Asian Institute of Research, Journal Publication, Journal Academics, Education Journal, Asian Institute
Asian Institute of Research, Journal Publication, Journal Academics, Education Journal, Asian Institute

Education Quarterly Reviews

ISSN 2621-5799

asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
open access

Published: 11 June 2021

Examination of Secondary School Students' Attitudes towards Socioscientific Issues

Hanife Gamze Hastürk, Eyüp Ökkeşoğulları

Gaziosmanpaşa University (Turkey), Ministry of Education (Turkey)

asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
pdf download

Download Full-Text Pdf



Pages: 513-525

Keywords: Socioscientific Issues, Attitude, Secondary School Students


The interplay between culture and technology is dynamic. Since ancient times, science has had a major impact on people, and people have determined the general direction of science progress. In this way, there is mutual influence between society and science. Socioscientific issues have emerged as a result of the interaction process between science and society. In this context, it was aimed to examine eighth grade students' attitudes towards socioscientific issues. The study was conducted with 136 eighth grade students studying in a city in the Central Anatolia region of Turkey in the 2018-2019 academic year. Quantitative data collection and analysis methods were used in this study, which aimed to examine the secondary school students’ attitudes towards socioscientific issues. “The Attitudes towards Socioscientific Issues Scale (ATSIS) " was used as data collection tool in the study. According to the findings of the factorial ANOVA test; it was determined that eighth grade students' showed positive attitude on socioscientific issues. While students had positive attitudes related to interest and usefulness of SSI, they also had neither positive nor negative attitudes related to interest and usefulness of SSI. In addition, it was observed that the general attitude levels about socioscientific issues and the mean scores of interest and usefulness, liking and anxiety sub-dimensions did not differentiate according to gender. Based on the findings, the importance of socioscientific issues was emphasized and recommendations were made to program makers, researchers and practitioners on teaching.


  1. Akbulut, Y. (2010).  Sık kullanılan istatiksel analizler ve açıklamalı SPSS çözümleri. [SPSS applications in social sciences] İstanbul: İdeal Kültür Press.

  2. Al, S. (2015). Pre-service science teachers' perceptions of socioscientific issues: Global warming as a case. Unpublished master thesis, Middle East Technical University, Institute of Social Sciences, Ankara.

  3. Albe, V. (2008). Students’ positions and considerations of scientific evidence about acontroversial socioscientific issue. Science ve Education, 17(8-9), 805-827.

  4. Altuntaş, E. Ç., Yilmaz, M., & Turan, S. L. (2017). Analysis of critical thinkings of prospective biology teachers on a socio-scientific issue in terms of empathy. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 6(3), 915-931.

  5. Arslan, A., & Atabey, N. (2018). The effects of teaching biotechnology and cloning issue with cooperative learning model on primary preservice teachers’ argumentation qualities. Journal of Social Sciences of Mus Alparslan University, 6(18), 35-45.

  6. Ayvacı, H. Ş., & Şenel Çoruhlu, T. (2009). A developmental research to determine students' view of global environmental problems and their misconceptions. HAYEF: Journal of Education, 12(2), 11-25.

  7. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. [Manual of data analysis for social sciences] Ankara: Pegem Press.

  8. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2010). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Scientific research methods] (5thedition). Ankara: Pegem Press

  9. Çavuş, R. (2013). Epistemological beliefs with different of 8th grade students' perspectives on socio-scientific issues. Unpublished master thesis, Sakarya University, Institute of Social Sciences, Sakarya.

  10. Cebesoy, Ü., & Şahin, M. D. (2013). Investigating pre-service science teachers’ attitudes towards socioscientific issues in terms of gender and class level. Marmara University Atatürk Education Faculty Journal of Educational Sciences, 37(37), 100-117.

  11. Çepni, S. (2005). Bilim, fen, teknoloji ve eğitim programlarına yansımaları. Kuramdan uygulamaya fen ve teknoloji öğretimi [Reflections on science, science, technology and education programs. Science and technology teaching from theory to practice] (3thedition). Ankara: Pegem Press.

  12. Çepni, Z., & Geçit, Y. (2020). Social studies teacher candidates' attitudes and views regarding socio-scientific issues. International Journal Of Geography And Geography Education, (42), 133-154.

  13. Çetin, G., & Harman, Ö. (2012). High school students' knowledge and attitudes of organ transplantation and organ donation. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 1(2), 172-177.

  14. Dawson, V. M. (2011). A case study of the impact of introducing socio-scientific issues into a reproduction unit in a Catholic Girls’ school. T. D. Sadler (Ed.). Socioscientific Issues in the Classroom (313-345). New York: Springer Dordect.

  15. Demir, B., & Düzleyen, E. (2012). Investigation of Primary School 8th Grade Students' GMO Knowledge Levels. XUFBMEK. 27-30 July 2012, Niğde.

  16. Demiral, Ü., & Çepni, S. (2018). Science teacher candidates' on a socioscientific topic examination of argumentation skills. Kırşehir Journal of Education Faculty 19(1), 734-760.

  17. Demirci, M., & Yüce, Z. (2018). 8th grade in teaching the subject of biotechnology and genetic engineering

  18. experimental planning of the lesson for students. Sakarya University Journal of Educational Faculty, (35), 87-108.

  19. Demircioğlu, T., & Uçar, S. (2014). Investigation of written arguments about akkuyu nuclear power plant. Elementary Education Online, 13(4), 1373-1386.

  20. Doğru, M. S. (2011). Primary 8 grade students' about biotechnology approaches and measure the levels of knowledge. Unpublished master thesis, Kastamonu University, Institute of science, Kastamonu.

  21. 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.

  22. Eş, H., Mercan, S. I., & Ayas, C. (2016). A new socio-scientific issue for Turkey: Life with nuclear. Turkish Journal of Education, 5(2), 47-59.

  23. Fowler, S. R., Zeidler, D. L. & Sadler, T. D. (2009). Moral sensitivity in the context of socioscientific ıssues in high school science students. International Journal of Science Teacher Education, 31(2), 279-296.

  24. Genç, M., & Genç, T. (2017). The content analysis of the researches about socio-scientific issues in turkey. E-Kafkas Journal of Educational Research, 4(2), 27- 42.

  25. Gray, D. S. & Bryce, T. (2006). Socio-scientific issues in science education: Implications for the professional development of teachers. Cambridge Journal of Education, 36(2), 171-192.

  26. Gülhan, F. (2012). The investigation about the effect of argumentation on socio-scientific issues in scientific literacy for eighth grade students, tendency in the argumentation, decision making skills and science-social problems of sensitivity, Unpublished master thesis, Marmara University, Institute of Ecucational Science, İstanbul.

  27. Gürbüzoğlu Yalmancı, S., & Gözüm, A. İ. C. (2016). Examination of research behaviours of pre-service science teachers on gmo socio-scientific issues. Journal of Kirsehir Education Faculty, 17(1).

  28. Harman, G., & Çökelez, A. (2017). Science teacher candidates’ metaphoric perception on organ donation which is a socio-scientific issue. Usak University Journal of Social Sciences, 10(1), 55-70.

  29. Howell, D. C. (2008). Fundamental statistics for the behavioral sciences. Boston: Nelson Education.

  30. İşbilir, E. (2010). Investigating pre-service science teachers’s quality of written argumentations about socio-scientific ıssues in relation to epistemic beliefs and argumentativeness. Unpublished master thesis, METU, Institute of Science, Ankara.

  31. İşbilir, E., Ertepınar, H., & Çakıroğlu, J. (2012). Examining the scientific discussions of science teacher candidates on socioscientific issues in terms of their epistemic beliefs. X. National Science and Mathematics Education Congress, 27-30 June, Niğde, Turkey.

  32. Karakaya, E. (2015). Understanding the nature of scientific knowledge and reasoning in socio - scientific issues. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Marmara University, Institute of Educational Science, İstanbul.

  33. Karasar, N. (2006). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi. [Scientific research method] Ankara: Nobel Press.

  34. Kaya, M. F. (2013). Metaphor perceptions of social studies teacher candidates towards the concept of “global warming.” Eastern Geographical Review, 18(29), 117-134.

  35. Keefer, M. (2003). Moral reasoning and case based approaches to ethical instruction in science. D.L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific ıssues and discourse in science education (p. 241-260). Netherland: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

  36. Kilinc, A., & Sönmez, A. (2012). Preservice science teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs about teaching gm foods: the potential effects of some psychometric factors. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6(2), 49-76.

  37. Kolstø, S. D. (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientific ıssues. Science Education, 85(3), 291- 310

  38. Kolsto, S. O. (2006). Patterns in students’ argumentation confronted with a riskfocused socio-scientific ıssue. International Journal of Science Education, 28 (14), 1689-1716

  39. Kurt, H., & Ekici, G. (2013). Determining biology student teachers’ cognitive structure and alternative concepts on the concept of “bacteria”. Turkish Studies, 8(8), 885-910.

  40. MEB. (2018). Science lesson (Primary and Secondary School 3,4,5,6,7 and 8th Grades) Curriculum.

  41. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

  42. Nielsen, J.A. (2012). Science in discussions: An analysis of the use of science content in socio-scientific discussions. Science Education 96(3), 428-456.

  43. Oulton, C., Dillon, J., & Grace, M.M. (2004). Reconceptualizing the teaching of controversial issues. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 411-423.

  44. Özdemir, N., & Çobanoğlu, O. E. (2008). Prospective teachers’ attitudes towards the use of nuclear energy and the construction of nuclear plants in turkey. H. U. Journal of Education, 34(34), 218-232.

  45. Özsoy, T., & Kılınç, A. (2017). The 5th grade students’ opinions about SSI-based science education (Feskök Pedagogy). Journal of Uludag University Faculty of Education, 30(2), 909-925.

  46. Öztürk, A. (2013). An action research about argumentation skill on socio-scientific issues and development of attitudes towards human rights. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Çukurova University, Institute of Educationa Sciences, Adana.

  47. Qin, W., & Brown, J.L. (2007). Public reactions to information about genetically engineered foods: effects of information formats and male/female differences. Public Understanding of Science 16(4), 471–488.

  48. Queensland School Curriculum Council. (2001). Studies of society and environment [Online]. Retrieved from http://

  49. Ratcliffe, M., & Grace, M. (2003). Science education for citizenship: Teaching socio-scientific ıssues. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

  50. Sadler, T. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding ssı: a critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41 (5), 513-536.

  51. Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). The morality of socioscientific ıssues construal and resolution of genetic engineering dilemmas. Science Education, 88 (1), 4- 27.

  52. Sadler, T.D. (2011). Situating socio-scientific issues in classrooms as a means of achieving goals of science education. T.D. Sadler (Ed.). Socioscientific Issues in the Classroom (1-10). New York: Springer Dordect.

  53. Sadler, T.D., Amirshokoohi, A., Kazempour, M., & Allspaw, K. (2006). Socioscience and ethics in science classrooms: Teacher perspectives and strategies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 353-376.

  54. Şimşek, N. (2017). The Validity and Reliability Studies of Multidimensional Scale of Life Skills Education. Kastamonu Education Journal, 27(1), 261-270.

  55. Soysal, Y. (2012). Influence of content knowledge level to socioscientific argumentation quality: Genetically modified organisms. Unpublished master thesis. Abant İzzet Baysal University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Bolu.

  56. Tekin, H. (1987). Eğitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme. [Measurement and evaluation in education] Ankara: Mesa Press.

  57. Tekin, N., & Aslan, O. (2019). Investigation of pre-service teachers’ attitudes towards socioscientific issues with respect to different variables. The Journal of International Social Sciences, 29(1), 133-141.

  58. Tekinarslan Şahiner, C. (2018). Student knowledge levels about the energy-related socio-scientific subjects in social studies course program. Unpublished master thesis. Kırşehir Ahi Evran University, Institute of Social Sciences, Kırşehir.

  59. Topçu, M. S. (2010). Development of attitudes towards socioscientific ıssues scale for undergraduate students. Evaluation ve Research in Education, 23(1), 51- 67.

  60. Topçu, M. S., Muğaloğlu, E. Z., & Güven, D. (2014). Socioscientific Issues in Science Education: The Case of Turkey. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14(6), 1-22.

  61. Topçu, M. S., & Atabey, N. (2017). The Effect of socioscientific issues based field trips on elementary school students’ argumentation quality. Bartin University Journal of Faculty of Education, 6(1), 68.

  62. Turan, B. (2012). Determining and comparing of primary preservice teachers? scientific habits of mind via socioscientific issues. Unpublished master thesis. Karadeniz Technical University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Trabzon.

  63. Ural Keleş, U. (2018). Effect of a seminar on stem cell on cognitive structions of science teacher candidates. International Journal of Education Science and Technology, 4(1), 41-57.

  64. Uzunkol, E. (2012). Analysis of the primary school prospective teachers’ perceptions about genetically modified organisms through metaphors. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 1 (4), 94-101.

  65. Van der Zande, P.A.M. (2009). Health-related genomics in classroom practice. D. J. Boerwinkel, and A. J. Waarlo (Eds.). Rethinking science curricula in the genomics era (82–89). FISME series on Research in Science Education No. 62. Utrecht: CD-β Press. 94

  66. Van der Zande, P.A.M., Warloo, A.J., Brekelmans, M., Akkerman, S.F., & Vermunt J.D. (2011). A knowledge base for teaching biology situated in the context of genetic testing. International Journal of Science Education, 33(15). 2307-2067.

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

  68. Yalvaç Hastürk, H. G. (2013). Investigating and assessing the changes in the teacher candidates' cognitive structures about some environmental topics in authentic learning environments. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Gazi University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.

  69. Yavuz Topaloğlu, M., & Balkan Kıyıcı, F. (2017). Middle School Students’ Opinions about Hydroelectric Power Plants. Journal of Kirsehir Education Faculty, 18(1), 159-179.

  70. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in the social sciences].Ankara: Seçkin Press.

  71. Yolagiden, C. (2017). Examination of the relationship between prospective teacher's attitudes towards science learning skills, science literacy and social scientific issues. Unpublished master thesis, Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University, Institute of Science, Kahramanmaraş.

  72. Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Applebaum, S., & Callahan, B. E. (2009). Advancing reflective judgment through socioscientific ıssues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 74-101.

  73. Zeidler, D. L., Walker, K. A., Ackett, W. A. & Simmons, M. L. (2002). Tangled Up in Views: Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific dilemmas. Science Education, 86(3), 343-367.

  74. Zengin Kırbağ, F., Keçeci, G., Kırılmazkaya, G., & Şener, A. (2012). Elemantary school studentslearning about nuclear power plants with the on-line scientific argumentation learning program. Education Sciences, 7(2), 647-654.