Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

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

DOI QR Code

SSI Education and Scientific Literacy from a Lifelong Learning Perspective

평생학습적 시각을 통해 바라본 SSI 교육과 과학적 소양

  • Received : 2021.11.22
  • Accepted : 2022.01.27
  • Published : 2022.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Recently, lifelong learning ability was newly proposed as scientific literacy, the goal of the science curriculum. To solve various science-related problems students encounter in life, lifelong learning abilities related to science beyond school science education are required, but empirical evidence shows that students can solve problems they actually face through scientific literacy. It is not easy to find in the existing science education research. In addition, there is a lack of discussion on how to cultivate lifelong learning ability suggested in the curriculum through school science education. In this study, attention was paid to SSI education as a method for students to cultivate lifelong learning ability through school science education and to develop their ability to solve science-related problems encountered in life. In this context, statements in the existing SSI education studies were reviewed to discover discourses related to lifelong learning, and their types and characteristics were distinguished. It was possible to confirm lifelong learning and its applicability with focus on science education research through this. For the study, 18 literature materials on the subject of SSI education were selected, and the discourses related to lifelong learning in the SSI education research were discovered by examining the statements revealed in the data. As a result of the study, there are four categories of discourses related to lifelong learning: 'awareness of science,' 'connection between science and everyday life', 'promotion of participatory citizenship', and 'construction of identity'. Various SSI education studies have already had lifelong learning perception in various contexts, and the four types of discourses related to lifelong learning could be linked to the four types of learning presented in the UNESCO Lifelong Learning Report. SSI education tends to view students' life experiences as part of their learning and aims to help students develop the character and capacity to make responsible decisions on social issues related to science and put them into practice. This competency can be continuously connected to the real-life of students outside of school as a lifelong learning ability. This study requires expanding the discourse related to lifelong learning in science education and operating and managing the overall educational system to foster students' lifelong learning ability.

최근 과학과 교육과정의 목표인 과학적 소양으로 새롭게 평생학습능력이 제시되었다. 학생들이 삶 속에서 접하는 다양한 과학 관련 문제를 해결하기 위해서는 학교 과학교육을 넘어선 과학과 관련한 평생학습능력이 필요하지만, 기존의 과학교육 연구에서 학생들이 실제로 삶 속에서 맞닥뜨리는 문제를 과학적 소양을 통해 해결할 수 있었다는 경험적 증거는 찾기 어렵다. 또한 교육과정에서 제시한 평생학습능력을 학교 과학교육을 통해 어떻게 함양시켜야 하는지에 대한 논의도 부족하다. 본 연구에서는 학생들이 학교 과학교육을 통해 평생학습능력을 함양하고 삶 속에서 접하는 과학 관련 문제를 해결하는 능력을 기르기 위한 방법으로 SSI 교육에 주목하였다. 그리고 기존의 SSI 교육연구 속 진술을 검토하여 평생학습 관련 담론을 발견하고 그 유형과 특성을 구분하였다. 이를 통해 과학교육 연구에서 주목하는 평생학습과 그것의 적용 가능성을 확인할 수 있었다. 연구를 위해 SSI 교육을 주제로 한 문헌 자료 18개를 선정하였으며, 자료에 드러난 진술을 검토하여 SSI 교육 연구에 내포된 평생학습 관련 담론을 발견하였다. 연구 결과, 범주화된 평생학습 관련 담론은 4가지이며 '과학에 대한 인식', '과학과 일상의 연결', '참여적 시민성의 촉진', '정체성의 구성'이다. 다양한 SSI 교육 연구들은 이미 여러 맥락에서 평생학습적 인식을 가지고 있었으며 평생학습 관련 담론의 4가지 유형은 UNESCO 평생학습 보고서에서 제시한 4가지 학습과 연결할 수 있었다. SSI 교육은 학생들의 삶의 경험을 학습의 일부로 바라보며, 학생들이 과학과 관련한 사회적 쟁점에 대해 책임감 있는 의사 결정을 내리고 실제 행동으로 옮길 수 있는 인성과 역량을 갖추는 데에 도움을 주고자 하였다. 이러한 역량은 평생학습능력으로서 학교 밖 학생들의 실제 삶과 지속적으로 연결될 수 있다. 본 연구를 통해 과학교육에서 평생학습과 관련한 담론의 확장과 학생들의 평생학습능력 함양을 위한 교육 시스템 전반에 걸친 운영과 관리가 요구된다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

이 논문은 2019년 대한민국 교육부와 한국연구재단의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임(NRF-2019S1A5A2A03048062).

References

  1. AAAS (1989). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
  2. AAAS (1993). Benchmarks for Science Literacy: A tool for curriculum reform. New York: Oxford University Press.
  3. Aikenhead, G. S. (2006). Science education for everyday life: Evidence-based practice: Teachers College Press.
  4. Albe, V. (2008). Students' positions and considerations of scientific evidence about a controversial socioscientific issue. Science & Education, 17(8/9), 805-827. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-007-9086-6
  5. Barrue, C., & Albe, V. (2013). Citizenship Education and Socioscientific Issues: Implicit Concept of Citizenship in the Curriculum, Views of French Middle School Teachers. Science & Education, 22(5), 1089-1114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9571-4
  6. Beck, U. (1997). Risk society - Towards a new modernity, (trans., Hong, S.). Seoul: Saemulgyul.
  7. Bencze, L., & Pouliot, C. (2017). Battle of the bands: Toxic dust, active citizenship and science education. In Science and technology education promoting wellbeing for individuals, societies and environments, (pp. 381-404). Springer.
  8. Bencze, L., Pouliot, C., Pedretti, E., Simonneaux, L., Simonneaux, J., & Zeidler, D. (2020). SAQ, SSI and STSE education: defending and extending "science-in-context". Cultural Studies of Science Education, 15(3), 825-851. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-019-09962-7
  9. Bencze, L., Sperling, E., & Carter, L. (2012). Students' Research-Informed Socio-scientific Activism: Re/Visions for a Sustainable Future. Research in Science Education, 42(1), 129-148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9260-3
  10. Blondiaux, L., & Sintomer, Y. (2002). L'imperatif deliberatif. Politix. Revue des sciences sociales du politique, 15(57), 17-35.
  11. Boeren, E., & Field, J. (2019). 4th Global Report on Adult Learning and Education: Leave No One Behind--Participation, Equity and Inclusion. UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning.
  12. Bosser, U., & Lindahl, M. (2019). Students' Positioning in the Classroom: a Study of Teacher-Student Interactions in a Socioscientific Issue Context. Research in Science Education, 49(2), 371-390. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9627-1
  13. Callon, M., Lascoumes, P., & Barthe, Y. (2001). Agir dans un monde incertain: essai sur la democratie technique: Seuil.
  14. Carlone, H. B., Johnson, A., & Scott, C. M. (2015). Agency amidst formidable structures: How girls perform gender in science class. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(4), 474-488. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21224
  15. Chang Rundgren, S. N., & Rundgren, C. J. (2010). SEE-SEP: From a separate to a holistic view on socio-scientific issues. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 11(1), 1-24.
  16. Choi, K., Lee, H., Shin, N., Kim, S. W., & Krajcik, J. (2011). Reconceptualization of scientific literacy in South Korea for the 21st century. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(6), 670-697. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20424
  17. Christenson, N., Chang Rundgren, S.-N., & Hoglund, 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(3), 342-352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9328-x
  18. Chung, Y. L., & Choi, J. M. (2007). An assessment of the scientific literacy of secondary school students. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 27(1), 9-17.
  19. Commission of the European Communities(2002). European Report on Quality Indicators of Lifelong Learning: Fifteen Quality Indicators. European Commission. Directorate-General for Education and Culture.
  20. DeBoer, G. (1991). A history of ideas in science education: Implications for practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
  21. Delors, J. et al. (1996) Learning: the treasure within. Report to UNESCO of the international commission on education for the twenty-first century. Paris: UNESCO.
  22. Dewey, J. (1910). Science as subject-matter and as method. Science, 31(787), 121-127. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.31.787.121
  23. Dewey, J. (1927). The Public and its Problems. New York: Holt.
  24. Elo, S., & Kyngas, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(1), 107-115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x
  25. Es, H., & Ozturk, N. (2021). An Activity for Transferring the Multidimensional Structure of SSI to Middle School Science Courses: I Discover Myself in the Decision-Making Process with SEE-STEP! Research in Science Education, 51(3), 889-910. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09865-1
  26. Faure, E. et al. (1972) Learning to Be. The World of Education Today and Tomorrow. Paris: UNESCO.
  27. Feinstein, N. W. (2011). Salvaging science literacy. Science education, 95(1), 168-185. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20414
  28. Feinstein, N. W. (2015). Education, communication, and science in the public sphere. Journal of research in science teaching : the official journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 52(2), 145-163. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21192
  29. Field, J. (2000). Lifelong learning and the new educational order. Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham Books.
  30. Fowler, S. R., Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2009). Moral sensitivity in the context of socioscientific issues in high school science students. International Journal of Science Education, 31(2), 279-296. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701787909
  31. Han, S. (2009). Lifelong Education 3rd Ed. Seoul: Hakjisa.
  32. Han, S., Yang, E., & Lim, H. (2020). Conceptual Ecology of 'Lifelong Learning:' Expansion, Interconnection and Evolution. Journal of Lifelong Education. 26(2), 1-39.
  33. Herman, B. C. (2018). Students' environmental NOS views, compassion, intent, and action: Impact of place-based socioscientific issues instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(4), 600-638. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21433
  34. Hodson, D. (1999). Going beyond cultural pluralism: Science education for sociopolitical action. Science education, 83(6), 775-796. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199911)83:6<775::AID-SCE8>3.0.CO;2-8
  35. Hodson, D. (2003). Time for action: Science education for an alternative future. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 645-670. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690305021
  36. Hodson, D. (2017). Foreword: The Significance of STEPWISE for Fostering Life-Long Sociopolitical Activism. In Science and Technology Education Promoting Wellbeing for Individuals, Societies and Environments, (pp. 3-18). Springer.
  37. Hurd, P. D. (1958). Science literacy: Its meaning for American schools. Educational leadership, 16(1), 13-16.
  38. Hwang, S. (2018). Research trend on the sociocultural approaches to science learning identity for the realization of 'Science Education for All'. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 38(2), 187-202.
  39. Ideland, M., & Malmberg, C. (2012). Body talk: students' identity construction while discussing a socioscientific issue. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 7(2), 279-305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-012-9381-7
  40. Iversen, E., & Jonsdottir, G. (2019). 'We did see the lapwing' - practising environmental citizenship in upper-secondary science education. Environmental Education Research, 25(3), 411-421. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2018.1455075
  41. Jarvis, P. (2018). Learning to be a person in society. In K. Illeris (Ed.), Contemporary Theories of Learning (2nd ed.), (pp. 15-28). London: Routledge.
  42. Jenkins, E. W. (1990). Scientific literacy and school science education. School Science Review, 71(256), 43-51.
  43. Jenkins, E. W. (1999). School science, citizenship and the public understanding of science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(7), 703-710. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006999290363
  44. Jeon, S. J., Koh, H. Y., Lee, Y. S., & Choi, S. Y. (2017). The needs analysis on science literacy required for Koreans in the future society. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 37(3), 441-452. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2017.37.3.441
  45. Jho, H., Yoon, H.-G., & Kim, M. (2014). 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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-013-9652-z
  46. Jung, J.-C. (2015). A Meta Analysis of Korean Media Discourse Analysis Method Study. Journal of Speech, Media & Communication Research, 28(9), 297-322.
  47. Karahan, E., & Roehrig, G. (2017). Secondary School Students' Understanding of Science and Their Socioscientific Reasoning. Research in Science Education, 47(4), 755-782. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9527-9
  48. Kerckhoff, A. S., & Reis, G. (2014). Responsible stewards of the earth: Narratives of youth activism in high school (science). In Activist science and technology education, (pp. 465-476). Springer.
  49. Kim, G., Ko, Y., & Lee, H. (2020). The Effects of Community-Based Socioscientific Issues Program (SSI-COMM) on Promoting Students' Sense of Place and Character as Citizens. International Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 18(3), 399-418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-09976-1
  50. Kim, J., & Lee, M. (2004). An international comparative study of science curriculum. Journal of the Korean association for science education, 24(6), 1082-1093.
  51. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning : experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
  52. Kolsto, S. D. (2000). Consensus projects: Teaching science for citizenship. International Journal of Science Education, 22(6), 645-664. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006900289714
  53. Kolsto, S. D. (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientific issues. Science education, 85(3), 291-310. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.1011
  54. Kung, S.-H. (2016). Understanding Foucault: A Search for Alternative Approaches to Curriculum Studies. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 34(4), 197-221.
  55. Kyle Jr, W. C. (1996). Shifting Ideologies and Science Education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(10), 1043-1044.
  56. Lauri, S., & Kyngas, H. (2005). Developing nursing theories. Vantaa, Finland: Werner Soderstrom, Dark Oy.
  57. Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire (VNOS): Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497-521. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10034
  58. Lee, H. (2018). What is SSI Education?. Seoul: PYMATE.
  59. Lee, H., Chung, K., & Yoo, J. (2010). Perceptions of Science Teachers in Korea and US on Global Scientific Literacy. Journal of Curriculum Evaluation, 13(1), 143-163. https://doi.org/10.29221/jce.2010.13.1.143
  60. Lee, H., Lee, H., & Zeidler, D. L. (2020). Examining tensions in the socioscientific issues classroom: Students' border crossings into a new culture of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57(5), 672-694. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21600
  61. 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.749546
  62. Lee, M. K., & Kim, J. H. (2004). An international comparative study of science curriculum. Journal of the Korean association for science education, 24(6), 1082-1093.
  63. Lee, S. (2018). Exploring an alternative direction for a competence-based curriculum in an age of uncertainty: An" ontological approach. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(1), 45-69. https://doi.org/10.15708/KSCS.36.1.3
  64. Levinson, R. (2010). Science education and democratic participation: An uneasy congruence? Studies in Science Education, 46(1), 69-119. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260903562433
  65. Miller, J. D. (1998). The measurement of civic scientific literacy. Public understanding of science, 7, 203-223. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/7/3/001
  66. MOE (Ministry of Education) (2015). 2015 revised Science National Curriculum. Ministry of Education.
  67. Mun, K., Mun, J., Cho, M., Chung, Y., Kim, S. W., & Krajcik, J. (2012). Development and Application of 21st Century Scientific Literacy Evaluation Framework on Korean High School Science Text Books. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 32(5), 789-804. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2012.32.5.789
  68. NILE (National Institute for Lifelong Education) (2020). The public's demand for the national responsibility for promoting lifelong education. National Institute for Lifelong Education.
  69. National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  70. National Research Council (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press.
  71. National Science Teachers Association (1982). Science-technology-society: Science education for the 1980s. Washington, D.C.: National Science Teachers Association.
  72. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For states, by states (vol. 1, The Standards). Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
  73. OECD. (2018). The future of education and skills: Education 2030. OECD Education Working Papers.
  74. Osborne, J. (2006). Towards a science education for all: The role of ideas, evidence and argument. Paper presented at the ACER Research Conference: Boosting Science Learning -What will it take?
  75. Ottander, C., & Ekborg, M. (2012). Students' Experience of Working with Socioscientific Issues - a Quantitative Study in Secondary School. Research in Science Education, 42(6), 1147-1163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9238-1
  76. Park, J. (2016). Discussions about the three aspects of scientific literacy: Focus on integrative understanding, settlement in curriculum, and civic education. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 36(3), 413-422. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2016.36.3.0413
  77. Park, S. H., Choe, S. U., & Kim, C. J. (2020). Elementary Students' Creativity Appear in Small Group Interactions During Model-Based Classrooms on Terraforming. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 40(6), 611-620.
  78. Patronis, T., Potari, D., & Spiliotopoulou, V. (1999). Students' argumentation in decision-making on a socio-scientific issue: implications for teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 21(7), 745-754. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006999290408
  79. Pella, M. O. (1967). Scientific literacy and the HS curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 67(4), 346-356. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1967.tb15185.x
  80. Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S. K. Abell, K. Appleton, & D. Hanuscin (Ed.), Handbook of research on science education, (pp. 743-794). Routledge.
  81. Roberts, D. A. (2011). Competing visions of scientific literacy. In Linder, C., Ostman, L., Roberts, D. A., Wickman, P. O., Ericksen, G., & MacKinnon, A. (Eds.), Exploring the landscape of scientific literacy, (pp. 11-27).: Routledge.
  82. Roberts, D. A., & Bybee, R. W. (2014). Scientific literacy, science literacy, and science education. In N. G. Lederman, S. K. Abell (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Science Education, Volume II, (pp. 559-572). Routledge.
  83. Robottom, I. (2012). Socio-scientific issues in education: Innovative practices and contending epistemologies. Research in Science Education, 42(1), 95-107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9258-x
  84. Roth, W.-M., & Lee, S. (2004). Science education as/for participation in the community. Science education, 88(2), 263-291. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10113
  85. Rudolph, J. L., & Horibe, S. (2016). What do we mean by science education for civic engagement? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(6), 805-820. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21303
  86. Ryder, J. (2001). Identifying Science Understanding for Functional Scientific Literacy. Studies in Science Education, 36(1), 1-44. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260108560166
  87. Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513-536. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20009
  88. Sadler, T. D. (2009). Situated learning in science education: socio-scientific issues as contexts for practice. Studies in Science Education, 45(1), 1-42. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260802681839
  89. Sadler, T. D. (2011). Socio-scientific issues-based education: What we know about science education in the context of SSI. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socio-scientific Issues in the Classroom (pp. 355-369): Springer.
  90. 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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9030-9
  91. Sadler, T. D., & Fowler, S. R. (2006). A threshold model of content knowledge transfer for socioscientific argumentation. Science education, 90(6), 986-1004. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20165
  92. Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 112-138. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20042
  93. Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2009). Scientific literacy, PISA, and socioscientific discourse: Assessment for progressive aims of science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 46(8), 909-921. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20327
  94. Shamos, M. (1995). The myth of scientific literacy. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
  95. Simonneaux, J., & Simonneaux, L. (2012). Educational Configurations for Teaching Environmental Socioscientific Issues Within The Perspective of Sustainability. Research in Science Education, 42(1), 75-94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9257-y
  96. Simonneaux, L., & Simonneaux, J. (2009). Socio-scientific reasoning influenced by identities. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 4(3), 705-711. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-008-9145-6
  97. Sjostrom, J., & Eilks, I. (2018). Reconsidering different visions of scientific literacy and science education based on the concept of Bildung. In Y. J. Dori, Z. R. Mevarech, & D. R. Baker (Ed.), Cognition, metacognition, and culture in STEM education, pp. 65-88. Springer.
  98. Solli, A., Bach, F., & Akerman, B. (2014). Learning to argue as a biotechnologist: disprivileging opposition to genetically modified food. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 9(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-013-9528-1
  99. Song, J., Kang, S. J., Kwak, Y., Kim, D., Kim, S., Na, J., ... & Joung, Y. J. (2019). Contents and Features of 'Korean Science Education Standards (KSES)' for the Next Generation. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 39(3), 465-478. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2019.39.3.465
  100. Sutter, A. M., Dauer, J. M., Kreuziger, T., Schubert, J., & Forbes, C. T. (2019). Sixth grade students' problematization of and decision-making about a wind energy socio-scientific issue. International Research in Geographical & Environmental Education, 28(3), 242-256. https://doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2019.1613586
  101. Zeidler, D. L. (2014). Socioscientific issues as a curriculum emphasis: Theory, research, and practice. In N. G. Lederman, S. K. Abell (Ed.), Handbook of research on science education, Volume II, (pp. 711-740). Routledge.
  102. Zeidler, D. L., Herman, B. C., Ruzek, M., Linder, A., & Lin, S. S. (2013). Cross-cultural epistemological orientations to socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(3), 251-283. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21077
  103. Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Applebaum, S., & Callahan, B. E. (2009). Advancing reflective judgment through socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 74-101. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20281
  104. 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20048
  105. 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10025
  106. Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35-62. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008