Investigating decision making process of different groups of people about hydroelectric power plants which is a socio-scientific issue

The purpose of science education in our country as in many western countries is to educate science literate individuals. In this path, science education is not only analyzing complex connections of science, technology and society, but also to support decision- making on issues related to students as citizens (Liu et. al, 2011). Towards this end, the most logical applications of the decision making process is on socio-scientific issues. This is because there is not a single perspective and/or a single solution for socio-scientific issues. Different stake- holders should discuss and negotiate socioscientific issues. Since Hydroelectric Power Plants (HEPP) are contraversial issue and has social, scientific and technological dimension, it had been accepted as a socio-scientific issue in this study. During this study, reasoning modes of different groups of people when they were making a decision about HEPP were investigated. HEPP are the systems which produce energy form the potential energy of the released water from a high point. There are two kinds of HEPP which are dam type and river type.River-type dam are the subject of this study. The river?s water is captured from very high point and is taken to the tunnels and then it reaches to the tribune. ix Majority ofThe big amount of water is passed through the tunnel instead of flowing at the river bed. The electric energy is produced from the water when it hits the tribune. The produced electric energy is transmitted by the transmission lines immediately to the distribution regions (Sarıbaş, 2011). While majority of the water is taken to the tunnels at the HEPP, minority of the water which is calculated for that specific area is stayed on the river bed. This minority of water is called ?life-giving waters?. This amount is calculated by the experts. Government Water Works and Resources Survey and Management of Electricity are responsible for the planning of HEPP in Turkey (Coşkun, 2010). However, the construction and operation of HEPP is given to private companies. Government incentives provide places for private companies for constructing and managing HEPP for 49 years. In total 2000 river type HEPP project is planned to be constructed. The purpose of this study is to investigate different groups of people?s reasoning modes and aspects while they are making desicions about HEPPs. There are four groups of people which are officers, members of environmental organizations, local people and distant people. It was aimed to include 20 participants from each group, and 80 participants in total. Participatio-ng in this study was voluntary. Participants were askednot to write their names on the questionnaire to help them express their ideas freelyAfter providing information about the research study and the questionnaire they were asked whether they want to participate in the study or not. Some of the participantsfilled out the questionnaire promptly while, some of them filled out the questionnaire on their spare time. The questionnaire datacollection instrument, is a text which has an open-ended question at the end of an explarotory test about HEPP. The text consist of three parts; an explanation of HEPP (215 words), advantages of HEPP (294) words), disadvantages of HEPP (306 words). At the end of the text it was asked to decide whether construction of HEPP was stopped or to be continued. They were also asked to write their reasons for their decision in detail. Analysis of the data is made by qualitative codification and interpretation. Encoding scheme was taken from Liu, Lin and Tsai?s (2011) study. Reasoning modes x were coded asecological, scientific-technological, socio-economic and ethical-aesthetic. Then the data is classified and compared according to four groups of participants. In addition, the data is compared and classified into two main groups. One of them is people who want the HEPP?s contruction continues the other group is people who do not want the HEPP?s construction continues. Results of the analysis on the officers showed that they decided on continuing construction of HEPP because, HEPP are proposed to reduce the country?s dependence on foreign energy supply systemsThe members of environmental organizations indicated harmful effects to the the environment, compulsory migration of villagers by reducing, agriculture and animal husbandry. They also cite the disruption of the ecological balance,dictruction of picnic areas, streams, village roads.People living away from the HEPP proposed that rivers, to be a part of the nature and people?s wrong and overuse of natural resources. They also pointed out the increase in the death rate of animal and human, cancer of humans, the damage to natural beauties. Destruction of rivers reduction of ecological diversity, disturbing the balance of the nature, disrupting the food chain were also proposed as reasons for their decisions of stopping the construction of HEPP. Villagers ling nearby HEPP were totally refused the construction of HEPP for reasons such as not reducing the electricity costs, the increase in the electrical defficiency, distruction of their leasure areas nearby the river, the formation of disturbing smell, flies on the river because of the low rate of water. As a result, majority of the participants in all four groups of people decided on stopping the construction of HEPP and their reasoning modes were mostly socioeconomical and ecological. But, different views existed in different groups when the data were analyzed in detail in different groups of people. Thus, it is reasonable to include different stake holders in making a decision on a socio-scientific issue such as HEPP to better include different view points and thus making more comprehensive decisions. Key words: Hydroelectric Power Plants, Socio-scientific Decision Making, Socioscientific Issues, Reasoning Modes, Views Points.