration for teaching socio-scientific issues: Disconnection with reform efforts. International Journal of Science Education, 31(7), 931- 960.
Lee, H., Chang, H., Choi, K., Kim, S. W., & Zeidler, D. L. (2012). Developing character and values for global citizens: Analysis of pre-service science teachers’ moral reasoning on socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 34(6), 925- 953.
Lee, H., Yoo, J., Choi, K., Kim, S. W., Krajcik, J., Herman, B. C., & Zeidler, D. L. (2013). Socioscientific issues as a vehicle for promoting character and values for global citizens. International Journal of Science Education, 35(12), 2079-2113.
Lee, M. K., & Erdogan, I. (2007). The effect of science–technology– society teaching on students’ attitudes toward science and certain aspects of creativity. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1315-1327.
Levinson, R., & Turner, S. (2001). Valuable lessons. London, UK: The Wellcome Trust.
Levinson, R. (2006) Towards a theoretical framework for teaching controversial socio-scientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 28(10), 1201–1224.
Lewis, J., & Leach, J. (2006). Discussion of socio-scientific issues: The role of science knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 28(11), 1267-1287.
Liu, S. Y., Lin, C. S., & Tsai, C. C. (2011). College students’ scientific epistemological views and thinking patterns in socioscientific decision making. Science Education, 95(3), 497-517.
Mthethwa-Kunene, E., Onwu, G. O., & de Villiers, R. (2015). Exploring biology teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge in the teaching of genetics in Swaziland science classrooms. International Journal of Science Education, 37(7), 1140-1165.
National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science eductaion standards. Washington, D. C.: National Academy Press.
Nielsen, J. A. (2012). Arguing from Nature: The role of ‘nature’in students’ argumentations on a socio-scientific issue. Interna- tional Journal of Science Education, 34(5), 723-744. Pedretti, E. G., Bencze, L., Hewitt, J., Romkey, L., & Jivraj, A. (2008). Promoting issues-based STSE perspectives in science teacher education: Problems of identity and ideology. Science & Education, 17(8), 941-960.
Presley, M. L., Sickel, A. J., Muslu, N., Merle-Johnson, D., Witzig, S. B., Izci, K., & Sadler, T. D. (2013). A framework for socio- scientific issues based education. Science Educator, 22(1), 26–32.
Ratcliffe, M. (1997). Pupil decision-making about socioscientific issues within the science curriculum. International Journal of Science Education, 19(2), 167–182.
Ratcliffe, M., & Grace, M. (2003). Science Education for Citizenship. Teaching Socio-Scientific Issues. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Reiss, M. J. (1999). Teaching ethics in science. Studies in Science Education, 34(1), 115-140.
Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. SK Abell & NG Lederman (Eds.). Handbook of research on science education (pp. 729-780).
Rollnick, M., Bennett, J., Rhemtula, M., Dharsey, N., & Ndlovu, T. (2008). The place of subject matter knowledge in pedagogical content knowledge: A case study of South African teachers teaching the amount of substance and chemical equilibrium. International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1365-1387.
Rose, S. L., & Barton, A. C. (2012). Should great lakes city build a new power plant? How youth navigate socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(5), 541-567.
Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 4, 513-536.
Sadler, T. D. (2009). Situated learning in science education: socio- scientific issues as contexts for practice. Studies in Science Education, 45(1), 1-42.
Sadler, T. D. (2011). Socio-scientific issues-based education: What we know about science education in the context of SSI. In Troy D. Sadler (Eds), Socio-scientific Issues in the Classroom (pp. 355-369). Springer Netherlands.
Sadler, T. D., & Donnelly, L. A. (2006). Socioscientific argumentation: The effects of content knowledge and morality. International Journal of Science Education, 28(12), 1463-1488.
Sadler, T. D., & Fowler, S. R. (2006). A threshold model of content knowledge transfer for socioscientific argumentation. Science Education, 90(6), 986-1004.
Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 112-138.
Sadler, T. D., Amirshokoohi, A., Kazempour, M., & Allspaw, K. M. (2006). Socioscience and ethics in science classrooms: Teacher perspectives and strategies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 353-376.
Sadler, T. D., Barab, S. A., & Scott, B. (2007). What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry?. Research in Science Education, 37(4), 371-391.
Sadler, T. D., Foulk, J. A., & Friedrichsen, P. J. (2017). Evolution of a model for socio-scientific issue teaching and learning. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 5(2), 75-87
Sadler, T. D., Romine, W. L., & Topçu, M. S. (2016). Learning science content through socio-scientific issues-based instruction: a multi-level assessment study. International Journal of Science Education, 38(10), 1622-1635.
Sadler, T., & Zeidler, D. (2004). The morality of socio-scientific issues: Construal and resolution of genetic engineering dilemmas. Science Education, 88, 4–27.
Sadler, T., Friedrichsen, P., Graham, K., Foulk, J., Tang, N., & Menon D. (April, 2015) Socio-scientific issue based education for three dimensional learning: Derivation of instructional model. NARST Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL.
Saunders, K. J., & Rennie, L. J. (2013). A pedagogical model for ethical inquiry into socioscientific issues in science. Research in Science Education, 43(1), 253-274.
Settelmaier, E. (2003, March). Dilemmas with dilemmas: Exploring the suitability of dilemma stories as a wayof addressing ethical issues in science education. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia, PA.
Shamos, M. H. (1995). The myth of scientific literacy. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
Simonneaux, L. (2001). Role play or debate to promote students’ argumentation and justification on an issue in animal transgenesis. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 903 – 927.
Tal, T., & Kedmi, Y. (2006). Teaching socioscientific issues: Classroom culture and students’ performances. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 1(4), 615-644.
Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı (2013). Biyoloji dersi (9, 10, 11 ve 12. sınıflar) öğretim programı. Ankara: Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı.
Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı (2017). Biyoloji Dersi (9, 10, 11 ve 12. sınıflar) öğretim programı. Ankara: Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı.
Venville, G. J., & Dawson, V. M. (2010). The impact of a classroom intervention on grade 10 students’ argumentation skills, informal reasoning, and conceptual understanding of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(8), 952- 977.
Walker, K. A., & Zeidler, D. L. (2007). Promoting discourse about socioscientific issues through scaffolded inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1387-1410. Wongsri, P., & Nuangchalerm, P. (2010). Learning Outcomes between Socioscientific Issues-Based Learning and Conventional Learning Activities. Journal of Social Science, 6(2), 240-243.
Yadav, A., Lundeberg, M., DeSchryver, M., & Dirkin, K. (2007). Teaching science with case studies: A national survey of faculty perceptions of the benefits and challenges of using cases. Journal of College Science Teaching, 37(1), 34.
Yager, R. (1998). STS challenges for accomplishing educational reform: The need for solving learning problems. Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society, 18, 315–326.
Zeidler, D. L. (2001). Participating in program development: Standard F. In D. Siebert & W. McIntosh (Eds.), College pathways to the science education standards (pp. 18-22). Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Press.
Zeidler, D. L. (2014). Socioscientific Issues as a Curriculum Emphasis. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education Vol II (pp. 697-726). New York: Routhledge.
Zeidler, D. L., & Keefer, M. (2003). The role of moral reasoning and the status of socioscientific issues in science education: Philosophical, psychological and pedagogical considerations. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Zeidler, D. L., Applebaum, S. M., & Sadler, T. D. (2011). Enacting a socioscientific issues classroom: Transformative transformations. In T. D. Sadler (Eds), Socio-scientific issues in the classroom (pp. 277-305). Netherlands: Springer.
Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Applebaum, S., & Callahan, B. E. (2009a). Advancing reflective judgment through socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 74-101.
Zeidler, D. L., & Nichols, B. H. (2009b). Socioscientific issues: Theory and practice. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(2), 49-58.
Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education, 89(3), 357-377.
Zeidler, D. L., Walker, K. A., Ackett, W. A., & Simmons, M. L. (2002). Tangled up in views: Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific dilemmas. Science Education, 86(3), 343-367.
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35-62.