Learning to Argue in the Anthropocene: How do 4th and 6th Grade Students Use Multimodal Materials to Solve a Socioscientific Issue?

Learning to Argue in the Anthropocene: How do 4th and 6th Grade Students Use Multimodal Materials to Solve a Socioscientific Issue? | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Article Learning to Argue in the Anthropocene: How do 4th and 6th Grade Students Use Multimodal Materials to Solve a Socioscientific Issue? Nuria Fernández-Huetos, José Manuel Pérez-Martín, Tamara Esquivel-Martín, and 1 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7045084/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract In light of the Anthropocene crisis, environmental education must adopt a transformative, critical literacy-based approach grounded in scientific practices to prepare students to address current socioenvironmental issues from a systemic perspective. This study, which was conducted with 4th and 6th grade primary school students (aged 9–12), presents the results of an activity based on a socioscientific question about the presence of pharmaceuticals in surface water. This activity was carried out within the framework of the Sustainable Development Goals and the scientific practice of argumentation. The aim is to evaluate students' performance in argumentation, their use of and understanding of the materials from which they extract evidence, and the solutions they propose. To this end, the content (written reports) and discourse (group discussions) were analyzed, and different statistical tests were carried out to compare individual and group performance, as well as performance among educational levels. The results show that students in both years tend to perform at a low-to-medium level, with higher performance in 6th grade but there are no significant differences in most areas. They also use materials in different semiotic modalities, similarly, experiencing more difficulty with maps and graphs than with texts and videos. Additionally, they propose solutions from various perspectives. Overall, this approach contributes to the development of scientific reasoning in primary school students and should therefore be incorporated into their classroom culture. Earth and environmental sciences/Environmental social sciences Social science/Environmental studies Primary education Multimodal scaffolding Science Education Transformative Environmental Education Water pollution Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12 Figure 13 Introduction The current environmental crisis has highlighted the limitations of traditional Environmental Education practices, which mainly focus on transmitting ecological content (Authors et al., 2024 ; Reid et al., 2021 ). To address the challenges of the Anthropocene, an era characterized by the interdependence of science, technology, society and the environment (OECD, 2023; Zhang & Hsu, 2025 ), it is crucial to transition to Transformative Environmental Education (TEE). This approach promotes critical literacy, systemic thinking, and action grounded in environmental justice (Authors et al., 2024 ; Zhang & Hsu, 2025 ). In this context, given the interconnection of socioenvironmental issues, it is crucial that students develop the ability to make informed, reasoned and critical decisions. Argumentation is one of the most successful scientific practices in science education (Dawson, 2025 ; Zhang et al., 2023 ) because, to debate complex issues, students need to be able to construct, defend and criticize arguments based on adequate scientific literacy. There are several different views on what constitutes scientific literacy (Valladares, 2021 ). Firstly, view 1 focuses more on scientific content and processes. By contrast, view 2 emphasizes the application of knowledge in real and controversial contexts. The latter is the one that best aligns with TEE (Dawson, 2025 ). While some studies have implemented scientific argumentation (view 2) in classrooms (Authors et al., 2023 ; Authors, 2025 ; Author, 2024 ), this practice is not common due to time constraints and a lack of teacher training in designing, implementing and evaluating student learning outcomes in response to such proposals (Dawson, 2025 ; Osborne et al., 2013 ). Finally, in view 3, students develop a global perspective on issues and participate in social activism (Siarova et al., 2019 ; White et al., 2022 ). There are few examples of this approach in educational practice, but in the study conducted by Herman et al. ( 2021 ), students understood the impact of the reintroduction of wolves in Yellowstone and took action to address this socioscientific issue (SSI) by writing letters to public officials explaining the controversy over wolf hunting, for example. In this sense, socioscientific issues (SSIs) are ideal for developing argumentation skills in the context of TEE classrooms, as they address real and complex problems and require decisions to be made based on multiple factors (Zeidler & Sadler, 2023 ). SSIs therefore contribute to the contextualization of learning around controversial topics (e.g. the use of GMOs, nuclear energy and climate change) and encourage students to evaluate information, construct evidence-based arguments, consider multiple perspectives and act responsibly (Arifin et al., 2025 ; Tang et al., 2023 ). Likewise, designing activities based on SSIs allows students to understand the complexity of current issues from a systemic perspective, recognizing that there are no single solutions, but rather multiple solutions with diverse implications (Şaşmazören et al., 2023 ). Furthermore, SSIs enable students to connect their interests to scientific content and their everyday lives, thereby promoting their motivation and engagement in the classroom, particularly when addressing local issues or topics relevant to their experience (Wiyarsi and Çalik, 2019 ). Such attitudes are crucial for TEE with a focus on social change (Freitas et al., 2023 ; Kokolaki & Stavrou, 2022 ). Indeed, numerous studies have demonstrated the positive impact of incorporating SSIs into the classroom, as this approach improves scientific literacy, critical thinking, argumentation, decision-making skills and academic performance (Akyol & Kanadli, 2022 ; Martini et al., 2021 ). Despite its potential, the analysis of the implementation of SSIs in educational research has been limited. There were virtually no publications on the subject between 2002 and 2006 (Narayanan et al., 2025 ). From 2011 onwards, growth began to be recorded, with a notable increase in publications and citations between 2019 and 2020 (Arifin et al., 2025 ; Kumar et al., 2024 ). This reflects a growing commitment to and interest in exploring SSIs as a means of promoting scientific literacy in educational institutions (Kumar et al., 2024 ; Zeidler and Sadler, 2023 ). However, SSIs are still rarely implemented in classrooms (Chen and Xiao, 2021 ; Högström et al., 2024 ). Consequently, scientific concepts such as the water cycle or energy sources are commonly taught without exploring related controversies (Dawson and Carson, 2020 ). Teachers also find this approach difficult to apply due to a lack of time, knowledge of how to teach SSIs or teaching resources (Christenson et al., 2017 ; Dawson, 2023 ; Özcan-Ermis and Hervé, 2024). Despite these obstacles and teachers' fear of possible criticism (Levinson, 2018 ), some decide to incorporate SSIs into their classrooms, primarily in secondary and higher education (Zamalloa et al., 2025 ). However, educational research recommends taking a transformative approach to addressing environmental issues, particularly in the early stages, as the impact on behavioral change is greater at this time (Olsson & Gericke, 2016 ; Van de Wetering et al., 2022 ). In fact, childhood is the stage at which the cognitive, emotional and attitudinal foundations that determine a person's relationship with the environment are formed (Nepraš et al., 2022 ; Zamalloa et al., 2025 ). Therefore, these educational practices should be incorporated throughout all years of schooling (Dawson, 2025 ) to promote more complex thinking (Nepraš et al., 2022 ) and the ability to ask questions, think critically, and make informed decisions (Öztürk & Karakaş, 2024 ). In this context, several studies have demonstrated that children in early childhood (ECE) and primary education (PE) can engage with SSIs and develop an argumentative approach (Byrne et al., 2014 ; Zamalloa et al., 2025 ). This can lead to a more positive attitude towards science and increased environmental awareness (Lu et al., 2024 ). For instance, Byrne et al. ( 2014 ) found that 9-10-year-old students could discuss different government options for reducing carbon dioxide emissions and negotiate solutions from various perspectives. Meanwhile, Öztürk and Karakaş ( 2024 ) found that 8–9-year-old students who carried out a sequence of SSIs-based activities increased their decision-making skills and academic performance. Similarly, Dawson ( 2025 ) and McNeill ( 2011 ) demonstrated that 11–12-year-old students could improve their scientific reasoning and argumentation skills. The study by Zamalloa et al. ( 2025 ) also demonstrated the inquiry and argumentation skills exhibited by 3-year-old children throughout the activity. Consequently, it is essential to design activities within the framework of TEE, implement them in the early stages of education, and assess their efficacy. In this regard, Authors ( 2025 ) conducted a pilot study with 6th grade PE students, analyzing the results of implementing an activity based on an SSI related to the presence of pharmaceuticals in wastewater. This activity was designed to address the pressing issue of environmental, human, and animal health (One Health) concerns, particularly the presence of drugs in wastewater. This context is aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 3, 6, 11, 12, 14, and 15, with the objective of enhancing TEE instruction and providing students with a quality education (SDG 4). Therefore, we consider it necessary to continue with this line of research, implementing the same activity with a greater number of students from different schools and grades. The objective of this study is to analyze how the designed teaching proposal promotes argumentation and scientific reasoning in 4th and 6th grade students at another educational center. This study aims to assess students' proficiency in argumentation, to identify the types of evidence they employ, and to examine the way they utilize evidence based on their level of understanding. Additionally, the study will analyze the proposed solutions. It will also compare the development of the activity between the two grades, as well as individual versus group performance. To that end, the following research questions (RQ) are hereby proposed: RQ1. What levels of performance do students show when solving this SSI compared to the reference answer, and what differences are observed depending on the type of work (individual or group) and the grade (4th or 6th )? RQ2. What materials do they draw when formulating arguments, how do they use them in relation to their level of understanding, and what differences can be observed depending on the type of work (individual or group) and the grade (4th or 6th )? RQ3. What kind of solutions do students propose to prevent the presence of pharmaceuticals in the river, and what differences are observed depending on the type of work (individual or group) and the grade (4th or 6th )? Method Context This study employs a multiple case study design (Yin, 2018 ), with three class groups serving as participants: a group of 24 4th grade students (ages 9–10) and two 6th grade groups, comprising a total of 41 students (ages 11–12). They are enrolled in a public school located within the Community of *censured* (Spain), which is characterized by a medium-high socioeconomic level. This classification is due to the area's average income per person exceeding the regional mean for the Community of *censured*. During the intervention, the students initially engaged in individualized activities and subsequently collaborated in groups, thereby preserving the conventional classroom work teams. Participation was voluntary with signed consent forms, and anonymity was ensured using numerical codes. The activity implemented, "Pharmaceuticals in the river?", is identical to that in the study by Authors ( 2025 ). The sequence of the activity, the design, and the teaching tools utilized remain the same (supplementary material 1). Data analysis The present study involved a qualitative analysis of the content of the responses (Schreier, 2012 ) and a discourse analysis (Gee, 2014 ). To this end, the data was listened to and interpreted. All written responses from the students (individual and group), as well as all group oral responses, were processed. The analysis of all questions in the activity (Q) followed the work of Authors ( 2025 ), employing the categories included in supplementary material 2. After categorization, absolute (Q1-Q6) and relative (Q7) frequencies were calculated. For RQ1, which is related to student performance, the categories used to analyze Q1-Q6 range from null (1) to high (5). For RQ2, which is related to the materials used, the categories used for the analysis of Q1 to Q6 are graphs, maps, videos, report, and leaflet. To analyze the level of comprehension, Barret's (1968) taxonomy was used for texts and Curcio's (1989) taxonomy for graphics. Finally, for RQ3, the five types of solutions proposed in Q7 were identified. Furthermore, descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were performed in all three cases using Microsoft Excel TM e IBM® SPSS® Statistics 19 (2010) to compare individual and group performance among students and between levels (4th and 6th ). Specifically, a non-parametric statistical analysis of mean comparison (Mann-Whitney U test, p ≤ 0.05) was performed on the results of Q1 to Q6, since the sample did not show normality (Kolmogorov-Smirnov test) or homoscedasticity of variances (Levene test). For Q7, the data were analyzed using the nonparametric Chi-square test (c 2 , p ≤ 0.05). Finally, to analyze the use of materials at different educational levels, the nonparametric Chi-square test (c 2 , p ≤ 0.05) was applied. Results and Discussion Analysis of the performance level of students in 4th and 6th grade of PE (RQ1) The results show that 4th and 6th grade PE students can solve the case, although with different levels of performance. The average individual performance (Table 1 ) of 4th grade students when completing the activity is 2.59, and that of 6th grade students is significantly higher (2.88 ± 1.57; Mann-Whitney U test, p ≤ 0.05). Therefore, students in both grades are between a low level (2/5) and a medium-low level (3/5). In this sense, it is reasonable that 6th grade students achieve a higher level of performance on all questions, as they have more knowledge and skills. However, when analyzing group performance, no significant differences are observed between the two grades, with a similar level of performance comparable to the individual performance of 6th grade students (Table 1 ). Table 1 Analysis of the difference between the performance of 4th and 6th grade students individually and in groups in the activity. The asterisk (*) indicates statistically significant differences (Mann-Whitney U test), p ≤ 0,05). Individual (I) Group (G) Mean ± Variance 4th 2.59 ± 1,71* 2.90 ± 2.02 6th 2.88 ± 1,57* 3.00 ± 1.89 The analysis by question enables the observation of discrepancies between grades and according to the type of work (Table 2 ). In the Q1, Q2, Q3, Q5 and Q6 no significant differences were observed, indicating that students from both grades answered the survey questions in a similar manner. In Q4 significant differences were identified. Furthermore, this is the question with the lowest performance level in both grades. This may be because it requires students to simultaneously understand and apply information from different materials. Likewise, the perception of difficulty is similar in both grades, as reflected in the level of performance achieved in each question, which is as follows in ascending order: Q4 < Q2 < Q1 < Q5 < Q3 < Q6. A subsequent comparison of performance levels based on work mode (individual and group) revealed no statistically significant differences (Table 2 ). This finding aligns with the conclusions of Authors ( 2025 ), which demonstrated that group work does not enhance student performance in any of the PE grades under analysis. For instance, in Q4, G8 of 6th grade, one group member (S35) correctly argues his answer, but his classmates (S34) overlook it and give incorrect responses. S33: “If the pharmaceuticals most commonly found in the Bodonal stream are not the best-selling ones, how and why do they end up in such large quantities in the stream?” S34: “ Because in pharmacies, if a product, that is, a medicine, is not sold..., they throw it away.” S35: “And because they are the most difficult to eliminate. ” S36: “ And it also expires ”. S35: “ They are also the most difficult to eliminate. ”. S33: “ Yes, but...”. S35: “ The best sellers are the easiest to eliminate. And the worst sellers... ”. S34: “ No, but not that. It says... How and why do so many of them end up in the stream? Because pharmacies throw them away when they don't sell them. And also when they expire. ”. S36: “ Because if they don't stock them and they expire, pharmacies throw them away. ”. Table 2 Analysis of the difference between individual and group performance and between PE courses in each question. The asterisk (*) indicates statistically significant differences (Mann-Whitney U test, p ≤ 0,05). Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 I G I G I G I* G I G I G Mean ± Variance 4th 2.83 ± 0.58 3.20 ± 0.20 1.58 ± 0.78 1.80 ± 1.20 3.08 ± 2.08 3.60 ± 3.80 1.25 ± 0.37 1.20 ± 0.20 3.04 ± 0.48 3.20 ± 0.20 3.75 ± 1.50 4.40 ± 0.30 6th 3.00 ± 0.15 3.00 ± 0.00 1.78 ± 0.93 1.56 ± 0.78 3.66 ± 1.48 4.00 ± 1.50 1.76 ± 1.04 1.67 ± 1.00 3.24 ± 0.79 3.44 ± 0.53 3.85 ± 0.98 4.33 ± 1.00 Analysis of the use of materials by students in 4th and 6th grade of PE (RQ2) Each question analyzed the materials that 4th and 6th grade students used to support their answers. In general, 6th grade students tended to use more materials simultaneously than 4th grade students, though no significant differences were found between the two grades (χ 2 , p ≤ 0.05). No differences were observed in the choice of materials according to the different semiotic modalities (textual, visual, or graphic). These results suggest that 4th grade students are as capable as 6th grade students of analyzing data extracted from different sources of information. As seen in Table 2 , students performed better on questions Q3 and Q5, which required extracting evidence from texts only, and on Q6, where they had to take a position without using materials. In contrast, they performed worse on questions Q4, Q2, and Q1, which required extracting evidence from maps and graphs. Q1: “Based on what you have read and seen, what is polluting the river?” To answer this question correctly, it is necessary to use graphs, specifically the one showing the most prevalent pharmaceuticals in the river. Other materials may be useful, such as the scientist’s video mentioning the presence of drugs or the leaflet and report listing the names of the drugs present in the river. However, they do not contain enough data to provide a high-level answer. In fact, no 4th or 6th grade students achieve this level of performance. As for 4th grade students (Fig. 1 ), during individual work, 12 students use the report, 3 use the graphs, 5 extract information from the videos, 1 combines video and text, and 3 do not specify the material used, nor can it be inferred. In contrast, when working in groups, each group uses different materials: leaflet (G1), scientist’s video (G2), graphs (G4), report (G5), and 1 group (G3) does not specify. These results suggest that 4th grade students tend to avoid using graphs, probably because they do not know how to interpret them correctly. Instead, most choose to look for information in the report. In the case of 6th grade students (Fig. 2 ), 20 use videos, 7 use texts (leaflet or report), 2 use graphs, and 3 supplement graphs with the report during individual work. Additionally, 5 students combine the scientist's video with the report, 1 student uses 3 materials, and 3 students do not specify the material used. By contrast, when working in groups, 3 (G1, G7, and G9) use the scientist's video; 1 (G4) relies exclusively on the report; 1 (G8) combines graphs with the report; 1 (G3) combines the scientist's video with the report; and 3 (G2, G5, and G6) do not specify the material. The findings reveal that, like 4th grade, 6th grade students rarely utilize graphs. Only 5 out of 41 students used them in their individual answers, which suggests possible difficulties interpreting this type of representation. Most students instead extract information from the videos. Notably, 9 6th grade students could extract information from various materials, whereas in 4th grade, this occurred in only one case. However, this combination of materials did not enable them to achieve a high level of understanding. According to Curcio's (1969) taxonomy of graph comprehension, high performance on Q1 is associated with level 2 (reading between the data). Students must select the bar graph and compare the values of each drug. In this study, 4th and 6th grade PE students who use graphs achieve average performance levels by identifying some or all the pharmaceuticals present in the river. In other words, they extract information by reading the data on the "Y" axis of the graph, achieving level 1 graph comprehension (read the data). In a previous pilot study (Authors, 2025 ), nearly three-quarters of students used graphs, and some achieved level 2 comprehension. Historically, multiple studies have examined PE students' understanding of graphs using this taxonomy. In Guimarães's (2002) study, 3rd grade students could identify the frequencies and basic elements of a bar graph (maximums and minimums). However, only a quarter could locate a specific area of the graph. According to Cruz ( 2013 ), 3rd grade students performed better with pictograms than pie charts. Regardless of the type of graph, half of the students correctly answered level 1 and 2 comprehension questions, and only a quarter correctly answered level 3 questions (reading beyond the data). Various studies show that, in 5th and 6th grade, almost all students respond well to tasks requiring level 1 bar graphs (Canché, 2009 ; Pagan et al., 2008 ), and approximately half answer correctly when the activities are level 2 (Pagan et al., 2008 ) or level 3 (Canché, 2009 ). Furthermore, research incorporating tasks up to level 4 of graph comprehension (reading behind the data) shows that most students reach level 2 (Arteaga et al., 2021 ; Batanero et al., 2018 ). Along these lines, Evangelista ( 2013 ) concludes that students correctly answer half of level 1 and 2 tasks. In general, PE students tend to have difficulty reaching levels 3 and 4 of graph comprehension, regardless of the type of graph they work with (Arteaga et al., 2021 ). Even so, the Spanish educational curriculum (Royal Decree 157/2022, Ministerio de Educación y Formación Profesional [MEFP]) includes stochastic reasoning from the first cycle of PE (1st and 2nd grades). It introduces strategies for recognizing the main elements of simple graphs (pictograms and bar charts) and for extracting the most relevant information. In the second cycle (3rd and 4th grade), students learn to represent and select data, as well as compare two sets of data to establish relationships and draw conclusions. In the third cycle (5th and 6th grade), students learn to complete a simple statistical study (formulating questions, collecting, recording, organizing, and interpreting data). They also learn to compare two sets of data based on their graphical representation (formulate conjectures, analyze dispersion, and draw conclusions). Therefore, in accordance with educational legislation, 4th and 6th grade students participating in this study should know how to select the appropriate graph and extract relevant information. However, our results indicate that students have difficulty understanding graphs. This is not surprising, as textbooks offer few activities requiring high levels of comprehension, so students are unfamiliar with this type of task (Arteaga et al., 2021 ). Instead, activities that only require literal reading of graphs and comparisons without critical evaluation or inference are usually presented (Salcedo et al., 2021). According to the 2023 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) report (MEFP, 2024), the performance of Spanish 4th grade PE students in mathematics has declined since 2019. Their performance is significantly lower than the OECD average and the European Union (EU) total, with similar results in all three domains (numbers and measurements, geometry, and data). Therefore, it is important to include basic knowledge and skills related to statistical literacy in the PE curriculum. However, this must be accompanied by research on children's actual skills when faced with this type of task (Arteaga et al., 2020 ) and classroom practices that allow for their development. Considering the excessive amount of information in the media (Engel, 2017 ), it is urgent that PE students acquire critical statistical literacy to interpret and analyze information from tables and graphs at an early age. Only then will they be able to make informed decisions, for example, about election results or food ingredients (Ridgway et al., 2019 ; Papancheva, 2017 ). Q2: “Based on what you have read and seen, where do the pharmaceuticals in the river come from?” To achieve a high level of performance in this question, it is essential to combine information from the hydrographic and satellite maps and from the leaflet. In fact, only by correctly using the maps can a medium-high level be achieved. On the other hand, using only the leaflet can achieve at best a medium-low level. Thus, maps are key to answering this question because they allow us to identify the origin of the pharmaceuticals found in the river (Bodonal stream), a specific geographical location: Tres Cantos, Soto de Viñuelas, or the Tres Cantos Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). The leaflet incorporates the idea of domestic drug consumption, which is implicit in the WWTP video as well. Therefore, students could infer that when a person takes a drug, it is excreted at home and reaches the river through wastewater. Nevertheless, the video only shows this information briefly, so students are unlikely to use it, especially since the leaflet explicitly provides the same information. Students can also use the report, but at best reach a medium-low level, as it only shows the drugs come from a WWTP. With regard to 4th grade students (Fig. 3 ), during individual work, 6 students use the leaflet, 4 use maps, 3 use the report, 3 use the video on how WWTP works, 1 uses graphs, 1 combines the scientist's video with the report, and 6 do not specify the material. In group work, each group uses a different material: report (G1), leaflet (G2), WWTP video (G4), maps (G5), and one does not specify (G3). These results show that 4th grade students have difficulty interpreting and applying information from maps. To mitigate this shortcoming, students choose to look for information in the leaflet, a text, but in a manageable and visual format. As for the 6th grade students (Fig. 4 ), when working individually, 9 use the report, 8 use the leaflet, 6 use the WWTP video, 4 use the maps, 1 uses the graphs, 1 combines graphs and the leaflet, 1 student uses the scientist’s video, and 11 do not specify, nor can it be inferred, the material used. When working in groups, 3 use the WWTP video (G3, G4, and G5), 1 uses the scientist’s video (G7), 1 uses the report (G1), 1 uses the maps (G2), and 1 does not specify (G6). Additionally, two groups combine two materials: WWTP video and leaflet (G9) and maps and graphs (G8). However, the latter group's performance level was null, indicating that this strategy was ineffective. It can be observed that working in groups does not improve the choice of material. Only 4 students use maps individually, and 1 group uses them, but both use them incorrectly. Consequently, 6th grade students are also unable to adequately extract information from these materials and instead rely mainly on texts and videos. In short, PE students were unable to correctly interpret maps, as none of them achieved a medium-high or high level of performance. Furthermore, none of the students used the map and leaflet simultaneously. This makes this question the second most difficult for both grades because success depends on properly using maps. This issue was also identified in the previous pilot study, in which most 6th grade students were unable to extract information from the maps. The Spanish PE curriculum (Royal Decree 157/2022, MEFP) introduces working with maps and plans on different scales in the second cycle (3rd and 4th grades), alongside the representation of space and Earth using a globe. In the third cycle (5th and 6th grades), students learn about the geographical diversity of Spain and Europe through graphic, visual, and cartographic representations using analog and digital resources. Consequently, although maps are included in the curriculum, their use in classrooms tends to focus on the location and distribution of geographical features. This approach falls into a transmissive teaching model (Armas-Quintá et al., 2022 ) rather than encouraging spatial thinking and reasoning (Jonuzi & Selvi, 2023 ). Nevertheless, maps (two- and three-dimensional) should be used to promote cartographic literacy, which includes reading and interpreting maps, transferring information to maps, using scales, drawing and creating symbols, and finding addresses (Ayuldeş & Akbaş, 2023 ). In fact, students need to develop their map-reading skills because maps are increasingly used in everyday life (Havelková & Hanus, 2019 ). Therefore, it is important for children to interact with maps, plans, globes, and world maps from an early age (Ayuldeş & Akbaş, 2023 ; Catling, 2018 ), which should be adapted to their level of understanding (Jonuzi & Selvi, 2023 ). Indeed, there has been an increase in publishers and cartographers designing maps specifically for children with appropriate symbols and colors. A child exposed to these resources in ECE will likely be able to understand abstract symbols and draw local maps from a plan view by the age of 11 or 12. However, many children of this age lack the knowledge to understand map or atlas information (Catling, 2018 ), as evidenced by our 4th and 6th PE students. Q3: “What diseases do these pharmaceuticals treat?” To achieve a high level of performance on this question, the leaflet must be used as it is the only material that lists all the pharmaceuticals, the diseases they treat, and their characteristics. As for the 4th grade students (Fig. 5 ), 19 use the leaflet when working individually, 2 use the report, 1 combines the leaflet with graphs, 1 uses the scientist's video, and 1 does not specify. When working in groups, all of them used the leaflet except one group (G5) who used the report. Thus, half of the students were able to correctly use the leaflet to identify the appropriate evidence from all the materials to answer the question. This enabled them to achieve a medium-high (4/5) or high (5/5) level of performance. Specifically, 4 students and 3 groups reached the highest level by using the leaflet’s information on diseases treated by the pharmaceuticals in the river. As for 6th grade students (Fig. 6 ), 35 use the leaflet when working individually, 1 combines the leaflet and report, 1 combines the leaflet and graphs, and 4 do not specify the material. Almost three-quarters of the students achieve a medium-high or high level in their responses by using the appropriate materials. When working in groups, all students use the leaflet. In this case, working in groups favors the choice of material. At this point, it is worth noting the difference between the medium-high and high levels in relation to Barrett's (1968) taxonomy of text comprehension. The high level on Q3 is associated with level 2 (reorganize information), as students must interpret and synthesize the information to generate a new discourse understanding that all diseases are linked to mental health. In both the 4th and 6th PE grades, there are students who have reached this level, although they are in the minority (4/24 of 4th grade students and 10/41 of 6th grade students). In contrast, the medium-high level of this question is associated with level 1 text comprehension (reading comprehension). At this level, students recognize information and identify data but make a literal copy of the leaflet. More students reach this level in 4th grade PE (8/24 students) and in 6th grade (18/41 students). The Spanish educational curriculum (Royal Decree 157/2022, MEFP) calls for students in the second cycle of PE (3rd and 4th grades) to locate, select, and compare information from different sources. However, we observe a tendency to copy information directly rather than process it and generate new and more accurate information that is relevant to the question. This may be because textbook activities tend to require textual reproduction rather than interpretation of data (Authors et al., 2019 ). On the other hand, students in 4th and 6th grade did not have difficulty selecting the appropriate material (leaflet), probably because it is a familiar type of material often found in advertising brochures that presents information concisely and visually (Authors et al., 2023 ). Nevertheless, it is crucial to implement various strategies for textual comprehension in the classroom (Tang et al., 2017 ) since students are accustomed to narrative texts from the first cycle of PE (1st and 2nd grades) but not as much to expository texts, which become more prevalent from 4th grade onwards (Míguez-Álvarez et al., 2022 ). Q4: “If the pharmaceuticals most commonly found in the Bodonal stream are not the best-selling ones, how and why do they end up in such large quantities in the stream?” This is the only question in which significant differences were found between the two grades, and students performed at a lower level. To perform well, students must use graphs, report, and leaflet. The expected answer should explain the ineffectiveness of WWTPs in removing certain pharmaceuticals, using evidence from the report, and relate this idea to the best and worst-selling pharmaceuticals, using evidence from the graphs. This would lead to the conclusion that despite not being the best-selling pharmaceuticals, they end up in the river because WWTPs cannot effectively remove them. Additionally, consider that they are used to treat mental health and chronic conditions, so their discharge is constant (evidence implicitly taken from the leaflet or an idea learned from Q3). In the case of 4th grade PE (Fig. 7 ), nearly half of the students could not extract the correct evidence from any of the materials. Furthermore, none of them used more than one source, as the question required. 3 students used the report; 2 used the graphs; 2 used the scientist's video; 2 used the leaflet; 1 used the WWTP video; and 1 used the video and the report together. Of the groups working together, 2 (G1 and G3) did not specify which materials they used, 1 (G4) used the graphs, 1 (G2) used the scientist's video, and 1 (G5) used the leaflet. In terms of performance level, only 2 students argued that WWTPs do not effectively remove certain pharmaceuticals, placing them at the medium-low level. The rest were below this level, with most at the null level. Therefore, it seems that this question is highly difficult for 4th grade students. Perhaps students need teacher support in the form of mediating questions that help them analyze and relate the different types of data in the materials (Authors, 2024 ). As for the 6th grade students (Fig. 8 ), 10 use the report, 5 use graphs, 5 use videos, and 5 use the leaflet when working individually. Additionally, 4 students combine the graphs with the report, 1 combines the report with WWTP video, and 11 do not specify the material. In group work, 4 groups (G1, G3, G4, and G9) use the report; 1 (G8) uses the graphs; and 4 (G2, G5, G6, and G7) do not specify the material. Overall, most students use textual materials to find answers in a single source, suggesting a preference for text over graphics, possibly due to their frequent use in the classroom (Mohamedi-Amaruch & Rico-Martín, 2020 ). However, some students combined the report with the graphs, achieving performance levels ranging from low to high depending on their interpretation and understanding of the sources. Nevertheless, this question was also difficult for 6th grade students, as just over half of the group achieved a null-performance level. Only 1 student achieved the medium-high level (establishing a relationship between two sources of information), and 1 achieved the high level (adding a third source of information). To determine the extent to which students understood the materials needed to answer Q4, Barlett's (1968) taxonomy for text comprehension was applied to the report and leaflet. In 4th grade, 2 students gave a level 1 response (reading comprehension) because they only identified some of the information in the report. In 6th grade, 8 students were at this level. 1 student reached level 2 (reorganize information) by combining information and establishing relationships between the most and least sold pharmaceuticals. Another student reached level 3 (inferential or interpretive) by integrating implicit data from the leaflet and inferring that the type of diseases (mental health and chronic) treated by these medicines means their discharge is constant and affects their presence and persistence in the river. According to Curcio's (1989) taxonomy, which is applicable to medium-high, and high-performance levels, none of the 4th grade students adequately understood the graphs to answer correctly. In contrast, 2 out of 41 6th grade students reached this level: 1 reached level two (reading between the data) by comparing the most and least sold pharmaceuticals, and another reached level 3 (reading beyond the data) by connecting the information in the graphs with the rest of the materials. Therefore, in Q4, 6th grade students performed better than 4th grade students, as reflected in their understanding of the texts and graph. However, all students had difficulty integrating tests from different materials and establishing relationships between them. These skills are included in the Spanish educational curriculum (Royal Decree 157/2022, MEFP). For instance, in the second cycle of PE (3rd and 4th grades), students learn to "graphically compare two sets of data to establish relationships and draw conclusions" in mathematics and "search for and select information from different sources" in social and natural studies. In addition, the 3rd cycle (5th and 6th grades) includes "contrast of information". Therefore, it is logical that performance in 4th grade was lower than in 6th grade. However, the difficulties 6th grade students encountered in this study are similar to those in the previous pilot study. In the previous study, no 6th grade student achieved a high level of performance, reaching only level 2 of text and graph comprehension. These results highlight the necessity of activities involving the search, selection, and contrast data from various sources. Likewise, PE classrooms rarely implement activities that encourage evidence-based argumentation, such as those in this study (Dawson, 2025 ). These activities are more common in secondary education or preservice teachers (Ottander & Simon, 2021 ; Sakamoto et al., 2021 ). Nevertheless, such activities are possible in PE, as students understand the information in the materials when working on them separately (graphs, report, and leaflet). If children had more opportunities to participate in these activities, they would probably develop better information-handling and argumentation skills. For example, Dawson ( 2025 ) found that Australian 6th grade students improved their argumentation skills after several sessions addressing SSIs related to water. Q5: “Is it harmful for pharmaceuticals to be in the river? Why?” To perform at their best on this question, students must use the report. Although some students use the scientist's video, it only provides context and lacks relevant evidence. The WWTP video could help connect the three perspectives of health: environmental, human, and animal. However, understanding the One Health approach requires a systemic view of the issue. The analysis revealed that no 4th grade students achieved this level, while two students and one group in 6th grade did. Most students fall within the medium-low level (they indicate that it is harmful without providing evidence) or the medium-high level (they argue based on evidence from the report). In 4th grade (Fig. 9 ), when working individually, 8 students use the report, 2 combine it with videos, 8 use videos, and 6 do not specify the material. During group work, 2 groups (G4 and G5) use the report, 2 (G1 and G2) use the scientist's video, and 1 (G3) do not specify. Almost a quarter of the 4th grade students and 1 group use the report correctly, extracting evidence and integrating it into their answers. Most students were able to take a position on whether the presence of pharmaceuticals in the river is harmful, although they did not justify their position with evidence. This was either because they did not understand the report or because they relied on more visual materials, such as videos, that were not useful for answering this question. In 6th grade (Fig. 10 ), 19 students use the report when working individually. 3 students combine that material with videos, 13 use videos, 1 uses the leaflet, and 5 students do not specify. In group work, 6 groups (G2, G3, G4, G5, G8, and G9) use the report; 2 (G1 and G7) use video; and 1 (G6) does not specify. Thus, more than a third of the students and 3 groups used the report correctly. However, the rest of the students did not know how to integrate the tests into their answers, despite being able to use them, or opting for more visual materials, which is common among most 4th grade students. This situation is reflected in the 2021 Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) report (MEFP, 2023). It shows that the average reading comprehension score of 4th grade Spanish students (integration, inferences, and content evaluation) is significantly below the OECD and EU averages. This reality underscores the importance of allocating more classroom time to reading comprehension. Historically, more time has been devoted to grammar and vocabulary (Sekelj & Rigo, 2011 ) or to summarizing and identifying information in descriptions (Peña-García, 2019 ) than to understanding texts through active learning (Richmond & Hagan, 2011 ). However, the latter approach is more effective because it promotes greater attention and participation (Käsper et al., 2019 ). In general, both PE grades identified appropriate material from which to extract the evidence. However, in relation to Barret's (1968) taxonomy, notable differences in the degree of comprehension emerged. On the one hand, 16 of the 24 students in the 4th grade of PE understood the text at level 1 (reading comprehension) and 5 at level 2 (reorganize information). Of the 41 6th grade students, 19 were at level 1, 14 were at level 2, and 2 students reached level 4 (critical or evaluative judgment), as they also handled the One Health concept (S31: “ Yes, it is harmful because it can also kill many living beings and contaminate us"; S36: “ Yes, because they affect the environment and us. Because drinking water gets polluted and animals drink it and have problems ”). Interestingly, no 4th grade students addressed this idea, though a minority of 6th grade students did, as in the previous pilot study. This suggests that older PE students can grasp the concept of One Health as a whole. Therefore, this TEE activity seems to encourage a systemic perspective and helps students develop environmental competence, enabling them to critically and rationally address current environmental issues (Authors, 2024 a; Romero-Ariza et al., 2021 ). Q6: “Would it be better to take medication or not? Why?” This question does not require evidence extracted from the materials to justify the answers because it raises a socioscientific controversy (SSC) on which students must take a position. They must reflect on what they have learned in the activity and their experiences to give an answer. A high level of performance is achieved when students take a position and justify their answer based on the benefits of the medicines (or alternatives to these products). Concepts such as responsible medicine use and the need for a prescription should also be included. In 4th grade PE (Fig. 11 ), all groups and approximately three-quarters of the students achieved a medium-high (10 students) or high (7 students) level. These students justified the benefits of medications or proposed alternatives in their answers (S9: "It depends. If you're feeling very ill, then yes, take it to get better. But if you're not feeling ill, then no. If you take it when you're not feeling ill and nothing happens, it won't have any effect when you do feel ill” ). 7 students are at a lower level because they did not take a position on the controversy or justify their answers. (S1: “If it hurts, yes; if not, no” ), or respond incoherently (S22: “Because otherwise, nothing heals” ). In 6th grade PE (Fig. 12 ), the situation is similar to that in 4th grade. Nearly three-quarters of students achieve the medium-high and high levels, while 12 students achieve the highest level (S1: “It would be better to take medication because it helps you get better. But it's very harmful if you don't need it because it ends up in the river” ). Only 13 students are at lower levels. When working in groups, however, all of them fall within the two highest levels, except for 1 group (G7), whose level is the same as that of its individual members. This suggests that if all group members start at a low performance level, it is difficult for them to improve together. Consistent with the findings of Authors ( 2025 ), most students in both grades achieve medium-high and high levels, with medium-high levels predominating. In fact, this question (Q6) is the one that students answer best, perhaps because the answer depends on personal reflection rather than the evidence. Therefore, it can be said that 4th and 6th grade students can make decisions about an SSC, taking a position on whether to take medication, and justifying their stance. However, although Lassoued et al. ( 2020 ) claim that social interaction improves decision-making abilities, our results reveal no significant differences in performance levels between individuals and groups. Considering the above, it can be observed that working with SSCs involves students in debate and decision-making because they first work and reflect individually. This educational intervention prepares students to be critical citizens who contribute to society (Eidin & Schwartz, 2023; Kokolaki & Stavrou, 2022 ). While activities with this approach are common in secondary education—such as debates on natural versus synthetic products in food, medicine, and cosmetics (Caracuel-González et al., 2024)—they are less common in PE. One reason is that teachers are concerned about whether students will be able to participate in or lead classroom debates (Leden et al., 2017 ). However, an increasing number of studies demonstrate that PE students can engage in these activities effectively (Dawson & Venville, 2020 ; Lee & Yang, 2019 ). Analysis of the type of solutions proposed by students in 4th and 6th grade of PE (RQ3) Q7: “What solutions can you think of to prevent so many medicines from reaching the river?” It should be noted that all 6th grade students propose at least one solution, and some propose more than one. In contrast, while some 4th grade students propose more than one solution, 4 students do not propose any (E). Specifically, in 4th grade (Fig. 13 ), the same percentage of students (29.17%) proposed solutions related to responsible use (B) and solutions that were too generic or out of context (D). 25% of students propose solutions related to pharmaceutical design and WWTP (A), and, to a lesser extent (16.67%), solutions related to political-legislative measures (C). Meanwhile, 6th grade students (Fig. 13 ) mainly propose Type D solutions (40.39%), followed by Type B solutions (25%), Type A solutions (23.08%), and finally, Type C solutions (11.54%). Thus, proportionally, 4th grade students propose more solutions than 6th grade students. Furthermore, the order of preference remains consistent across both grades, regardless of the number of solutions proposed (B = D > A > C in 4th ; D > B > A > C in 6th ). Thus, the least proposed solutions correspond to political-legislative measures (C). In contrast, students focus on responsible use (B) and pharmaceutical design and WWTP (A), with similar percentages. Students in both grades behave similarly when working in groups. Although no statistically significant differences were found between individual and group work (χ 2 , p ≤ 0.05), we can see that Type A and Type C solutions increase while Type B and Type D solutions decrease. These changes are more pronounced in 6th grade. Working in groups increases solutions with scientific (type A) and political-legislative (type C) perspectives. This could be because, during the debate, students consider dimensions they had not previously thought of (Iordanou, 2022 ). Conversely, students propose fewer generic or out-of-context solutions (D) and solutions from an ethical perspective (B). Issues related to values are personal, so it makes sense that students tend to reveal their moral perspective less when working in groups and avoid standing out. The desire to belong to a group can also influence decision-making (Bader et al., 2023 ). In short, and taking as a reference the perspectives put forward by Kiili et al. ( 2016 ) and List ( 2022 ), it can be seen that, when working individually, PE students make greater use of the ethical perspective (B) (S34, 6th PE: “ People should not take medication every time they feel a little unwell, and if they have phobias, panic attacks, or anxiety, they can go to a psychologist to resolve them ”) and the scientist (A) (S14, 4th PE: “Create a type of trash that burns medicines” ) and, to a lesser extent, political and legislative (C) (S6, 4th PE: “I'm thinking of setting rules” ). When working in groups, students consider the political-legislative and scientific perspectives more and the ethical perspective less (uncommon in classrooms). Students at different educational levels frequently consider the scientific perspective (Byrne et al., 2014 ; Authors et al., 2023 ; Authors, 2025 ; Author, 2024 ; Öhman & Öhman, 2012 ). However, incorporating other perspectives is not yet widespread. Nevertheless, studies such as that by Author ( 2024 ) demonstrate how preservice teachers examined the production and consumption of avocados in Spain from an ethical standpoint. Similarly, research has been conducted in PE in which students integrate the sociopolitical perspective, in addition to the ethical dimension, when dealing with different controversial issues, such as coal-fired power plants, organ donation, and assisted reproduction (Henderson et al., 2025 ). However, students sometimes propose solutions without assessing their full impact (Authors, 2025 ; Öhman and Öhman, 2012 ) or put forward unrealistic ideas (Byrne et al., 2014 ), as they do not always consider all perspectives and the complexity of the issues (Iordanou, 2022 ; List, 2022 ; Ottander and Simon 2021 ). In fact, our study revealed some ill-considered solutions, such as "Close the pipelines and never open them again ” (S11, 6th PE) or “Do not manufacture medicines” (S31, 6th PE). Conclusions The results show that teaching students to argue about SSIs in PE classrooms promotes scientific reasoning. However, performance levels observed, especially in 4th grade, range from low to medium-low. These results highlight the importance of developing argumentation and data interpretation skills from an early age. When it came to using and interpreting information to solve the case, students found maps and graphs more difficult than texts and videos. This emphasizes the importance of incorporating these types of resources into classroom activities and questions that encourage students to relate, understand, and reflect on data. Despite this limitation, 4th and 6th PE students were able to propose solutions to the environmental problem presented from different perspectives. This reflects the development of critical and systemic thinking, as well as eco-social awareness. Similarly, although better results were observed in 6th than in 4th grade, the differences are not statistically significant for most questions, either individually or collectively. This shows that not only is it possible to work on SSIs in the final grades of PE, but they can also be successfully addressed in the second cycle of PE. Furthermore, these findings prompt reflection on the progression of scientific reasoning throughout PE and on the fact that group work does not necessarily lead to better learning outcomes. Finally, to evaluate this activity's effectiveness in other educational contexts, we propose expanding the research to underperforming schools in the future. This will enable us to compare results among students from various grades and socioeconomic backgrounds, allowing us to draw more robust conclusions. Overall, this study reveals this proposal's educational potential within the TEE framework, as it promotes the critical literacy necessary to understand and address the socioenvironmental issues of the Anthropocene. Declarations Competing interests The authors declare no conflicts of interest. None of the authors are on the editorial board of Humanities and Social Science Communications. Ethical approval The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Ethics Committee of Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (protocol code CEI-137-2954, and date of approval 14 March 2024). Informed consent Prior to the activity (May 2024), a written information sheet was sent by post to the educational centres for the participant and their legal guardian describing the aim, objectives, roles of the participants and methods of study. Following the indications of the Ethics Committee of Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, two informed consent forms were also sent: one for the participant and one for their legal guardian. In this informed consent, both confirmed that they understood the aims of the activity and of their participation, the plans for data processing and the communication of the results. Participants could withdraw their participation in the research at any time. Funding declaration This research was supported by a predoctoral research contract from the Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades [*censured*]. The Article Processing Charges (APCs) will be covered either by the library services of the author's home institution (Universidad Autónoma de Madrid) or, alternatively, by the III Edition of the Programme for the Promotion of Knowledge Transfer of the author's university [*censured*]. Author Contribution All authors contributed to the conceptualization and design of the study. [] led the data collection and analysis and drafted the initial and final manuscript. [] contributed to the design of the research instruments and data analysis. Authors [] provided critical revisions and contributed to refining the final version of the manuscript. All authors read and approved of the final manuscript. Acknowledgement This research was funded by the Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades [N.F.H] predoctoral research contract (FPU22/02563). This research was supported by the III Edition of the Programme for the Promotion of Knowledge Transfer of the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (FUAM, 0375/2022, 465059).The researchers would like to express their sincere thanks to both the students and teachers who participated in the study and to Raquel Mínguez Castellano for the technical support. Data availability The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article; further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author. References Author (2024) Authors (2024) Authors (2024a) Authors (2025) Authors et al (2019) Authors et al (2023) Authors et al (2024) Akyol C, Kanadli S (2022) Investigating the effect of socioscientific issues-based instruction on the academic achievement of students: A mixed-research synthesis. FIRE Forum Int Res Educ 7(2):64–85. https://doi.org/10.32865/fire202172264 Arifin Z, Sukarmin S, Saputro S (2025) Trends and research frontiers in socioscientific issues for sustainable science education: A systematic and bibliometric analysis from 2014–2024. J Pedagog Res 9(1):407–434. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202530575 Armas-Quintá FX, Rodríguez-Lestegás F, Macía-Arce XC, Pérez-Guilarte Y (2022) Teaching and learning landscape in primary education in Spain: A necessary curricular review to educate citizens. Acta Geogr Slov 62(1):55–64. https://doi.org/10.3986/AGS.10457 Arteaga P, Diaz-Levicoy D, Batanero C (2020) Primary school students’ reading levels of line graphs. Stat Educ Res J 20(2):6–6. https://doi.org/10.17648/acta.scientiae.5884 Arteaga P, Diaz-Levicoy D, Batanero C (2021) Primary school students’ reading levels of line graphs. Stat Educ Res J 20(2):6–6. https://doi.org/10.52041/serj.v20i2.339 Ayuldeş M, Akbaş Y (2023) The effect of orienteering on the sixth-grade students’ academic achievement and map literacy. Educ Sci 48(213):113–142. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2023.11528 Bader JD, Ahearn KA, Allen BA, Anand DM, Coppens AD, Aikens ML (2023) The decision is in the details: justifying decisions about socioscientific issues. J Res Sci Teach 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21854 Barrett TC (1968) Taxonomy of cognitive and affective dimensions of reading comprehension. In: Robinson HM (ed) Innovation and change in reading instruction. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 17–23 Batanero C, Díaz-Levicoy D, Arteaga P (2018) Evaluación del nivel de lectura y la traducción de pictogramas por estudiantes chilenos de Educación Básica. Avances de Investigación en Educación Matemática, 14, 49–64 Byrne J, Ideland M, Malmberg C, Grace M (2014) Climate change and everyday life: Repertoires children use to negotiate a socio-scientific issue. Int J Sci Educ 36(9):1491–1509. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.891159 Canché L (2009) La comprensión gráfica de los alumnos del nivel primaria. Master’s thesis, Universidad Autónoma de Yucatán, México Caracuel–González M, Benarroch AB, Cobos TL et al (2024) Preferences and reasoning of 14–15 year–old students in relation to natural or synthetic products in different contexts: influence of an instructional module. Res Sci Educ 54:909–932. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-024-10166-5 Catling S (2018) To know maps: Primary school children and contextualised map learning. Bol Paul Geogr 99:268–290 Available at. https://publicacoes.agb.org.br/boletim-paulista/article/view/1480 Chen L, Xiao S (2021) Perceptions, challenges and coping strategies of science teachers in teaching socioscientific issues: A systematic review. Educational Res Rev 32., Article 100377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100377 Christenson N, Gericke N, Chang-Rundgren SN (2017) Science and language teachers’ assessment of upper secondary students’ socioscientific argumentation. Int J Sci Math Educ 15(8):1403–1422. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9746-6 Cruz A (2013) Erros e dificuldades de alunos de 1.º ciclo na representação de dados estatísticos. Master’s thesis, Universidad de Lisboa, Portugal Curcio FR (1989) Developing graph comprehension. NCTM, Reston, VA Dawson V (2023) Teachers’ support in developing year 7 students’ argumentation skills about water-based socioscientific issues. Int J Sci Educ 46(3):222–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2023.2226334 Dawson V (2025) Using Socioscientific Issues to Teach Argumentation to Year 7 Science Students in a Low Socioeconomic Rural Australian School. Res Sci Educ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-024-10224-y Dawson V, Venville G (2020) Testing a methodology for the development of socioscientific issues to enhance middle school students’ argumentation and reasoning. Res Sci Technol Educ 40(4):499–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2020.1830267 Dawson VM, Carson K (2020) Introducing argumentation about climate change socioscientific issues in a disadvantaged school. Res Sci Educ 50(3):863–883. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9715-x Eidin E, Shwartz Y (2023) From ideal to practical—A design of teacher professional development on socioscientific issues. Sustainability 15(14):11394. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151411394 Engel J (2017) Statistical literacy for active citizenship: A call for data science education. Stat Educ Res J 16(1):44–49 Evangelista B (2013) Activities on interpreting bar and line graphs: what do 5th grade students know? In: Contreras, J.M., Cañadas, G.R., Gea, M.M., Arteaga, P. (eds) Proceedings of the Virtual Conference on Teaching Statistics, Probability and Combinatorics, pp 121–128. Department of Mathematics Education, University of Granada Freitas AC, Do Nascimiento AL, De Castro RG, Motokane MT, Reis P (2023) Biodiversity and citizenship in an argumentative socioscientific process. Sustainability 15(4):2987. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15042987 Gee JP (2014) An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method, 4th edn. Routledge, London Guimarães G (2002) Interpretando e construindo gráficos de barras. Dissertation, Universidad Federal de Pernambuco, Brasil Havelková L, Hanus M (2019) Map skills in education: a systematic review of terminology, methodology, and influencing factors. Rev Int Geogr Educ Online 9(2):361–401. https://doi.org/10.33403/rigeo.591094 Henderson S, Tomas L, King D (2025) Does topic matter? Investigating students’ interest, emotions and learning when writing stories about socioscientific issues. Res Sci Educ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-025-10239-z Herman BC, Newton MH, Zeidler DL (2021) Impact of place–based socioscientific issues instruction on students’ contextualization of socioscientific orientations. Sci Educ 105(4):585–627. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21618 Högström P, Gericke N, Wallin J et al (2024) Teaching Socioscientific Issues: A Systematic Review. Sci Educ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-024-00542-y Iordanou K (2022) Supporting strategic and meta-strategic development of argument skill: the role of reflection. Metacogn Learn 17:399–425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-021-09289-1 Jonuzi E, Selvi HZ (2023) Enhancing map comprehension via symbols: developing symbols for thematic maps based on children’s cognitive development. Necmettin Erbakan Univ Fen Mühendislik Bil Sci Derg 5(2):88–110. https://doi.org/10.47112/neufmbd.2023.12 Käsper M, Uibu K, Mikk J (2019) Primary school teachers’ teaching strategies for the development of students’ text comprehension. Educ 3–13 48(5):512–526. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2019.1623282 Kiili C, Coiro J, Hämäläinen J (2016) An online inquiry tool to support the exploration of controversial issues on the Internet. J Lit Technol 17(1–2):31–52 Kokolaki A, Stavrou D (2022) Pre-service primary teachers develop teaching artifacts on contemporary socioscientific issues. J Sci Teach Educ 34(3):287–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2022.2078546 Kumar V, Choudhary SK, Singh R (2024) Environmental socio-scientific issues as contexts in developing scientific literacy in science education: A systematic literature review. Soc Sci Humanit Open 9:100765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100765 Lassoued K, Awad A, Guirat R (2020) The impact of managerial empowerment on problem solving and decision making skills: the case of Abu Dhabi University. Manag Sci Lett 10(4):769–780. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2019.10.020 Leden L, Hansson L, Redfors A (2017) From black and white to shades of grey. Sci Educ 26:483–511. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-017-9920-4 Lee H, Yang JE (2019) Science teachers taking their first steps toward teaching socioscientific issues through collaborative action research. Res Sci Educ 49(1):51–71 Levinson R (2018) Realising the school science curriculum. Curric J 29(4):522–537. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2018.1504314 List A (2022) Demonstrating the effectiveness of two scaffolds for fostering students’ domain perspective reasoning. Eur J Psychol Educ 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-022-00643-8 Lu YH, Shih JL, Chen PC et al (2024) Exploring elementary school students’ perceptions towards socioscientific issues through the role-playing game Future City. IIAI Lett Inf Interdisciplinary Res 5:237. https://doi.org/10.52731/liir.v005.237 Martini M, Widodo W, Qosyim A, Mahdiannur M, Jatmiko B (2021) Improving undergraduate science education students’ argumentation skills through debates on socioscientific issues. Jurnal Pendidikan Ipa Indonesia 10(3):428–438. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v10i3.30050 McNeill KL (2011) Elementary students’ views of explanation, argumentation and evidence, and their abilities to construct arguments over the school year. J Res Sci Teach 48(7):793–823. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20430 Míguez-Álvarez C, Cuevas-Alonso M, Saavedra A, Cabanach RG (2022) The role of text characteristics in the reading comprehension of primary school children in Spanish. Rev Iberoam Psicol Salud 13(1):41–55. https://doi.org/10.23923/j.rips.2022.01.053 Ministerio de Educación y Formación Profesional [MEFP] (2023) PIRLS 2021. Estudio internacional de progreso en comprensión lectora. Informe español. Instituto Nacional de Evaluación Educativa, Madrid Ministerio de Educación y Formación Profesional [MEFP] (2022) Real Decreto 157/2022, de 1 de marzo, por el que se establecen la ordenación y las enseñanzas mínimas de la Educación Primaria . Boletín Oficial del Estado, 52, 1–109. Recuperado de https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-2022-3296 Ministerio de Educación y Formación Profesional [MEFP] (2024) TIMSS 2023. Estudio internacional de tendencias en matemáticas y ciencias. Informe español . Instituto Nacional de Evaluación Educativa. Recuperado de https://www.libreria.educacion.gob.es/libro/timss-2023-estudio-internacional-de-tendencias-en-matematicas-y-ciencias-informe-espanol_184942/ Mohamedi-Amaruch A, Rico-Martín AM (2020) Assessment of reading comprehension in primary education: reading processes and texts [Evaluación de la comprensión lectora en educación primaria: procesos lectores y textos]. Lenguas Modernas 55:37–52 Narayanan B, Kumar AG, Gunasekaran D, Vengayil R, Maduvegadde K, Alampady N (2025) Perspectives of socio-scientific issues in educational research: A bibliometric analysis. J Teach Learn 19(1):50–84. https://doi.org/10.22329/jtl.v19i1.8985 Nepraš K, Strejčková T, Kroufek R (2022) Climate change education in primary and lower secondary education: Systematic review results. Sustainability 14(22):14913. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142214913 OCDE (2023) PISA 2025 science framework (second draft). OCDE. https://pisa-framework.oecd.org/science-2025/assets/docs/PISA_2025_Science_Framework.pdf . Accessed October 20, 2025 Öhman J, Öhman M (2012) Participatory approach in practice: An analysis of student discussions about climate change. Environ Educ Res 19(3):324–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2012.695012 Olsson D, Gericke N (2016) The adolescent dip in students’ sustainability consciousness. J Environ Educ 47:35–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.2015.1075464 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. J Res Sci Teach 50(3):315–347. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21073 Ottander K, Simon S (2021) Learning democratic participation? Meaning-making in discussion of socioscientific issues in science education. Int J Sci Educ 43(12):1895–1925. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.1946200 Ozcan-Ermis G, Hervé N (2024) Identifying pre- and in-service teachers’ stances on teaching socioscientific issues: A systematic review of empirical studies. Can J Sci Math Technol Educ 23(4):741–764. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42330-023-00306-w Öztürk S, Karakaş H (2024) Scenario-based teaching process in the life science course based on socioscientific issues [Special Issue]. Turk J Educ 13(5):441–464. https://doi.org/10.19128/turje.1505099 Pagan A, Leite AP, Magina S, Cazorla I (2008) A leitura e interpretação de gráficos e tabelas no Ensino Fundamental e Médio. In: Gitirana V, Bellemain F, Andrade V (eds) Anais do 2º Simpósio Internacional de Pesquisa em Educação Matemática. Universidad Federal de Pernambuco, Recife, pp 1–10 Papancheva RY (2017) Working with data tables and graphs at Primary school. J Process Manag New Technol 5(4) Peña-García SN (2019) The challenge of reading comprehension in primary education. Panorama 13(24):43–56. https://doi.org/10.15765/pnrm.v13i24.1205 Reid A, Dillon J, Ardoin N, Ferreira JA (2021) Scientists’ warnings and the need to reimagine, recreate, and restore environmental education. Environ Educ Res 27:783–795. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2021.1937577 Richmond AS, Hagan LK (2011) Promoting higher level thinking in psychology: is active learning the answer? Teach Psychol 38(2):102–105. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628311401581 Ridgway J, Nicholson J, Sutherland S, Hedger S (2019) Critical statistical literacy and interactive data visualisations. In: Evans J, Ruane S, Southall H (eds) Data in society: challenging statistics in an age of globalisation . Policy Press, p 349–357 Romero-Ariza M, Quesada A, Estepa A (2021) Promoting critical thinking through mathematics and science teacher education: the case of argumentation and graphs interpretation about climate change. Eur J Teach Educ 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2021.1961736 Sakamoto M, Yamaguchi E, Yamamoto T, Wakabayashi K (2021) An intervention study on students’ decision-making towards consensus building on socio-scientific issues. Int J Sci Educ 43(12):1965–1983. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.1947541 Şaşmazören F, Karapınar A, Sarı K, Demirer T (2023) Teaching socioscientific issues through scientific scenarios: A case evaluation based on secondary school students’ views. Bartın Univ J Fac Educ 14(1):124–145. https://doi.org/10.14686/buefad.988894 Schreier M (2012) Qualitative Content Analysis in Practice. SAGE, London Sekelj A, Rigo I (2011) Teaching English grammar in primary school. Tabula: Periodicus Facultatis Philosophicae Polensis; Rivista Della Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia. J Fac Humanit 9:188–199. https://doi.org/10.32728/tab.09.2011.14 Siarova H, Sternadel D, Szőnyi E (2019) Research for CULT Committee – Science and scientific literacy as an Educational Challenge. European Parliament, Policy Department for Structural and Cohesion policies. European Union Tang KY, Lin TC, Hsu YS (2023) Status and trends of socioscientific issues in educational literature: insights and extensions from a co-word analysis. Int J Sci Educ 46(11):1073–1097. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2023.2272603 Tang X, Kikas E, Pakarinen E, Lerkkanen M-K, Muotka J, Nurmi J-E (2017) Profiles of teaching practices and first and third graders’ reading skills in Finland and Estonia. Teach Teach Educ 64:150–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.01.020 Valladares L (2021) Scientific literacy and social transformation. Sci Educ 30:557–587. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00205-2 Van de Wetering J, Leijten P, Spitzer J, Thomaes S (2022) Does environmental education benefit environmental outcomes in children and adolescents? A meta-analysis. J Environ Psychol 81:101782. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2022.101782 White P, Ferguson J, O’Connor Smith N, O’Shea Carre H (2022) School strikers enacting politics for climate justice: Daring to think differently about education. Aust J Environ Educ 38(1):26–39. https://doi.org/10.1017/aee.2021.24 Wiyarsi A, Çalik M (2019) Revisiting the scientific habits of mind scale for socio-scientific issues in the Indonesian context. Int J Sci Educ 41(17):2430–2447. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1640427 Yin RK (2018) Case study research and applications: Design and methods, 6th edn. SAGE, London Zamalloa T, Salgado M, Berciano A (2025) How to promote scientific practices in early childhood education: The teachers’ role. Int J Sci Math Educ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-025-10557-8 Zeidler DL, Sadler TD (2023) Exploring and expanding the frontiers of socioscientific issues. En: Lederman NG, Zeidler DL, Lederman JS (eds.) Handbook of research on science education, 1.ª ed. Routledge, págs. 899–929 Zhang J, Lopez Wui MG, Nam R, Relyea JE, Wong SS (2023) Improving argumentative writing of sixth-grade adolescents through dialogic inquiry of socioscientific issues. J Writ Res 14(3):375–419. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2023.14.03.03 Zhang WX, Hsu YS (2025) Professional Development for Socioscientific Issue Teaching: Exploring the Discourse of In-Service Teachers in Community Activities through Epistemic Network Analysis. Res Sci Educ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-025-10237-1 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files Supplementarymaterial1.pdf Supplementarymaterial2.pdf Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7045084","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":518629153,"identity":"a863a794-ff6f-4135-9ce1-4a508ea39e7b","order_by":0,"name":"Nuria Fernández-Huetos","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Autonomous University of Madrid","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Nuria","middleName":"","lastName":"Fernández-Huetos","suffix":""},{"id":518629154,"identity":"7be4d7d4-7866-4e86-95b0-33ac06fe93b7","order_by":1,"name":"José Manuel Pérez-Martín","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Autonomous University of Madrid","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"José","middleName":"Manuel","lastName":"Pérez-Martín","suffix":""},{"id":518629155,"identity":"fe636c44-59b7-4af8-8512-233bf3cb48cc","order_by":2,"name":"Tamara Esquivel-Martín","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Autonomous University of Madrid","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Tamara","middleName":"","lastName":"Esquivel-Martín","suffix":""},{"id":518629158,"identity":"6687ca15-7b03-4c8a-9281-300ce2ac34fd","order_by":3,"name":"Irene Guevara-Herrero","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Autonomous University of Madrid","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Irene","middleName":"","lastName":"Guevara-Herrero","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-07-04 09:23:11","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7045084/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7045084/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":92532283,"identity":"50c10af7-84c4-4c01-ad12-6f4e824ae7c1","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:50:56","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":103094,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"FinalManuscriptAnthropocene.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/52f42c703176779fcf07d712.docx"},{"id":92531591,"identity":"8d4ebdf7-154b-445a-835f-95c4f1b706e1","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:57","extension":"json","order_by":14,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":6469,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"303baaee91e34a66bb8a06e29f58370d.json","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/c3f29d30d7a2e1add6cd6f90.json"},{"id":92531598,"identity":"e40faa36-9d2b-4143-8aad-1063f7f42386","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:57","extension":"pdf","order_by":15,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":7287453,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Supplementarymaterial1.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/7853ed35da0be6b042025fce.pdf"},{"id":92533126,"identity":"61d15432-d0ce-42a8-bb92-d64884f2e587","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:58:57","extension":"pdf","order_by":16,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":151405,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Supplementarymaterial2.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/4478a3f328c444d9ccd6a802.pdf"},{"id":92531594,"identity":"e640949e-b4f4-4dcd-8c71-209dc8e74a93","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:57","extension":"xml","order_by":17,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":188777,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"303baaee91e34a66bb8a06e29f58370d1enriched.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/7b2cd453dae3319638edc4c6.xml"},{"id":92532293,"identity":"7b04b971-89f9-46f5-8104-d073ad61853d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:50:57","extension":"jpg","order_by":18,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":3054124,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Figure01.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/91a8315785b0734b3fdc5047.jpg"},{"id":92531609,"identity":"4560faf5-76a9-4e9f-9f89-d2f0815b32ce","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:57","extension":"jpg","order_by":19,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":5080213,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Figure02.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/355262b174b3be74843b9f96.jpg"},{"id":92532295,"identity":"dc91fcb4-5991-4a3c-9269-e0cf59a11891","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:50:57","extension":"jpg","order_by":20,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":3162810,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Figure03.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/1e263d84cb758705d1cd1180.jpg"},{"id":92533127,"identity":"d15d9696-6f6b-4225-b20f-35fc9bf72a14","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:58:57","extension":"jpg","order_by":21,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":5044122,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Figure04.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/bec775563f12ec2220529ab1.jpg"},{"id":92532294,"identity":"4b781e9b-84e7-40a2-9543-0f019d4ab951","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:50:57","extension":"jpg","order_by":22,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":3334145,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Figure05.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/405c31605384128a758cc411.jpg"},{"id":92532297,"identity":"6da8821e-7b51-4fea-96e7-f536c969d4f8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:50:57","extension":"jpg","order_by":23,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":5389589,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Figure06.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/3f2dea559e5f25228c63f25a.jpg"},{"id":92533128,"identity":"06351062-0396-47d1-826e-5d8f1d1b0e4d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:58:57","extension":"jpg","order_by":24,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":2872212,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Figure07.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/933ce646b39df29b79efe4bd.jpg"},{"id":92531614,"identity":"0a8fd6a4-86ab-43d2-bad5-9f5d20872b93","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:57","extension":"jpg","order_by":25,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":4862259,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Figure08.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/f9c7d97a73f81577a6e16406.jpg"},{"id":92531606,"identity":"1f143431-d852-4f37-9cf5-9b1b7c17c7d0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:57","extension":"jpg","order_by":26,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":2948609,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Figure09.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/1cd5f5a87378de49d9944278.jpg"},{"id":92531612,"identity":"97cde6c4-cf30-4051-bc7b-753ed3715b06","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:57","extension":"jpg","order_by":27,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":5051345,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Figure10.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/8e2d11297f5357798fcc4319.jpg"},{"id":92531600,"identity":"b9fdf205-1468-42f2-a109-3cecc81a7c1d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:57","extension":"jpg","order_by":28,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":1777960,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Figure11.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/f06d3f207eb7912600031ef7.jpg"},{"id":92531611,"identity":"0d8eee75-9a4d-400c-a6c2-3deaf2e5c2b2","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:57","extension":"jpg","order_by":29,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":3105053,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Figure12.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/6f61af007bd07165d8c84fc6.jpg"},{"id":92531619,"identity":"4fff5bad-f142-462a-ade1-f069e64e32c9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:57","extension":"jpg","order_by":30,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":4953449,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Figure13.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/f198dfc454ab23f2f1c73282.jpg"},{"id":92532298,"identity":"cc663e2e-4e16-42a6-90e7-86435372b36d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:50:57","extension":"png","order_by":31,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":262574,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"OnlineFigure01.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/64c596b71c88a5ce2abcdef2.png"},{"id":92531613,"identity":"096a7299-7081-49c1-8bea-aee8af7907b3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:57","extension":"png","order_by":32,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":446720,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"OnlineFigure02.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/7f17059c70a805fb958bdf13.png"},{"id":92531603,"identity":"11b20709-9fbb-4960-9771-afbf1f0a059f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:57","extension":"png","order_by":33,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":291935,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"OnlineFigure03.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/ef7a48fa73180cc6d357a162.png"},{"id":92531608,"identity":"0c87d27c-89e6-494c-9fee-ec86184fd575","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:57","extension":"png","order_by":34,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":464475,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"OnlineFigure04.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/97ffa57180ba9cacb11e71a0.png"},{"id":92532300,"identity":"9f458ce7-b4e8-498e-97f1-088d9a37a9de","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:50:57","extension":"png","order_by":35,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":311956,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"OnlineFigure05.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/063d44751d9c24d5665a5fd1.png"},{"id":92531610,"identity":"b53a4a1a-6a03-428f-b4bf-6719f12fcae5","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:57","extension":"png","order_by":36,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":535765,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"OnlineFigure06.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/d0fff73ada3c411c1edaa697.png"},{"id":92531617,"identity":"9c57d7fc-85dd-451e-a6a3-c445964d41e8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:57","extension":"png","order_by":37,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":251317,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"OnlineFigure07.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/f1e8cff205938eb586e0bdc7.png"},{"id":92531627,"identity":"901c59e8-0d35-4245-95ef-b5d388b66ee9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:58","extension":"png","order_by":38,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":433347,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"OnlineFigure08.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/9533d1eee395a3575389b5c0.png"},{"id":92532299,"identity":"8f44df54-64f9-4245-8d4e-387be2cbee1c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:50:57","extension":"png","order_by":39,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":300777,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"OnlineFigure09.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/6b91a8a34f5527b3f4c573a2.png"},{"id":92532301,"identity":"825fe57b-892e-4e5b-86c8-878b3b85ed34","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:50:57","extension":"png","order_by":40,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":409581,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"OnlineFigure10.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/c3f589c31a7e92822c21e98a.png"},{"id":92532305,"identity":"032f8511-25e5-4be5-9de4-ce1486b2239a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:50:58","extension":"png","order_by":41,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":215452,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"OnlineFigure11.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/4cb0f59537aa79e1234e1f52.png"},{"id":92531621,"identity":"e6fbc4cd-c7fe-4ada-bed6-12522f4fb542","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:58","extension":"png","order_by":42,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":343817,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"OnlineFigure12.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/bfbc9c353a61dc74ec6556cb.png"},{"id":92531623,"identity":"3b9ae181-a949-45cc-9914-75803fe5c154","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:58","extension":"png","order_by":43,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":232233,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"OnlineFigure13.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/d5b7228b60a011e5fd4e75fd.png"},{"id":92532303,"identity":"d975bfa8-0851-4a13-adf4-a00c4785cf7c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:50:58","extension":"xml","order_by":44,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":185859,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"303baaee91e34a66bb8a06e29f58370d1structuring.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/0ea01f93e623aa62d785d56a.xml"},{"id":92532304,"identity":"22eddf65-ff02-4033-9fb2-c2957a3ac971","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:50:58","extension":"html","order_by":45,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":196986,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"earlyproof.html","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/11af529fbc970e7a94df3c71.html"},{"id":92531579,"identity":"287587d7-b877-4adc-a01e-1ddb71304dfb","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:56","extension":"jpg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":3054124,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePerformance levels and materials used by 4\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e grade students for Q1.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure01.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/e2e62fec12b8fe737c11d484.jpg"},{"id":92531589,"identity":"7ea66036-7dc6-4d0d-b542-ebd7f5a71690","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:57","extension":"jpg","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":5080213,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePerformance levels and materials used by 6\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e grade students for Q1.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure02.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/2eb769867c9c6f648c7f566e.jpg"},{"id":92532284,"identity":"5bc26147-b02b-45af-a7a8-787a0ec0530f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:50:56","extension":"jpg","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":3162810,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePerformance levels and materials used by 4\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e grade students for Q2.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure03.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/17bd3ea7eb1188bc9ebed3ec.jpg"},{"id":92531584,"identity":"3ecc507e-89c9-4ef2-b601-fa084734527d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:56","extension":"jpg","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":5044122,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePerformance levels and materials used by 6\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e grade students for Q2.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure04.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/83db84669b2c3b323e44a28b.jpg"},{"id":92533123,"identity":"73d0e810-746b-43aa-bd55-a07483388fe6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:58:56","extension":"jpg","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":3334145,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePerformance levels and materials used by 4\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e grade students for Q3.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure05.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/5e8e863804f1249b28cb20bf.jpg"},{"id":92532286,"identity":"3813b12c-05d8-4407-9a82-de27929134c9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:50:56","extension":"jpg","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":5389589,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eFigure 6. Performance levels and materials used by 6\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e grade students for Q3.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure06.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/014c11ca06c11208d315951a.jpg"},{"id":92531585,"identity":"2a86a384-9b40-4bc9-9cc5-6f5ca8bf3c78","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:56","extension":"jpg","order_by":7,"title":"Figure 7","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":2872212,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePerformance levels and materials used by 4\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e grade students for Q4.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure07.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/5a2bc095abe2abfd211d2c81.jpg"},{"id":92532289,"identity":"754f443b-2e6a-46ca-b8b4-50fc1d9dbe2b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:50:57","extension":"jpg","order_by":8,"title":"Figure 8","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":4862259,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePerformance levels and materials used by 6\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e grade students for Q4.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure08.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/fcda36ab17596cf93eea434e.jpg"},{"id":92533124,"identity":"67d2eb3a-d0f2-4e43-a296-513033aa2744","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:58:56","extension":"jpg","order_by":9,"title":"Figure 9","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":2948609,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePerformance levels and materials used by 4\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e grade students for Q5.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure09.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/194eabcdd91e3f92f28cbd24.jpg"},{"id":92532288,"identity":"01647c67-330b-4496-b8bf-57a8511b627b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:50:57","extension":"jpg","order_by":10,"title":"Figure 10","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":5051345,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePerformance levels and materials used by 6\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e grade students for Q5. A student used a video that had been used in a different activity a few days earlier. This demonstrates the impact that activity had on the student's learning.)\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure10.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/42785e298db6d60630591def.jpg"},{"id":92531587,"identity":"098ebf5b-7377-421d-8a75-7a79f479da1c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:56","extension":"jpg","order_by":11,"title":"Figure 11","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":1777960,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePerformance levels achieved by 4\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e grade students for Q6.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure11.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/b6ce0a105db12851805a1957.jpg"},{"id":92532290,"identity":"26ba7a8a-a685-42db-9fae-1ff356ae87fb","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:50:57","extension":"jpg","order_by":12,"title":"Figure 12","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":3105053,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePerformance levels achieved by 6\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e grade students for Q6.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure12.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/fdb99699ef9a7e3bbde9253b.jpg"},{"id":92531593,"identity":"05318290-c0d0-428e-ada4-f7fa6400426b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:57","extension":"jpg","order_by":13,"title":"Figure 13","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":4953449,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eRelative frequencies of types of solutions proposed by 4\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e and 6\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e grade students working individually and in groups. A: Pharmaceutical design and WWTP; B: Responsible use; C: Political-legislative measures; D: Not in line with content or generic; E: no solutions.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure13.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/75c6964cf805641b96f7f857.jpg"},{"id":100356470,"identity":"aa43742d-7e1a-468b-9c05-f5e3964fdf20","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-16 07:10:50","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":51667865,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/becd2158-bd77-46fd-b0ea-869431e09117.pdf"},{"id":92533125,"identity":"5eb7e252-0ba3-4d83-a841-548adecd7165","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:58:57","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":7287453,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Supplementarymaterial1.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/6b2dc32a7f520197054e91c5.pdf"},{"id":92531581,"identity":"a1f99d08-bf82-4711-9821-91b16e7bd3c2","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-30 16:42:56","extension":"pdf","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":151405,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Supplementarymaterial2.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7045084/v1/1dc051bb6da9f3df1ba3f70e.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Learning to Argue in the Anthropocene: How do 4th and 6th Grade Students Use Multimodal Materials to Solve a Socioscientific Issue?","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe current environmental crisis has highlighted the limitations of traditional Environmental Education practices, which mainly focus on transmitting ecological content (Authors et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Reid et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR70\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). To address the challenges of the Anthropocene, an era characterized by the interdependence of science, technology, society and the environment (OECD, 2023; Zhang \u0026amp; Hsu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR89\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e), it is crucial to transition to Transformative Environmental Education (TEE). This approach promotes critical literacy, systemic thinking, and action grounded in environmental justice (Authors et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Zhang \u0026amp; Hsu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR89\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn this context, given the interconnection of socioenvironmental issues, it is crucial that students develop the ability to make informed, reasoned and critical decisions. Argumentation is one of the most successful scientific practices in science education (Dawson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Zhang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR88\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) because, to debate complex issues, students need to be able to construct, defend and criticize arguments based on adequate scientific literacy. There are several different views on what constitutes scientific literacy (Valladares, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR81\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Firstly, view 1 focuses more on scientific content and processes. By contrast, view 2 emphasizes the application of knowledge in real and controversial contexts. The latter is the one that best aligns with TEE (Dawson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). While some studies have implemented scientific argumentation (view 2) in classrooms (Authors et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Authors, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Author, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), this practice is not common due to time constraints and a lack of teacher training in designing, implementing and evaluating student learning outcomes in response to such proposals (Dawson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Osborne et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Finally, in view 3, students develop a global perspective on issues and participate in social activism (Siarova et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR78\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; White et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR83\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). There are few examples of this approach in educational practice, but in the study conducted by Herman et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), students understood the impact of the reintroduction of wolves in Yellowstone and took action to address this socioscientific issue (SSI) by writing letters to public officials explaining the controversy over wolf hunting, for example.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn this sense, socioscientific issues (SSIs) are ideal for developing argumentation skills in the context of TEE classrooms, as they address real and complex problems and require decisions to be made based on multiple factors (Zeidler \u0026amp; Sadler, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR87\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). SSIs therefore contribute to the contextualization of learning around controversial topics (e.g. the use of GMOs, nuclear energy and climate change) and encourage students to evaluate information, construct evidence-based arguments, consider multiple perspectives and act responsibly (Arifin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Tang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR79\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Likewise, designing activities based on SSIs allows students to understand the complexity of current issues from a systemic perspective, recognizing that there are no single solutions, but rather multiple solutions with diverse implications (Şaşmaz\u0026ouml;ren et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR75\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, SSIs enable students to connect their interests to scientific content and their everyday lives, thereby promoting their motivation and engagement in the classroom, particularly when addressing local issues or topics relevant to their experience (Wiyarsi and \u0026Ccedil;alik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR84\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Such attitudes are crucial for TEE with a focus on social change (Freitas et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Kokolaki \u0026amp; Stavrou, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Indeed, numerous studies have demonstrated the positive impact of incorporating SSIs into the classroom, as this approach improves scientific literacy, critical thinking, argumentation, decision-making skills and academic performance (Akyol \u0026amp; Kanadli, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Martini et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite its potential, the analysis of the implementation of SSIs in educational research has been limited. There were virtually no publications on the subject between 2002 and 2006 (Narayanan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). From 2011 onwards, growth began to be recorded, with a notable increase in publications and citations between 2019 and 2020 (Arifin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Kumar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). This reflects a growing commitment to and interest in exploring SSIs as a means of promoting scientific literacy in educational institutions (Kumar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Zeidler and Sadler, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR87\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). However, SSIs are still rarely implemented in classrooms (Chen and Xiao, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; H\u0026ouml;gstr\u0026ouml;m et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Consequently, scientific concepts such as the water cycle or energy sources are commonly taught without exploring related controversies (Dawson and Carson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Teachers also find this approach difficult to apply due to a lack of time, knowledge of how to teach SSIs or teaching resources (Christenson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Dawson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; \u0026Ouml;zcan-Ermis and Herv\u0026eacute;, 2024).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite these obstacles and teachers' fear of possible criticism (Levinson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), some decide to incorporate SSIs into their classrooms, primarily in secondary and higher education (Zamalloa et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR86\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). However, educational research recommends taking a transformative approach to addressing environmental issues, particularly in the early stages, as the impact on behavioral change is greater at this time (Olsson \u0026amp; Gericke, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Van de Wetering et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR82\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). In fact, childhood is the stage at which the cognitive, emotional and attitudinal foundations that determine a person's relationship with the environment are formed (Nepraš et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Zamalloa et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR86\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, these educational practices should be incorporated throughout all years of schooling (Dawson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e) to promote more complex thinking (Nepraš et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) and the ability to ask questions, think critically, and make informed decisions (\u0026Ouml;zt\u0026uuml;rk \u0026amp; Karakaş, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn this context, several studies have demonstrated that children in early childhood (ECE) and primary education (PE) can engage with SSIs and develop an argumentative approach (Byrne et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Zamalloa et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR86\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). This can lead to a more positive attitude towards science and increased environmental awareness (Lu et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). For instance, Byrne et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e) found that 9-10-year-old students could discuss different government options for reducing carbon dioxide emissions and negotiate solutions from various perspectives. Meanwhile, \u0026Ouml;zt\u0026uuml;rk and Karakaş (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) found that 8\u0026ndash;9-year-old students who carried out a sequence of SSIs-based activities increased their decision-making skills and academic performance. Similarly, Dawson (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e) and McNeill (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e) demonstrated that 11\u0026ndash;12-year-old students could improve their scientific reasoning and argumentation skills. The study by Zamalloa et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR86\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e) also demonstrated the inquiry and argumentation skills exhibited by 3-year-old children throughout the activity.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eConsequently, it is essential to design activities within the framework of TEE, implement them in the early stages of education, and assess their efficacy. In this regard, Authors (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e) conducted a pilot study with 6th grade PE students, analyzing the results of implementing an activity based on an SSI related to the presence of pharmaceuticals in wastewater. This activity was designed to address the pressing issue of environmental, human, and animal health (One Health) concerns, particularly the presence of drugs in wastewater. This context is aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 3, 6, 11, 12, 14, and 15, with the objective of enhancing TEE instruction and providing students with a quality education (SDG 4). Therefore, we consider it necessary to continue with this line of research, implementing the same activity with a greater number of students from different schools and grades.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe objective of this study is to analyze how the designed teaching proposal promotes argumentation and scientific reasoning in 4th and 6th grade students at another educational center. This study aims to assess students' proficiency in argumentation, to identify the types of evidence they employ, and to examine the way they utilize evidence based on their level of understanding. Additionally, the study will analyze the proposed solutions. It will also compare the development of the activity between the two grades, as well as individual versus group performance. To that end, the following research questions (RQ) are hereby proposed:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eRQ1. What levels of performance do students show when solving this SSI compared to the reference answer, and what differences are observed depending on the type of work (individual or group) and the grade (4th or 6th )?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eRQ2. What materials do they draw when formulating arguments, how do they use them in relation to their level of understanding, and what differences can be observed depending on the type of work (individual or group) and the grade (4th or 6th )?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eRQ3. What kind of solutions do students propose to prevent the presence of pharmaceuticals in the river, and what differences are observed depending on the type of work (individual or group) and the grade (4th or 6th )?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Method","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eContext\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study employs a multiple case study design (Yin, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR85\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), with three class groups serving as participants: a group of 24 4th grade students (ages 9\u0026ndash;10) and two 6th grade groups, comprising a total of 41 students (ages 11\u0026ndash;12). They are enrolled in a public school located within the Community of *censured* (Spain), which is characterized by a medium-high socioeconomic level. This classification is due to the area's average income per person exceeding the regional mean for the Community of *censured*. During the intervention, the students initially engaged in individualized activities and subsequently collaborated in groups, thereby preserving the conventional classroom work teams. Participation was voluntary with signed consent forms, and anonymity was ensured using numerical codes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe activity implemented, \"Pharmaceuticals in the river?\", is identical to that in the study by Authors (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). The sequence of the activity, the design, and the teaching tools utilized remain the same (supplementary material 1).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe present study involved a qualitative analysis of the content of the responses (Schreier, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR76\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e) and a discourse analysis (Gee, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). To this end, the data was listened to and interpreted. All written responses from the students (individual and group), as well as all group oral responses, were processed.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe analysis of all questions in the activity (Q) followed the work of Authors (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e), employing the categories included in supplementary material 2. After categorization, absolute (Q1-Q6) and relative (Q7) frequencies were calculated. For RQ1, which is related to student performance, the categories used to analyze Q1-Q6 range from null (1) to high (5). For RQ2, which is related to the materials used, the categories used for the analysis of Q1 to Q6 are graphs, maps, videos, report, and leaflet. To analyze the level of comprehension, Barret's (1968) taxonomy was used for texts and Curcio's (1989) taxonomy for graphics. Finally, for RQ3, the five types of solutions proposed in Q7 were identified.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were performed in all three cases using Microsoft Excel TM e IBM\u0026reg; SPSS\u0026reg; Statistics 19 (2010) to compare individual and group performance among students and between levels (4th and 6th ). Specifically, a non-parametric statistical analysis of mean comparison (Mann-Whitney U test, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05) was performed on the results of Q1 to Q6, since the sample did not show normality (Kolmogorov-Smirnov test) or homoscedasticity of variances (Levene test). For Q7, the data were analyzed using the nonparametric Chi-square test (c\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05). Finally, to analyze the use of materials at different educational levels, the nonparametric Chi-square test (c\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05) was applied.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results and Discussion","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAnalysis of the performance level of students in 4th and 6th grade of PE (RQ1)\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe results show that 4th and 6th grade PE students can solve the case, although with different levels of performance. The average individual performance (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) of 4th grade students when completing the activity is 2.59, and that of 6th grade students is significantly higher (2.88\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.57; Mann-Whitney U test, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05). Therefore, students in both grades are between a low level (2/5) and a medium-low level (3/5). In this sense, it is reasonable that 6th grade students achieve a higher level of performance on all questions, as they have more knowledge and skills. However, when analyzing group performance, no significant differences are observed between the two grades, with a similar level of performance comparable to the individual performance of 6th grade students (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnalysis of the difference between the performance of 4th and 6th grade students individually and in groups in the activity. The asterisk (*) indicates statistically significant differences (Mann-Whitney U test), p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0,05).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIndividual (I)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eGroup (G)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eMean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;Variance\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e4th\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.59\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1,71*\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.90\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.02\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e6th\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.88\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1,57*\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.89\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe analysis by question enables the observation of discrepancies between grades and according to the type of work (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). In the Q1, Q2, Q3, Q5 and Q6 no significant differences were observed, indicating that students from both grades answered the survey questions in a similar manner. In Q4 significant differences were identified. Furthermore, this is the question with the lowest performance level in both grades. This may be because it requires students to simultaneously understand and apply information from different materials. Likewise, the perception of difficulty is similar in both grades, as reflected in the level of performance achieved in each question, which is as follows in ascending order: Q4\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;Q2\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;Q1\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;Q5\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;Q3\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;Q6.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA subsequent comparison of performance levels based on work mode (individual and group) revealed no statistically significant differences (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). This finding aligns with the conclusions of Authors (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e), which demonstrated that group work does not enhance student performance in any of the PE grades under analysis. For instance, in Q4, G8 of 6th grade, one group member (S35) correctly argues his answer, but his classmates (S34) overlook it and give incorrect responses.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eS33: \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;If the pharmaceuticals most commonly found in the Bodonal stream are not the best-selling ones, how and why do they end up in such large quantities in the stream?\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eS34: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eBecause in pharmacies, if a product, that is, a medicine, is not sold..., they throw it away.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eS35: \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;And because they are the most difficult to eliminate.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eS36: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eAnd it also expires\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eS35: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eThey are also the most difficult to eliminate.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eS33: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eYes, but...\u0026rdquo;.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eS35: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eThe best sellers are the easiest to eliminate. And the worst sellers...\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eS34: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eNo, but not that. It says... How and why do so many of them end up in the stream? Because pharmacies throw them away when they don't sell them. And also when they expire.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eS36: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eBecause if they don't stock them and they expire, pharmacies throw them away.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnalysis of the difference between individual and group performance and between PE courses in each question. The asterisk (*) indicates statistically significant differences (Mann-Whitney U test, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0,05).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"14\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c10\" colnum=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c11\" colnum=\"11\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c12\" colnum=\"12\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c13\" colnum=\"13\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c14\" colnum=\"14\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" morerows=\"1\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eQ1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eQ2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eQ3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c10\" namest=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eQ4\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c12\" namest=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eQ5\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c14\" namest=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eQ6\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eI\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eG\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eI\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eG\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eI\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eG\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eI*\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eG\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eI\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eG\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eI\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eG\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eMean\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026plusmn; Variance\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e4th\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.83\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.58\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.20\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.20\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.58\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.78\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.80\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.20\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.08\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.08\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.60\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.80\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.25\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.37\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.20\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.20\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.04\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.48\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.20\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.20\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.75\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.50\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4.40\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.30\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e6th\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.15\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.78\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.93\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.56\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.78\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.66\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.48\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.50\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.76\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.04\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.00\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.24\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.79\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.44\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.53\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.85\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.98\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4.33\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.00\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eAnalysis of the use of materials by students in 4th and 6th grade of PE (RQ2)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEach question analyzed the materials that 4th and 6th grade students used to support their answers. In general, 6th grade students tended to use more materials simultaneously than 4th grade students, though no significant differences were found between the two grades (χ\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05). No differences were observed in the choice of materials according to the different semiotic modalities (textual, visual, or graphic). These results suggest that 4th grade students are as capable as 6th grade students of analyzing data extracted from different sources of information. As seen in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, students performed better on questions Q3 and Q5, which required extracting evidence from texts only, and on Q6, where they had to take a position without using materials. In contrast, they performed worse on questions Q4, Q2, and Q1, which required extracting evidence from maps and graphs.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eQ1: “Based on what you have read and seen, what is polluting the river?”\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo answer this question correctly, it is necessary to use graphs, specifically the one showing the most prevalent pharmaceuticals in the river. Other materials may be useful, such as the scientist\u0026rsquo;s video mentioning the presence of drugs or the leaflet and report listing the names of the drugs present in the river. However, they do not contain enough data to provide a high-level answer. In fact, no 4th or 6th grade students achieve this level of performance.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs for 4th grade students (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e), during individual work, 12 students use the report, 3 use the graphs, 5 extract information from the videos, 1 combines video and text, and 3 do not specify the material used, nor can it be inferred. In contrast, when working in groups, each group uses different materials: leaflet (G1), scientist\u0026rsquo;s video (G2), graphs (G4), report (G5), and 1 group (G3) does not specify. These results suggest that 4th grade students tend to avoid using graphs, probably because they do not know how to interpret them correctly. Instead, most choose to look for information in the report.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn the case of 6th grade students (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e), 20 use videos, 7 use texts (leaflet or report), 2 use graphs, and 3 supplement graphs with the report during individual work. Additionally, 5 students combine the scientist's video with the report, 1 student uses 3 materials, and 3 students do not specify the material used. By contrast, when working in groups, 3 (G1, G7, and G9) use the scientist's video; 1 (G4) relies exclusively on the report; 1 (G8) combines graphs with the report; 1 (G3) combines the scientist's video with the report; and 3 (G2, G5, and G6) do not specify the material.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe findings reveal that, like 4th grade, 6th grade students rarely utilize graphs. Only 5 out of 41 students used them in their individual answers, which suggests possible difficulties interpreting this type of representation. Most students instead extract information from the videos. Notably, 9 6th grade students could extract information from various materials, whereas in 4th grade, this occurred in only one case. However, this combination of materials did not enable them to achieve a high level of understanding.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAccording to Curcio's (1969) taxonomy of graph comprehension, high performance on Q1 is associated with level 2 (reading between the data). Students must select the bar graph and compare the values of each drug. In this study, 4th and 6th grade PE students who use graphs achieve average performance levels by identifying some or all the pharmaceuticals present in the river. In other words, they extract information by reading the data on the \"Y\" axis of the graph, achieving level 1 graph comprehension (read the data). In a previous pilot study (Authors, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e), nearly three-quarters of students used graphs, and some achieved level 2 comprehension.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHistorically, multiple studies have examined PE students' understanding of graphs using this taxonomy. In Guimar\u0026atilde;es's (2002) study, 3rd grade students could identify the frequencies and basic elements of a bar graph (maximums and minimums). However, only a quarter could locate a specific area of the graph. According to Cruz (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e), 3rd grade students performed better with pictograms than pie charts. Regardless of the type of graph, half of the students correctly answered level 1 and 2 comprehension questions, and only a quarter correctly answered level 3 questions (reading beyond the data). Various studies show that, in 5th and 6th grade, almost all students respond well to tasks requiring level 1 bar graphs (Canch\u0026eacute;, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e; Pagan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e), and approximately half answer correctly when the activities are level 2 (Pagan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e) or level 3 (Canch\u0026eacute;, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, research incorporating tasks up to level 4 of graph comprehension (reading behind the data) shows that most students reach level 2 (Arteaga et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Batanero et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Along these lines, Evangelista (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e) concludes that students correctly answer half of level 1 and 2 tasks. In general, PE students tend to have difficulty reaching levels 3 and 4 of graph comprehension, regardless of the type of graph they work with (Arteaga et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEven so, the Spanish educational curriculum (Royal Decree 157/2022, \u003cem\u003eMinisterio de Educaci\u0026oacute;n y Formaci\u0026oacute;n Profesional\u003c/em\u003e [MEFP]) includes stochastic reasoning from the first cycle of PE (1st and 2nd grades). It introduces strategies for recognizing the main elements of simple graphs (pictograms and bar charts) and for extracting the most relevant information. In the second cycle (3rd and 4th grade), students learn to represent and select data, as well as compare two sets of data to establish relationships and draw conclusions. In the third cycle (5th and 6th grade), students learn to complete a simple statistical study (formulating questions, collecting, recording, organizing, and interpreting data). They also learn to compare two sets of data based on their graphical representation (formulate conjectures, analyze dispersion, and draw conclusions). Therefore, in accordance with educational legislation, 4th and 6th grade students participating in this study should know how to select the appropriate graph and extract relevant information. However, our results indicate that students have difficulty understanding graphs. This is not surprising, as textbooks offer few activities requiring high levels of comprehension, so students are unfamiliar with this type of task (Arteaga et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Instead, activities that only require literal reading of graphs and comparisons without critical evaluation or inference are usually presented (Salcedo et al., 2021). According to the 2023 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) report (MEFP, 2024), the performance of Spanish 4th grade PE students in mathematics has declined since 2019. Their performance is significantly lower than the OECD average and the European Union (EU) total, with similar results in all three domains (numbers and measurements, geometry, and data).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTherefore, it is important to include basic knowledge and skills related to statistical literacy in the PE curriculum. However, this must be accompanied by research on children's actual skills when faced with this type of task (Arteaga et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) and classroom practices that allow for their development. Considering the excessive amount of information in the media (Engel, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e), it is urgent that PE students acquire critical statistical literacy to interpret and analyze information from tables and graphs at an early age. Only then will they be able to make informed decisions, for example, about election results or food ingredients (Ridgway et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Papancheva, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eQ2: \u0026ldquo;Based on what you have read and seen, where do the pharmaceuticals in the river come from?\u0026rdquo;\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo achieve a high level of performance in this question, it is essential to combine information from the hydrographic and satellite maps and from the leaflet. In fact, only by correctly using the maps can a medium-high level be achieved. On the other hand, using only the leaflet can achieve at best a medium-low level. Thus, maps are key to answering this question because they allow us to identify the origin of the pharmaceuticals found in the river (Bodonal stream), a specific geographical location: Tres Cantos, Soto de Vi\u0026ntilde;uelas, or the Tres Cantos Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). The leaflet incorporates the idea of domestic drug consumption, which is implicit in the WWTP video as well. Therefore, students could infer that when a person takes a drug, it is excreted at home and reaches the river through wastewater. Nevertheless, the video only shows this information briefly, so students are unlikely to use it, especially since the leaflet explicitly provides the same information. Students can also use the report, but at best reach a medium-low level, as it only shows the drugs come from a WWTP.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWith regard to 4th grade students (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e), during individual work, 6 students use the leaflet, 4 use maps, 3 use the report, 3 use the video on how WWTP works, 1 uses graphs, 1 combines the scientist's video with the report, and 6 do not specify the material. In group work, each group uses a different material: report (G1), leaflet (G2), WWTP video (G4), maps (G5), and one does not specify (G3). These results show that 4th grade students have difficulty interpreting and applying information from maps. To mitigate this shortcoming, students choose to look for information in the leaflet, a text, but in a manageable and visual format.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs for the 6th grade students (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e), when working individually, 9 use the report, 8 use the leaflet, 6 use the WWTP video, 4 use the maps, 1 uses the graphs, 1 combines graphs and the leaflet, 1 student uses the scientist\u0026rsquo;s video, and 11 do not specify, nor can it be inferred, the material used. When working in groups, 3 use the WWTP video (G3, G4, and G5), 1 uses the scientist\u0026rsquo;s video (G7), 1 uses the report (G1), 1 uses the maps (G2), and 1 does not specify (G6). Additionally, two groups combine two materials: WWTP video and leaflet (G9) and maps and graphs (G8). However, the latter group's performance level was null, indicating that this strategy was ineffective. It can be observed that working in groups does not improve the choice of material.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOnly 4 students use maps individually, and 1 group uses them, but both use them incorrectly. Consequently, 6th grade students are also unable to adequately extract information from these materials and instead rely mainly on texts and videos.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn short, PE students were unable to correctly interpret maps, as none of them achieved a medium-high or high level of performance. Furthermore, none of the students used the map and leaflet simultaneously. This makes this question the second most difficult for both grades because success depends on properly using maps. This issue was also identified in the previous pilot study, in which most 6th grade students were unable to extract information from the maps.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Spanish PE curriculum (Royal Decree 157/2022, MEFP) introduces working with maps and plans on different scales in the second cycle (3rd and 4th grades), alongside the representation of space and Earth using a globe. In the third cycle (5th and 6th grades), students learn about the geographical diversity of Spain and Europe through graphic, visual, and cartographic representations using analog and digital resources. Consequently, although maps are included in the curriculum, their use in classrooms tends to focus on the location and distribution of geographical features. This approach falls into a transmissive teaching model (Armas-Quint\u0026aacute; et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) rather than encouraging spatial thinking and reasoning (Jonuzi \u0026amp; Selvi, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Nevertheless, maps (two- and three-dimensional) should be used to promote cartographic literacy, which includes reading and interpreting maps, transferring information to maps, using scales, drawing and creating symbols, and finding addresses (Ayuldeş \u0026amp; Akbaş, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn fact, students need to develop their map-reading skills because maps are increasingly used in everyday life (Havelkov\u0026aacute; \u0026amp; Hanus, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, it is important for children to interact with maps, plans, globes, and world maps from an early age (Ayuldeş \u0026amp; Akbaş, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Catling, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), which should be adapted to their level of understanding (Jonuzi \u0026amp; Selvi, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Indeed, there has been an increase in publishers and cartographers designing maps specifically for children with appropriate symbols and colors. A child exposed to these resources in ECE will likely be able to understand abstract symbols and draw local maps from a plan view by the age of 11 or 12. However, many children of this age lack the knowledge to understand map or atlas information (Catling, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), as evidenced by our 4th and 6th PE students.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eQ3: \u0026ldquo;What diseases do these pharmaceuticals treat?\u0026rdquo;\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo achieve a high level of performance on this question, the leaflet must be used as it is the only material that lists all the pharmaceuticals, the diseases they treat, and their characteristics.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs for the 4th grade students (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e), 19 use the leaflet when working individually, 2 use the report, 1 combines the leaflet with graphs, 1 uses the scientist's video, and 1 does not specify. When working in groups, all of them used the leaflet except one group (G5) who used the report. Thus, half of the students were able to correctly use the leaflet to identify the appropriate evidence from all the materials to answer the question. This enabled them to achieve a medium-high (4/5) or high (5/5) level of performance. Specifically, 4 students and 3 groups reached the highest level by using the leaflet\u0026rsquo;s information on diseases treated by the pharmaceuticals in the river.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs for 6th grade students (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e), 35 use the leaflet when working individually, 1 combines the leaflet and report, 1 combines the leaflet and graphs, and 4 do not specify the material. Almost three-quarters of the students achieve a medium-high or high level in their responses by using the appropriate materials. When working in groups, all students use the leaflet. In this case, working in groups favors the choice of material.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAt this point, it is worth noting the difference between the medium-high and high levels in relation to Barrett's (1968) taxonomy of text comprehension. The high level on Q3 is associated with level 2 (reorganize information), as students must interpret and synthesize the information to generate a new discourse understanding that all diseases are linked to mental health. In both the 4th and 6th PE grades, there are students who have reached this level, although they are in the minority (4/24 of 4th grade students and 10/41 of 6th grade students). In contrast, the medium-high level of this question is associated with level 1 text comprehension (reading comprehension). At this level, students recognize information and identify data but make a literal copy of the leaflet. More students reach this level in 4th grade PE (8/24 students) and in 6th grade (18/41 students).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Spanish educational curriculum (Royal Decree 157/2022, MEFP) calls for students in the second cycle of PE (3rd and 4th grades) to locate, select, and compare information from different sources. However, we observe a tendency to copy information directly rather than process it and generate new and more accurate information that is relevant to the question. This may be because textbook activities tend to require textual reproduction rather than interpretation of data (Authors et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). On the other hand, students in 4th and 6th grade did not have difficulty selecting the appropriate material (leaflet), probably because it is a familiar type of material often found in advertising brochures that presents information concisely and visually (Authors et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Nevertheless, it is crucial to implement various strategies for textual comprehension in the classroom (Tang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR80\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e) since students are accustomed to narrative texts from the first cycle of PE (1st and 2nd grades) but not as much to expository texts, which become more prevalent from 4th grade onwards (M\u0026iacute;guez-\u0026Aacute;lvarez et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eQ4: \u0026ldquo;If the pharmaceuticals most commonly found in the Bodonal stream are not the best-selling ones, how and why do they end up in such large quantities in the stream?\u0026rdquo;\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis is the only question in which significant differences were found between the two grades, and students performed at a lower level. To perform well, students must use graphs, report, and leaflet. The expected answer should explain the ineffectiveness of WWTPs in removing certain pharmaceuticals, using evidence from the report, and relate this idea to the best and worst-selling pharmaceuticals, using evidence from the graphs. This would lead to the conclusion that despite not being the best-selling pharmaceuticals, they end up in the river because WWTPs cannot effectively remove them. Additionally, consider that they are used to treat mental health and chronic conditions, so their discharge is constant (evidence implicitly taken from the leaflet or an idea learned from Q3).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn the case of 4th grade PE (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e), nearly half of the students could not extract the correct evidence from any of the materials. Furthermore, none of them used more than one source, as the question required. 3 students used the report; 2 used the graphs; 2 used the scientist's video; 2 used the leaflet; 1 used the WWTP video; and 1 used the video and the report together. Of the groups working together, 2 (G1 and G3) did not specify which materials they used, 1 (G4) used the graphs, 1 (G2) used the scientist's video, and 1 (G5) used the leaflet.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn terms of performance level, only 2 students argued that WWTPs do not effectively remove certain pharmaceuticals, placing them at the medium-low level. The rest were below this level, with most at the null level. Therefore, it seems that this question is highly difficult for 4th grade students. Perhaps students need teacher support in the form of mediating questions that help them analyze and relate the different types of data in the materials (Authors, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs for the 6th grade students (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig8\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e), 10 use the report, 5 use graphs, 5 use videos, and 5 use the leaflet when working individually. Additionally, 4 students combine the graphs with the report, 1 combines the report with WWTP video, and 11 do not specify the material. In group work, 4 groups (G1, G3, G4, and G9) use the report; 1 (G8) uses the graphs; and 4 (G2, G5, G6, and G7) do not specify the material. Overall, most students use textual materials to find answers in a single source, suggesting a preference for text over graphics, possibly due to their frequent use in the classroom (Mohamedi-Amaruch \u0026amp; Rico-Mart\u0026iacute;n, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). However, some students combined the report with the graphs, achieving performance levels ranging from low to high depending on their interpretation and understanding of the sources. Nevertheless, this question was also difficult for 6th grade students, as just over half of the group achieved a null-performance level. Only 1 student achieved the medium-high level (establishing a relationship between two sources of information), and 1 achieved the high level (adding a third source of information).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo determine the extent to which students understood the materials needed to answer Q4, Barlett's (1968) taxonomy for text comprehension was applied to the report and leaflet. In 4th grade, 2 students gave a level 1 response (reading comprehension) because they only identified some of the information in the report. In 6th grade, 8 students were at this level. 1 student reached level 2 (reorganize information) by combining information and establishing relationships between the most and least sold pharmaceuticals. Another student reached level 3 (inferential or interpretive) by integrating implicit data from the leaflet and inferring that the type of diseases (mental health and chronic) treated by these medicines means their discharge is constant and affects their presence and persistence in the river.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAccording to Curcio's (1989) taxonomy, which is applicable to medium-high, and high-performance levels, none of the 4th grade students adequately understood the graphs to answer correctly. In contrast, 2 out of 41 6th grade students reached this level: 1 reached level two (reading between the data) by comparing the most and least sold pharmaceuticals, and another reached level 3 (reading beyond the data) by connecting the information in the graphs with the rest of the materials.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTherefore, in Q4, 6th grade students performed better than 4th grade students, as reflected in their understanding of the texts and graph. However, all students had difficulty integrating tests from different materials and establishing relationships between them. These skills are included in the Spanish educational curriculum (Royal Decree 157/2022, MEFP). For instance, in the second cycle of PE (3rd and 4th grades), students learn to \"graphically compare two sets of data to establish relationships and draw conclusions\" in mathematics and \"search for and select information from different sources\" in social and natural studies. In addition, the 3rd cycle (5th and 6th grades) includes \"contrast of information\". Therefore, it is logical that performance in 4th grade was lower than in 6th grade. However, the difficulties 6th grade students encountered in this study are similar to those in the previous pilot study. In the previous study, no 6th grade student achieved a high level of performance, reaching only level 2 of text and graph comprehension. These results highlight the necessity of activities involving the search, selection, and contrast data from various sources. Likewise, PE classrooms rarely implement activities that encourage evidence-based argumentation, such as those in this study (Dawson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). These activities are more common in secondary education or preservice teachers (Ottander \u0026amp; Simon, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Sakamoto et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR74\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Nevertheless, such activities are possible in PE, as students understand the information in the materials when working on them separately (graphs, report, and leaflet). If children had more opportunities to participate in these activities, they would probably develop better information-handling and argumentation skills. For example, Dawson (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e) found that Australian 6th grade students improved their argumentation skills after several sessions addressing SSIs related to water.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eQ5: “Is it harmful for pharmaceuticals to be in the river? Why?”\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo perform at their best on this question, students must use the report. Although some students use the scientist's video, it only provides context and lacks relevant evidence. The WWTP video could help connect the three perspectives of health: environmental, human, and animal. However, understanding the One Health approach requires a systemic view of the issue. The analysis revealed that no 4th grade students achieved this level, while two students and one group in 6th grade did. Most students fall within the medium-low level (they indicate that it is harmful without providing evidence) or the medium-high level (they argue based on evidence from the report).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn 4th grade (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig9\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e), when working individually, 8 students use the report, 2 combine it with videos, 8 use videos, and 6 do not specify the material. During group work, 2 groups (G4 and G5) use the report, 2 (G1 and G2) use the scientist's video, and 1 (G3) do not specify. Almost a quarter of the 4th grade students and 1 group use the report correctly, extracting evidence and integrating it into their answers. Most students were able to take a position on whether the presence of pharmaceuticals in the river is harmful, although they did not justify their position with evidence. This was either because they did not understand the report or because they relied on more visual materials, such as videos, that were not useful for answering this question.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn 6th grade (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig10\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e), 19 students use the report when working individually. 3 students combine that material with videos, 13 use videos, 1 uses the leaflet, and 5 students do not specify. In group work, 6 groups (G2, G3, G4, G5, G8, and G9) use the report; 2 (G1 and G7) use video; and 1 (G6) does not specify. Thus, more than a third of the students and 3 groups used the report correctly. However, the rest of the students did not know how to integrate the tests into their answers, despite being able to use them, or opting for more visual materials, which is common among most 4th grade students.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis situation is reflected in the 2021 Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) report (MEFP, 2023). It shows that the average reading comprehension score of 4th grade Spanish students (integration, inferences, and content evaluation) is significantly below the OECD and EU averages. This reality underscores the importance of allocating more classroom time to reading comprehension. Historically, more time has been devoted to grammar and vocabulary (Sekelj \u0026amp; Rigo, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR77\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e) or to summarizing and identifying information in descriptions (Pe\u0026ntilde;a-Garc\u0026iacute;a, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR69\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) than to understanding texts through active learning (Richmond \u0026amp; Hagan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). However, the latter approach is more effective because it promotes greater attention and participation (K\u0026auml;sper et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn general, both PE grades identified appropriate material from which to extract the evidence. However, in relation to Barret's (1968) taxonomy, notable differences in the degree of comprehension emerged. On the one hand, 16 of the 24 students in the 4th grade of PE understood the text at level 1 (reading comprehension) and 5 at level 2 (reorganize information). Of the 41 6th grade students, 19 were at level 1, 14 were at level 2, and 2 students reached level 4 (critical or evaluative judgment), as they also handled the One Health concept (S31: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eYes, it is harmful because it can also kill many living beings and contaminate us\";\u003c/em\u003e S36: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eYes, because they affect the environment and us. Because drinking water gets polluted and animals drink it and have problems\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;). Interestingly, no 4th grade students addressed this idea, though a minority of 6th grade students did, as in the previous pilot study. This suggests that older PE students can grasp the concept of One Health as a whole. Therefore, this TEE activity seems to encourage a systemic perspective and helps students develop environmental competence, enabling them to critically and rationally address current environmental issues (Authors, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003ea; Romero-Ariza et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eQ6: “Would it be better to take medication or not? Why?”\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis question does not require evidence extracted from the materials to justify the answers because it raises a socioscientific controversy (SSC) on which students must take a position. They must reflect on what they have learned in the activity and their experiences to give an answer. A high level of performance is achieved when students take a position and justify their answer based on the benefits of the medicines (or alternatives to these products). Concepts such as responsible medicine use and the need for a prescription should also be included.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn 4th grade PE (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig11\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e), all groups and approximately three-quarters of the students achieved a medium-high (10 students) or high (7 students) level. These students justified the benefits of medications or proposed alternatives in their answers (S9: \u003cem\u003e\"It depends. If you're feeling very ill, then yes, take it to get better. But if you're not feeling ill, then no. If you take it when you're not feeling ill and nothing happens, it won't have any effect when you do feel ill\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e). 7 students are at a lower level because they did not take a position on the controversy or justify their answers. (S1: \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;If it hurts, yes; if not, no\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e), or respond incoherently (S22: \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;Because otherwise, nothing heals\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn 6th grade PE (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig12\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e), the situation is similar to that in 4th grade. Nearly three-quarters of students achieve the medium-high and high levels, while 12 students achieve the highest level (S1: \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;It would be better to take medication because it helps you get better. But it's very harmful if you don't need it because it ends up in the river\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e). Only 13 students are at lower levels. When working in groups, however, all of them fall within the two highest levels, except for 1 group (G7), whose level is the same as that of its individual members. This suggests that if all group members start at a low performance level, it is difficult for them to improve together.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eConsistent with the findings of Authors (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e), most students in both grades achieve medium-high and high levels, with medium-high levels predominating. In fact, this question (Q6) is the one that students answer best, perhaps because the answer depends on personal reflection rather than the evidence.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTherefore, it can be said that 4th and 6th grade students can make decisions about an SSC, taking a position on whether to take medication, and justifying their stance. However, although Lassoued et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) claim that social interaction improves decision-making abilities, our results reveal no significant differences in performance levels between individuals and groups.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eConsidering the above, it can be observed that working with SSCs involves students in debate and decision-making because they first work and reflect individually. This educational intervention prepares students to be critical citizens who contribute to society (Eidin \u0026amp; Schwartz, 2023; Kokolaki \u0026amp; Stavrou, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). While activities with this approach are common in secondary education\u0026mdash;such as debates on natural versus synthetic products in food, medicine, and cosmetics (Caracuel-Gonz\u0026aacute;lez et al., 2024)\u0026mdash;they are less common in PE. One reason is that teachers are concerned about whether students will be able to participate in or lead classroom debates (Leden et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). However, an increasing number of studies demonstrate that PE students can engage in these activities effectively (Dawson \u0026amp; Venville, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Lee \u0026amp; Yang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eAnalysis of the type of solutions proposed by students in 4th and 6th grade of PE (RQ3)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eQ7: \u0026ldquo;What solutions can you think of to prevent so many medicines from reaching the river?\u0026rdquo;\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIt should be noted that all 6th grade students propose at least one solution, and some propose more than one. In contrast, while some 4th grade students propose more than one solution, 4 students do not propose any (E).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSpecifically, in 4th grade (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig13\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e), the same percentage of students (29.17%) proposed solutions related to responsible use (B) and solutions that were too generic or out of context (D). 25% of students propose solutions related to pharmaceutical design and WWTP (A), and, to a lesser extent (16.67%), solutions related to political-legislative measures (C). Meanwhile, 6th grade students (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig13\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e) mainly propose Type D solutions (40.39%), followed by Type B solutions (25%), Type A solutions (23.08%), and finally, Type C solutions (11.54%). Thus, proportionally, 4th grade students propose more solutions than 6th grade students.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, the order of preference remains consistent across both grades, regardless of the number of solutions proposed (B\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;D\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;A\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;C in 4th ; D\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;B\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;A\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;C in 6th ). Thus, the least proposed solutions correspond to political-legislative measures (C). In contrast, students focus on responsible use (B) and pharmaceutical design and WWTP (A), with similar percentages.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eStudents in both grades behave similarly when working in groups. Although no statistically significant differences were found between individual and group work (χ\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05), we can see that Type A and Type C solutions increase while Type B and Type D solutions decrease. These changes are more pronounced in 6th grade. Working in groups increases solutions with scientific (type A) and political-legislative (type C) perspectives. This could be because, during the debate, students consider dimensions they had not previously thought of (Iordanou, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Conversely, students propose fewer generic or out-of-context solutions (D) and solutions from an ethical perspective (B). Issues related to values are personal, so it makes sense that students tend to reveal their moral perspective less when working in groups and avoid standing out. The desire to belong to a group can also influence decision-making (Bader et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn short, and taking as a reference the perspectives put forward by Kiili et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) and List (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), it can be seen that, when working individually, PE students make greater use of the ethical perspective (B) (S34, 6th PE: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003ePeople should not take medication every time they feel a little unwell, and if they have phobias, panic attacks, or anxiety, they can go to a psychologist to resolve them\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;) and the scientist (A) (S14, 4th PE: \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;Create a type of trash that burns medicines\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e) and, to a lesser extent, political and legislative (C) (S6, 4th PE: \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;I'm thinking of setting rules\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e). When working in groups, students consider the political-legislative and scientific perspectives more and the ethical perspective less (uncommon in classrooms). Students at different educational levels frequently consider the scientific perspective (Byrne et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Authors et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Authors, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Author, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; \u0026Ouml;hman \u0026amp; \u0026Ouml;hman, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). However, incorporating other perspectives is not yet widespread. Nevertheless, studies such as that by Author (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) demonstrate how preservice teachers examined the production and consumption of avocados in Spain from an ethical standpoint. Similarly, research has been conducted in PE in which students integrate the sociopolitical perspective, in addition to the ethical dimension, when dealing with different controversial issues, such as coal-fired power plants, organ donation, and assisted reproduction (Henderson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHowever, students sometimes propose solutions without assessing their full impact (Authors, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; \u0026Ouml;hman and \u0026Ouml;hman, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e) or put forward unrealistic ideas (Byrne et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e), as they do not always consider all perspectives and the complexity of the issues (Iordanou, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; List, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Ottander and Simon \u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). In fact, our study revealed some ill-considered solutions, such as \u003cem\u003e\"Close the pipelines and never open them again\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; (S11, 6th PE) or \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;Do not manufacture medicines\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e (S31, 6th PE).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe results show that teaching students to argue about SSIs in PE classrooms promotes scientific reasoning. However, performance levels observed, especially in 4th grade, range from low to medium-low. These results highlight the importance of developing argumentation and data interpretation skills from an early age.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhen it came to using and interpreting information to solve the case, students found maps and graphs more difficult than texts and videos. This emphasizes the importance of incorporating these types of resources into classroom activities and questions that encourage students to relate, understand, and reflect on data. Despite this limitation, 4th and 6th PE students were able to propose solutions to the environmental problem presented from different perspectives. This reflects the development of critical and systemic thinking, as well as eco-social awareness.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSimilarly, although better results were observed in 6th than in 4th grade, the differences are not statistically significant for most questions, either individually or collectively. This shows that not only is it possible to work on SSIs in the final grades of PE, but they can also be successfully addressed in the second cycle of PE. Furthermore, these findings prompt reflection on the progression of scientific reasoning throughout PE and on the fact that group work does not necessarily lead to better learning outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFinally, to evaluate this activity's effectiveness in other educational contexts, we propose expanding the research to underperforming schools in the future. This will enable us to compare results among students from various grades and socioeconomic backgrounds, allowing us to draw more robust conclusions. Overall, this study reveals this proposal's educational potential within the TEE framework, as it promotes the critical literacy necessary to understand and address the socioenvironmental issues of the Anthropocene.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003ch2\u003eCompeting interests\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare no conflicts of interest. None of the authors are on the editorial board of Humanities and Social Science Communications.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthical approval\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003e The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Ethics Committee of Universidad Aut\u0026oacute;noma de Madrid (protocol code CEI-137-2954, and date of approval 14 March 2024).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInformed consent\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003ePrior to the activity (May 2024), a written information sheet was sent by post to the educational centres for the participant and their legal guardian describing the aim, objectives, roles of the participants and methods of study. Following the indications of the Ethics Committee of Universidad Aut\u0026oacute;noma de Madrid, two informed consent forms were also sent: one for the participant and one for their legal guardian. In this informed consent, both confirmed that they understood the aims of the activity and of their participation, the plans for data processing and the communication of the results. Participants could withdraw their participation in the research at any time.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eFunding\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003edeclaration\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis research was supported by a predoctoral research contract from the Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovaci\u0026oacute;n y Universidades [*censured*]. The Article Processing Charges (APCs) will be covered either by the library services of the author's home institution (Universidad Aut\u0026oacute;noma de Madrid) or, alternatively, by the III Edition of the Programme for the Promotion of Knowledge Transfer of the author's university [*censured*].\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAll authors contributed to the conceptualization and design of the study. [] led the data collection and analysis and drafted the initial and final manuscript. [] contributed to the design of the research instruments and data analysis. Authors [] provided critical revisions and contributed to refining the final version of the manuscript. All authors read and approved of the final manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis research was funded by the Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovaci\u0026oacute;n y Universidades [N.F.H] predoctoral research contract (FPU22/02563). This research was supported by the III Edition of the Programme for the Promotion of Knowledge Transfer of the Universidad Aut\u0026oacute;noma de Madrid (FUAM, 0375/2022, 465059).The researchers would like to express their sincere thanks to both the students and teachers who participated in the study and to Raquel M\u0026iacute;nguez Castellano for the technical support.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData availability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe original contributions presented in the study are included in the article; further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAuthor (2024)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAuthors (2024)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAuthors (2024a)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAuthors (2025)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAuthors et al (2019)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAuthors et al (2023)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAuthors et al (2024)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAkyol C, Kanadli S (2022) Investigating the effect of socioscientific issues-based instruction on the academic achievement of students: A mixed-research synthesis. FIRE Forum Int Res Educ 7(2):64\u0026ndash;85. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.32865/fire202172264\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.32865/fire202172264\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eArifin Z, Sukarmin S, Saputro S (2025) Trends and research frontiers in socioscientific issues for sustainable science education: A systematic and bibliometric analysis from 2014\u0026ndash;2024. J Pedagog Res 9(1):407\u0026ndash;434. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202530575\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.33902/JPR.202530575\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eArmas-Quint\u0026aacute; FX, Rodr\u0026iacute;guez-Lesteg\u0026aacute;s F, Mac\u0026iacute;a-Arce XC, P\u0026eacute;rez-Guilarte Y (2022) Teaching and learning landscape in primary education in Spain: A necessary curricular review to educate citizens. Acta Geogr Slov 62(1):55\u0026ndash;64. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3986/AGS.10457\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3986/AGS.10457\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eArteaga P, Diaz-Levicoy D, Batanero C (2020) Primary school students\u0026rsquo; reading levels of line graphs. Stat Educ Res J 20(2):6\u0026ndash;6. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.17648/acta.scientiae.5884\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.17648/acta.scientiae.5884\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eArteaga P, Diaz-Levicoy D, Batanero C (2021) Primary school students\u0026rsquo; reading levels of line graphs. Stat Educ Res J 20(2):6\u0026ndash;6. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.52041/serj.v20i2.339\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.52041/serj.v20i2.339\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAyuldeş M, Akbaş Y (2023) The effect of orienteering on the sixth-grade students\u0026rsquo; academic achievement and map literacy. Educ Sci 48(213):113\u0026ndash;142. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2023.11528\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.15390/EB.2023.11528\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBader JD, Ahearn KA, Allen BA, Anand DM, Coppens AD, Aikens ML (2023) The decision is in the details: justifying decisions about socioscientific issues. J Res Sci Teach 1\u0026ndash;33. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21854\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/tea.21854\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBarrett TC (1968) Taxonomy of cognitive and affective dimensions of reading comprehension. In: Robinson HM (ed) Innovation and change in reading instruction. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 17\u0026ndash;23\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBatanero C, D\u0026iacute;az-Levicoy D, Arteaga P (2018) Evaluaci\u0026oacute;n del nivel de lectura y la traducci\u0026oacute;n de pictogramas por estudiantes chilenos de Educaci\u0026oacute;n B\u0026aacute;sica. Avances de Investigaci\u0026oacute;n en Educaci\u0026oacute;n Matem\u0026aacute;tica, 14, 49\u0026ndash;64\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eByrne J, Ideland M, Malmberg C, Grace M (2014) Climate change and everyday life: Repertoires children use to negotiate a socio-scientific issue. Int J Sci Educ 36(9):1491\u0026ndash;1509. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.891159\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/09500693.2014.891159\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCanch\u0026eacute; L (2009) La comprensi\u0026oacute;n gr\u0026aacute;fica de los alumnos del nivel primaria. Master\u0026rsquo;s thesis, Universidad Aut\u0026oacute;noma de Yucat\u0026aacute;n, M\u0026eacute;xico\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCaracuel\u0026ndash;Gonz\u0026aacute;lez M, Benarroch AB, Cobos TL et al (2024) Preferences and reasoning of 14\u0026ndash;15 year\u0026ndash;old students in relation to natural or synthetic products in different contexts: influence of an instructional module. Res Sci Educ 54:909\u0026ndash;932. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-024-10166-5\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11165-024-10166-5\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCatling S (2018) To know maps: Primary school children and contextualised map learning. Bol Paul Geogr 99:268\u0026ndash;290 Available at. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://publicacoes.agb.org.br/boletim-paulista/article/view/1480\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://publicacoes.agb.org.br/boletim-paulista/article/view/1480\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChen L, Xiao S (2021) Perceptions, challenges and coping strategies of science teachers in teaching socioscientific issues: A systematic review. Educational Res Rev 32., Article 100377. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100377\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100377\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChristenson N, Gericke N, Chang-Rundgren SN (2017) Science and language teachers\u0026rsquo; assessment of upper secondary students\u0026rsquo; socioscientific argumentation. Int J Sci Math Educ 15(8):1403\u0026ndash;1422. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9746-6\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10763-016-9746-6\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCruz A (2013) Erros e dificuldades de alunos de 1.\u0026ordm; ciclo na representa\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o de dados estat\u0026iacute;sticos. Master\u0026rsquo;s thesis, Universidad de Lisboa, Portugal\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCurcio FR (1989) Developing graph comprehension. NCTM, Reston, VA\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDawson V (2023) Teachers\u0026rsquo; support in developing year 7 students\u0026rsquo; argumentation skills about water-based socioscientific issues. Int J Sci Educ 46(3):222\u0026ndash;239. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2023.2226334\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/09500693.2023.2226334\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDawson V (2025) Using Socioscientific Issues to Teach Argumentation to Year 7 Science Students in a Low Socioeconomic Rural Australian School. Res Sci Educ. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-024-10224-y\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11165-024-10224-y\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDawson V, Venville G (2020) Testing a methodology for the development of socioscientific issues to enhance middle school students\u0026rsquo; argumentation and reasoning. Res Sci Technol Educ 40(4):499\u0026ndash;514. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2020.1830267\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/02635143.2020.1830267\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDawson VM, Carson K (2020) Introducing argumentation about climate change socioscientific issues in a disadvantaged school. Res Sci Educ 50(3):863\u0026ndash;883. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9715-x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11165-018-9715-x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEidin E, Shwartz Y (2023) From ideal to practical\u0026mdash;A design of teacher professional development on socioscientific issues. Sustainability 15(14):11394. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/su151411394\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/su151411394\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEngel J (2017) Statistical literacy for active citizenship: A call for data science education. Stat Educ Res J 16(1):44\u0026ndash;49\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEvangelista B (2013) Activities on interpreting bar and line graphs: what do 5th grade students know? In: Contreras, J.M., Ca\u0026ntilde;adas, G.R., Gea, M.M., Arteaga, P. (eds) Proceedings of the Virtual Conference on Teaching Statistics, Probability and Combinatorics, pp 121\u0026ndash;128. Department of Mathematics Education, University of Granada\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFreitas AC, Do Nascimiento AL, De Castro RG, Motokane MT, Reis P (2023) Biodiversity and citizenship in an argumentative socioscientific process. Sustainability 15(4):2987. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/su15042987\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/su15042987\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGee JP (2014) An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method, 4th edn. Routledge, London\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGuimar\u0026atilde;es G (2002) Interpretando e construindo gr\u0026aacute;ficos de barras. Dissertation, Universidad Federal de Pernambuco, Brasil\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHavelkov\u0026aacute; L, Hanus M (2019) Map skills in education: a systematic review of terminology, methodology, and influencing factors. Rev Int Geogr Educ Online 9(2):361\u0026ndash;401. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.33403/rigeo.591094\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.33403/rigeo.591094\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHenderson S, Tomas L, King D (2025) Does topic matter? Investigating students\u0026rsquo; interest, emotions and learning when writing stories about socioscientific issues. Res Sci Educ. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-025-10239-z\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11165-025-10239-z\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHerman BC, Newton MH, Zeidler DL (2021) Impact of place\u0026ndash;based socioscientific issues instruction on students\u0026rsquo; contextualization of socioscientific orientations. Sci Educ 105(4):585\u0026ndash;627. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21618\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/sce.21618\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eH\u0026ouml;gstr\u0026ouml;m P, Gericke N, Wallin J et al (2024) Teaching Socioscientific Issues: A Systematic Review. Sci Educ. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-024-00542-y\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11191-024-00542-y\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIordanou K (2022) Supporting strategic and meta-strategic development of argument skill: the role of reflection. Metacogn Learn 17:399\u0026ndash;425. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-021-09289-1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11409-021-09289-1\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJonuzi E, Selvi HZ (2023) Enhancing map comprehension via symbols: developing symbols for thematic maps based on children\u0026rsquo;s cognitive development. Necmettin Erbakan Univ Fen M\u0026uuml;hendislik Bil Sci Derg 5(2):88\u0026ndash;110. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.47112/neufmbd.2023.12\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.47112/neufmbd.2023.12\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eK\u0026auml;sper M, Uibu K, Mikk J (2019) Primary school teachers\u0026rsquo; teaching strategies for the development of students\u0026rsquo; text comprehension. Educ 3\u0026ndash;13 48(5):512\u0026ndash;526. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2019.1623282\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/03004279.2019.1623282\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKiili C, Coiro J, H\u0026auml;m\u0026auml;l\u0026auml;inen J (2016) An online inquiry tool to support the exploration of controversial issues on the Internet. J Lit Technol 17(1\u0026ndash;2):31\u0026ndash;52\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKokolaki A, Stavrou D (2022) Pre-service primary teachers develop teaching artifacts on contemporary socioscientific issues. J Sci Teach Educ 34(3):287\u0026ndash;306. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2022.2078546\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/1046560X.2022.2078546\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKumar V, Choudhary SK, Singh R (2024) Environmental socio-scientific issues as contexts in developing scientific literacy in science education: A systematic literature review. Soc Sci Humanit Open 9:100765. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100765\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100765\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLassoued K, Awad A, Guirat R (2020) The impact of managerial empowerment on problem solving and decision making skills: the case of Abu Dhabi University. Manag Sci Lett 10(4):769\u0026ndash;780. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2019.10.020\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.5267/j.msl.2019.10.020\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLeden L, Hansson L, Redfors A (2017) From black and white to shades of grey. Sci Educ 26:483\u0026ndash;511. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-017-9920-4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11191-017-9920-4\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLee H, Yang JE (2019) Science teachers taking their first steps toward teaching socioscientific issues through collaborative action research. Res Sci Educ 49(1):51\u0026ndash;71\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLevinson R (2018) Realising the school science curriculum. Curric J 29(4):522\u0026ndash;537. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2018.1504314\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/09585176.2018.1504314\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eList A (2022) Demonstrating the effectiveness of two scaffolds for fostering students\u0026rsquo; domain perspective reasoning. Eur J Psychol Educ 1\u0026ndash;34. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-022-00643-8\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10212-022-00643-8\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLu YH, Shih JL, Chen PC et al (2024) Exploring elementary school students\u0026rsquo; perceptions towards socioscientific issues through the role-playing game Future City. IIAI Lett Inf Interdisciplinary Res 5:237. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.52731/liir.v005.237\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.52731/liir.v005.237\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMartini M, Widodo W, Qosyim A, Mahdiannur M, Jatmiko B (2021) Improving undergraduate science education students\u0026rsquo; argumentation skills through debates on socioscientific issues. Jurnal Pendidikan Ipa Indonesia 10(3):428\u0026ndash;438. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v10i3.30050\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.15294/jpii.v10i3.30050\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMcNeill KL (2011) Elementary students\u0026rsquo; views of explanation, argumentation and evidence, and their abilities to construct arguments over the school year. J Res Sci Teach 48(7):793\u0026ndash;823. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20430\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/tea.20430\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eM\u0026iacute;guez-\u0026Aacute;lvarez C, Cuevas-Alonso M, Saavedra A, Cabanach RG (2022) The role of text characteristics in the reading comprehension of primary school children in Spanish. Rev Iberoam Psicol Salud 13(1):41\u0026ndash;55. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.23923/j.rips.2022.01.053\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.23923/j.rips.2022.01.053\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMinisterio de Educaci\u0026oacute;n y Formaci\u0026oacute;n Profesional [MEFP] (2023) PIRLS 2021. Estudio internacional de progreso en comprensi\u0026oacute;n lectora. Informe espa\u0026ntilde;ol. Instituto Nacional de Evaluaci\u0026oacute;n Educativa, Madrid\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMinisterio de Educaci\u0026oacute;n y Formaci\u0026oacute;n Profesional [MEFP] (2022) \u003cem\u003eReal Decreto 157/2022, de 1 de marzo, por el que se establecen la ordenaci\u0026oacute;n y las ense\u0026ntilde;anzas m\u0026iacute;nimas de la Educaci\u0026oacute;n Primaria\u003c/em\u003e. Bolet\u0026iacute;n Oficial del Estado, 52, 1\u0026ndash;109. Recuperado de \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-2022-3296\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-2022-3296\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMinisterio de Educaci\u0026oacute;n y Formaci\u0026oacute;n Profesional [MEFP] (2024) \u003cem\u003eTIMSS 2023. Estudio internacional de tendencias en matem\u0026aacute;ticas y ciencias. Informe espa\u0026ntilde;ol\u003c/em\u003e. Instituto Nacional de Evaluaci\u0026oacute;n Educativa. Recuperado de \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.libreria.educacion.gob.es/libro/timss-2023-estudio-internacional-de-tendencias-en-matematicas-y-ciencias-informe-espanol_184942/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.libreria.educacion.gob.es/libro/timss-2023-estudio-internacional-de-tendencias-en-matematicas-y-ciencias-informe-espanol_184942/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMohamedi-Amaruch A, Rico-Mart\u0026iacute;n AM (2020) Assessment of reading comprehension in primary education: reading processes and texts [Evaluaci\u0026oacute;n de la comprensi\u0026oacute;n lectora en educaci\u0026oacute;n primaria: procesos lectores y textos]. Lenguas Modernas 55:37\u0026ndash;52\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNarayanan B, Kumar AG, Gunasekaran D, Vengayil R, Maduvegadde K, Alampady N (2025) Perspectives of socio-scientific issues in educational research: A bibliometric analysis. J Teach Learn 19(1):50\u0026ndash;84. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.22329/jtl.v19i1.8985\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.22329/jtl.v19i1.8985\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNepraš K, Strejčkov\u0026aacute; T, Kroufek R (2022) Climate change education in primary and lower secondary education: Systematic review results. Sustainability 14(22):14913. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/su142214913\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/su142214913\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOCDE (2023) \u003cem\u003ePISA 2025 science framework (second draft).\u003c/em\u003e OCDE. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://pisa-framework.oecd.org/science-2025/assets/docs/PISA_2025_Science_Framework.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://pisa-framework.oecd.org/science-2025/assets/docs/PISA_2025_Science_Framework.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. Accessed October 20, 2025\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u0026Ouml;hman J, \u0026Ouml;hman M (2012) Participatory approach in practice: An analysis of student discussions about climate change. Environ Educ Res 19(3):324\u0026ndash;341. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2012.695012\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/13504622.2012.695012\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOlsson D, Gericke N (2016) The adolescent dip in students\u0026rsquo; sustainability consciousness. J Environ Educ 47:35\u0026ndash;51. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.2015.1075464\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/00958964.2015.1075464\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOsborne 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. J Res Sci Teach 50(3):315\u0026ndash;347. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21073\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/tea.21073\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOttander K, Simon S (2021) Learning democratic participation? Meaning-making in discussion of socioscientific issues in science education. Int J Sci Educ 43(12):1895\u0026ndash;1925. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.1946200\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/09500693.2021.1946200\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOzcan-Ermis G, Herv\u0026eacute; N (2024) Identifying pre- and in-service teachers\u0026rsquo; stances on teaching socioscientific issues: A systematic review of empirical studies. Can J Sci Math Technol Educ 23(4):741\u0026ndash;764. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s42330-023-00306-w\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s42330-023-00306-w\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u0026Ouml;zt\u0026uuml;rk S, Karakaş H (2024) Scenario-based teaching process in the life science course based on socioscientific issues [Special Issue]. Turk J Educ 13(5):441\u0026ndash;464. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.19128/turje.1505099\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.19128/turje.1505099\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePagan A, Leite AP, Magina S, Cazorla I (2008) A leitura e interpreta\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o de gr\u0026aacute;ficos e tabelas no Ensino Fundamental e M\u0026eacute;dio. In: Gitirana V, Bellemain F, Andrade V (eds) Anais do 2\u0026ordm; Simp\u0026oacute;sio Internacional de Pesquisa em Educa\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o Matem\u0026aacute;tica. Universidad Federal de Pernambuco, Recife, pp 1\u0026ndash;10\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePapancheva RY (2017) Working with data tables and graphs at Primary school. J Process Manag New Technol 5(4)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePe\u0026ntilde;a-Garc\u0026iacute;a SN (2019) The challenge of reading comprehension in primary education. Panorama 13(24):43\u0026ndash;56. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.15765/pnrm.v13i24.1205\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.15765/pnrm.v13i24.1205\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eReid A, Dillon J, Ardoin N, Ferreira JA (2021) Scientists\u0026rsquo; warnings and the need to reimagine, recreate, and restore environmental education. Environ Educ Res 27:783\u0026ndash;795. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2021.1937577\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/13504622.2021.1937577\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRichmond AS, Hagan LK (2011) Promoting higher level thinking in psychology: is active learning the answer? Teach Psychol 38(2):102\u0026ndash;105. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0098628311401581\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0098628311401581\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRidgway J, Nicholson J, Sutherland S, Hedger S (2019) Critical statistical literacy and interactive data visualisations. In: Evans J, Ruane S, Southall H (eds) \u003cem\u003eData in society: challenging statistics in an age of globalisation\u003c/em\u003e. Policy Press, p 349\u0026ndash;357\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRomero-Ariza M, Quesada A, Estepa A (2021) Promoting critical thinking through mathematics and science teacher education: the case of argumentation and graphs interpretation about climate change. Eur J Teach Educ 1\u0026ndash;19. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2021.1961736\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/02619768.2021.1961736\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSakamoto M, Yamaguchi E, Yamamoto T, Wakabayashi K (2021) An intervention study on students\u0026rsquo; decision-making towards consensus building on socio-scientific issues. Int J Sci Educ 43(12):1965\u0026ndash;1983. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.1947541\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/09500693.2021.1947541\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eŞaşmaz\u0026ouml;ren F, Karapınar A, Sarı K, Demirer T (2023) Teaching socioscientific issues through scientific scenarios: A case evaluation based on secondary school students\u0026rsquo; views. Bartın Univ J Fac Educ 14(1):124\u0026ndash;145. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.14686/buefad.988894\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.14686/buefad.988894\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchreier M (2012) Qualitative Content Analysis in Practice. SAGE, London\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSekelj A, Rigo I (2011) Teaching English grammar in primary school. Tabula: Periodicus Facultatis Philosophicae Polensis; Rivista Della Facolt\u0026agrave; di Lettere e Filosofia. J Fac Humanit 9:188\u0026ndash;199. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.32728/tab.09.2011.14\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.32728/tab.09.2011.14\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSiarova H, Sternadel D, Szőnyi E (2019) Research for CULT Committee \u0026ndash; Science and scientific literacy as an Educational Challenge. European Parliament, Policy Department for Structural and Cohesion policies. European Union\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTang KY, Lin TC, Hsu YS (2023) Status and trends of socioscientific issues in educational literature: insights and extensions from a co-word analysis. Int J Sci Educ 46(11):1073\u0026ndash;1097. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2023.2272603\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/09500693.2023.2272603\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTang X, Kikas E, Pakarinen E, Lerkkanen M-K, Muotka J, Nurmi J-E (2017) Profiles of teaching practices and first and third graders\u0026rsquo; reading skills in Finland and Estonia. Teach Teach Educ 64:150\u0026ndash;161. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.01.020\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.tate.2017.01.020\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eValladares L (2021) Scientific literacy and social transformation. Sci Educ 30:557\u0026ndash;587. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00205-2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11191-021-00205-2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVan de Wetering J, Leijten P, Spitzer J, Thomaes S (2022) Does environmental education benefit environmental outcomes in children and adolescents? A meta-analysis. J Environ Psychol 81:101782. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2022.101782\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jenvp.2022.101782\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWhite P, Ferguson J, O\u0026rsquo;Connor Smith N, O\u0026rsquo;Shea Carre H (2022) School strikers enacting politics for climate justice: Daring to think differently about education. Aust J Environ Educ 38(1):26\u0026ndash;39. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1017/aee.2021.24\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1017/aee.2021.24\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWiyarsi A, \u0026Ccedil;alik M (2019) Revisiting the scientific habits of mind scale for socio-scientific issues in the Indonesian context. Int J Sci Educ 41(17):2430\u0026ndash;2447. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1640427\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/09500693.2019.1640427\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYin RK (2018) Case study research and applications: Design and methods, 6th edn. SAGE, London\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZamalloa T, Salgado M, Berciano A (2025) How to promote scientific practices in early childhood education: The teachers\u0026rsquo; role. Int J Sci Math Educ. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-025-10557-8\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10763-025-10557-8\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZeidler DL, Sadler TD (2023) Exploring and expanding the frontiers of socioscientific issues. En: Lederman NG, Zeidler DL, Lederman JS (eds.) Handbook of research on science education, 1.\u0026ordf; ed. Routledge, p\u0026aacute;gs. 899\u0026ndash;929\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhang J, Lopez Wui MG, Nam R, Relyea JE, Wong SS (2023) Improving argumentative writing of sixth-grade adolescents through dialogic inquiry of socioscientific issues. J Writ Res 14(3):375\u0026ndash;419. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2023.14.03.03\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.17239/jowr-2023.14.03.03\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhang WX, Hsu YS (2025) Professional Development for Socioscientific Issue Teaching: Exploring the Discourse of In-Service Teachers in Community Activities through Epistemic Network Analysis. Res Sci Educ. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-025-10237-1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11165-025-10237-1\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Primary education, Multimodal scaffolding, Science Education, Transformative Environmental Education, Water pollution","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7045084/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7045084/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eIn light of the Anthropocene crisis, environmental education must adopt a transformative, critical literacy-based approach grounded in scientific practices to prepare students to address current socioenvironmental issues from a systemic perspective. This study, which was conducted with 4th and 6th grade primary school students (aged 9\u0026ndash;12), presents the results of an activity based on a socioscientific question about the presence of pharmaceuticals in surface water. This activity was carried out within the framework of the Sustainable Development Goals and the scientific practice of argumentation. The aim is to evaluate students' performance in argumentation, their use of and understanding of the materials from which they extract evidence, and the solutions they propose. To this end, the content (written reports) and discourse (group discussions) were analyzed, and different statistical tests were carried out to compare individual and group performance, as well as performance among educational levels. The results show that students in both years tend to perform at a low-to-medium level, with higher performance in 6th grade but there are no significant differences in most areas. They also use materials in different semiotic modalities, similarly, experiencing more difficulty with maps and graphs than with texts and videos. Additionally, they propose solutions from various perspectives. Overall, this approach contributes to the development of scientific reasoning in primary school students and should therefore be incorporated into their classroom culture.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Learning to Argue in the Anthropocene: How do 4th and 6th Grade Students Use Multimodal Materials to Solve a Socioscientific Issue?","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-09-30 16:42:51","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7045084/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"010ad3f7-12d9-40c4-b88f-782ba6b0c165","owner":[],"postedDate":"September 30th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":55106991,"name":"Earth and environmental sciences/Environmental social sciences"},{"id":55106992,"name":"Social science/Environmental studies"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-01-05T18:39:02+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-09-30 16:42:51","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7045084","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7045084","identity":"rs-7045084","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}