Cover Image

Investigating Turkish Pre-service Science Teachers’ Moral Reasoning in Genetics related Socioscientific Issues

Ümran Betül Cebesoy

Abstract


In this study, Turkish pre-service science teachers' moral reasoning patterns and the factors which influence their decisions while discussing genetics-related socio-scientific issues (SSI) were investigated. A basic qualitative approach was adopted for this purpose. Seven third-grade pre-service science teachers enrolled in the study. Semi-structured interviews for different genetics related SSI were conducted. The results revealed that decisions were generally based on the consequences of genetic applications (consequentialist) or based on moral principles or prescripts (principle-based). Most participants used consequence-based moral reasoning in their decisions, while principle-based moral reasoning was less used. They also used emotion-based moral reasoning.  Their decisions were influenced by emotions, including empathy or sympathy toward the characters, or the unborn baby, in the scenarios. Additional and varied factors, including legal, ethical, economic, and technological concerns, were revealed as influential. Participants' decisions were also shaped by their own experiences, media resources, and faith in science. The implications for science teacher education programs are discussed.

Full Text:

DOWNLOAD PDF

References


Aivelo, T., & Uitto, A. (2019). Teachers' approaches to genetics teaching mirror their choice of content and avoidance of sensitive issues. [E-reader version]. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/350710

Archibald, M. M. (2016). Investigator triangulation: A collaborative strategy with potential for mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 10(3), 228-250.

Bell, R. L. (1999). Understandings of the nature of science and decision making on science and technology based issues (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Oregon State University, Oregon.

Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Understandings of the nature of science and decision making on science and technology based issues. Science Education, 87(3), 352-377.

Bingle, W. H., & Gaskell, P. J. (1994). Scientific literacy for decision-making and the social construction of scientific knowledge. Science Education, 78(2), 185-201.

Bossér, U., Lundin, M., Lindahl, M., & Linder, C. (2015). Challenges faced by teachers implementing socioscientific issues as core elements in their classroom practices. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 3(2), 159-176.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. Sage.

Bryce, T., & Gray, D. (2004). Tough acts to follow: the challenges to science teachers presented by biotechnological progress. International Journal of Science Education, 26(6), 717-733.

Caelli, K., Ray, L., & Mill, J. (2003). ‘Clear as mud’: Toward greater clarity in generic qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2(2), 1-13.

Cebesoy, U. B. (2014). An analysis of science teachers’ genetics literacy and related decision making process (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.

Chang Rundgren, S. N., & 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.

Eggert, S., Ostermeyer, F., Hasselhorn, M., & Bögeholz, S. (2013). Socio-scientific decision making in the science classroom: The effect of embedded metacognitive instructions on students' learning outcomes. Education Research International, 1-12.

Fowler, S. R., & Zeidler, D. L. (2016). Lack of evolution acceptance inhibits students' negotiation of biology-based socioscientific issues. Journal of Biological Education, 50(4), 407-424.

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.

Gericke, N., & Smith, M. (2014). Twenty-first-century genetics and genomics: Contributions of HPS-informed research and pedagogy. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science teaching (pp. 423–467). Springer.

Gresch, H., Hasselhorn, M., & Bögeholz, S. (2017). Enhancing decision-making in STSE education by inducing reflection and self-regulated learning. Research in Science Education, 47(1), 95-118.

Guion, R. M. (2002). Validity and reliability. In S. G. Rogelberg (Ed.), Handbook of Research Methods in Industrial– Organizational Psychology (pp. 57–76). Blackwell.

Hsu, Y. S., & Lin, S. S. (2017). Prompting students to make socioscientific decisions: embedding metacognitive guidance in an e-learning environment. International Journal of Science Education, 39(7), 964-979.

Jho, H., Yoon, H. G., & Kim, M. (2014). The relationship of science knowledge, attitude and decision making on socioscientific issues: The case study of students’ debates on a nuclear power plant in Korea. Science & Education, 23(5), 1131-1151.

Kahlke, R. M. (2014). Generic qualitative approaches: Pitfalls and benefits of methodological mixology. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 13(1), 37-52.

Karisan, D., & Cebesoy, U. B. (2020). Use of the SEE-SEP model in pre-service science teacher education: The case of genetics dilemmas. In W. A. Powell (Ed.), Socioscientific Issues-Based Instruction for Scientific Literacy Development (pp. 223-254). IGI Global.

Khishfe, R. (2014). Explicit nature of science and argumentation instruction in the context of socioscientific issues: An effect on student learning and transfer. International Journal of Science Education, 36(6), 974-1016.

Lee, H., Chang, H., Choi, K., Kim, S. W., & Zeidler, D. L. (2012). Developing character and values for global citizens: Analysis of pre-service science teachers' moral reasoning on socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 34(6), 925-953.

Maxwell, J. A. (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (Vol. 41). Sage Publications.

Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (3rd Ed.). Jossey-Bass.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd Ed.). Sage Publications.

Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2018). Primary science and technology curriculum for 3th–8th grades. [E-reader version]. Retrieved from http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/ProgramDetay.aspx?PID=325

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2016). Science literacy: Concepts, contexts, and consequences. The National Academies Press.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD]. (2012). Assessment and Analytical Framework. [E-reader version]. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisa-for-development/PISA-D-Assessment-and-Analytical-Framework-Ebook.pdf

Ozden, M. (2020). Elementary school students' informal reasoning and its' quality regarding socioscientific issues. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 86, 61-84.

Percy, W. H., Kostere, K., & Kostere, S. (2015). Generic qualitative research in psychology. The Qualitative Report, 20(2), 76-85.

Rundgren, C. J., & Chang Rundgren, S. N. (2018). Aiming for responsible and competent citizenship through teacher professional development on teaching socioscientific inquiry-based learning (SSIBL). Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 19(2), Article 2.

Sadler, T. D. (2004a). Moral sensitivity and its contribution to the resolution of socioscientific issues. Journal of Moral Education, 33(3), 339-358.

Sadler, T. D. (2004b). Moral and ethical dimensions of socioscientific decision-making as integral components of scientific literacy. The Science Educator, 13, 39–48.

Sadler, T.D. (2004c). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of the literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 4, 513–536.

Sadler, T. D., & Donnelly, L. A. (2006). Socioscientific argumentation: The effects of content knowledge and morality. International Journal of Science Education, 28(12), 1463-1488.

Sadler, T. D. & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). The morality of socioscientific issues: Construal and resolution of genetic engineering dilemmas. Science Education, 88, 4–27.

Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 112-138.

Sadler, T. D., Amirshokoohi, A., Kazempour, M., & Allspaw, K. M., (2006). Socioscience and ethics in science classrooms: Teacher perspectives and strategies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 353‐376.

Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Sage Publications.

Topcu, M. S. (2008). Pre-service science teachers' informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues and the factors influencing their informal reasoning (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Middle East Technical University, Ankara.

Topcu, M. S., Yılmaz-Tüzün, Ö., & Sadler, T. D. (2011). Turkish pre-service science teachers' informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues and the factors influencing their informal reasoning. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22(4), 313-332.

Walker, K. A., & Zeidler, D. L. (2007). Promoting discourse about socioscientific issues through scaffolded inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1387-1410.

Zeidler, D. L., & Keefer, M. (2003). The role of moral reasoning and the status of socioscientific issues in science education. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The Role of Moral Reasoning on Socioscientific Issues and Discourse in Science Education (pp. 7-38). Springer.

Zeidler, D. L., & Schafer, L. E. (1984). Identifying mediating factors of moral reasoning in science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21(1), 1-15.

Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Applebaum, S., & Callahan, B. E. (2009). Advancing reflective judgment through socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 74-101.

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.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.17509/jsl.v4i1.28155

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Copyright (c) 2020 Ümran Betül Cebesoy

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.


Published by Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
in collaboration with the Indonesian Society of Science Educators
2021