Umeå University's logo

Learning democratic participation as future citizens is an important goal for science education for all students. To take part in debates and decision-making involving socioscientific issues, such as sustainability, students need to become aware of different positions and dilemmas regarding such issues. This study seeks to understand how democratic participation is constructed by 45 student participants aged 16 years, for whom science is not the main course of study. Students worked in small groups on tasks that involved discussion of two different socioscientific issues. The analysis of student discourse used a theoretical perspective from discursive psychology, and shows how students deal with ideological dilemmas and resolve different positions within their discussions. Five ‘interpretative repertoires’ were identified from student talk illustrating the dilemmas occurring in the specific SSIs and also the function of science within the discussion. Through identifying interpretative repertoires used by the students, the stances they take and the function of science in their discussions, the study sheds light on how democratic participation can be learnt in a science education context.

Socio-Scientific Inquiry-Based Learning (SSIBL) pedagogy differs in emphasis and approach from traditional content-focused teaching and proves challenging for many teachers. In this study, eight teachers from two schools joined a collegial teacher professional development programme (TPD) on SSIBL and were interviewed after participating. In order to understand how Swedish science teachers interpret and implement teaching of skills for action, we pose the questions: What are teachers’ views of students’ development of skills for action, and What are teachers’ views of their role in students’ development of skills for action. Results show that teachers see argumentation as a key skill that is necessary for students to develop, as well as learning factual knowledge and critical thinking. Practice in seeing different perspectives and arguing for a position or view are important in the process of becoming responsible citizens that engage in society. However, although teachers want to encourage students’ to make responsible choices in everyday life, such as lifestyle and well-being, they hesitate to encourage students to engage in larger issues, including activism. Further, it is not straightforward for the teachers to support students’ development of skills for action. The teachers’ major concerns include practicing argumentation and other skills without losing focus on factual knowledge as well as maintaining a balance between being neutral and showing opinions in the new types of situations SSIBL brings into the classroom. Other factors of concern to teachers include the time SSIBL takes and feelings of lack of competence in for example assessment. Teachers choose issues close to students’ everyday lives to create interest and engagement, and the TPD supports collegial collaboration when developing SSIBL lessons of interest.

To prepare students for future challenges as citizens and to provide the knowledge necessary for science education studies, socio-scientific inquiry-based learning (SSIBL) is one possible approach. SSIBL pedagogy differs in emphasis and approach from traditional content-focused teaching and proves challenging for many teachers. The curriculum for the Swedish upper-secondary course Science Studies has a strong focus on students’ development of action competence, and this study aims to characterise teachers’ views of students’ active citizenship after a year-long online collegial TPD on SSIBL. The questions asked are “how do teachers view conflicts of interest and practices in taking action as learning tools for active citizenship” and “what are the teachers’ views/motives underlying their approaches and choices when teaching about action competence”. Eight teachers from two schools, i.e. two independent courses, were interviewed after participating. Data was analysed using thematic and theory-driven analyses. Results show that all teachers position students in situations where they take part in conflicts of interest. Some teachers used conflicts of interests to let students find arguments for and against something, and other teachers created situations where more than two perspectives of an issue were represented and students enacted a role. Teachers highlight that they want students to understand that questions are complex, and that active choices are important in life. Many of the teachers let students individualise their ideas by, within the SSIBL work, reflecting on the hypothetical question “what can I do as an individual”. Reasons teachers give for schools’ role in developing action competence include personal reasons such as it is important for students themselves to develop these competences for life, and global reasons such as this is needed for the planet to survive. Even if teachers did not actively encourage students to take action in everyday life, many students appeared to develop active citizenship. 

In the European Union, educational policy-making bodies are encouraging projects of inquiry-based learning to stimulate interest of young people in science and broaden the science and technological skills base. In this chapter, I discuss how a project that incorporates socio-political questions as the object of its inquiry can critically address issues of consumerism and unequal distribution that affect contemporary neoliberal economies. Components of this model of inquiry draw on substantive scientific knowledge incorporating Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), Critical Citizenship Education, Socio-Scientific Issues, as well as Inquiry; hence, the acronym, SSIBL (Socio-Scientific Inquiry Based Learning). Social values at the heart of this project are science inquiry as for and with people, recognising that we live in a diverse world where technological change should be underpinned by social justice and political responsibility. We describe how authentic activities, those that stem from students' concerns, can be derived from these values to lead to non-trivial action which takes into account social, political and cultural constraints and uncertainties. Inquiries reflect issues that have personal, social and global relevance. A sensitive assessment strategy is developed, which incorporates knowledge about the issue, skills of organising, values that reflect the underlying principles of compassionate justice and dispositions of inclusivity and criticality.

An important goal for science education is to develop the knowledge students need as citizens as well as knowledge for future studies in science and technology. This knowledge can be developed through inquiry-based science education (IBSE) and the teaching of socio-scientific issues (SSI). However, such pedagogy has proved to be challenging for many teachers, as it involves changes in their beliefs and values as well as the adoption of new practices.  In a development and coordination EU FP7 project, PARRISE, three approaches to science education are drawn together: SSI, IBSE, Citizenship Education (CE) within the umbrella of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) into Socio-Scientific Inquiry Based Learning (SSIBL). This study explores how experienced science education teachers, participating in a two-step teacher professional program based on SSIBL, express commitments and conceptualization of the goals in SSIBL. It also investigates the teachers’ design capacity of SSIBL teaching materials for upper secondary Science Studies. The empirical data consist of the communication and the designed learning materials within a learning management system. Both the developed teaching materials and the design process are analysed. Results show that all teachers developed design agency for SSIBL teaching; for example, most of the activities encouraged the students to pose questions and develop a “need-to-know” among the students. Moreover, the teaching materials gave the students an opportunity to uncover the dilemmas and controversies, and critically explore the reasons for different viewpoints and gave good opportunities for students to develop action competence.

Previous research on teachers’ responses to changes in the curriculum or to new innovations has shown that they do not easily make changes in practice. For teachers to commit to new goals and strategies it is important that the TPD satisfy three basic needs: for competence, relatedness, and autonomy. For headmasters and education managers it is important to organize a TPD that is cost efficient. This workshop will present a model for TPD that mix online material with face to face discussions where teachers discuss, co-plan and collectively reflect upon experiences from the changed practice. The model focuses on the processes by which teachers advance their skills (competence), make their plans relevant to their contexts (relatedness) and exercise ownership (autonomy) in the process of change. Hence, it is an effective professional development model designed to address teachers view of student learning goals and needs. The model can be implemented without too much interference in the teachers’ time schedules for teaching.