Abstract

Argumentation skills are important for students to analyze and evaluate critical information, especially in complex science issues. Socio-Scientific Real-world Inquiry [SSRI] learning helps students develop deep scientific understanding and the ability to build evidence-based arguments in a real context. This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of SSRI learning model in improving argumentation skills. The research design used was quasi-experimental with a pretest-posttest non-equivalent control group design, in which argumentation skills were measured before and after the intervention in two groups: an experimental group consisting of 44 students who received learning with the SSRI model and a control group comprised of 46 students who followed the inquiry learning. Analysis of changes in pretest and posttest scores on each aspect of argumentation skills was conducted using a paired sample t-test. In contrast, comparison of posttest scores between the two groups was analyzed by independent sample t-test. Analysis of the effect size on each aspect of argumentation skills in the control group and experimental group using Cohen's Effect Size method. The analysis results showed that the SSRI learning model was more effective in improving argumentation skills than the inquiry learning. These results indicate that SSRI can be an effective learning approach for educators and educational policymakers in an effort to develop argumentation skills that are crucial for individuals.  

Keywords

References

• Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Waddington, D. I., Wade, C. A., & Persson, T. (2015). Strategies for teaching students to think critically: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85(2), 275–314. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314551063
• Aikenhead, G. S. (2006). Science education for everyday life: Evidence-based practice. Teachers College Columbia University.
• Alcaraz-Dominguez, S. Y. S., & Barajas, M. (2024). SSI-based instruction by secondary school teachers: what really happens in class? International Journal of Science Education, 46(18), 1944–1962. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2024.2303779
• Aldresti, F., Rahayu, S., & Fajaroh, F. (2018). The influence of inquiry-based chemistry learning with the context of socio-scientific issues on high school students’ scientific explanation skills. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA, 23(2), 139–146. https://doi.org/10.18269/jpmipa.v23i2.XXX
• Alfarraj, Y. F., Aldahmash, A. H., & Omar, S. H. (2023). Teachers’ perspectives on teaching science through an argumentation-driven inquiry model: A mixed-methods study. Heliyon, 9(9), Article e19739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19739
• Amos, R., & Levinson, R. (2019). Socio-scientific inquiry-based learning: An approach for engaging with the 2030 sustainable development goals through school science. International Journal of Development Education and Global Learning, 11(1), 29–49. https://doi.org/10.18546/ijdegl.11.1.03
• Antonio, R. P., & Prudente, M. S. (2021). Metacognitive argument-driven inquiry in teaching antimicrobial resistance: effects on students’ conceptual understanding and argumentation skills. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 18(2), 192–217. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2021.60
• Arslan, H. O., Genc, M., & Durak, B. (2023). Exploring the effect of argument-driven inquiry on pre-service science teachers’ achievement, science process, and argumentation skills and their views on the ADI model. Teaching and Teacher Education, 121, Article 103905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103905
• Aslan, S. (2019). The impact of argumentation-based teaching and scenario-based learning method on the students’ academic achievement. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 18(2), 171–183. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/19.18.171
• Balkin, R. S., & Lenz, A. S. (2021). Contemporary issues in reporting statistical, practical, and clinical significance in counseling research. Journal of Counseling and Development, 99(2), 227–237. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcad.12370
• Bennett, J., Hogarth, S., & Lubben, F. (2003). A systematic review of the effects of context-based and Science-Technology-Society (STS) approaches in the teaching of secondary science. Institute of Education, University of London.
• Bossér, U., & Lindahl, M. G. (2020). Students’ use of open-minded attitude and elaborate talk in group discussion and role-playing debate on socioscientific issues. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 16(12), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.29333/EJMSTE/9127
• Calado, F. M., Scharfenberg, F. J., & Bogner, F. X. (2018). Science-technology-society-environment issues in German and Portuguese biology textbooks: influenced of the socio-cultural context? International Journal of Science Education, Part B: Communication and Public Engagement, 8(3), 266–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2018.1486051
• Çalik, M., & Coll, R. K. (2012). Investigating socioscientific issues via scientific habits of mind: development and validation of the scientific habits of mind survey. International Journal of Science Education, 34(12), 1909–1930. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.685197
• Çalik, M., & Wiyarsi, A. (2024). The effect of socio-scientific issues-based intervention studies on scientific literacy: a meta-analysis study. International Journal of Science Education, 47(3), 399-421. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2024.2325382
• Çalık, M., & Wiyarsi, A. (2021). A systematic review of the research papers on chemistry-focused socio- scientific issues. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 20(3), 360–372. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/21.20.360
• Capps, D. K., & Crawford, B. A. (2013). Inquiry-based instruction and teaching about nature of science: Are they happening? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(3), 497–526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-012-9314-z
• Cents-Boonstra, M., Lichtwarck-Aschoff, A., Denessen, E., Aelterman, N., & Haerens, L. (2021). Fostering student engagement with motivating teaching: An observation study of teacher and student behaviours. Research Papers in Education, 36(6), 754–779. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2020.1767184
• Cetin, P. S. (2014). Explicit argumentation instruction to facilitate conceptual understanding and argumentation skills. Research in Science and Technological Education, 32(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2013.850071
• Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2010). Supporting argumentation through students’ questions: Case studies in science classrooms. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(2), 230–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400903530036
• Choden, T., & Kijkuakul, S. (2020). Blending problem based learning with scientific argumentation to enhance students’ understanding of basic genetics. International Journal of Instruction, 13(1), 445–462. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13129a
• Christenson, N., & Walan, S. (2023). Developing pre-service teachers’ competence in assessing socioscientific argumentation. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 34(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2021.2018103
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587
• Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429469237-3
• Dah, N. M., Noor, M. S. A. M., Kamarudin, M. Z., & Azziz, S. S. S. A. (2024). The impacts of open inquiry on students’ learning in science: A systematic literature review. Educational Research Review, 43, Article 100601. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2024.100601
• Dawson, V., & Venville, G. (2022). Testing a methodology for the development of socioscientific issues to enhance middle school students’ argumentation and reasoning. Research in Science and Technological Education, 40(4), 499–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2020.1830267
• Demircioglu, T., Karakus, M., & Ucar, S. (2023). Developing students’ critical thinking skills and argumentation abilities through augmented reality–based argumentation activities in science classes. Science and Education, 34(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00369-5
• Dimopoulou, G., & Gasparatou, R. (2024). Emile’s inquiry-based science education. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 58(1), 58–71. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/jopedu/qhae012
• Dobber, M., Zwart, R., Tanis, M., & van Oers, B. (2017). Literature review: The role of the teacher in inquiry-based education. Educational Research Review, 22, 194–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.002
• 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.667582
• Effendi-Hasibuan, M. H., Bakar, A., & Harizon. (2020). Skills to argue: Using argument-based learning (AbL) and socio-scientific issues to promote university students’ argumentation skills in chemistry. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1567(2), Article 022042. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1567/2/022042
• Erdogan, I., Ciftci, A., & Topcu, M. S. (2017). Examination of the questions used in science lessons and argumentation levels of students. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 16(6), 980–993. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/17.16.980
• Eshetu, D., Atnafu, M., & Woldemichael, M. (2022). The effectiveness of guided inquiry-based technology integration on pre-service mathematics teachers’ understanding of plane geometry. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 6(4), 84–100. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202215241
• Evagorou, M., Nielsen, J. A., & Dillon, J. (2020). Science teacher education for responsible citizenship. Springer.
• Fadzil, H. M. (2017). Exploring early childhood preservice teachers’ problem-solving skills through socioscientific inquiry approach. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 18(1), 1–19.
• Faize, F. A., Husain, W., & Nisar, F. (2018). A critical review of scientific argumentation in science education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(1), 475–483. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/80353
• Falah, M. M., Hartono, Nugroho, S. E., & Ridlo, S. (2024). Socio-scientific issues (SSI) research trends: A systematic literature review of publications 2011 – 2022. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 21(1), 61–81. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2024.004
• Fang, S. C., Hsu, Y. S., & Lin, S. S. (2019). Conceptualizing socioscientific decision making from a review of research in science education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(3), 427–448. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-018-9890-2
• Fisher, W. P. (2007). Rating scale instrument quality criteria. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 21(1), Article 1095.
• Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education. McGraw-Hill.
• Garg, P., Gupta, B., Chauhan, A. K., Sivarajah, U., Gupta, S., & Modgil, S. (2021). Measuring the perceived benefits of implementing blockchain technology in the banking sector. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 163, Article 120407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120407
• Garrecht, C., Eckhardt, M., Höffler, T. N., & Harms, U. (2020). Fostering students’ socioscientific decision-making: exploring the effectiveness of an environmental science competition. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 2(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-020-00022-7
• Genisa, M. U., Subali, B., Djukri, Agussalim, A., & Habibi, H. (2020). Socio-scientific issues implementation as science learning material. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 9(2), 311–317. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v9i2.20530
• Goodenough, A. E., MacTavish, L., MacTavish, D., & Hart, A. G. (2023). Teaching complex and controversial issues: Importance of in-situ experiences in changing perceptions of global challenges. World, 4(2), 214–224. https://doi.org/10.3390/world4020015
• Gormally, C., Sullivan, C. S., & Szeinbaum, N. (2016). Uncovering barriers to teaching assistants (TAs) implementing inquiry teaching: Inconsistent facilitation techniques, student resistance, and reluctance to share control over learning with students. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 17(2), 215–224. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v17i2.1038
• Gul, M. D., & Akcay, H. (2020). Structuring a new socioscientific issues (SSI) based instruction model: Impacts on pre-service science teachers’ (PSTs) critical thinking skills and dispositions. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 6(1), 141–159. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijres.v6i1.785
• Güler, M., Bütüner, S. Ö., Danişman, Ş., & Gürsoy, K. (2022). A meta-analysis of the impact of mobile learning on mathematics achievement. Education and Information Technologies, 27(2), 1725–1745. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10640-x
• Gutierez, S. B. (2015). Integrating socio-scientific issues to enhance the bioethical decision-making skills of high school students. International Education Studies, 8(1), 142–151. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v8n1p142
• Hidayati, S. N., Dasna, I. W., Munzil, M., Wonorahardjo, S., & Kohar, A. W. (2023). Prospective science teachers’ information literacy and scientific argumentation skills in online learning during covid-19 pandemic. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 12(1), 67–79. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v12i1.41798
• Högström, P., Gericke, N., Wallin, J., & Bergman, E. (2024). Teaching socioscientific issues: A systematic review. Science and Education, 1–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-024-00542-y
• Howells, L. M., Chalmers, J. R., Gran, S., Ahmed, A., Apfelbacher, C., Burton, T., Howie, L., Lawton, S., Ridd, M. J., Rogers, N. K., Sears, A. V., Spuls, P., von Kobyletzki, L., & Thomas, K. S. (2020). Development and initial testing of a new instrument to measure the experience of eczema control in adults and children: Recap of atopic eczema (RECAP). British Journal of Dermatology, 183(3), 524–536. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjd.18780
• Jho, H., & Ha, M. (2024). Towards effective argumentation : Design and implementation of a generative ai-based evaluation and feedback. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 23(2), 280–291. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/24.23.292
• Joyce, B., Weil, M., & Calhoun, E. (2015). Models of teaching. Pearson Education.
• Jufrida, J., Kurniawan, D. A., Tanti, T., Sukarni, W., Erika, E., Hoyi, R., & Ikhlas, M. (2021). Description of student responses to the implementation of the inquiry learning model in physics. Jurnal Penelitian Fisika Dan Aplikasinya (JPFA), 11(1), 16–28. https://doi.org/10.26740/jpfa.v11n1.p16-28
• Khalaf, B. K., & Zin, Z. B. M. (2018). Traditional and inquiry-based learning pedagogy: A systematic critical review. International Journal of Instruction, 11(4), 545–564. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11434a
• Khishfe, R. (2022). Nature of science and argumentation instruction in socioscientific and scientific contexts. International Journal of Science Education, 44(4), 647–673. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2050488
• Koçoğlu, A., & Kanadlı, S. (2024). Effect of argumentation-based instruction on student achievement: a mixed-research synthesis. Asia Pacific Education Review, 25(4), 1051–1081. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-024-09945-6
• Krell, M., Garrecht, C., & Minkley, N. (2024). Preservice biology teachers’ socioscientific argumentation: Analyzing structural and content complexity in the context of a mandatory covid-19 vaccination. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 22(1), 121–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-023-10364-z
• Lestari, D. P., Paidi, & Suwarjo. (2024). Development and validation of the inquiry-based nature of science and argumentation: A new instructional model on students’ scientific argumentation ability. International Journal of Education and Practice, 12(2), 189–206. https://doi.org/10.18488/61.v12i2.3657
• Li, S., & Lajoie, S. P. (2022). Cognitive engagement in self-regulated learning : An integrative model. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 37, 833–852. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-021-00565-x
• Lin, Y. (2024). The effects of students ’ standpoints in socio-scientific issues. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 23(1), 104–118. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/24.23.104
• Lin, Y. R. (2023). An idiom-driven learning strategy to improve low achievers’ science comprehension, motivation, and argumentation. Computers and Education, 195, Article 104710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104710
• Lubben, F., Bennett, J., Hogarth, S., & Robinson, A. (2005). A systematic review of the effects of context-based and Science-Technology-Society (STS) approaches in the teaching of secondary science on boys and girls, and on lower ability pupils. Institute of Education, University of London.
• Lunn Brownlee, J., & Ryan, M. (2020). Supporting elementary school children to engage in collaborative argumentation: developing a kaleidoscope framework of inquiry dialogue. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 26(7–8), 543–557. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2021.1900811
• Majidi, A. el, Janssen, D., & de Graaff, R. (2021). The effects of in-class debates on argumentation skills in second language education. System, 101, Article 102576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102576
• Martini, 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. https://doi.org/10.15294/JPII.V10I3.30050
• Memiş, E. K., & Çevik, E. E. (2018). Argumentation based inquiry applications: Small group discussions of students with different levels of success. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 15(1), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.12973/tused.10219a
• Mesci, G., Yeşildağ-Hasançebi, F., & Tuncay-Yüksel, B. (2023). Argumentation based nature of science instruction: Influence on pre-service science teachers’ NOS views and practicing. Teaching and Teacher Education, 132, Article 104231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104231
• Miller, C. J., Smith, S. N., & Pugatch, M. (2020). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs in implementation research. Psychiatry Research, 283, Article 112452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2019.06.027
• Mokshein, S. E., Ishak, H., & Ahmad, H. (2019). The use of rasch measurement model in English testing. Cakrawala Pendidikan, 38(1), 16–32. https://doi.org/10.21831/cp.v38i1.22750
• Mun, J., Kim, M., & Kim, S. W. (2022). How seventh-grade students experience the complexity of socioscientific issues through decision making on the autonomous vehicle issue. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 8(1), 43–71. https://doi.org/10.1163/23641177-bja10040
• Muzammil, M. (2020). Application of the model inquiry learning for efforts to improve english learning achievement (a case study in class XII IPA-3 MAN 2 students in odd semester academic year 2019/2020). Edulingua: Jurnal Linguistiks Terapan Dan Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, 7(2), 27–36. https://doi.org/10.34001/edulingua.v7i2.1402
• Nam, Y., & Chen, Y. C. (2017). Promoting argumentative practice in socio-scientific issues through a science inquiry activity. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(7), 3431–3461. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00737a
• Nicol, C. B. (2021). An overview of inquiry-based science instruction amid challenges. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(12), Article em2042. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11350
• Nugroho, A. A., Sajidan, S., Suranto, S., & Masykuri, M. (2023). Analysis of students argumentation skills in biotechnological socioscientific issue for designing innovative learning. AIP Conference Proceedings, Article 100002. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0143258
• Nurohman, S., Sunarno, W., Sarwanto, & Yamtinah, S. (2021). The validation of digital analysis tool-assisted real-world inquiry (Digita-ri) as a modification of the inquiry-based learning model in the digital age. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 10(3), 387–399. https://doi.org/10.15294/JPII.V10I3.30779
• Nurtamara, L., Sajidan, S., & Suranto, S. (2019). The importance socio-scientific issues of in biology learning preparing students as a 21st century society. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1157(2), Article 022070. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1157/2/022070
• OECD. (2019). OECD learning compass 2030: A series of concept notes. Author.
• Osborne, J. F., Henderson, J. B., MacPherson, A., Szu, E., Wild, A., & Yao, S. Y. (2016). The development and validation of a learning progression for argumentation in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(6), 821–846. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21316
• Öztürk, B., Kaya, M., & Demir, M. (2022). Does inquiry-based learning model improve learning outcomes? A second-order meta-analysis. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 6(4), 201–216. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202217481
• Pekel, F. O. (2021). The effects of concept cartoons and argumentation based concept cartoons on students’ academic achievements. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 20(6), 956–968. https://doi.org/10.33225/JBSE/21.20.956
• Ping, I. L. L., Halim, L., & Osman, K. (2020). Explicit teaching of scientific argumentation as an approach in developing argumentation skills, science process skills and biology understanding. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 19(2), 276–288. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/20.19.276
• Prahani, B. K., Susiawati, E., Deta, U. A., Lestari, N. A., Yantidewi, M., Jauhariyah, M. N. R., Mahdiannur, M. A., Candrawati, E., Misbah, Mahtari, S., Suyidno, & Siswanto, J. (2021). Profile of students’ physics problem-solving skills and the implementation of inquiry (free, guided, and structured) learning in senior high school. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1747, Article 012012. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1747/1/012012
• Probosari, R. M., Sajidan, S., Suranto, S., & Prayitno, B. A. (2022). Integrating reading as evidence to enhance argumentation in scientific reading-based inquiry: A design-based research in biology classroom. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 11(1), 171–184. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v11i1.29350
• Putri, P. A. W., Rahayu, S., Widarti, H. R., Yahmin, Y., & Sulistina, O. (2024). Technology‑embedded argument‑driven inquiry in preservice chemistry teacher education. Science and Education. Advance Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-024-00581-5
• Reichardt, C. S. (2019). Quasi-experimentation a guide to design and analysis. The Guilford Press.
• Saad, M., Baharom, S., Mokshien, S., & Setambah, M. (2017). The study of used socio-scientific issues (SSI) in biology. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 7(3), 348–355. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v7-i3/2740
• Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513-536.
• Sadler, T. D. (2011). Socio-scientific issues-based education: What we know about science education in the context of SSI. In T. Sadler (Ed.), Socio-scientific Issues in the Classroom: Teaching, Learning 355 and Research (pp. 355–369). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1159-4_20
• Sanger, M. J., & Greenbowe, T. J. (1996). Science-technology-society (STS) and ChemCom courses versus college chemistry courses: is there a mismatch?. Journal of Chemical Education, 73(6), 532.
• Songsil, W., Pongsophon, P., Boonsoong, B., & Clarke, A. (2019). Developing scientific argumentation strategies using revised argument-driven inquiry (rADI) in science classrooms in Thailand. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 5(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41029-019-0035-x
• Sparks, R. A., Jimenez, P. C., Kirby, C. K., & Dauer, J. M. (2022). Using critical integrative argumentation to assess socioscientific argumentation across decision-making contexts. Education Sciences, 12(10), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12100644
• Stuckey, M., Hofstein, A., Mamlok-Naaman, R., & Eilks, I. (2013). The meaning of “relevance” in science education and its implications for the science curriculum. Studies in Science Education, 49(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2013.802463
• Subiantoro, A. W., Treagust, D., & Tang, K. S. (2021). Indonesian biology teachers perceptions about socio-scientific issue-based biology instruction. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 7(2), 452–476. https://doi.org/10.1163/23641177-bja10032
• Sugrah, N., Suyanta, & Wiyarsi, A. (2023). Promoting students’ critical thinking and scientific attitudes through socio-scientific issues-based flipped classroom. Lumat, 11(1), 140–165. https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.11.1.1856
• Sulistina, O., Rahayu, S., Dasna, I. W., & Yahmin. (2024). Enhancing the scientific argumentation skills of prospective chemistry teacher using integrated chemical literacy strategy. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 13(6), 4346–4353. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v13i6.26935
• Suwono, H., Rofi’Ah, N. L., Saefi, M., & Fachrunnisa, R. (2023). Interactive socio-scientific inquiry for promoting scientific literacy, enhancing biological knowledge, and developing critical thinking. Journal of Biological Education, 57(5), 944–959. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2021.2006270
• Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840005
• Ummels, M. H. J., Kamp, M. J. A., De Kroon, H., & Boersma, K. T. (2015). Designing and evaluating a context-based lesson sequence promoting conceptual coherence in biology. Journal of Biological Education, 49(1), 38–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2014.882380
• Ültay, N., & Çalık, M. (2012). A thematic review of studies into the effectiveness of context-based chemistry curricula. Journal of science education and technology, 21(6), 686-701. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9357-5
• Vácha, Z., & Rokos, L. (2017). Integrated science and biology education as viewed by Czech university students and their attitude to inquiry-based scientific education. New Educational Review, 47(1), 243–252. https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.2017.47.1.19
• 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), 2–29. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16145827
• Wansink, B. G.-J., Mol, H., Kortekaas, J., & Mainhard, T. (2023). Discussing controversial issues in the classroom: Exploring students’ safety perceptions and their willingness to participate. Teaching and Teacher Education, 125, Article 104044. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104044
• Wenning, C. J. (2011a). Experimental inquiry in introductory physics courses. Journal of Physics Teacher Education Online, 6(2), 2–8. https://bit.ly/EI231
• Wenning, C. J. (2011b). The levels of inquiry model of science teaching. Journal of Physics Teacher Education Online, 6(2), 9–16. https://bit.ly/EI231
• Wicaksono, I. (2020). Validity and practicality of the biotechnology series learning model to concept mastery and scientific creativity. International Journal of Instruction, 13(3), 157–170. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13311a
• Yerdelen, S., Cansiz, M., Cansiz, N., & Akcay, H. (2018). Promoting preservice teachers’ attitudes toward socioscientific issues. Journal of Education in Science, Environment and Health, 4(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.21891/jeseh.387465
• Yoon, H. G., Joung, Y. J., & Kim, M. (2012). The challenges of science inquiry teaching for pre-service teachers in elementary classrooms: Difficulties on and under the scene. Research in Science Education, 42(3), 589–608. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9212-y
• Zeidler, D. L., Herman, B. C., & Sadler, T. D. (2019). New directions in socioscientific issues research. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0008-7
• Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research‐based framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education, 89(3), 357-377.
• Zhu, Y., & He, A. (2022). The effects of a collaborative argumentation intervention on Chinese students’ socioscientific issues decision-making. Journal of Educational Research, 115(6), 317–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2022.2150996

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.