Informal Reasoning Regarding Socioscientific Issues: A Critical Review of Research

Socioscientific issues encompass social dilemmas with conceptual or technological links to science. The process of resolving these issues is best characterized by informal reasoning which describes the generation and evaluation of positions in response to complex situations. This article presents a critical review of research related to informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues. The findings reviewed address (a) socioscientific argumentation; (b) relationships between nature of science conceptualizations and socioscientific decision making; (c) the evaluation of information pertaining to socioscientific issues, including student ideas about what counts as evidence; and (d) the influence of an individual’s conceptual understanding on his or her informal reasoning. This synthesis of the current state of socioscientific issue research provides a comprehensive framework from which future research can be motivated and decisions about the design and implementation of socioscientific curricula can be made. The implications for future research and classroom applications are discussed. 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 41: 513–536, 2004 Social issues with conceptual or technological ties to science have captured the national spotlight during the recent past. Cloning, stem cells, genome projects, global warming, and alternative fuels have become common elements of the national vocabulary as well as the currency of political debates. Regardless of society’s reluctance or enthusiasm towards the advent of these issues or its preparedness to deal with them, scientific issues with social ramifications undoubtedly will continue to arise and evolve. Advances in medical science and molecular genetics coupled with the environmental challenges produced by a burgeoning human population guarantee the prominence of these kinds of issues in the present and the future. Because of the central roles of both social and scientific factors in these dilemmas, they have been termed socioscientific issues. The suggestion that issues such as those related to biotechnology and environmental challenges can be classified together as socioscientific issues is not meant to imply that science and society represent independent entities. On the contrary, all aspects of science are inseparable from the society from which they arise. However, the topics described by the phrase socioscientific issues display a unique degree of societal interest, effect, and consequent. Correspondence to: T.D. Sadler; E-mail: [email protected] DOI 10.1002/tea.20009 Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Several science educators have argued for the inclusion of socioscientific issues in science classrooms, citing their central role in the development of a responsible citizenry capable of applying scientific knowledge and habits of mind (Driver, Newton, & Osborne, 2000; Kolstø, 2001a; Zeidler, 1984). Their efforts to infuse socioscientific issues into science curricula are not the first intent on making classroom science more reflective of the society in which it exists as opposed to an isolated, irrelevant academic discipline. The science, technology, and society (STS) movement has sought to educate students about the interdependence of these three domains since at least the early 1980s (Yager, 1996). However, STS education has become quite diffuse over the course of its tenure, representing approaches as disparate as isolated courses focused on particular STS issues, pedagogical strategies that highlight the connections between science and society, and ancillary text boxes in the midst of science textbooks (Pedretti & Hodson, 1995). In contrast, the socioscientific issue movement’s aims focus more specifically on empowering students to handle the science-based issues that shape their current world and those which will determine their future world (Driver et al., 2000; Kolstø, 2001a). Informal Reasoning and Its Relation to Socioscientific Issues In the context of science, reasoning historically referred to formal reasoning characterized by rules of logic and mathematics. The formal processes of deduction or induction lead thinkers to necessary conclusions, and positivist philosophers of science such as Popper and Carnap argued that these very processes distinguish the scientific enterprise from other ways of knowing the world (Curd & Cover, 1998). T.S. Kuhn (1962) challenged the significance of formal reasoning in science by proposing a novel model of scientific change and progress. T.S. Kuhn disputed the purported rationality of scientific theory change and the perpetual accretion of scientific knowledge. He described episodes of theory change as tumultuous periods during which scientists judge competing theories using a variety of criteria including social influences. An enduring theory rises to prominence through a process more reminiscent of political revolutions than episodes of formal reasoning. T.S. Kuhn’s work directed attention to the fact that although formal reasoning may contribute to scientific discovery, it is not the only vehicle for producing progress. Although the results of science may be presented in the language of formal reasoning and logic, the results themselves originate through informal reasoning (Tweney, 1991). Unlike scientific investigations, the premises of formal reasoning are fixed and unchanging, and conclusions are necessary derivatives. In informal reasoning, on the other hand, premises can change as additional information becomes available, and conclusions are not self-evident (Perkins, Farady, & Bushey, 1991). Informal reasoning involves the generation and evaluation of positions in response to complex issues that lack clear-cut solutions. Thinkers are engaged in informal reasoning as they ponder causes and consequences, pros and cons, and positions and alternatives (Means & Voss, 1996; Zohar & Nemet, 2002). Means and Voss (1996) provided an illustrative description in the following: ‘‘Informal reasoning assumes importance when information is less accessible, or when the problems are more open-ended, debatable, complex, or ill-structured, and especially when the issue requires that the individual build an argument to support a claim’’ (p. 140). Postpositivist accounts of science describe the enterprise as a multifaceted set of disciplines which employ informal reasoning (Tweney, 1991). Socioscientific issues are ideal candidates for the application of informal reasoning (D. Kuhn, 1993). By definition, they are complex, open-ended, often contentious dilemmas, with no definitive answers. In response to socioscientific dilemmas, valid, yet opposing, arguments can be constructed from multiple perspectives. Just as scientists employ informal reasoning to gain 514 SADLER