Sci & Educ DOI 10.1007/s11191-013-9644-z

Development and Implementation of Science and Technology Ethics Education Program for Prospective Science Teachers Hyang-yon Rhee • Kyunghee Choi

 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Abstract The purposes of this study were (1) to develop a science and technology (ST) ethics education program for prospective science teachers, (2) to examine the effect of the program on the perceptions of the participants, in terms of their ethics and education concerns, and (3) to evaluate the impact of the program design. The program utilized problem-based learning (PBL) which was performed as an iterative process during two cycles. A total of 23 and 29 prospective teachers in each cycle performed team activities. A PBL-based ST ethics education program for the science classroom setting was effective in enhancing participants’ perceptions of ethics and education in ST. These perceptions motivated prospective science teachers to develop and implement ST ethics education in their future classrooms. The change in the prospective teachers’ perceptions of ethical issues and the need for ethics education was greater when the topic was controversial.

1 Introduction In August 1945, Little Boy and Fat Man, developed during the Manhattan Project, burned the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki to the ground. These events played a crucial role in ending World War II and allowed Korea to gain independence from imperialist Japan. At the same time, however, these scientific inventions perpetrated the most terrible genocide on record. Hundreds of developers and assistants participated in the project, as well as the principal physicists, Compton, Fermi, and Oppenheimer. But all of them, by the very nature of the project, were workers in bits & pieces. (…) But in all this group there was no man to whom the others could point and say: ‘‘This is one.’’1

1

‘‘The Bomb and the Man.’’, \Time[, 1945. 12. 31, http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/ 0,9171,886699-2,00.html (search date: 19 Dec 2010).

H. Rhee
K. Choi (&) Department of Science Education, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea e-mail: [email protected] H. Rhee e-mail: [email protected]

123

H. Rhee, K. Choi

Until the early twentieth century, it was possible to maintain a division between scientific research and its social responsibility. Scientific discovery and its application were well-separated, and the scientists who conducted ‘‘pure’’ research did not need to be burdened by the side effects of their studies on humans or indeed, upon the environment. The enormous progress of ‘‘pure’’ physics and biology during the twentieth century, however, fundamentally changed the relationship between science, technology, and society. While this new form of science-technology (ST) brought huge improvements in people’s lives, it caused serious risks, such as environmental pollution and the exhaustion of natural resources (Rotblat 2001). It also produced ethical problems related to ST, which gradually became influential social issues so that now, the public often see science and technology as a single entity. It would, therefore, be artificial to teach only ‘pure’ science apart from technology (Millar and Osborne 1998). As ethical problems in ST have become important issues in our society, they are considered an important component within science education. Education about the ethical aspects of science was introduced as a part of Science, Technology and Society (STS) education in the 1980s (Ziman 1984) and since then, it has evolved into education about socioscientific issues (SSI) which goes beyond the STS emphasis on students’ moral development and reasoning (Zeidler et al. 2005). Another strand of education dealing with ethical issues that occur during the performance of scientific research was also implemented in the 1990s (Barden et al. 1997; Derting 1997). In Korea, education relating to the social and ethical aspects of ST was originally implemented as a part of STS education in secondary science classrooms.2 Recently, science education programs for research ethics (Lee and Jang 2010; Ryu et al. 2007) have been developed for both elementary and secondary students, and research on SSI education (Chung et al. 2010; Lee et al. 2006b) is also on the rise. Although social concern about ethics in science and demands for education related to this are gradually growing, ethics education in ST is barely implemented in science classrooms in Korea (Lee et al. 2006a), and the secondary science curriculum includes very little ST ethics content (MOEHRD 2007a; Rhee et al. 2009). According to Lee’s (2008) study on science teachers’ perceptions of science ethics education in the big cities of Korea, the majority of teachers (50 %) believed that the lack of ethics education was due to ‘‘the failure of science teachers to be aware of the importance of science ethics education’’, followed by ‘‘a shortage of time to cover all of the desired material’’ and ‘‘a lack of instructional resources and materials’’. They also pointed to ‘‘in-service training’’ as the first priority for science ethics education. A similar nationwide survey (Choi 2010) of 594 prospective science teachers found that only 8.4 % had taken ethics-related course, and that their main information source about ethical issues in ST was mass media, rather than the school system. When the science ethics education of students is scarcely attempted despite its importance, teacher education for both in-service and prospective teachers becomes vitally important. Through education, teachers can develop not only as teaching professionals but also develop their own confidence as an authority within such areas. However, teacher education for ST ethics is rarely provided in Korea. In-service training for ST ethics is mainly performed as a part of STS education, and a few programs have been conducted with a focus on ethics3 or morality (Lee et al. 2006a). Similarly, education relating to 2

See for instance Choi et al. (2003), Choi and Jo (2003), Jeong and Kim (2000), Jo and Choi (1998).

3

In-service science teacher training: ‘‘science education, ethics and human right’’, Korean National Commission for UNESCO, 06 Nov 2001, http://unesco.or.kr/front/news_center/news_center_01_view. asp?articleid=395&cate=news01 (search date: 19 Oct 2011).

123

Development and Implementation of Science and Technology

ethical aspects of ST for prospective science teachers is mostly delivered only through elective courses (Choi 2010). The absence of teacher education for ST ethics is serious because it results in a dearth of such an education for students. The purposes of this study were (1) to develop an ST ethics education program for prospective teachers so that they can prepare for their future classroom; (2) to examine the effect of the program on perceptions of ST ethics and ST ethics education; and (3) to evaluate the impact of the program design. To achieve these purposes, the research plan was designed around the following research questions: 1. How does the ST ethics education program developed in this study affect the perceptions of prospective teachers about ST ethics and ST ethics education for the secondary science level? 2. What are the features of prospective teachers’ approaches to problem solving in ST ethics in the science classrooms? 3. What is the impact of the problem scenarios which incorporate ST ethics into science classrooms?

2 Research Design and Methods Studies of teaching and learning, unlike research conducted in laboratories, are rarely implemented in accordance with their initial design due to many unexpected mediating factors and the difficulty of controlling human factors. Within such experimental design, it is often more effective for achieving teaching–learning principles not to adhere to the initial design, but to revise and adapt it flexibly in response to the actual educational field (Bannan-Ritland 2003; Cobb et al. 2003; Joseph 2004). This study utilized Bannan-Ritland’s (2003) framework to design and refine an ST ethics education program for prospective teachers, and attempted to improve the design and implementation of the program through an iterative process. The process was implemented by adapting the first three of the four stages: informed exploration; enactment; evaluation of local impact; and evaluation of broader impact (see Fig. 1). The last stage can be performed in a following study, which utilizes the design intervention developed in this study.

Fig. 1 Research design

123

H. Rhee, K. Choi Table 1 Number of participants

Cycle

Team

Pre-survey

Post-survey

Total

The 1st

4 groups

23

21

23

The 2nd

5 groups

28

18

29

2.1 The Informed Exploration Phase In this phase, researchers identify and define research problems including educational need, and survey the literature (Bannan-Ritland 2003). This study identified a dearth of ST ethics education programs, as well as the teachers’ corresponding predicaments in dealing with ST ethics in their own classroom, as major problems for the successful implementation of ST ethics education at the secondary science level. Science teachers’ needs relating to ST ethics education included training programs for themselves and available instructional resources or materials.4 For the informed exploration, this study also (1) examined experiences of participants related to ST ethics, (2) surveyed ST ethics categories, and (3) analyzed the secondary science curriculum to select topics and categories for ST ethics education programs. 2.1.1 Experience of Participants Related to ST Ethics Participants in this study consisted of third or fourth year students majoring in science education, many of whom expected to be science teachers. The number of participants in each cycle is as shown in Table 1. Participants’ experience of ST ethics-related lessons or lessons they had taken in college before our program is shown in Table 2. The majority of students reported that they did not learn ST ethics in college. Most lectures in which students had leaned ST ethics were in liberal arts and issues of ST ethics were mostly introduced as a case. The participants’ main information sources on ethical issues in science and technology are presented in Table 3. The ethical issues that they exemplified were varied from bioethics-related issues—genetic copying, embryonic stem cell, euthanasia, animal experiments and so on, to information ethics-related ones—hacking, copyright of software and so on. Most of the participants responded that they obtained their relevant information from the mass media (38.9 %) and from the Internet (33.3 %), whereas just 16.7 % of students had obtained information from an academic institution. The participants were provided with information on how to search for research papers through the online library, rather than being provided with prepared materials as references in the problem solving process. This was done to allow participants to teach themselves what they want and need to know, based on the assumption that they were self-regulated learners. However, when they adhered to a biased position we suggested they explore the controversial view point to find a way to persuade opponents. We also provided prepared materials when they digressed from the scenario and proceeded discussions without relevant materials. 2.1.2 Resources of Ethical Issues in ST Ethical issues in ST can be categorized as ‘‘process of research’’; ‘‘publication of research outcomes’’; ‘‘management of research laboratories’’; ‘‘area specific ethical issues’’; and ‘‘social responsibility of scientists and engineers’’ from macroscopic perspectives as shown 4

See for instance Choi (2010), Lee et al. (2006a), Lee (2008), Rhee et al. (2009).

123

Development and Implementation of Science and Technology Table 2 Lectures in which participants had learned ST ethics Cycle

Major

Liberal arts

Others

None

Sum (%)

The 1st

2 (7.1)

5 (23.8)

1 (4.8)

13 (61.9)

21

The 2nd

3 (10.7)

3 (10.7)

0 (0.0)

22 (78.6)

28

Table 3 Information sources on ethical issues in science and technology Cycle

School (lecture, workshop, etc.)

Mass media (TV, radio, etc.)

Printed media (book, magazine, newspaper, etc.)

People (family, friends, colleagues, etc.)

Internet (news, blogs, search, etc.)

Sum (%)

The 1st

5 (11.9)

16 (38.1)

5 (11.9)

1 (2.4)

15 (35.7)

42 (100.0)

The 2nd

10 (20.8)

19 (39.6)

2 (4.2)

2 (4.2)

15 (31.3)

48 (100.0)

Total

15 (16.7)

35 (38.9)

7 (7.8)

3 (3.3)

30 (33.3)

90 (100.0)

Multiple response analysis (percentages and totals based on response)

Fig. 2

Process of topic selection for the secondary ST ethics education. *Added in the second cycle

in Fig. 2. The first three categories relate to overall research areas in ST; the fourth category relates to specific research areas in ST, such as dealing with living things (human or animal subjects); and the fifth category includes issues relating to scientists and engineers as professionals, the range of their responsibility, and their role in society.5 Ethical problems in the ST area frequently occur in the process of conducting research, the first category of ST ethics. Specifically, fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism (FFP) of data or theory are serious issues of scientific misconduct or fraud (Resnik 1998; Song 2007). ‘‘Fabrication is making up data or results; falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record; and plagiarism is the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit (COSEPUP et al. 2009)’’. The second category of ST ethics, publication of research outcomes, includes ethical issues related to the analysis and interpretation of data and the responsibility of scientists and engineers to avoid errors and prejudices in their work (Resnik 1998). The other issues in this category are authorship based upon a substantial contribution, a fair distribution of 5

See for example Friedman (1996), Kim (2002), Resnik (1998), Shamoo and Resnik (2003), Song (2001, 2007).

123

H. Rhee, K. Choi

credit especially for graduate students and postdoctoral researchers in vulnerable positions, and honorary authorship (Song 2007). Possible issues arising within the third category, ‘‘management of laboratory’’ include discrimination against social minorities, sexual discrimination against females, psychological harassment, lab safety, and management of toxic substances (COSEPUP et al. 2009; Jo 2008). Among these issues, the lab safety issue is frequently ignored or overlooked, but as ‘‘no researcher or scientific discipline is immune from accidents’’ (COSEPUP et al. 2009), it is one of the most important aspects that should be considered in science labs. ‘‘Area specific ethical issues’’ in ST are involved in bioethics, environmental ethics, information ethics, space ethics, and other potential areas. The most established ethics area is bioethics, which is actively discussed in terms of subjects of research. For example, researchers have to obtain ‘‘informed consent’’ from their participants, informing them of every possible danger from the research. Animal experiments are also strongly regulated. Replacement, reduction and refinement (3R) alternatives to lessen the pain of test animals are considered a foundational principle in animal experiments (Russell and Burch 1959). The fifth category of ST ethics is the social responsibility of scientists and engineers. As the profession, scientists and engineers have responsibility for their research outcomes as well as public welfare. The profession or professional ‘‘lays claim to a body of specialized knowledge and skill not easily attainable by the majority of people. In return for a monopoly on the practice of those skills, the profession agrees to use them to serve society and to render professional judgment when asked (Kovac 1999)’’. Scientists and engineers are generally given autonomy as professionals due to their expert knowledge gained through many years of training. Therefore, they have a responsibility for social welfare (Martin and Schinzinger 2004; Harris et al. 2005; Song 2008). 2.1.3 Topics and Areas of Secondary ST Ethics Education The first category of secondary ST ethics education was defined as ‘‘the process and the results of scientific inquiry’’ as shown in (2) of Fig. 2. It was derived from the first and second categories of ST ethics because scientific research by scientists can be approximated to the scientific inquiry of students. The secondary science curriculum was analyzed to select relevant content and activities using scientific inquiry. The Korean science curriculum presents content-related inquiries in each unit, and ‘‘open-ended inquiry’’, as a long-term task, was newly added to the 2007 curriculum revision. Open-ended inquiry aims to increase students’ interests in science and to improve creativity. In open-ended inquiry, students select and investigate topics of interest by themselves, and teachers check the process, provide advice, and evaluate the performance of the students through observation and through the review of their reports (MOEHRD 2007b). ‘‘Open-ended inquiry’’ can directly deal with ethical problems which might occur in the process and results of scientific inquiry. FFP can also occur during students’ performance of open-ended inquiry. Thus ‘‘integrity of writing open-ended inquiry papers’’ was determined as a topic in this category. In the second cycle, ‘‘scientific misconduct in experiments’’ was newly added as an educational topic. Although this topic is not presented in the science curriculum, it is a prominent issue in the process and the outcome of research. Also many secondary students in Korea have reported committing such ethical misconduct and the frequency of the responses was higher in the upper grade (Rhee et al. 2009).

123

Development and Implementation of Science and Technology

The second category, ‘‘management of science labs’’ was formulated from ‘‘management of research laboratory’’. Ethical issues within this category, presented in the secondary science curriculum, include ‘‘lab safety’’ and ‘‘disposal of laboratory waste and environmental pollution’’ in the guidance of laboratory practice as teaching–learning methods.6 Therefore, ‘‘lab safety and waste disposal’’ was determined as an educational topic. The third category was defined as ‘‘bioethics’’, derived from the general category on the ‘‘area specific ethical issues’’ The secondary science curriculum only deals with ‘‘bioethics’’ among other issues: for 7th grade, the content related to ‘‘bioethics’’ includes ‘‘animal dissection’’ as an inquiry activity; for 9th grade, ‘‘effect of nervous system drugs on the human body’’ as the learning content; and a brief mention of laboratory animals in the guidance for laboratory practice. Among this content, ‘‘animal dissection’’ was determined to be a relevant educational topic because it is linked with animal experiments, one of the representative ethical themes in ST. ‘‘Animal dissection’’ in the curriculum was excluded from the 7th curriculum revision7 and was re-included in the following revision. Re-inclusion of animal dissection in the new curriculum may raise its own ethical issue if the decision is perceived as an acceptance of the practice. The last category of secondary ST ethics education was defined as ‘‘social responsibility and the role of ST’’ which was formulated from the ‘‘social responsibilities of scientists and engineers’’ category. However, there was no relevant topic in the Korean science curriculum; therefore, the category was extended to the ‘‘social responsibility and the role of ST’’. The selected topic was ‘‘Launch of the Naro Rocket’’8 which is related to the social and economic repercussions of the success or failure of such a large-scale project. 2.2 The Enactment Phase The enactment phase is to design an intervention for implementation in a naturalistic environment, and to develop a more detailed intervention. Development in this phase is influenced by the following phase for evaluations of local impact (Bannan-Ritland 2003). With the intention of better preparing future teachers for the classroom, problem-based learning (PBL) was adopted as an educational method for an ST ethics program as it is effective in the elevation of field adaptability through practical problem solving (Albanese and Mitchell 1993; Vernon and Blake 1993). PBL helps learners to acquire problemsolving abilities and to relate knowledge through the process of self-directed resolution of real world problems.9 Research on PBL reports that it has an effect on the preservation of

6

Korean secondary science curriculum consists of four parts: goals, content, teaching and learning methods, and evaluation. The content part presents content objects and recommendations for inquiry activities for the units in each grade. Teaching and learning methods include planning learning guidance; material preparation and utilization; methods of learning guidance; guidance for laboratory practice; and supporting science teaching–learning guidance.

7

After the seventh Korean curriculum revision was implemented in 1997, the name of following curriculum revisions included the year of implementation, such as 2007 revised curriculum.

8

Naro: Korea Space Launch Vehicle-I (KSLV-I). The first flight was conducted on August 2009 but it failed because of ‘‘fairing problems’’. When the first cycle of this study was being performed (March 2010), the second flight was scheduled in June 2010, but that launch also ended in failure when contact with the rocket was lost. The Naro rocket succeeded in launching in January 2013.

9

See for instance Barrows (1994), Barrows and Tamblyn (1980), Savery and Duffy (1996) and Torp and Sage (2002).

123

H. Rhee, K. Choi

learned knowledge (Norman and Schmidt 1992), and a positive effect on the affective domain, such as attitudes, interests, and values.10 This section outlines (1) core principles of problem scenarios, (2) development and (3) implementation of PBL. The influence of the following phase and revision of initial design is discussed in the research findings. 2.2.1 Principles of Problem Scenarios Problem scenarios were composed for each topic for the secondary ST ethics education (See Appendix). The carefully designed PBL program aimed to assist prospective science teachers to see the importance of secondary ST ethics education and to enhance their own perception of ST ethics, so that they can also develop their capacity to handle ST ethics topics in their science classrooms. Three core principles were established to support these aims when composing problem scenarios. The first was to bring the topics of ST ethics into the classroom context. Problematic situations and the role provided to learners in PBL make them active problem solvers or self-directed learners as the parties encountering problems (Torp and Sage 2002). Each scenario was presented in the first person, addressing the teachers as ‘‘you’’. The plots for all the scenarios were designed for science lessons based on the secondary science curriculum and the categories of secondary ST ethics education. For example, animal experiment topics were inked into animal dissection in the science lessons and the Naro topic, a large-scale science project, was incorporated into the students’ questions about the satellite during a relevant lesson. The second core principle was to reflect teacher’s actual experiences into the scenarios to create more realistic problems. Authentic problems pertain to real-world circumstances involving information to provide background to problems as well as specific and substantial data (IMSA 2001). A science teacher was involved in this study to share her experience related to the topics, and she helped researchers to compose realistic plots. For example, the teacher’s concern in the scenario for the ‘‘open-ended inquiry paper’’ related to what she had perceived as problematic, and the dialogue inserted in the lab safety and waste disposal scenario was what she had actually talked about with her students. The third core principle was to create ill-structured problems which do not directly address what should be solved and what possible solutions could be. Ill-structured problems allow learners to draw various conclusions depending on their approach. The standard of conclusions and solutions vary with the learners’ level and efforts (Barrows 1992). All of the scenarios only present problematic situations related to ST ethics and never mention ethics education so that the participants can perceive that they made their own decisions about whether they suggest ethics education as a solution or not. The teacher and two experts in science education reviewed the validity of the scenario. The scenarios were refined and revised based on this feedback. After reexamination by three reviewers, the four scenarios were finally completed. 2.2.2 Development of the Program The PBL program in this study was designed based on Cho’s procedure (2006), which was a revision of Barrows and Myers’ model (1993) (See Fig. 3). The learning environment for 10 See for instance Achilles and Hoover (1996), Diggs (1997), Kang and Kim (1998), Norwak (2001) and Oh (1999).

123

Development and Implementation of Science and Technology

Fig. 3 Procedure and activities of the program Table 4

The goals of the course and the objectives of the program

The goals of the course

The objectives of the program

To increase awareness of the importance of science education

To cultivate the perception of ST ethics within the prospective teacher

To widen students’ knowledge for understanding the nature To develop students’ self-regulated capacity for exploring relevant knowledge of science and science education, as well as the theory of science teaching, learning, and evaluation To perceive the importance of ST ethics within secondary education To develop students’ basic literacy to apply what they learned within their future science classrooms

To develop the ability to implement ST ethics education in future classrooms

this study was designed for both off-line and online users. For the on-line setting, a discussion board for the process of problem solving was provided, as well as a project room to submit all the final artifacts for each team. The problem scenarios were also presented on a bullet board and the participants were asked to select one of the scenarios on-line. Learning materials and worksheets were prepared for the off-line environment. Activity sheets were composed to chart the progress through each step, and the materials developed by Kang et al. (2007) were utilized for their construction. The sheets consisted of six types: team building, defining a problem and planning task implementation, summarizing learning, generalization and application, evaluating peers, and a reflection journal. 2.2.3 Implementation of the Program The program developed in this study was implemented as an assignment of the 3-credit compulsory course. The goals of the course and the objectives of programs are as shown in Table 4. The goals were presented to students in the first class of the course while the objectives of the programs were not. This consideration was made because there is no clear learning objective in the real world problems. The program was implemented during the spring semester of two cycles (in 2010 and 2011). For the first cycle, one of the researchers acted as an instructor of the course, and the other played the role of a program assistant who guided and facilitated participants. The course was offered as a 90 min class twice a week for 16 weeks and the program was run for 4 weeks in March 2010. The time designated to each session for the program was 30 min, though this was extended to 40 min at participants’ request. In the second cycle, new participants took part in four sessions in May 2011, each 60 min in length during a 180 min class given once a week. In this cycle, the researcher who was an assistant in the first cycle implemented both the instruction and the program guide.

123

H. Rhee, K. Choi

2.3 The Evaluation Phase of Local Impact This phase was conducted to evaluate the actual effects of the design. The outcomes of one cycle acted as feedback for the following interactions. Through the first cycle of this study, researchers evaluated the effectiveness of the program by analyzing the approaches of the prospective teachers’ problem solving in ST ethics education, and the impact on their perceptions of ST ethics and its instructional necessity for secondary students. The participants also evaluated the program in terms of what they improved through the program. The results are discussed in the research findings. 2.3.1 Survey Questionnaire To investigate the effect of our program, such as changes in the perception of ST ethics and in ST ethics education for the secondary science level, pre- and post-surveys were conducted, adapted from a previously published questionnaire. Choi (2010) investigated prospective science teachers’ perception of ST ethics and secondary ST ethics education, and developed a survey based on related studies (Bowman and Anthonysamy 2006; Broom et al. 2009; Hong et al. 2005). The questionnaire consisted of three parts: ‘‘experiences in ethics education’’, ‘‘perception of ST ethics’’, and ‘‘opinions on the necessity of ST ethics’’. Reliability was calculated for the items of Likert scale and the coefficients (Cronbach’s a) were .854, .873, and .670 in each part, respectively. The first part of the pre-survey inquired about examples that the participants regarded as ethical issues in ST, participants’ major information sources of general ethical issues in ST, ST ethics lectures that the participants attended in college, and their opinions of the lectures. The second part consisted of questions about participants’ self-awareness of ST ethics, and their perceptions of several ethical issues within ST. Ethical issues included the protection of participants primarily experienced in the behavioral science research area, FFP regarded as typical scientific misconduct, laboratory safety, animal experiments, and the responsibility of scientists and engineers in our society. Some items in Choi’s (2010) questionnaire were replaced with the relevant ones to the developed program. The items directly related to the program were the last six from FFP to scientists and engineers in society. The last part elicited opinions on the necessity of secondary education about the ethical issues in ST, adequate subjects for teaching ST ethics at the secondary educational level, and proper types and effective teaching methods for ST ethics. Ethical issues presented in ‘‘necessity of ST ethics education’’ were consistent with those which were included in ‘‘perception of ethical issues in ST’’ while FFP was merged into one item (See Table 5). The post-survey was different from the pre-survey. The first three questions on the ‘‘experience of ST ethics education’’ were excluded and the following five questions, ‘‘opinions on ST ethics lectures attended’’, were replaced with ‘‘opinions on the program’’ implemented in this study. The other two parts were identical to those of the pre-survey. The reliability coefficients were .784 and .869 in the last two parts, respectively. 2.3.2 Data Collection and Analysis Data collection for this study included team discussions, posts on the on-line bulletin boards, final reports, the learner’s notebooks, surveys, and researchers’ memos. Team discussions in the first cycle were recorded and transcribed in order to analyze the

123

b

a

Replaced in the post-survey

Excluded in the post-survey

Total

3. Opinions on ST ethics education for secondary schools

2. Perception of ST ethics

Q28 Q29 Q30

Adequate subject to teach ST ethics

Proper types and effective teaching methods for ST ethics

Opinion on ST ethics education

Q1–Q30

Q20–Q27

Q10–Q19

Necessity of ST ethics education

Perception of ethical issues in ST

Q4–Q8

Opinions on ST ethics lectures attended

32

1

1

1

8

10

1

5

3

Q3b

ST ethics lectures attended

Q9

1

Awareness of ST ethics

1

Q1a Q2a

Example of ST ethics

1. Experience of ST ethics education

Number of items

Question number

Information source on ethical issues in ST

Subject

Topic

Table 5 Structure of pre-survey questions and the number of questions under each subject

Description

Multiple-choice

Multiple-choice

Likert 5-scale

Likert 5-scale

Choice

Likert 5-scale

Description, Multiple-choice

Multiple-choice

Description

Item type

Development and Implementation of Science and Technology

123

H. Rhee, K. Choi

approaches of prospective science teachers when problem solving in ST ethics education. This study investigated the approaches of the prospective teachers’ problem solving in terms of what they identified as problems to solve as well as what they proposed as a solution. Some of the findings in the first cycle inspired revision of the program design and the revised design was applied in the second cycle. The second cycle discussions were not recorded, but each team presented what they discussed at the end of each session and received feedback from other teams and from the instructor. Each team also posted its discussion on the electronic board on the same day. Posts on the board and the final reports were used for our analysis. This study also analyzed quantitative and qualitative changes in participants’ perceptions of ST ethics and ST ethics education in both the first and second cycle. The effects of the program were further considered in the evaluations of the program by the participants and the effect of the design for the program was discussed. The survey results were analyzed using SPSS version 17.0 and the descriptive items were coded using Microsoft Excel 2010. To examine the differences between the pre- and post-survey, a paired-sample t test was used.11 Even though the reliability coefficients of the survey were high, there was a limitation in the interpretation of data due to the small sample size, and when participants showed high levels of perception at both the pre- and post-surveys. For the interpretation of the survey results, qualitative data such as FGI interviews and participants’ reflective journals were referred to as a means of describing qualitative changes between the pre- and post-survey in the perceptions of ST ethics and opinions on ST ethics education. 2.4 The Evaluation Phase of Broader Impact The evaluation phase includes not only dissemination and diffusion but also adoption and adaptation of researched practices and design interventions. The evaluation of broader impact for this study can be performed by researchers, educators, and educational designers who are interested in the design of educational programs which target authenticity and willingness of pre- and in-service teachers. The distinct feature of our design was that ethical topics in ST were linked to science classrooms so that prospective science teachers could integrate their knowledge, perceptions, and practices. However, it should be re-tested whether the integration was possible due to the features of the design or because of characteristics of ethical issues that requires personal reflection embedded in such a design. It would be expected to be confirmed in future research which adopts and adapts our program design. The suggestions for future research are further discussed in the implications section in this paper.

3 Research Findings 3.1 Changes in Perceptions of ST Ethics On the question ‘‘I’m well aware of ethical issues in science and technology’’, the participants’ response of ‘‘yes’’ increased in the post survey compared to the pre-survey for 11 The effective sample size for the 1st cycle survey was 15 pairs with .938 of power for the given effect size (population mean difference of 1.6, SD of change = 2.0) and 17 pairs for the 2nd cycle with .626 of power for the given effect size (population mean difference of 2.1, SD of change = 3.6). These were computed using SPSS sample power version 3.0.

123

Development and Implementation of Science and Technology Table 6 Self-awareness of ST ethics The 1st cycle (%) Pre

The 2nd cycle (%) Post

Pre

Post

Yes

3 (14.3)

11 (52.4)

8 (44.4)

16 (88.9)

No

6 (28.6)

10 (47.6)

10 (55.5)

2 (11.1)

No response

12 (57.1)

Total

21 (100.0)

–

–

21 (100.0)

–

18 (100.0)

18 (100.0)

both the first and the second cycles. The number of positive responses changed from 3 (14.3 %) to 11 (52.4 %) in the first cycle and from 8 (44.4 %) to 16 (88.9 %) in the second cycle (see Table 6). This result implies that participants became confident in ST ethics through the implementation of the program. To examine if there was a significant difference in participants’ perceptions of ST ethics before and after implementing the program, a paired sample t test was used on the total scores of perceptions between the pre- and post-survey. There was a significant difference both in the first cycle (t = 3.575, p = .002) and the second cycle (t = 2.476, p = .027) as shown in Table 7. With the results presented in Table 6, this confirms that the participants not only improved their self-confidence, but also intensified their perception of ST ethics through the developed program. The topics directly introduced in our program among all items for perceptions of ST ethics were ‘‘animal experiments’’, ‘‘FFP’’, ‘‘lab safety’’, and ‘‘social responsibility of scientists and engineers’’. Participants’ mean scores on those topics are presented in Table 8. The mean values on all topics except ‘‘animal experiments’’ were over 4.0, both in the first and the second cycle. Means on the ‘‘animal experiments’’ question showed the lowest value among other questions; however, the score change between pre- and post-test was the highest in each cycle. Meanwhile, the mean scores of three questions, such as ‘‘lab safety’’, were decreased in the post-survey. According to the results of the t test to examine if there was a significant difference between the pre- and post-means, only the question about ‘‘animal experiments’’ showed a statistical significance as presented in Table 9. The relatively large shift in the mean score for this question may have occurred because the pre-score was very low compared to other questions. On the other hand, the ‘‘animal experiments’’ topic was different from the other topics. There are many pros and cons within that topic, and decision-making relating to it seems to involve more indecision than that relating to other topics. Participants’ conflicts about ‘‘animal experiments’’ were also shown in the focus group interview (FGI). Even though the focus group consisted only of participants who answered ‘‘strongly agree’’ to most questions, two of the three interviewees responded ‘‘neutral’’ to Table 7 Paired sample t test analysis for the perceptions of ST ethics N

Mean Pre

SD

t

p

Post

The 1st cycle

21

40.2

41.8

2.014

3.575

.002*

The 2nd cycle

18

41.3

43.4

3.692

2.476

.027*

* p \ .05

123

H. Rhee, K. Choi Table 8 Mean for the perceptions of ethical issues relevant to the program Item

The 1st cycle

The 2nd cycle

Pre

Post

Dev.

Pre

Post

Dev.

a

2.57

3.14

.57

2.94

3.50

.56

a

4.19

4.43

.24

4.17

4.56

.34

When using someone else’s research outcomes or data, the reference must be cited

4.71

4.67

-.04

4.72

4.83

.11

Even if the research outcomes are beneficial to the society, researchers must not make up non-existent data or results

4.71

4.62

-.09

4.78

4.72

-.06

Scientists and engineers are responsible for the safety or waste disposal in their laboratory

4.62

4.48

-.14

4.56

4.39

-.14

Scientists and engineers are responsible for the effect of their research and activities on the society

4.05

4.19

.14

4.28

4.39

.11

We cannot help but sacrifice experimental animals for the research needed for humans If the results come out similar to the acknowledged theory, researchers may change the data consistent to the theory

a

Reverse coding item

Table 9 Paired sample t test analysis for the perception of animal experiments N

Mean Pre

SD

t

p

Post

The 1st cycle

21

2.57

3.14

1.076

2.434

.024*

The 2nd cycle

18

2.94

3.50

1.042

2.263

.037*

* p \ .05

the ‘‘animal experiments’’ question, whereas the other chose ‘‘agree’’. The reason for choosing the ‘‘neutral’’ response was that they had difficulty in deciding because of the many pros and cons; however, their actual view appeared to be closer to agreement [1]. [1] [Even though I chose ‘strongly agree’ in other questions] I chose an average score for this one instead of a radical answer. Actually, I’m usually against animal experiments which re-confirm what we already know. People who are in the medical or vet schools say that you can’t experiment on people, but that we have no choice but to conduct experiments on animals for the sake of the human race. Therefore, after pondering which side to take since I agree that both sides are convincing and decided to tick ‘average’ which is right in the middle.

The changes in perception relating to animal experiments were identified from the reflective journals of the participants who had solved the ‘‘animal dissection’’ problem in the first cycle. Reflection of their limited experience could lead to skeptical thinking about what they had taken for granted [2]. The material surveys also led to an understanding of different or neglected opinions [3]. [2] I took three animal dissection classes in total from middle school to university. The classes left me with a deep impression (…). Ethical aspects were not something that I cared much about (…). I was also a proponent of the experiments as I thought I had benefited in many ways from them. However, it occurred to me that I was never properly educated about the ethical aspects of the experiments, and so, I started to look at the issue with greater skepticism. (…). [3] (…) But I came to realize the gravity of the situation through the material surveys. I don’t know if it’s because they are immature middle school kids but this video in which students played with

123

Development and Implementation of Science and Technology animal organs shocked me. Then I understood why there are the people against dissection experiments and why some foreign countries are gradually looking for alternative classes to reduce dissection experiments.

The ‘‘animal dissection’’ team of the second cycle showed both differences and similarities with the team of the first cycle. The differences were that the second cycle team directly worked on the animal dissection experiments in schools, whereas the first cycle team investigated the pros and the cons of general animal experiments prior to animal dissection in schools. Consequently, the members of the second cycle team showed a deeper and more detailed reflection on animal dissections than the first cycle, although the more that the second cycle members had experienced animal dissections in their schools, the more they were sure of the effectiveness of animal dissections as a teaching method. They also reported that their perceptions of animal dissections were changed after accessing the contrary opinions that they surveyed [4]. [4] I strongly approved of animal dissections until I encountered the problem for the first time… Because I wasn’t reluctant to do dissection experiments (…), I was barely concerned about whether dissections should be performed or not. However, a strange thing happened during the team project. All of our members who approved of dissection experiments in the beginning of the first discussion, (…) in the end, reached the same disproving opinion. This was not because the opinion of those who disproved was strong. This was because all of us have treated the dissection experiments like it was a natural thing to go through the process of rationalizing the inherent ethical issues made us realize that it may not be.

The changes in perception relating to other topics showed very similar patterns: the majority of the participants realized their previous opinions on the topics were not informative, but vague, and they became reinforced in their perceptions of the ethical issues through the process of problem solving. An interesting aspect was that many participants referred to their attitude as a teacher when they reported their perception changes [5]. This confirmed the implementation of one of the design intentions in this study. In the problem scenarios, the ethical topics were merged with the challenges of classroom teachers so that our participants could cultivate their perceptions of ST ethics as well as their capacities as a teacher. [5] When I encountered the problem [scenario], I thought that environment pollution should be prevented and lab safety regulations should be followed, for granted without a question. However, to my surprise, (…) I also realized that both in-service and prospective teachers lack a sufficient awareness of such issues. In the process of identifying the problem, I realized that problems related to ‘perception’ are more serious than systematic problems. By looking for alternatives during the problem solving process, I ensured the perception of safety as a teacher.

To summarize the above findings, our participants were able to enhance both their confidence in, and their perceptions of ST ethics through the designed program; when the topic was controversial, a big shift occurred. Their perception changes on ST ethics could be linked with the role and the attitude of a teacher through the problem solving process when the problems dealt with ethical issues in the classroom situation. 3.2 Changes in Opinions on Necessity of ST Ethics Education The survey questions about the necessity of ST ethics education consisted of one general question about ST ethics instructions and seven related questions about instructions for the ethical issues at the secondary education level. As shown in Table 10, on the general question asking about participants’ opinions on the necessity of ST ethics instruction, the average was very high, yielding above 4 in both the first and the second cycle of the pre-

123

H. Rhee, K. Choi Table 10 Paired sample t test analysis for the perceptions of necessity of ST ethics classes N

Mean Pre

SD

t

p

Post

The 1st cycle

21

4.24

4.62

.669

2.609

.017*

The 2nd cycle

18

4.61

4.72

.832

.566

.579

* p \ .05

and post-survey, and the participants showed stronger agreement in the post-survey compared with the pre-survey in both cycles. In order to investigate whether or not the observed differences were significant, a paired sample t test was utilized. The t-value was statistically significant in the first cycle; however, there was no significant difference in the second cycle. Less of a difference in the second cycle occurred as in the pre-survey, the mean value was already high. The average of items related to our program among questions about the necessity of instructions for ethical issues at the secondary education level was above 4 (see Table 11). With the outcomes presented in Table 10, this confirms that our participants had positive opinions relating to the necessity of ST ethics instructions for secondary education, and these results are consistent with the findings in Choi’s survey (2010) on the Korean prospective science teachers’ perceptions of ST ethics education. This study further explored whether there were qualitative changes in participant opinions. In our analysis of the reflective journals, most of our participants reported that their perceptions of ST ethics education changed and they realized the importance of education related to the presented ethical issues [6]. [6] Actually, I wanted to think of practical methods to utilize in the school context, but it was difficult to find practical ways since the Internet has developed to a great extent. So what I realized as important was the education in ‘ethical’ aspects. One could easily question what the use of ethics education is but I thought there was no other better way than this [ethics education] as a solution to the homework agency business.

Among all teams, the ‘‘animal dissection’’ team expressed a deep impression of the efforts of bioethics education and related approaches [7]. Similar to the perception changes on ST ethics stated in the previous section, because almost all participants of the team had a supportive opinion on animal dissections at the beginning, and they had taken animal dissection for granted without applying any critical thinking, their perception changes showed a big shift. [7] … By solving this problem, I got to think about what I’ve never given enough attention before concerning animal dissections… While doing the survey to find alternatives to animal dissections, I realized how important bioethics problems in biology education nowadays. The alternatives to dissections which have been developed recently don’t just suggest answers but also emphasize the respect towards life.

In other teams, the majority of participants reported that they found a lack of education related to ethical issues through their investigations of problem solutions, and they presented their opinions on the issues very clearly. Some of them proposed that the instructional methods, which they developed as problem solutions, could be utilized for the relevant education [8], [9]. [8] What I have found out through the discussion activities and material surveys… the cases of fabricated experiment results, such as Hwang Woo-suk case, Jan Hendrik Schon case, even

123

Development and Implementation of Science and Technology Table 11 program

Mean for the opinions on the necessity of instructions for the ethical issues relevant to the

Item

The 1st cycle Pre

The 2nd cycle

Post Dev. Pre

Post Dev.

It is necessary to teach scientific misconduct (fabrication, falsification, 4.52 4.33 -.19 4.56 4.72 and plagiarism of data) in the secondary science lessons

.16

It is necessary to teach responsible conduct of research and inquiry in 4.43 4.38 -.05 4.50 4.61 the secondary science lessons

.11

It is necessary to teach promotion of safe laboratory environment (hazardous waste disposal etc.) in the secondary science lessons

4.71 4.57 -.14 4.78 4.61 -.17

It is necessary to teach ethical issues on animal subject research and 4.10 4.33 experiment in the secondary science lessons

.23 4.61 4.50 -.11

It is necessary to teach social role and responsibility of scientists and 4.43 4.33 -.10 4.28 4.44 engineers in the secondary science lessons

.16

manipulation of medicine efficacy occur very often, and the science ethics education has not been conducted in the real educational field seriously enough. Therefore, our team thought that fabricating experiment results should never occur again by utilizing various methods that we devised to spread the science ethics education. [9] When I read the textbooks, all of them seemed to describe no more than ‘‘interactions’’ about relationship of science, technology and society without providing a detailed introduction to the dual aspects of science and technology. I think getting various opinions and forming one’s own opinion, simply through textbooks or news is not enough, and it seems better to offer discussion lessons structured by teachers like our team’s solutions.

To summarize the above findings, our participants had high perceptions of ST ethics education prior to the program, and for this reason it was difficult to see the quantitative changes before and after. However, our participants reported that through the process of problem solving in the designed program, they had come to realize the seriousness and the importance of ST ethics education, which they had not recognized before. This means that participants’ previous high perceptions were not gained from a deep consideration but were taken for granted, and they gained substantial and sober perceptions through the problem solving process. This confirms that the program developed in this study positively affected the prospective science teachers’ perceptions of secondary ST ethics education. 3.3 Participants’ Evaluation of the Program To compare with the evaluations of our program, the participants were asked in the pre survey to evaluate the lectures related to ST ethics that they attended before our program. The participants’ evaluations of previous lectures and our program are shown in Table 12. For the five items relating to previous lectures, in both the first and the second cycles, participants showed positive evaluations above the response mean of 3.0, whereas they showed higher response means for all items relating to the current lecture. In the first cycle, the items yielding responses over the mean of 4.0 for the current lecture were about knowledge and interest growth in ST ethics, and about reflective thinking, whereas all items yielded responses mean above the 4.0 in the second cycle. All of the mean differences between the previous and current lectures were higher in the second cycle compared to the first cycle.

123

H. Rhee, K. Choi Table 12 Evaluation of previous instructions and the current program Item

The 1st cycle

The 2nd cycle

Previous Current Dev. Previous Current Dev. My knowledge on ST ethics has been increased through the program

3.75

4.10

.35

3.70

4.22

.50

My interest in ST ethics has increased through the program

3.88

4.14

.26

3.70

4.61

.91

My critical thinking has been improved through the program

3.63

3.86

.23

3.56

4.22

.66

My decision-making skill has been developed through 3.50 the program

3.90

.40

3.70

4.11

.41

My reflective thinking has been improved through the 3.63 program

4.19

.56

3.50

4.11

.61

These results are consistent with those of the perception changes on ST ethics and ST ethics education described in the previous sections. Our participants reported that they became aware of new facts and recognized the importance of what they had not been interested in previously. They also reflected on ST ethics and ST ethics education as a prospective teacher or as an in-service teacher. This confirms that the prospective teachers can acquire relevant knowledge and interests on ST ethics and can involve themselves through the designed problem solving process. Furthermore, the revised design seemed to be more effective than the design in the first cycle. Many participants positively evaluated that the process of problem solving would be helpful in practice, and that they could reflect on ST ethics problems in science classrooms. The prominent aspect in the participants’ reports was that their perceptions of ST ethics were based on the reflective thinking about themselves as well as reflecting their perceptions of ST ethics education [5], [10], [11]. These integrated perceptions were possible because the developed problem scenarios dealt with topics related to ST ethics in the context of secondary science education. [10] When I first encountered the problem, I selected the issue because it seemed to be closely related to my major, Science Education. I had many opportunities to do experiments since I am majoring in Physics Education. Frankly speaking, I have fabricated experimental results in order to write a better (?) report. Though through problem solving with team members, I learned a lot, and reflected on my own actions after the discussion. [11] It was a productive time dealing with problems which I had never imagined (problems which I didn’t usually think deeply about) and I can refer to later on when I become a teacher.

In addition, the participants positively assessed the step-by-step discussion process and the feedback from the facilitator, and some of the teams adopted those methods in their problem solutions. In their problem solutions, the ‘‘open-ended inquiry’’ team proposed a step-by-step process and the feedback methods used in our program. As a solution, this team proposed a way for teachers to design the step-by-step process to implement an openended inquiry, to present the specific guidelines at each step, and to provide feedback to steer their students in the right direction. The ‘‘Naro rocket’’ team assessed that the way they were performing was appropriate to the teaching–learning methods of the problem solutions, and they designed STS instructions utilizing the ‘‘Jigsaw I’’ model with a similarity to their performance.

123

Development and Implementation of Science and Technology

To summarize the above findings, the prospective teachers positively evaluated the designed program, and they accepted the program as useful. Furthermore, they tended to adopt what they performed in this program as their final solutions. 3.4 The Approaches of Problem Solving on ST Ethics in Science Classrooms There were two main features shown in the approaches of the prospective teachers’ problem solving. The first feature was that they consistently pointed out ‘‘teachers’ responsibility’’ when they identified the ethical problems as well as explored the possible solutions. The second feature was their willingness to integrate the ethical issues they encountered to science education. The other features were some problematic aspects in their approaches, such as dependence on experience, lack of internalization, and feedback sensitivity. 3.4.1 Teachers’ Responsibility on Ethical Issues When the participants identified problems to solve, their focus of discussion was mainly ‘‘who’’ had primary responsibility for the identified problems. Three teams, except the team in charge of the ‘‘animal dissection’’ problem, saw that main problems in their scenario had occurred because of ‘‘teachers’’, who lacked an appropriate perception of the given ethical issue and/or may have failed in preparing relevant instruction for the students. Even when they raised the matter of students, such as lack of ethical perceptions, carelessness of lab safety, cruelty to animals, and indifference to ethical issues unrelated to grade, they saw that such problems also should be solved by teachers. Occasionally, they referred to actual conditions and present status of the school, curriculum, and social systems but their main consideration was still on teachers. Ethical issues and teacher-related factors shown in the discussions in each team were as follows. The ethical issues referred to in the ‘‘open-ended inquiry’’ scenario were students’ manipulation of experimental data, scientists’ fraud, public copyright infringement, and homework agency businesses which complete the homework of students for money. The identified ethical problems in the team discussions were that students copied internet materials or used a homework agency for their inquiry papers, and the team sought to comprehend the cause of the problems. A problematic situation which the team perceived was that students had difficulties in performing their tasks because teachers assigned tasks to students without presenting proper guidelines and evaluated their students’ performance by focusing mostly on grading [12]. Even though the team perceived ‘‘students’ misbehavior’’ as problematic, most discussions were focused on ‘‘teachers’ accountability’’. [12] In my high school days, my teacher didn’t set the guidelines properly. So I did whatever I wanted to do by choosing any topic, extracting and editing parts of other students’ work. Then my teacher thought that I copied everything. (…) When teachers conduct performance assessments, they always give out similar tasks. That’s why… If not that, because teachers assess mainly based on grades, [students] want to do well and eagerly…[copy assignments.]

In the case of ‘‘labs safety’’, the ethical issues involved in the scenario were lab safety and waste disposal in school. The ethical issues which the team discussed at the beginning were the lack of students’ safety consciousness in their lab activities, uninformed teachers’ guidelines of specific do’s and don’ts for accidents to be expected in science lab, and the actual condition of the educational field in which the safety guidelines were not practiced in spite of regulations and equipment for waste disposal. Later, the focus of the discussions

123

H. Rhee, K. Choi

gradually shifted to teachers. Even though the team pointed out students’ problems, they saw the lack of perception and practice of teachers for safety guidelines and their attitude to allow students’ undesirable behavior as the causes of the problems [13]. [13] I read somewhere on the internet that there is a regulation that liquid chemical waste should not be disposed of in the sink, but because the teacher was unaware of this, and thought chemicals will be diluted with water, (s)he let the students dispose of chemical waste in the sink. (…) But it’s not like they are throwing out the chemical stuff knowing that it would cause fire. It shows that they attend the training but they soon forget and fail to take appropriate action. (…) The fact that the teacher didn’t know about this [lab safety training]… It’s not right for the teacher to not know this after having previously received training, as the loss of this training is [also] a big problem.

The team saw that there were two possible cases; the first case is when teachers are not aware of knowledge about lab safety; the second case is when teachers do not follow the guidelines in spite of having awareness of their responsibility. Both cases are caused by teachers’ low level of perceptions of safety issues. However, when they discussed solutions to the problems, they included systemic problems of school and teacher education related to lab safety in their consideration. They sought to explore microscopic resolutions as practices of teachers as well as macroscopic ones as improvement of systemic problems. In the ‘‘Naro rocket’’ scenario, broader STS topics such as multiple aspects of ST, were dealt with while the benefit of success and risk of failure in large-scale projects in ST were referred to. What the team identified as problems to solve was also broad and included how to impress on students the relationship between science and society. The teams’ discussions were mainly focused on the classroom situation presented in the scenario, and the team pointed out that most students were not interested in the relationship between science and society. The reasons why students lose interest were students were not concerned about topics irrelevant to exams, the teacher did not consider the students’ cognitive level, and they answered the questions off-the-cuff using difficult terms for students [14]. [14] …If we only stick to the passage [on the scenario], students lose interest or when the teacher uses complicated sentences like [the launch of Naro was a] ‘half success,’ they lose interest [again]. On top of that, even more difficult explanations make the situation worse… (…) … This one [in the scenario] is about how uninterested students are packing their bags [while the teacher is explaining]. This is a specific case. It’s not like many other kids are interested in it, and also even the teachers don’t know about the contents very well, and they can’t even provide proper answers… (…)

As the team identified ill-prepared teachers as the cause of the problems, it proceeded to discuss the instructional methods for STS to be applied in actual educational fields and how students’ interest could be raised. However, the teachers’ behavior which the ‘‘Naro rocket’’ team identified as a cause of the problem was not directly link to the ethical issues because the ethical issues on the Naro rocket are related to social aspects rather than personal features. The ‘‘animal dissection’’ scenario included issues about frog dissection, animal experiments, and bioethics. The team in charge of the scenario saw that the main problem was the absence of bioethics education and did not directly point out teachers’ responsibility. The angle of this team was that the problem was animal dissection without ethics education rather than dissection itself, so if somehow the ethics education were delivered, dissection would not be a problem [15]. [15] In my experience of [animal dissection] experiments, I realized that real experiments are much more helpful than simulations. When dissecting a rabbit, everything is comparable to the information within a textbook, and I already know about the large intestine or the appendix. In my opinion, there are bigger issues with regard to ethics than just [dissection] experiment classes. (…)

123

Development and Implementation of Science and Technology Whether or not the animal experiments should be conducted is controversial, as there are many benefits from animal experimentation, especially to students. Therefore, we need to resolve how the [dissection] experiments are taught at school. That seems to be the problem.

This point of view seemed to be held because the team started the discussion with a supportive view of animal dissection at the beginning. Even though the members of the team collected information about 3R which are alternatives to animal dissection (Russell and Burch 1959) as well as alternative classes for dissection in other countries such as model and video based experiments, they did not use such information to judge their claim or belief remaining in ‘‘blind faith’’ (Zeidler et al. 2003). However, they came to review their naive conception and their formal concept of ethics education after having received feedback that suggested they evaluate not only pros but also the cons of animal dissection. To summarize the above findings, the prospective science teachers had a tendency to clarify the agent of responsibility on the presented problems, and they found teachers responsibility of major concern when they encountered problematic ethical issues related to ST in the context of science classrooms. Even when they identified other causes of the problems, they found that the main causes of the problems originated from teachers. This identification of teachers as the problem is in part similar to Lee’s (2008) study on perceptions of Korean science teachers in which many science teachers believed that the main problem of ST ethics education was ‘‘the failure of science teachers to be aware of the importance of science ethics education’’. However, although science teachers perceived the dearth of ethics education in science as problematic, such perceptions did not guarantee their educational practice. So their decisions on the problematic situations are gaining importance. 3.4.2 Willingness to Integrate the Ethical Issues to Science Education Based on team discussions, each team presented their solutions to the problems in wholeclass discussions, and they submitted final reports based on their problem solving exercise. The solutions presented by each team had something in common, in that all teams, except for the ‘‘lab safety’’ team, composed specific instructional content and teaching–learning methods for ethical issues to be delivered by ‘‘teachers’’ as solutions to the problems. One can see this finding as trivial but the program designers consider it as encouraging because all the decisions about whether to conduct ethics education, what content should be taught, and what kind of teaching–learning methods would be effective for such education, were made by prospective teachers themselves based on their willingness. These outcomes also met the objectives of the program as well as the goals of the course. The solutions of each team involved not only ST ethics education but also its necessity. The ‘‘open-ended inquiry’’ team proposed two possible solutions to the problem. One was ‘‘what teachers ought to do using teachers’ own efforts’’ This team illustrated guidelines which can be used by teachers to present the inquiry process to students and exemplify assessment frameworks on the process and the results of open-ended inquiry so that teachers can help students’ to write the inquiry paper and prevent them copying. The other was ‘‘what teachers ought to provide for their students’’, which were ethics education and self-evaluation. The educational content for the ethics education included ‘‘plagiarism prevention education’’, and ‘‘the correct way to refer to Internet materials and to cite references’’. Relevant activities developed by the team were sharing experiences, discussion about ‘‘homework agency businesses’’, enacting task laws, and so on. The team also suggested a way to utilize self-evaluation as a follow-up activity after inquiry so that students reflect on and evaluate their performance. The activities that the team proposed

123

H. Rhee, K. Choi

very much resembled what the team performed during our PBL program. This result indicates that our program had credibility with the participants with regard to enhancement and practices of ethical perceptions for learners. The ‘‘lab safety’’ team divided the problem solutions into three dimensions: teachers, school, and the government. The solutions under the heading of teachers were to implement orientations for safe experimentation and to utilize multimedia materials to attract students’ interests as the team saw students’ low perception of lab safety as a problem. Although the team mentioned education relating to the ‘‘proper disposal of laboratory waste’’, it did not provide specific content or strategies for the education. The solutions under the school dimension were related to the improvement of the laboratory environment and included the establishment of a waste disposal system, making a contract with a waste disposal specialist company, and hiring laboratory assistants. The government solutions referred to as systemic reform were to develop educational materials including real cases of laboratory accidents to distribute to schools, make relevant training for both in- and pre-service teachers mandatory, implement laboratory assistants training system, and inspect school safety systems. The conclusion of this team was that environmental and systemic improvements are no less necessary than teachers’ efforts because they found that the causes of problems related to teachers, schools, and the government. Because the range of solutions presented by this team was broad, the derived solutions were also wide and ill-defined. However, the team reported both teachers’ and students’ low perception level of lab safety based on the results of the survey which was developed and conducted by the team and emphasized the necessity of relevant education. Meanwhile, the ‘‘Naro rocket’’ team investigated curriculum content that can be connected to Naro issues, and they designed a teaching–learning plan and activity sheets to embody Naro-related decision-making instructions. The teaching–learning plan was developed as role-playing learning module that adopted different views on Naro issues, as an example of such large-scale projects. In the instruction plan, students were asked to explore both positive and negative aspects based on their roles as scientists, politicians, economists, local citizens, and as people who have fundamental technology, and to build their opinions on the issues through team discussion. This team further introduced some examples of real life problem-based STS instructions in detail. Although the team presented specific educational contents and methods for STS education, their decision on the Naro issues was not presented. This result seemed to be shown because STS education does not command clear attention to the ethical issues while it stresses the role of decision in ST (Zeidler et al. 2005). The team seemed to consider that to understand multiple aspects of ST would be enough for STS education and also to have difficulty to connect STS issues to the ethical issues. Lastly, the ‘‘animal dissection’’ team presented both positive and negative opinions on such experiments in detail, and bioethics educational content with teaching–learning methods, such as discussion and role-playing to improve students’ decision-making ability. The ultimate conclusion was that bioethics education must be required whether teachers apply animal dissection or adopt alternative instructions. Instead of forcing a one-sided view, the conclusion in the final report of the team began with the question: which has priority, ‘‘respect for life’’ or ‘‘intellectual curiosity?’’ Even though the members of the team began with a supportive view of animal dissection, their decision was that animal dissection in the secondary science level should be restricted, and they chose alternative lessons as a solution. As possible solutions, alternative materials for the experiments, such as two-way computer programs and animal models, were presented based on more

123

Development and Implementation of Science and Technology

legitimate rationales compared to those of other teams because their decision was derived from evaluating both the pros and the cons as well as reflecting their initial claim critically. To summarize the above findings, the solutions proposed by the prospective teachers were mostly related to teachers’ implementation and practice, and they included teaching– learning methods to deliver relevant ST ethics education. The team tried to determine the causes of the presented problems, and they saw that the main causes related to the teachers. Because of this, the presented methods varied in terms of the ethical issues they dealt with. Our participants found solutions from teachers themselves as an agent of problem solving by developing teaching–learning materials, whereas most science teachers sought solutions from external supports like providing in-service training, instructional equipment and materials, and teachers’ manuals (Lee 2008). 3.4.3 Dependence on Experience, Lack of Internalization, and Feedback Sensitivity Some negative approaches of the participants were identified as falling into the following three categories: dependence of experience, lack of internalization, and feedback sensitivity. First, our participants showed a tendency to be dependent on their experiences when they identified the causes of the problems at the beginning of the problem solving process. To understand and explain the causes, they tended to present their first- or second-hand experiences rather than collecting data or references [12], [13], [15], [16], even though they justified this with the supplementary investigations later on in the process. [16] Teachers often assign ?? open-ended [inquiry] paper in that way. My younger sister also got this open-ended [inquiry] paper… nothing was provided but the teacher just told her to think about anything.

The pattern can be interpreted as an assimilation process to understand a new phenomenon with their prior scheme, where the scheme consists of more social, especially school-related, experiences rather than knowledge related to the team’s ethical issues. The tendency of dependence on experience weakened as the study proceeded; however, due to the delayed discussion based on data, the time which was available to clarify and establish the problem solutions became a constraint. When the participants proceeded with the discussions without informed justification, relevant feedback was provided, but sporadically. Because the pattern was identified after the first cycle, the feedback on this characteristic was not carefully considered. Thus, the design was revised for the second cycle to include a summary at the end of each discussion, where the teams were encouraged to provide rationales for their claims. A second characteristic of the problem solving methodology was the lack of internalization of the scenario, which showed that they considered ‘‘you12’’ in the problem scenario, not as themselves but teachers as an object. They interpreted the problems not as they were provided, but expanded them to more general problems. In the case of the ‘‘lab safety’’ team, when they constructed solutions to the problems, they yielded three subjects as the main body of problem solving, namely teacher, school, and the government. This lack of internalization could have occurred because the plot of the scenarios reflects the problems that the prospective teachers as their current selves could not face, but which in-service teachers as their future selves could. However, this characteristic was not found in the other teams, so, for the next cycle a more intensive orientation was planned as the first step of PBL, instead of revising the problems. 12

The subject of the PBL scenarios in our program was ‘‘you’’.

123

H. Rhee, K. Choi

The other type of lack of internalization was shown by the ‘‘open-ended inquiry’’ team, which broadened the topic from the ‘‘open-ended inquiry papers’’, which were presented in the scenario, to the more inclusive performance assessment, or to the more general ‘‘homework’’. Thus the team at the beginning discussed whether assigning homework is valid or not, and they continued the discussions for a while as they considered ‘‘no homework’’ as a solution, comparing the situations of a school assigning no homework in Canada with those of Korean schools. This characteristic could have occurred because the title of the problem scenario was ‘‘taking your homework’’, while the topic dealt with in the problem scenario was ‘‘open-ended inquiry papers’’. Therefore, when the topic was split into two topics for the second cycle, the topic was revised to the ‘‘integrity of openended inquiry papers’’. The ‘‘homework agency businesses’’ and the ‘‘beautiful experiment reports’’ topic was added to deal with the falsification of experimental results. The participants were also asked to present their reasons for broadening their topic in the second cycle. The last category of ‘‘feedback sensitivity’’ was that the facilitator’s feedback strongly influenced the direction of the teams’ problem solving. The feedback was provided both in the face-to-face and on-line environments. The program assistant provided feedback during team discussion by responding to the questions from the participants, and she also commented on the materials and ideas that were posted on the online-board by the participants. Participants responded sensitively to what the facilitator mentioned or commented on, and they tended to adjust their discussions to the facilitator’s ‘‘preference’’ or ‘‘complaint’’ (to their mind) rather than assessing the feedback independently [17], [18], [19]. [17] (…) The teaching assistant preferred the ‘cognition’ aspect more. It’s like we should take ‘cognition’ as the main theme, isn’t it? (…) Can’t we include this in [the solution]? Isn’t it possible [to include] transforming the whole ‘cognition’ [of teachers/of students] [in the solution] as an alternative, maybe? [18] Something came up on the posted comments. (Ah, the teaching assistant?) Yes. ‘‘You mean the complaint? (OO Lee13) It was a definitely a complaint.’’ (…) [19] ‘‘What the assistant is saying is that the whole purpose of the discussion started from whether or not animal experiments should be conducted, so how can we put this, it’s a bit extreme? People are asking why experiments on animals are carried out in the first place, so from their point of view even this…’’ ‘‘[The teaching assistant] is putting emphasis for us to study their situation more’’. ‘‘Then [let’s investigate through voting] the pros and cons’’. ‘‘I’m against it’’. ‘‘I also oppose’’. ‘‘I’m for it’’.

This characteristic seems to be shown because the participants wanted to get a higher grade. The interesting aspect was that the intention of the provided feedback was different from what the participants had interpreted. The ‘‘lab safety’’ team interpreted positive comments relating to source materials, as these materials were the assistant’s preferences, while the intention of the comment was to encourage the identification of more proper materials, and the assistant left similar comments on every message the participants posted.

4 Conclusions and Implications 4.1 Conclusions This study designed and enacted PBL in ST ethics education programs for prospective science teachers, reflecting the ethical issues in ST as if they were occurring in the actual 13

OO Lee: the name of the assistant.

123

Development and Implementation of Science and Technology

classroom settings. Such adaptation of the scenarios helped the prospective teachers to directly relate to the circumstances and utilize their rationale in solving the ethical problems through active discussion. The results derived through implementation of the developed program yielded the following conclusions. Firstly, PBL in a ST ethics education program for the science classroom setting was effective in enhancing prospective science teachers’ perceptions of ST ethics and ST ethics education. Self-reflection on ST ethics during and after the given task helped them to realize the importance not only of ethical issues but also of ethics education in ST. It means that the perception of ST ethics was incorporated into the perception of ST ethics education and it was possible because the ethical issues were presented in the context of science classrooms in the developed problem scenarios. When teachers identify themselves as the agents with the responsibility for the presented ethical issues, they are reminded of the importance of the teaching and learning of ethical issues in ST. Previous research on ST ethics education related to science teachers14 has mainly shed light on teachers’ perceptions of education or their confidence to deliver such an education and focused less on the ethical perceptions of teachers themselves. The integrated perceptions of ethical issues with ethics education can lead teachers to enact authentic ethics education as they become a role model for their students. Second, the integrated perceptions motivated prospective science teachers to develop and implement ST ethics education in their future classrooms. Although research on science teachers related to ST ethics reported that the majority of both prospective and inservice teachers perceived the importance of ST ethics, the relevant education was not actively delivered to the practical education field. It means that their considerations of the importance of ST ethics were superficial and gained without any effort towards justification. Consequently, appreciation of the importance of ST ethics can lead to educational practice only when teachers critically reflect on and justify their prior perceptions and beliefs about ST ethics and education. Third, the change in the prospective teachers’ perception of ethical issues and the needs of the ethics education was greater when the topic deals with controversial ethical issues. Ethical integrity, laboratory waste and safety issues are major ethical topics that needs consensus; therefore the degree of consensus is important. However, the issues such as animal experiments or dissections are topics that have two groups, those who agree and those who disagree. Although it might be difficult to change an opinion from one end to the other, if it occurs, the change is great. Therefore, in order to reinforce ethical reasoning ability, claims and evidence for both sides must be provided sufficiently. 4.2 Implications for Teacher Education Important in Ethics Education The developed program was designed to be used as a teaching material to educate prospective science teachers in ST ethics. The results of this study provide the following implications for teacher education of ST ethics. Firstly, ethics education for prospective teachers can be incorporated in the required science education course. Since few credit hours can be assigned to ST ethics education, it might be more practical if the ethics content can be incorporated in the science education content. Secondly, ideas for formulating the ethics learning content for the secondary education setting would be efficient for in-service teacher training. Various problem scenarios for 14

See for instance Choi (2010), Lee (2008), Lee et al. (2006a), Rhee et al. (2009).

123

H. Rhee, K. Choi

ethical topics need to be developed. The identified five representative ST ethics categories focus on issues in science and engineering rather than covering diverse ST ethics issues. If problem scenarios on the sub-categories of ST ethics are developed, in-service science teachers can select topics of interest for flexible use of the program. Ethics education, more than any other area of education, entails authenticity, and so its effectiveness can be maximized when teachers not only deliver knowledge and ethical principles but also try to reflect on their own ethical awareness. In this sense, ST ethics training for in-service science teachers needs to develop competency in the topics and the perceptions of education as well as to encourage self reflection. Third, it is questionable whether there are long-term effects of ST ethics education. This can be addressed by having other subjects collaborate in teaching ethical issues in many other overlapping areas. Ethics education is not just for science education. Therefore raising students’ ethical sensitivity as social agents may be improved when learning takes places in various subject areas. Ethical issues pose challenges which all literate global citizens have to solve together. This means that other subjects should look into incorporating ethical perspectives as a common theme. These efforts can be realized through collaborations in subject areas such as science education, politics, and sociology. Acknowledgments This work (2010-0027611) was supported by the Mid-career Researcher Program through NRF (National Research Foundation of Korea) Grant funded by the MEST (Ministry of Education, Science and Technology). The authors valued the comments and suggestions of four reviewers and the careful copy-editing work of Dr Robyn Yucel (LaTrobe University, Australia) that considerably improved the text.

Appendix: Descriptions of Problem Scenarios

a

Integrity of writing open-ended inquiry papers: We do your homework!

You are a newly appointed science teacher for 1st year middle school students You are preparing the discussion subject for your students and the type of inquiry before performing ‘openended inquiry’ You worry that there are some students who download information for the directly to the homework assignment and ask to do their homework on the internet sites. An article you once read reminds you the seriousness of the problem A newspaper article inserted: ‘Homework assistance’ business is bursting, ‘‘Click…. Click… Done?’’ You asked an experienced teacher for advice. According to the teacher, this has been an ongoing problem and it is necessary to do a plagiarism check on the web Overall conversation with the experienced teacher is as follows: Students copy and paste internet contents or materials for their inquiry report as if the idea of contents is their own without any sense of guilt Students adjust their experiment outcomes to fit ideal results You think that it cannot be a solution to check hundreds of students’ paper and to deduct grade just because the data is too accurate; and checking all the papers on the web is not a realistic solution It should not be overlooked since the issues on the copyrights as well as on scientific fraud and plagiarism have become societal problems

123

Development and Implementation of Science and Technology

Lab safety and waste disposal: If the monster appears from the Han River? You are a science teacher teaching 3rd year students in OO middle school located in Seoul You inform students of caution about fire and burn, and specific safety directions related to flame reaction before the experiment as usual You make students close the curtains when they say that they cannot identify flame color clearly during the experiment Soon after, you had to make students stop the performance and open the windows to ventilate the lab because of strong smell You completed the class without big problem even though some slight accidents like spark of reagent occurred A student asked you a question when washing Nichrome wires covered with chemical Overall conversation with the student is as follows: The student is worried what if a real monster appears from the Han River like in a film ‘‘Monster’’ because chemicals were threw down the drain You answered that a small amount would not be a big problem but it could be pollution when it adds up After a moment: Take a moment to reflect on yourself and your classroom. You usually let students rinse small amount of chemicals in water even though each container for solid and liquid waste was equipped in the lab The movie poster for Monster was inserted The launch of the Naro rocket: Where is Noro? You are a science teacher teaching 2nd year students in OO middle school A student asks a question when you are summarizing today’s lesson about the effect of solar activity on satellites in the ‘solar system’ unit Overall conversation with a few students is as follows: You differentiate a satellite from a launch vehicle like Naro using difficult terminology when a student asks if the Noro is satellite You say that it would not be helpful even if the wreckage is found, when students argue where the Naro crashed (During discussion other students cleaned their desk with seeming indifference.) You quote the government announcement, ‘‘half of success’’, when students feel sorry for the failure and huge amount of money paid for Russia A student asked what the ‘‘half’’ of success means and the bell rings for the end of the class When you were thinking of the answer, other students reminded you that the class was over so you postponed the discussion till the next class After a moment: You retrospect the classroom discourse. You think that the topic of Naro is related to the current major social issue but not directly linked to the subject matter in science lessons A newspaper figure describing Naro failed to enter the orbit inserted b

Animal dissection: Dissection of living things; what should we do to our children?

You are a science teacher teaching 1st year students in OO middle school You are making the annual plan for the upcoming semester and see ‘observation and dissection of various living things’ as an inquiry activity in the fourth unit, ‘composition of organism and biodiversity’, that is newly added in the reformed curriculum Dissection activity was excluded in the formal curriculum due to reducing subject contents, not to the ethical consideration Recently, the shocking incident related to animal dissection becomes social problem A newspaper article inserted: ‘Now Hamster’ dissection photos uploaded on the elementary student’s blog

123

H. Rhee, K. Choi

An article about cruel teenagers in China who dissected a dog also heated up internet and the seriousness of animal abuse is becoming a problem in our society Social and systemic changes related to animal experiments are occurring worldwide, for instance a new law to protect student’ right refusing animal experiments was enacted in the USA, while not many concerns with the issues made in Korea You are torn: you are in duty to follow the curriculum and must teach dissection, but the lesson involves ethical problems a

The 1st cycle scenario. The scenario for ‘Integrity of writing open-ended inquiry paper’ in the 1st cycle involved in related topics both of inquiry paper and experiments. The scenario for the topic of scientific misconduct in experiment was separated and newly composed in the 2nd cycle

b

The 2nd cycle scenario. The newspaper articles and the event dealt in the scenario was up to date from the 1st cycle scenario which was introduced an article related to frog dissection

References Achilles, C. M., & Hoover, S. P. (1996). Exploring problem-based learning (PBL) in Grades 6-12. ED: 406406. Albanese, M. A., & Mitchell, S. (1993). Problem-based learning: A review of the literature on its outcomes and implementation issues. Academic Medicine, 68(1), 52–81. Bannan-Ritland, B. (2003). The role of design in research: The integrative learning design framework. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 21–24. Barden, L. M., Frase, P. A., & Kovac, J. (1997). Teaching scientific ethics: A case studies approach. The American Biology Teacher, 59(1), 12–14. Barrows, H. S. (1992). The tutorial process. Springfield, IL: Southern Illinois University School of Medicine. Barrows, H. S. (1994). Practice-based learning: Problem-based learning applied to medical education. Springfield, IL: Southern Illinois University School of Medicine. Barrows, H. S., & Myers, A. C. (1993). Problem based learning in secondary schools. Unpublished monograph. Springfield, IL: Problem-Based Learning Institute, Lanphier High School, Southern Illinois University Medical School. Barrows, H. S., & Tamblyn, R. M. (1980). Problem-based learning: An approach to medical education. New York: Springer. Bowman, L. L., & Anthonysamy, A. (2006). Malaysian and American students’ perceptions of research ethics. College Student Journal, 40(1), 11–24. Broom, M. E., Pryor, E., Habermann, B., Pulley, L., & Kincaid, H. (2009). The scientific misconduct questionnaire-revised (SMQ-R): Validation and psychometric testing. Accountability in Research, 12, 263–280. Cho, Y. (2006). Theory and practice of problem-based learning: Instructions beginning with problems. Seoul: Hakjisa. Choi, K. (2010). The perception of pre-service science teachers regarding ethics education related to science and technology. Journal of Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 30(5), 576–593. Choi, K., Chang, H., & Jo, H. (2003). The perceptions of female high school students regarding the social aspects and ethical characteristics of science. Sae-Mulli, 46(1), 10–17. Choi, K., & Jo, H. (2003). Ethical teaching/learning methods of science. Journal of Korean Association for Research in Science education, 23(2), 131–143. Chung, Y., Mun, K., & Kim, S. (2010). Exploration of socioscientific issues (SSI) in the science textbook. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 10(3), 435–456. Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9–13. Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy (COSEPUP), National Academy of Science (NAS), National Academy of Engineering (NAE), & Institute of Medicine (IOM). (2009). On being a scientist: A guide to responsible conduct in research (3rd Edn.). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12192.html. Derting, T. L. (1997). Undergraduate views of academic misconduct in the biological sciences. The American Biology Teacher, 59(3), 147–151.

123

Development and Implementation of Science and Technology Diggs, L. L. (1997). Student attitude toward and achievement in science in problem based learning educational experience. Doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri, Columbia. Friedman, P. J. (1996). An introduction to research ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 2(4), 443–456. Harris, C. E., Pritchard, M. S., & Rabins, M. J. (1995). Engineering ethics: Concepts and cases. Belmount, CA: Wadsworth. Hong, S., Yi, S., Koo, Y., & Cho, E. (2005). A survey of researchers’ opinions in biological sciences for the development of research ethics education program. The Korean Journal of Biological Education, 33(1), 82–94. Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy (IMSA). (2001). What is the relationship between problembased learning and other instructional approaches? Retrieved from http://www.imsa.edu/team/cpbl/ whatis/design/slide34.html. Jeong, E., & Kim, Y. (2000). Development of a value inquiry model in biology education. Journal of Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 20(4), 582–598. Jo, H. (2008). Theory and methods of science ethics education. Gyeonggi: Gypmunsa. Jo, H., & Choi, K. (1998). The necessities and current states of educating ethical characteristics of science. Journal of Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 18(4), 559. Joseph, D. (2004). The practice of design-based research: Uncovering the interplay between design, research, and the rear-world context. Educational Psychologist, 39(4), 235–242. Kang, I., Jung, J., & Jeong, D. (2007). Practical understanding of PBL. Seoul: Moonumsa. Kang, I., & Kim, S. (1998). An instructional design and implementation by PBL : A case study of social studies in an elementary school classroom. Journal of Educational Technology, 14(3), 1–31. Kim, M. (2002). The status and challenges of science ethics in Korea. Scientific Ideas, 43, 252–271. Kovac, J. (1999). Professional ethics in the college and university science curriculum. Science & Education, 8, 309–319. Lee, J. (2008). Perception of the middle and high school teachers regarding the science ethics. Master dissertation, College of Education, Yonsei University, Seoul. Lee, H., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Choi, K. (2006a). Korean science teachers’ perceptions of the introduction of socioscientific issues into the science curriculum. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 6(2), 97–117. Lee, H., Choi, K., & Chang, H. (2006b). Patterns of college students’ moral engagement with socioscientific issues. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 25(6), 646–659. Lee, H., & Jang, S. (2010). Development and application of elementary science education programs for changing students scientific research ethical views. Elementary Science Education, 29(2), 195. Martin, M. W., & Schinzinger, R. (2004). Ethics in engineering (4th edn.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (Eds.) (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. London: Kings College. Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development (MOEHRD). (2007a). Science curriculum (Vol. Supplement 9). Seoul: Daehan Textbook. Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development (MOEHRD). (2007b). Science Curriculum. Seoul, Korea: Author. Norman, G. R., & Schmidt, H. G. (1992). The psychological basis of problem-based learning: A review of the evidence. Academic Medicine, 67(9), 557–565. Norwak, J. A. (2001). The implications and outcomes of using problem-based learning to teach middle school science. Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington. Oh, M. (1999). The effect analysis of problem-based learning (PBL) on the academic achievement and affective characteristics. Dotoral dissertation, Korea University, Seoul. Resnik, D. B. (1998). The ethics of science: An introduction. London, New York: Routledge. Rhee, H., Park, S., Yoo, J., Lee, S., & Jang, J. (2009). Survey and analysis on ethics education in science and technology of science textbook, science teacher and middle school students. Bioethics Policy Studies, 3(2), 233–257. Rotblat, J. (2001). The social conscience of scientist? In S. Parkinson, & V. Spedding (Eds.) An ethical career in science and technology (pp. 2). Folkestone: Scientists for Global Responsibility [SGR]. Russell, W., & Burch, R. (1959). The principles of humane experimental techniques. London: Methuen & Co. Ryu, H., Park, S., Lee, I., Lee, J., Jang, S., & Park, Y. (2007). Curriculum development on the research ethics for the elementary and secondary school level. Seoul: Korean Research Foundation. Savery, J. R., & Duffy, T. M. (1996). Problem based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framwork. In B. G. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design (pp. 135–148). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. Shamoo, A. E., & Resnik, D. B. (2003). Responsible conduct of research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

123

H. Rhee, K. Choi Song, S. (2001). Responsibility of scientists and engineers in the modern industrial society (dialogue on science, religion, and ethics). Seoul: KungRee. Song, S. (2007). Discussions on science ethics in the context of Korean society. Journal of ELSI Studies, 5(1), 1–18. Song, S. (2008). Discussion on the social responsibility of scientists and engineers revisited. Journal of Engineering Education Research, 11(2), 5–14. Torp, L., & Sage, S. (2002). Problems as possibilities: Problem-based learning for K-16 education. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Vernon, D. T. A., & Blake, R. L. (1993). Does problem-based learning work? A meta-analysis of evaluation research. Academic Medicine, 68(7), 550–563. Zeidler, D. N., Osborne, J., Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Monk, M. (2003). The role of argument during discourse about socioscientific issues. In: D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moran reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education (pp. 97–116). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher. Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: a research-based framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education, 89(3), 357–377. Ziman, J. ( 1984). An introduction to science studies: The philosophical and social aspect of science and technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University.

123