1. Introduction
Socioscientific issues (SSI) refer to complex and controversial social issues that are directly related to scientific concepts, principles, and theories [1]. The difference between SSI and ordinary scientific issues is that SSI are not only related to science, but also to social, political, cultural, economic, ethical, and other issues, and involves multiple stakeholders [2,3]. SSI education refers to education that promotes an understanding of the relationship between science and society, through the process of understanding, reasoning, arguing, and decision-making around controversial issues, as well as a formation of personal values and moral development that promotes individuals’ adaptation to social life [4]. Researchers and educators have closely studied and published their academic work, including journals, books, and conference papers. Therefore, it is necessary to have a comprehensive and in-depth understanding of the current status of, and development trends in, SSI education research, which will not only help researchers and educators to carry out and improve SSI education research more clearly, but will also provide better references for the development of SSI education worldwide.
1.1. The Development of Socio-Scientific Issues as a Research Field
The earliest references to SSI can be traced back to 1986 [5,6]. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, many science educators believed that students’ scientific knowledge would develop if they understood the relationship between science and technology, and how they both impacted society. This led some advocates to focus on the field of science, technology, and society (STS) in the United States [7]. In 1989, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) proposed that scientifically literate individuals should be able to understand the connections and interdependence between science, technology, and society. This further promoted the development of STS education. However, STS education was criticized for its lack of theoretical foundations and sociological frameworks. For example, the development of nuclear weapons has become detached from young people’s understanding of social relationships, and has overlooked psychological and ethical–moral development. Additionally, little attention has been given to social interaction and reflective discourse. Some advocates believe that STS is a typical notion that requires a theoretical framework [3,8,9]. Afterward, as ecological problems, such as global warming, biodiversity loss, and water pollution, became increasingly prominent, researchers introduced environmental issues on the basis of STS, to cultivate scientifically literate future citizens, with sustainable development awareness. This led to the formation of science, technology, society, and environment (STSE) education [8,10]. Both STS and STSE were criticized for not addressing the emotional and ethical–moral development of learners, which could lead to an ethical gap in science education, and hinder learners’ understanding of the nature of science [11,12]. During this period, an increasing number of researchers underwent a huge transformation in their view of science itself, believing that much scientific knowledge was provisional, unclear, and ambiguous, and that many scientific issues were controversial and had no definitive answers. An increasing number of science education researchers realized that science was a product of time, and that there were countless connections between science and societal culture, and conventions that influenced and restricted it [1,13]. With the rise of argumentation teaching, the further maturation of constructivist educational ideas, and the development of the informal logic movement, researchers in developed capitalist countries in the West introduced reasoning, informal argumentation, critical thinking, and decision-making into science, technology, and social issues, leading to the formation of social science issues, namely SSI [14,15,16]. SSI not only encompass the content knowledge of STS, but also consider the emotional, moral, and ethical development of learners.
In 1980, American universities began offering elective courses on “controversial science and technology issues” for students. In 1982, the National Science Teacher Association included SSI education requirements in its goals for science education. The National Science Education Standards of 1996 explicitly stated that “controversial science and technology issues should be included in personal choices, public speaking, and discussions on scientific events and applications” [17], marking the first time that SSI were included in the national curriculum as standard. The experiences of the United Kingdom and the United States were similar. Influenced by these two countries, others, such as Australia, Canada, Germany, France, Sweden, and Israel, began to recognize the important role of SSI in science education, and even education more broadly. These countries began exploring, practicing, and researching SSI education, and achieved outstanding results.
In contemporary times, the United States has issued documents such as “A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practice, Crosscutting Concept and Core Ideas” and “Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS)”, in which the importance of SSI has been highlighted and recognized as one of the important ways of developing students’ abilities [18]. The Next Generation Science Standards utilize Performance Expectations to specify what students should be able to do to demonstrate their attainment of the standards. Each Performance Expectation is divided into three dimensions: Science and Engineering Practices, Disciplinary Core Ideas, and Crosscutting Concepts. Sadler et al., (2017) integrated the Framework and NGSS document, particularly focusing on the theme of big ideas in science, in conjunction with the scientific practices in the NGSS [19]. They adapted the initial generalized framework for describing SSI-TL (socio-scientific issue teaching and learning) into a model for designing and implementing SSI-TL. This model translates the NGSS ideas into “performance expectations”. Many developed countries in Europe have also proposed requirements and standards for SSI education that align with the cultivation of scientific literacy (Council of Ministers of Education Canada Pan-Canadian Science Project, 1997; Queensland School Curriculum Council, 2001). In recent years, SSI have become a global research topic, with significant changes in the number of articles, authors, and content; thus, it is necessary to further analyze and review the SSI educational research.
1.2. Literature Review of SSI Education Research
To understand the current state of, and future development trends in, a specific field, it is common to use scientometric or content analysis methods to analyze the relevant literature, and summarize the findings. For example, in the field of science education, scientometric methods were used to analyze the research themes and development trends in, and the contributors to, articles published in four authoritative science education journals from 1990 to 2007: International Journal of Science Education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Science Education Research, and Journal of Science Education [20]. Professor Lin and colleagues conducted comprehensive surveys of articles published in three major science journals, Science Education, International Journal of Science Education, and Journal of Research in Science Teaching, every five years (1998–2002/2003–2007/2008–2012/2013–2017). The surveys aimed to determine the research topics, subjects, and trends in science education, and to assist researchers in recognizing the current status of internationalization [21,22].
Some researchers have conducted literature reviews on SSI. Sadler (2004) conducted a comprehensive review of informal reasoning research in the context of SSI, encompassing four aspects: social scientific argumentation, the relationship between scientific nature conceptualization and decision-making, the evaluation of SSI source information, and the impact of a conceptual understanding on informal reasoning [1]. Hernandez-Ramos and colleagues conducted a review of the use of SSI in problem-based learning [23]. Researchers from South Korea utilized the program analysis framework [24] to analyze SSI education research in their country from 2000 to 2016 [25]. Their review focused on the level of contradiction in SSI, the utilization of scientific knowledge, and the development of social content in SSI. The researchers encouraged educators to integrate SSI into their teaching, develop diverse substantive programs, and establish SSI training or teacher-training sessions.
A study used software, such as Cite Space, to perform a visual analysis, and review 167 relevant pieces of literature on SSI research between 2000 and 2018 [26]. The article analyzed the research topics and ideas from the perspective of the keywords and co-cited literature. Despite providing a comprehensive review of SSI education, this article was published three years ago. Since then, there has been a significant increase in the number of SSI education articles, with changes in the content and authors. Consequently, a further analysis and review of recent SSI education articles is necessary. Researchers from China selected 267 empirical pieces of literature on SSI from international authoritative journals on science education from 2000 to early 2021, and used technology and systematic review methods to review the hot topics [27]. Unfortunately, this review was only published in Chinese, which limits its accessibility to many English-speaking researchers who may benefit from the research information and the insights it provides. To address this gap, we deem it necessary to conduct an analytical review of SSI education. However, attempting to encompass the entire spectrum of SSI in a single review is not feasible. The core themes highlighted in the resolution proposed by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) emphasized curriculum and pedagogical practices, and enhancing value-based learning and interdisciplinary approaches, while emphasizing critical reasoning, to advance education for sustainable development during the period from 2005 to 2014 [2]. This theme aligns well with the research framework of SSI. Given UNESCO’s strong promotion, a significant increase in SSI education research articles after 2005 is expected. Therefore, we have defined the time frame of our review study as 2004, to verify this hypothesis.
While acknowledging the significant contribution of these reviews to SSI education research, we recognize the need for a more comprehensive review. Our study will encompass the latest research articles, and utilize a more detailed coding approach, to comprehensively analyze the basic characteristics and research attributes of the relevant studies. This approach aims to provide a deeper understanding of the current publication status of, and trends in, SSI education research, including the research participants, research methods, research topics, and research fields. We hope that this review can attract more researchers’ attention to SSI education research and assist them in quickly understanding the relevant studies on SSI, and finding valuable reference materials. This review can also help researchers understand what past researchers have focused on, identify trends in research hotspots, and discover research gaps, thus facilitating a better development of SSI education research.
2. Research Questions
-
What is the basic information of SSI education research publications (including the number of publications, journals, titles, and authors),
-
What is the research information of SSI education research publications (including the research participants, research methods, research topics, and research fields).
3. Methods
To ensure the validity and reliability of the research results, three effective steps were taken in this study, to determine, collect, and analyze articles related to SSI: (1) a keyword search and screening, (2) a journal search and screening, and (3) a coding and analysis framework.
3.1. Keyword Search and Screening for SSI
This study used the Web of Science (WoS) database, which includes the Social Science Citation Index, Arts and Humanities Citation Index, and Conference Proceedings Citation Index (Social Science and Humanities). The search was refined based on the year (2004–2022) and language (English). To ensure comprehensive coverage of SSI education articles, the following keywords were used for the search: socioscientific, socio-scientific, socioscientific issues, socio-scientific issues, socio-scientific issues education, and socioscientific issues education. The search time frame was set from January 2004 to December 2022. This is because, without denying the importance of publications before 2004, the author relies on a study [28] in which the authors stressed the impossibility of reviewing all the published articles in the entire human history, and decided to choose a timeline between 2004–2022, as it is in line with the concept of the study field’s maturity [29]. Within this period, the number of relevant articles is higher; therefore, more major topics are investigated, and more evidence is given. A total of 2747 articles were retrieved.
3.2. Journal Search and Screening
Due to the interdisciplinary nature of SSI, they involve a wide range of dimensions, including sociology, culture, environment, economics, science, ethics, morality, policy, values, personal experience, and knowledge. In order to enhance the quality of the research articles, the researchers categorized the 2747 articles obtained from the keyword search, and excluded general education journals with fewer than four articles published between 2004 and 2022. This decision is based on the rationale that if the number of articles published in a journal related to SSI education research during the 19-year period is lower than four, it can be inferred that the journal does not primarily focus on this area. The researchers selected mainstream journals with a high recognition of SSI education research articles published in the WoS database. After the journal search and screening, a total of 25 journals were selected (Table 1), and 580 published English articles related to SSI were included in the study (Figure 1).
3.3. Coding and Analytical Framework
Referring to the coding analysis framework [30], the researchers developed a coding and analysis framework for this study’s research questions. The coding framework is divided into two parts: the first part includes the basic information of the articles, and the second part includes the research information of the articles. The basic information includes the author, the title, the country or region of the first author’s affiliation, the year of publication, the journal name, and the article type. The research information includes the research participants, research methods, research topics, and research fields. The explanation of the codes is shown in Table 2.
The author, title, year of publication, journal name, and article type in the basic information were coded directly. The country or region of the first author’s affiliation was coded based on the country or region of the first author’s institution. If the first author had multiple affiliations, only the country or region of the first affiliation was coded.
The two researchers independently conducted the manual coding of the research information. Once the preliminary coding framework was established, they individually coded the samples. After the completion of the coding process, a consistency analysis of the coded information was conducted, resulting in a 86.5% consistency. Subsequently, the researchers discussed any inconsistent coding information, and reached a consensus on the final coding. Following the completion of the coding, the researchers further discussed and revised the coding framework, ultimately finalizing the coding framework.
The coding of the research participants and research methods was divided into three steps. Firstly, the coding framework [30] was used, including 10 research object categories: (1) not applicable, (2) primary school students, (3) secondary school students, (4) high school students, (5) university non-teacher-education students, (6) teacher-education students, (7) primary and secondary school teachers, (8) university teachers, (9) cross-grade, and (10) others, including problems and schools. The four categories of research method were (1) quantitative research, (2) qualitative research, (3) mixed research, and (4) non-empirical research, which included theoretical articles, conceptual articles, and literature reviews. Secondly, after coding 100 samples based on this framework, the coders modified and determined the final coding framework for the research objects and research methods. The research object categories were reduced to eight: (1) no research objects, (2) K–12 students, (3) college students, (4) pre-service teachers, (5) primary and secondary school teachers, (6) college teachers, (7) cross-grade/cross-profession, and (8) others, including problems, schools, and courses. The five categories of research methods were: (1) quantitative research, (2) qualitative research, (3) mixed research, (4) theoretical construction and model verification, and (5) others, including content analysis, introduction, and sharing articles. Finally, after the completion of the coding framework, the articles related to SSI education research publications were analyzed, using this coding framework.
To encode the research topics and fields, the researchers went through three steps. Firstly, the coders selected 80 samples to code independently, and entered the original information. Examples of research topics included the assessment of teaching cognitive thinking about SSI, enhancement of argumentation abilities, explorations of a scientific nature, research on SSI curricula, theoretical and model explorations of SSIs, and others. Hot topics included global climate change, global warming, COVID-19, vaccines, nuclear energy use, nanomaterials, sexual behavior, and others. Then, two coders proofread the coded information and, after the discussion, we established a preliminary coding framework. The coding framework for the research topics included: (1) the educational value and significance of SSI education, (2) SSI teaching practices in subject teaching, (3) teacher education and professional development in SSI (including pre-service teachers), (4) SSI curricula, policy, assessment, and evaluation (5) teaching models and conceptual frameworks, and (6) historical and epistemological perspectives (including literature reviews in general fields). The educational value and significance of SSI education were further refined and classified as: (1) the nature of science (including scientific knowledge, such as scientific nature, concepts, and terms), (2) argumentation, reasoning, decision-making ability, and critical thinking, (3) ethics, morals, emotions, and values; (4) social, cultural, and religious, and (5) mixed (including the mixing of two or three categories).
The coding of the fields included environmental issues, such as global warming, water pollution, and ocean acidification; safety and health issues, such as the prevention and control of infectious diseases, the use and pollution control of nuclear energy, and others; resource and energy issues, such as the global shortage of fresh water and seawater, the development and utilization of clean energy, and others; ecosystem issues, such as biodiversity; biotechnology issues, such as genetically modified technology, cloning, gene therapy, and others; new materials, such as nanotechnology and nanomaterials; physical science issues, such as particle physics, physical dynamic models, and others; prevention and emergency issues related to natural disasters, such as earthquakes, typhoons, volcanic eruptions, and extreme weather events; population and eugenics issues, such as human sexual behavior, commercial surrogacy, abortion, and others; and other and hybrid issues, such as iron mining, designer babies in crises, global warming, genetically modified foods, acid rain, and human cloning. The coding framework for the fields of the SSI articles included: (1) environmental issues, (2) safety and health issues, (3) resource and energy issues, (4) ecosystem issues, (5) biotechnology issues, (6) new materials, (7) physical science issues, (8) prevention and emergency issues related to natural disasters, (9) population and eugenics issues, and (10) “other” or “mixed”.
4. Results
4.1. Results of Basic Information of SSI Education Research Publications
4.1.1. Annual Distribution of SSI Education Research Publications
As shown in Figure 2, the number of SSI education research publications has increased year by year. From 2007 to 2012, the number of articles increased sevenfold; from 2015 to 2017, the number of publications doubled. In particular, the number of publications in 2018 increased from 28 to 72 in 2022, indicating a rapid growth in the publication of SSI education research during this period. The results indicate that, since 2007, SSI education research publications have shown significant growth and, during this time, the number of published SSI education research articles has multiplied, indicating that SSI have become a popular and important research field for many researchers, and has been recognized by many different well-known journals.
4.1.2. Title of SSI Education Research Publications
From 2004 to 2022, a total of 580 SSI education research publications were published, of which 179 article titles included “SSI”, and 401 article titles did not include “SSI”, but their abstracts or keywords contained “SSI”. According to the development trend, the number of articles with and without “SSI” in the title is generally increasing (Figure 3). Compared with articles with “SSI” in the title, the number of articles without “SSI” in the title is increasing more rapidly each year, especially from 2018 to 2022; the trend of publication is increasing rapidly each year. This is due to researchers’ more specialized research in the field of SSI. Researchers tend to highlight “SSI” in the titles of articles, such as “Which socio-scientific dimensions do 11th graders refer to when deciding whether to be vaccinated against COVID-19?”, “Using Drama to Enrich Students’ Argumentation About Genetically Modified Foods”, and “Role Reversal to Facilitate Social & Moral Compassion: A Case for Climate Change as an Ethics Dilemma”. More specialized topics, such as COVID-19, genetically modified foods, and climate change are increasingly appearing in the titles of articles.
4.1.3. Journal Sources of SSI Education Research Publications
According to the analysis, the top five journals with the most publications of SSI education research articles are INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION (J12, 25.3%, N = 147), SCIENCE & EDUCATION (J21, 11.9%, N = 69), RESEARCH IN SCIENCE EDUCATION (J20, 11.0%, N = 64), JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN SCIENCE TEACHING (J16, 9.0%, N = 52), and SCIENCE EDUCATION (J22, 5.2%, N = 22).
The characteristic trends in the annual publication volume for the top five journals with the highest number of published SSI education articles were analyzed, and are shown in Figure 4. The annual publication volumes for these five journals all exhibit fluctuating trends. The journal SCIENCE & EDUCATION (J21) shows a rapid growth trend in publications during the period from 2021 to 2022. Both RESEARCH IN SCIENCE EDUCATION (J20) and JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN SCIENCE TEACHING (J16) show stable and uniform growth trends during the same period. Although the publication volumes for INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION (J12) and SCIENCE EDUCATION (J22) show a downward trend in 2021 and 2022, the annual publication number for INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION (J12) is significantly higher than that of the other journals publishing SSI education research articles.
4.1.4. The Countries or Regions of the First Author of SSI Education Research Publications
Figure 5 shows a heat map of the countries or regions of the first author of SSI education research publications. Among the 580 SSI education research articles, researchers from the United States published 146 articles as the first author, accounting for 25.2%, followed by researchers from Taiwan, China, who published 45 articles, accounting for 7.8%. The third to tenth places were represented, respectively, by Turkey with 41 articles (7.1%), Germany with 40 articles (6.9%), Sweden with 33 articles (5.7%), the United Kingdom with 26 articles (4.5%), Australia with 24 articles (4.1%), Spain with 19 articles (3.3%), Switzerland with 19 articles (3.3%), Canada with 16 articles (2.8%), and mainland China with 16 articles (2.8%). Spain and Switzerland tied for eighth place, while Canada and mainland China tied for ninth.
4.2. Results of Research Information of SSI Education Research Publications
4.2.1. Research Participants
After coding and analysis, it was found that among the 580 articles in SSI education research publications, the research participants were mainly K–12 and college students. The number of articles on K–12 students, not applicable, and college students was 244, 101, and 76, respectively. The number of articles on pre-service teachers, primary and secondary school teachers, cross-grade/cross-profession, others, and college teachers were 45, 43, 36, 32, and 3, respectively, as shown in Figure 6.
From the annual distribution trend, it can be seen that, during the period from 2004 to 2022, SSI articles focusing on K–12 students showed a fluctuating growth trend. Although the fluctuation range was relatively large, the annual publication number was significantly higher than that of the other research participants. SSI education research publications on college students, with no research objects, on pre-service teachers, and on K–12 students all showed a clear increasing trend. However, SSI articles focusing on cross-grade/cross-profession and college teachers did not show an increasing trend, and were relatively evenly distributed over the 19 years (Figure 7).
4.2.2. Research Methods of SSI Education Research Publications
Of the 580 SSI education research publications, 210 (36.2%) adopted qualitative research methods, 154 (26.6%) adopted mixed research methods, and 89 (15.3%) adopted quantitative research methods. There were 61 (10.5%) theoretical construction and model verification articles, and 66 (11.4%) other articles.
Based on the annual distribution trend from 2004 to 2022, the growth trend in qualitative research articles fluctuated greatly, while the articles using quantitative research methods, mixed research methods, theoretical and model articles, and other articles all showed a fluctuating growth trend, as shown in Figure 8.
4.2.3. Research Topics of SSI Education Research Publications
A statistical analysis of the 580 SSI education research publications from 2004 to 2022 revealed that 276 articles, accounting for 47.6% of the total, focused on the educational value and significance of SSI education. Meanwhile, 108 articles, accounting for 18.6% of the total, introduced and discussed SSI teaching practices in subject teaching. In addition, 79 articles (13.6% of the total) focused on teaching models and conceptual frameworks, while 56 articles (9.7% of the total) explored teacher education and professional development in SSI (including pre-service teacher education). Articles discussing the SSI curricula, policies, assessment, and evaluation totaled 27, accounting for 4.7% of the total, while those on history, epistemology, and perspectives (including literature reviews in the general field) accounted for 34, or 5.9% of the total.
Based on the annual distribution trend, there was a significant increase in the number of articles on the research of the educational value and significance of SSI education, as well as those discussing SSI teaching practices in subject teaching from 2004 to 2022. Articles focusing on teaching models and conceptual frameworks, teacher education and professional development in SSI (including pre-service teacher education), and history, epistemology, and perspectives also showed an increasing trend. However, articles discussing SSI curricula, policies, assessment, and evaluation did not show an obvious increase trend (Figure 9).
Regarding the 276 articles on the topic of educational value and the significance of SSI education, there are 58 articles on the nature of science, accounting for 21.0%; 112 articles on argumentation, reasoning, decision-making ability, and critical thinking, accounting for 40.6%; 35 articles on ethics, morals, emotions, and values, accounting for 12.7%; 17 articles on social, cultural, and religious, accounting for 6.2%; and 54 mixed articles, accounting for 19.6% (Figure 10).
According to the trend in the annual distribution, publications on the topic of the educational value and significance of SSI education, particularly in the areas of argumentation, reasoning, decision-making ability, and critical thinking, as well as mixed-category publications, have shown a clear increasing trend, despite some fluctuations. However, publications related to ethics, morals, and values, as well as social, cultural, and religious values, have shown a decreasing trend in annual publication from 2004 to 2022 (Figure 11).
4.2.4. Research Field of SSI Education Research Publications
Of the 580 SSI articles, 354 (61.0%) dealt with specific research areas. Among them, there were 99 articles related to environmental issues, 58 related to ecosystem issues, and 55 related to safety and health issues. There were also 54 articles categorized as “other” or “mixed”. Additionally, there were 49 articles related to biotechnology issues, while the remaining articles covered topics such as resource and energy issues, population and eugenics issues, physical science issues, new materials, and prevention and emergency issues related to natural disasters, with 13, 10, 7, 6, and 3 articles, respectively (Figure 12).
Based on the annual distribution trends, between 2004 and 2022, the top five research areas in SSI education research publications were environmental issues, safety and health issues, ecosystems issues, biotechnology issues, and “other” or “mixed”. Articles related to environmental issues showed a steady increasing trend, while articles on ecosystem issues, safety and health issues, and biotechnology issues fluctuated, but also showed an increasing trend. However, articles related to other social issues and mixed issues in SSI hot topics fluctuated greatly, and did not show an increasing trend (Figure 13).
5. Discussion and Conclusions
The results of this study provide an overview of the development trends in SSI, and could be useful for researchers, especially newcomers and those interested in SSI. Using keyword and journal selection, this study analyzed and coded 580 SSI education articles, summarizing the current state of, and development trends in, SSI. This provides a reference for the development and practice of SSI education research publications.
5.1. Basic Information of SSI Education Research Publications
The number of SSI education research publications has been increasing year by year, which indicates that the importance of SSI education research has been recognized globally, and an increasing number of researchers and educators are engaging in research and practices related to SSI education. This upward trend has also been observed in a previous review [31], which can be attributed to the successful implementation of SSI education, and its positive outcomes in numerous countries [32,33]. To investigate this trend further, we categorized publications into two groups, based on whether their titles included “SSI”, and compared their publication trends. The results indicated a faster increase in the number of publications without “SSI” in the title. As researchers deepen and refine their understanding of SSI education research, they tend to focus on specific controversial SSI education scenarios for research and practice. Moreover, an increasing number of frontline science teachers are engaging in SSI education research and practice, and research article titles usually directly indicate specific research areas or backgrounds. SSI involve the deliberate use of scientific issues, and these issues are personally meaningful and engaging to students.
Journals related to science education are the most attentive to SSI education [31]. In the WoS database, the top five journals for SSI education research publications are INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION, SCIENCE & EDUCATION, RESEARCH IN SCIENCE EDUCATION, JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN SCIENCE TEACHING, and SCIENCE EDUCATION. Research articles in these journals have always constituted the main type of publication every year, and the number of publications has generally increased. SCIENCE & EDUCATION has shown the fastest growth in the number of SSI education research publications.
The development of SSI education research is uneven on a global scale. Researchers from the United States published the most articles as the first author, followed by researchers from Taiwan, China. Researchers can learn about the latest research directions of SSI in the United States, which is a leader in SSI education research, to better conduct research and practice in SSI education. The second-highest number of publications by researchers from Taiwan, China, is due to the early introduction of, and emphasis on, SSI in Taiwan’s education, which closely focuses on everyday technology issues around the learners, and values the integration of international and local research, to form a regional SSI model that is student-centered. This innovative research mode of absorption and innovation has led to a rapid development and rise in localized SSI research in Taiwan [34]. Numerous countries or regions have the opportunity to directly benefit from international experience, to explore the significance and value of SSI education in fostering scientific literacy and argumentation skills among students and teachers. However, various aspects of the SSI education research are influenced by local science education contexts and practical requirements. Therefore, while drawing on international experience, it is equally important to consider local research, to provide relevant evidence.
5.2. Research Information of SSI Education Research Publications
Articles utilizing qualitative research methods were the most prevalent, displaying an upward trend over time, with some fluctuations. Qualitative research enables a deeper comprehension of individuals’ subjective experiences and perspectives; however, it also comes with limitations, including the sample representativeness, researcher subjectivity, and the interpretative nature of the data. In contrast, mixed methods and quantitative research articles were less numerous, but demonstrated a more consistent growth pattern. Quantitative research findings often directly influence policies, and have practical implications, offering advantages in aspects including the sample size, objectivity, and replicability. Consequently, when investigating SSI education, it becomes crucial to consider the research purpose and subjects, and make informed choices regarding the research methods.
In terms of SSI education research subjects, the studies mainly focus on K–12 students; and articles on SSI for college students, with no research subject, on pre-service teachers, and on primary and secondary school teachers all showed a significant increasing trend. It can be seen that researchers pay special attention to practical research in SSI education research publications, and to the education of SSI teachers. This is consistent with the main research themes, which mainly focus on research on the value and significance of SSI teaching, the application and introduction of SSI in subject teaching, and the teaching models and conceptual frameworks of SSI. SSI themselves contain scientific, technological, personal, cultural, and social content, which can provide rich scientific value and teaching experience for educational practice [1]. In school education, to solve controversial or even thorny issues in SSI, teachers guide students in using scientific knowledge and scientific abilities to discover, analyze, judge, make decisions, and express the relevant information [35]. This process can enhance students’ knowledge of a scientific nature, scientific concepts/terms, and other scientific literacy [9,36]. It can also promote the development of students’ critical thinking, informal reasoning, argumentation skills, and decision-making skills [13,37,38]. At the same time, thoughts and feelings about ethical paradoxes and dilemmas in some thorny social issues also challenge students’ emotional attitudes, moral ethics, and values [39]. Many studies have shown that although science teachers and pre-service science teachers have a positive attitude toward implementing social science issues in classroom teaching, they lack the relevant background knowledge, are unfamiliar with the methods of implementing SSI, and lack the teaching strategies and methods to evaluate students’ academic performance and progress in SSI education [27]. Therefore, more and more research is focusing on the professional development of SSI teachers, with the hope of cultivating high-quality SSI teachers, through the development and use of SSI curricula and teaching materials, beliefs and participation in implementing SSI, the selection and application of teaching strategies, and research into teacher actions [2]. In SSI classroom teaching practices, prioritizing student-centered approaches, and considering students’ objective and subjective characteristics, are essential. The teaching methods and curriculum design employed by teachers significantly influence students’ learning outcomes [40,41]. Thus, promoting effective teaching experiences, and implementing them appropriately among teachers, will significantly contribute to the advancement of SSI education.
A total of 354 articles covered specific research fields, mainly environmental issues, ecosystem issues, and safety and health issues. From the research fields covered by SSI, it can be seen that the international community is concerned about SSI, and they are often the most valuable content in teaching. SSI education research on sustainable issues is prominent. This is not only related to global topics, but also to the origin of SSI development. SSI are conceptually related to STSs and STSE [3]. The goal of environmental education originated from the green revolution, and the latest framework for environmental literacy consists of four parts, contexts, competencies, environmental knowledge, and dispositions toward the environment, making environmental literacy a part of Volume I of scientific literacy [2,18]. SSI have been proven to be a way of establishing and developing scientific literacy [36,42,43]. When SSI involve environmental issues, they not only enable learners to acquire environmental-related cognition, practical abilities, and moral emotions, but also enhances environmental literacy, to solve Volume I of scientific literacy [31,44]. Sustainability is a global issue that intersects with ecological civilization and human wellbeing. SSI education serves as a vital tool for shaping students’ sustainability awareness, showing positive outcomes [45]. It plays a pivotal role in promoting sustainability, and its significance cannot be overstated.
5.3. Limitations
Rasch’s framework for the development of communication is defined by the five W questions of “who”, “what topic (what)”, “when”, “where (which countries or regions)”, and “what effects (producing what effects)” [46]. This study used content analysis to investigate who, what topics, when, and where in SSI education research. The research results can provide a more rapid and effective understanding of the current status of, and future development trends in, SSI education research, as well as of the hot topics in SSI in recent years, which will help researchers and educators to focus on research topics. This study analyzed and summarized SSI education research publications but, due to the complexity and comprehensiveness of SSI, the “who” in the research results needs further exploration, such as co-authors and authors from different disciplines. The “what effects” also require further exploration, such as citation analysis and citation frequency analysis, to determine the level of research impact [47,48]. In this review, journals with fewer than four publications related to SSI education research were excluded, creating a curated list of journals focusing on SSI education research. While this facilitates efficient journal selection, it also raises the concern of potentially overlooking valuable research articles. Moreover, this review primarily focused on publications from the WoS database, which could have led to the omission of high-quality papers indexed in other databases that were not captured in our search. In terms of coding, the development and application of a more systematic and objective approach would be more reasonable.
6. Implications
The enthusiasm for SSI research is growing, and an increasing number of scholars are focusing on educational theory and practice within specific disciplinary domains. However, the research findings indicate that, in numerous countries or regions, SSI education has not witnessed significant development. These areas warrant prioritization when it comes to further investigation by scholars. Additionally, alongside conducting new research, local scholars can utilize the research findings from countries or regions, such as the United States, and validate them in diverse contexts, to facilitate the implementation of established practices.
Researchers primarily focus on K–12 students, and we anticipate a continued prominence of studies among this age group in the future. While other participant categories show an upward trend, their prominence is comparatively lower than that of K–12 students. Investigating and comparing diverse student populations could present a promising avenue for future research. Qualitative research constitutes the largest proportion of research methods, while the use of quantitative and mixed methods is expected to increase progressively. Quantitative methods are deemed more reliable, particularly in practical research involving the validation of teaching approaches. The educational value and significance of SSI education, with a specific focus on argumentation, reasoning, decision-making ability, and critical thinking, stands as the most prominent research topic. These competencies are vital for students’ development, and the trend is anticipated to persist. Within specific domains, nearly all the topics pertain to sustainability, with environmental issues being the most prevalent. This underscores the significant role of sustainability in the present era, and the attention it garners in student education. Subsequent research should continue to prioritize sustainability, and incorporate specific topics into teaching practices within the respective disciplines.
In general, there is a growing focus on, and development of, SSI research. Researchers should prioritize students’ characteristics and their holistic development, and endeavor to make advancements in key areas, and address gaps in the field. Regarding teachers’ professional development, it is essential to acknowledge the significance of teachers, as their understanding of new teaching reforms directly impacts their classroom instruction. Therefore, careful attention should be paid to teachers’ professional development. By leveraging successful international experience, diverse methods can be employed to enhance the professional development of teachers in SSI teaching across various stages and subject areas, thus catering to the diverse needs of SSI implementation.
Conceptualization, S.B. and S.N.D.M.; methodology, S.B. and S.N.D.M.; data curation, S.B.; writing—original draft preparation, S.B.; writing—review and editing, S.N.D.M.; supervision, S.N.D.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
All data analyzed during this study are included in this published article.
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Footnotes
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Enlarge this image.Figure 3. Trends in the annual publication number of SSI-related and non-SSI-related titles in SSI education research publications.
Enlarge this image.Figure 4. The annual number of SSI publications for the top five journals with the highest number of SSI articles published.
Enlarge this image.Figure 5. Heat map of the countries or regions of the first author of SSI education research publications.
Enlarge this image.Figure 7. Annual distribution of SSI education research publications according to the research participant category.
Enlarge this image.Figure 8. Annual distribution of SSI education research publications according to the research method category.
Enlarge this image.Figure 9. Annual distribution of SSI education research publications according to the research topic category.
Enlarge this image.Figure 10. Secondary distribution of the research on teaching value and significance.
Enlarge this image.Figure 11. Annual distribution of the secondary distribution of the research on teaching value and significance.
Enlarge this image.Figure 12. Annual distribution of SSI education research publications by research field category.
Enlarge this image.Figure 13. The annual distribution of the top five research fields in SSI education research publications.
The 25 journals that published articles on SSI education research, selected through screening.
| No. | Journal Name | Number of Articles |
|---|---|---|
| J1 | AMERICAN BIOLOGY TEACHER | 6 |
| J2 | CBE-LIFE SCIENCES EDUCATION | 5 |
| J3 | CHEMISTRY EDUCATION RESEARCH AND PRACTICE | 6 |
| J4 | COMPUTERS & EDUCATION | 8 |
| J5 | COMPUTERS IN HUMAN BEHAVIOR | 5 |
| J6 | CULTURAL STUDIES OF SCIENCE EDUCATION | 15 |
| J7 | ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION RESEARCH | 12 |
| J8 | EURASIA JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICS SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION | 12 |
| J9 | FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY | 6 |
| J10 | INSTRUCTIONAL SCIENCE | 6 |
| J11 | INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS EDUCATION | 28 |
| J12 | INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION | 147 |
| J13 | JOURNAL OF BALTIC SCIENCE EDUCATION | 13 |
| J14 | JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL EDUCATION | 25 |
| J15 | JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL EDUCATION | 6 |
| J16 | JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN SCIENCE TEACHING | 52 |
| J17 | JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION AND TECHNOLOGY | 17 |
| J18 | LEARNING AND INSTRUCTION | 5 |
| J19 | RESEARCH IN SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGICAL EDUCATION | 14 |
| J20 | RESEARCH IN SCIENCE EDUCATION | 64 |
| J21 | SCIENCE & EDUCATION | 69 |
| J22 | SCIENCE EDUCATION | 30 |
| J23 | STUDIES IN SCIENCE EDUCATION | 9 |
| J24 | SUSTAINABILITY | 16 |
| J25 | TEACHING AND TEACHER EDUCATION | 5 |
The explanations/categories of the codes.
| Information Codes | Explanation/Categories | |
|---|---|---|
| Basic information | Author | All authors’ names |
| Title | Full title of the study | |
| Country or region | The country or region of the first author’s affiliation | |
| Year of publication | Published year | |
| Journal name | Full name of the journal | |
| Article type | Type stated on the published page | |
| Research information | Research participants | No research objects |
| K–12 students | ||
| College students | ||
| Pre-service teachers | ||
| Primary and secondary school teachers | ||
| College teachers | ||
| Cross-grade/cross-profession | ||
| Others, including problems, schools, and courses | ||
| Research methods | Quantitative research | |
| Qualitative research | ||
| Mixed research | ||
| Theoretical construction and model verification | ||
| Others, including content analysis, introduction, and sharing articles | ||
| Research topics | Educational value and significance of SSI education | |
| Teacher education and professional development in SSI | ||
| SSI teaching practice in subject teaching (including pre-service teacher education) | ||
| SSI curriculum, policy, assessment, and evaluation | ||
| Teaching models and conceptual frameworks | ||
| History, epistemology, and perspectives (including literature reviews in general fields) | ||
| Research fields | Environmental issues | |
| Safety and health issues | ||
| Resource and energy issues | ||
| Ecosystem issues | ||
| Biotechnology issues | ||
| New materials | ||
| Physical science issues | ||
| Prevention and emergency issues related to natural disasters | ||
| Population and eugenics issues | ||
| “Other” or “mixed” | ||
References
1. Sadler, T. Informal Reasoning Regarding Socioscientific Issues: A Critical Review of Research. J. Res. Sci. Teach.; 2004; 41, pp. 513-536. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.20009]
2. Zeidler, D. Socioscientific Issues as a Curriculum Emphasis: Theory, Research and Practice. Handbook of Research on Science Education; Lederman, N.G.; Abell, S.K. Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2014; pp. 697-726.
3. Zeidler, D.L.; Sadler, T.D.; Simmons, M.L.; Howes, E.V. Beyond STS: A Research-Based Framework for Socioscientific Issues Education. Sci. Educ.; 2005; 89, pp. 357-377. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.20048]
4. Zeidler, D.; Nichols, B. Socioscientific Issues: Theory and Practice. J. Elem. Sci. Educ.; 2009; 21, pp. 49-58. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF03173684]
5. Fleming, R. Adolescent Reasoning in Socio-Scientific Issues, Part I: Social Cognition. J. Res. Sci. Teach.; 1986; 23, pp. 677-687. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660230803]
6. Fleming, R. Adolescent Reasoning in Socio-Scientific Issues Part II: Nonsocial Cognition. J. Res. Sci. Teach.; 1986; 23, pp. 689-698. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660230804]
7. Fensham, P.J. A Research Base for New Objectives of Science Teaching. Res. Sci. Educ.; 1980; 10, pp. 23-33. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02356306]
8. Hodson, D. Time for Action: Science Education for an Alternative Future. Int. J. Sci. Educ.; 2003; 25, pp. 645-670. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500690305021]
9. Shamos, M.H. The Myth of Scientific Literacy. Lib. Educ.; 1996; 82, pp. 44-49. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.2807544]
10. Hodson, D. Seeking Directions for Change: The Personalisation and Politicisation of Science Education. Curric. Stud.; 1994; 2, pp. 71-98. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0965975940020104]
11. Hughes, G. Marginalization of Socioscientific Material in Science–Technology–Society Science Curricula: Some Implications for Gender Inclusivity and Curriculum Reform. J. Res. Sci. Teach.; 2000; 37, pp. 426-440. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(200005)37:5<426::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-U]
12. Zeidler, D.L.; Keefer, M. The Role of Moral Reasoning and the Status of Socioscientific Issues in Science Education. The Role of Moral Reasoning on Socioscientific Issues and Discourse in Science Education; Zeidler, D.L. Science & Technology Education Library Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2003; pp. 7-38. ISBN 978-1-4020-4996-5
13. Driver, R.; Newton, P.; Osborne, J. Establishing the Norms of Scientific Argumentation in Classrooms. Sci. Educ.; 2000; 84, pp. 287-312. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<287::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-A]
14. Sadler, T.D. Socio-Scientific Issues-Based Education: What We Know About Science Education in the Context of SSI. Socio-scientific Issues in the Classroom: Teaching, Learning and Research; Sadler, T.D. Contemporary Trends and Issues in Science Education Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2011; pp. 355-369. ISBN 978-94-007-1159-4
15. Steffe, L.P.; Gale, J. Constructivism in Education; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 1995; ISBN 978-0-203-05260-0
16. Zeidler, D.L.; Herman, B.C.; Ruzek, M.; Linder, A.; Lin, S.-S. Cross-Cultural Epistemological Orientations to Socioscientific Issues. J. Res. Sci. Teach.; 2013; 50, pp. 251-283. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.21077]
17. Voss, J.F.; Perkins, D.N.; Segal, J.W. Informal Reasoning and Education; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 1991; ISBN 978-0-203-05222-8
18. Roberts, D.A.; Bybee, R.W. Scientific Literacy, Science Literacy, and Science Education; Routledge Handbooks Online Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2014; ISBN 978-0-415-62937-9
19. Sadler, T.D.; Foulk, J.A.; Friedrichsen, P.J. Evolution of a Model for Socio-Scientific Issue Teaching and Learning. Int. J. Educ. Math. Sci. Technol.; 2017; 5, pp. 75-87. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18404/ijemst.55999]
20. Chang, Y.-H.; Chang, C.-Y.; Tseng, Y.-H. Trends of Science Education Research: An Automatic Content Analysis. J. Sci. Educ. Technol.; 2010; 19, pp. 315-331. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10956-009-9202-2]
21. Lin, T.-C.; Lin, T.-J.; Tsai, C.-C. Research Trends in Science Education from 2008 to 2012: A Systematic Content Analysis of Publications in Selected Journals. Int. J. Sci. Educ.; 2014; 36, pp. 1346-1372. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.864428]
22. Lin, T.-J.; Lin, T.-C.; Potvin, P.; Tsai, C.-C. Research Trends in Science Education from 2013 to 2017: A Systematic Content Analysis of Publications in Selected Journals. Int. J. Sci. Educ.; 2019; 41, pp. 367-387. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1550274]
23. Hernández-Ramos, J.; Pernaa, J.; Cáceres-Jensen, L.; Rodríguez-Becerra, J. The Effects of Using Socio-Scientific Issues and Technology in Problem-Based Learning: A Systematic Review. Educ. Sci.; 2021; 11, 640. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/educsci11100640]
24. Ekborg, M.; Ideland, M.; Malmberg, C. Science for Life—A Conceptual Framework for Construction and Analysis of Socio-Scientific Cases. Nord. Stud. Sci. Educ.; 2009; 5, pp. 35-46. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5617/nordina.277]
25. Park, H.; Kim, N. Analysis of Socio-Scientific Issues(SSI) Programs in Korea. J. Korean Chem. Soc.; 2018; 62, pp. 137-147. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5012/JKCS.2018.62.2.137]
26. Chen, K.; Huang, Y.-Y. Hotspots and Englightenment in the Study of International Socioscientific Issues. Chin. J. Chem. Educ.; 2020; 41, pp. 104-110.
27. Bing, J.; Liu, E. International Experience and Enlightenment of Socio-Scientific Issues in Science Education. J. Tianjin Norm. Univ. (Elem. Educ. Ed.); 2022; 23, pp. 48-52.
28. Okoli, C.; Schabram, K. A Guide to Conducting a Systematic Literature Review of Information Systems Research. Sprouts Work. Pap. Inf. Syst.; 2010; 10, pp. 1-49. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1954824]
29. Shaffril, H.A.M.; Samah, A.A.; Kamarudin, S. Speaking of the Devil: A Systematic Literature Review on Community Preparedness for Earthquakes. Nat. Hazards; 2021; 108, pp. 2393-2419. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11069-021-04797-4]
30. Li, Y. Six Years of Development in Promoting Identity Formation of STEM Education as a Distinct Field. Int. J. Stem Educ.; 2020; 7, 59. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00257-w]
31. Li, Y.; Guo, M. Scientific Literacy in Communicating Science and Socio-Scientific Issues: Prospects and Challenges. Front. Psychol.; 2021; 12, 758000. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.758000]
32. Shervey, S.W.; Sandilos, L.E.; DiPerna, J.C.; Lei, P.-W. Social Validity of the Social Skills Improvement System-Classwide Intervention Program (SSIS-CIP) in the Primary Grades. Sch. Psychol. Q.; 2017; 32, pp. 414-421. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/spq0000203]
33. Nordqvist, O.; Aronsson, H. It Is Time for a New Direction in Biotechnology Education Research. Biochem. Mol. Biol. Educ.; 2019; 47, pp. 189-200. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bmb.21214]
34. Oulton, C.; Dillon, J.; Grace, M.M. Reconceptualizing the Teaching of Controversial Issues. Int. J. Sci. Educ.; 2004; 26, pp. 411-423. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000072746]
35. Zeidler, D.L.; Sadler, T.D.; Applebaum, S.; Callahan, B.E. Advancing Reflective Judgment through Socioscientific Issues. J. Res. Sci. Teach.; 2009; 46, pp. 74-101. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.20281]
36. Sadler, T.D.; Chambers, F.W.; Zeidler, D.L. Student Conceptualizations of the Nature of Science in Response to a Socioscientific Issue. Int. J. Sci. Educ.; 2004; 26, pp. 387-409. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000119456]
37. Kolstø, S.D. Patterns in Students’ Argumentation Confronted with a Risk-focused Socio-scientific Issue. Int. J. Sci. Educ.; 2006; 28, pp. 1689-1716. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500690600560878]
38. Wu, Y.; Tsai, C. High School Students’ Informal Reasoning on a Socio-scientific Issue: Qualitative and Quantitative Analyses. Int. J. Sci. Educ.; 2007; 29, pp. 1163-1187. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500690601083375]
39. Zeidler, D.; Herman, B.; Sadler, T. New Directions in Socioscientific Issues Research. Discip. Interdiscip. Sci. Educ. Res.; 2019; 1, 11. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0008-7]
40. Krstovic, M. Preparing Students for Self-Directed Research-Informed Actions on Socioscientific Issues. Activist Science and Technology Education; Bencze, L.; Alsop, S. Cultural Studies of Science Education Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2014; Volume 9, pp. 399-417. ISBN 978-94-007-4360-1
41. Sandilos, L.E.; Neugebauer, S.R.; DiPerna, J.C.; Hart, S.C.; Lei, P. Social-Emotional Learning for Whom? Implications of a Universal SEL Program and Teacher Well-Being for Teachers’ Interactions with Students. Sch. Ment. Health; 2023; 15, pp. 190-201. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12310-022-09543-0]
42. Eastwood, J.L.; Sadler, T.D.; Zeidler, D.L.; Lewis, A.; Amiri, L.; Applebaum, S. Contextualizing Nature of Science Instruction in Socioscientific Issues. Int. J. Sci. Educ.; 2012; 34, pp. 2289-2315. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.667582]
43. Sadler, T.D.; Fowler, S.R. A Threshold Model of Content Knowledge Transfer for Socioscientific Argumentation. Sci. Educ.; 2006; 90, pp. 986-1004. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.20165]
44. Kinslow, A.T.; Sadler, T.D.; Nguyen, H.T. Socio-Scientific Reasoning and Environmental Literacy in a Field-Based Ecology Class. Environ. Educ. Res.; 2019; 25, pp. 388-410. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2018.1442418]
45. Tsai, C. The Effect of Online Argumentation of Socio-Scientific Issues on Students’ Scientific Competencies and Sustainability Attitudes. Comput. Educ.; 2018; 116, pp. 14-27. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.08.009]
46. Lasswell, H.D. The Structure and Function of Communication in Society; Harper and Row: New York, NY, USA, 2007; pp. 37-51.
47. Gokceoglu, C.; Okay, A.I.; Sezer, E. International Earth Science Literature from Turkey—1970–2005: Trends and Possible Causes. Scientometrics; 2008; 74, pp. 409-423. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1813-x]
48. Shih, M.; Feng, J.; Tsai, C.-C. Research and Trends in the Field of E-Learning from 2001 to 2005: A Content Analysis of Cognitive Studies in Selected Journals. Comput. Educ.; 2008; 51, pp. 955-967. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.10.004]
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Details
