High School Students’ Informal Reasoning on a Socio‐scientific Issue: Qualitative and quantitative analyses

Recently, the significance of learners’ informal reasoning on socio‐scientific issues has received increasing attention among science educators. To gain deeper insights into this important issue, an integrated analytic framework was developed in this study. With this framework, 71 Grade 10 students’ informal reasoning about nuclear energy usage was explored qualitatively and quantitatively. It was found that the students in this study tended to process reasoning from multiple perspectives, and most of them were prone to make evidence‐based decisions. However, less than 40% of the participants were able to construct rebuttals against counter‐arguments. It was also revealed that students’ abundant usage of supportive arguments did not guarantee for their counter‐argument construction as well as rebuttal construction, but their usage of counter‐arguments might act as precursors to their construction of rebuttals. In addition, learners’ usage of multiple reasoning modes might help them propose more arguments and, in particular, generate more counter‐arguments, which may act as precursors to their rebuttal construction. This study also showed evidence that students’ scientific knowledge that might be mainly acquired from school science instruction could be viewed as important foundation for better informal reasoning and decision‐making on socio‐scientific issues.

[1]  Jonathan Evans,et al.  Informal reasoning: theory and method. , 2004, Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale.

[2]  A. Ahlgren,et al.  Science for all Americans , 1990 .

[3]  J. Shea.  National Science Education Standards , 1995 .

[4]  Troy D. Sadler,et al.  Student conceptualizations of the nature of science in response to a socioscientific issue , 2004 .

[5]  D. Zeidler,et al.  The Morality of Socioscientific Issues: Construal and Resolution of Genetic Engineering Dilemmas. , 2004 .

[6]  J. F. Voss,et al.  Who Reasons Well? Two Studies of Informal Reasoning Among Children of Different Grade, Ability, and Knowledge Levels , 1996 .

[7]  D. Perkins.  Postprimary Education Has Little Impact on Informal Reasoning. , 1985 .

[8]  渋江 靖弘,et al.  Science for All Americans , 1990 .

[9]  O. R. Anderson,et al.  Senior high school students' preference and reasoning modes about nuclear energy use , 2003 .

[10]  Jonathan Evans,et al.  Logic and human reasoning: an assessment of the deduction paradigm. , 2002, Psychological bulletin.

[11]  Troy D. Sadler,et al.  Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research , 2004 .

[12]  S. Sloman.  The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. , 1996 .

[13]  Shirley Simon,et al.  Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science , 2004 .

[14]  M. Linn,et al.  Learning and Instruction: An Examination of Four Research Perspectives in Science Education , 1988 .

[15]  Randy L. Bell,et al.  Understandings of the nature of science and decision making on science and technology based issues , 2003 .

[16]  P. Johnson-Laird,et al.  Mental Models: Towards a Cognitive Science of Language, Inference, and Consciousness , 1985 .

[17]  Shirley Simon,et al.  Enhancing the quality of argument in school science , 2001 .

[18]  V. Shaw.  The Cognitive Processes in Informal Reasoning , 1996 .

[19]  R. C. Laugksch.  Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview , 2000 .

[20]  Anat Zohar,et al.  Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics , 2002 .

[21]  Fang-Ying Yang,et al.  Exploring high school students' use of theory and evidence in an everyday context: the role of scientific thinking in environmental science decision‐making , 2004 .

[22]  Ira A. Noveck,et al.  Predicting intermediate and multiple conclusions in propositional logic inference problems: Further evidence for a mental logic , 1995 .

[23]  A. Onwuegbuzie,et al.  Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come , 2004 .

[24]  Chin-Chung Tsai,et al.  Information Commitments in Web-Based Learning Environments , 2004 .

[25]  Troy D. Sadler,et al.  The Significance of Content Knowledge for Informal Reasoning regarding Socioscientific Issues: Applying Genetics Knowledge to Genetic Engineering Issues. , 2005 .

[26]  D. Zeidler,et al.  Tangled up in views: Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific dilemmas , 2002 .

[27]  T. Sadler.  Evolutionary theory as a guide to socioscientific decision-making , 2005 .

[28]  D. Potari,et al.  Students' Argumentation in Decision-Making on a Socio-Scientific Issue: Implications for Teaching. , 1999 .

[29]  S. D. Kolstø.  Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientific issues , 2001 .

[30]  Ying-Tien Wu,et al.  Information commitments: evaluative standards and information searching strategies in web-based learning environments , 2005, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[31]  Kathleen Hogan,et al.  Small Groups' Ecological Reasoning While Making an Environmental Management Decision. , 2002 .

[32]  J. Lagowski.  National Science Education Standards , 1995 .

[33]  Jonathan Evans.  In two minds: dual-process accounts of reasoning , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[34]  Troy D. Sadler,et al.  Patterns of Informal Reasoning in the Context of Socioscientific Decision Making. , 2005 .

[35]  J. Osborne,et al.  Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms , 2000 .

[36]  Deanna Kuhn,et al.  Connecting scientific and informal reasoning , 1993 .

[37]  R. Glaser.  Education and Thinking: The Role of Knowledge. , 1984 .