An intervention study on students’ decision-making towards consensus building on socio-scientific issues
An intervention study on students’ decision-making towards consensus building on socio-scientific issues
复制标题
学生就社会科学问题达成共识的决策干预研究
DOI：
10.1080/09500693.2021.1947541
复制
发表时间：
2021
影响因子：
2.3
通讯作者：
Wakabayashi Kazuya
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sakamoto Miki;Yamaguchi Etsuji;Yamamoto Tomokazu;Wakabayashi Kazuya
社会科学决策需要从多个角度进行推理，并进行权衡。本研究探讨学生如何决定社会科学问题时，他们从事的教学干预，以提高他们的社会科学决策对共识的建设，在这项研究中，强调产生解决问题的解决方案。我们为非理科本科生开发了一个以社会科学问题为基础的单元，重点是加强他们围绕转基因生物问题的社会科学决策的干预。我们的干预重点是建立共识，学生们在不同利益相关者的意见中发现了多种冲突，并提出了解决方案。特别是，学生们考虑了科学和技术的权衡。本文介绍了两个干预研究的结果，其中12和49非科学本科生参加。为了确认每个研究的参与者都实现了课程单元的目标，我们分析了学生在单元结束时合作构建的解决方案（分析1）。然后，我们使用干预前和干预后的方法来评估学生的独立决策（分析2）。在课程单元中，我们给学生布置了两次论文写作任务，并调查了他们的决定质量。前后测试的比较显示，干预后总体上向更高水平的反应转变。学生对社会科学问题的论点从辩护性论点转变为解决方案的建议。这些研究结果表明，教学促进了学生的社会科学决策走向共识的建立。最后，本研究探讨本研究对社会科学议题教学与学生决策评量的意涵，并提出未来工作的建议。
Socio-scientific decision-making necessitates reasoning from multiple perspectives and the use of trade-offs. This study examines how students decide on socio-scientific issues when they engage in an instructional intervention to enhance their socio-scientific decision-making towards consensus building that, in this study, emphasises generating solutions to resolve issues. We developed a socio-scientific issue-based unit for non-science undergraduate students focusing on an intervention that enhances their socio-scientific decision-making around issues regarding a genetically modified organism. Our intervention focused on consensus building wherein students identified multiple conflicts among various stakeholders’ opinions and proposed solutions to resolve them. In particular, students considered the trade-offs of science and technology. This paper presents the results from two intervention studies in which 12 and 49 non-science undergraduate students participated. To confirm that the participants of each study achieved the goal of the curriculum unit, we analysed the solutions students collaboratively constructed at the end of the unit (Analysis 1). We then used a pre- and post-intervention approach to assess students’ independent decision-making (Analysis 2). During the curriculum unit, we assigned students an essay-writing task twice and investigated the quality of their decisions. A comparison of the pre- and post-tests revealed a general shift towards higher-level responses after the intervention. Students’ arguments on socio-scientific issues changed from justificatory arguments to proposals for solutions. These findings demonstrated that the instruction promoted students’ socio-scientific decision-making towards consensus building. Finally, we discuss the implications for socio-scientific issue instruction and the evaluation of students’ decision-making as well as provide suggestions for future work.