Socioscientific argumentation: The effects of content knowledge and morality

International Journal of Science Education

Volumn 28, Issue 12, 2006, Pages 1463-1488

  Sadler, Troy D ^a   Donnelly, Lisa A ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

^b INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33750617598     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: 14645289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09500690600708717     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Bell, R. L. and Lederman, N. G. (2003) Understandings of the nature of science and decision making on science and technology based issues Science Education. 87, pp. 352-377.
2. Bingle, W. H. and Gaskell, P. J. (1994) Scientific literacy for decisionmaking and the social construction of scientific knowledge Science Education, 78, pp. 185-201.
3. Boss, J. A.(2002) Analyzing moral issues (2nd ed.). Boston MA: McGraw-Hill.
4. Bransford, J. D. and Brown, A. L. and Cocking, R. R. (1999) How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
5. Brown, J. S. and Collins, A. and Duguid, P. (1989) Situated cognition and the culture of learning Educational Researcher, 18((1)), pp. 34-41.
6. Chen, S. Y. and Raffan, J. (1999) Biotechnology: Student's knowledge and attitudes in the UK and Taiwan Journal of Biological Education, 34, pp. 17-23.
7. Davidson, M. L. and Robbins, S. (1978) The reliability and validity of objective indices of moral development Applied Psychological Measurement, 2, pp. 391-403.
8. Dawson, V. and Schibeci, R. (2003) Western Australian school students' understanding of biotechnology International Journal of Science Education, 25, pp. 57-69.
9. DeMarco, J. P.(1996) Moral theory: A contemporary overview. Boston MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
10. Driver, R. and Newton, P. and Osborne, J. (2000) Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms Science Education, 84, pp. 287-312.
11. Duschl, R. A. and Osborne, J. (2002) Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education Studies in Science Education, 38, pp. 39-72.
12. Eisner, E. W. (1991) The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational practice. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
13. Erduran, S. and Simon, S. and Osborne, J. (2004) TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin's argument pattern for studying science discourse Science Education 88, pp. 915-933.
14. Evans, J. H.(2002) Playing God? Human genetic engineering and the rationalization of public bioethical debate. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15. Fleming, R. (1986a) Adolescent reasoning in socio-scientific issues, part I: Social cognition Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23, pp. 677-687.
16. Fleming, R. (1986b) Adolescent reasoning in socio-scientific issues, part II: Nonsocial cognition Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23, pp. 689-698.
17. Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, A. L.(1967) The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine.
18. Greeno, J. G. (1998) The situativity of knowing, learning, and research American Psychologist, 53, pp. 5-26.
19. Gunter, B. and Kinderlerer, J. and Beyleveld, D. (1998) Teenagers and biotechnology: A survey of understanding and opinion in Britain Studies in Science Education, 32, pp. 81-112.
20. Haskell, R. E.(2001) Transfer of learning: Cognition, instruction, and reasoning. San Diego CA: Academic Press.
21. Hogan, K. (2002) Small groups' ecological reasoning while making an environmental management decision Journal of Research in Science Teaching 39, pp. 341-368.
22. Keselman, A. and Kaufman, D. R. and Patel, V. L. (2004) "You can exercise your way out of HIV" and other stories: The role of biological knowledge in adolescents' evaluation of myths Science Education, 88, pp. 548-573.
23. King, P. M. and Kitchener, K. S. (2004) Reflective judgment: Theory and research on the development of epistemic assumptions through adulthood Educational Psychology, 39, pp. 5-18.
24. Kolstø, S. D. (2001) Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientific issues Science Education 85, pp. 291-310.
25. Kortland, K. (1996) An STS case study about students' decision making on the waste issue Science Education, 80, pp. 673-689.
26. Kuhn, D.(1991) The skills of argument. Cambridge MA: Cambridge University Press.
27. Leighton, J. P. and Bisanz, G. L. (2003) Children's and adults' knowledge and models of reasoning about the ozone layer and its depletion International Journal of Science Education, 25, pp. 117-139.
28. Levinson, R.(2003). Teaching bioethics in science: Crossing a bridge too far?. Paper Presented at the NARST Annual Meeting PhildelphiaPA. In [pp.].
29. Lincoln, Y. S. and Guba, E. G.(1985) Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park CA: Sage Publications.
30. Martinez-Gracia, M. V. and Gil-Quilez, M. J. and Osada, J. (2003) Genetic engineering: A matter that requires further refinement in Spanish secondary school textbooks International Journal of Science Education, 25, pp. 1147-1168.
31. Means, M. L. and Voss, J. F. (1996) Who reasons well? Two studies of informal reasoning among children of different grade, ability, and knowledge levels Cognition and Instruction, 14, pp. 139-178.
32. Patronis, T. and Potari, D. and Spiliotopoulou, V. (1999) Students' argumentation in decision-making on a socio-scientific issue: Implications for teaching International Journal of Science Education, 21, pp. 745-754.
33. Pedretti, E. and Hodson, D. (1995) From rhetoric to action: Implementing STS education through action research Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, pp. 463-485.
34. Perkins, D. N. and Farady, M. and Bushey, B.(1991) Everyday reasoning and the roots of intelligence. In Informal reasoning and education. (pp. 83-105). Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
35. Perkins, D. N. and Salomon, G. (1989) Are cognitive skills context-bound? Educational Researcher, 18((1)), pp. 16-25.
36. Rest, J. R.(1979) Development in judging moral issues. Minneapolis MN: University of Minnesota Press.
37. Rest, J. R.(1986) Manual for the Defining Issues Test. Minneapolis MN: Center for the Study of Ethical Development.
38. Rest, J. R. and Narvaez, D. and Bebeau, M. J. (2000) A neo-Kohlbergian approach to morality research Journal of Moral Education, 29, pp. 381-395.
39. Rest, J. R. and Narvaez, D. and Bebeau, M. J. and Thoma, S. J.(1999) Postconventional moral thinking: A neo-Kohlbergian approach. Mahwah NJ: Erlbaum.
40. Sadler, T. D.(2003) Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: The influence of morality and content knowledge. USA: University of South Florida. Unpublished doctoral dissertation
41. Sadler, T. D. (2004a) Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of the literature Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, pp. 513-536.
42. Sadler, T. D. (2004b) Moral and ethical dimensions of socioscientific decision-making as integral components of scientific literacy The Science Educator, 13, pp. 39-48.
43. Sadler, T. D. (2004c) Moral sensitivity and its contribution to the resolution of socio-scientific issues Journal of Moral Education, 33, pp. 339-358.
44. Sadler, T. D. and Zeidler, D. L. (2004) The morality of socioscientific issues: Construal and resolution of genetic engineering dilemmas Science Education, 88, pp. 4-27.
45. Sadler, T. D. and Zeidler, D. L. (2005a) The significance of content knowledge for informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: Applying genetics knowledge to genetic engineering issues Science Education, 85, pp. 71-93.
46. Sadler, T. D. and Zeidler, D. L. (2005b) Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, pp. 112-138.
47. Toulmin, S.(1958) The uses of argument. Cambridge MA: Cambridge University Press.
48. Tytler, R. and Duggan, S. and Gott, R. (2001) Dimensions of evidence, the public understanding of science and science education International Journal of Science Education, 23, pp. 815-832.
49. Wynne, C. F. and Stewart, J. and Passmore, C. (2001) High school students' use of meiosis when solving genetics problems International Journal of Science Education, 23, pp. 501-515.
50. Yang, F. Y. and Anderson, O. R. (2003) Senior high school students' preference and reasoning modes about nuclear energy use International Journal of Science Education, 25, pp. 221-244.
51. Zeidler, D. L. and Keefer, M.(2003) The role of moral reasoning and the status of socioscientific issues in science education: Philosophical, psychological and pedagogical considerations. In The role of moral reasoning and discourse on socioscientific issues in science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
52. Zeidler, D. L. and Schafer, L. E. (1984) Identifying mediating factors of moral reasoning in science education Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21, pp. 1-15.
53. Zeidler, D. L. and Walker, K. A. and Ackett, W. A. and Simmons, M. L. (2002) Tangled up in views: Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific dilemmas Science Education, 86, pp. 343-367.
54. Zohar, A. and Nemet, F. (2002) Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, pp. 35-62.