SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Anadolu Öğretmen Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 10 Sayı: 1

EXPLORING SOCIOSCIENTIFIC ISSUES WITH DILEMMA CARDS: REFLECTONS OF PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS

İKİLEM KARTLARIYLA SOSYOBİLİMSEL KONULARIN KEŞFİ: ÖĞRETMEN ADAYLARININ YANSIMALARI

Hanife Gamze Hastürk(Tokat Gaziosmanpaşa Üniversitesi)0000-0002-8495-560X
Gökhan Hastürk(TOKAT GAZİOSMANPAŞA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-1470-758X
Pages
62–80
Publication Date
2026-06-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings revealed that dilemma cards contributed to the development of pre-service teachers’ critical thinking, multiple perspective-taking, argumentation skills, and professional awareness.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of this study is to examine in depth pre-service teachers’ views on the preparation and implementation of dilemma cards in the teaching of socioscientific issues.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study group consisted of 20 pre-service classroom teachers enrolled in the Department of Primary Education at the Faculty of Education of a state university.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings revealed that dilemma cards contributed to the development of pre-service teachers’ critical thinking, multiple perspective-taking, argumentation skills, and professional awareness.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Sosyobilimsel konular · ikilem kartları · öğretmen adayları

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine in depth pre-service teachers’ views on the preparation and implementation of dilemma cards in the teaching of socioscientific issues. The study was conducted using a phenomenological design, one of the qualitative research approaches. The study group consisted of 20 pre-service classroom teachers enrolled in the Department of Primary Education at the Faculty of Education of a state university. During the research process, a different socioscientific issue was addressed each week. Pre-service teachers worked in small groups to prepare dilemma cards related to the selected issue, and these cards were discussed in the classroom environment. Data were collected through a semi-structured interview form and analyzed using content analysis. The findings revealed that dilemma cards contributed to the development of pre-service teachers’ critical thinking, multiple perspective-taking, argumentation skills, and professional awareness. However, some limitations were identified, including difficulties related to time management, controlling classroom discussions, and students’ readiness levels. Based on the findings, pedagogical recommendations were proposed for the more effective use of dilemma cards in teaching socioscientific issues.

Özet

Bu araştırmanın amacı, sosyobilimsel konuların öğretiminde ikilem kartlarının hazırlanması ve uygulanmasına yönelik öğretmen adaylarının görüşlerini derinlemesine incelemektir. Araştırma, nitel araştırma yaklaşımlarından olgu bilim deseninde yürütülmüştür. Çalışma grubunu bir devlet üniversitesinin eğitim fakültesi sınıf öğretmenliği anabilim dalında öğrenim gören 20 öğretmen adayı oluşturmaktadır. Araştırma sürecinde her hafta farklı bir sosyobilimsel konu ele alınmış; öğretmen adayları küçük gruplar hâlinde çalışarak ilgili konuya yönelik ikilem kartları hazırlamış ve bu kartlar sınıf ortamında tartışmaya açılmıştır. Veriler, yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme formu aracılığıyla toplanmış ve içerik analizi yöntemiyle analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular, ikilem kartlarının öğretmen adaylarının eleştirel düşünme, çoklu bakış açısı geliştirme, argümantasyon ve mesleki farkındalıklarını desteklediğini; buna karşın zaman yönetimi, tartışmaların kontrolü ve öğrenci hazırbulunuşluğu gibi bazı sınırlılıkların bulunduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Araştırma sonuçları doğrultusunda sosyobilimsel konuların öğretiminde ikilem kartlarının daha etkili kullanımına yönelik pedagojik öneriler sunulmuştur.

🔖

Cite This Article

Hastürk, H. G., Hastürk, G. (2026). EXPLORING SOCIOSCIENTIFIC ISSUES WITH DILEMMA CARDS: REFLECTONS OF PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS. Anadolu Öğretmen Dergisi, Cilt: 10 Sayı: 1, 62–80. https://doi.org/10.35346/aod.1858563

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (36)

  1. Atabey, N., & Topçu, M. S. (2017). The effects of socioscientific issues based instruction on middle school students' argumentation quality. Journal of Education and Practice, 8(36), 61-71.
  2. Cenk, A. G., & Ercan Yalman, F. (2023). Fen bilimleri öğretmen adaylarının farklı sosyobilimsel konularda argümantasyon formları ve ikilem kartları aracılığıyla tartışma becerilerinin belirlenmesi. Buca Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, (57), 1234-1255. https://doi.org/10.53444/deubefd.1258239
  3. Creswell, J. W. (2021). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. SAGE publications.
  4. Day, S. P., & Bryce, T. G. K. (2011). Does the discussion of socio-scientific issues require a paradigm shift in science teachers’ thinking? International Journal of Science Education, 33(12), 1675-1702. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.519804
  5. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312.
  6. Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin’s argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915-933.
  7. Evagorou, M., & Dillon, J. (2020). Introduction: Socio-scientific issues as promoting responsible citizenship and the relevance of science. In Science teacher education for responsible citizenship: Towards a pedagogy for relevance through socioscientific issues (pp. 1-11). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
  8. Evren Yapıcıoğlu, A. (2018). Advantages and disadvantages of socioscientific issue-based instruction in science classrooms. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 5(2), 361-374.
  9. Evren Yapıcıoğlu, A. (2020). Fen eğitiminde sosyobilimsel konu olarak Covid 19 pandemisi ve örnek uygulama önerileri. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 49(1), 1121-1141. https://doi.org/10.37669/milliegitim.787170
  10. Evren, A., & Kaptan, F. (2014). Fen eğitiminde sosyobilimsel durum temelli öğretim ve önemi. VI. Uluslararası Eğitim Araştırmaları, 5(8), 389-402.
  11. Hastürk, H. G. (2024). Fen Eğitiminde Sosyobilimsel Konular. Matematik ve Fen Bilimleri Eğitiminde Yeni Yaklaşımlar, F. Erdoğan (Ed), Efe Yayınevi, Ankara.
  12. Hastürk, H. G. (2025). Fen Eğitiminde Sosyobilimsel Konular Ve Örnek Uygulamaları. Eğitim & Bilim 2025: Fen Eğitiminde Geleneksel ve Modern Uygulamalar, G. Uyanık (Ed), Efe Yayınevi, Ankara.
  13. Kara, Y. (2012). Pre-service biology teachers’ perceptions on the instruction of socio-scientific issues in the curriculum. European Journal of Teacher Education, 35(1), 111–129.
  14. Lee, H., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Choi, K. (2006). Korean science teachers’ perceptions of the introduction of socio-scientific issues into the science curriculum. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 6(2), 97–117.
  15. Leung, J. S. C. (2021). Shifting the teaching beliefs of preservice science teachers about socioscientific issues in a teacher education course. International journal of science and mathematics education, 20(4), 659.
  16. Levinson, R. (2008). Promoting the role of the personal narrative in teaching controversial socio-scientific issues. Science & Education, 17(8), 855-871.
  17. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Sage, London.
  18. Osborne, J., Duschl, R., & Fairbrother, R. (2002). Breaking the mould? Teaching science for public understanding. London: Nuffield Foundation.
  19. Ökkeşoğulları, E., & Hastürk, G. (2022). Ortaokul Öğrencilerinin Sosyobilimsel Konulara İlişkin Zihinsel Yapılarının Tespiti. Trakya Eğitim Dergisi, 12(1), 417-435.
  20. Presley, M. L., Sickel, A. J., Muslu, N., Merle-Johnson, D., Witzig, S. B., Izci, K., & Sadler, T. D. (2013). A framework for socio-scientific issues based education. Science Educator, 22(1), 26-32.
  21. Ratcliffe, M., & Grace, M. (2003). Ebook: Science Education for Citizenship. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
  22. Roberts, D. A. (2013). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In Handbook of research on science education (pp. 729-780). Routledge.
  23. Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513-536.
  24. Sadler, T. D. (2009). Situated learning in science education: socio‐scientific issues as contexts for practice. Studies in science Education, 45(1), 1-42.
  25. Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). The significance of content knowledge for informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: Applying genetics knowledge to genetic engineering issues. Science Education, 89(1), 71-93.
  26. 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.
  27. Viehmann, C., Fernández Cárdenas, J. M., & Reynaga Peña, C. G. (2024). The use of socioscientific issues in science lessons: A scoping review. Sustainability, 16(14), 5827.
  28. Yalman, F. E. (2023). Does Context Affect Argument Quality and Informal Reasoning in Socio-scientific Issues? Science Education International, 34(4), 250-261.
  29. Yapıcıoğlu, A.E., & Kaptan, F. (2017). Sosyobilimsel konu temelli öğretim yaklaşımı uygulamalarının etkililiğine yönelik bir karma yöntem çalışması. Eğitim ve Bilim, 42(192), 113-137.
  30. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2016). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  31. Zeidler, D. L. (2014). Socioscientific issues as a curriculum emphasis: Theory, research, and practice. N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Ed.), Handbook of research on science education, Volume II içinde (ss. 697-726). Routledge.
  32. Zeidler, D. L., & Keefer, M. (2003). The role of moral reasoning and the status of socioscientific issues in science education: Philosophical, psychological and pedagogical considerations. In The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education (pp. 7-38). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
  33. Zeidler, D. L., & Nichols, B. H. (2009). Socioscientific issues: Theory and practice. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(2), 49-58.
  34. Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2023). Exploring and expanding the frontiers of socioscientific issues. In Handbook of research on science education (pp. 899-929). Routledge.
  35. Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Applebaum, S., & Callahan, B. E. (2009). Advancing reflective judgment through socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 74-101.
  36. 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, 343-367.