Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Preservice Science Teachers’ Epistemological Beliefs and Informal Reasoning Regarding Socioscientific Issues

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study investigated preservice elementary science teachers’ (PSTs) informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues (SSI), their epistemological beliefs, and the relationship between informal reasoning and epistemological beliefs. From several SSIs, nuclear power usage was selected for this study. A total of 647 Turkish PSTs enrolled in three large universities in Turkey completed the open-ended questionnaire, which assessed the participants’ informal reasoning about the target SSI, and Schommer’s (1990) Epistemological Questionnaire. The participants’ epistemological beliefs were assessed quantitatively and their informal reasoning was assessed both qualitatively and quantitatively. The findings revealed that PSTs preferred to generate evidence-based arguments rather than intuitive-based arguments; however, they failed to generate quality evidence and present different types of evidence to support their claims. Furthermore, among the reasoning quality indicators, PSTs mostly generated supportive argument construction. Regarding the use of reasoning modes, types of risk arguments and political-oriented arguments emerged as the new reasoning modes. The study demonstrated that the PSTs had different epistemological beliefs in terms of innate ability, omniscient authority, certain knowledge, and quick learning. Correlational analyses revealed that there was a strong negative correlation between the PSTs’ certain knowledge and counterargument construction, and there were negative correlations between the PSTs’ innate ability, certain knowledge, and quick learning dimensions of epistemological beliefs and their total argument construction. This study has implications for both science teacher education and the practice of science education. For example, PST teacher education programs should give sufficient importance to training teachers that are skillful and knowledgeable regarding SSIs. To achieve this, specific SSI-related courses should form part of science teacher education programs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahearne, J. F. (2000). Intergenerational issues regarding nuclear power, nuclear waste, and nuclear weapons. Risk Analysis, 20(6), 763–770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aini, M. S., Fakhru’l-Razi, A., Laily, H. P., & Jariah, M. (2003). Environmental concerns, knowledge and practices gap among Malaysian teachers. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 4(4), 305–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akcay, B. (2009). The case of nuclear energy in Turkey: from Chernobyl to Akkuyu nuclear power plant. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning and Policy, 4(4), 347–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albe, V. (2008). When scientific knowledge, daily life experience, epistemological and social considerations intersect: students’ argumentation in group discussions on a socioscientific issue. Research in Science Education, 38, 67–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armaroli, N., & Balzani, V. (2007). The future of energy supply: challenges and opportunities. Angewandte Chemie International Edition, 46, 52–66. doi:10.1002/anie.200602373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Assessment, Selection and Placement Center. (2012). Number of students and teaching stuff according to educational institutions for the 2011–2012 academic year. Ankara: OSYM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, P., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: designing for learning from the web with KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 797–817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bickerstaff, K., Lorenzoni, I., Pidgeon, N. F., Poortinga, W., & Simmons, P. (2008). Reframing nuclear power in the UK energy debate: nuclear power, climate change mitigation and radioactive waste. Public Understanding of Science, 17, 145–169. doi:10.1177/0963662506066719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bostrom, A., Morgan, M. G., Fischhoff, B., & Read, D. (1994). What do people know about global climate change? 1. Mental models. Risk Analysis, 14(6), 959–970.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cerbin, B. (1988, April). The nature and development of informal reasoning skills in college students. Paper presented at the National Institute on Issues in Teaching and Learning, Chicago, IL.

  • Chan, K. W., & Elliott, R. G. (2000). Exploratory study of epistemological beliefs of Hong Kong teacher education students: resolving conceptual and empirical issues. Asia Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 28, 225–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christenson, N., Rundgren, S. N. C., & Höglund, H. O. (2012). Using the SEE-SEP model to analyze upper secondary students’ use of supporting reasons in arguing socioscientific issues. Journal of Science Education Technology, 21, 342–352. doi:10.1007/s10956-011-9328-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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. doi:10.1080/09500690801992870.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Groot, J. I., Steg, L., & Poortinga, W. (2013). Values, perceived risks and benefits, and acceptability of nuclear energy. Risk Analysis, 33(2), 307–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erdogdu, E. (2007). Nuclear power in open energy markets: a case study of Turkey. Energy Policy, 35(5), 3061–3073.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erturk, F., Akkoyunlu, A., & Varinca, K. B. (2006). Energy production and environmental impacts (report no: 14). Istanbul: Tasam Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Environmental Agency. (2008). Indicator: EN13 nuclear energy and waste production. Retrieved from http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/nuclear-energy-and-waste-production/nuclear-energy-and-waste-production-1

  • Evans, J. S. B. T. (2002). Logic and human reasoning: an assessment of the deduction paradigm. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 978–996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, D. S., & Bryce, T. (2006). Socioscientific issues in science education: implications for the professional development of teachers. Cambridge Journal of Education, 36(2), 171–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, J. C., Lee, C. T. P., Kao, S. F., Chen, R. Y., Ieong, M. C., Chang, H. L., & Chang, P. W. (2014). Perceived environmental and health risks of nuclear energy in Taiwan after Fukushima nuclear disaster. Environment International, 73, 295–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofer, B. K. (2001). Personal epistemology research: implications for learning and teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology Review, 13(4), 353–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67(1), 88–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jho, H., Yoon, H. G., & Kim, M. (2013). The relationship of science knowledge, attitude and decision making on socio-scientific issues: the case study of students’ debates on a nuclear power plant in Korea. Science & Education , 23(5), 1131–1151. doi:10.1007/s11191-013-9652-z.

  • Kardash, C. M., & Scholes, R. J. (1996). Effects of pre-existing beliefs, epistemological beliefs, and need for cognition on interpretation of controversial issues. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 260–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khalid, T. (2000). Pre-service teachers’ misconceptions regarding three environmental issues. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 6(1), 102–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilinc, A., Boyes, E., & Stanisstreet, M. (2013). Exploring students’ ideas about risks and benefits of nuclear power using risk perception theories. Journal of Science Education Technology, 22, 252–266. doi:10.1007/s10956-012-9390-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitchener, K. S. (1983). Cognition, metacognition, and epistemic cognition. Human Development, 26, 222–232. doi:10.1159/000272885.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolstø, S. D., Bungum, B., Arnesen, E., Isnes, A., Kristensen, T., Mathiaassen, K., Mestad, I., Quale, A., Vedvik-Tonning, A. S., & Ulvik, M. (2006). Science students’ critical examination of scientific information related to socioscientific issues. Wiley, retrieved from www.interscience.wiley.com.

  • Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77(3), 319–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, H., & Witz, K. G. (2009). Science teachers’ inspiration for teaching socioscientific issues: disconnection with reform efforts. International Journal of Science Education, 31(7), 931–960.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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. doi:10.1080/09500693.2011.625505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Means, M. L., & Voss, J. F. (1996). Who reasons well? Two studies of informal reasoning of different grade, ability, and knowledge levels. Cognition and Instruction, 14(2), 139–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of National Education. (2013). Elementary science program for 3 th - 8 th grade students. Retrieved from http://ttkb.meb.gov.tr/www/guncellenen-ogretim-programlari-ve-kurul-kararlari/icerik/150

  • Mocan, H., Bozkaya, H., Mocan, Z., & Furtun, E. M. (1990). Changing incidence of anencephaly in the eastern Black Sea region of Turkey and Chernobyl. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, 4(3), 264–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994–1020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patronis, T., Potari, D., & Spiliotopoulou, V. (1999). Students’ argumentation in decision-making on a socioscientific issue: implications for teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 745–754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pe’er, S., Goldman, D., & Yavetz, B. (2007). Environmental literacy in teacher training: attitudes, knowledge, and environmental behavior of beginning students. The Journal of Environmental Education, 39(1), 45–59. doi:10.3200/JOEE.39.1.45-59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, D. N. (1985). Post-primary education has little impact upon informal reasoning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 562–571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosa, E. A., Machlis, G. E., & Keating, K. M. (1988). Energy and society. Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 149–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding SSI: a critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T. D., & Chambers, F. W. (2004). Student conceptualizations of the nature of science in response to a socioscientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 387–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). The significance of content knowledge for informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: applying genetics knowledge to genetic engineering issues. Wiley Online Library. doi:10.1002/sce.20023.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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. doi:10.1002/tea.20042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schommer, M. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(3), 498–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schommer, M. (1993). Epistemological development and academic performance among secondary students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(3), 406–411.

  • Schommer, M. (1994). An emerging conceptualization of epistemological beliefs and their role in learning. In R. Garner & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Beliefs about text and instruction with text (pp. 25–40). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schommer, M., Crouse, A., & Rhodes, N. (1992). Epistemological beliefs and mathematical text comprehension: believing it is simple does not make it so. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(4), 435–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schommer-Aikins, M. (2002). An evolving theoretical framework for an epistemological belief system. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology: the psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 103–118). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

  • Schommer-Aikins, M., & Hutter, R. (2002). Epistemological beliefs and thinking about everyday controversial issues. The Journal of Psychology, 136(1), 5–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Short, J. F., Jr. (1984). The social fabric of risk: towards the social transformation of risk analysis. American Sociological Review, 49(6), 711–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simmons, M. L., & Zeidler, D. L. (2003). Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific issues. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education (pp. 81–94). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

  • Slovic, P., Flynn, J. H., & Layman, M. (1991). Perceived risk, trust, and the politics of nuclear waste. Science, 254(5038), 1603–1607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stamm, K. R., Clark, F., & Eblacas, P. R. (2000). Mass communication and public understanding of environmental problems: the case of global warming. Public Understanding of Science, 9, 219–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steg, L., & Vleck, C. (2009). Encouraging pro-environmental behavior: an integrative review and research agenda. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29, 309–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern, P. C. (1999). Information, incentives, and proenvironmental consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Policy, 22, 461–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Topcu, M. S., & Yilmaz-Tuzun, O. (2006). The effects of self-efficacy and epistemological world views on preservice science teachers’ epistemological beliefs. Paper presented at the 8th International Conference on Education, Athens, Greece

  • Topcu, M. S., Sadler, T. D., & Yilmaz-Tuzun, O. (2010). Pre-service science teachers’ informal reasoning about socioscientific issues: the influence of issue context. International Journal of Science Education, 32(18), 2475–2495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder: Westview.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuncay, B., Yilmaz-Tuzun, O., & Tuncer-Teksoz, G. (2012). Moral reasoning patterns and influential factors in the context of environmental problems. Environmental Education Research, 18(4), 485–505. doi:10.1080/13504622.2011.630576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Union of Chambers of Turkish Engineers and Architects. (2006). Energy report. Retrieved from http://www.tmmob.org.tr/resimler/ekler/90f2aca5c640289_ek.pdf.

  • Wu, Y. T., & Tsai, C. C. (2007). High school students’ informal reasoning on a socioscientific issue: qualitative and quantitative analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 29(9), 1163–1187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, Y. T., & Tsai, C. C. (2011). High school students’ informal reasoning regarding a socioscientific issue, with relation to scientific epistemological beliefs and cognitive structures. International Journal of Science Education, 33(3), 371–400. doi:10.1080/09500690903505661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, F. Y., & Anderson, O. R. (2003). Senior high school students’ preference and reasoning modes about nuclear energy use. Journal of Science Education, 25(2), 221–224. doi:10.1080/09500690210126739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yilmaz-Tuzun, O., & Topcu, M. S. (2008). Relationships among pre-service science teachers’ epistemological beliefs, epistemological world views, and self-efficacy beliefs. International Journal of Science Education, 30(1), 65–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoshiko, M. (1997). Epistemological beliefs and language learning beliefs: what do language learners believe about their learning? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.

  • 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, 357–377. doi:10.1002/sce.20048.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zembal-Saul, C., Munford, D., Crawford, B., Friedrichsen, P., & Land, S. (2002). Scaffolding preservice science teachers’ evidence-based arguments during an investigation of natural selection. Research in Science Education, 32, 437–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Elementary Education, Faculty of Education, Middle East Technical University, EFA-37, 06800, Ankara, Turkey

    Nilay Ozturk & Ozgul Yilmaz-Tuzun

Authors
  1. Nilay Ozturk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ozgul Yilmaz-Tuzun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nilay Ozturk.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ozturk, N., Yilmaz-Tuzun, O. Preservice Science Teachers’ Epistemological Beliefs and Informal Reasoning Regarding Socioscientific Issues. Res Sci Educ 47, 1275–1304 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9548-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9548-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation