Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

The Korean Association for Science Education (한국과학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Patterns of Student Evaluation on Media Information Regarding Socioscientific Issues

과학기술관련 사회쟁점 미디어 정보에 대한 중학생들의 평가 양상 탐색

  • Received : 2021.01.11
  • Accepted : 2021.03.08
  • Published : 2021.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Ability to make informed decisions by critically evaluating media information on socioscientific issues (SSI) is one of the crucial elements of scientific literacy that citizens should obtain. This study aims to investigate how middle school students evaluated media information about socioscientific issues (SSI) when they faced two different types of information (i.e., numerical and empathic information). To achieve the aim, 96 middle school students responded to the questionnaires asking them to evaluate reliability and persuasiveness of SSI media information. The questionnaires consisted of two sets of newspaper articles on each SSI (pro-numerical/empathic, against-numerical/empathic). After reading the articles, the students evaluated reliability and persuasiveness of each article and wrote the reasons for their evaluation. The results were as follows: First, the students believed that news articles with numerical information were more reliable than the ones with empathic information in all SSI contexts. They tended to trust scientific evidence and data from numerical information, and real cases, societal problems, expressions, and values from empathic information. In addition, they evaluated their reliability based on the logic of information, accuracy of information, breadth and depth of data, and quantity and quality of sources both numerical and empathic information. Second, in case of evaluating persuasiveness of the articles, they focused more on the values that information contained, richness and logicality of the information, rather than the types of information, regardless of the type of information.

대중매체를 통해 전달되는 과학기술관련 사회쟁점(SSI)에 관한 미디어 정보를 비판적으로 평가하여 합리적인 의사결정을 내릴 수 있는 능력은 시민으로서 지녀야 할 과학적 소양의 한 측면이다. 본 연구는 합리적인 의사결정을 위해 선행되어야 할 학생들의 정보 평가 양상에 관한 것으로, 일상에서 접하는 SSI 미디어 정보를 과학적 요소가 강조된 수치정보와 정서적 공감이 강조된 공감정보로 구분한 후, 이러한 정보의 특성에 따라 중학생들의 정보 평가 양상이 어떻게 다른지 탐색해보았다. 본 연구에는 중학생 96명이 참여하였으며, 신문기사 형식의 SSI 자료 내 정보의 신뢰도와 설득력 있는 정도를 묻는 질문지를 도입하였다. 질문지는 세 가지 SSI 주제에 대한 찬성 또는 반대 입장에 대해 과학적 요소가 강조된 수치정보와 정서적으로 호소하여 공감을 불러일으키는 공감정보 기사 2개로 구성되었으며, 정보가 얼마나 믿을만한가를 묻는 신뢰도 평가 문항과 정보가 얼마나 설득력 있는가를 묻는 설득력 있는 정도 평가 문항을 포함하였다. 연구 결과, 첫째 전반적으로 학생들은 SSI 맥락에서 공감정보보다 수치정보를 더 신뢰하는 것으로 나타났다. 신뢰하는 정보 요소로는 수치정보에서는 과학적 증거와 데이터를, 공감정보에서는 사례, 사회 문제, 표현, 그리고 가치를 주로 신뢰하는 것으로 나타났다. 둘째, 설득력 있는 정도에 대한 평가는 수치나 공감과 같은 정보의 유형보다는 SSI 맥락이나 내용적인 측면에 따라 상이한 것으로 나타났다. 즉, 학생들은 SSI 정보를 담은 기사의 설득력을 판단할 때 정보에 담긴 가치, 근거의 풍부함, 정보의 논리성을 바탕으로 판단하였다고 볼 수 있다.

Keywords

References

  1. Capkinoglu, E., Cetin, P. S., & Peten, D. M. (2021). How do pre-service science teachers evaluate persuasiveness of a socioscientific argument? International Journal of Science Education, https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.1876273
  2. Choe, I. (2005). A comparative study on modelling readability formulas: Focus on primary and secondary textbooks. Journal of the Korean Society for information Management, 22(4), 173-195. https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2005.22.4.173
  3. Christenson, N., Rundgren, S. N., & Zeidler, D. L. (2014). The relationship of discipline background to upper secondary students' argumentation on socioscientific issues. Research in Science Education, 44(4), 581-601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-013-9394-6
  4. Dani, D., Wan, G., & Henning, J. E. (2010). A case for media literacy in the context of socioscientific issues. New Horizons in Education, 58(3), 85-98.
  5. Evagorou, M. (2011). Discussing a socioscientific issue in a primary school classroom: The case of using a technology-supported environment in formal and nonformal settings. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socio-scientific issues in the classroom: Teaching, learning, and research (pp. 133-159). The Netherlands: Springer.
  6. Hogan, K., & Maglienti, M. (2001). Comparing the epistemological underpinnings of students' and scientists' reasoning about conclusions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(6), 663-687. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.1025
  7. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Puig, B. (2012). Argumentation, evidence evaluation and critical thinking. In B. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 1001-1015). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
  8. Kim, Y., & Ahn, J. (2019). Factors influencing internet media credibility among college students. The Journal of the Korea Contents Association, 19(2), 438-449. https://doi.org/10.5392/JKCA.2019.19.02.438
  9. Ko, Y. (2017). Comparison of college students' dialogic argumentation in the context of socioscientific issues: Based on idiocentrism and allocentrism. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea.
  10. Kolsto, S. D. (2001). 'To trust or not to trust,... '-pupils' ways of judging information encountered in a socio-scientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 23(9), 877-901. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690010016102
  11. Kolsto, S. D. (2006). Patterns in students' argumentation confronted with a risk-focused socio-scientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 28(14), 1689-1716. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600560878
  12. Kolsto, S. D., Bungum, B., Arnesen, E., Isnes, A., Kristensen, T., Mathiassen, K., Mestad, I., Quale, A., Tonning, A. S. V., & Ulvik, M. (2006). Science students' critical examination of scientific information related to socioscientific issues. Science Education, 90(4), 632-655. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20133
  13. Kwon, H., & Choi, H. (2013). Effect of epistemological beliefs on dependency on the source authority in terms of evaluating persuasiveness of scientific explanation. The Korean Journal of Educational Psychology, 27(1), 181-200.
  14. Lee, E. (2011). Perceived bias or biased perception? Effects of others' comments, perceived opinion climate, and issue involvement on perceived news slant. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 55(3), 179-198.
  15. Lee, E., & Kang, N. (2014). Middle school students' evaluation of scientific information: From the perspective of hypothetico-deductive Reasoning. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 34(4), 375-383. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2014.34.4.0375
  16. Leung, J. S. C., Wong, A. S. L., & Yung, B. H. W. (2015). Understandings of nature of science and multiple perspective evaluation of science news by non-science majors. Science & Education, 24(7-8), 887-912. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-014-9736-4
  17. Leung, J. S. C., Wong, A. S. L., & Yung, B. H. W. (2017). Evaluation of science in the media by non-science majors. International Journal of Science Education(Part B), 7(3), 219-236.
  18. Lin, S. S. (2014). Science and non-science undergraduate students' critical thinking and argumentation performance in reading a science news report. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(5), 1023-1046. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9451-7
  19. McClune, B., & Jarman, R. (2012). Encouraging and equipping students to engage critically with science in the news: What can we learn from the literature? Studies in Science Education, 48(1), 1-49. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2012.655036
  20. Miller, J. D. (2006). Civic scientific literacy in Europe and the United States. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the World Association for Public Opinion Research, Montreal, Canada.
  21. Mun, J., Kim, E., & Kim, S. (2017). College students' evaluation of scientific information: Focusing on the trustworthiness of information. The Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 17, 143-165. https://doi.org/10.22251/jlcci.2017.17.22.143
  22. Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (1994). Interpreting pragmatic meaning when reading popular reports of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 947-967. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660310909
  23. Oliveras, B., Marquez, C., & Sanmarti, N. (2014). Students' attitudes to information in the press: Critical reading of a newspaper article with scientific content. Research in Science Education, 44(4), 603-626. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-013-9397-3
  24. Phillips, L. M., & Norris, S. P. (1999). Interpreting popular reports of science: What happens when the reader's world meets the world on paper? International Journal of Science Education, 21(3), 317-327. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006999290723
  25. Ratcliffe, M. (1997). Pupil decision-making about socio-scientific issues within the science curriculum. International Journal of Science Education, 19(2), 167-182. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069970190203
  26. Raveendran, A., & Chunawala, S. (2015). Values in science: Making sense of biology doctoral students' critical examination of a deterministic claim in a media article. Science Education, 99(4), 669-695. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21174
  27. Rundgren, S. N. C., & Rundgren, C. J. (2010). SEE-SEP: From a separate to a holistic view of socioscientific issues. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning & Teaching, 11(1), 1-24.
  28. Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513-536. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20009
  29. Song, H., Kim W, W., & Cho, H. (2005). A study on audience's awareness about the media reports of science technology risk: Focused on the genetically modified organism(GMO) case. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 49(3), 105-128.
  30. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology: An overview. In Y. S. Lincoln & N. K. Denzin (Eds), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 273-285). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  31. Tseng, A. S. (2018). Students and evaluation of web-based misinformation about vaccination: Critical reading or passive acceptance of claims? International Journal of Science Education(Part B), 8(3), 250-265.
  32. Werner da Rosa, C., & Otero, J. (2018). Influence of source credibility on students' noticing and assessing comprehension obstacles in science texts. International Journal of Science Education, 40(13), 1653-1668. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1501168
  33. Witzig, S. B., Halverson, K. L., Siegel, M. A., & Freyermuth, S. K. (2013). The interface of opinion, understanding and evaluation while learning about a socioscientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 35(15), 2483-2507. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.600351
  34. Wu, Y. T., & Tsai, C. C. (2007). High school students' informal reasoning on a socio-scientific issue: Qualitative and quantitative analyses. International Journal of Science Education, 29(9), 1163-1187. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690601083375
  35. Xiao, S., & Sandoval, W. A. (2017). Associations between attitudes towards science and children's evaluation of information about socioscientific issues. Science & Education, 26(3-4), 247-269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-017-9888-0
  36. Yang, F. Y., Chen, Y. H., & Tsai, M. J. (2013). How university students evaluate online information about a socio-scientific issue and the relationship with their epistemic beliefs. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 16(3), 385-399.
  37. 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
  38. Zimmerman, C., Bisanz, G. L., Bisanz, J., Klein, J. S., & Klein, P. (2001). Science at the supermarket: A comparison of what appears in the popular press, experts' advice to readers, and what students want to know. Public Understanding of Science, 10(1), 37-58. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/10/1/303