Use of evidence and decisions of pre-service teachers in a debate on plastics bans
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The society requires reflective and critical citizens who know how to effectively solve current problems posed by scientific-technological aspects. To this end, it is necessary that students to be trained in the necessary skills so that they know how to act responsibly in the face of these problems. Thus, evidence-based argumentation is essential as it will allow informed decisions to be made, and debates are an appropriate tool to promote it in the classroom. This paper raises a debate on the socio-scientific problem of the ban on single-use plastics in the initial training of secondary school teachers. The participants act as listeners to the debate between two people, one for and one against the ban, and must make an argued decision on the problem before and after the debate. The results show important changes in the decision adopted at the two moments, with a predominance of positions in favor before the debate and both positions after, supported by different types of evidence, initially environmental, social and related to material properties, and finally social in many cases.
Article Details
Citas en Dimensions Service
References
Achiam, M., Glackin, M., & Dillon, J. (2021). Wicked problems and out-of-school science education: Implications for practice and research. In M. Achiam, J. Dillon, & M. Glackin (Eds.), Addressing wicked problems through science education: The role of out-of-school experiences (pp. 229–237). Springer International Publishing.
Bravo, B., Puig, B., & Jiménez-Aleixandre, M.P. (2009). Competencias en el uso de pruebas en argumentación. Educación Química, 20(2), 137–142.
Bravo, B., & Jiménez-Aleixandre, M.P. (2013). ¿Criaríamos leones en granjas? Uso de pruebas y conocimiento conceptual en un problema de acuicultura. Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias, 10(2), 145-158.
Christenson, N., Chang-Rundgren, S. N., & Höglund, H. O. (2012). Using the SEE-SEP Model to Analyze Upper Secondary Students’ Use of Supporting Reasons in Arguing Socioscientific Issues. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21, 342–352.
Cook, D. (2014). Conflicts in chemistry: The case of plastics. A role-playing game from high school chemistry students. Journal of Chemical Education, 91(10), 1580–1586.
Creswell, J.W., & Zhang, W. (2014). The application of mixed methods designs to trauma research. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 22(6), 612–621.
Crujeiras, B., Martín, C., Díaz, N., & Fernández, A. (2020). Trabajar la argumentación a través de un juego de rol: ¿debemos instalar un cementerio nuclear? Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 38, 125-142.
Elías, R. (2015). Mar del plástico: una revisión del plástico en el mar. Marine & Fishery Sciences, 27, 83–105.
Eriksen, M., & Al., E. (2014). Plastic pollution in the world’s oceans: More than 5 trillion plastic pieces weighing over 250,000 tons afloat at sea. PLOS ONE, 9(12), E111913.
European Union (2006). Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the council of 18 December 2006 on key competences for lifelong learning. Official Journal of the European Union, 30-12-2006, L 394/10–L 394/18.
Feierabend, T., & Eilks, I. (2011). Teaching the societal dimension of chemistry using a socio-critical and problem-oriented lesson plan based on bioethanol usage. Journal of Chemical Education, 88(9), 1250−1256.
Hahn, U., & Oaksford, M. (2012). Rational Argument. Oxford University Press.
Jaén, M., Esteve, P. y Banos, I. (2019). Los futuros maestros ante el problema de la contaminación de los mares por plásticos y el consumo. Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias, 16(1), 1501.
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M.P. (2010). 10 Ideas Clave. Competencias en argumentación y uso de pruebas. Graó.
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., Rodriguez, A. B., & Duschi R. A. (2000). “Doing the lesson” or “Doing science”: arguments in high school genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757-792.
López-Fernández, M.M., González, F., & Franco-Mariscal, A.J. (2021). Should We Ban Single-Use Plastics? A Role-Playing Game to Argue and Make Decisions in a Grade-8 School Chemistry Class. Journal of Chemical Education, 98(12), 3947–3956.
López-Fernández, M.M., González, F., & Franco-Mariscal, A.J. (2022). Plásticos: Revisión bibliográfica en Didáctica de las Ciencias Experimentales (2010-2019). Revista de Educación, 397, 261-292.
Kanari, Z., y Millar, R. (2004). Reasoning from data: how students collect and interpret data in science investigations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(7), 748-769.
Koch, B.S., & Barber, M. M. (2019). Basuras marinas; impacto, actualidad y las acciones para mitigar sus consecuencias. Revista de Marina, 968, 30–39.
Maloney, J. (2007). Children’s roles and use of evidence in science: an analysis of decision-making in small groups. British Educational Research Journal, 33(3), 371 – 401.
Marcén, C., & Molina, P. J. (2006). La persistencia de las opiniones de los escolares sobre el Medio Ambiente. Una particular visión retrospectiva desde 1980 a 2005. Madrid: MMA.
Martini, M., Widodo, W., Qosyim, A., Mahdiannur, M. A., & Jatmiko, B. (2021). Improving undergraduate science education students’ argumentation skills through debates on socioscientific issues. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 10(3), 428–438
Mercier, H., & Sperber, D. (2011). Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34(2), 57–74.
Nida, S., Marsuki, M. F., & Eilks, I. (2021). Palm-Oil-Based Biodiesel in Indonesia: A Case Study on a Socioscientific Issue That Engages Students to Learn Chemistry and Its Impact on Society. Journal of Chemical Education, 98(8), 2536−2548.
Ozturk, N., & Yilmaz-Tuzun, O. (2017). Preservice science teachers’ epistemological beliefs and informal reasoning regarding socio-scientific issues. Research in Science Education, 47, 1275-1304.
Pérez, M.P., Postigo, Y., & García, M. (2016). Argumentation and education: notes for a debate. Journal for the Study of Education and Development, 39(1), 1–24.
Sadler, T.D., & Zeidler, D. (2005). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision-making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 112–138.
Sandoval, W. A., & Millwood, K. A. (2005). The quality of students’ use of evidence in written scientific explanations. Cognition and Instruction, 23(1), 23-55.
Sardà, A. y Sanmartí, N. (2000). Enseñar a argumentar científicamente: un reto de las clases de ciencias. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 18(3), 405–422.
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.
Toulmin, S. (2003). The uses of argument. 3rd. Edition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Yacoubian, H.A., & Khishfe, R. (2018). Argumentation, critical thinking, nature of science and socioscientific issues: a dialogue between two researchers. International Journal of Science Education, 40(7), 796–807.
Wu, Y.-T. (2013). University students’ knowledge structures and informal reasoning on the use of genetically modified foods: multi-dimensional analyses. Research in Science Education, 43, 1873-1890.
Educación Química por Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México se distribuye bajo una Licencia Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivar 4.0 Internacional.
Basada en una obra en http://www.revistas.unam.mx/index.php/req.