Future teachers need to be better equipped to teach their students to argue about controversial issues at the interface between science and society, according to a study conducted by researchers from Ruhr University Bochum and the Leibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education. The study examined the argumentation skills of 76 prospective biology teachers on the topic of mandatory vaccination against COVID-19. The researchers found that the participants had varied opinions on whether there should be a mandatory vaccination against COVID-19. The participants showed a high level of structural complexity in their argumentation but were lacking in content complexity. Teachers should be exposed to the full breadth of perspectives on such issues to be able to teach their students to approach such issues with critical thinking and responsibility. The study’s findings offer important insights into the argumentation skills of prospective biology teachers on a controversial issue and provide valuable guidance for science teachers.
How Prospective Biology Teachers Argue About Controversial Issues
Prospective biology teachers should learn to teach their students to approach controversial issues in a balanced and informed way so that they can make better decisions and take responsibility for their actions. However, how well can they do this themselves? In a study conducted by Dr. Nina Minkley from the Behavioural Biology and Biology Education group at Ruhr University Bochum, Germany, along with Professor Moritz Krell and Dr. Carola Garrecht from the Leibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education in Kiel, it was found that the structural complexity of the argumentation among 76 prospective biology teachers was good. However, the content complexity was found to be lacking in some respects.
The study examined the argumentation skills of the prospective biology teachers on the topic of mandatory vaccination against COVID-19. The researchers found that the participants had varied opinions on whether there should be a mandatory vaccination against COVID-19. About one-third of the participants even included possible counter-positions in their own argumentation, showcasing a high level of structural complexity.
On the other hand, content complexity was only partially reflected, and the participants only considered two out of six possible content areas, namely politics, ethics, and social sciences. The researchers also found that those who supported mandatory vaccination mostly relied on scientific and ethical arguments, while those who opposed it often used political arguments.
The study’s findings highlight the need for prospective teachers to develop a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of controversial issues. Science teachers should teach their students to engage with such topics in a balanced and informed way, considering multiple perspectives and content areas.
The researchers published their findings in the International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education in March 2023. The study offers important insights into the argumentation skills of prospective biology teachers on a controversial issue and provides valuable guidance for science teachers to better equip their students with the tools they need to approach such issues with critical thinking and responsibility.
Future Teachers Need to Be Better Equipped to Teach Argumentation Skills
According to the researchers, future teachers should be better equipped to teach their students to argue about controversial issues at the interface between science and society. They recommend that teachers should be exposed to the full breadth of perspectives on such issues, so they can teach this skill to their students. By doing so, teachers can better equip their students with the tools they need to approach such issues with critical thinking and responsibility.
Don’t miss interesting posts on Famousbio
