| Abstract |
Literature review. Socioscientific Issues (SSI) are controversial issues rooted in science (e.g. Sadler & Zeidler, 2005) and usually in the knowledge related to frontiers of science (e.g. Ratcliffe & Grace, 2003) while their solutions are shaped by social, economic, political, and ethical concerns.
The value of SSI- based teaching in science courses is widely recognized (e.g. Sadler & Zeidler, 2005). SSI approaches have been argued to support students’ science learning as well as to serve as effective contexts for understanding aspects of the nature of science (e.g. Karisan & Zeidler, 2017; Sadler et al., 2007). Educators have additionally argued the use of SSI in terms of their potential to foster students’ argumentation and reasoning skills (e.g. Dawson & Venville, 2010; Zohar & Nemet, 2002). By discussing SSI, students form their own arguments, look for evidence, evaluate the available claims and try to balance the scientific and the social aspects of an issue. In this way, they gain knowledge and skills to make informed decisions, participate in public debates and take informed sociopolitical actions. All the aforementioned competencies are conceived to be necessary for students, as future citizens, in order to be able to deal with the social challenges and inequalities (e.g. Bencze et al., 2020).
However, literature review revealed that teachers face difficulties regarding the implementation of SSI – based teaching (e.g. Lee & Yang, 2017) such as a. the limited content knowledge especially in case of cutting – edge research topics, b. the limited pedagogical content knowledge regarding SSI negotiation in science courses and c. the lack of teaching materials, updated curriculums and time. Despite of teachers’ difficulties, the research in SSI field is focused mainly on students. Empirical studies on the teaching practices teachers’ use and on the way they plan and implement their SSI instructions are limited (e.g. Evagorou & Dillon, 2020; Hancock et al., 2019; Nielsen, 2020; Saunders & Rennie, 2013). The limited empirical research on how teachers use SSI approaches in science course is even less when referring to primary school teachers and to SSIs derived from contemporary scientific topics and technological innovations (e.g. Espeja & Couso, 2020; Evagorou & Puig, 2017; Nielsen et al. al., 2020).
Aim of the study. Based on the above, the present study focuses on pre – service primary teachers’ education in the negotiation of SSI that arise from cutting – edge research topics in science courses through the design and development of SSI teaching scenarios about Nanotechnology applications. In particular, we explore the types of SSI teaching scenarios pre – service primary teachers (PPTs) develop. The type of the SSI teaching scenario is determined by a. the subject areas included, b. the objectives of the activities, c. the teaching practices used and d. the type of incorporated questions. In particular, the research question that guides the present study is the following:
Which are the types of teaching scenarios pre – service primary teachers design and develop for the negotiation of the SSIs that arise from cutting – edge research topics such as nanotechnology?
Research design. The study was conducted within the framework of the Model of Educational Reconstruction for Teacher Education (Komorek & Kattmann, 2008; Van Dijk & Kattmann, 2007). Initially, in the context of the empirical study, a pilot study with 12 PPTs took place. During the pilot study, the participants, divided in groups of three, designed and developed teaching material for the negotiation of the SSIs that arise from the use of plastics and micro – plastics in daily life. Data analysis from the pilot study provided us with insights into the features of the SSI instructions PPTs develop while the results gave us the necessary feedback for the design of the main empirical study.
During the main study, 6 PPTs designed and developed teaching scenarios for the negotiation of the SSIs that arise from Nanotechnology applications. The main study took place through three phases. In phase Α (6 meetings), PPTs got familiar with a. the scientific content, the social implications and the teaching approach of Nanotechnology and b. with the SSI - based teaching approach in science education. In phase Β (8 meetings with each participant), PPTs designed and developed their SSI teaching scenario. Finally, in phase C (4 meetings for each SSI teaching scenario), the implementation of the developed SSI teaching materials took place.
Data collection & analysis. During the main study, data was collected through a. an initial interview, b. the audio recordings of phases A and B, c. a semi – structured interview after the development of the SSI teaching materials and d. a semi – structured final interview after the implementation of the SSI teaching materials. In order to explore the types of the SSI teaching scenarios PPTs design and develop, the data was analyzed based on four different axes:
1. The subject areas included in the teaching scenarios
2. The objectives of the developed activities
3. The adopted teaching practices in the lesson plans
4. The type of incorporated questions
Because of the explorative nature of the study, for the data analysis qualitative methods of content analysis were used (Mayring, 2015).
Results. The results show that PPTs develop three different types of SSI teaching scenarios. The first type – the Multidimentional – driven SSI teaching material – is focused on the SSIs’ multiple perspectives and factors. In detail, this type of teaching scenario gives emphasis on the social aspects of the issues under examination while the main objective refers to the development of students’ perspective – taking. The main teaching practice adopted in the lesson plans is stakeholders’ analysis while most of the incorporated questions ask students to predict or analyze the relationship among the diverse involved factors (explain questions). Three of the participants developed multidimentional – driven SSI teaching materials.
The second type – the Content – driven SSI teaching material – gives emphasis on the SSIs scientific aspects. In particular, this type of SSI teaching scenario focuses on the scientific principles and empirical data relating to the issues under examination while the main objective concerns students’ recognition of the SSIs’ on – going inquiry. In the content – driven SSI teaching materials reasoning questions that call students to argument, to propose a solution or to take a decision are mainly incorporated. Two of the participants developed content – driven SSI teaching scenarios.
Finally, the third type of teaching scenarios use SSIs as contexts for students’ engagement with scientific principles or technological applications. Either topic – specific teaching practice or SSI – related goals were identified. One of the participants developed a teaching scenario that uses SSI as context.
Conclusions. The results give insights into the potential of SSI approach in primary education while they support the need for PPTs training in the topic – specific teaching goals and strategies. Hence, based on the aforementioned, the present study contributes in research literature relating to pre – service primary teachers’ training in the negotiation of the SSIs that are raised by contemporary scientific topics and technological applications.
|
Collections
