Socioscientific Argumentation of Pre-Service Teachers about Genetically Modified Organisms

Abstract

This study aims to investigate socioscientific argumentation of pre-service teachers of science and non-science major regarding Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) issue. We used descriptive study and involved second-year pre-service teachers from two major, 28 pre-service science teachers (PSTs) and 28 pre-service non-science teachers (PNSTs) as participants. Paper and pencil test was administered in order to obtain the data of PSTs’ and PNSTs’ argument about GMOs. All of the data were analyzed by descriptive analysis. We applied Toulmin Argumentation Pattern (TAP) as a basic framework to identify the argumentation component. The result showed that both PSTs and PNSTs were able to propose an argument with a claim, data, and/or warrant.. Most of their argument contain data which provided in the text, without any further reasoning or relevant scientific knowledge. So, the coherency between argumentation component in both PSTs and PNSTs was limited. However, PSTs are more able to propose coherent arguments than PNSTs. These findings indicated that educational background and learning experiences may influence to pre-service teacher argumentation in the context of GMOs. Beside that, teaching and learning process which focused on the socioscientific issues is necessary to develop pre-service teachers’ argumentation