Michelle L. Klosterman

Multi‐level Assessment of Scientific Content Knowledge Gains Associated with Socioscientific Issues‐based Instruction

This study explored the impact of using a socioscientific issue (SSI) based curriculum on developing science content knowledge. Using a multi‐level assessment design, student content knowledge gains were measured before and after implementation of a three‐week unit on global warming (a prominent SSI) that explored both the relevant science content and the controversy surrounding global warming. Measures of student content knowledge were made using a standards‐aligned content knowledge exam (distal assessment) and a curriculum‐aligned exam (proximal assessment). Data were collected from 108 students enrolled from two schools. Quantitative analysis of the distal assessment indicated that student post‐test scores were statistically significantly different than their pre‐test scores (F = 15.31, p<0.001). Qualitative analyses of student responses from the proximal assessment indicated that students, on average, expressed more accurate, more detailed, and more sophisticated understandings of global warming, the greenhouse effect, and the controversy and challenges associated with these issues following the three‐week unit. Combined results from the proximal and distal assessments explored in this study offer important evidence in supporting the efficacy of using SSI as contexts for science education. In addition to a discussion of the components of an SSI‐based curriculum, this study provides support for the use of SSI as a context for learning science content.

Learning Science Content and Socio-scientific Reasoning Through Classroom Explorations of Global Climate Change

The goals for our research related to socio-scientific issues (SSI) have always been related to the promotion of scientific literacy (see Chap. 1) and the improvement of science learning experiences. However, the work has not always been centrally situated in classroom environments. For much of our early research, we explored students’ moral perspectives (Sadler & Zeidler, 2004), reasoning (Sadler & Zeidler, 2005), understandings of science (Sadler & Fowler, 2006), and argumentation (Sadler & Donnelly, 2006) related to SSI in contexts not necessarily connected to students’ experiences in science classrooms or other learning environments. We were interested in building an empirical understanding of how science learners made sense of complicated socio-scientific dilemmas, how they made decisions about these issues, and what factors influenced their thinking practices. We engaged students in reasoning and argumentation collecting data through interviews and instruments, but did not explore classroom practices or the possible effects of intervening in learning environments. In an attempt to advance the SSI research agenda and create stronger connections among theory, research, and practice we began working on projects situated in science classrooms.

Exploring the Sociopolitical Dimensions of Global Warming.

The authors present an activity to help high school students conceptualize the sociopolitical complexity of global warming through an exploration of varied perspectives on the issue. They argue that socioscientific issues such as global warming present important contexts for learning science and that the social and political dimensions of these issues must be featured along with the underlying science. The activity is structured as a jigsaw in which learners explore multiple perspectives on the issue of global warming as they work to develop recommendations for national policy.

Metalogue: Issues in the Conceptualization of Research Constructs and Design for SSI Related Work

Sadler: As I reflect on the project featured in this chapter while simultaneously considering the future of my own work in the area of SSI and the SSI research agenda more generally, I am drawn to the socio-scientific reasoning (SSR) aspect of the project. In some ways, this part of the project was not very successful. First, the students demonstrated no gains in SSR. And second, the subcomponents of the larger SSR construct (i.e., complexity, inquiry, and perspectives) did not show evidence of association to an underlying latent variable. In other words, these data suggest that the SSR aspects ought to be treated as independent variables as opposed to related subconstructs. However, despite these results, I think the work around SSR may be the most important contribution of the project. As we mention in the chapter and elsewhere (Sadler, Barab, & Scott, 2007; Sadler & Zeidler, 2009), I think that there is a real need for tools to help us as researchers and educators better operationalize what it is that we are trying to do with SSI. I do not think it is enough for us to continue to argue that we need to enhance scientific literacy. I do not think that anyone contributing to this book would disagree that promoting scientific literacy is important, but given the political climate in which schools are currently situated, I think that our community (i.e. those of us who advocate the contextualization of science education through SSI) has a responsibility to move beyond the rhetoric of scientific literacy as a rationale for SSI-based education.

Metalogue: Preconditions and Resources for Productive Socio-scientific Issues Teaching and Learning

Klosterman: It seems natural to include news broadcasts, clips from documentary films, and other media sources to introduce teachers and students to socio-scientific issues (SSI) and to highlight current features of nature of science (NOS). Like the SSI used as contexts in this chapter, media is timely, captures student attention (and therefore qualifies as being “relevant”), and can highlight the different perspectives of individuals concerned with SSI. As someone interested in classroom use of media and how science is represented in the media, I would like to know more about how and why the media clips were selected. In the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) example, it was clear that multiple perspectives were represented through the clips and the accuracy of the information presented was considered. Was the goal to present an overall picture of the issue? Did the teacher use media for a similar purpose? Did any of the other teachers you observed incorporate media from multiple perspectives within one lesson? What impact, if any, do you think the type or content of media might have on student’s decision making around the issues?