Perceptions of Teachers, Program Instructors, and Local Experts on Implementing Community-Based Socioscientific Issues Programs

지역사회연계 과학이슈 교육프로그램 운영의 교육적 함의에 대한 운영 교사 및 강사, 지역 전문가의 인식 탐색

  • Received : 2017.03.24
  • Accepted : 2017.05.08
  • Published : 2017.06.30


The purposes of the study are to investigate the experiences of major stakeholders (i.e. science teachers, program instructors, local experts, etc.) who participated in implementing Community-Based Socioscientific Issues Programs (SSI-COMM) and to provide educational implications for further implementation. SSI-COMM dealt with three issues (i.e. abandoned pets, fine dust, and recycling) that students often encountered in their local community. Each program, lasting over 16 class periods in a free semester, included in-school and out-of-school activities in order to promote their interest and participation in community. Four teachers, four program instructors, and six local experts joined the interviews to explain their experience of participating in the programs. As a result, school teachers, program instructors, and local experts positively appreciated their experiences of the program implementation and perceived educational potentials of SSI-COMM. All the stakeholders mentioned that they became more interested in local socioscientific issues and strongly perceived the need for the implementation of such programs linked to their own community. The science teachers appreciated the opportunities to identify students' potentials through SSI-COMM and believed that SSI-COMM would contribute to reducing the gap between learning and practice. The program instructors, observed that out-of-school activities contributed to enhancing students' self-confidence and fulfillment in learning. Finally, the local experts obtained a sense of belonging to their community and were very satisfied with their contribution. The SSI-COMM programs are expected to be one of the educational models that will help to encourage the participation of students and stakeholders in facilitating educational activities in relation to the community.


socioscientific issues(SSI);community-based learning;informal learning;scientific literacy


Supported by : 서울산업진흥원


  1. Anderson, D., & Lucas, K. B. (1997). The effectiveness of orienting students to the physical features of a science museum prior to visitation. Research in Science Education, 27(4), 485-495.
  2. Barton, A. C., & Tan, E. (2010). We be burnin'! Agency, identity, and science learning. Journal of the Learning Science, 19(2), 187-229.
  3. Billig, S., Root, S., & Jesse, D. (2005). The impact of participation in service-learning on high school students' civic engagement (CIRCLE Working Paper 33). Washington, DC: Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement.
  4. Birmingham, D., & Barton A. C. (2014). Putting on a green carnival: Youth taking educated action on socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(3), 286-314.
  5. Bouillion, L. M., & Gomez, L. M. (2001). Connecting school and community with science learning: Real world problems and school-community partnerships as contextual scaffolds. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(8), 878-898.
  6. Catalano, R. F., Oesterle, S., Fleming, C. B., & Hawkins, D. (2004). The importance of bonding to school for healthy development: Findings from the social development research group. Journal of School Health, 74(7), 252-261.
  7. Cheak, M., Volk, T., & Hungerford, H. (2002). Molokai: An investment in children, the community, and the environment. Carbondale, IL: Center for Instruction, Staff Development, and Evaluation.
  8. Cobb, P., & Bowers, J. (1999). Cognitive and situated learning perspectives in theory and practice. Educational Researcher, 28(2), 4-15.
  9. Duffin, M., Powers, A., & Tremblay, G. (2004). Report on cross-program research and other program evaluation activities: 2003-2004. Richomond, VT: PEER Associates.
  10. Emekauwa, E. (2004). They remember what they touch: The impact of place-based learning in East Feliciana Parich. Washington, DC: Rural School and Community Trust.
  11. Han, S. (2002). Lifelong learning from the perspective of learning ecology. Seoul: Hakjisa.
  12. Kim, G. (2016). The effects of community-based socioscientific issues programs on promoting students' understanding of community issues and character and values as citizens. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ewha Womans University, Korea.
  13. Knapp, C. E. (2008). Place-based curricular and pedagogical models my adventures in teaching through community contexts. In D. A. Gruenewald & G. A. Smith (Eds.), Place-based education in the global age: Local diversity (pp. 5-28). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  14. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  15. Lee, S., & Chang, N. (1993). The effect of the environmental education Strategy through personalization of environment. The Korean Society of Environmental Education, 5, 71-88.
  16. Lee, S., & Roth, M. W. (2003). Science and the "good citizen": Community-based scientific literacy. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 28(3), 403-424.
  17. Lee, S., Shin, H., Moung, J., & Kim, C. (2010). The effect of science museum educational program on primary school students’ science learning motivation. The Korean Society of Elementary Science Education, 29(1), 47-55.
  18. Lieberman, G., & Hoody, L. (1998). Closing the achievement gap: Using the environment as an integrating context for learning. San Diego, CA: State Education and Environment Roundtable.
  19. Lim M., & Barton, A. C. (2010). Exploring insideness in urban children’s sense of place. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(3), 328-337.
  20. Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  21. Morgan, A. (2011). Place-based education versus geography education? In G. Butt (Ed.), Geography, education and the future. (pp. 84-102). New York, NY: Continuum International Publishing Group.
  22. Powers, A. L. (2004). An evaluation of four place-based education programs. Reports & Research, 35(4), 17-32.
  23. Senechal, E. (2008). Environmental justice in Egleston square. In D. A. Gruenewald & G. A. Smith (Eds.) Place-based education in the global age: Local diversity (pp. 85-111). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  24. Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  25. Stevenson, K. T. (2014). Role of significant life experiences in building environmental knowledge and behavior among middle school students. The Journal of Environmental Education, 45(3), 163-177.
  26. Tal, T., & Abramovitch, A. (2013). Activity and action: Bridging environmental sciences and environmental education. Research in Science Education, 43(4), 1665-1687.
  27. Volk, T., & Cheak, M. (2003). The effects of an environmental education program on students, parents, and community. Journal of Environmental Education, 34(4), 12-25.
  28. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  29. Yetes, M., & Youniss, J. (1999). Roots of civic identity: International perspectives on community service and activism in youth. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  30. Yoon, O. (2016). Practices of place-based environmental education in a general education course for pre-service elementary teachers. The Journal of the Korean Association of Geographic and Environmental Education, 24(1), 139-150.