Dana L. Zeidler

1. Current Research and Trends in Socioscientific IssuesPresented to: Marmara UniversityGazi UniversityMiddle East Technical UniversityTURKEY Dana L. Zeidler

2. Merhaba! Teşekkürdavetiçinbeniburayabugün!

3. Academic Experiences… • 1974 AAS - Agronomy & Conservation (Natural Sciences) State University of New York, Alfred • 1974 BS – Biology / Earth Science, State University of New York, Buffalo • 1976 MS – Science Education, Syracuse University, NY • 1982 PhD – Science Education, Syracuse University, NY

4. Unraveling the moral elements – the beginning of SSI • 1976Coursework in Philosophy& Sociology, (Cultural Foundations -Thomas F. Green) Developmental Psychology, Science Education • 1978 Scoring Workshops (Larry Kohlberg & Marvin Berkowitz), Harvard University, MA • 1979 Bioethics and Biology at Auburn Correctional Facility, NY via ISDP of Syracuse University, NY • 1980 Physical Science, APW Middle School, NY • 1982 Dissertation, Syracuse University, NY (Identifying Mediating Factors of Moral Reasoning in Science Education*)

5. *Central Claim of Dissertation “It is of pedagogical importance for educators to know what factors above and beyond intellectual development contribute to how one reasons about different moral problems. Educators would then be able to maximize the conditions that give students the opportunity to attend to those factors and subsequently, assess their moral ideologies.”

6. Socioscientific Issues SSI movement arises from a conceptual framework that unifies development of moral and epistemological orientations of students and considers the role of emotions and character as key components of science education. (Sadler, 2002; Zeidler & Keefer, 2003; Zeidler & Sadler, 2008; Zeidler, Sadler, Applebaum & Callahan, 2008).

7. What are Socioscientific Issues? • SSI are by nature, controversial and ill-structured in their make up – but require evidence-based reasoning. • Deliberate use of scientific topics that require students to engage in dialogue, discussion and argumentation. • Tend to have implicit and explicit ethical components and require some degree of moral reasoning. • Formation of virtue / character as a long-range pedagogical goal is often associated with SSI.

8. The shortest and surest way to live with honor in the world, is to be in reality what we would appear to be; all human virtues increase and strengthen themselves by the practice and experience of them. – Socrates Character

9. L. Dignus - worthy / worth Dignity - worthiness high repute,honor stateliness calm, self possession self respect decorum

10. Sin Virtue Lust (inappropriate desire) Chastity (purity) Gluttony(over-indulgence) Moderation (self-restraint) Greed (avarice) Generosity (vigilance) Sloth (laziness) Zeal (enthusiasm) Wrath (anger) Meekness (composure) Envy (jealousy) Charity (giving) Pride (vanity) Humility (humbleness) Roman Catholic Virtues: (Socialization Continued…)The Roman Catholic Church recognizes the seven capital virtues as opposites to the seven capital sins. According to Dante's The Divine Comedy the sins have an order of greatness, and the virtues a respective order of greatness as well. Vanitas with her mirror. (Painting by Titian, c.1515)Dante shown holding a copy of The Divine Comedy, next to the entrance to Hell, the seven terraces of Mount Purgatory and the city of Florence, with the spheres of Heaven above. (Fresco by Michelino, c. 1450)

11. Arete (excellence) • Arete (Greek) "goodness" or "excellence" of any kind. In its earliest appearance in Greek this notion of excellence was bound up with the notion of the fulfillment of purpose or function; the act of living up to one's full potential. The moral excellence or arete of a person or thing was virtue. • Hence: Particular excellence depended upon fittingness of fulfillment to purpose. • Note: The root of the word is the same as 'aristos', the word which shows superlative ability and superiority. The ancient Greeks applied the term to anything: for example, the excellence of a chair, the excellence of a horse, and the excellence of a man.

12. In the Greek, Areteis construed as"habitual excellence." The Process of Normation (The formation of Conscience) • It is something practiced at all times. • The virtue of perseverance is needed for all and any virtues since it is a habit of character and must be used continuously in order for any person to maintain oneself in virtue.

13. What is Character? Character is bound by a set of psychological characteristics that collectively influence the ability and inclination to do what is right – to function morally. • Character is our moral maturity and commitment to doing the right thing regardless of the personal cost. • Character involves the will to respond to events according to values and principles rather than to appetites, urges, whims, or impulses.

14. Optimality Optimal: (1) feasible --------------------^^^-------------------- (2) ideal Brute Facts 1) We cannot have moral education without the functional presence of the holy. 2) Moral argument is ineffective in establishing conscience because engaging in moral argument presupposes existence of conscience. 3) Prudence is more primitive, natural, than morality. 4) If the primacy of prudence is the foundation for the formulation of conscience, then an education in prudence must be part of moral education. 5) Moral education must include an education of emotions. 6) Moral education cannot exist unless it includes the cultivation of a social memory. “Only because we are first creatures of prudence can we subsequently become creatures of conscience.” T.F. Green

15. Pedagogical Outcomes of Learning Traditions

16. A Socioscientific View of Scientific Literacy

18. “Core Beliefs” Protective Belt Separating Students from Larger Community (Social & Environmental)

19. Confronting Core Beliefs Students often dismissed data that was in conflict with core beliefs or failed to meet criteria of personal experience Perceived value and relevance of information was based upon its fit with personal experience When compelled to defend opinions, students included core beliefs and personal experiences Students were surprised when reliable sources provided conflicting claims

20. How will reasoning and discouse skills and abilities be achieved? Experience Experience Experience Experience Experience Experience Experience Experience Experience

21. Research on SSI & NOS Issues Tangled Up in Views: Beliefs in theNature of Science and Responsesto Socioscientific Dilemmas(Zeidler, Walker, Ackett & Simmons, 2002) Purpose: To investigate the relationships between students’ conceptions of the nature of science and their reactions to evidence that challenged their beliefs about socioscientific issues.

22. Tangled Up in Views: Beliefs in the Nature of Science and Responses to Socioscientific Dilemmas(Zeidler, Walker, Ackett & Simmons, 2002, Science Education) • Significant difference b/w pre-posttest beliefs/convictions about a SSI scenario (n=82, p =.0001) • Significant difference b/w high school and college students’ degree of confidence in “official research news reports” favoring high school students (n=81, p=.06) • Nascent relationship between certain NOS views (social / cultural influences and empirical evidence) and students’ patterns of ethical reasoning on SSI identified.

23. Research on SSI & NOS IssuesSadler, Chambers & Zeidler (2004) Students decisions regarding SSI is analogous to decisions engaged by scientists regarding the justification of scientific knowledge in that both processes require the use of rational discourse and invoke value judgments and common sense. Students tend to distort whatever data, evidence or knowledge claims are available to them for the purpose of supporting a predetermined viewpoint with respect to the issue under consideration.

24. Research on SSI & NOS Issues (cont’d.) • Students rated articles according to which had more “scientific merit” but in determining which articles they found to be most convincing, many (40%) selected articles which most complemented their own personal beliefs independent from its status of having scientific merit. • 10% of the students could exhibit complete data recognition, description and explanation; • 43% showed data recognition and partial description; • 30% data recognition only; • 17% exhibited total data confusion.

25. Research on SSI & NOS Issues (cont’d.)Advancing Reflective Judgment Through Socioscientific Issues(Zeidler, Sadler, Applebaum & Callahan, 2008) • Purpose: to explore possible relationships between socioscientific issues instruction and students’ development of reflective judgment (epistemological development).

26. Reflective Judgment Model and the Connection to SSI • The domain of reflective judgment entails a set of assumptions about the status of knowledge and the reciprocal justification of beliefs concerning that knowledge as people reason about ill-structured problems. • SSI are by definition ill-structured problems that are complex, open-ended, often contentious dilemmas utilizing students’ informal reasoning that involves the generation pros and cons for multiple courses of actions, the evaluation of evidence to support claims, and moral sensitivity as consensus for an issue or position is constructed. Uncertainty is a given in both true SSI and in true reflective judgment where informal reasoning has its day.

27. Epistemological Beliefs in Reflective Judgment (1)Nature of Knowledge a. View of Knowledge b. Right versus Wrong Knowledge c. Legitimacy of Differences in Viewpoints (2)Nature of Justification a. Concept of Justification b. Use of Evidence c. Role of Authority

28. Emphasis on Dissonant Evidence and Epistemological Probes • I would now like each of you to restate your position to one another about to what extent you agree with the statement; “Animals should be used for research”—and explain the reason for your position. [Justification/Clarification Probe] 2) If you had to convince (the other person) that your view is right, what evidence of proof would you say or show to persuade him/her? [Justification/Evidence Probe] 3) Could (the other person) prove that you were wrong? Why? Why not? [Alternative Viewpoint/Alternative Theory Probe] 4) Could more than one point of view on this matter be right? Please explain. [Epistemological Probe] 5) How does either scientific knowledge or opinion play a role in each of your positions? [Epistemological/Evidence/Personal & Sociocultural Probe]

29. Summary of Reflective Thinking Stages LevelEpistemological Justification Pre-ReflectiveKnowledge is fixed with high degree of certainty and usually derived from direct experience and/or culturally accepted authority. Quasi-ReflectiveIll-structured problems contain knowledge claims that, while based upon evidence, possess problematic uncertainties, may be ambiguous and/oridiosyncratic. ReflectiveJudgments concerning SSI, while tentative, can be evaluated on the merit of the available data, internal coherence of that data, and are open to reevaluation in light of new evidence.

30. Guiding NOS Theory of SSI Instruction 1) Science-in-the-making and the role of consensus in science 2) Science as one of several social domains 3) Descriptive and normative statements 4) Demands for underpinning evidence 5) Scientific models as context-bound 6) Scientific evidence 7) Suspension of belief 8) Scrutinizing science-related knowledge claims. (Kolstø, 2001)

31. Pedagogical Characteristic of an SSI Classroom • Show respect for students’ assumptions • Scaffold ill-structured issues with students throughout their activities/lessons • Make available resources that illuminates issues from several perspectives. • Create many opportunities for students to analyze others’ points of view for their evidentiary adequacy and to develop and justify their own points of view about controversial issues. • Teach students strategies for systematically gathering data, assessing the relevance of the data, evaluating data sources, and making interpretive judgments based on the available data. • Help students explicitly address issues of uncertainty in judgment-making and to examine their assumptions about knowledge and how it is gained. ( Developed/modified from King & Kitchener, 2002)

32. Pedagogical Framework for SSI Study.

33. Instrumentation & Scoring • Prototypic Reflective Judgment Interview (PRJI) (King & Kitchner, 1994; 2004). • Topics: Chemical Additives, Religion and Science, & Familial Ties to Alcoholism) • Random sample of ten students per class (initially n = 40) • 5 randomly selected transcripts scored by 3 raters: inter- rater agreement of 100% on the dominant stage and over 90% for the less dominant stages. (e.g.: 4-3-5)

34. Results: Paired Samples t-test for the Use of Socioscientific Issues on Reflective Judgment. Non Parametric ComparisonWilcoxon test - The ranked mean scores for both control and treatment groups showed the same direction of changes as the parametric data with a significant difference observed for the SSI treatment group (p= .09, alpha ≤.10), with no discernable differences for the control group. Effect Size.74 (moderately large) - mean of treatment group was at the 78th percentile of the control group; distribution of scores indicated a nonoverlap of 45% in the two distributions.

35. Results: Qualitative Key Indicators of Reflective Judgment on Religion & Science IssuePretest Key Indicator Posttest Key Indicator Researchers’ Interpretation

36. Results: Contextual Factors of Epistemological Reasoning • Example: Two students were rated as reflective thinkers at the completion of the study on the scenarios of Chemical Additives and Genetic Determination of Alcoholism. • However, they remained quasi- reflective in their reasoning in regard to their epistemological positions and concept of justification for knowledge on the Religion and Science issue. • Core beliefs are highly entrenched personal beliefs, -- defend against counter viewpoints and reinforced by like-minded personal opinions and dogmatic authority. Hence, the contextual embededness of subject matter would seem to influence the quality of epistemological stances. Finding: epistemological reasoning is not content-free but is influenced by situational (and by extension, educational) contexts.

37. Confronting Contextual Factors Students ability to evaluate claims was improved when scientific concepts were related to relevant SSI. Scientific concept understanding was improved when attached to relevant SSI. When presented with contemporary SSI, students were able to transfer concept understanding from one context to another context.

38. Summary of Key Points Reciprocal relationships between more advanced stages of reflective judgment and more sophisticated views of NOS: • Both require epistemological frameworks that conceptualize and justify knowledge via a process of inquiry. • Both are based on data-driven evidence. • Both allow for the probabilistic nature of data. • Both possess an openness to reevaluation.

39. Contextualizing Nature of ScienceInstruction in Socioscientific Issues(Eastwood, Sadler, Zeidler, Lewis, Amiri and Applebaum, 2012) Within Group Pre- to Post-instructional Changes in VNOS Results Content Group p-Value SSI Group p-Value Empirical 0.005 0.003 Tentative 0.007 0.006 Creative 0.006 0.001 Socially/culturally embedded 0.050 0.009 Theory and law 0.009 0.007 Models 0.030 0.060

40. SSI Scaffolding

42. Contextualizing Nature of ScienceInstruction in Socioscientific Issues(Eastwood, Sadler, Zeidler, Lewis, Amiri and Applebaum, 2012) • Research on NOS supports the conclusion that most learners do not have adequate understanding of NOS. • However, there is evidence to suggest that explicit-reflective approaches to NOS instruction can promote students’ development of more informed NOS understanding. • SSI provide excellent contexts for explicit-reflective NOS instruction in their numerous opportunities to exemplify aspects of NOS.

43. Cross-Cultural Comparisons of Epistemological Beliefs on Socioscientific IssuesZeidler, Herman, Ruzek, Sheng & Linder, (In Press, JRST) RQ1 What cultural patterns may exist among ethical issues and patterns of reasoning relative to conceptualizations of distributive justice as students respond to selected socioscientific issues? RQ 2 What cultural patterns exist in terms of how students evaluate and prioritize scientific evidence related to socioscientific issues in varied contexts? RQ 3 What relationships may exist between cultural identity and students’ epistemological beliefs about science across selected international communities of students?

44. Coding of Data • a-priori scoring rubric for scoring items and forming taxonomies of responses. • inductive analysis -four rounds/ four researchers scoring 40 subsets of the data. • independently scoring 10 data sets per round 97% inter-rater agreement. • potential conflicts eliminated resulting in virtually 100% inter-coder agreement for all items. • original 40 data sets were reevaluated after consensus of the coding scheme. • every set of remaining 10 data sets always had 2 data sets in commonamong all four raters.

45. Results Qualitative Taxonomies of SSI Justification • Fairness (temporal, random selection, degree of illness) • Pragmatism (survivability, cost and value, wasting organ) • Emotive Reasoning (caring, empathy, value judgments) • Utility (means to an end, benefit to society) • Theological (religious overtones)

46. Summary and Implications Commonalities in Epistemological Orientations • In many ways, our findings show a degree of epistemological congruence among the samples of students from these countries. • These results would lead us to infer that, at the very least, indirect support exists for the notion that students engage in a type of socioscientific reasoning that transcends certain contextual features of SSI.

47. Threshold Model of the Interaction Between Epistemological Sophistication and Socioscientific Reasoning

48. Summary of Key Points • Reflective Judgment Model is guided by a cognitive-developmental progression. An equivalent model has not typically or explicitly informed NOS research. • SSI instruction may have the added benefit of embedding NOS into a scientific context that is, de facto, theory laden, driven by data, as well as socially and culturally embedded. • SSI approach is that opportunities are afforded for the exploration of character -- consistent with a humanistic approach to science education. • SSI show much promise in engaging students and advancing their understanding of the kind of practical reasoning inherent in ill-structured problems, issues or dilemmas. It is in this vein that our notion of “functional scientific literacy” may be best understood

49. Character Considerations(KOREAN RESEARCH) • By participating in carefully designed, socially responsible activities, students will hopefully develop or have reinforced such qualities as reliability, trustworthiness, dependability, altruism, and compassion. • Our recent research has shown that teaching within the context of SSI can increase students’ moral sensitivity and reflective judgment, thus contributing to overall moral development and NOS.

50. Sociocultural Considerations • In the process of cultivating scientifically literate citizens, our aim is to foster the formation of a collective social conscience. • The goal is to instill the desire to consistently hold one’s actions up for internal scrutiny (i.e. reflective reasoning) -- which is a fundamental feature of conscience.