Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

The Korean Association for Science Education (한국과학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Conceptualization of an SSI-PCK Framework for Teaching Socioscientific Issues

과학기술 관련 사회쟁점 교육을 위한 교과교육학적 지식(SSI-PCK) 요소에 대한 탐색

  • Received : 2016.07.14
  • Accepted : 2016.08.01
  • Published : 2016.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of the study is to conceptualize SSI-PCK by identifying major components and sub-components to promote science teachers' confidence and knowledge on teaching SSIs. To achieve this, I conducted extensive literature reviews on teachers' perceptions on SSI, case studies of teachers addressing SSIs, SSI instructional strategies, etc. as well as PCK. Results indicate that SSI-PCK include six major components: 1) Orientation for Teaching SSI (OTS), 2) Knowledge of Instructional Strategies for Teaching SSI (KIS), 3) Knowledge of Curriculum (KC), 4) Knowledge of Students' SSI Learning (KSL), 5) Knowledge of Assessment in SSI Learning (KAS), and 6) Knowledge of Learning Contexts (KLC). OTS refers to teachers' instructional goals and intentions for teaching SSIs. Teachers often present a) activity-driven, b) knowledge and higher order thinking skills, c) application of science in everyday life, d) nature of science and technology, e) citizenship and f) activism orientations for teaching SSIs. KIS indicates teachers' instructional knowledge required for effectively designing and implementing SSI lessons. It includes a) SSI lesson design, b) utilizing progressive instructional strategies, and c) constructing collaborative classroom cultures. KC refers to teachers' knowledge on a) connection to science curriculum (horizontal/vertical) and b) connection to other subject matters. KSL refers to teachers' knowledge on a) learner experiences in SSI learning, b) difficulties in SSI learning, and c) SSI reasoning patterns. KAS indicates teachers' knowledge on a) dimensions of SSI learning to assess, and b) methods of assessing SSI learning. Finally, KLC refers to teachers' knowledge on the cultures of a) classrooms, b) schools, and c) community and society where they are located when teaching SSIs.

본 연구는 교사들의 SSI 교수를 돕기 위해 SSI 교수를 위한 PCK 요소를 도출하여 이론적으로 개념화하는데 목적이 있다. 이를 위해, 기존 PCK의 틀 내에서 SSI 교수와 관련된 문헌분석을 통해 SSI-PCK의 요소를 도출하였고, 관련 선행 연구 자료의 재분석을 통해 그 타당성을 검증하였다. 연구 결과, SSI-PCK에는 6개 주요 요소, 즉 SSI 교수지향, SSI 교수 방법에 관한 지식, 교육과정에 관한 지식, 학생의 SSI 학습에 관한 지식, SSI 학습 평가에 관한 지식, 학습 환경에 관한 지식이 도출되었다. 첫째, SSI 교수지향은 교사가 학생들에게 SSI를 가르치는 목적 및 목표를 의미하는 것으로, 학생 중심 활동, 지식과 고등사고능력, 실생활과의 연결, 과학 및 기술의 본성, 시민역량 및 인성, 사회적 실천의 6가지 하위 요소들이 있다. 둘째, SSI 교수 방법에 관한 지식은 SSI 수업을 운영하는데 필요한 교수 학습 방법론적 지식을 의미하며, SSI 수업 설계, 진보적 교수전략, 협력적 수업 환경 조성의 3가지 하위 요소들이 있다. 셋째, 교육과정에 관한 지식은 SSI와 국가 수준의 교육과정과의 연관성에 관한 지식을 의미하며, 과학 교육과정과의 수평적/수직적 연계성, 타교과와의 연계성의 2가지 하위 요소들을 포함한다. 넷째, 학생의 SSI 학습에 관한 지식은 SSI 수업에 참여하는 학생들의 특성 및 학습 과정에 대한 지식으로, SSI 학습 경험, SSI 학습 시 겪는 어려움, SSI 추론의 특성에 관한 지식의 3가지 하위 요소로 구성되어 있다. 다섯 번째, SSI 학습 평가에 대한 지식은 SSI 수업에서는 어떠한 영역에 평가의 초점을 두어야 하며 어떠한 평가 방법을 적용할 수 있는지에 대해 지식으로, 평가 영역과 평가 방법에 대한 지식으로 구성되어 있다. 마지막으로, 학습 환경에 관한 지식은 SSI 교수를 위한 학습 환경에 관한 지식으로, 교실 환경, 학교 환경과 지역사회 환경의 3가지 하위 요소들이 있다. 본 연구는 SSI를 도입하는 교사들의 전문성과 자신감을 함양하는 방안을 마련하는 기초가 될 것으로 기대된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Abell, S. K. (2008). Twenty years later: Does pedagogical content knowledge remain a useful idea? International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1405-1416. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802187041
  2. Agell, L., Soria, V., & Carrio, M. (2014). Using role play to debate animal testing. Journal of Biological Education, 49(3), 309-321. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2014.943788
  3. Aikenhead, G. S. (2006). Science education for everyday life: Evidence-based practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
  4. Albe, V. (2008). When scientific knowledge, daily life experience, epistemological and social considerations intersect: Students' argumentation in group discussion on a socio-scientific issue. Research in Science Education, 38, 67-90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9040-2
  5. Angeli, C., & Valanides, N.(2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT-TPCK: Advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers & Education, 52(1), 154-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.07.006
  6. Avargil, S., Herscovitz, O., & Dori, Y. J. (2012). Teaching thinking skills in context-based learning: Teachers' challenges and assessment knowledge. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(2), 207-225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9302-7
  7. Barrett, S. E., & Nieswandt, M. (2010). Teaching about ethics through socioscientific issues in physics and chemistry: Teacher candidates' beliefs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 380-401. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20343
  8. Brown, P., Friedrichsen, P., Abell, S. (2009, April). Teachers' knowledge of learners and instructional sequencing in an alternative certification program. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
  9. Bryce, T., & Gray, D. (2004). Tough acts to follow: The challenges to science teachers presented by biotechnology progress. International Journal of Science Education, 26(6), 717-733. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000138833
  10. Chang, H., & Lee, H. (2010). College students' decision-making tendencies in the context of socioscientific issues (SSI). Journal of Korean Association in Science Education, 30(7), 887-900.
  11. Cho, H., & Choi, K. (1998). The necessities and current states of educating ethical characteristics of science. Journal of Korean Association for Science Education, 18(4), 559-570.
  12. Christenson, N., & Rundgren, S. C. (2015). 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
  13. Chung, Y., Yoo, J., Kim, S., Lee, H., & Zeidler, D.L. (2016). Enhancing students' communication skills in the science classroom through socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14, 1-27.
  14. Cochran, K. F., DeRuiter, J. A., & King, R. A. (1993). Pedagogical content knowledge: An integrative model for teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 44, 263-272. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487193044004004
  15. Cohen, R., & Yarden, A. (2009). Experienced junior-high-school teachers' PCK in light of a curriculum change: 'The cell is to be studied longitudinally'. Research in Science Education, 39, 131-155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-008-9088-7
  16. Cotton, D.R.E. (2006). Implementing curriculum guidance on environmental education: The importance of teachers' beliefs. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38(1), 67-83. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270500038644
  17. Cross, R.T., & Price, R.F. (1996). Science teachers' social conscience and the role of controversial issues in the teaching of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(3), 319-333. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199603)33:3<319::AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-W
  18. De Jong, O., Van Driel, J. H., & Verloop, N. (2005). Preservice teachers' pedagogical content knowledge of using particle models in teaching chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(8), 947-964. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20078
  19. Dori, Y. J., Tal, R. T. & Tsaushu, M. (2003). Teaching biotechnology through case studies: Can we improve higher order thinking skills of nonscience majors? Science Education, 87(6), 767-793. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10081
  20. Dreyfus, A., & Roth, Z. (1991). Twelfth-grade biology pupils'' opinions on interventions of man in nature: Agreement, indifference and ambivalence. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(1), 81-95. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660280108
  21. Ekborg, M., Ottander, C., Silfver, E., & Simon, S. (2013). Teachers' experience of working with socio-scientific issues: A large scale and in depth study. Research in Science Education, 43, 599-617. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9279-5
  22. Finucane, M. L., Alhakami, A., Slovic, P., & Johnson, S. M. (2000). The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 13(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(200001/03)13:1<1::AID-BDM333>3.0.CO;2-S
  23. Forbes, C. T., & Davis, E. A. (2008). Exploring preservice elementary teachers' critique and adaptation of science curriculum materials in respect to socioscientific issues. Science & Education, 17, 829-854. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-007-9080-z
  24. Friedrichsen, P., & Dana, T. M. (2005). Substantive-level theory of highly regarded secondary biology teachers' science teaching orientations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(2), 218-244. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20046
  25. Friedrichsen, P., Van Driel, J. H., & Abell, S. K. (2011). Taking a closer look at science teaching orientations. Science Education, 95, 358-376. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20428
  26. Gray, S. D., & Bryce, T. (2006). Socio-scientific issues in science education: implications for the professional development of teachers. Cambridge Journal of Education, 36(2), 171-192. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640600718489
  27. Grossman, P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.
  28. Hansen, K.H., & Olson, J. (1996). How teachers construe curriculum integration: The Science, Technology, Society (STS) movement as Bildung. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 28(6), 669-682. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027980280603
  29. Hashweh, M. Z. (2005). Teacher pedagogical constructions: A reconfiguration of pedagogical content knowledge. Teachers and Teaching, 11(3), 273-292. https://doi.org/10.1080/13450600500105502
  30. Hestness, E., McGinnis, J. R., Riedinger, K., & Marbach-Ad, G. (2011). A study of teacher candidates' experiences investigating global climate change within an elementary science methods course. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22(4), 351-369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-011-9234-3
  31. Hughes, G. (2000). Marginalization of socioscientific material in science-technology-society science curricula: Some implications for gender inclusivity and curriculum reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(5), 426-440. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(200005)37:5<426::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-U
  32. Ideland, M., Malmberg, C., & Winberg, M. (2011). Culturally equipped for socio-scientific issues? A comparative study on how teachers and students in mono- and multiethnic schools handle work with complex issues. International Journal of Science Education, 33(13), 1835-1859. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.519803
  33. Jang, H., & Choi, B. (2010). A Case Study on the Development of Science Teachers' PCK through development of content representation(CoRe): Focusing on molecular motion for 7th grade class. Journal of Korean Association for Science Education, 30(6), 870-885.
  34. Kara, Y. (2012). Pre-service biology teachers' perceptions on the instruction of socio-scientific issues in the curriculum. European Journal of Teacher Education, 35(1), 111-129. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2011.633999
  35. Kilinc, A., Kartal, T., Eroğlu, B., Demiral, U., Afacan, O., Polat, Guler, M. P. D, & Gorgulu, O. (2013). Preservice science teachers' efficacy regarding a socioscientific issue: A belief system approach. Research in Science Education, 43(6), 2455-2475. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-013-9368-8
  36. Ko, M., Nam, J., & Lim, J. (2009). Two case studies of the development of beginning science teachers' pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Korean Association for Science Education, 29(1), 54-67.
  37. Kwak, S., & Choi, B. (2012). The level of secondary school science teachers' PCK on density and the characteristics of eight aspects of CoRe by the level of PCK. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society, 56(1), 128-136. https://doi.org/10.5012/jkcs.2012.56.1.128
  38. Lee, H. (2008). Articulating science teachers' values and convictions for teaching socioscientific issues: Based on essentialist methodology. Journal of Korean Association for Science Education, 28(3), 253-268.
  39. Lee, H., & Chang, H. (2010). Exploration of experienced science teachers' personal practical knowledge of teaching socioscientific issues(SSI). Journal of Korean Association for Science Education, 30(3), 353-365.
  40. Lee, H., & Chung, K. (2013). Understanding science teacher's teaching of socioscientific issues: Using cultural-historical activity theory as an analytical lens. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 13(5), 413-433.
  41. Lee, H., & Lee, H. (2016). Contextualized nature of technology in socioscientific issues. Journal of Korean Association for Science Education, 36(2), 303-315. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2016.36.2.0303
  42. Lee, H., & Witz, K. G. (2009). Science teachers' inspiration for teaching socioscientific issues (SSI): Disconnection with reform efforts. International Journal of Science Education, 31(7), 931-960. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690801898903
  43. Lee, H., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Choi, K. (2006). Korean science teachers' perceptions of the introduction of socioscientific issues into the science curriculum. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 6(2), 97-117.
  44. Lee, H., Chang, H., Choi, K., Kim, S., & Zeidler, D. L. (2012). Developing character and values for global citizens: Analysis of preservice science teachers' moral reasoning on socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 34(6), 925-953. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.625505
  45. Lee, H., Choi, Y., & Ko, Y. (2014). Designing collective intelligence-based instructional models for teaching socioscientific issues. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 34(6), 523-534. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2014.34.6.0523
  46. Lee, H., Choi, Y., & Ko. Y. (2015). Effects of collective intelligence-based SSI instruction on promoting middle school students' key competencies as citizens. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 35(3), 431-442. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2015.35.3.0431
  47. Lee, H., Yoo, J., Choi, K., Kim, S., Krajcik, J., Herman, B. C., & Zeidler, D. L. (2013). Socioscientific issues as a vehicle for promoting character and values for global citizens. International Journal of Science Education, 35(12), 2079-2113. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.749546
  48. Lee, K., Maeng, S., Park, Y., Lee, J., & Oh, H.(2014). A case study of middle school science teachers' topic-specific pedagogical content knowledge on the unit of stars and universe. Journal of Korean Association for Science Education, 34(4), 393-406. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2014.34.4.0393
  49. Levinson, R., & Turner, S. (2001). Valuable lessons: Engaging with the social context of science in schools. Retrieved January 1, 2015, from http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/About-us/Publications/Reports/Education/WTD003435.htm.
  50. Loewenstein, G. F., Weber, E. U., Hsee, C. K., & Welch, N. (2001). Risk as feelings. Psychological Bulletin, 127(2), 267. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.127.2.267
  51. Loughran, J., Berry, A., & Mulhall, P. (2006). Understanding and developing science teachers' pedagogical content knowledge. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
  52. Loughran, J., Mulhall, P., & Berry, A. (2004). In search of pedagogical content knowledge in science: Developing ways of articulating and documenting professional practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(4), 370-391. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20007
  53. Magnusson, S., Krajcik, L., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources and development of pedagogical content knowledge. In: J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 95-132). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  54. Mansour, N. (2010). Impact of the knowledge and beliefs of Egyptian science teachers in integrating a STS based curriculum: A sociocultural perspective. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21, 513-534. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-010-9193-0
  55. Millar, R. (2006). Twenty first century science: Insights from the design and implementation of a scientific literacy approach in school science. International Journal of Science Education, 28(13), 1499-1521. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600718344
  56. Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. King's College London: Fulmar Colour Printing Company Limited.
  57. Ministry of Education. (2015). 2015 revised national science curriculum in Korea. Ministry of Education.
  58. National Research Council [NRC]. (2010). Conceptual framework for new science education standards. Retrieved from http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/Standards_Framework_Homepage.html.
  59. Noh, T., Kim, Y., Yang, C., & Kang, H. (2011). Case study on beginning teachers' teaching professionalism based on pedagogical content knowledge in science-gifted education. Journal of Korean Association for Science Education, 31(8), 1214-1228.
  60. Nuangchalerm, P. (2009). Development of socioscientific issues-based teaching for preservice science teachers. Journal of Social Sciences, 5(3), 239-243. https://doi.org/10.3844/jssp.2009.239.243
  61. Organization for Economic and Co-operation and Development [OECD]. (2004). Scientific literacy.In J. Gilbert (Ed.), The RoutledgeFalmer reader in science education (pp. 39-52). London and New York: RoutledgeFalmer, Taylor and Francis Group.
  62. Oulton, C., Dillon, J., & Grace, M.M. (2004). Reconceptualizing the teaching of controversial issues. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 411-423. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000072746
  63. Park, S., & Chen, Y. (2012). Mapping out the integration of the components of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): Examples from high school biology classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(7), 922-941. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21022
  64. Park, S., & Oliver, J. S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualisation of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals. Research in Science Education, 38(3), 261-284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9049-6
  65. Presley, M. L., Sickel, A. J., Muslu, N., Merle-Johnson, D., Witzig, S. B., Izci, K., & Sadler, T. D.(2013). A framework for socio-scientific issues based education. Science Educator, 22(1), 26-32.
  66. Ratcliffe, M. (1997). Pupil decision-making about socio-scientific issues within the science curriculum. International Journal of Science Education, 19(2), 167-182. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069970190203
  67. Reis, P., & Galvao C. (2004). The impact of socio-scientific controversies in Portuguese natural science teachers' conceptions and practices. Research in Science Education, 34, 153-171. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:RISE.0000033760.04656.a1
  68. Roth, W. M. & Lee, S. (2004). Science education as/for participation in the community. Science Education, 88(2), 263-294. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10113
  69. Roth, W. M. (2003). Scientific literacy as an emergent feature of collective human praxis. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35(1), 9-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270210134600
  70. Sadler, T. D. (2011). Situating socioscientific issues in classrooms as a means of achieving goals of science education. In T. Sadler (Ed.), Socio-scientific issues in the classroom: Teaching, learning and research (pp. 1-9). New York: Springer.
  71. Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). The morality of socioscientific issues: Construal and resolution of genetic engineering dilemmas. Science Education, 88, 4-27. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10101
  72. Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). The significance of content knowledge for informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: Applying genetics knowledge to genetic engineering issues. Science Education, 89, 71-93. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20023
  73. Sadler, T.D., Amirshokoohi, A., Kazempour, M., & Allspaw, K.M. (2006). Socioscience and ethics in science classrooms: Teacher perspectives and strategies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 353-376. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20142
  74. Savadori, L., Savio, S., Nicotra, E., Rumiati, R., Finucane, M., & Slovic, P. (2004). Expert and public perception of risk from biotechnology. Risk Analysis, 24(5), 1289-1299. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00526.x
  75. Setbon, M., Raude, J., Fischler, C., & Flahault, A. (2005). Risk perception of the "mad cow disease" in France: determinants and consequences. Risk Analysis, 25(4), 813-826. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00634.x
  76. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. https://doi.org/10.2307/1175860
  77. 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
  78. Tal, R. T., & Hochberg, N. (2003). Reasoning, problem-solving and reflections: Participating in WISE project in Israel. Science Education International, 14, 3-19.
  79. Tal, R. T., & Kedmi, Y. (2006). Teaching socioscientific issues: Classroom culture and students'performances. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 1(4), 615-644.
  80. Tamir, P. (1988). Subject matter and related pedagogical knowledge in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4, 99-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X(88)90011-X
  81. Veal, W. R., & Kubasko, D. S. (2003). Biology and geology teachers' domain-specific pedagogical content knowledge of evolution. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 18(4), 334-352.
  82. Witz, K.G., & Lee, H. (2009). Science as an ideal: Teachers' orientations to science and science education reform. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 41(3), 409-431. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270802165640
  83. Yoo, J., Choi, S., & Lee, H. (2011). Perceptions of science, social studies, and ethics teachers on teaching socio-scientific issues. Journal of Research in Curriculum Instruction, 15(2), 415-432. https://doi.org/10.24231/rici.2011.15.2.415
  84. Zeidler, D. L., Applebaum, S. M., & Sadler, T. D. (2011). Enacting a socioscientific issues classroom: Transformative transformations. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socioscientific issues in the classroom (pp. 277-305). Springer, Netherlands.
  85. Zeidler, D.L., & Nichols, B.H. (2009). Socioscientific issues: Theory and practice. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(2), 49-58. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173684
  86. Zeidler, D.L., Sadler, T.D., Simmons, M.L., & Howes, E.V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socio-scientific issues education. Science Education, 89(3), 357-377. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20048
  87. Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 35-62. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008

Cited by

  1. A Suggestion of the new construction of science education stressed social responsibility and the education strategies to integrate Education for Sustainable Development into science education vol.22, pp.6, 2016, https://doi.org/10.24159/joec.2016.22.6.279
  2. 과학 기술 관련 사회쟁점 교육에 대한 과학 교사들의 SSI-PCK 사례연구 vol.37, pp.4, 2016, https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2017.37.4.679
  3. 과학 관련 사회적 쟁점(Socio-Scientific Issues, SSI)을 활용한 국내 프로그램 분석 vol.62, pp.2, 2018, https://doi.org/10.5012/jkcs.2018.62.2.137
  4. SSI 교사모임의 특성과 교사 전문성 발달과의 관련성에 관한 사례연구 vol.38, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2018.38.3.431
  5. 예비과학교사의 비유 생성 수업 계획 및 시연에서 나타나는 특징 vol.38, pp.4, 2018, https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2018.38.4.587
  6. 의사결정 유형 및 성격특성에 따른 예비생물교사들의 SSI(Socio-Scientific Issues) 토론 담화 차이 분석 vol.38, pp.5, 2018, https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2018.38.5.739
  7. Developing teacher professionalism for teaching socio-scientific issues: What and how should teachers learn? vol.15, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-019-09955-6