Reasoning on Controversial Science Issues in Science Education and Science Communication

The ability to make evidence-based decisions, and hence to reason on questions concerning scientific and societal aspects, is a crucial goal in science education and science communication. However, science denial poses a constant challenge for society and education. <i>Controversial science is...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Anna Beniermann, Laurens Mecklenburg, Annette Upmeier zu Belzen
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2021-09-01
Series:Education Sciences
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7102/11/9/522
id doaj-00b75bd97a254cfb98c31d289c1e4843
record_format Article
spelling doaj-00b75bd97a254cfb98c31d289c1e48432021-09-26T00:02:11ZengMDPI AGEducation Sciences2227-71022021-09-011152252210.3390/educsci11090522Reasoning on Controversial Science Issues in Science Education and Science CommunicationAnna Beniermann0Laurens Mecklenburg1Annette Upmeier zu Belzen2Biology Education, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, 10099 Berlin, GermanyBiology Education, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, 10099 Berlin, GermanyBiology Education, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, 10099 Berlin, GermanyThe ability to make evidence-based decisions, and hence to reason on questions concerning scientific and societal aspects, is a crucial goal in science education and science communication. However, science denial poses a constant challenge for society and education. <i>Controversial science issues</i> (CSI) encompass scientific knowledge rejected by the public as well as <i>socioscientific issues</i>, i.e., societal issues grounded in science that are frequently applied to science education. Generating evidence-based justifications for claims is central in scientific and informal reasoning. This study aims to describe attitudes and their justifications within the argumentations of a random online sample (<i>N</i> = 398) when reasoning informally on selected CSI. Following a deductive-inductive approach and qualitative content analysis of written open-ended answers, we identified five types of justifications based on a fine-grained category system. The results suggest a topic-specificity of justifications referring to specific scientific data, while justifications appealing to authorities tend to be common across topics. Subjective, and therefore normative, justifications were slightly related to conspiracy ideation and a general rejection of the scientific consensus. The category system could be applied to other CSI topics to help clarify the relation between scientific and informal reasoning in science education and communication.https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7102/11/9/522argumentationreasoningjustificationssocioscientific issuessocietally denied sciencecontroversial science issues
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Anna Beniermann
Laurens Mecklenburg
Annette Upmeier zu Belzen
spellingShingle Anna Beniermann
Laurens Mecklenburg
Annette Upmeier zu Belzen
Reasoning on Controversial Science Issues in Science Education and Science Communication
Education Sciences
argumentation
reasoning
justifications
socioscientific issues
societally denied science
controversial science issues
author_facet Anna Beniermann
Laurens Mecklenburg
Annette Upmeier zu Belzen
author_sort Anna Beniermann
title Reasoning on Controversial Science Issues in Science Education and Science Communication
title_short Reasoning on Controversial Science Issues in Science Education and Science Communication
title_full Reasoning on Controversial Science Issues in Science Education and Science Communication
title_fullStr Reasoning on Controversial Science Issues in Science Education and Science Communication
title_full_unstemmed Reasoning on Controversial Science Issues in Science Education and Science Communication
title_sort reasoning on controversial science issues in science education and science communication
publisher MDPI AG
series Education Sciences
issn 2227-7102
publishDate 2021-09-01
description The ability to make evidence-based decisions, and hence to reason on questions concerning scientific and societal aspects, is a crucial goal in science education and science communication. However, science denial poses a constant challenge for society and education. <i>Controversial science issues</i> (CSI) encompass scientific knowledge rejected by the public as well as <i>socioscientific issues</i>, i.e., societal issues grounded in science that are frequently applied to science education. Generating evidence-based justifications for claims is central in scientific and informal reasoning. This study aims to describe attitudes and their justifications within the argumentations of a random online sample (<i>N</i> = 398) when reasoning informally on selected CSI. Following a deductive-inductive approach and qualitative content analysis of written open-ended answers, we identified five types of justifications based on a fine-grained category system. The results suggest a topic-specificity of justifications referring to specific scientific data, while justifications appealing to authorities tend to be common across topics. Subjective, and therefore normative, justifications were slightly related to conspiracy ideation and a general rejection of the scientific consensus. The category system could be applied to other CSI topics to help clarify the relation between scientific and informal reasoning in science education and communication.
topic argumentation
reasoning
justifications
socioscientific issues
societally denied science
controversial science issues
url https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7102/11/9/522
work_keys_str_mv AT annabeniermann reasoningoncontroversialscienceissuesinscienceeducationandsciencecommunication
AT laurensmecklenburg reasoningoncontroversialscienceissuesinscienceeducationandsciencecommunication
AT annetteupmeierzubelzen reasoningoncontroversialscienceissuesinscienceeducationandsciencecommunication
_version_ 1717367173011210240