Abbott, R. (1965). Abbott’s new card games: Babel, Leopard, auction, variety, metamorphosis, switch, Eleusis, construction, ultima. Frederick Muller Limited.

Adúriz-Bravo, A. (2014). Teaching the nature of science with scientific narratives. Interchange, 45(3–4), 167–184.

Article Google Scholar

Allchin, D., & Zemplén, G. Á. (2020). Finding the place of argumentation in science education: Epistemics and whole science. Science Education, 104(5), 907–933.

Article Google Scholar

Archila, P. A. (2015). Using history and philosophy of science to promote students’ argumentation: A teaching–learning sequence based on the discovery of oxygen. Science & Education, 24(9–10), 1201–1226.

Article Google Scholar

Archila, P. A., Restrepo, S., Truscott de Mejía, A.-M., & Bloch, N. I. (2023). Drama as a powerful tool to enrich socio-scientific argumentation. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 21(5), 1661–1683.

Article Google Scholar

Bacon, F. (2000). The new organon. Cambridge University Press.

Balgopal, M. M., Wallace, A. M., & Dahlberg, S. (2017). Writing from different cultural contexts: How college students frame an environmental SSI through written arguments. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(2), 195–218.

Article Google Scholar

Bathgate, M., Crowell, A., Schunn, C., Cannady, M., & Dorph, R. (2015). The learning benefits of being willing and able to engage in scientific argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 37(10), 1590–1612.

Article Google Scholar

Bialystok, L. (2017). Philosophy across the curriculum and the question of teacher capacity; or, what is philosophy and who can teach it? Journal of Philosophy of Education, 51(4), 817–836.

Article Google Scholar

Binns, I. C., & Bell, R. L. (2015). Representation of scientific methodology in secondary science textbooks. Science & Education, 24, 913–936.

Article Google Scholar

Braund, M., Lubben, F., Scholtz, Z., Sadeck, M., & Hodges, M. (2007). Comparing the effect of scientific and socio-scientific argumentation tasks: Lessons from South Africa. School Science Review, 88(324), 67.

Brown, R. A. J., & Renshaw, P. D. (2000). Collective argumentation: A sociocultural approach to reframing classroom teaching and learning. In H. Cowie, & G. van der Aalsvoort (Eds.), Social interaction in learning and instruction: The meaning of discourse for the construction of knowledge (pp. 52–66). Pergamon/Elsevier Science Inc.

Bryce, T. G., & Day, S. P. (2014). Scepticism and doubt in science and science education: The complexity of global warming as a socio-scientific issue. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 9, 599–632.

Article Google Scholar

Burla, L., Knierim, B., Barth, J., Liewald, K., Duetz, M., & Abel, T. (2008). From text to codings: Intercoder reliability assessment in qualitative content analysis. Nursing Research, 57(2), 113–117.

Article Google Scholar

Butera, F., Caverni, J.-P., & Rossi, S. (2005). Interaction with a high-versus low-competence influence source in inductive reasoning. The Journal of Social Psychology, 145(2), 173–190.

Article Google Scholar

Capkinoglu, E., Yilmaz, S., & Leblebicioglu, G. (2020). Quality of argumentation by seventh-graders in local socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57(6), 827–855.

Article Google Scholar

Çayır, N. A. (2018). Philosophy for children in teacher education: Effects, difficulties, and recommendations. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 11(2), 173–180.

Article Google Scholar

Christenson, N., & Chang Rundgren, S.-N. (2015). A framework for teachers’ assessment of socio-scientific argumentation: An example using the GMO issue. Journal of Biological Education, 49(2), 204–212.

Article Google Scholar

Christenson, N., & Walan, S. (2023). Developing pre-service teachers’ competence in assessing socioscientific argumentation. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 34(1), 1–23.

Article Google Scholar

Christodoulou, A., & Osborne, J. (2014). The science classroom as a site of epistemic talk: A case study of a teacher’s attempts to teach science based on argument. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(10), 1275–1300.

Article Google Scholar

Council, N. R. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. The National Academies Press.

Dalyot, K., Rozenblum, Y., & Baram-Tsabari, A. (2022). Justification of decision-making in response to COVID-19 socio-scientific dilemmas. In The pandemic of argumentation (pp. 247–268). Springer International Publishing Cham.

Davies, M. (2013). Critical thinking and the disciplines reconsidered. Higher Education Research & Development, 32(4), 529–544.

Article Google Scholar

Dawson, V., & Carson, K. (2017). Using climate change scenarios to assess high school students’ argumentation skills. Research in Science & Technological Education, 35(1), 1–16.

Article Google Scholar

Dawson, V., & Carson, K. (2020). Introducing argumentation about climate change socioscientific issues in a disadvantaged school. Research in Science Education, 50, 863–883.

Article Google Scholar

Dawson, V. M., & Venville, G. (2010). Teaching strategies for developing students’ argumentation skills about socioscientific issues in high school genetics. Research in Science Education, 40, 133–148.

Article Google Scholar

Dawson, V., & Venville, G. (2013). Introducing high school biology students to argumentation about socioscientific issues. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 13(4), 356–372.

Article Google Scholar

Dias, G., & P dos Santos, R. (2015). The game of Eleusis: An entertaining simulation of the research heuristic. Acta Scientiae (Ulbra), 17(3).

Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287–312.

Article Google Scholar

Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38(1), 39–72.

Erduran, S., & Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2012). Argumentation in science education research: Perspectives from Europe. In Science education research and practice in Europe (pp. 253–289). Brill.

Erduran, S. (2020). Science education in the era of a pandemic: How can history, philosophy and sociology of science contribute to education for understanding and solving the Covid-19 crisis? In (Vol. 29, pp. 233–235): Springer.

Erduran, S. (2022). Argumentation in chemistry education: Research, policy and practice. Royal Society of Chemistry.

Google Scholar

Erduran, S., Ardac, D., & Yakmaci-Guzel, B. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: Case studies of pre-service secondary science teachers. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 2(2), 1–14.

Article Google Scholar

Erduran, S., & Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2008). Argumentation in science education. Perspectives from classroom-based research. Springer.

Google Scholar

Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin’s argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915–933.

Article Google Scholar

Eryasar, A. S., & Kilinc, A. (2022). The coherence between epistemologies and SSI teaching: A multiple-case study with three science teachers. Science & Education, 31(1), 123–147.

Garcia Romano, L., Occelli, M., & Adúriz-Bravo, A. (2021). School scientific argumentation enriched by digital technologies: Results with pre-and in-service science teachers. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(7).

Gorman, M. E., & Gorman, M. E. (1984). A comparison of disconfirmatory, confirmatory and control strategies on Wason’s 2–4–6 task. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36(4), 629–648.

Article Google Scholar

Gorman, M. E., Gorman, M. E., Latta, R. M., & Cunningham, G. (1984). How disconfirmatory, confirmatory and combined strategies affect group problem solving. British Journal of Psychology, 75(1), 65–79.

Article Google Scholar

Hanna, R. (2020). Popular philosophy,‘populist philosophy,’ mind-manacled philosophy, and real philosophy. Against Professional Philosophy, 8.

Herman, B. C., Clough, M. P., & Rao, A. (2022). Socioscientific Issues thinking and action in the midst of science-in-the-making. Science & Education, 31(5), 1105–1139.

Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Erduran, S. (2007). Argumentation in science education: An overview. In Erduran, S., & Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (Eds.), Argumentation in Science Education. Science & Technology Education Library, vol 35. Springer, Dordrecht.

Karisan, D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2017). Contextualization of nature of science within the socioscientific issues framework: A review of research. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 5(2), 139–152.

Google Scholar

Ke, L., Sadler, T. D., Zangori, L., & Friedrichsen, P. J. (2021). Developing and using multiple models to promote scientific literacy in the context of socio-scientific issues. Science & Education, 30(3), 589–607.

Article Google Scholar

Khishfe, R. (2022). Nature of science and argumentation instruction in socioscientific and scientific contexts. International Journal of Science Education, 44(4), 647–673.

Article Google Scholar

Kolstø, S. D., Paulsen, V. H. P., & Mestad, I. (2024). Critical thinking in the making: Students’ critical thinking practices in a multifaceted SSI project. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 19(4), 499–530.

Article Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. (2012). Objectivity, value judgment, and theory choice. In Arguing about science (pp. 74–86). Routledge.

Kuhn, D., & Crowell, A. (2011). Dialogic argumentation as a vehicle for developing young adolescents’ thinking. Psychological Science, 22(4), 545–552.

Article Google Scholar

Kuhn, D., & Moore, W. (2015). Argumentation as core curriculum. Learning: Research and practice, 1(1), 66–78.

Google Scholar

Kuhn, D., & Udell, W. (2003). The development of argument skills. Child Development, 74(5), 1245–1260.

Article Google Scholar

Lagaron, D. M. C. (2014). Preparing pre-service science teachers to teach socio-scientific (SSI) argumentation. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 69, 39–48.

Google Scholar

Lam, C. M. (2007). Is Popper’s falsificationist heuristic a helpful resource for developing critical thinking? Educational Philosophy and Theory, 39(4), 432–448.

Article Google Scholar

Lazarou, D. (2009, August). Learning to TAP: An effort to scaffold students’ argumentation in science. In ESERA 2009 Conference Proceedings (pp. 43–50).

Lazarou, D., Erduran, S., & Sutherland, R. (2017). Argumentation in science education as an evolving concept: Following the object of activity. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 14, 51–66.

Article Google Scholar

Lazarou, D., Sutherland, R., & Erduran, S. (2016). Argumentation in science education as a systemic activity: An activity-theoretical perspective. International Journal of Educational Research, 79, 150–166.

Article Google Scholar

Lin, S.-S. (2014). Science and non-science undergraduate students’critical thinking and argumentation performance in reading a science news report. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12, 1023–1046.

Article Google Scholar

Lipman, M. (1976). Philosophy for children. Metaphilosophy, 7(1), 17–39.

Article Google Scholar

Liu, S., & Roehrig, G. (2019). Exploring science teachers’ argumentation and personal epistemology about global climate change. Research in Science Education, 49, 173–189.

Article Google Scholar

Liu, W., Li, X., & Li, G. (2023). The contributions of philosophy of science in science education research: A literature review. Science & Education, 1–20.

Magolda, P. M., & Magolda, M. B. B. (2023). Contested issues in student affairs: Diverse perspectives and respectful dialogue. Taylor & Francis.

Martín-Páez, T., Aguilera, D., Perales-Palacios, F. J., & Vílchez-González, J. M. (2019). What are we talking about when we talk about STEM education? A Review of Literature. Science Education, 103(4), 799–822.

Google Scholar

Matthews, M. R. (1992). Constructivism and empiricism: An incomplete divorce. Research in Science Education, 22, 299–307.

Article Google Scholar

Matthews, M. R. (2014). Science teaching: The contribution of history and philosophy of science. Routledge.

Book Google Scholar

Matthews, M. R. (2024). Thomas Kuhn and science education: Learning from the past and the importance of history and philosophy of science. Science & Education, 33(3), 609–678.

Article Google Scholar

McDonald, C. V. (2010). The influence of explicit nature of science and argumentation instruction on preservice primary teachers’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(9), 1137–1164.

Article Google Scholar

McKeon, R. (2009). The basic works of Aristotle. Modern Library.

Merryfield, M. (2012). Four strategies for teaching open-mindedness. Social Studies and the Young Learner, 25(2), 18–22.

Google Scholar

Mork, S. M. (2005). Argumentation in science lessons: Focusing on the teacher’s role. Nordic Studies in Science Education, 1(1), 17–30.

Article Google Scholar

Murris, K. (2016). The posthuman child: Educational transformation through philosophy with picturebooks. Routledge.

Book Google Scholar

Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175–220.

Article Google Scholar

Nussbaum, E. M. (2008). Collaborative discourse, argumentation, and learning: Preface and literature review. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(3), 345–359.

Article Google Scholar

Nussbaum, E. M. (2012). Argumentation and student-centered learning environments. Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments, 2, 114–141.

Google Scholar

Nussbaum, E. M. (2021). Critical integrative argumentation: Toward complexity in students’ thinking. Educational Psychologist, 56(1), 1–17.

Article Google Scholar

O’Keefe, D. J. (1999). How to handle opposing arguments in persuasive messages: A meta-analytic review of the effects of one-sided and two-sided messages. Annals of the International Communication Association, 22(1), 209–249.

Article Google Scholar

Ortiz, C. M. A. (2007). Does philosophy improve critical thinking skills? University of Melbourne.

Google Scholar

Osborne, J. (2000). Science for citizenship. Good Practice in Science Teaching: What Research Has to Say, 2, 46–67.

Google Scholar

Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994–1020.

Article Google Scholar

Osborne, J., Simon, S., Christodoulou, A., Howell-Richardson, C., & Richardson, K. (2013). Learning to argue: A study of four schools and their attempt to develop the use of argumentation as a common instructional practice and its impact on students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(3), 315–347.

Article Google Scholar

Owens, D. C., Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2017). Controversial issues in the science classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 99(4), 45–49.

Article Google Scholar

Pontecorvo, C., & Girardet, H. (1993). Arguing and reasoning in understanding historical topics. Cognition and Instruction, 11(3–4), 365–395.

Article Google Scholar

Popper, K. (1945). The poverty of historicism. III. Economica, 12(46), 69–89.

Article Google Scholar

Popper, K. R. (1963). Science as falsification. Conjectures and Refutations, 1(1963), 33–39.

Google Scholar

Popper, K. R. (1975). The open society and its enemies: Hegel & Marx. Royal National Institute for the Blind.

Google Scholar

Popper, K. R. (1994). The myth of the framework: In defence of science and rationality. Psychology Press.

Google Scholar

Popper, K. (2005). The logic of scientific discovery. Routledge.

Book Google Scholar

Popper, K. R. (2020). The open society and its enemies (Vol. 119). Princeton University Press.

Puig, B., & Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2011). Different music to the same score: Teaching about genes, environment, and human performances. In Socio-scientific issues in the classroom: Teaching, learning and research (pp. 201–238). Springer.

Reichenbach, H. (1938). Experience and prediction. An analysis of the foundations and the structure of knowledge. Journal of Philosophy, 35(10).

Reimers, F. M. (2020). Educating students to improve the world. Springer Nature.

Book Google Scholar

Reiss, J., & Sprenger, J. (2013). Scientific objectivity. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Reiss, M. J. (2008). Should science educators deal with the science/religion issue? Studies in Science Education, 44(2), 157–186.

Article Google Scholar

Reiss, M. J. (2020). Science education in the light of COVID-19: The contribution of history, philosophy and sociology of science. Science & Education, 29(4), 1079–1092.

Article Google Scholar

Ribeiro, H. J. (2021). Karl Popper and contemporary argumentation theory: The case of pragma-dialectics. Revista Filosófica De Coimbra, 30(59), 71–98.

Article Google Scholar

Sadler, T. D. (2009). Situated learning in science education: Socio-scientific issues as contexts for practice. Studies in Science Education, 45(1), 1–42.

Article Google Scholar

Sadler, T. D., & Dawson, V. (2011). Socio-scientific issues in science education: Contexts for the promotion of key learning outcomes. Second international handbook of science education, 799–809.

Sadler, T. D., & Donnelly, L. A. (2006). Socioscientific argumentation: The effects of content knowledge and morality. International Journal of Science Education, 28(12), 1463–1488.

Article Google Scholar

Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). The morality of socioscientific issues: Construal and resolution of genetic engineering dilemmas. Science Education, 88(1), 4–27.

Article Google Scholar

Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). The significance of content knowledge for informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: Applying genetics knowledge to genetic engineering issues. Science Education, 89(1), 71–93.

Article Google Scholar

Sadler, T. D., Barab, S. A., & Scott, B. (2007). What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry? Research in Science Education, 37, 371–391.

Article Google Scholar

Sampson, V. D., & Clark, D. B. (2006, June). Assessment of argument in science education: a critical review of the literature. In Proceedings of the 7th international conference on Learning sciences (pp. 655–661).

Schickore, J. (2011). More thoughts on HPS: Another 20 years later. Perspectives on Science, 19(4), 453–481.

Article Google Scholar

Scipione, L. (2020). philosophy (and argumentation) for children: Some reflection for primary school. Childhood & Philosophy, 16, 1–25.

Shi, X. (2021). Using explicit teaching of philosophy to promote understanding of the nature of science: a case study from a Chinese high school. Science & Education, 30(2), 409–440.

Shi, X. (2023). The value of the philosophy of science in senior high school science education from the perspective of the nature of science. Science & Education, 32(5), 1613–1636.

Shi, X. (2024). Improving argumentation by teaching philosophy of science with critical questions in Chinese senior high school. International Journal of Science Education, 46(16), 1690–1712.

Sjøberg, S., & Jenkins, E. (2022). PISA: A political project and a research agenda. Studies in Science Education, 58(1), 1–14.

Article Google Scholar

Solar, H., Ortiz, A., Deulofeu, J., & Ulloa, R. (2021). Teacher support for argumentation and the incorporation of contingencies in mathematics classrooms. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 52(7), 977–1005.

Article Google Scholar

Teixeira, E. S., Greca, I. M., & Freire, O. (2012). The history and philosophy of science in physics teaching: A research synthesis of didactic interventions. Science & Education, 21, 771–796.

Article Google Scholar

Tsai, C.-Y. (2018). The effect of online argumentation of socio-scientific issues on students’ scientific competencies and sustainability attitudes. Computers & Education, 116, 14–27.

Article Google Scholar

Tyrrell, D., & Calinger, M. (2020, June). Breaking the COVID-19 Ice: Integrating socioscientific issues into problem-based learning lessons in middle school. In EdMedia+ Innovate Learning (pp. 120–125). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

Untereiner, B. (2013). Teaching and learning the elements of argumentation. University of Victoria (Canada).

Van Gelder, T., Bissett, M., & Cumming, G. (2004). Cultivating expertise in informal reasoning. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/revue Canadienne De Psychologie Expérimentale, 58(2), 142.

Article Google Scholar

Von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Case studies of how students’ argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 101–131.

Article Google Scholar

Walton, D. (2007). Media argumentation: Dialectic, persuasion and rhetoric. Cambridge University Press.

Book Google Scholar

Wang, H. A., & Sshmidt, W. H. (2001). History, philosophy and sociology of science in science education: Results from the third international mathematics and science study. Science & Education, 10, 51–70.

Article Google Scholar

Wang, J., & Buck, G. (2015). The relationship between Chinese students’ subject matter knowledge and argumentation pedagogy. International Journal of Science Education, 37(2), 340–366.

Article Google Scholar

Watt, M. G. (2011). The Common Core State Standards Initiative: An overview. Online submission.

Wong, S. L., & Hodson, D. (2009). From the horse’s mouth: What scientists say about scientific investigation and scientific knowledge. Science Education, 93(1), 109–130.

Article Google Scholar

Yacoubian, H. A. (2018). Scientific literacy for democratic decision-making. International Journal of Science Education, 40(3), 308–327.

Article Google Scholar

Yao, J.-X., & Guo, Y.-Y. (2018). Core competences and scientific literacy: The recent reform of the school science curriculum in China. International Journal of Science Education, 40(15), 1913–1933.

Article Google Scholar

Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2008). The role of moral reasoning in argumentation: Conscience, character, and care. In Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 201–216). Springer.

Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Applebaum, S., & Callahan, B. E. (2009). Advancing reflective judgment through socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 74–101.

Article Google Scholar

Zhang, J., & Browne, W. J. (2023). Exploring Chinese high school students’ performance and perceptions of scientific argumentation by understanding it as a three-component progression of competencies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 60(4), 847–884.

Article Google Scholar

Zohar, A. (2007). Science teacher education and professional development in argumentation. In Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 245–268). Springer.

Zohar, A., Degani, A., & Vaaknin, E. (2001). Teachers’ beliefs about low-achieving students and higher order thinking. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(4), 469–485.

Article Google Scholar

Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35–62.

Article Google Scholar