A Model Proposal to Address Relationships Between Epistemic Practices and Socioscientific Issues in Science Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.28976/1984-2686rbpec2021u743770Keywords:
Epistemic objectives, Informal reasoning, Epistemic cognition, Social normsAbstract
In this paper, we present a model that relates epistemic practices and socio-scientific issues (SSI) in science education. In order to develop it, we establish interweavings between norms, practices, epistemic objectives, epistemic cognition, informal reasoning, epistemic practices and justified positioning. We suggest that epistemic cognition is the link between reasoning and epistemic practices. We present three epistemic goals that should guide work with epistemic practices when solving a SSI: recognising and using multiple lines of reasoning when solving the SSI, construction and evaluation of holistic arguments aiming to understand the multiple dimensions of the SSI and the development of sceptical investigations to resolve the SSI. The stated objectives contribute to the critical assessment and resolution of the SSI. We believe that for the construction of social norms in teaching environments with SSI, it should be considered that these questions do not require a “single” answer and, therefore, a space for reflection, awareness and justification of the different perspectives on the question must be allowed. The relationships established in this article contribute to research that aims to develop and analyse epistemic practices “in situ” in teaching contexts with SSI. In addition, they have the potential to provide support to teachers who wish to favour the occurrence of epistemic practices in a SSI approach.
Downloads
References
Alexander, P. A. (2016). The Arguments for and the Reasoning About Epistemic Cognition. In J. A. Greene, W. A. Sandoval, & I. Braten (Eds.), Handbook of Epistemic Cognition, 100–110. New York: Routledge.
Allchin, D., & Zemplén, G. A. (2020). Finding the place of argumentation in science education: Epistemics and Whole Science. Science Education, 104(5), 907–933. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21589
Berland, L. K., Schwarz, C. V., Krist, C., Kenyon, L., Lo, A. S., & Reiser, B. J. (2015). Epistemologies in Practice: Making Scienti®c Practices Meaningful for Students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(7), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21257.
Chinn, C. A., & Buckland, L. A. (2011). Expanding the Dimensions of Epistemic Cognition: Arguments From Philosophy and Psychology. Educational Psychologist, 46(3), 141–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.587722
Christodoulou, A., & Osborne, J. (2014). The Science Classroomas a Site of EpistemicTalk: ACase Study of aTeacher’s Attempts toTeach Science Based on Argument. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(10), 1275–1300. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21166
Clément, P. (2016). Social Cognition. In J. A. Greene, W. A. Sandoval, & I. Braten (Eds.), Handbook of Epistemic Cognition, 86–99. Routledge.
Conrado, D. M., & Nunes-Neto, N. (2018). Questões Sociocientíficas e Dimensões Conceituais, Procedimentais e Atitudinais dos Conteúdos no Ensino de Ciências. In D. M. N. Conrado, N. N. (Ed.), Questões Sociocientíficas: fundamentos, propostas de ensino e perspectivas para ações sociopolíticas, 77–120. Salvador: Editora da Universidade Federal da Bahia.
Dionor, G. A., Conrado, D. M., Martins, L., & Neto, N. N. (2020). Avaliando Propostas de Ensino Baseadas em Questões Sociocientíficas: Reflexões e Perspectivas para Ciências no Ensino Fundamental. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências, 20(u), 429–464. https://doi.org/10.28976/1984-2686rbpec2020u429464
Duschl, R. (2008). Science Education in Three-Part Harmony: Balancing Conceptual, Epistemic, and Social Learning Goals Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 268–291. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X07309371
Duschl, R. (2008a) Quality argumentation and epistemic criteria. In: Erduran. S.; Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (Ed.). Argumentation in science education: perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht: Springer, 159–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2_8
Elby, A., Macrander, C., & David, H. (2016). Epistemic Cognition in Science. In J. A. Greene, W. A. Sandoval, & I. Braten (Eds.), Handbook of Epistemic Cognition 113–127. Routledge.
Franco, L., & Munford, D. (2020). Aprendizagem de ciências: uma análise de interações discursivas e diferentes dimensões espaço-temporais no cotidiano da sala de aula. Revista Brasileira de Educação, 25, 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1413-24782020250015
González-Howard, M., & McNeill, K. L. (2016). Learning in a Communityof Practice: Factors Impacting English-Learning Students’ Engagement in Scientific Argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(4), 527–553. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21310
González-Howard, M., & McNeill, K. L. (2019). Teachers’ framing of argumentation goals: Working together to develop individual versus communal understanding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(6), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21530
Greene, J. A., Sandoval, W. A., & Braten, I. (2016). An Introduction to Epistemic Cognition. In J. A. Greene, W. A. Sandoval, & I. Braten (Eds.), Handbook of Epistemic Cognition, 1–16. Routledge.
Guimarães, M. A., Carvalho, W. L., & Oliveira, M. S. (2010). Raciocínio Moral na Tomada de Decisões em Relação a Questões Sociocientíficas: O Exemplo do Melhoramento Genético Humano. Ciência & Educação, 16(2), 465–477. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-73132010000200013
Hodson, D. (2018). Questões Sociocientíficas: Fundamentos, Propostas de Ensino e Perspectivas para Ações Sociopolíticas. In D. M. Conrado & N. N. Neto (Eds.), Realçando o Papel da Ética e da Política na Educação Científica: Algumas Considerações Teóricas e Práticas sobre Questões Sociocientíficas. Salvador: Editora da Universidade Federal da Bahia.
Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2014). International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching New directions for nature of science research, 999–1021. Springer.
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M., & Crujeiras, B. (2017). Epistemic pratices and scientific practices in science education. Science Education, 31, 69–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-749-8_5
Kelly, G. (2008). Inquiry, activity and epistemic practice. In R. Duschl & R. E. Grandy (Eds.), Teaching Scientific Inquiry: recommendations for research and implementation, 288–291. Taipei Sense Publishers.
Kelly, G. (2016). Methodological Considerations for the Study of Epistemic Cognition in Practice. In J. A. S. Greene, W. A. Braten, I. (Ed.), Handbook of Epistemic Cognition, 393–408. Routledge.
Kelly, G., & Duschl, R. (2002). Toward a research agenda for epistemological studies in science education. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA.
Kelly, G., & Licona, P. (2018). Epistemic Practices and Science Education. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), History, Philosophy and Science Teaching, 139–165. Springer.
Kienhues, D., Ferguson, L., & Stahl, E. (2016). Diverging information and epistemic change. In J. A. Greene, W. A. Sandoval, & I. Braten (Eds.), Handbook of epistemic cognition, 318–330. Routledge.
Kuhn, D. (1982). Connecting Scientific and Informal Reasoning. JSTOR, 39(1), 74–103. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23087301
Kuhn, D. (1991). The Skills of Argument. New York: Cambridge University.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511571350
Lave, J. (1992). Learning as Participation in Communities of Practice. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association San Francisco, California.
Lave, J. (1996). Teaching, as learning, in practice. Mind, culture, and activity, 3(3), 149–164. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327884mca0303_2
Lidar, M., Lundqvist, E., & Ostman, L. (2005). Teaching and Learning in the Science Classroom: The Interplay Between Teachers’ Epistemological Moves and Students’ Practical Epistemology. Wiley InterScience, 149–163.
Longino, H. (2002). The Fate of Knowledge. Princeton University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv2tvzv0
Mendonça, P. C. C. (2020). De que Conhecimento sobre Natureza da Ciência Estamos Falando?. Ciência & Educação, 26, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1590/1516-731320200003.
Moshman, D., & Tarricone, P. (2016). Logical and Causal Reasoning. In J. A. Greene, W. A. Sandoval, & I. Braten (Eds.), Handbook of Epistemic Cognition, 54–67. Routledge.
Motta, A. E., Medeiros, M. D., & Motokane, M. T. (2018). Práticas e movimentos epistêmicos na análise dos resultados de uma atividade prática experimental. Alexandria: Revista de Educação em Ciência e Tecnologia, 11, 337–359. https://doi.org/10.5007/1982-5153.2018v11n2p337
Nascimento, L. A., & Sasseron, L. H. (2019). A constituição de normas e práticas culturais nas aulas de ciências: proposição e aplicação de uma ferramenta de análise. Revista Ensaio Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências, 21, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-21172019210104
Nunes-Neto, N. N., & Conrado, D. M. (2021). Ensinando ética. Educação em revista, 27, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1590/0102-469824578
Osborne, J. (2014). Handbook of Research on Science Education. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Scientific Practices and Inquiry in the Science Classroom Vol. II, 593–613. Routledge.
Pierson, A. E., Clark, D. B., & Kelly, G. (2019). Learning Progressions and Science Practices: Tensions in Prioritizing Content, Epistemic Practices, and Social Dimensions of Learning. Science & Education. 28, 833–831. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00070-0
Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal Reasoning Regarding Socioscientific Issues: A Critical Review of Research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513–536. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20009
Sadler, T. D. (2009). Situated learning in science education: socio‐scientific issues as contexts for practice. Studies in Science Education, 45(1), 1–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260802681839
Sadler, T. D., Barab, S. A., & Scott, B. (2007). What Do Students Gain by Engaging in Socioscientific Inquiry? Research Science Education, 37, 371–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9030-9
Sadler, T. D., Foulk, J. A., & Friedrichsen, P. J. (2017). Evolution of a model for socioscientific issue teaching and learning. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 5(2).
Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision-making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 112–138. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20042
Sandoval, W. A. (2005). Understanding Student’s Pratical Epistemolgies and Their Influence on Learning Through Inquiry. Science Education, 89(4), 634–656. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20065
Sasseron, L. H., & Duschl, R. (2016). Ensino de Ciências e as Práticas Epistêmicas: O papel do professor e o engajamento dos estudantes. Investigações em Ensino de Ciências, 21(2), 52–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.22600/1518-8795.ienci2016v21n2p52
Silva, A. C. (2015). Interações Discursivas e Práticas Epistêmicas em Sala de Aula de Ciências. Revista Ensaio Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências, 17, 69–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1983-2117201517s05
Silva, K. M., Delmondes, A. V., Silva, S. M., & Santos, W. L. (2013). Questões sociocientíficas: uma análise do Raciocínio Informal a partir de discussões sobre aquecimento global. Artigo apresentado em IX Encontro Nacional de Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências, Águas de Lindóia, SP.
Simonneaux, L., & Simonneaux, J. (2009). 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
Stroupe, D. (2014). Examining Classroom Science Practice Communities: How Teachers and Students Negotiate Epistemic Agency and Learn Science-as-Practice. Science Education, 98(3), 487–516. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21112
Stroupe, D. (2015). Describing “Science Practice” in Learning Settings. Science Education, 99(6), 1033–1040. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21191
Toulmin, S. (2006). Os usos do argumento (2. ed.). Martins Fontes.
Zeidler, D. L. (2015). Socioscientific Issues as a Curriculum Emphasis. In N. G. A. Lederman, S. K. (Ed.), Research on Science Education. Vol. II, 697–726: Routledge.
Zeidler, D. L., Herman, B. C., & Sadler, T. D. (2019). New directions in socioscientific issues research. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(11), 2–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0008-7
Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Applebaum, S., & Callahan, B. E. (2009). Advancing Reflective Judgment through Socioscientific Issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 74–101. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20281
Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., & Howes, M. L. (2005). Beyond STS: A Research-Based Framework for Socioscientific Issues Education. Wiley Periodicals, 358–376. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20048
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Tatiana Costa Ramos, Paula Cristina Cardoso Mendonça
![Creative Commons License](http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by/4.0/88x31.png)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The authors are responsible for the veracity of the information provided and for the content of the papers.
The authors who publish in this journal fully agree with the following terms:
- The authors attest that the work is unpublished, that is, it has not been published in another journal, event notices or equivalent.
- The authors attest that they did not submit the paper to another journal simultaneously.
- The authors retain the copyright and grant to RPBEC the right of first publication, with the work licensed simultaneously under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows the sharing of the work with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- The authors attest that they own the copyright or the written permission from copyright owners of figures, tables, large texts, etc. that are included in the paper.
- Authors are authorized to take additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (for example, to publish in institutional repository or as a book chapter), with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) after the publication in order to increase the impact and citation of published work.
In case of identification of plagiarism, inappropriate republishing and simultaneous submissions, the authors authorize the Editorial Board to make public what happened, informing the editors of the journals involved, any plagiarized authors and their institutions of origin.