Comparative Study of Teachers and Students Perceptions towards Science Technology Society and Environment (STSE) Approach
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54183/jssr.v2i3.41Keywords:
STSE Approach, Scientific Thinking, Critical Thinking, Challenges, Science TeachersAbstract
The main aim of this study was to compare the perceptions ofsecondary school science teachers and students towards Science,
Technology, Society and Environment (STSE) approach. Quantitative
survey design was used to investigate the problem. The population of the
study consisted of all Government secondary school science teachers and
students in the tehsil Adenzai. By using stratified sampling technique 90
science teachers and 737 science students were randomly selected for
this study. A self-developed questionnaire consisted of multiple scales
were used to collect data from the respondents. The study results show
significant differences between the perceptions of science teachers and
students regarding the concept of STSE approach, required training
skills, social context of science, and usefulness of STSE approach for
teaching of science. Rank order, frequency and percentage scores
showed no difference between the perceptions of science teachers and
students regarding aim of science education, hindering challenges in
STSE approach and suggestions and recommendations for the
implementation of STSE approach. It was recommended that science
curriculum may be developed on the basis of STSE approach and science
teachers may properly be trained to implement this approach in
classroom for teaching science subjects
References
Ball, P. (2012). Why society is a complex matter: Meeting twenty-first century challenges with a new kind of science. Springer Science & Business Media.
Hughes, G. (2000). Marginalization of socioscientific material in science–technology–society science curricula: Some implications for gender inclusivity and curriculum reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 37(5), 426-440.
Kolsto, S. D. (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientific issues. Science education, 85(3), 291-310.
Lee, M. K., & Erdogan, I. (2007). The effect of science–technology–society teaching on students’ attitudes toward science and certain aspects of creativity. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1315-1327.
Levinson, R. (2006). Towards a theoretical framework for teaching controversial socio‐scientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 28(10), 1201-1224.
Mansour, N. (2007). Challenges to STS education: Implications for Science Teacher Education. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 27, (6), 482-497.
Noss, R., & Hoyles, C. (1996). Windows on mathematical meaning, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Waks, L. J. (1987). A technology credo. Bulletin of Science, technology & Society, 7(1-2), 357-366.
Watts, M. (1994). Constructivism, re-constructivism and task-orientated problemsolving. In P. Fensham, R. Gunstone, & R. White (Eds.), The content of science: A constructivist approach to its teaching and learning (pp. 39-58). London: The Falmer Press,.
Yager, R. E. (Ed.). (1996). Science/technology/society as reform in science education. Suny Press.
Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: When students believe that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational psychologist, 47(4), 302-314.
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). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers
Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Applebaum, S., & Callahan, B. E. (2009). Advancing reflective judgment through socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 74-101.
Zoller, U. (2000). Teaching tomorrow's college science courses--are we getting it right? Journal of College Science Teaching, 29(6), 409.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Copyright in the Journal of Social Sciences Review is retained by the author(s). Authors also grant any third party the right to use the article freely as long as its integrity is maintained and its original authors, citation details and publisher are identified.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
SSR's Editorial Board shares the vision of providing free access to information, education, and science for everyone, thus promoting its content through an OPEN ACCESS POLICY, fulfilling the DOAJ definition of open access. The JSSR adheres to an Open Access and Copyright Licensing Policy based on the belief that making research freely accessible to the public promotes greater global knowledge sharing.
The JSSR uses the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. The authors who apply and publish in JSSR consent to abide by the copyright policy set out in the Creative Commons 4.0 license (Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International license).
- Copyright in the Journal of Social Sciences Review is retained by the author(s).
- Authors also grant any third party the right to use the article freely as long as its integrity is maintained and its original authors, citation details and publisher are identified.
While "By 'open access' to this literature, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself."
