The impact of different data sources used in various socioscientific issues on the quality of formed argumentations and science achievement

The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of 8th grade students' ways of obtaining information from different sources of information on the socioscientific issues of base stations and genetically modified organisms on their science achievement and the quality of the arguments they have formed. The study was conducted with 36 students. With the data obtained from concept cartoons, discussion questionnaire and biotechnology academic achievement test, three similar groups were formed. The sources of information (research, presentation, interview) were randomly assigned to each group. Within each group, four subgroups were formed, each consisting of three students, homogeneous in terms of test scores, and heterogeneous in terms of their views on socioscientific issues. Small group and collective class discussions were made. Qualitative data were analyzed through content analysis and quantitative analyses were done by comparing the pretest and posttest scores. According to the results, second level argumentations were highest in all groups. The frequencies of other levels were gradually decreasing. Best quality oral argumentations were produced in the research group. Students put forward more and better quality arguments in the last argumentation process and on the issue of base stations. The quantitative data indicated that the academic achievement of the students in the groups that obtained information from different sources increased slightly, but there was no statistically significant difference between the gained achievement scores of the groups. In this context, all findings were discussed and various suggestions specific to the study were made in line with the conclusions obtained.