Socioscientific Argumentation: The effects of content knowledge and morality

TLDR

Broad support exists in science education for integrating socioscientific issues and argumentation into the curriculum. This study examines how content knowledge and moral reasoning influence high‑school students’ SSI argumentation quality and proposes a Threshold Model of Knowledge Transfer to explain the relationship. Using a mixed‑methods design, 56 students completed content‑knowledge and moral‑reasoning tests and participated in SSI‑related interviews that were scored with an argumentation rubric. Regression and qualitative analyses revealed no significant link between content knowledge, moral reasoning, and argumentation quality, with students rarely applying content knowledge but frequently viewing SSI as moral problems, underscoring implications for science education.

Abstract

Broad support exists within the science education community for the incorporation of socioscientific issues (SSI) and argumentation in the science curriculum. This study investigates how content knowledge and morality contribute to the quality of SSI argumentation among high school students. We employed a mixed‐methods approach: 56 participants completed tests of content knowledge and moral reasoning as well as interviews, related to SSI topics, which were scored based on a rubric for argumentation quality. Multiple regression analyses revealed no statistically significant relationships among content knowledge, moral reasoning, and argumentation quality. Qualitative analyses of the interview transcripts supported the quantitative results in that participants very infrequently revealed patterns of content knowledge application. However, most of the participants did perceive the SSI as moral problems. We propose a "Threshold Model of Knowledge Transfer" to account for the relationship between content knowledge and argumentation quality. Implications for science education are discussed.