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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Assessment, Selection and Placement Center. (2012). Number of students and teaching stuff according to educational institutions for the 2011–2012 academic year. Ankara: OSYM.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Erdogdu, E. (2007). Nuclear power in open energy markets: a case study of Turkey. Energy Policy, 35(5), 3061–3073.
Erturk, F., Akkoyunlu, A., & Varinca, K. B. (2006). Energy production and environmental impacts (report no: 14). Istanbul: Tasam Press.
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.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine.
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.
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.
Hofer, B. K. (2001). Personal epistemology research: implications for learning and teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology Review, 13(4), 353–383.
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.
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.
Khalid, T. (2000). Pre-service teachers’ misconceptions regarding three environmental issues. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 6(1), 102–120.
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.
Kitchener, K. S. (1983). Cognition, metacognition, and epistemic cognition. Human Development, 26, 222–232. doi:10.1159/000272885.
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.
Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77(3), 319–337.
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.
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.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park: Sage.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Beverly Hills: Sage.
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.
Perkins, D. N. (1985). Post-primary education has little impact upon informal reasoning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 562–571.
Rosa, E. A., Machlis, G. E., & Keating, K. M. (1988). Energy and society. Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 149–172.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Schommer, M. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(3), 498–504.
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.
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.
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.
Short, J. F., Jr. (1984). The social fabric of risk: towards the social transformation of risk analysis. American Sociological Review, 49(6), 711–725.
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.
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.
Steg, L., & Vleck, C. (2009). Encouraging pro-environmental behavior: an integrative review and research agenda. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29, 309–317.
Stern, P. C. (1999). Information, incentives, and proenvironmental consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Policy, 22, 461–478.
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.
Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder: Westview.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
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
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9548-4