International Association of Educators   |  ISSN: 2834-7919   |  e-ISSN: 1554-5210

Original article | International Journal of Progressive Education 2023, Vol. 19(3) 160-177

Preservice Science Teachers’ Opinions and Argument Quality regarding COVID-19 Vaccines

Feride Ercan Yalman

pp. 160 - 177   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2023.546.10   |  Manu. Number: MANU-2202-22-0003.R1

Published online: June 01, 2023  |   Number of Views: 68  |  Number of Download: 152


Abstract

This study aims to identify preservice science teachers’ opinions and argument quality regarding the COVID-19 vaccines. The research was conducted with 18 4th year preservice science teachers studying at the Department of Science Education. The study was conducted with phenomenological design and the data were obtained using focus group interview and dilemma cards. The data obtained from the focus group interview were analyzed with content analysis. The argument components in the dilemma cards were analyzed using the “Argumentation Model Rating Scale” developed by Hiğde and Aktamış (2017). The findings obtained from the focus group interview showed that the majority of preservice science teachers were undecided about vaccination. The minority of the participants who expressed positive views on COVID-19 vaccines mentioned the health, social and scientific aspects of the vaccine (protection, reducing the rate of disease, facilitating the fight against epidemic, contributing to the advancement of science, etc.). On the other hand, it was underlined by the presevice science teachers that the COVID-19 vaccines still contained uncertainties (side effects, lack of protection on its own, lack of confidence, etc.) and created feelings of unease due to the new technological products. The results obtained from the dilemma cards demonstrated that the preservice science teachers were able to present their opinions (claims) and evidence successfully and were partially successful in supporting them. However, it was concluded that the preservice science teachers could not achieve the same level of success in the rebuttal part while presenting their arguments.

Keywords: COVID-19 Vaccine, Socio-scientific Issues, Preservice Science Teacher, Argument Quality


How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Yalman, F.E. (2023). Preservice Science Teachers’ Opinions and Argument Quality regarding COVID-19 Vaccines . International Journal of Progressive Education, 19(3), 160-177. doi: 10.29329/ijpe.2023.546.10

Harvard
Yalman, F. (2023). Preservice Science Teachers’ Opinions and Argument Quality regarding COVID-19 Vaccines . International Journal of Progressive Education, 19(3), pp. 160-177.

Chicago 16th edition
Yalman, Feride Ercan (2023). "Preservice Science Teachers’ Opinions and Argument Quality regarding COVID-19 Vaccines ". International Journal of Progressive Education 19 (3):160-177. doi:10.29329/ijpe.2023.546.10.

References
  1. Aktamış, H., & Hiğde, E. (2015). Assessment of argumentation models used in science education. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Education Faculty, 35, 136-172. [Google Scholar]
  2. Anisa, A., Widodo, A., Riandi, R., & Muslim, M. (2019). The use of scientific writing heuristics (SWH) to build rebuttal abilities in scientific argumentation. Scientiae Educatia: Jurnal Pendidikan Sains, 8(2), 180-195. [Google Scholar]
  3. Atabey, N. (2021). Science teachers’ argument types and supporting reasons on socioscientific issues: COVID-19. International Journal of Psychology and Educational Studies, 8(2), 214-231. [Google Scholar]
  4. Campo-Arias A., & Pedrozo-Pupo J. C. (2021). COVID-19 vaccine distrust in Colombian University students: Frequency and associated variables. MedRxiv, 1- 15. https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.07.21253080 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  5. Cenk, A. G. (2020). Fen bilimleri öğretmen adaylarının sosyobilimsel konularda argümantasyon becerilerinin incelenmesi: Konu bağlamının etkisi [The examination of pre-service science teacher’s argumentation skills in socio-scientific subjects: The influence of the context]. Master's thesis. Mersin University. Mersin, Turkey. [Google Scholar]
  6. Chen, Y. C., Benus, M. J., & Hernandez, J. (2019). Managing uncertainty in scientific argumentation. Science Education, 103(5), 1235-1276. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21527. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  7. Chen, S., & Bonanno G. A. (2020). Psychological adjustment during the global outbreak of COVID-19: A resilience perspective. Psychological trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy,12(1), 51-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/tra0000685 [Google Scholar]
  8. Cömert, I., & Şahin Çakır, Ç. (2021). COVID-19 ile ilgili öğretmen algılarını belirlemeye yönelik bir olgu bilim çalışması [A Phenomenological study to determine teacher perceptions regarding the COVID-19]. Academia Journal Education Research, 6(2), 382-405. [Google Scholar]
  9. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications. [Google Scholar]
  10. Çakın, M., & Akyavuz Külekçi, E. (2020). COVID-19 süreci ve eğitime yansıması: öğretmen görüşlerinin incelenmesi [The COVID-19 process and its reflection on education: An analysis on teachers’ opinions]. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research, 6(2), 165-186. https://doi.org/10.24289/ijsser.747901 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  11. Dalyot, K., Rozenblum, Y., & Baram Tsabari, A. (2022). Justification of decision-making in response to COVID-19 socio-scientific dilemmas. S. Oswald, M. Lewiński, S. Greco, & S. Villata (Eds.), In The Pandemic of Argumentation (p.245-268). Springer Publisher. [Google Scholar]
  12. Daniel, J. (2020). Education and the COVID-19 pandemic. Prospects, 49(1), 91-96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09464-3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  13. Dawson, V., & Carson, K. (2020). Introducing argumentation about climate change socioscientific issues in a disadvantaged school. Research in Science Education, 50, 863-883. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11165-018-9715-x [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  14. Değirmenci, A., & Doğru, M. (2017). Türkiye’de sosyobilimsel konularla ilgili yapılan çalışmaların incelenmesi: Bir betimsel analiz çalışması [Analysis of research on socio-scientific issues made in Turkey: A descriptive analysis study]. The Journal of Buca of Faculty of Education, 44, 123-138. [Google Scholar]
  15. Demircioğlu, T., & Uçar S. (2014). Akkuyu nükleer santrali konusunda üretilen yazılı argümanların incelenmesi [Investigation of written arguments about Akkuyu nuclear power plant]. Elementary Education Online, 13(4), 1373-1386. [Google Scholar]
  16. Ding, Y., Du, X., Li, Q., Zhang, M., Zhang, Q., Tan, X., et al. (2020). Risk perception of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and its related factors among college students in China during quarantine. PLoS One, 15(8): e0237626. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237626 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  17. Douglas, K. M. (2021). COVID-19 conspiracy theories. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 24(2), 270-275. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430220982068 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  18. Edwards, B., Biddle, N., Gray, M., & Sollis, K. (2021). COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and resistance: Correlates in a nationally representative longitudinal survey of the Australian population. PloS One 16(3): e0248892. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0248892 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  19. Erduran, S. (2020). Science education in the era of pandemic. Science & Education, 29, 233-235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00122-w. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  20. Erkekoğlu, P., Erdemli Köse, S. B., Balcı, A., & Yirün, A. (2020). Aşı kararsızlığı ve COVID-19’un etkileri [Vaccine hesitancy and effects of COVID-19]. Journal of Literature Pharmacy Sciences, 9(2), 208-220. https://doi.org/10.5336/pharmsci.2020-76102 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  21. Evagorou, M., & Osborne, J. (2013). Exploring young students’ collaborative argumentation within a socioscientific issue. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(2), 209-237. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21076 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  22. Evren Yapıcıoğlu, A. (2020). Fen eğitiminde sosyobilimsel bir konu olarak COVID 19 pandemisi ve örnek uygulama önerileri [COVID 19 pandemic as a socioscientific issue in science education and suggestions for sample applications]. The Journal of National Education, 49(1), 1121-1141. https://doi.org/10.37669/milliegitim.787170 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  23. Gök, G., & Güzel Baydoğan, Ü. (2022). COVID-19 aşısı olma durumu ve COVID-19'dan korunmanın sağlık inanç modeli bağlamında değerlendirilmesi [Evaluation of COVID-19 Vaccination and Protection from COVID-19 in the Context of Health Belief Model]. IBAD Journal of Social Sciences, 12, 231-248. [Google Scholar]
  24. Görgülü Arı, A., & Arslan, K. (2020). Ortaokul öğrencilerinin COVID-19’a yönelik metaforik algıları [COVID-19 perception in middle school student' mind]. Electronic Turkish Studies, 15(6), 503-524. [Google Scholar]
  25. Görgülü Arı, A., & Hayır Kanat, M. (2020). Prospective teacher' views on COVID-19 (Coronavirus). Van Yüzüncü Yıl University the Journal of Social Sciences Institute, Outbreak Diseases Special Issue, 459-492. [Google Scholar]
  26. Gülhan, F. (2012). Sosyobilimsel konularda bilimsel tartışmanın 8. sınıf öğrencilerinin fen okuryazarlığı, bilimsel tartışmaya eğilim, karar verme becerileri ve bilim-toplum sorunlarına duyarlılıklarına etkisinin araştırılması [The investigation about the effect of argumentation on socio-scientific issues in scientific literacy for eighth grade students, tendency in the argumentation, decision making skills and science-social problems of sensitivity]. Master's thesis. Marmara University. Istanbul, Turkey [Google Scholar]
  27. Handebo, S., Wolde, M., Shitu, K., & Kassie, A. (2021) Determinant of intention to receive COVID-19 vaccine among school teachers in Gondar City, Northwest Ethiopia. PLoS ONE 16(6): e0253499. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253499 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  28. Herman, B. C. (2015). The influence of global warming science views and sociocultural factors on willingness to mitigate global warming. Science Education, 99, 1-38. [Google Scholar]
  29. Hiğde, E., & Aktamış, H. (2017). Examination of pre-service science teachers’ argumentation based science lessons: case study. Elementary Education Online, 16(1), 89-113. [Google Scholar]
  30. Höttecke, D., & Allchin, D. (2020). Reconceptualizing nature-of-science education in the age of social media. Science Education, 104, 641–666. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21575 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  31. Kampourakis, K., & McCain, K. (2019). Uncertainty: How it makes science advance. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  32. Ke, L., Sadler, T. D., Zangori, L., & Friedrichsen, P. J. (2021). Developing and using multiple models to promote scientifc literacy in the context of socio scientifc issues. Science & Education, 30, 589-607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00206-1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  33. Khishfe, R. (2012). Relationship between nature of science understandings and argumentation skills: A role for counterargument and contextual factors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(4), 489–514. [Google Scholar]
  34. Kim, M., Anthony, R., & Blades, D. (2014). Decision making through dialogue: A case study of analyzing pre-service teachers’ argumentation on socio-scientific issues. Research in Science Education,44, 903-926. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-0149407-0 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  35. Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2000). Focus groups. A practical guide for applied research. Sage Publications [Google Scholar]
  36. Kuhn, D., & Udell, W. (2007). Coordinating own and other perspectives in argument. Thinking and Reasoning, 13(2), 90-104. [Google Scholar]
  37. Lazarus, J. V., Ratzan, S. C., Palayew, A., Gostin, L. O., Larson, H. J., Rabin, K., Kimball, S., & El Mohandes, A.A. (2021). Global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine. Nature Medicine, 27(2), 225-228. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-1124 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  38. Lee, Y. C. (2007). Developing decision-making skills for socio-scientific issues. Journal of Biological Education, 41(4), 170-177 [Google Scholar]
  39. Loomba, S., De Figueiredo, A., Piatek, S. J., De Graaf, K., & Larson, H. J. (2021). Measuring the impact of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on vaccination intent in the UK and USA. Nature Human Behaviour, 5, 337-348. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01056-1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  40. Maia, P., Justi, R., & Santos, M. (2021). Aspects about science in the context of production and communication of knowledge of COVID-19. Science & Education, 594 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00229-8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  41. Megget, K. (2020). Even COVID-19 can’t kill the anti-vaccination movement. BMJ, 369. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m2184. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  42. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage Publications.   [Google Scholar]
  43. Ministry of Health (2022). COVID-19 Vaccine platform: Information about the vaccine. https://covid19asi.saglik.gov.tr/  [Google Scholar]
  44. Ministry of National Education [MoNE] (2018). Science education program (primary and middle school 5, 6, 7, 8. Grade.  [Google Scholar]
  45. Oliveira, A. W., Akerson, V. L., & Oldfield, M. (2012). Environmental argumentation as socio-cultural activity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(7), 869-897. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21020 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  46. Pulido, C. M., Villarejo-Carballido, B., Redondo-Sama, G., & Gomez, A. (2020). COVID-19 infodemic: More retweets for sciencebased information on coronavirus than for false information. International Sociology, 35(4), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580920914755  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  47. Rosawati, E. E., & Rahayu, S. (2020). Turning crisis into opportunity: Indonesian chemistry teachers’ perceptions of socio-scientific issues in COVID-19. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 541, 211-223 [Google Scholar]
  48. Sadler, T. D., Friedrichsen, P., Zangori, L., & Ke, L. (2020). Technology-supported professional development for collaborative design of COVID-19 instructional materials. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 28(2), 171-177. [Google Scholar]
  49. Saied S. M., Saied E. M., Kabbash I. A., & Abdo, S. (2021). Vaccine hesitancy: Beliefs and barriers associated with COVID-19 Vaccination among Egyptian medical students. Journal Medical Virol, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  50. Salali, G. D., & Uysal M. S. (2020). COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is associated with beliefs on the origin of the novel coronavirus in the United Kingdom and Turkey. Psychological Medicine 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0033291720004067 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  51. Sallam, M., Al-Sanafi, M., & Sallam, M. (2022). A global map of COVID-19 Vaccine acceptance rates per country: An updated concise narrative review. Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 15, 21-45. https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S347669 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  52. Salman, M., Akcaoğlu, M. Ö., & Ergün, M. (2021). The COVID-19 Pandemic: Teacher candidates’ views regarding the virus and vaccination process. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 16(3), 150-166. https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2020.373.9 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  53. Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2011). A comparison of the collaborative scientific argumentation practices of two high and two low performing groups. Research in Science Education, 41, 63-97. [Google Scholar]
  54. Sarıbaş, D., & Çetinkaya, E. (2021). Pre-service teachers’ analysis of claims about COVID-19 in an online course. Science & Education, 30, 235-266, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00181-z [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  55. Seyhan, A. (2021). Sosyal bilgiler öğretmen adaylarının covid-19 salgını sürecinde uzaktan eğitim deneyimleri ve görüşleri [Distance education experiences and opinions of prospective social studies teacher during the covid-19 epidemic]. Açıköğretim Uygulamaları ve Araştırmaları Dergisi (AUAd), 7(3), 65-93. https://doi.org/10.51948/auad.910385 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  56. Topçu, M. S. (2008). Preservice science teachers’ informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues and the factors influencing their informal reasoning. Doctorate Dissertation, Middle East Tecnical University, Ankara, Turkey. [Google Scholar]
  57. Topsakal, T., & Ferik, F. (2021). Haber sitelerinin COVID-19 aşılarına yönelik yaklaşımı ve haber içeriklerinin değerlendirilmesi [Approaches of news sites to COVID-19 vaccines and evaluation of news content]. Journal of Akdeniz University's Faculty of Communication, 0(35), 370-386. https://doi.org /10.31123/akil.886679 [Google Scholar]
  58. Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  59. Türköz, G., & Öztürk, N. (2020). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının bazı sosyobilimsel konularla ilgili kararlarının çok boyutlu bakış açısı ile incelenmesi [Examination of pre-service science teachers’ decisions about some socioscientific issues with a multidimensional point of view]. Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education, 9(1), 175-197. http://dx.doi.org/10.30703/cije.550533 [Google Scholar]
  60. World Health Organization (2020). Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) advice for the public: myth busters. https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public/myth-busters. Accessed 19 June 2021 [Google Scholar]
  61. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2016). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods]. Seçkin Publishing.  [Google Scholar]
  62. Yılmaz, H. İ., Turgut, B., Çıtlak, G., Mert, O., Paralı, B., Engin, M., Aktaş, A. & Alimoğlu, O. (2021). Türkiye’de insanların COVID-19 aşısına bakışı [People's view of COVID-19 vaccine in Turkey]. Dicle Medical Journal, 48(3),583-594. https://doi.org/10.5798/dicletip.988080 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  63. Zhao, G., Zhao, R., Li, X., Duan, Y., & Long, T. (2021). Are pre-service science teachers (PSTs) prepared for teaching argumentation? Evidence from a university teacher preparation program in China. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1-20, https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2021.1872518 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]