The Coherence Between Epistemologies and SSI Teaching

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to understand the nature of the link between science teachers’ epistemologies and their socioscientific issue (SSI) teaching discourse. It is important to consider this link due to the limitations of science teachers in shifting from monologic to more dialogic orientations in their teaching, despite SSI-based science education reforms in many countries. Teachers’ epistemologies are likely to contribute to the difficulties experienced in this shift. We selected three science teachers using purposive sampling procedures. Using classroom observations and follow-up constructivism-oriented interviews, we selected one non-constructivist, one moderately constructivist, and one constructivist science teacher. We then examined these teachers’ (knowledge-based and science-based) epistemologies by two semi-structured interviews. The teachers taught one SSI topic and then we conducted classroom observations. Benefiting from highly used classifications, we classified teachers’ epistemologies and discourses in the transcripts. The results showed that there were some coherences and incoherences between science teachers’ epistemologies and their SSI teaching. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11191-021-00200-7.

Strengthening the Tension of Socio-Scientific Issues Based Learning to Promoting Democratic Life : A Systematic Review

“…Related to SSI as a learning approach, several research finding show that SSI can improve student learning outcomes (increase students' understanding of scientific knowledge) (Chen & So, 2017;Lorite et al, 2023;Estigarribia et al, 2022;Karpudewan & Roth, 2016;Kolarova et al, 2013;Owens et al, 2020;Sadler et al, 2016;Wahono, Chang, et al, 2021;Wahono et al, 2021), the development of students' attitudes and motivation towards science (Bossér & Lindahl, 2020;Chang et al, 2013;Lindahl & Folkesson, 2016;Yahaya et al, 2016), related to epistemological beliefs (Baytelman et al, 2020;Chang et al, 2020;Eryasar & Kilinc, 2022;Hsu et al, 2014;Lin et al, 2020;Muis et al, 2021;Öztürk & Yilmaz-Tuzun, 2016;Zeidler et al, 2013), increasing students' understanding of the nature of science itself (Bilican, 2018;Christenson & Walan, 2023;Khishfe et al, 2017;Kutluca & Aydın, 2018), critical thinking (Gül & Akcay, 2020;Pratiwi et al, 2016;Solbes et al, 2018), argumentation (Anwar & Ali, 2020;Capkinoglu et al, 2020;Evagorou & Osborne, 2013;Grooms, 2020;Grooms et al, 2014;Jumadi et al, 2021;Khishfe, 2014;Kutluca & Aydin, 2016;…”