Sources of knowledge and trust in authorities as prerequisites of pre-service teachers’ reflective judgment skills in the context of socioscientific issues
Dilek Karışan 1 * , Ingo Eilks 2
More Detail
1 Aydın Adnan Menderes University, Education Faculty, Türkiye
2 University of Bremen, Department of Biology and Chemistry, Germany
* Corresponding Author


Developments in science and technology enrich life in the 21st century. To cope with life in society, reflective judgment and decision-making abilities on both the individual and societal levels are needed. Schools must prepare the younger generations to become responsible citizens who are able to make reflective judgments. This study elaborates on how pre-service teachers in Türkiye make reflective judgments as persons who will go on to teach secondary school-level students in the future. The study focuses on sources of information students use, their trust in expert knowledge, and levels of reflective judgment skills. The study is based on a qualitative approach combining analyses of recordings of classroom discussions and interviews. The study found different levels of reflective judgment skills among the students and identified the sources of knowledge they select to make judgments and measured their trust in expert knowledge.  The more students trust expert knowledge, the more reflective they are toward developments in science and technology.



  • Akerson, V. L., Morrison, J. A., & McDuffie, A. R. (2006). One course is not enough: Preservice elementary teachers' retention of improved views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 194-213.
  • Audi, R. (2002). The sources of knowledge. In P. K. Moser (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of epistemology (pp. 71-94). Oxford University Press.
  • Barzilai, S., Tzadok, E., & Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2015). Sourcing while reading divergent expert accounts: Pathways from views of knowing to written argumentation. Instructional Science, 43, 737-766.
  • Baytelman, A., Iordanou, K., & Constantinou, C. P. (2020). Epistemic beliefs and prior knowledge as predictors of the construction of different types of arguments on socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57, 1199-1227.
  • Belova, N., Dittmar, J., Hansson, L., Hofstein, A., Nielsen, J. A., Sjöström, J., & Eilks, I. (2017). Cross-curricular goals and the raise of the relevance of science education. In K. Hahl, K. Juuti, J. Lampiselkä, J., Lavonen & A. Uitto (Eds.), Cognitive and affective aspects in science education research (pp. 297-302). Springer.
  • Bendixen, L. D., Schraw, G., & Dunkle, M. E. (1998). Epistemic beliefs and moral reasoning. The Journal of Psychology, 132(2), 187-200.
  • Bernecker, S., & Pritchard, D. (eds.) (2011). The Routledge companion to epistemology. Routledge.
  • Çalik, M., & Coll, R. K. (2012). Investigating socioscientific issues via scientific habits of mind: development and validation of the scientific habits of mind survey. International Journal of Science Education, 34, 1909-1930.
  • Callahan, B. E. (2009). Enhancing nature of science understanding, reflective judgment, and argumentation through socioscientific issues. University of South Florida.
  • Cebesoy, U. B., & Chang Rundgren, S. N. (2023). Embracing socioscientific issues-based teaching and decision-making in teacher professional development. Educational Review, 75(3), 507-534.
  • Chang Rundgren, S. N., & Rundgren, C. J. (2010). SEE-SEP: From a separate to a holistic view of socio-scientific issues. Asia-Pacific Forum of Science Learning and Teaching, 11(1), Article 2.
  • Chung, Y., Yoo, J., Kim, S.-W., Lee, H., & Zeidler, D. L. (2016). Enhancing students’ communication skills in the science classroom through socio-scientific issues. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14, 1-27.
  • Dew Jr, J. K., & Foreman, M. W. (2020). How do we know?: An introduction to epistemology. InterVarsity Press.
  • Dewey, J. (1910). The analysis of a complete act of thought. In J. Dewey, How we think (pp. 68-78). Heath.
  • Eastwood, J. L., Sadler, T. D., Zeidler, D. L. Lewis, A., Amiri, L., & Applebaum, S. (2012). Contextualizing nature of science instruction in socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 34, 2289-2315.
  • Eilks, I., Nielsen, J. A., & Hofstein, A. (2014). Learning about the role of science in public debate as an essential component of scientific literacy. In C. Bruguière, A. Tiberghien & P. Clément (Eds.), Topics and trends in current science education (pp. 85-100). Springer.
  • Eilks, I., & Rauch, F. (2012). Sustainable development and green chemistry in chemistry education. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13, 57-58.
  • Fischer, K. W. (1980). A theory of cognitive development: The control and construction of hierarchies of skills. Psychological Reviews, 87, 477-531.
  • Fosshage, J. L. (2011). How do we “know” what we “know?” and change what we “know?”. Psychoanalytical. Dialogues, 21, 55-74.
  • Gladwell, M. E. (2007). Blink: The power of thinking without thinking (9th ed.). Little, Brown & Company.
  • Guba, E. G., Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105-117). Sage.
  • Hofer, B. K. (2016). Epistemic cognition as a psychological construct: Advancements and challenges. In J. A. Greene, W. A. Sandoval & I. Bråten (Eds.), Handbook of epistemic cognition (pp. 19-38). Routledge.
  • Holbrook, J., & Rannikmae, M., The nature of science education for enhancing scientific literacy. International Journal of Science Education, 29, 1347-1362.
  • Holbrook, J., & Rannikmae, M. (2009). The meaning of scientific literacy. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 4, 275-288.
  • Karisan, D., Yilmaz-Tüzün, Ö. & Zeidler, D. (2018). Pre-service teachers’ reflective judgment skills in the context of socio-scientific issues based inquiry laboratory course. Turkish Journal of Education, 7, 99-116.
  • Kim, K. S., Yoo‐Lee, E., & Joanna Sin, S. C. (2011). Social media as information source: Undergraduates' use and evaluation behavior. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 48(1), 1-3.
  • King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (Eds.) (1994). Developing reflective judgment: Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults. Jossey-Bass.
  • King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (2002). The reflective judgment model: Twenty years of epistemic cognition. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 37-61), Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • King, P. M., Kitchener, K. S. (2004). Reflective judgment: Theory and research on the development of epistemic assumptions through adulthood. Education Psychology, 39, 5-18.
  • Kitchener, K. S., Lynch, C. L., Fischer, K. W., & Wood, P. K. (1993). Developmental range of reflective judgment: The effect of contextual support and practice on developmental stage. Developmental Psychology, 29, 893-906.
  • Kolstø, S. D. (2001) 'To trust or not to trust,…'-pupils' ways of judging information encountered in a socio-scientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 877-901.
  • Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge University Press.
  • Lee, H., Chang, H., Choi, K., Kim, S. W., Zeidler, D. L. (2011). Developing character and values for global citizens: Analysis of pre-service science teachers’ moral reasoning on socio-scientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 34, 925-953.
  • Marks, R., & Eilks, I. (2009). Promoting scientific literacy using a sociocritical and problem-oriented approach to chemistry teaching: Concept, examples, experiences. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 4, 231-245.
  • Mayring, P. (2004). Qualitative content analysis. In U. Flick, E. von Kardorf & I. Steinke (Eds.), A companion to qualitative research (pp. 266-269). Sage.
  • Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Wiley.
  • Miettinen, R. (2000). The concept of experiential learning and John Dewey's theory of reflective thought and action. International Journal Lifelong Education, 19, 54-72.
  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Sage.
  • OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) (2015). The innovation imperative: Contributing to productivity, growth and well-being. OECD.
  • Pigott, T. D., Tocci, C., Ryan, A. M., & Galliher, A. (2021). Quality of research evidence in education: How do we know? Review of Research in Education, 45, 7-12.
  • Powell, W. A., Newton, M. H., & Zeidler, D. L. (2021). Impact of socio-scientific Issues on middle school students' character and values for global citizenship. In W. A. Powell (Ed.), Socio-scientific issues-based instruction for scientific literacy development (pp. 59-91). IGI Global.
  • Sadler, T. D. (2009). Situated learning in science education: Socio-scientific issues as contexts for practice. Studies in Science Education, 45, 1–42.
  • Sadler, T. D. (2011). Situating socio-scientific issues in classrooms as a means of achieving goals of science education. In T. D. Sadler (ed.), Socio-scientific issues in the classroom (pp. 1-10). Springer.
  • Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socio-scientific decision making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 112-138.
  • Sjöström, J., Eilks, I., & Zuin, V. G. (2016). Towards eco-reflexive science education: A critical reflection about educational implications of green chemistry. Science & Education, 25, 321–341.
  • Sjöström, J., & Eilks, I. (2018). Reconsidering different visions of scientific literacy and science education based on the concept of Bildung. In Y. J. Dori, Z Mevarech & D. Baker (Eds.), Cognition, metacognition, and culture in STEM education (pp. 65-88). Springer.
  • Stolz, M., Witteck, T., Marks, R., & Eilks, I. (2013). Reflecting socio-scientific issues for science education coming from the case of curriculum development on doping in chemistry education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 9, 273-282.
  • Stuckey, M., Heering, P., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Hofstein, A., & Eilks, (2015). I. The philosophical works of Ludwik Fleck and their potential meaning for teaching and learning science. Science & Education, 24, 281-298.
  • Subiantoro, A. W., Ariyanti, N. A., & Sulistiyo (2013). Pembelajaran materi ekosistem denfan socio-scientific issues dan pengaruhnya terhadap reflective judgement siswa [Learning ecosystem material with socio-scientific issues and its influence on students' reflective judgment]. Journal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 2(1), 41-47.
  • Tuncay‐Yüksel, B., Yılmaz‐Tüzün, Ö. & Zeidler, D. L. (2023). Epistemological beliefs and values as predictors of preservice science teachers' environmental moral reasoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. Advance online publication.
  • Wood, P. K., Kitchener, K. S., & Jensen, L. (2002). Considerations in the design and evaluation of a paper-and pencil measure of reflective thinking. In B. Hofer & P. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 277-294), Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Woodwell, D. (2000). Research foundations: How do we know what we know? Sage.
  • Yin, R. K. (2015). Qualitative research from start to finish. Guilford.
  • Zeidler, D. L. (2001). Standard F: Participating in program development. In E. Siebert & W. McIntosh (Eds.), Pathways to the science standards: College edition (pp. 18-22). NSTA.
  • Zeidler, D. L. (2012). Preface for socio-scientific Issues socio-scientific Issues and the search for functional scientific literacy. In A. Yenilmez-Turkoglu & D. Karisan (Eds.), Socio-scientific issues (pp. 7-28). Eğiten Kitap.
  • Zeidler, D. L., Applebaum, S. M., & Sadler, T. D. (2011). Enacting a socioscientific issues classroom: Transformative transformations. In Z. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socio-scientific issues in the classroom (pp. 277-305). Springer.
  • Zeidler, D. L., & Keefer, M. (2003). The role of moral reasoning and the status of socioscientific issues in science education: Philosophical, psychological and pedagogical considerations. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education (pp. 7-38). Springer.
  • Zeidler, D. L., & Nichols, B. H. (2009). Socio-scientific issues: Theory and practice. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21, 49-58.
  • Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Applebaum, S., & Callahan, B. E. (2009). Advancing reflective judgment through socio-scientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 74-101.
  • Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research‐based framework for socio-scientific issues education. Science Education, 89, 357-377.


This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.