**2. Socioscientific controversies in science teaching**

within schools and in other spheres of society. Social debate is definitively attracted by problems related to the promises, challenges, and controversies of subjects related to life sciences and

Within this context, Schramm [2] has claimed that we are witnessing a Biological Revolution, some examples of which are already part of citizens' lives, such as in vitro fertilization and implantation of embryos; cloning; the medicines produced by application of biotechnological knowledge; treatments for cancer, for AIDS, and for other pathologies; modification of plants and animals by manipulating and reprogramming their genes; and the fight against the major

As part of this veritable revolution, new scientific capabilities have been acquired, such as, for example, treatment of the genetic information of living beings. This Biological Revolution has not only made it possible to describe and understand life but has also enabled its modification, resulting from a new form of applied knowledge that has resulted from an alliance

Galvão and Reis [3] argue that nowadays the objective is to integrate scientific knowledge into the students' world, in order to help them understand the objects and events which they encounter every day, attempting to increase their interest in science and scientific activities and to encourage their involvement in processes of discussion and evaluation of socioscien-

These authors state that it is the responsibility of the school and, consequently, the teacher to provide opportunities for discussion of the socioscientific issues that are increasingly part of everyday life. Schools must foster a scientific education that problematizes scientific developments, because, in addition to being necessary, it is an indispensable social duty to present

Galvão and Reis [3] also point out that the teacher's role includes encouraging students to research and select reliable sources of information; contrast different points of view; seek the knowledge needed to understand a given issue; familiarize themselves with the practices, techniques, and theories of scientists, so that they can be related to their daily lives; to discuss the subjects; to study the benefits they can offer and the harm they can cause; and to critically

Therefore, the classroom should become a venue for discussion, where the students can participate actively, expressing their interest in and knowledge about the widest variety of subjects, which can be dealt with not merely in relation to scientific knowledge but also in terms of their social meaning and impact. This experience can be accomplished in a variety of different ways and should involve the points of view of distinct social groups, thereby providing a platform for discussion of the constraints on and potentials of participation in socioscientific

Within the scope of science teaching, the space occupied by this debate has been growing as a result of certain issues that have already attracted the interest of teachers and their students, such as cloning and assisted reproductive techniques. There appears to be the space and

between the technical sciences of language and the technical sciences of biology [2].

students with science that is more up‐to‐date, historical, social, critical, and human.

assess and express opinions on socioscientific issues.

technology.

tific issues.

controversies.

endemic diseases, hunger, and so on.

78 Science Education - Research and New Technologies

We live in a world in which new scientific discoveries and technologies are directly connected with our lives, interfering at greater or lesser intensities in our everyday society. On this basis, Delizoicov and Auler [5] refute the assumption that scientific enterprises and their agenda are neutral, pointing out that the questions that science asks, the phenomena that are selected for investigation and the problems chosen for solution, the research avenues opened and, as a consequence, the advances achieved in one or another field are all directly linked to the values of a specific spatiotemporal context and to the demands located within it.

We live in a society in which the technology clearly impacts on everyday affairs. This is why we must prepare our students to build the skills to evaluate and intervene intelligently in technological and scientific activities. In the current context, this role falls to science teachers.

The use of socioscientific controversies (SSCs) for teaching science and technology is increasingly emphasized in curricula and in research into science teaching. Certain elements of the science, technology, and society movement [6–8] refer to these subjects as socioscientific issues, which are an expression of the application of this movement's assumptions in the classroom. It is therefore more important to educate the population to take a position with relation to the scientific and technological revolution than it is to instruct and inform it.

#### **2.1. Socioscientific controversies (SSCs)**

In attempt to situate the reader, it is worthwhile to start by discussing what is meant by SSC, basing the discussion on the literature. The terms "controversial subjects," "scientific dilemmas," "socioscientific controversies," "socioscientific issues," and "contentious subjects" are all used to designate elements in common.

According to Rudduck [9], an issue is defined as controversial if it divides people and involves value‐judgments that prevent it from being settled solely on the basis of analysis of evidence or by experiment. A controversy cannot be settled by an appeal to facts, empirical data, or experience alone, because it involves both facts and issues of values.

<sup>1</sup> This and all subsequent quotations from work published in languages other than English have been translated by the author.

According to Nelkin [10, 11], scientific controversies can be caused by: (a) the social, moral, or religious implications of a scientific theory or practice (e.g., issues related to cloning and genetic modification of living beings); (b) social tensions between individual rights and social objectives, political priorities and environmental values, economic interests, and health‐related concerns that result from the application of technology; (c) by use of public financial resources for major scientific and technological projects to the detriment of other projects, such as, for example, for social ends. These controversies can also be referred to as socioscientific issues, that is, social issues provoked by scientific and technological developments.

Ramsey [12] defined three criteria for selection of controversial socioscientific subjects: (i) whether there are differences of opinion in relation to them; (ii) whether the subject has social significance; and (iii) whether the subject, to some extent, is related to science and technology.

According to Para Reis [13], controversial socioscientific issues (CSIs) are social issues with a considerable scientific and technological dimension, such as, for example, manipulation of the genomes of living beings, in vitro fertilization, and cloning; release into the atmosphere of substances with effects on public health, on the greenhouse effect, and on destruction of the ozone layer; use of hormones and antibiotics in animal production; environmental and public health issues.

Pérez and Carvalho [14] state that CSIs encompass debates, controversies, or subjects directly related to scientific and/or technological knowledge that have a major impact on society. According to Abd‐El‐Khalick [15], these issues are markedly different from the exercises or "problems" that appear at the ends of chapters of the text books used in the classroom. Such exercises are generally defined and cover multidisciplinary aspects that are very often loaded with ethical, esthetic, ecological, moral, educational, cultural, and religious values.

These authors argue that the characteristics generally observed in socioscientific issues are: (a) knowledge of a scientific nature; (b) formation of opinions and choosing between options; (c) frequent appearances in the news media; (d) local scope; (e) analysis in terms of cost versus benefit and of values; (f) awareness of sustainability; (g) permeation by ethical and moral rationales; (h) permeated by understanding of risks; and (i) normally, part of people's everyday lives.

We can see that even the definition of a controversy is a controversial issue. According to Velho and Velho [16], some authors consider a controversy to be a discussion between two parties about a particular subject in which their beliefs and arguments are at stake, which is a view that places controversy on a more cognitive or psychological plane. I therefore believe that controversies cannot be separated from a wider cultural context and are, therefore, social phenomena that are historically determined.

Faced with such a diversity of definitions, I have chosen to use the term "socioscientific controversies" and have adopted the following criteria for selection of the articles that make up our corpus for analysis:

(i) controversies that are provoked by the social impacts of scientific and technological innovations and divide both the scientific community and society in general;

