Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Contextualized Nature of Technology in Socioscientific Issues
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Contextualized Nature of Technology in Socioscientific Issues
Lee, Hyunok; Lee, Hyunju;
  PDF(new window)
Socioscientific issues (SSI), by their nature, are conceptually embedded in technology. Previous research reported that nature of technology (NOT), unlike nature of science, was quite explicitly manifested in SSI decision-making, and NOT could be a promising construct for promoting SSI reasoning. In this study, authors introduced an integrated conceptual framework for NOT, which consisted of four dimensions (i.e., artifacts, knowledge, practice and system) as diverse modes of technology. We adapted the framework to investigate students` conceptualizations of NOT in the context of various SSIs. Data was collected from 45 college students enrolled in a liberal arts course on science and technology. The students participated in a team project, where they prepared and led discussions for SSI topics in class. Seven topics concerning SSIs were selected by students themselves. The preparation and class discussion of each student group were audio-recorded, and final reports were also analyzed. As a result, NOT sub-components in the dimensions of artifacts and system were explicitly represented in most contexts of SSI with various ranges of understanding. Other sub-components under the dimensions of knowledge and practice were rarely or implicitly shown in the discussion. The depth of students` understanding on NOT varied. Implications for science education were discussed.
socioscientific issues;Nature of Technology;contextualized Nature of Technology;
 Cited by
Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2012). Examining the sources for our understandings about science: Enduring conflations and critical issues in research on nature of science in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 34(3), 353-374. crossref(new window)

Albe, V. (2008). When scientific knowledge, daily life experience, epistemological and social considerations intersect: Students' argumentation in group discussions on a socio-scientific issue. Research in Science Education, 38(1), 67-90. crossref(new window)

Allchin, D. (2011). Evaluating knowledge of the nature of (whole) science. Science Education, 95(3), 518-542. crossref(new window)

American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS] (1990). Science for all Americans. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS] (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

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. crossref(new window)

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.

Clough, M. P. (2013). Teaching about the nature of technology: Issues and pedagogical practices. In M. P. Clough, J. K. Olson, & D. S. Niederhauser (Eds.). The nature of technology: Implications for learning and teaching (pp. 345-369). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense.

Clough, M. P., Olson, J. K., & Niederhauser, D. S. (2013). The nature of technology: Implications for learning and teaching. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense.

De Vries, J., & De Vries, M. (2006). Teaching about technology: An introduction to the philosophy of technology for non-philosophers (Vol. 27). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.

DiGironimo, N. (2011). What is technology? Investigating student conceptions about the nature of technology. International Journal of Science Education, 33(10), 1337-1352. crossref(new window)

Eastwood, J. L., Sadler, T. D., Zeidler, D. L., Lewis, A., Amiri, L., & Applebaum, S. (2012). Contextualizing nature of science instruction in socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 34(15), 2289-2315. crossref(new window)

Feibleman, J. K. (1961). Pure science, applied science, technology, engineering: An attempt at definitions. Technology and Culture, 2(4), 305-317. crossref(new window)

Fleming, R. (1986). Adolescent reasoning in socio‐scientific issues part I: Social cognition. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23(8), 677-687. crossref(new window)

Galison, P. (1997). Image and logic: A material culture of microphysics. USA: University of Chicago Press.

Grace, M. M., & Ratcliffe, M. (2002). The science and values that young people draw upon to make decisions about biological conservation issues. International Journal of Science Education, 24(11), 1157-1169. crossref(new window)

Hughes, T. P. (2012). The evolution of large technological Systems. In W. E. Bijker, T. P. Hughes, T. Pinch, & D. G. Douglas (Eds.), The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology (pp. 45-74). Cambridge: MIT Press.

International Technology Education Association [ITEA] (2007). Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology. Reston, VA: ITEA.

Khishfe, R. (2012). Nature of science and decision-making. International Journal of Science Education, 34(1), 67-100. crossref(new window)

Kim, D., Mun, J., Lee, J., Song, C., & Park, J. (2013). The birth of modern engineers. Seoul: Ecolivres.

Lee, H. (2015). Construction of nature of technology framework and its utilization for investigation of changes in college students' perception of nature of technology through SSI-based program. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Ewha Womans University.

Lee, H. & Lee, H. (2015). Analysis of students' socioscientific decision-making from the nature of technology perspectives. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 35(1), 169-177. crossref(new window)

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. London: Sage.

National Research Council [NRC] (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Mitcham, C. (1994). Thinking through technology: The path between engineering and philosophy. United States of America: University of Chicago Press.

Pacey, A. (1983). The culture of technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.

Ratcliffe, M. (1997). Pupil decision‐making about socio‐scientific issues within the science curriculum. International Journal of Science Education, 19(2), 167-182. crossref(new window)

Roberts, D. A., & Bybee, R. W. (2014). Scientific literacy, science literacy, and science education. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education, Volume II (pp. 545-558). New York, NY: Routledge.

Rudolph, J. L. (2000). Reconsidering the 'nature of science' as a curriculum component. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(3), 403-419. crossref(new window)

Sadler, T. D., (2009) Situated learning in science education: socio‐scientific issues as contexts for practice. Studies in Science Education, 45(1), 1-42. crossref(new window)

Sadler, T. D., Chambers, F. W., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). Student conceptualizations of the nature of science in response to a socioscientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 387-409. crossref(new window)

Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). The morality of socioscientific issues: Construal and resolution of genetic engineering dilemmas. Science education, 88(1), 4-27. crossref(new window)

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. crossref(new window)

Schwartz, R. S., Lederman, N. G., & Abd‐El‐Khalick, F. (2012). A series of misrepresentations: A response to Allchin's whole approach to assessing nature of science understandings. Science Education, 96(4), 685-692. crossref(new window)

Vincenti, W. G. (1990). What engineers know and how they know it. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.

Volti, R. (2009). Society and Technological Change. New York, NY: Worth Publishers.

Walker, K. A., & Zeidler, D. L. (2007). Promoting discourse about socioscientific issues through scaffolded inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1387-1410. crossref(new window)

Waight, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2012). Nature of technology: Implications for design, development, and enactment of technological tools in school science classrooms. International Journal of Science Education, 34(18), 2875-2905. crossref(new window)

Zeidler, D. L. (2014). Socioscientific issues as a curriculum emphasis:Theory, research and practice. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.),Handbook of research on science education, Volume II (pp. 697-726).New York, NY: Routledge.

Zeidler, D. L., & Kahn, S. (2014). It's debatable!: Using socioscientific issuesto develop scientific literacy K-12. Arlington, VA: National ScienceTeachers Association Press.

Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Applebaum, S., & Callahan, B. E. (2009).Advancing reflective judgment through socioscientific issues. Journalof Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 74-101. crossref(new window)

Zeidler, D. L., Walker, K. A., Ackett, W. A., & Simmons, M. L. (2002).Tangled up in views: Beliefs in the nature of science and responsesto socioscientific dilemmas. Science Education, 86(3), 343-367. crossref(new window)