• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.41 no.2
• /
• pp.115-131
• /
• 2021

As the global climate change emergency is escalating, the need for 'Social Action-Oriented SSI (SAO-SSI) on climate change topics' in science education that can change society through social activity is increasing. By employing sociocultural theory, this study explores the challenges of limiting teacher's agency in implementing SAO-SSI on climate change topics in science education. Data from participant observation for 46 lessons, in-depth interviews with participants, field notes, and teacher reflection notes were analyzed by the structure of into micro- (classrooms), meso- (school), and macro- (Korea society) level. At the micro-level, the teacher's new attempts of SAO-SSI on climate change topics class made it difficult for him to identify students' understanding of climate change, because they have a low sense of perception that climate change is also their problem. In addition, the teacher had difficulties leading students' into an engagement for social action because students were skeptical about the feasibility of planned social behavior by positioning themselves as children or had difficulty in understanding social action and sympathizing with its values. At the meso-level, a school culture that encourages the implementation of a curriculum similar to that of colleagues, it was difficult to implement one's own curriculum. And it was difficult to develop expertise without the support and communications with colleagues who revealed the burden of unfamiliar science topics of climate change. In addition, conflicts arose in the process of implementing out-of-school social actions with the principal's passive support. At the macro-level, the insufficient proper material resources for SAO-SSI on climate change topics class, and negative perceptions on the students' social action in the society were acting as constraints. We offer implications for what kind of structural support and efforts from various subjects in the educational community should be provided to implement SAO-SSI on climate change topics class in science education.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.37 no.5
• /
• pp.787-797
• /
• 2017

In this study, we investigated the features of using smart devices in socioscientific issues (SSI) debate classes. Twenty-seven high school students in Gyeonggi-do participated in this study. The processes of the SSI debate classes with smart devices were classified into five stages: data searching, data sharing, summary and organization of data, debate in the classroom, and online debate. Then some features at each stage were identified. It was found that they collected self-directed and in-depth data while reflecting their knowledge and experience, and selected data which were easy to understand at the stage of data searching. The specificity and validity of the evidences gathered and the clarity of the sources were improved at the stage of data sharing, although they shared more data offline than online. They organized their data by using paper rather than smart devices at the stage of summary and organization of data. Most of them failed to use the summary in debate. They argued and refuted based on concrete grounds at the stage of debate in the classroom, which raised students' interest in debate and led students to participate actively. At the stage of online debate, they were able to rearrange and review the arguments of both sides, and the participation of the students who were passive in classroom debate was enhanced. Based on these results, we suggest some effective teaching methods for SSI debate classes using smart devices.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.38 no.2
• /
• pp.135-145
• /
• 2018

In this study, we investigated the argumentations of group and classroom discussions in socioscientific issues (SSI) discussion classes. Twenty-seven high school students participated in the SSI discussion classes on nuclear power generation. We observed and recorded the classes and also conducted semi-structured interviews. For the analyses, we revised a previous framework that was developed to analyze dialogic argumentations in the context of SSI. The analyses of the results indicated that there were more discourse schemes in the classroom discussions than the group discussions which are related to awareness and openness to multiple perspectives, evidence based reasoning, and on-going inquiry and skepticism. And there were few discourse schemes related to moral and ethical sensitivity in the group and classroom discussions. Various grounds, data, and information were presented in the classroom discussions. Students concentrated on carrying their claims and were not able to sympathize with and accept other opinions. Therefore, there were few discourse schemes to reach consensus. In addition, they perceived classroom discussions as competitive and actively rebutted other claims or grounds. The levels of argumentation were also high in the classroom discussions. The group discussions were held in relaxed atmosphere, and they asked the opponents more for clarification or additional information and evidences. However, classroom discussions were held in serious atmosphere, and they actively queried the validity of the claims or grounds. Based on the results, some suggestions to implement SSI discussion classes were discussed.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.33 no.1
• /
• pp.79-93
• /
• 2013

This study examined value-judgement and decision-making process of middle school students on three biotechnology related socioscientific issues (SSI) (i.e. designer baby, amniotic fluid test, and embryonic stem cell research). In particular, it focused on the level of consistency in their value application to the decisions. Twenty 8th grade students participated in the SSI program. The participants were asked to mark their positions on each issue before and after the debates. All classroom and sub-group debates were audio-recorded. The researcher conducted individual interviews with 10 students after the program. The results show three patterns emerging. First, five students applied their personal values in a consistent manner when making decisions on the three consecutive issues. Second, three students demonstrated incremental resoluteness in their value application as the sessions proceeded and had tendency to be oriented towards a specific value, more so towards the end of the program than the beginning. And third, four students gradually showed ambivalence in their decisions as they participate in the program. The results suggest that science teachers addressing SSI need to encourage students to be aware of their own values and to engage in internalized decision-making in light of those values. They also need to be aware of the possible challenges that students might feel in their decision-making process caused by the complexity of SSI.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.37 no.3
• /
• pp.395-405
• /
• 2017

This study aims to investigate the effects of socioscientific issues (SSI) instruction on promoting college students' character and values as citizens, and to compare the effects based on the psychological factor - idiocentrism and allocentrism. Thirty-one college students who enrolled in the SSI course participated in this study. The SSI course provided the students with opportunities to explore various aspects of five topics, to express and share their own opinions, and to identify reasonable alternatives. The students with distinct tendencies were classified into two groups (i.e. idiocentric and allocentric groups) based on the personal value orientation scores before the instruction, and they responded to the questionnaire to examine their character and values as citizens before and after the instruction. The results showed that the students' social and moral compassion and socioscientific accountability improved significantly after the SSI course. The overall effects of the SSI program on students' character and values were not significantly different between two groups. However, the post-mean score of the allocentric group in socioscientific accountability was higher than the one of the idiocentric group. This study shows that SSI instruction could positively affect character development regardless of psychological tendencies, and could be implemented in the science classroom as a good instructional approach to integrating science education and character education.

• Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education
• /
• v.42 no.3
• /
• pp.421-433
• /
• 2023

This study examined the reasoning of gifted elementary science students in a socioscientific issues (SSI) classroom discussion on COVID-19-related trash disposal challenges. This study aimed to understand the characteristics of evidence use and decision-making difficulties in each type of SSI-related reasoning. To this end, the transcripts of 17 gifted students of elementary science discussing SSIs in a classroom were analyzed within the framework of informal reasoning. The analysis framework was categorized into three types according to the primary influence involved in reasoning: rational, emotional, and intuitive. The analysis showed that students exhibited four categories of evidence use in SSI reasoning. First, in the rational reasoning category, students deemed and recorded scientific knowledge, numbers, and statistics as objective evidence. However, students who experienced difficulty in investigating such scientific data were less likely to have factored them in subsequent decisions. Second, in the emotional reasoning category, students' solutions varied considerably depending on the perspective they empathized with and reasoned from. Differences in their views led to conflicting perspectives on SSIs and consequent disagreement. Third, in the intuitive reasoning category, students disagreed with the opinions of their peers but did not explain their positions precisely. Intuitive reasoning also created challenges as students avoided problem-solving in the discussion and did not critically examine their opinions. Fourth, a mixed category of reasoning emerged: intuition combined with rationality or emotion. When combined with emotion, intuitive reasoning was characterized by deep empathy arising from personal experience, and when combined with rationality, the result was only an impulsive reaction. These findings indicate that research on student understanding and faculty knowledge of SSIs discussed in classrooms should consider the difficulties in informal reasoning and decision-making.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.36 no.2
• /
• pp.303-315
• /
• 2016

Socioscientific issues (SSI), by their nature, are conceptually embedded in technology. Previous research reported that nature of technology (NOT), unlike nature of science, was quite explicitly manifested in SSI decision-making, and NOT could be a promising construct for promoting SSI reasoning. In this study, authors introduced an integrated conceptual framework for NOT, which consisted of four dimensions (i.e., artifacts, knowledge, practice and system) as diverse modes of technology. We adapted the framework to investigate students' conceptualizations of NOT in the context of various SSIs. Data was collected from 45 college students enrolled in a liberal arts course on science and technology. The students participated in a team project, where they prepared and led discussions for SSI topics in class. Seven topics concerning SSIs were selected by students themselves. The preparation and class discussion of each student group were audio-recorded, and final reports were also analyzed. As a result, NOT sub-components in the dimensions of artifacts and system were explicitly represented in most contexts of SSI with various ranges of understanding. Other sub-components under the dimensions of knowledge and practice were rarely or implicitly shown in the discussion. The depth of students' understanding on NOT varied. Implications for science education were discussed.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.37 no.3
• /
• pp.453-464
• /
• 2017

The purposes of the study are to investigate the experiences of major stakeholders (i.e. science teachers, program instructors, local experts, etc.) who participated in implementing Community-Based Socioscientific Issues Programs (SSI-COMM) and to provide educational implications for further implementation. SSI-COMM dealt with three issues (i.e. abandoned pets, fine dust, and recycling) that students often encountered in their local community. Each program, lasting over 16 class periods in a free semester, included in-school and out-of-school activities in order to promote their interest and participation in community. Four teachers, four program instructors, and six local experts joined the interviews to explain their experience of participating in the programs. As a result, school teachers, program instructors, and local experts positively appreciated their experiences of the program implementation and perceived educational potentials of SSI-COMM. All the stakeholders mentioned that they became more interested in local socioscientific issues and strongly perceived the need for the implementation of such programs linked to their own community. The science teachers appreciated the opportunities to identify students' potentials through SSI-COMM and believed that SSI-COMM would contribute to reducing the gap between learning and practice. The program instructors, observed that out-of-school activities contributed to enhancing students' self-confidence and fulfillment in learning. Finally, the local experts obtained a sense of belonging to their community and were very satisfied with their contribution. The SSI-COMM programs are expected to be one of the educational models that will help to encourage the participation of students and stakeholders in facilitating educational activities in relation to the community.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.36 no.5
• /
• pp.757-768
• /
• 2016

This study developed an SSI (Socio-Scientific Issue) discussion program that applies a creative technique called six thinking hats, and then investigated the differences in argumentation patterns and effects on the decision-making abilities of each character feature of students between SNS debate and existing face to face debate. There were three SSI themes - Designer Babies, embryonic stem cell study, and legitimacy of abortion. Students were divided into two groups, the debate group using SNS and face to face debate group. The character patterns of students were divided to 'extraversion,' 'agreeableness,' and 'conscientiousness' through test sheets for character features for each student. Both groups were educated for creative discussion methods using six thinking hats and then, the class progressed. As a result of analyzing argumentation patterns used in SNS debate and face to face debate, the most used argumentation pattern was the "cause pattern." But comparing to face to face debate, other patterns (mark, inference, authority, motive) were also used in SNS debate. The study analyzed three factors of decision-making ability for each character feature of students such as complexity, perspectives, and inquiry. As a result, for 'complexity' factor, there was a significant difference between SNS debate group and face to face debate group only in the student group of Agreeableness. For 'perspectives' factor, there were significant differences between SNS debate group and face to face debate group in all three characters. Finally, for inquiry, there were no significant differences between SNS debate group and face to face debate group in all three characters. Accordingly it would be necessary to apply SNS debate using the six thinking hats in SSI education to enhance perspectives.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.32 no.7
• /
• pp.1124-1138
• /
• 2012

This study investigates Korean middle school students' perceptions as global citizens (i.e. ecological worldview, social and moral compassion, and socioscientific accountability) of Socioscientific Issues (SSI). We developed questionnaires that consisted of 20 Likert-type items to gauge their preceptions of the three different SSI contexts (i.e. nuclear power generation, bio-technology, climate change), and administered them to 225 9th grade students in Seoul. The results revealed that participants showed relatively high scores for ecological worldview but scored low on social and moral compassion across the SSI contexts. In addition, participants presented much higher scores for ecological worldview and socioscientific accountability regarding the issues of climate change. The participant responses indicated that they perceived more inter-connectedness with the environment and felt the responsibility of promoting sustainable development more to prevent further devastation in the context of climate change compared to nuclear power generation or biotechnology.