Socio-scientific reasoning (SSR) is key to helping students take informed positions around socio-scientific issues (SSI). SSR comprises four competencies: recognising complexity of SSI’s, multiple perspectives around SSI’s, the need for ongoing inquiry around SSI’s, and skepticism around different parties’ claims made about SSI’s. The Quantitative Assessment of SSR (QuASSR) provides a promising measurement framework, but there are still important questions around the ability of this instrument to measure transfer across different scenarios and change in SSR over an intervention. Further, prior work suggests that the four competencies may constitute a progression. We explored the ability of the QuASSR to measure transfer of SSR across three different SSI’s using 2-faceted and multi-faceted Rasch models. We used path analysis to test the hypothesis that competencies associated with SSR formed a progression. We found transfer or neartransfer of SSR across the three scenarios, and that the competencies comprise a unidimensional hierarchy. Perspective-taking is a necessary bridge between students’ understanding of complexity and the higher-level competencies of inquiry and skepticism. Inquiry and skepticism were found to be conditionally independent upon accounting for perspective-taking, supporting the idea that seeing multiple perspectives around SSI’s is central to development of the other SSR competencies.

In STEM learning focused on science literacy, socioscientific issues instruction is often proposed as a way to bolster students’ civic engagement, however few studies in science education have explicitly examined this connection. We define civic engagement as the work of influencing legitimately public matters using means within the existing political structure. In this work we investigate students’ feelings of self-efficacy for this type of civic engagement in the context of four socioscientific issues (prairie dog conservation, food insecurity, biofuels and water conservation). This study was in the context of a large enrollment introductory science college course, where students used a structured decision-making process to examine alternative policy solutions to complex socioscientific issues. We qualitatively examined students’ response about their perception of the importance of the issue, their self-efficacy in exploring actions they could take to impact the issue, and the effectiveness of those actions. We found that students’ ideas about impact and effectiveness varied across the four different issues contexts due to students’ sense of the issues’ importance and scale. Generally, students’ ideas about actions they could take to impact the issue were narrow and rarely included political actions like voting. We also found post instruction increases in students’ civic engagement attitudes and skills related to social justice, interpersonal and problem-solving skills and political awareness. Finally, we suggest that socioscientific instruction must have an explicit connection to policy-level decisions and reveal how individual actions can influence the societal system. Our course using a structured decision-making process in the context of socioscientific issues is one model to help students make these connections.

A mixed methods study was used to transcend the traditional pre-, post-test approach of citizen science evaluative research by integrating adults’ test scores with their perceptions. We assessed how contributory entomology citizen science affects participants’ science self-efficacy, self-efficacy for environmental action, nature relatedness and attitude towards insects. Pre- and post-test score analyses from citizen scientists (n = 28) and a control group (n = 72) were coupled with interviews (n = 11) about science experiences and entomological interactions during participation. Considering quantitative data alone, no statistically significant changes were evident in adults following participation in citizen science when compared to the control group. Citizen scientists’ pre-test scores were significantly higher than the control group for self-efficacy for environmental action, nature relatedness and attitude towards insects. Interview data reveal a notable discrepancy between measured and perceived changes. In general, citizen scientists had an existing, long-term affinity for the natural world and perceived increases in their science self-efficacy, self-efficacy for environmental action, nature relatedness and attitude towards insects. Perceived influences may act independently of test scores. Scale instruments may not show impacts with variances in individual’s prior knowledge and experiences. The value of mixed methods on citizen science program evaluation is discussed.

Socioscientific issues (SSI) are often used to facilitate students’ engagement in multiple scientific practices such as decision-making and argumentation, both of which are goals of STEM literacy, science literacy, and integrated STEM education. Literature often emphasizes scientific argumentation over socioscientific argumentation, which involves considering social factors in addition to scientific frameworks. Analyzing students’ socioscientific arguments may reveal how students construct such arguments and evaluate pedagogical tools supporting these skills. In this study, we examined students’ socioscientific arguments regarding three SSI on pre- and post-assessments in the context of a course emphasizing SSI-based structured decision-making. We employed critical integrative argumentation (CIA) as a theoretical and analytical framework, which integrates arguments and counterarguments with stronger arguments characterized by identifying and refuting counterarguments. We hypothesized that engaging in structured decision-making, in which students integrate multidisciplinary perspectives and consider tradeoffs of various solutions based upon valued criteria, may facilitate students’ development of integrated socioscientific arguments. Findings suggest that students’ arguments vary among SSI contexts and may relate to students’ identities and perspectives regarding the SSI. We conclude that engaging in structured decision-making regarding personally relevant SSI may foster more integrated argumentation skills, which are critical to engaging in information-laden democratic societies.

Acid deposition and repeated biomass harvest have decreased soil calcium (Ca) availability in many temperate forests worldwide, yet existing methods for assessing available soil Ca do not fully characterize soil Ca forms. To account for discrepancies in ecosystem Ca budgets, it has been hypothesized that the highly insoluble biomineral Ca oxalate might represent an additional soil Ca pool that is not detected in standard measures of soil-exchangeable Ca. We asked whether several standard method extractants for soil-exchangeable Ca could also access Ca held in Ca oxalate crystals using spike recovery tests in both pure solutions and soil extractions. In solutions of the extractants ammonium chloride, ammonium acetate, and barium chloride, we observed 2% to 104% dissolution of Ca oxalate crystals, with dissolution increasing with both solution molarity and ionic potential of cation extractant. In spike recovery tests using a low-Ca soil, we estimate that 1 M ammonium acetate extraction dissolved sufficient Ca oxalate to contribute an additional 52% to standard measurements of soil-exchangeable Ca. However, in a high-Ca soil, the amount of Ca oxalate spike that would dissolve in 1 M ammonium acetate extraction was difficult to detect against the large pool of exchangeable Ca. We conclude that Ca oxalate can contribute substantially to standard estimates of soil-exchangeable Ca in acid forest soils with low soil-exchangeable Ca. Consequently, measures of exchangeable Ca are unlikely to fully resolve discrepancies in ecosystem Ca mass balance unless the contribution of Ca oxalate to exchangeable Ca is also assessed.

This study provides a deeper understanding of the model of teaching assistant (TA) self-efficacy by connecting self-efficacy to teaching approach and suggesting that high self-efficacy TAs show a greater concern for impacting student learning (outward focus) than for their own tasks (inward focus).