PEN Academic Publishing   |  ISSN: 1554-5210

Original article | International Journal of Progressive Education 2020, Vol. 16(4) 115-134

Evaluation of Trends in Theses on Socio-Scientific Issues: The Case of Turkey

Ayşegül Evren Yapıcıoğlu & Nejla Atabey

pp. 115 - 134   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2020.268.8   |  Manu. Number: MANU-1911-11-0001

Published online: August 13, 2020  |   Number of Views: 19  |  Number of Download: 50


Abstract

The purpose of the current study is to determine the trends in M.A and Ph.D. theses on socio-scientific issues. To this end, thesis studies completed between 2008 and 2018 on socio-scientific issues were analyzed in terms of the year of thesis and publication type, the university where the thesis is done, the purpose of the thesis, research methods and designs, study groups and their size, data collection tools and the socio-scientific issues preferred for investigation. The thesis studies analysed in the current study were reached from the Higher Education Council Thesis Search Centre Database in Turkey. As a result of the current study, it was determined that such thesis studies started in 2008, the great majority of them are master’s theses, the quasi-experimental design, one of the quantative research methods, was frequently used, documents were generally used as the data collection instruments and pre-service teachers were used as the study groups in most of them.  Moreover, in these thesis, the effect of instructional applications directed socio-scientific issues on the related variable (mostly argumentation skill/quality/ability and decision-making skills) has been frequently investigated and the most popular socio-scientific issues selected in these theses were found to include global warming, climate change and nuclear energy. In light of the findings of the current study, suggestions were made for future research and applications to be conducted on socio-scientific issues.

Keywords: Socio-scientific Issues; Thesis Studies; Science Education


How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Yapicioglu, A.E. & Atabey, N. (2020). Evaluation of Trends in Theses on Socio-Scientific Issues: The Case of Turkey . International Journal of Progressive Education, 16(4), 115-134. doi: 10.29329/ijpe.2020.268.8

Harvard
Yapicioglu, A. and Atabey, N. (2020). Evaluation of Trends in Theses on Socio-Scientific Issues: The Case of Turkey . International Journal of Progressive Education, 16(4), pp. 115-134.

Chicago 16th edition
Yapicioglu, Aysegul Evren and Nejla Atabey (2020). "Evaluation of Trends in Theses on Socio-Scientific Issues: The Case of Turkey ". International Journal of Progressive Education 16 (4):115-134. doi:10.29329/ijpe.2020.268.8.

References
  1. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1990). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  2. Author. (2016). Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Ankara.  [Google Scholar]
  3. Bağ, H., & Çalık, M. (2017). İlköğretim düzeyinde yapılan argümantasyon çalışmalarına yönelik tematik içerik analizi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 42(190), 281-303. [Google Scholar]
  4. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E. K., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2010). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (fifth edition). Ankara: Pegem Akademi  [Google Scholar]
  5. Calhoun, E. F. (2002). Action research for school improvement. Retrieved from http://educationalleader.com/subtopicintro/read/ASCD/ASCD_408_1.pdf.  [Google Scholar]
  6. Çalık, M., Ünal, S., Coştu, B., & Karataş, F. Ö. (2008). Trends in Turkish science education. Essays in Education, Special Edition, 23-45. [Google Scholar]
  7. Çalışkan, M., & Serçe, H. (2018). Türkiye’de Eğitim Alanındaki Eylem Araştırması Makaleleri: Bir İçerik Analizi. Ahi Evran Universitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(1), 57-79. [Google Scholar]
  8. Chang, Y-H., Chang, C-Y., & Tseng, Y-H. (2010) Trends of science education research: An automatic content analysis. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19(4), 315-331.  [Google Scholar]
  9. de Jhong, O. (2007). Trends in western science curricula and science education research: A Bird’s eye view. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 6(1), 15-22.  [Google Scholar]
  10. Değirmenci, A., & Doğru, A. (2017).  Türkiye’de sosyobilimsel konularla ilgili yapılan çalışmaların incelenmesi: bir betimsel analiz çalışması. Buca Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 44, 123-138. [Google Scholar]
  11. Doğru, M., Gençosman, T., Ataalkın, A. N., & Şeker, F. (2012). Fen bilimleri eğitiminde çalışılan yüksek lisans ve doktora tezlerinin analizi.  Türk Fen Eğitim Dergisi, 9(1), 49-64 [Google Scholar]
  12. Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2005). The role of argumentation in developing scientific literacy. Kerst, B., Martin, G., Onno, J., & Harrie, E. (Ed. ), Research and the quality of science education (pp. 381-394). Springer, Dordrecht. [Google Scholar]
  13. Ergun, M., & Çelik, E. (2011). Türkiye’de fen eğitiminde yeni eğilimler: 2008 yılı örneği. e-Journal of New World Sciences Academy Education Sciences, 6(1), 508- 514.  [Google Scholar]
  14. Evren Yapıcıoğlu, A., & Kaptan, F. (2017). Sosyobilimsel Konu Temelli Öğretim Yaklaşımı Uygulamalarının Etkililiğine Yönelik Bir Karma Yöntem Çalışması. Eğitim ve Bilim, 42(192), 113-137.  [Google Scholar]
  15. 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.  [Google Scholar]
  16. Fowler, F. J. (2009). Survey research methods (fourth edition) Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.  [Google Scholar]
  17. Genç, M., & Genç, T. (2017). Türkiye’de Sosyo-bilimsel Konular Üzerine Yapılmış Araştırmaların İçerik Analizi. e – Kafkas Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(2), 19-26.  [Google Scholar]
  18. Karamustafaoğlu, O. (2009). Fen ve teknoloji eğitiminde temel yönelimler. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 17(1), 87-102. [Google Scholar]
  19. Karasar, N.(2006). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel yayın Dağıtım. [Google Scholar]
  20. Kula Wassink F., & Sadi, Ö. (2016). Türk fen bilimleri eğitiminde araştırma ve yönelimler: 2005–2014 yılları arası bir içerik analizi. İlköğretim Online, 15(2), 594-614. [Google Scholar]
  21. Lee, H. (2017). Science education research trends in south Korea: Focusing on socioscientific issues education as an integrated approach. ESERA 2017 Conference E-Proceeding Book. [Google Scholar]
  22. Lee, M-H., Wu, Y-T., & Tsai, C-C. (2009). Research trends in science education from 2003 to 2007: a content analysis of publications in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 31(19), 1999-2020 [Google Scholar]
  23. Lin, T-J., Lin, T-C., Potvind, P., & Tsai, C-C. (2018). Research trends in science education from 2013 to 2017: a systematic content analysis of publications in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 41(3), 367-387. [Google Scholar]
  24. Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, Sage. [Google Scholar]
  25. Ministry of National Education of Turkey (MoNE). (2013). Science curriculum (3th-8th grades) of elementary institutions (primary and secondary schools). Ankara: Board of Education. [Google Scholar]
  26. Mortimore, P. (2000). Does educational research matter?. British Educational Research Journal, 26(1), 5-24. [Google Scholar]
  27. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Retrieved from http://www.nextgenscience.org/next-generation-science-standards. [Google Scholar]
  28. Ozan, C., & Köse, E. (2014). Eğitim programları ve öğretim alanındaki araştırma eğilimleri. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 4(1), 116-136. [Google Scholar]
  29. Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513-536. [Google Scholar]
  30. Shymansky, J. A., & Kyle, W. C. (1992). Overview: Science curriculum reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(8), 745-747. [Google Scholar]
  31. Tatar, E., & Tatar, E. (2008). Analysis of science and mathematics education articles published in Turkey I: Keywords. İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 9(16), 89-103.  [Google Scholar]
  32. Tekin, N., Aslan, O., & Yılmaz, S. (2016). Research trends on socioscientific issues: A content analysis of publication in selected science education journal. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 4(9), 16-24. [Google Scholar]
  33. Topçu, M. S. (2008). Preservice science teachers’ informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues and the factors influencing their informal reasoning (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Middle East Tecnical University, Ankara.  [Google Scholar]
  34. Topçu, M. S., Muğaloğlu, E. Z., & Güven, D. (2014). Fen eğitiminde sosyobilimsel konular: Türkiye örneği. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 14(6), 2327-2348.  [Google Scholar]
  35. Tsai, C-C., & Wen, M. L. (2005). Research and trends in science education from 1998 to 2002: a content analysis of publication in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 27(1), 3-14.   [Google Scholar]
  36. 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. [Google Scholar]
  37. Vaismoradi, M., Turunen, H., & Bondas, T. (2013). Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications forconducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nursing and Health Sciences, 15(3), 398-405.  [Google Scholar]
  38. Varişoğlu, B., Şahin, A., & Göktaş, Y. (2013). Türkçe eğitimi araştırmalarında eğilimler. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 13(3), 1767-1781. [Google Scholar]
  39. Yalçın, N., Bilican, S., Kezer, F., & Yalçın, Ö. (2009). Hacettepe üniversitesi eğitim fakültesi dergisin de yayınlanan makalelerin niteliği: içerik analizi. Retrieved from http://www.eab.org.tr/eab/oc/egtconf/pdfkitap/pdf/453.pdf.  [Google Scholar]
  40. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2008). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri (7.baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayınevi [Google Scholar]