The effects of a collaborative argumentation intervention on Chinese students’ socioscientific issues decision-making

References

• 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10063
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bossér, U., & Lindahl, M. G. (2020). Students’ use of open-minded attitude and elaborate talk in group discussion and role-playing debate on socioscientific issues. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 16(12), em1910. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/9127
   Google Scholar
• Burkstrand-Reid, B., Carbone, J., & Hendricks, J. S. (2011). Teaching controversial topics. Family Court Review, 49(4), 678–684. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-1617.2011.01404.x
   Google Scholar
• Chan, Z. C. (2012). Role-playing in the problem-based learning class. Nurse Education in Practice, 12(1), 21–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2011.04.008
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Christenson, N., & Chang Rundgren, S. N. (2014). A framework for teachers’ assessment of socio-scientific argumentation: An example using the GMO issue. Journal of Biological Education, 49(2), 204–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2014.923486
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christenson, N., Chang Rundgren, S. N., & Höglund, H. O. (2012). Using the SEE-SEP model to analyze upper secondary students’ use of supporting reasons in arguing socioscientific issues. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(3), 342–352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9328-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christenson, N., Chang Rundgren, S. N., & Höglund, H. O. (2012). Using the SEE-SEP model to analyze upper secondary students’ use of supporting reasons in arguing socioscientific issues. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(3), 3420–352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9328-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christenson, N., Chang Rundgren, S. N., & Zeidler, D. L. (2014). The relationship of discipline background to upper secondary students’ argumentation on socioscientific issues. Research in Science Education, 44(4), 581–601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-013-9394-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cinici, A. (2016). Balancing the pros and cons of GMOs: Socio-scientific argumentation in pre-service teacher education. International Journal of Science Education, 38(11), 1841–1866. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1220033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Connolly, M. (2000). Book Review: Academic controversy: Enriching college instruction through intellectual conflict. NASPA Journal, 37(2), 476–480. https://doi.org/10.2202/0027-6014.1102
   Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, D. J. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Dawson, V. M., & Venville, G. (2008). Teaching strategies for developing students’ argumentation skills about socioscientific issues in high school genetics. Research in Science Education, 40(2), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-008-9104-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eggert, S., & Bögeholz, S. (2009). Students’ use of decision-making strategies with regard to socioscientific issues: An application of the Rasch partial credit model. Science Education, 94(2), 230–258. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20358
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eggert, S., Ostermeyer, F., Hasselhorn, M., & Bögeholz, S. (2013). Socioscientific decision making in the science classroom: The effect of embedded metacognitive instructions on students’ learning outcomes. Education Research International, 2013, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/309894
   Google Scholar
• Eş, H., & Öztürk, N. (2019). An activity for transferring the multidimensional structure of SSI to middle school science courses: I discover myself in the decision-making process with SEE-STEP!. Research in Science Education, 51(3), 889–910. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09865-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flick, U. (2019). An introduction to qualitative research (6th ed.). SAGE Publications Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• He, J., & Lin, B. (2019). Assessment of waste incineration power with considerations of subsidies and emissions in China. Energy Policy, 126, 190–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.11.025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herman, B. C., Owens, D. C., Oertli, R. T., Zangori, L. A., & Newton, M. H. (2019). Exploring the complexity of students’ scientific explanations and associated nature of science views within a place-based socioscientific issue context. Science & Education, 28(3–5), 329–366. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00034-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jho, H., Yoon, H. G., & Kim, M. (2013). The relationship of science knowledge, attitude and decision making on socio-scientific issues: The case study of students’ debates on a nuclear power plant in Korea. Science & Education, 23(5), 1131–1151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-013-9652-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1979). Conflict in the classroom: Controversy and learning. Review of Educational Research, 49(1), 51–69. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543049001051
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, J., Macalalag, A. Z., & Dunphy, J. (2020). Incorporating socioscientific issues into a STEM education course: Exploring teacher use of argumentation in SSI and plans for classroom implementation. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 2(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-020-00026-3
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2019). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches (7th ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Khourey-Bowers, C. (2006). Structured academic controversy: A peaceful approach to controversial issues. The American Biology Teacher, 68(5), 43–45. https://doi.org/10.1894/0038-4909(2006)68[e43:SACAPA]2.0.CO;2
   Google Scholar
• Kolstø, S. D. (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientific issues. Science Education, 85(3), 291–310. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.1011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kolstø, S. D. (2006). Patterns in students’ argumentation confronted with a risk‐focused socio‐scientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 28(14), 1689–1716. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600560878
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D., & Udell, W. (2003). The development of argument skills. Child Development, 74(5), 1245–1260. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00605
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawson, A. (2003). The nature and development of hypothetico‐predictive argumentation with implications for science teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 25(11), 1387–1408. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000052117
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, Y. C., & Grace, M. (2010). Students’ reasoning processes in making decisions about an authentic, local socio-scientific issue: Bat conservation. Journal of Biological Education, 44(4), 156–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2010.9656216
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, Y., Zhao, X., Li, Y., & Li, X. (2015). Waste incineration industry and development policies in China. Waste Management (New York, N.Y.), 46, 234–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2015.08.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nam, Y., & Chen, Y. C. (2017). Promoting argumentative practice in socio-scientific issues through a science inquiry activity. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(7), 3431–3461. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00737a
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newton, M. H., & Zeidler, D. L. (2020). Developing socioscientific perspective taking. International Journal of Science Education, 42(8), 1302–1319. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1756515
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20035
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Papadouris, N., & Constantinou, C. P. (2010). Approaches employed by sixth-graders to compare rival solutions in socio-scientific decision-making tasks. Learning and Instruction, 20(3), 225–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pedretti, E., & Nazir, J. (2011). Currents in STSE education: Mapping a complex field, 40 years on. Science Education, 95(4), 601–626. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20435
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ratcliffe, M. (2003). Science education for citizenship: teaching socio-scientific issues (1st ed.). Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ratcliffe, M., & Grace, M. (2003). Science education for citizenship: Teaching socio-scientific issues (pp. 113–135). McGraw-Hill Education.
   Google Scholar
• Rundgren, C. J., Eriksson, M., & Rundgren, S. N. C. (2016). Investigating the intertwinement of knowledge, value, and experience of upper secondary students’ argumentation concerning socioscientific issues. Science & Education, 25(9–10), 1049–1071. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-016-9859-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rundgren, S. N. C., & Rundgren, C. J. (2010). June SEE-SEP: From a separate to a holistic view of socioscientific issues. In Asia-pacific forum on science learning and teaching (Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 1–24). The Education University of Hong Kong, Department of Science and Environmental Studies. https://doi.org/urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-57918
   Google Scholar
• Sadler, T. D. (2011). 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 (pp. 355–369). Springer. https://doi..org/978-94-007-1158-7
   Google Scholar
• Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 112–138. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20042
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadler, T. D., & Fowler, S. R. (2006). A threshold model of content knowledge transfer for socioscientific argumentation. Science Education, 90(6), 986–1004. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20165
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadler, T. D., Barab, S. A., & Scott, B. (2007). What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry? Research in Science Education, 37(4), 371–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9030-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandoval, W. A., & Millwood, K. A. (2005). The quality of students’ use of evidence in written scientific explanations. Cognition and Instruction, 23(1), 23–55. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci2301_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simonneaux, L. (2001). Role-play or debate to promote students’ argumentation and justification on an issue in animal transgenesis. International Journal of Science Education, 23(9), 903–927. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690010016076
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simonneaux, L., & Simonneaux, J. (2008). Students’ socio-scientific reasoning on controversies from the viewpoint of education for sustainable development. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 4(3), 657–687. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-008-9141-x
   Google Scholar
• Tait, P. W., Brew, J., Che, A., Costanzo, A., Danyluk, A., Davis, M., Khalaf, A., McMahon, K., Watson, A., Rowcliff, K., & Bowles, D. (2019). The health impacts of waste incineration: A systematic review. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 44(1), 40–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/1753-6405.12939
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tait, P. W., Brew, J., Che, A., Costanzo, A., Danyluk, A., Davis, M., … & Bowles, D. (2020). The health impacts of waste incineration: A systematic review. Australian and New Zealand journal of public health, 44(1), 40–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/1753-6405.12939
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tavakoli, R., Aliasin, S. H., & Mobini, F. (2017). The effect of structured academic controversy on english proficiency level within communicative language teaching context. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 8(2), 349. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0802.18
   Google Scholar
• Wu, Y., & Tsai, C. (2007). High school students’ informal reasoning on a socio‐scientific issue: Qualitative and quantitative analyses. International Journal of Science Education, 29(9), 1163–1187. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690601083375
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, W. X., & Hsu, Y. S. (2021). The interplay of students’ regulation learning and their collective decision-making performance in a SSI context. International Journal of Science Education, 43(11), 1746–1778. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.1933250
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2001). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar