Analysing the Quality of Risk-Focused Socio-Scientific Arguments on Nuclear Power Using a Risk-Benefit Oriented Model.
Saved in:
| Title: | Analysing the Quality of Risk-Focused Socio-Scientific Arguments on Nuclear Power Using a Risk-Benefit Oriented Model. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Kim, Jong-Uk1 (AUTHOR), Kang, Da Yeon1,2 (AUTHOR) dayeon.kang.9@gmail.com, Kim, Chan-Jong1 (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Research in Science Education. Oct2025, Vol. 55 Issue 5, p1205-1228. 24p. |
| Subject Terms: | *School children, *Teaching methods, Nuclear energy, Risk assessment, Safety, Sociotechnical systems |
| Geographic Terms: | South Korea |
| Abstract: | Literature has emphasised the need for SSI education to systematically address the risks produced by modern society. This study examines the quality of risk-focused, socio-scientific arguments generated by 22 elementary students in South Korea, concerning nuclear power. Participants read two articles with opposing views on the nuclear phase-out policy and constructed written arguments to justify their positions on this policy. To analyse the quality of arguments, a risk-benefit oriented model encompassing both positivist and constructivist perspectives on risk was developed and applied. The model comprises knowledge components and comparison components. The research results showed that participants generally tended to justify their claims without incorporating comparison components. Some included risk-benefit comparison components, justifying their claims by presenting specific knowledge components in more detail and with more diversity, or by emphasising safety values. Based on these results, educational strategies and implications for improving the quality of students' risk-focused socio-scientific arguments were discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Research in Science Education is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Education Research Complete |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Literature has emphasised the need for SSI education to systematically address the risks produced by modern society. This study examines the quality of risk-focused, socio-scientific arguments generated by 22 elementary students in South Korea, concerning nuclear power. Participants read two articles with opposing views on the nuclear phase-out policy and constructed written arguments to justify their positions on this policy. To analyse the quality of arguments, a risk-benefit oriented model encompassing both positivist and constructivist perspectives on risk was developed and applied. The model comprises knowledge components and comparison components. The research results showed that participants generally tended to justify their claims without incorporating comparison components. Some included risk-benefit comparison components, justifying their claims by presenting specific knowledge components in more detail and with more diversity, or by emphasising safety values. Based on these results, educational strategies and implications for improving the quality of students' risk-focused socio-scientific arguments were discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0157244X |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s11165-024-10219-9 |
