The effect of social scientific biology conditions on written argumentation skills of science teachers of science

The aim of this study is to determine the argumentation skills of prospective science teachers in biology-based sociolinguistic issues. The study was conducted with voluntary participation of 48 (7 male, 41 female) students who attended Bartın University Science Teacher Training 4th semester in the fall semester of 2017-2018 academic year. The reports that teacher candidates prepare weekly for socio-economic issues and deliver in writing form the data set of the study. In the evaluation of the written reports, an evaluation table of the argument categories created by the researcher was used. Written reports were evaluated by two researchers. Written reports of prospective teachers were analyzed weekly. When examining the first week's written reports of prospective teachers, it was seen that their allegations were established with simple sentences, their connections to the evidence were less consistent, and there were fewer multiple reasons. In the following weeks it has been determined that there is a marked improvement in the links between allegations, justifications and evidence. At the same time, there has been an increase in the more descriptive and coherent forms of expression in the arguments of individuals. As a result, it was determined that as the written experience of written argumentation of teacher candidates increased, the levels of argumentation developed as well, but not in all categories of argumentation. As a result of the work done, the studies for argumentation in science education can be increased. Scenarios on biology-based socio-scientific issues can be applied to individuals who are trained in different departments in future studies, and the arguments they generate by conducting interviews at the end of each report written by prospective teachers can be examined in more detail.