Cover Image

Improving Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Content Knowledge and Argumentation Quality through Socio-Scientific Issues-Based Modules: An Action Research Study

Nurcan Tekin, Oktay Aslan, Süleyman Yılmaz


This paper aimed to assess improvements in content knowledge and argumentation quality of pre-service science teachers (PST) through a socio-scientific issues-based (SSI-based) module course. The study was designed as action research with 25 PSTs. Data collection instruments were an energy-related content knowledge questionnaire and video recordings. An energy-related content knowledge rubric was used to evaluate the content knowledge of PSTs, while their argumentation quality was analyzed using a video analysis inventory. The module course was completed in eight weeks. Findings showed that the SSI-based teaching modules course improved energy-related content knowledge with all  PSTs increasing by a minimum of one criterion on the rubric.  Although the number of arguments decreased weekly, the argumentation quality also increased. Thus, it can be inferred that SSI-based module teaching is a practical tool to teach energy-related content knowledge and argumentation qualities. The study suggests that action research can contribute to developing an effective learning environment.  Further studies that include the actual practices of PSTs as they reflect and revise their learning are indicated.

Full Text:



Andrews, R., Costello, P., & Clarke, S. (1993). Improving the quality of argument: Final report. Hull. UK: University of Hull.

Bartosch, I. (2018). Learning about energy. A real-life approach challenging the present culture of science & engineering. Visions for Sustainability. 9, 27-40. doi: 10.13135/2384-8677/2771

Bencze, J.L. (2000). Procedural apprenticeship in school science: Constructivist enabling of connoisseurship. Science Education, 84(6), 727-739. doi: 10.1002/1098-237X(200011)84:6<727::AID-SCE3>3.0.CO;2-O

Borgerding, L.A., & Dagistan, M. (2018) Pre-service science teachers’ concerns and approaches for teaching socio-scientific and controversial issues. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 29(4), 283-306, doi: 10.1080/1046560X.2018.1440860

Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 20(1), 37-46.

Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC). (1997). Common framework of science learning outcomes K to 12: Pan-Canadian protocol for collaboration on school curriculum for use by curriculum developers. Toronto, Canada.

Creswell, J.W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Los Angeles: Sage.

Çetin, P.S. (2014). Explicit argumentation instruction to facilitate conceptual understanding and argumentation skills. Research in Science & Technological Education. 32(1), 1-20. doi: 10.1080/02635143.2013.850071

Dawson, V. (2001). Addressing controversial issues in secondary school science. Australian Science Teachers Journal. 47(4), 38-44.

Dawson, V., & Carson, K. (2017). Using climate change scenarios to improve grade 10 students’ argumentataion skills. In O. Finlayson, E. McLoughlin, S. Erduran, & P. Childs (Eds). Electronic Proceedings of the ESERA 2017 Conference. Research, Practice and Collaboration in Science Education, Part 8 (co-ed. J.A. Nielsen & M. Lindahl), Dublin, Ireland: Dublin City University. ISBN 978-1-873769-84-3

DeWaters, J., & Powers, S. (2013). Establishing measurement criteria for an energy literacy questionnaire. The Journal of Environmental Education. 44(1), 38-55. doi: 10.1080/00958964.2012.711378

Duschl, R.A., Schweingruber, H.A., & Shouse, A.W. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington DC: National Academy Press.

Eilks, I. (2018). Action research in science education: A twenty years personal perspective. Action Research and Innovation in Science Education. 1(1), 3-14. doi: 10.12973/arise/98909

Eilks, I., & Ralle, B. (2002). Participatory action research in chemical education. In B. Ralle & I. Eilks (Eds.), Research in chemical rducation-What does this mean? (pp. 87-98). Aachen: Shaker.

Eisenkraft, A., Nordine, J., Chen, R.F., Fortus, D., Krajcik, J., Neumann, K. (2014). Why focus on energy instruction? In R.F. Chen, A. Eisenkraft, D. Fortus, J. Krajcik, K. Neumann, J. Nordine & A. Scheff (Eds). Teaching and learning of energy in K-12 education (pp. 1-14). Switzerland: Springer.

Ekborg, M., Ottander, C., Silfver, E., & Simon, S. (2013). Teachers’ experience of working with socio-scientific issues: A large scale and in depth study. Research in Science Education. 43, 599-617. doi: 10.1007/s11165-011-9279-5

Elliot, J. (1991). Action research for educational change. Buchingam: Open University Press.

Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin’s argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education. 88(6), 915-933. doi: 10.1002/sce.20012

Evagorou, M. (2011). Discussing a socio-scientific 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). New York: Springer.

Evagorou, M., Guven, D., & Mugaloglu, E. (2014). Preparing elementary and secondary pre-service teachers for everyday science. Science Education International. 25(1), 68-78.

Fleiss, J.L. (1971). Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychological Bulletin. 76(5), 378-382.

Friedrichsen, P., Sadler, T., Graham, K., & Brown, P. (2016). Design of a socio-scientific issue curriculum unit: Antibiotic resistance, natural selection and modelling. International Journal of Design for Learning. 7(1), 1-18. doi: 10.14434/ijdl.v7i1.19325

Gresch, H., Hasselhorn, M., & Bögeholz, S. (2013). Training in decision-making strategies: An approach to enhance students’ competence to deal with socio-scientific issues. International Journal of Science Education. 35(15), 2587-2607. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2011.617789

Hanley, P., Ratcliffe, M., & Osborne, J. (2007). Teachers’ experiences of teaching ‘ideas-about-science’ and socio-scientific issues. Paper presented at the 7th Conference of the European Science Education Research Association. Malmö, Sweden.

Jegstad, K.M., & Sinnes, A.T. (2015). Chemistry teaching for the future: A model for secondary chemistry education for sustainable development. International Journal of Science Education, 37(4), 655-683. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2014.1003988.

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

Jimenez-Aleixandre, M.P., & Pereiro-Munoz, C. (2002). Knowledge producers or knowledge consumers? Argumentation and decision making about environmental management. International Journal of Science Education, 24(11), 1171-1190.

Johnson, A.P. (2012). A short guide to action research. (4th ed.). Boston MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Keefer, M.W. (2003). Moral reasoning and case-based approaches to ethical instruction in science. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socio-scientific issues and discourse in science education (pp. 241-259). Dordrecht: Springer.

Klosterman, M.L., & Sadler, T.D. (2010). Multi-level assessment of scientific content knowledge gains associated with socio-scientific issues based instruction. International Journal of Science Education. 32, 1017-1043.

Klosterman, M. L., Sadler, T. D., & Brown. J. (2012). Science teachers’ use of mass media to address socio-scientific and sustainability issues. Research in Science Education, 42(1), 51-74. doi: 10.1007/s11165-011-9256-z

Landis, J.R., & Koch, G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159-174.

Lederman, G., Antink, A., & Bartos, S. (2014). Nature of science, scientific inquiry, and socio-scientific issues arising from genetics: A pathway to developing a scientifically literate citizenry. Science and Education. 23, 285-302. doi: 10.1007/s11191-012-9503-3

Lee, R.P. (2015). Analysis of psychological determinants and factors influencing energy evaluations and preferences: Implications for managing the human dimension of energy system (Doctoral Dissertation). TU Bergakademie Freiberg, Germany.

Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education (pp. 95-132). Boston: Kluwer.

McIntyre, D. (2005). Bridging the gap between research and practice. Cambridge Journal of Education. 35, 357-382.

McTaggart, R. (1997). Reading the collection. In R. McTaggart (Ed.), Participatory action research (pp. 1-12). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

Ministry of National Education of Turkey (MoNE) (2013). İlköğretim kurumları fen bilimleri dersi öğretim programı [Elementary schools science education curriculum for grades 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8]. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı.

Ministry of National Education of Turkey (MoNE) (2017). Fen bilimleri dersi öğretim programı (İlkokul ve Ortaokul 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ve 8. sınıflar) [Science education curriculum for grades 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8]. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı.

Nielsen, J.A. (2012). Science in discussions: An analysis of the use of science content in socio-scientific discussions. Science Education, 96(3), 428-456.

Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 41(10), 994-1020. doi: 10.1002/tea.20035

Presley, M.L., Sickel, A.J., Muslu, N., Merle-Johnson, D., Witzig, S.B., Izci, K. et. al. (2013). A framework for socio-scientific issues based education. Science Educator, 22, 26-32.

Pitiporntapin, S., Yutakom, N., & Sadler, T.D. (2016). Thai pre-service science teachers’ struggles in using Socio-scientific Issues (SSIs) during practicum. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 17(2), 1-20.

Ratcliffe, M., & Grace, M. (2003). Science education for citizenship: Teaching socio-scientific issues. Philadelphia: Open University Press.

Sadler, T.D. (2009). Situated learning in science educaton: socioscientfc issues as contexts for practce. Studies in Science Educaton. 45(1), 1-42. doi: 10.1080/03057260802681839

Sadler, T.D. (2011a). Situating socio-scientific issues in classrooms as a means of achieving goals of science education. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.). Socio-scientific Issues in the Classroom: Teaching, Learning and Research (pp. 1-10). New York: Springer.

Sadler, T.D. (2011b). 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: Teaching, Learning and Research (pp. 355-369). New York: Springer.

Sadler, T.D., Friedrichsen, P., Graham, K., Foulk, J., Tang, N., & Menon, D. (2015). The derivation of an instructional model and design processes for socio-scientific issues-based teaching. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Chicago IL.

Sadler, T.D., & Zeidler D.L. (2005). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socio-scientific decision making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 112-138. doi: 10.1002/tea.20042

Sakschewski, M., Eggert, S., Schneider, S., & Bögeholz, S. (2014). Students’ socio-scientific reasoning and decision-making on energy-related issues-development of a measurement instrument. International Journal of Science Education. 36(14), 2291-2313. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2014.920550

Sandell, K., Öhman, J., & Östman, L. (2003). Education for sustainable development-nature, school and democracy. Malmö: Studentlitteratur.

Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2011). A comparison of the collaborative scientific argumentation practices of two high and two low performing groups. Research in Science Education, 41, 63-97. doi: 10.1007/s11165-009-9146-9

Simon, S., & Amos, R. (2011). Decision-making and use of evidence in a socio-scientific problem on air quality. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.). Socio-scientific Issues in the Classroom: Teaching, Learning and Research (pp. 167-192). New York: Springer.

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. doi:10.1007/s11165-011-9257-y

Topçu, M.S. (2008). Pre-service science teachers’ informal reasoning regarding socio-scientific issues and the factors influencing their informal reasoning (Doctoral Dissertation). Middle East Technical University, Ankara.

Topçu, M.S. (2015). Sosyobilimsel Konular ve Öğretimi [Socioscientific Issues and Their Instruction]. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.

Topçu, M.S., Muğaloğlu, E.Z., & Güven, D. (2014). Fen eğitiminde sosyobilimsel konular: Türkiye örneği [Socioscientific issues in science education: The case of Turkey]. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 14(6), 2327-2348.

Venville, G.J., & Dawson, V.M. (2010). The impact of a classroom intervention on grade 10 students’ argumentation skills, informal reasoning, and conceptual understanding of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 47(8), 952-977. doi: 10.1002/tea.20358

Von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Case studies of how students’ argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 45(1), 101-131. doi: 10.1002/tea.20213

Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., Braaten, M., & Stroupe, D. (2012). Proposing a core set of instructional practices and tools for teachers of science. Science Education, 96, 878-903. doi: 10.1002/sce.21027

Western Australia Curriculum Council (WACC). (1998). The curriculum framework for kindergarten to Year 12 education in Western Australia. Perth, Western Australia.

Zeidler, D.L., Sadler, T.D, Simmons, M., & Howes, E. (2005). Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socio-scientific issues education. Science Education, 89(3), 357-377. doi: 10.1002/sce.20048

Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 35-62.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2020 Nurcan Tekin, Oktay Aslan, Süleyman Yılmaz

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