Teaching socioscientific issues in the digital age: Emerging trends and unexplored frontiers

Year 2024, , 92 - 109, 31.01.2024

Dilek Karışan , Dana Zeıdler

https://doi.org/10.19128/turje.1384524

Abstract

As society navigates complex socioscientific issues (SSI) in an increasingly digitalized world, science education faces evolving challenges and opportunities. This study aimed to conduct a literature review by systematically analyzing and synthesizing existing research and publications on SSI pedagogy and the digital age. The steps involved in this method include: identifying the research scope, searching and selecting relevant literature, analyzing and synthesizing relevant literature, identifying gaps and trends, and critical evaluation and interpretation. The study explores the intersection of SSI pedagogy and the digital age, shedding light on both emerging trends and uncharted frontiers. The review delves into the dynamic landscape of SSI education, emphasizing the integration of digital technologies as a means to engage students in authentic, real-world problem-solving. It examines the role of technology in enhancing SSI learning experiences, from virtual simulations to online collaborative platforms. Furthermore, the review critically evaluates the impact of digital tools on student decision-making, argumentation skills, and ethical reasoning in the context of socioscientific dilemmas. This review also addresses the challenges and opportunities of teaching SSI in online and blended learning environments, particularly in light of the global shift toward remote education. In summary, this review informs educators, and researchers, and underscores the pivotal role of digital technologies in preparing students to navigate the complex socioscientific challenges of the 21st century.

Keywords

Digital tools, Online collaborative platforms, Socioscientific issues

Ethical Statement

derleme çalışması olduğu için etik izin gerekli değildir.

Dijital çağda sosyobilimsel konuların öğretimi: Ortaya çıkan eğilimler ve keşfedilmemiş sınırlar

Abstract

Toplum giderek dijitalleşen bir dünyada karmaşık sosyobilimsel konulara (SBK) yönelirken, fen eğitimi de değişen zorluklar ve fırsatlarla karşı karşıya kalmaktadır. Bu çalışma, SBK ve dijital çağ üzerine mevcut araştırma ve yayınları sistematik bir şekilde analiz ve sentez ederek bir literatür taraması yapmayı amaçlamıştır. Bu yöntemde yer alan adımlar şunlardır: araştırma kapsamının belirlenmesi, ilgili literatürün taranması ve seçilmesi, ilgili literatürün analizi ve sentezlenmesi, boşlukların ve eğilimlerin belirlenmesi ve eleştirel değerlendirme ve yorumlama. Bu literatür incelemesi hem yeni ortaya çıkan trendlere hem de keşfedilmemiş sınırlara ışık tutarak SBK pedagojisi ile dijital çağın kesişimini araştırmaktadır. İnceleme, öğrencileri otantik, gerçek dünya problemlerinin çözümüne dahil etmenin bir yolu olarak dijital teknolojilerin entegrasyonunu vurgulayarak SBK eğitiminin dinamik ortamını araştırmaktadır. Sanal simülasyonlardan çevrimiçi işbirlikçi platformlara kadar teknolojinin SBK öğrenme deneyimlerini geliştirmedeki rolünü incelemektedir. Ayrıca, inceleme, dijital araçların sosyobilimsel ikilemler bağlamında öğrencilerin karar verme, tartışma becerileri ve etik muhakeme üzerindeki etkisini eleştirel bir şekilde değerlendirmektedir. Bu derleme aynı zamanda, özellikle uzaktan eğitime doğru küresel değişim ışığında, çevrimiçi ve karma öğrenme ortamlarında SBK öğretiminin zorluklarını ve fırsatlarını da ele almaktadır. Özetle bu derleme, eğitimcileri ve araştırmacıları bilgilendirmekte ve dijital teknolojilerin öğrencileri 21. yüzyılın karmaşık sosyobilimsel zorluklarının üstesinden gelmeye hazırlamadaki öneminin altını çizmektedir.

Keywords

Çevrimiçi işbirlikçi platformlar, Dijital araçlar, Sosyobilimsel konular

References

• Amilyana, A. S., & Noer, T. K. M. S., & Raharjo. (2021). A teaching material based on science, environment, technology, and society to improve student’s critical thinking skills: Synchronous and asynchronous learning during Covid-19 pandemic. International Journal of Recent Educational Research, 2(4), 372-391. https://doi.org/10.46245/ijorer.v2i4.109
• Anggoro, K. J. (2021). Pear deck. RELC Journal, 52(3), 645-647. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220936735
• Awedh, M., Mueen, A., Zafar, B., & Manzoor, U. (2015). Using Socrative and Smartphones for the support of collaborative learning. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1501.01276
• Barbosa, S. D. J., Barbosa, G. D. J., Souza, C. S. D., & Leitão, C. F. (2021, March). A semiotics-based epistemic tool to reason about ethical issues in digital technology design and development. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 363-374). https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445900
• Basar, Z. M., Mansor, A. N., Jamaludin, K. A., & Alias, B. S. (2021). The effectiveness and challenges of online learning for secondary school students–A case study. Asian Journal of University Education, 17(3), 119-129. https://doi.org/10.24191/ajue.v17i3.14514
• Bazzul, J. (2016). Ethics and science education: How subjectivity matters. Springer.
• Benham, A., Callas, M., Fotherby, R., Jones, M., Chadha, J., Dobbin, M., & Johnson, A. W. (2021, October). Developing and Implementing an Aerospace Macroethics Lesson in a Required Sophomore Course. In 2021 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (pp. 1-9). IEEE. https:/doi.org/10.1109/FIE49875.2021.9637172
• Benetos, K. (2023). Digital Tools for Written Argumentation. In Digital Writing Technologies in Higher Education: Theory, Research, and Practice (pp. 81-99). Springer International Publishing.
• Bond, M., Bergdahl, N., Mendizabal-Espinosa, R., Kneale, D., Bolan, F., Hull, P., & Ramadani, F. (2021). Global emergency remote education in secondary schools during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review. https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10136765/1/IPPO%20online%20learning%20-%20main%20report.pdf
• Brandt, M., Groom, Q., Magro, A., Misevic, D., Narraway, C. L., Bruckermann, T., ... & Jenkins, T. (2022). Promoting scientific literacy in evolution through citizen science. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 289(1980), 20221077. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2022.1077
• Brown, B., Pérez, G., Ribay, K., Boda, P. A., & Wilsey, M. (2021). Teaching culturally relevant science in virtual reality: “When a problem comes, you can solve it with science”. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 32(1), 7-38. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2020.1778248
• Chan, T. A. C. H., Ho, J. M. B., & Tom, M. (2023). Miro: Promoting collaboration through online whiteboard interaction. RELC Journal, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882231165061
• Channa, F. R., Sarhandi, P. S. A., Bugti, F., & Pathan, H. (2021). Harnessing artificial intelligence in education for preparing learners for the 21st century. Elementary Education Online, 20(5), 3186-3186. https:/doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2021.05.346
• Chang, H. Y., Hsu, Y. S., & Wu, H. K. (2016). A comparison study of augmented reality versus interactive simulation technology to support student learning of a socio-scientific issue. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(6), 1148-1161. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2014.961486
• Chen, C. M., Li, M. C., & Huang, Y. L. (2023). Developing an instant semantic analysis and feedback system to facilitate the learning performance of online discussion. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(3), 1402-1420. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1839505
• Chowdhury, T. B. M., Holbrook, J., & Rannikmäe, M. (2020). Socioscientific issues within science education and their role in promoting the desired citizenry. Science Education International, 31(2), 203-208. https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v31.i2.10
• Darazha, I., Lyazzat, R., Ulzharkyn, A., Saira, Z., & Manat, Z. (2021, March). Digital Competence of a Teacher in a Pandemic. International Conference on Information and Education Technology (ICIET) Conference 2021. https:/doi.org/10.1109/ICIET51873.2021
• Deck, P. (2020). Pear Deck for Google Slides. Peardeck Inc. Retrieved October 14, from https://www.wcupa.edu/education-socialWork/technologyCenter/documents/PearDeckQuickStart.pdf
• Delgado-Algarra, E. J. (Ed.). (2020). ICTs and innovation for didactics of social sciences. IGI Global.
• Devi, K. S., & Aparna, M. (2020). Moodle–An effective learning management system for 21st century learners. Alochana Chakra Journal, 9(6), 4474-4485.
• D.K. Academy (2021, October 14). Current Research Trends in Socioscientific Issues [video] Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MpCV8kWmZk
• EducationMelbourne (2020, October 8). Serendipity of Socioscientific Issues [video] Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iOf8iMQ3Jw
• Elam, M., Solli, A., & Mäkitalo, Å. (2019). Socioscientific issues via controversy mapping: Bringing actor-network theory into the science classroom with digital technology. Discourse: Studies in The Cultural Politics of Education, 40(1), 61-77. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2018.1549704
• Esmeijer, L. M. (2021). Future scenarios to introduce sustainability-related SocioScientific Issues in science education (Unpublished master’s thesis). Utrecht University.
• Fackler, A. K., & Sexton, C. M. (2020). Science teacher education in the time of COVID-19. The Electronic Journal for Research in Science & Mathematics Education, 24(3), 5-13.
• Graham, S. R., Tolar, A., & Hokayem, H. (2020). Teaching Preservice Teachers about COVID-19 through Distance Learning. Electronic Journal for Research in Science & Mathematics Education, 24(3), 29-37.
• Geelan, D. R., & Fan, X. (2014). Teachers using interactive simulations to scaffold inquiry instruction in physical science education. In B. Eilam, & J. K. Gilbert, (Eds.), Science Teachers’ Use of Visual Representations (pp. 249-270). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06526-7_11
• Gutierez, S. B. (2015). Integrating socio-scientific issues to enhance the bioethical decision-making skills of high school students. International Education Studies, 8(1), 142-151. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ies.v8n1p142
• Grosseck, G. (2009). To use or not to use Web 2.0 in higher education? Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, 478-482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.087
• Habiby, I. (2021, March). Improving students’ NOS understanding through explicit-reflective learning with socio-scientific issues context. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1806, No. 1, p. 012122). IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1806/1/012122
• Hoffman, C., Cooper, C. B., Kennedy, E. B., Farooque, M., & Cavalier, D. (2017). Scistarter 2.0: A digital platform to foster and study sustained engagement in citizen science. In L. Ceccaroni, & J. Piera, (Eds.), Analyzing the Role of citizen science in modern research (pp. 50-61). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-0962-2.ch003
• Hwang, Y., Ko, Y., Shim, S. S., Ok, S. Y., & Lee, H. (2023). Promoting engineering students’ social responsibility and willingness to act on socioscientific issues. International Journal of STEM Education, 10(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00402-1
• Johnson, J., Macalalag, A. Z., & Dunphy, J. (2020). Incorporating socioscientific issues into a STEM education course: exploring teacher use of argumentation in SSI and plans for classroom implementation. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 2, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-020-00026-3
• Karisan, D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2017). Contextualization of Nature of Science within the Socioscientific Issues Framework: A Review of Research. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 5(2), 139-152. https://doi.org/10.18404/ijemst.270186
• Kc, D. (2017). Evaluation of Moodle features at Kajaani University of applied sciences–case study. Procedia Computer Science, 116, 121-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2017.10.021
• Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2012). How should the higher education workforce adapt to advancements in technology for teaching and learning? The Internet and Higher Education, 15(4), 247-254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.12.002
• Kinskey, M. (2020). Developing and facilitating socioscientific issues based science lessons: elementary preservice teachers’ experiences. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of South Florida.
• Licorish, S. A., Owen, H. E., Daniel, B., & George, J. L. (2018). Students’ perception of Kahoot!’s influence on teaching and learning. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 13(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-018-0078-8
• Li, Y., & Ranieri, M. (2013). Educational and social correlates of the digital divide for rural and urban children: A study on primary school students in a provincial city of China. Computers & Education, 60(1), 197-209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.08.001
• Matovu, H., Ungu, D. A. K., Won, M., Tsai, C. C., Treagust, D. F., Mocerino, M., & Tasker, R. (2023). Immersive virtual reality for science learning: Design, implementation, and evaluation. Studies in Science Education, 1-40. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2022.2082680.
• McCrory, A., & Reiss, M. (2023). The place of ethics in science education: Implications for practice. Bloomsbury Academic.
• Merritt, E. G., Weinberg, A. E., & Archambault, L. (2023). Exploring energy through the lens of equity: Funds of knowledge conveyed through video-based discussion. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-023-10352-3
• Moorhouse, B. L., Lee, J., & Herd, S. (2021). Providing remote school-based professional support to teachers during school closures caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Learning: Research and Practice, 7(1), 5-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2020.1825777
• Moura, A. C. M., & Campagna, M. (2018). Co-design: Digital tools for knowledge-building and decision-making in planning and design. Disegnarecon, 11(20), 1-3. https://doi.org/10.20365/disegnarecon.20.2018.ed
• Newton, H.H., Annetta, L., & Bressler, D.M. (2023, April). Using extended reality technologies within a socioscientific issues unit on climate change Paper presentation. 94th Annual Meeting of NARST: A worldwide organization for improving science teaching and learning through research Conference 2023, Chicago, USA.
• Okada, A. (2008). Scaffolding school pupils’ scientific argumentation with evidence-based dialogue maps. Knowledge cartography: Software tools and mapping techniques, 131-162. https:/doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84800-149-7
• Olugbade, D., Ojo, O. A., & Tolorunleke, A. E. (2023). Challenges and limitations of Moodle LMS in handling large-scale projects: West-African Universities lecturers’ perspective. Journal of Educational Technology and Instruction, 2(2), 47-66. Retrieved from https://ijeti-edu.org/index.php/ijeti/article/view/71
• Özbugutu, E. (2022). Opinions of Science Teachers Who Are Graduate Students on Teaching Socio Scientific Issues. Bulletin of Education and Research, 44(1), 1-21.
• Öztürk, N., Bozkurt Altan, E., & Türkoğlu, A. Y. (2021). Discussing socio-scientific issues on X (Twitter): The quality of pre-service science teachers’ arguments. Journal of Education in Science Environment and Health, 7(1), 72-85. https://doi.org/10.21891/jeseh.798167
• Pedro, F., Subosa, M., Rivas, A., & Valverde, P. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Challenges and opportunities for sustainable development.
• PhET Interactive simulations. (2023, October, 08). PhET: Research and Development: How PhET simulations are designed, and the research process of refining the simulations to best promote learning. https://phet.colorado.edu/en/research
• Pena‐Silva, R. A., Velasco‐Castro, J. M., Zuluaga, L., Cocoma, G., & Jaramillo‐Rincon, S. X. (2022). Fostering ethical reasoning in medical pharmacology through role‐playing and digital tools. The FASEB Journal, 36. https://doi.org/10.1096/fasebj.2022.36.S1.R4797
• Perkins, K., & Moore, E., (2012). PhET interactive simulations: Using implicit scaffolding to support productive inquiry learning. Proceedings from EARLI SIG 20 Conference on Computer-Supported Inquiry Learning (pp 24-25).
• Presley L, Sickel A J, Muslu N, Johnson D, Witzig S, Izsi K, and Sadler T. A (2013). A framework for socio-scientific issues based education. Science Educator, 22(1), 26-32.
• Radics, R. (2021, Novenber). Methodological processing of gastronomic short stories using MIRO. COM platform. 14th Annual International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation (ICERI) Online Conference, https://doi.org/10.21125/iceri.2021.2010
• Ravenscroft, A., & McAlister, S. (2008). Investigating and promoting educational argumentation: Towards new digital practices. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 31(3), 317-335. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437270802417192
• 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
• Sadler, T. D., Klosterman, M. L., & Topcu, M. S. (2011). Learning science content and socio-scientific reasoning through classroom explorations of global climate change. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socio-Scientific issues in the classroom: Teaching, learning, and research, (pp. 45–77). Springer.
• Simamora, R. M. (2020). The challenges of online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: An essay analysis of performing arts education students. Studies in Learning and Teaching, 1(2), 86-103.
• Sexena, A. (2019). Ethics in science: Pedagogic issues and concerns. Springer Nature.
• Teig, N., & Scherer, R. (2016). Bringing formal and informal reasoning together—A new era of assessment? Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1097. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01097
• SciStarter. (2021, December 10). MIT Climate CoLab. https://scistarter.org/mit-climate-colab
• Solbu, G., Heidenreich, S., Robison, R., & Ryghaug, M. (2023). Engagement methods for climate, energy, and mobility transitions.
• Shaw, M., Walker, J., & Kafai, Y. (2019). Arguing about synthetic biology in 140 characters or less: Affordances of microblogging for high school students' discussions of socioscientific issues. In Lund, K., Niccolai, G. P., Lavoué, E., Hmelo-Silver, C., Gweon, G., & Baker, M. (Eds.), A Wide Lens: Combining Embodied, Enactive, Extended, and Embedded Learning in Collaborative Settings, 13th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) 2019, Volume 1 (pp. 526-533). International Society of the Learning Sciences.
• Sugino, C. (2021). Student perceptions of a synchronous online cooperative learning course in a Japanese women’s university. Education Sciences, 11(5), 231. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11050231
• Veng, S. (2023). Using an online student response system to promote student engagement in critical thinking classes. International Journal of TESOL Studies, 5(1), 69-86. https://doi.org/10.58304/ijts.20230106
• Xu, Y. (2010). Examining the effects of digital feedback on student engagement and achievement. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 43(3), 275-291. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.43.3.a
• Walker, K. A. & Zeidler, D. L. (2007). Promoting discourse about socioscientific issues through scaffolded inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1387-1410. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690601068095
• Wang, A.I. (2015). The wear-out effect of a game-based student response system. Computers & Education, 82, 217-227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.004
• Wash, P. D. (2014). Taking advantage of mobile devices: Using Socrative in the classroom. Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology, 99-101. https://doi.org/10.14434/jotlt.v3n1.5016
• Wong, R. (2023). When no one can go to school: Does online learning meet students’ basic learning needs? Interactive Learning Environments, 31(1), 434-450. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1789672
• Zeidler, D. L. (2003). The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education. Kluwer Academic Press.
• 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
• Zeidler, D. L., Herman, B. C., & Sadler, T. D. (2019). New directions in socioscientific issues research. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(11), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0008-7
• Zeidler, D. L., & Kahn, S. (2014). It's debatable!: Using socioscientific issues to develop scientific literacy K-12. NSTA press.
• Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2023). Exploring and expanding the frontiers of socioscientific issues: Crossroads and future directions. In N. G. Lederman, D.L. Zeidler, & J.S. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education, Volume III (pp. 899-929). Routledge.