Reimagining Scientific Literacy: A Framework for Future-Focused Science Education

Reimagining Scientific Literacy: A Framework for Future-Focused Science Education | 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 Research Article Reimagining Scientific Literacy: A Framework for Future-Focused Science Education Vishal Kumar, Sanjiv Kumar Choudhary This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4347536/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 09 Jun, 2025 Read the published version in Research in Science Education → Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Scientific literacy is a crucial goal of science education that must adapt to the needs of the time. Different scientific literacy frameworks (such as the PISA 2018 scientific literacy framework; Cansiz & Cansiz, 2019 ) have been used for evaluating textbooks to evaluate the content. However, in recent years, a significant body of literature about contemporary challenges, such as ‘environmental issues, misinformation, science denial, responsible and transformative actions,’ has emerged, necessitating an update to the current framework. This paper seeks to address this research gap by critically reviewing and synthesizing the recent literature on scientific literacy. This research paper proposes a reconstructed scientific literacy framework for evaluating textbooks that align with science education's evolving needs and challenges by analyzing and incorporating the latest insights, also considering the latest PISA 2025 framework. After careful analysis, considering the Cansiz & Cansiz ( 2019 ) framework as the base, descriptors of the aspect ‘Interaction of STSE’ have been reconceptualized, the aspect ‘Affective side of science’ has been reconceptualized as ‘Affective engagement with science,’ and the addition of a new aspect, ‘Environmental awareness and responsibility’ dedicated explicitly to environmental challenges and suitable actions, is suggested. The reconstructed framework will serve as a valuable resource for educators, policymakers, and researchers to enhance the teaching and assessment of scientific literacy in educational settings. The findings of this research have the potential to contribute to the ongoing discourse on scientific literacy and provide valuable guidance for future curriculum development and educational practices. Scientific Literacy Scientific Literacy framework Science Education Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Scientific literacy Scientific literacy is a term that has gained considerable attention in academic literature over the past six decades, playing an essential role in the evolution of modern education, civic engagement, and cultural dynamics (Li & Guo, 2021 ). The term's genesis can be traced back to 1958 when the need for public understanding of science was first emphasized (Hurd, 1958 ). The concept of scientific literacy is associated with various synonymous terms. While 'scientific literacy' is widely acknowledged in the USA, 'scientific culture' is predominant in European contexts, and 'public understanding of science' is particularly emphasized in England (Roberts,2007; Solomon,2005). Victor Showalter ( 1974 ) proposed a unified goal for science education through seven dimensions of scientific literacy, including the ability to understand the nature of scientific knowledge, apply scientific concepts accurately, use scientific processes effectively, value the essence of scientific principles, view society through the lens of science and technology, believe in lifelong learning, and develop science and technology-based skills. This comprehension of scientific literacy is closely related to science education research. Over time, the definition of 'scientific literacy' has changed, resulting in a rich and expansive conceptual framework that holds increasing significance in academic discourse (Laugksch, 2000). Over the last six decades, scientific literacy has evolved into a recognized academic field. It is strategically important as a research domain to bolster workforce capabilities, national development, and economic growth (Li & Guo, 2021 ). In the 1950s and 1960s, scientific literacy was associated mainly with the knowledge of scientific facts and principles. This was primarily due to the influence of the Sputnik era, where a strong emphasis was placed on developing scientific knowledge to compete in the Space Race (DeBoer, 2000 ). However, as science education progressed into the 1970s and 1980s, the definition of scientific literacy started to evolve. It began to encompass the understanding of scientific facts and the ability to apply scientific knowledge in everyday life. This shift was influenced by the growing recognition of the societal implications of science (Roberts,2007). In the 1990s and onwards, the meaning of scientific literacy further expanded to include critical thinking and decision-making about scientific issues. This was primarily due to the increasing complexity of the societal problems related to science and technology (Feinstein, 2010 ). Science for All Americans report (1991) by The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) defined scientific literacy as “the science-literate person is aware that science, mathematics, and technology are interdependent human enterprises with strengths and limitations; understands key concepts and principles of science; is familiar with the natural world and recognizes both its diversity and unity; and uses scientific knowledge and scientific ways of thinking for individual and social purposes.” Today, a scientifically literate individual is often described as someone who is not only knowledgeable about science but also able to evaluate scientific information critically, make informed decisions about scientific issues, and engage in science-related societal discussions. Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) defines scientific literacy as “an individual’s scientific knowledge and use of that knowledge to identify questions, to acquire new knowledge, to explain scientific phenomena, and to draw evidence-based conclusions about science-related issues, understanding of the characteristic features of a form of human knowledge and inquiry, awareness of how science and technology shape our material, intellectual, and cultural environments, and willingness to engage in science-related issues, and with the ideas of science, as a reflective citizen.” According to Holbrook and Rannikmae ( 2009 ), Scientific literacy is “Developing an ability to creatively utilize appropriate evidence-based scientific knowledge and skills, particularly with relevance for everyday life and a career, in solving personally challenging yet meaningful scientific problems as well as making responsible socio-scientific decisions.” The concept of "scientific literacy" in science education has evolved, leading to different visions to conceptualize and operationalize this term. According to Roberts ( 2007 ), two main visions of scientific literacy can be distinguished: Vision I and Vision II. Vision I, inherent in both the products and methodologies of science, focuses on mastering scientific content and techniques for their practical utilization. It underscores science requiring declarative and procedural knowledge, metacognition, and a positive attitude. On the other hand, Vision II, situated in social situations with a scientific component, encompasses scientific literacy definitions that emphasize comprehending the practical applications of scientific knowledge in daily life and within society. It promotes learning through meaningful contexts, emphasizing contextualizing and relating it to technology, the environment, and society. Vision II embraces a sociocultural approach to education, acknowledging that science extends beyond mere content and encompasses cultural dimensions such as values, beliefs, and emotions. It underscores the interconnection between science and both the societal and individual experiences of students and the historical, philosophical, and socio-cultural contexts of science. More recently, a third vision, Vision-III, has been proposed. Vision III of scientific literacy adopts a critical and emancipatory perspective, aiming to empower students as responsible citizens capable of engaging in meaningful and transformative actions related to socio-scientific issues. It emphasizes interdisciplinary teaching strategies, ethical reflection, and the development of critical thinking and socio-scientific reasoning skills (Valladares, 2021 ). By integrating the societal dimensions of science, Vision III offers a comprehensive approach to scientific literacy that goes beyond the traditional transmissive and content-centered approaches of science education as in previous visions. Scientific Literacy Frameworks for School Science Education One of the initial scientific literacy frameworks was developed by Chiappetta et al. ( 1991 ). This framework was based on four major themes: Scientific knowledge, the Investigative nature of science, Science as a way of thinking, and the Interaction of science, technology, and society. The first theme, knowledge of science, focuses on teaching scientific content and ensuring students remember and apply that knowledge. It highlights the transmission of scientific knowledge from educators to learners. The second theme, focusing on the investigatory aspect of science, relates to the development of science process skills. It evaluates students' active engagement with these skills, encouraging reasoning, interpretation, and evaluation. The goal is to promote the exploration of scientific knowledge instead of mere memorization. The third theme, science as a way of thinking, explores the nature of science and scientific knowledge. It examines how scientists conduct inquiries and employ reasoning skills. The theme emphasizes the significance of historical advancements in scientific knowledge, scientific methodologies, and the importance of evidence in shaping scientific understanding. The final theme in the framework is the interaction of science, technology, and society. It focuses on demonstrating the impact of science on the public. This theme encompasses examining the benefits and drawbacks of science and technology within society and evaluating real-world instances linked to social matters influenced by science and technology(Chiappetta et al., 1993 ). After a few modifications, Boujaoude ( 2002 ) used these themes to analyze science curricula. The framework underwent three modifications. Firstly, additional issues related to the practical application of science in everyday personal decision-making and problem-solving and addressing moral and ethical aspects of science into the existing element of the interaction of science, technology, and society. Subsequently, Boujaoude ( 2002 ) suggested analyzing different domains of scientific literacy separately, such as general science and physics. The rationale behind this recommendation was the recognition that individuals may possess scientific literacy in specific subject areas while lacking proficiency in others and argued for the importance of assessing scientific literacy within particular domains. Lastly, the author advocated using "science as a way of knowing" rather than "science as a way of thinking" as a preferred terminology for the third aspect. This shift was made to emphasize science's epistemological elements, focusing on acquiring knowledge and understanding rather than solely on cognitive thinking processes. These modifications aimed to enhance the framework's comprehensiveness by addressing practical applications, acknowledging subject-specific variations in scientific literacy, and highlighting the epistemological nature of scientific knowledge acquisition. Khishfe (2014) made a subsequent endeavor to examine textbooks through the lens of the scientific literacy framework. However, a modification was made to Boujaoude's (2002) framework to create a framework specifically tailored to analyze the capacity to foster environmental science literacy in the Qatari curriculum. In Khishfe's framework, the term "aspects" was replaced with "pillars" to signify the fundamental components of scientific literacy. This framework consisted of two key stages: a) the identification of the four pillars of scientific literacy and b) the recognition of their interdependence and interconnectedness. This framework's scope is restricted to assessing the curriculum about environmental science literacy. Environmental science literacy can be considered a subset of scientific literacy, focusing specifically on knowledge related to environmental science (Heiskanen, 2006 ). In other words, it encompasses the understanding and awareness of ecological concepts within the broader framework of scientific literacy. PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) is an international assessment conducted by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to evaluate and compare the performance of education systems worldwide. PISA assesses the knowledge and skills of 15-year-old students in reading, mathematics, and science literacy, focusing on real-life application of knowledge. The Scientific Literacy assessment framework introduced by PISA in 2018 consists of three primary components: Contexts, Competencies, and Knowledge. This framework comprehensively evaluates students' scientific literacy by considering various aspects of their scientific understanding and abilities. The second component, Competencies, outlines the desired skills and abilities that students should possess to demonstrate scientific literacy. The competencies include explaining phenomena scientifically, evaluating and designing scientific inquiries, and interpreting data and evidence scientifically. These competencies highlight students' capacity to apply scientific thinking and reasoning to analyze and solve problems effectively. Notably, the competencies for scientific literacy outlined in the PISA 2018 framework align closely with those described in previous frameworks. Although the component ‘contexts’ gives us new insights because this framework calls for assessing students’ understanding of scientific concepts in different contexts. The framework suggests evaluating scientific knowledge by presenting students with meaningful contexts that address pertinent issues. These contexts extend beyond school science topics and cover personal, local, national, and global aspects. The assessment evaluates students' competencies and knowledge within these specific contexts, which have been selected based on their significance to students' lives and their potential impact on enhancing the quality of life and informing public policy decisions. Cansiz and Cansiz ( 2019 ) undertook a comprehensive effort to develop a scientific literacy framework, building upon Boujaoude's (2002) existing framework. The first modification was made to the fourth aspect, originally called the ‘Interaction of Science, Technology, and Society.’ The term 'environment' was introduced in this modification, renaming the fourth aspect as ‘Interaction of Science, Technology, Society, and Environment.’ This inclusion expanded the scope of scientific literacy to encompass discussions on environmental concerns. Furthermore, a new aspect, the ‘Affective side of science,’ was introduced. This additional aspect emphasized the importance of various emotional and personal factors such as empathy, dedication, interests, attitudes, appreciation, values, and emotional responses concerning science. By incorporating these new aspects, the framework provided opportunities to explore the social and emotional dimensions of scientific learning and understanding (Cansiz & Cansiz, 2019 ). Environmental concerns and potential actions were included in the scientific literacy framework for the first time. Research Gap, Objectives, and Questions The concept of Scientific literacy continuously evolves, as evidenced by the various changes made to scientific literacy frameworks in response to evolving needs. While numerous frameworks have been proposed for scientific literacy, a critical examination of the existing literature reveals several gaps that warrant further investigation. Consequently, there is a pressing need to update the current framework to incorporate the insights and recommendations provided by the recent literature. Based on the identified gaps, this paper seeks answers to the following objective and research question. Objective: To reconstruct a comprehensive framework incorporating valuable suggestions and findings from the recent literature. Research Question: How can the identified suggestions and findings from the recent literature be used to build a comprehensive scientific literacy framework for textbook evaluation focused on contemporary needs and challenges? Research Methodology Altheide and Schneider's qualitative document analysis method was used to revise the existing framework. It is a systematic approach that guides researchers through analyzing documents to derive meaningful insights. The method involves five key stages and substeps: constructing a protocol, collecting the data, data analysis, the double loop of analysis, and reporting findings (Altheide & Schneider, 2012 ). For this study, these steps were adapted into four steps (see Table 1 ). Table 1 Process of Qualitative Document Analysis Steps Description 1. Defining the objective of the analysis This study aimed to revise the scientific literacy framework used for science textbook analysis by drawing insights from recent literature. 2. Identification of documents The steps in identifying relevant documents are explained in detail in the methodology section (Table 2 and Fig. 2 ). 3. Choosing the analysis approach and engagement with documents Documents were read carefully, and essential implications regarding scientific literacy were compiled (see Table 3 ). 4. Framework Revision The framework was revised based on the implications mentioned in the selected documents (see Table 5 ). Table 2 Summary of the process of collecting documents for analysis Database Querry Number of Results Scopus Article Title, Abstract, Keywords: “scientific AND literacy AND science AND education AND school AND education” Publication Year: (2019, 2020, 2021,2022, 2023, 2024) Document Type: Article or Review Source Type: Journal Language: English 217 Web Of Science Keyword search: “scientific literacy science education school education (All fields).” Publication Years: 2019 or 2020 or 2021 or 2022 or 2023 or 2024 Languages: English Document Types: Article or Review Article Research Areas: Education Educational Research Citation Topics Micro: 6.11.295 Science Education Web of Science Categories: Education Educational Research 266 Data Analysis Table 3 summarizes the implications mentioned in the selected studies. These implications have been categorized into five categories (see Table 4 ) used to devise the revised framework. Table 3 Summary of essential implications mentioned in the selected documents Study Implications Queiruga-Dios et al. ( 2020 ) Integrating citizen science in science curricula positively influences students’ attitudes toward science. Hodson ( 2020 ) The 4-stage SSI-based model encourages actions from students. Cavagnetto (2020) Suggests empowering students by employing a nested system of inquiry cycles. This involves breaking down the lesson into smaller segments, each guided by questions, enabling students to observe, reason, share, critique, and revise their claims, ultimately fostering agency in science learning. Bellová et al. ( 2021 ) Teachers can positively influence students’ attitudes towards science. Tseng et al. ( 2021 ) There is a critical need to enhance students' critical thinking skills, particularly in evaluating flawed scientific arguments, to prepare them for informed civic engagement in a world flooded with scientific misinformation. Pietrocola et al. ( 2021 ) Underscore the importance of instilling risk perception and promoting a more engaged relationship between science, technology, and societal decisions. This is crucial for navigating a future characterized by uncertainties and conflicting scenarios. Bateman et al. ( 2021 ) The need to transform science education towards sustainability engineering and agential literacy is emphasized, aiming to de-center human dominance, foster responsibility in innovation, and ensure survival without sacrificing other elements in our interconnected world. Valladares ( 2021 ) Urges a reassessment of scientific literacy, advocating a move from a transmissive to a transformative vision. It highlights the challenges in implementing this shift without considering interdisciplinary diversity. Emphasizing the need to recognize power dynamics, it calls for adopting an intersectional and emancipatory perspective and promoting inclusive participation. These measures are crucial for meaningful social and community transformations, especially in vulnerable contexts often overlooked in conventional views of scientific literacy. Holbrook et al. ( 2022 ) 4-phased trans-contextualized approach to science teaching learning. Lüsse et al. ( 2022 ) Citizen science projects aim to enhance students’ understanding of science, fostering personal development as responsible, engaged citizens. Díez-Palomar et al. ( 2022 ) Dialoguic Social Gatherings (DSGs) can potentially promote children’s scientific literacy abilities. Tasquier et al. ( 2022 ) Students must connect their understanding of climate change with taking personal action, highlighting the need for more profound cultural transformations that surpass mere behavioral changes to address environmental challenges effectively. Kubisch et al. ( 2022 ) Transformative Education's potential to influence Scientific Literacy and transformative engagement for climate action. Belova et al. ( 2022 ) Students need more capability to apply scientific knowledge to media contexts, resulting in challenges in correctly identifying and evaluating scientific aspects within media messages. Billingsley & Heyes ( 2022 ) Encouraging epistemic insight, encompassing critical thinking about knowledge and multidisciplinary perspectives, helps students recognize the limitations of science and technology, leading to greater epistemic humility. Fortus et al. ( 2022 ) Emphasize the necessity of integrating affective aspects (emotions, attitudes) into science education to achieve comprehensive science literacy. Tan & Koh ( 2023 ) Suggest transforming science education by focusing on practical investigations that acknowledge the limitations of scientific knowledge. It emphasizes understanding the interactions of physical effects to promote a deeper appreciation of science and the nature of knowledge and ignorance. Elhai ( 2023 ) There is a need to redefine science literacy as a communal endeavor, advocating for instilling core values of scientific inquiry among elementary students through experiential learning and fostering a culture of curiosity. Tapio (2023) Suggests a reexamination of scientific literacy, emphasizing the integration of long-term thinking, anticipation, imagination, and future perceptions, essential for wielding scientific knowledge responsibly and ensuring a sustainable future for science and technology. Osborne & Pimentel ( 2023 ) Emphasize the urgent need to overhaul science education to equip students with critical evaluation skills in the face of misinformation. It underscores the importance of preparing students as competent evaluators of information, promoting scientific literacy, and nurturing a commitment to evidence-based scientific reasoning. White et al. ( 2023 ) Discusses competencies for the Anthropocene. PISA 2025 Science Framework (Draft) (2023) The framework is divided into three domains: research and decision-making, procedural knowledge, and content knowledge. It also includes environmental awareness, concern, and agency, emphasizing the importance of taking a critical, evidence-informed perspective on ecological issues. The framework calls for preparing students for informed decision-making and active participation in addressing socio-environmental issues (see Fig. 4, Tables 10 and 11). Based on the important implications of the selected studies, they were divided into five themes (see Table 4 ). These themes point towards the aspects that need to be accommodated in the scientific literacy framework for textbook analysis. These categories highlight the importance of action-oriented learning, critical thinking, and engagement with contemporary issues in science education. Promoting Actions/Actions towards Environmental Challenges/Agency: This theme underscores the significance of imparting scientific knowledge and fostering a sense of agency and a transformative vision of science among students. It emphasizes the need for educational interventions encouraging students to take proactive steps towards addressing environmental challenges and fostering a culture of sustainability. Attitude towards science: This category is crucial in exploring how attitudes towards science are formed and influenced. It highlights the importance of understanding the role of personal beliefs and cultural contexts in shaping students' perceptions of science and their willingness to engage with scientific knowledge and practices. Integration of Citizen Science in Science Curriculum/Dialoguic Social Gatherings (DSGs): This theme emphasizes the integration of citizen science into science education, fostering a sense of community and encouraging students to become active participants in scientific research. It also highlights the value of dialogic social gatherings to enhance critical thinking and scientific literacy. Social media/Countering misinformation: This theme is particularly relevant in the era of digital information. It addresses the importance of equipping students with the skills to critically evaluate scientific information available on social media platforms critically, thereby countering misinformation and promoting scientific literacy. Future-focused/Transformative Vision: This category focuses on preparing students for the future by fostering a transformative vision of science. It emphasizes the need for science education to equip students with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to address future challenges and contribute to societal progress. Table 4 Categorization of studies based on critical implications Theme Study Promoting Actions/ Actions towards Environmental Challenges/ Agency Holbrook et al. ( 2022 ), Tasquier et al. ( 2022 ), Kubisch et al. ( 2022 ), Hodson ( 2020 ), Bateman et al. ( 2021 ), PISA 2025 Science Framework (Draft) (2023), White et al. ( 2023 ), Tan & Koh ( 2023 ), Fortus et al. ( 2022 ) Attitude towards science Bellová et al. ( 2021 ), Queiruga-Dios et al. ( 2020 ) Integration of Citizen Science in Science Curriculum/ Dialoguic Social Gatherings (DSGs) Lüsse et al. ( 2022 ), Queiruga-Dios et al. ( 2020 ), Díez-Palomar et al. ( 2022 ) Social media/ Countering misinformation Belova et al. ( 2022 ), Billingsley & Heyes ( 2022 ), Osborne & Pimentel ( 2023 ), Tseng et al. ( 2021 ) Future focused/ Transformative Vision Pietrocola et al. ( 2021 ), Tapio (2023), Valladares ( 2021 ), Elhai ( 2023 ) Revised Scientific Literacy Framework After thoroughly assessing the relevant studies, we have reorganized the Scientific Literacy framework. The primary modifications were made to the fourth aspect, which pertains to Science-Technology-Society-Environment (STSE) interactions, and the fifth aspect, which has been reimagined as ‘Affective engagement with science’ rather than the ‘affective side of science.’ Furthermore, we are introducing a sixth aspect, 'Environmental Awareness and Responsibility.' These revisions have been executed by drawing insights from relevant recent scholarly contributions. Table 5 Revised Scientific Literacy Framework Aspects of Scientific Literacy Descriptors Aspect 1: The Knowledge of Science ● Recall and apply scientific knowledge, facts, concepts, principles, laws, hypotheses, theories, and models. Aspect 2: The investigative nature of science ● Use scientific methods and processes such as observation, measurement, classification, inference, recording, and data analysis. ● Communicate scientific ideas effectively through various means, such as writing, speaking, graphs, tables, and charts. ● Propose appropriate experimental designs and evaluate their suitability for investigating scientific questions. Aspect 3: Science as a way of knowing ● Understand the importance of science's empirical nature and objectivity. ● Apply inductive and deductive reasoning to analyze cause-and-effect relationships. ● Recognize the relationship between evidence and proof in scientific inquiry. ● Acknowledge the role of self-examination and critical thinking in scientific understanding. Aspect 4: Science, Technology, Society, and Environment (STSE) interaction ● Understand the impact of science and technology on society and the environment. ● Explore the interrelationships between science, society, technology, and the environment. ● Identify, counter misinformation, and be open-minded. Aspect 5: Affective Engagement with Science Aspect 6. Environmental Awareness and Responsibility ● Develop a personal interest in science and scientific phenomena. ● Actively engage in science-related activities and discussions. ● Demonstrate curiosity, enthusiasm, and a positive attitude towards science and scientific inquiry. ● Construct and evaluate models representing scientific phenomena in the real world. ● Engage in discussions and manage emotions when addressing controversial issues. ● Consider the ethical and moral implications of scientific advancements. ● Take a critical, evidence-informed perspective on personal and socially relevant environmental issues. ● Recognize the scientific and social complexity underlying environmentally sustainable actions. ● Show concern regarding environmental challenges, sustainable living, equity, and social justice issues. ● Evaluate the role of science and other factors in sustainability practices. ● Promote environmentally sustainable practices and demonstrate a sense of personal agency. ● Research, evaluate, and use scientific information to inform decision-making and take appropriate action. Discussion The restructuring of Aspects 4, 5, and 6 aims to ensure that each facet of the framework addresses unique and clearly defined elements. In this regard, Aspect 4 now emphasizes cultivating a comprehensive understanding of science and technology's societal and environmental impacts. Aspect 5 is dedicated to "affectively" engaging with science, highlighting its significance. Lastly, Aspect 6 focuses on sustainability practices, environmental awareness, and responsibility. Science, Technology, Society, and Environment (STSE) This aspect has been reconceptualized to focus more explicitly on the interrelationships between science, technology, society, and the environment. It emphasizes understanding the impact of science and technology on society and the environment, addressing science-related social and environmental issues. We suggest a new descriptor: ‘Identify, counter misinformation and be open-minded.’ Research shows that students frequently encounter difficulties incorporating scientific knowledge into everyday thought processes (Aikenhead, 2006). We must motivate students to seek and rely on scientific knowledge and expertise, even when it challenges their existing beliefs. Simultaneously, we should instill in students the ability to critically evaluate scientific claims when necessary. In essence, fostering open-mindedness within the science classroom is of paramount importance. This approach is essential for equipping our students with the skills to become proficient assessors of scientific information, enabling them to engage effectively with the world (Sharon & Baram‐Tsabari, 2020). Affective engagement with science The renaming of the fifth aspect of the Scientific Literacy Framework from "Affective Side of Science" to "Affective Engagement with Science" signifies a notable shift in perspective. This change underscores the importance of active involvement and emotional connection with scientific concepts and practices rather than merely emphasizing an individual's feelings and attitudes toward science. For science education to be effective, it should promote the acquisition of scientific knowledge and the development of positive attitudes, self-efficacy, and motivation toward science, which are essential for lifelong learning and scientific literacy (David et al.,2022). Revising and reevaluating science education policies to include ‘affective’ goals is necessary for improving science education. The previous descriptors, such as "Having environmental awareness" and "Taking responsible action for the environment," have been replaced by descriptors that encourage individuals to "Develop a personal interest in science and scientific phenomena" and "Actively engage in science-related activities and discussions." This shift acknowledges that scientific literacy is not just about passive recognition but about fostering a proactive and engaged relationship with science. David et al. (2022) delve into the gap between knowledge and behavior and question whether having scientific knowledge leads to rational and informed decision-making in various aspects of life. It presents examples, such as people with knowledge of environmental issues still making environmentally harmful choices. It highlights that knowledge does not always translate into behavior, and there is often a divide between knowing what is scientifically best and implementing that knowledge in practice. The descriptor ‘Construct and evaluate multiple models representing scientific phenomena in the real world’ is introduced to counter this. The multiple-model approach in science education involves engaging students in scientific and socio-scientific modeling activities. Scientific models help students understand the underlying scientific phenomena, while socio-scientific models encourage them to apply scientific knowledge to broader social contexts. This approach bridges the gap between disciplinary knowledge and real-world decision-making, ultimately contributing to students' scientific literacy development (Ke et al., 2021). It highlights the dynamic interaction between science and society, fostering critical thinking and informed decision-making on complex societal issues. Including descriptors like "Actively engage in science-related activities and discussions" highlights the importance of hands-on learning and participation. This aspect aligns with modern pedagogical approaches that emphasize learning by doing. Engaging in science-related activities encourages individuals to apply theoretical knowledge to real-world situations, enhancing their comprehension and retention of scientific principles. The revised framework emphasizes the significance of emotional engagement in science. Demonstrating "curiosity, enthusiasm, and a positive attitude towards science and scientific inquiry" acknowledges that emotions play a vital role in motivating individuals to explore and understand the natural world. This emotional connection can lead to a more profound and lasting interest in science. "Engage in discussions and manage emotions when addressing controversial issues" is a critical addition to the framework. It recognizes that scientific literacy involves understanding facts and the ability to evaluate and discuss complex and often contentious scientific topics critically. Effective communication and emotional intelligence in these discussions are essential for informed decision-making. "Develop a personal interest in science and scientific phenomena" underscores the idea that scientific literacy is not one-size-fits-all. It acknowledges that individuals have unique interests and passions within science. Encouraging personal exploration and discovery can lead to more motivated and self-directed learners. While the previous framework mentioned "global issues," the revised version emphasizes active involvement and discussions regarding global scientific challenges. This aligns with the increasing importance of science in addressing global problems such as climate change, pandemics, and sustainability. Renaming the fifth aspect to "Affective Engagement with Science" and the accompanying descriptors reflects a contemporary understanding of scientific literacy beyond passive attitudes towards active engagement, personalization, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence. This shift acknowledges scientific knowledge's dynamic and evolving nature and its central role in addressing complex issues in today's world. Environmental Awareness and Responsibility This new aspect has been introduced to focus distinctly on sustainability practices and taking responsible actions. It underscores the importance of adopting a critical, evidence-informed viewpoint regarding environmental issues that are both personal and socially relevant, acknowledging the intricate scientific and social dimensions inherent in sustainable behaviors, demonstrating environmental awareness, and considering matters of fairness and social justice while also assessing the contribution of science to sustainable practices, and promoting environmentally responsible behaviors. Action-focused climate change education can transform science education into a more inclusive, collaborative, and culturally transformative process that addresses sustainability challenges and supports both human life and ecosystem health in the face of environmental degradation (Trott & Weinberg, 2020). Trott and Weinberg (2020) argue against framing science education in the context of global competition and dominance, calling for a departure from unsustainable practices like competition and consumerism. They promote a reimagined purpose for science education that emphasizes collaborative processes to create sustainable futures in the present. Engaging children in climate change education and action is seen as a means to enhance their interest in science and empower them to shape a more sustainable future. Conclusions and Implications In this study, we have presented an updated framework for scientific literacy that builds upon existing frameworks while incorporating new aspects from recent literature. The updated framework offers a comprehensive approach to developing scientific literacy, encompassing acquiring scientific knowledge, applying scientific inquiry and investigation skills, developing reasoning abilities, understanding STSE interactions, and promoting sustainability practices. The implications of this updated framework are significant for science education and curriculum development. Educators can utilize this framework to guide the design of science curricula that foster scientific literacy and promote sustainability practices. By aligning instructional strategies and assessment methods with the framework, educators can create learning experiences that engage students in scientific inquiry, critical thinking, and decision-making processes related to real-world issues. Furthermore, the framework has implications for policy development in science education. Policymakers can use this framework to inform the development of standards and guidelines. By integrating sustainability and environmental considerations into science education policies, policymakers can contribute to developing environmentally responsible citizens equipped to address the pressing challenges of our time. Implementing and evaluating this updated framework in educational settings should be a priority for future research. Application-based studies can provide insights into the framework's effectiveness in fostering scientific literacy and promoting sustainable behaviors among students. Additionally, further exploration of instructional strategies, professional development opportunities for educators, and integration of authentic, real-world contexts can enhance the implementation of the framework. It is important to note that this framework is not intended to replace existing frameworks but to build upon them and provide a more comprehensive and up-to-date approach to scientific literacy. Incorporating sustainability and environmental responsibility reflects the increasing recognition of the urgent need to address environmental challenges and promote sustainable practices. Statements and Declarations The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. References Aikenhead G. Science education for everyday life: evidence-based practice. Teachers College Press; 2006. Altheide, D. L., & Schneider, C. J. (2012). Qualitative media analysis (Vol. 38). Sage publications. Atkin, J. M. & Black, P. (2003). Inside science education reform. Teacher College Press. American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS] (1991). Project 2061— Science for all Americans. Washington, DC. Bateman, K. M., Steele, D., & Sexton, C. M. (2021). Sustainability science education: our animalistic response-ability. Cultural studies of science education , 16 (3), 841–855. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-021-10039-7 BouJaoude, S. (2002). Balance of scientific literacy themes in science curricula: The case of Lebanon. International Journal of Science Education, 24(2), 139–156. Bellová, R., Balážová, M., & Tomčík, P. (2021). Are attitudes towards science and technology related to critical areas in science education? Research in Science & Technological Education, 41 , 1117 - 1132. Belova, N., Krause, M., & Siemens, C. (2022). Students’ Strategies When Dealing with Science-Based Information in Social Media—A Group Discussion Study. Education Sciences , 12 (9), 603. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12090603 Billingsley, B., & Heyes, J.M. (2022). Preparing students to engage with science‐ and technology‐related misinformation: The role of epistemic insight. The Curriculum Journal . Bybee R.W. (1997). Towards an understanding of scientific literacy. In: W. Gräber & C. Bolte. (Eds.). Scientific Literacy. An international symposium (pp. 37–68). Institut Für die Pädagogik der Naturwissenschaften (IPN): Kiel, Germany. Cansiz, M., & Cansiz, N. (2019). Reconceptualizing and field testing the scientific literacy framework by exploring the aspect of scientific literacy in Turkish science curriculum. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 18(5), 681-691. https://doi.org/10.33225/ jbse/19.18.681 Cavagnetto, A.R., Hand, B.M., & Premo, J. (2020). Supporting student agency in science. Theory Into Practice, 59 , 128 - 138. Chiappetta, E. L., Fillman, D. A., & Sethna, G. H. (1991). Procedures for conducting content analysis of science textbook. Houston, TX: University of Houston, Department of Curriculum and Instruction. Chiappetta, E., Sethna, G., & Fillman, D. (1993). Do middle school life science textbooks provide a balance of scientific literacy themes? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 787–797. DeBoer, G. E. (2000). Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 37 (6), 582-601. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200008)37:63.0.CO;2-L Díez-Palomar, J., Font Palomar, M., Aubert, A., & García-Yeste, C. (2022). Dialogic Scientific Gatherings: The Promotion of Scientific Literacy Among Children. SAGE Open, 12 . Elhai, J. (2023). Science Literacy: A More Fundamental Meaning. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education , 24 (1). https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.00212-22 Feinstein, N. (2010). Salvaging science literacy. Science Education , 95 (1), 168-185. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20414 Fortus, D., Lin, J., Neumann, K., & Sadler, T.D. (2022). The role of affect in science literacy for all. International Journal of Science Education, 44 , 535 - 555. Heiskanen, E. (2006). Encounters between ordinary people and environmental science – A transdisciplinary perspective on environmental literacy. The Journal of Transdisciplinary Environmental Studies, 5(1 –2), 1 –13 Hodson, D. (2020). Going Beyond STS Education: Building a Curriculum for Sociopolitical Activism. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education , pp. 1–31. Holbrook, J., & Rannikmae, M. (2009). The Meaning of Scientific Literacy. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 4, 275-288. Holbrook, J., Chowdhury, T. B., & Rannikmäe, M. (2022). A Future Trend for Science Education: A Constructivism-Humanism Approach to Trans-Contextualisation. Education Sciences , 12 (6), 413. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12060413 Hurd, P. D. (1958). Science literacy: Its meaning for American schools. Educational leadership , 16 (1), 13-16. Ke, L., Sadler, T. D., Zangori, L., & Friedrichsen, P. J. (2021). Developing and Using Multiple Models to Promote Scientific Literacy in the Context of Socio-Scientific Issues. Science & education , 30 (3), 589–607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00206-1 Kubisch, S., Krimm, H., Liebhaber, N., Oberauer, K., Deisenrieder, V., Parth, S., Frick, M., Stötter, J., & Keller, L. (2022). Rethinking Quality Science Education for Climate Action: Transdisciplinary Education for Transformative Learning and Engagement. Frontiers in Education , 7 , 838135. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.838135 Li, Y., & Guo, M. (2021). Scientific Literacy in Communicating Science and Socio-Scientific Issues: Prospects and Challenges. Frontiers in Psychology , 12 , 758000. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.758000 Lüsse, M., Brockhage, F., Beeken, M., & Pietzner, V. (2022). Citizen science and its potential for science education. International Journal of Science Education, 44 , 1120 - 1142. Mateja Ploj Virtič (2022) Teaching science & technology: components of scientific literacy and insight into the steps of research, International Journal of Science Education, 44:12, 1916-1931, DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2022.2105414 OECD. (2019). “PISA 2018 Science Framework”, in PISA 2018 Assessment and Analytical Framework. Http://Www.Oecd.Org/, 97–118. OECD(2023). "PISA 2025 Scientific Literacy Framework Draft." OECD, [May 2023], [PISA 2025 SCIENCE FRAMEWORK (DRAFT) (oecd.org)]. Osborne, J., & Pimentel, D. (2023). Science education in an age of misinformation. Science Education , 107 (3), 553-571. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21790 Pietrocola, M., Rodrigues, E., Bercot, F., & Schnorr, S. (2021). Risk Society and Science Education: Lessons from the Covid-19 Pandemic. Science & education , 30 (2), 209–233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00176-w Queiruga-Dios, M.Á., López-Iñesta, E., Diez-Ojeda, M., Sáiz-Manzanares, M.C., & Vázquez Dorrío, J.B. (2020). Citizen Science for Scientific Literacy and the Attainment of Sustainable Development Goals in Formal Education. Sustainability . Rasa, T., Lavonen, J., & Laherto, A. (2023). Agency and Transformative Potential of Technology in Students' Images of the Future: Futures Thinking as Critical Scientific Literacy. Science & Education . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-023-00432-9 Rola Khishfe (2014) A Reconstructed Vision of Environmental Science Literacy: The case of Qatar, International Journal of Science Education, 36:18, 3067-3100, DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2014.951980 Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In Abell, S. K. & Lederman, N. G. (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 729–780). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Sharon, A.J., & Baram‐Tsabari, A. (2020). Can science literacy help individuals identify misinformation in everyday life? Science Education, 104 , 873-894. Showalter, V. (1974). What is united science education? Part 5: Program objectives and scientific literacy. PRism 2, 3–4. Solomon, J. (2005). School science and the future of scientific culture. In Levinson, R. & Thomas, J. (Eds.). Science Today, (pp. 80–85). Routledge. Tan, M., & Koh, T. S. (2023). Learning to become ignorant: Improving the quality of epistemic knowledge in science education. Science Education , 107 (1), 9–27. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21753 Tasquier, G., Knain, E., & Jornet, A. (2022). Scientific Literacies for Change Making: Equipping the Young to Tackle Current Societal Challenges. Frontiers in Education , 7 , 689329. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.689329 Trott, C.D., & Weinberg, A.E. (2020). Science Education for Sustainability: Strengthening Children’s Science Engagement through Climate Change Learning and Action. Sustainability . Tseng, A. S., Bonilla, S., & MacPherson, A. (2021). Fighting “bad science” in the information age: The effects of an intervention to stimulate evaluation and critique of false scientific claims. Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 58 (8), 1152-1178. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21696 Valladares, L. Scientific Literacy and Social Transformation. Sci & Educ 30, 557–587 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00205-2 White, P., et al. (2023), "Agency in the Anthropocene: Supporting document to the PISA 2025 Science Framework", OECD Education Working Papers , No. 297, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/8d3b6cfa-en Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 09 Jun, 2025 Read the published version in Research in Science Education → 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-4347536","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":297113180,"identity":"b5b3feaa-817a-4575-be53-92daaf97bc44","order_by":0,"name":"Vishal Kumar","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7861-6970","institution":"Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Vishal","middleName":"","lastName":"Kumar","suffix":""},{"id":297113267,"identity":"ba056a2c-e935-4a8d-81e5-c46f86895a56","order_by":1,"name":"Sanjiv Kumar Choudhary","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0009-0006-9746-9797","institution":"Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Sanjiv","middleName":"Kumar","lastName":"Choudhary","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-04-30 08:38:41","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":false,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false,"humanSubjectConsent":false,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4347536/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4347536/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-025-10269-7","type":"published","date":"2025-06-10T00:00:00+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":55784884,"identity":"948a2768-7123-4948-855b-d4155d672e8e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-05-03 06:41:53","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":67937,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eScientific Literacy framework adapted from Chiappetta et al. (1991,1993).\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4347536/v1/f5d01ed6fec05269e039bbd0.png"},{"id":55784883,"identity":"604916d5-dce0-4b0e-ba90-59922c2deee0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-05-03 06:41:53","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":106970,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSummary of the process of selecting documents for analysis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4347536/v1/652ba3dfb4d3be38e99f1f93.png"},{"id":84392271,"identity":"8958cf72-2368-46d4-b1c5-04a2e3a5848e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-11 11:46:27","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":862458,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4347536/v1/0f5ce5f0-21b6-41f2-87dc-6da97fe490b5.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eReimagining Scientific Literacy: A Framework for Future-Focused Science Education\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"Scientific literacy","content":"\u003cp\u003eScientific literacy is a term that has gained considerable attention in academic literature over the past six decades, playing an essential role in the evolution of modern education, civic engagement, and cultural dynamics (Li \u0026amp; Guo, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). The term's genesis can be traced back to 1958 when the need for public understanding of science was first emphasized (Hurd, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1958\u003c/span\u003e). The concept of scientific literacy is associated with various synonymous terms. While 'scientific literacy' is widely acknowledged in the USA, 'scientific culture' is predominant in European contexts, and 'public understanding of science' is particularly emphasized in England (Roberts,2007; Solomon,2005). Victor Showalter (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1974\u003c/span\u003e) proposed a unified goal for science education through seven dimensions of scientific literacy, including the ability to understand the nature of scientific knowledge, apply scientific concepts accurately, use scientific processes effectively, value the essence of scientific principles, view society through the lens of science and technology, believe in lifelong learning, and develop science and technology-based skills. This comprehension of scientific literacy is closely related to science education research.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOver time, the definition of 'scientific literacy' has changed, resulting in a rich and expansive conceptual framework that holds increasing significance in academic discourse (Laugksch, 2000). Over the last six decades, scientific literacy has evolved into a recognized academic field. It is strategically important as a research domain to bolster workforce capabilities, national development, and economic growth (Li \u0026amp; Guo, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). In the 1950s and 1960s, scientific literacy was associated mainly with the knowledge of scientific facts and principles. This was primarily due to the influence of the Sputnik era, where a strong emphasis was placed on developing scientific knowledge to compete in the Space Race (DeBoer, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e). However, as science education progressed into the 1970s and 1980s, the definition of scientific literacy started to evolve. It began to encompass the understanding of scientific facts and the ability to apply scientific knowledge in everyday life. This shift was influenced by the growing recognition of the societal implications of science (Roberts,2007). In the 1990s and onwards, the meaning of scientific literacy further expanded to include critical thinking and decision-making about scientific issues. This was primarily due to the increasing complexity of the societal problems related to science and technology (Feinstein, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Science for All Americans report (1991) by The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) defined scientific literacy as \u0026ldquo;the science-literate person is aware that science, mathematics, and technology are interdependent human enterprises with strengths and limitations; understands key concepts and principles of science; is familiar with the natural world and recognizes both its diversity and unity; and uses scientific knowledge and scientific ways of thinking for individual and social purposes.\u0026rdquo; Today, a scientifically literate individual is often described as someone who is not only knowledgeable about science but also able to evaluate scientific information critically, make informed decisions about scientific issues, and engage in science-related societal discussions. Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) defines scientific literacy as \u0026ldquo;an individual\u0026rsquo;s scientific knowledge and use of that knowledge to identify questions, to acquire new knowledge, to explain scientific phenomena, and to draw evidence-based conclusions about science-related issues, understanding of the characteristic features of a form of human knowledge and inquiry, awareness of how science and technology shape our material, intellectual, and cultural environments, and willingness to engage in science-related issues, and with the ideas of science, as a reflective citizen.\u0026rdquo; According to Holbrook and Rannikmae (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e), Scientific literacy is \u0026ldquo;Developing an ability to creatively utilize appropriate evidence-based scientific knowledge and skills, particularly with relevance for everyday life and a career, in solving personally challenging yet meaningful scientific problems as well as making responsible socio-scientific decisions.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe concept of \"scientific literacy\" in science education has evolved, leading to different visions to conceptualize and operationalize this term. According to Roberts (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e), two main visions of scientific literacy can be distinguished: Vision I and Vision II. Vision I, inherent in both the products and methodologies of science, focuses on mastering scientific content and techniques for their practical utilization. It underscores science requiring declarative and procedural knowledge, metacognition, and a positive attitude.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOn the other hand, Vision II, situated in social situations with a scientific component, encompasses scientific literacy definitions that emphasize comprehending the practical applications of scientific knowledge in daily life and within society. It promotes learning through meaningful contexts, emphasizing contextualizing and relating it to technology, the environment, and society. Vision II embraces a sociocultural approach to education, acknowledging that science extends beyond mere content and encompasses cultural dimensions such as values, beliefs, and emotions. It underscores the interconnection between science and both the societal and individual experiences of students and the historical, philosophical, and socio-cultural contexts of science. More recently, a third vision, Vision-III, has been proposed.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eVision III of scientific literacy adopts a critical and emancipatory perspective, aiming to empower students as responsible citizens capable of engaging in meaningful and transformative actions related to socio-scientific issues. It emphasizes interdisciplinary teaching strategies, ethical reflection, and the development of critical thinking and socio-scientific reasoning skills (Valladares, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). By integrating the societal dimensions of science, Vision III offers a comprehensive approach to scientific literacy that goes beyond the traditional transmissive and content-centered approaches of science education as in previous visions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec2\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eScientific Literacy Frameworks for School Science Education\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eOne of the initial scientific literacy frameworks was developed by Chiappetta et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1991\u003c/span\u003e). This framework was based on four major themes: Scientific knowledge, the Investigative nature of science, Science as a way of thinking, and the Interaction of science, technology, and society. The first theme, knowledge of science, focuses on teaching scientific content and ensuring students remember and apply that knowledge. It highlights the transmission of scientific knowledge from educators to learners. The second theme, focusing on the investigatory aspect of science, relates to the development of science process skills. It evaluates students' active engagement with these skills, encouraging reasoning, interpretation, and evaluation. The goal is to promote the exploration of scientific knowledge instead of mere memorization. The third theme, science as a way of thinking, explores the nature of science and scientific knowledge. It examines how scientists conduct inquiries and employ reasoning skills. The theme emphasizes the significance of historical advancements in scientific knowledge, scientific methodologies, and the importance of evidence in shaping scientific understanding. The final theme in the framework is the interaction of science, technology, and society. It focuses on demonstrating the impact of science on the public. This theme encompasses examining the benefits and drawbacks of science and technology within society and evaluating real-world instances linked to social matters influenced by science and technology(Chiappetta et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1993\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter a few modifications, Boujaoude (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e) used these themes to analyze science curricula. The framework underwent three modifications. Firstly, additional issues related to the practical application of science in everyday personal decision-making and problem-solving and addressing moral and ethical aspects of science into the existing element of the interaction of science, technology, and society. Subsequently, Boujaoude (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e) suggested analyzing different domains of scientific literacy separately, such as general science and physics. The rationale behind this recommendation was the recognition that individuals may possess scientific literacy in specific subject areas while lacking proficiency in others and argued for the importance of assessing scientific literacy within particular domains. Lastly, the author advocated using \"science as a way of knowing\" rather than \"science as a way of thinking\" as a preferred terminology for the third aspect. This shift was made to emphasize science's epistemological elements, focusing on acquiring knowledge and understanding rather than solely on cognitive thinking processes. These modifications aimed to enhance the framework's comprehensiveness by addressing practical applications, acknowledging subject-specific variations in scientific literacy, and highlighting the epistemological nature of scientific knowledge acquisition.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eKhishfe (2014) made a subsequent endeavor to examine textbooks through the lens of the scientific literacy framework. However, a modification was made to Boujaoude's (2002) framework to create a framework specifically tailored to analyze the capacity to foster environmental science literacy in the Qatari curriculum. In Khishfe's framework, the term \"aspects\" was replaced with \"pillars\" to signify the fundamental components of scientific literacy. This framework consisted of two key stages: a) the identification of the four pillars of scientific literacy and b) the recognition of their interdependence and interconnectedness. This framework's scope is restricted to assessing the curriculum about environmental science literacy. Environmental science literacy can be considered a subset of scientific literacy, focusing specifically on knowledge related to environmental science (Heiskanen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). In other words, it encompasses the understanding and awareness of ecological concepts within the broader framework of scientific literacy.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) is an international assessment conducted by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to evaluate and compare the performance of education systems worldwide. PISA assesses the knowledge and skills of 15-year-old students in reading, mathematics, and science literacy, focusing on real-life application of knowledge. The Scientific Literacy assessment framework introduced by PISA in 2018 consists of three primary components: Contexts, Competencies, and Knowledge. This framework comprehensively evaluates students' scientific literacy by considering various aspects of their scientific understanding and abilities. The second component, Competencies, outlines the desired skills and abilities that students should possess to demonstrate scientific literacy. The competencies include explaining phenomena scientifically, evaluating and designing scientific inquiries, and interpreting data and evidence scientifically. These competencies highlight students' capacity to apply scientific thinking and reasoning to analyze and solve problems effectively.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNotably, the competencies for scientific literacy outlined in the PISA 2018 framework align closely with those described in previous frameworks. Although the component \u0026lsquo;contexts\u0026rsquo; gives us new insights because this framework calls for assessing students\u0026rsquo; understanding of scientific concepts in different contexts. The framework suggests evaluating scientific knowledge by presenting students with meaningful contexts that address pertinent issues. These contexts extend beyond school science topics and cover personal, local, national, and global aspects. The assessment evaluates students' competencies and knowledge within these specific contexts, which have been selected based on their significance to students' lives and their potential impact on enhancing the quality of life and informing public policy decisions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCansiz and Cansiz (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) undertook a comprehensive effort to develop a scientific literacy framework, building upon Boujaoude's (2002) existing framework. The first modification was made to the fourth aspect, originally called the \u0026lsquo;Interaction of Science, Technology, and Society.\u0026rsquo; The term 'environment' was introduced in this modification, renaming the fourth aspect as \u0026lsquo;Interaction of Science, Technology, Society, and Environment.\u0026rsquo; This inclusion expanded the scope of scientific literacy to encompass discussions on environmental concerns. Furthermore, a new aspect, the \u0026lsquo;Affective side of science,\u0026rsquo; was introduced. This additional aspect emphasized the importance of various emotional and personal factors such as empathy, dedication, interests, attitudes, appreciation, values, and emotional responses concerning science. By incorporating these new aspects, the framework provided opportunities to explore the social and emotional dimensions of scientific learning and understanding (Cansiz \u0026amp; Cansiz, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Environmental concerns and potential actions were included in the scientific literacy framework for the first time.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Research Gap, Objectives, and Questions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe concept of Scientific literacy continuously evolves, as evidenced by the various changes made to scientific literacy frameworks in response to evolving needs. While numerous frameworks have been proposed for scientific literacy, a critical examination of the existing literature reveals several gaps that warrant further investigation. Consequently, there is a pressing need to update the current framework to incorporate the insights and recommendations provided by the recent literature. Based on the identified gaps, this paper seeks answers to the following objective and research question.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eObjective: To reconstruct a comprehensive framework incorporating valuable suggestions and findings from the recent literature.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearch Question: How can the identified suggestions and findings from the recent literature be used to build a comprehensive scientific literacy framework for textbook evaluation focused on contemporary needs and challenges?\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Research Methodology","content":"\u003cp\u003eAltheide and Schneider's qualitative document analysis method was used to revise the existing framework. It is a systematic approach that guides researchers through analyzing documents to derive meaningful insights. The method involves five key stages and substeps: constructing a protocol, collecting the data, data analysis, the double loop of analysis, and reporting findings (Altheide \u0026amp; Schneider, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). For this study, these steps were adapted into four steps (see 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\u003eProcess of Qualitative Document Analysis\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\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 \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSteps\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescription\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1. Defining the objective of the analysis\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study aimed to revise the scientific literacy framework used for science textbook analysis by drawing insights from recent literature.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2. Identification of documents\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe steps in identifying relevant documents are explained in detail in the methodology section (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e and Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3. Choosing the analysis approach and engagement with documents\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDocuments were read carefully, and essential implications regarding scientific literacy were compiled (see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4. Framework Revision\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe framework was revised based on the implications mentioned in the selected documents (see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e).\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 \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\u003eSummary of the process of collecting documents for analysis\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\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=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDatabase\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eQuerry\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNumber of Results\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eScopus\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eArticle Title, Abstract, Keywords: \u0026ldquo;scientific AND literacy AND science AND education AND school AND education\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePublication Year: (2019, 2020, 2021,2022, 2023, 2024)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDocument Type: Article or Review\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSource Type: Journal\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLanguage: English\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWeb Of Science\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eKeyword search: \u0026ldquo;scientific literacy science education school education (All fields).\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePublication Years: 2019 or 2020 or 2021 or 2022 or 2023 or 2024\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLanguages: English\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDocument Types: Article or Review Article\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearch Areas: Education Educational Research\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCitation Topics Micro: 6.11.295 Science Education\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWeb of Science Categories: Education Educational Research\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e266\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 \u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eData Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e summarizes the implications mentioned in the selected studies. These implications have been categorized into five categories (see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e) used to devise the revised framework.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSummary of essential implications mentioned in the selected documents\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\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 \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudy\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eImplications\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eQueiruga-Dios et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntegrating citizen science in science curricula positively influences students\u0026rsquo; attitudes toward science.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHodson (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe 4-stage SSI-based model encourages actions from students.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCavagnetto (2020)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSuggests empowering students by employing a nested system of inquiry cycles. This involves breaking down the lesson into smaller segments, each guided by questions, enabling students to observe, reason, share, critique, and revise their claims, ultimately fostering agency in science learning.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBellov\u0026aacute; et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTeachers can positively influence students\u0026rsquo; attitudes towards science.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTseng et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThere is a critical need to enhance students' critical thinking skills, particularly in evaluating flawed scientific arguments, to prepare them for informed civic engagement in a world flooded with scientific misinformation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePietrocola et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnderscore the importance of instilling risk perception and promoting a more engaged relationship between science, technology, and societal decisions. This is crucial for navigating a future characterized by uncertainties and conflicting scenarios.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBateman et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe need to transform science education towards sustainability engineering and agential literacy is emphasized, aiming to de-center human dominance, foster responsibility in innovation, and ensure survival without sacrificing other elements in our interconnected world.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eValladares (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUrges a reassessment of scientific literacy, advocating a move from a transmissive to a transformative vision. It highlights the challenges in implementing this shift without considering interdisciplinary diversity. Emphasizing the need to recognize power dynamics, it calls for adopting an intersectional and emancipatory perspective and promoting inclusive participation. These measures are crucial for meaningful social and community transformations, especially in vulnerable contexts often overlooked in conventional views of scientific literacy.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHolbrook et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4-phased trans-contextualized approach to science teaching learning.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eL\u0026uuml;sse et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCitizen science projects aim to enhance students\u0026rsquo; understanding of science, fostering personal development as responsible, engaged citizens.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eD\u0026iacute;ez-Palomar et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDialoguic Social Gatherings (DSGs) can potentially promote children\u0026rsquo;s scientific literacy abilities.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTasquier et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudents must connect their understanding of climate change with taking personal action, highlighting the need for more profound cultural transformations that surpass mere behavioral changes to address environmental challenges effectively.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eKubisch et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTransformative Education's potential to influence Scientific Literacy and transformative engagement for climate action.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBelova et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudents need more capability to apply scientific knowledge to media contexts, resulting in challenges in correctly identifying and evaluating scientific aspects within media messages.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBillingsley \u0026amp; Heyes (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEncouraging epistemic insight, encompassing critical thinking about knowledge and multidisciplinary perspectives, helps students recognize the limitations of science and technology, leading to greater epistemic humility.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFortus et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmphasize the necessity of integrating affective aspects (emotions, attitudes) into science education to achieve comprehensive science literacy.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTan \u0026amp; Koh (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSuggest transforming science education by focusing on practical investigations that acknowledge the limitations of scientific knowledge. It emphasizes understanding the interactions of physical effects to promote a deeper appreciation of science and the nature of knowledge and ignorance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eElhai (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThere is a need to redefine science literacy as a communal endeavor, advocating for instilling core values of scientific inquiry among elementary students through experiential learning and fostering a culture of curiosity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTapio (2023)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSuggests a reexamination of scientific literacy, emphasizing the integration of long-term thinking, anticipation, imagination, and future perceptions, essential for wielding scientific knowledge responsibly and ensuring a sustainable future for science and technology.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOsborne \u0026amp; Pimentel (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmphasize the urgent need to overhaul science education to equip students with critical evaluation skills in the face of misinformation. It underscores the importance of preparing students as competent evaluators of information, promoting scientific literacy, and nurturing a commitment to evidence-based scientific reasoning.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhite et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDiscusses competencies for the Anthropocene.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePISA 2025 Science Framework (Draft) (2023)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe framework is divided into three domains: research and decision-making, procedural knowledge, and content knowledge. It also includes environmental awareness, concern, and agency, emphasizing the importance of taking a critical, evidence-informed perspective on ecological issues. The framework calls for preparing students for informed decision-making and active participation in addressing socio-environmental issues (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;4, Tables\u0026nbsp;10 and 11).\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\u003eBased on the important implications of the selected studies, they were divided into five themes (see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). These themes point towards the aspects that need to be accommodated in the scientific literacy framework for textbook analysis. These categories highlight the importance of action-oriented learning, critical thinking, and engagement with contemporary issues in science education.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003ePromoting Actions/Actions towards Environmental Challenges/Agency: This theme underscores the significance of imparting scientific knowledge and fostering a sense of agency and a transformative vision of science among students. It emphasizes the need for educational interventions encouraging students to take proactive steps towards addressing environmental challenges and fostering a culture of sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eAttitude towards science: This category is crucial in exploring how attitudes towards science are formed and influenced. It highlights the importance of understanding the role of personal beliefs and cultural contexts in shaping students' perceptions of science and their willingness to engage with scientific knowledge and practices.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntegration of Citizen Science in Science Curriculum/Dialoguic Social Gatherings (DSGs): This theme emphasizes the integration of citizen science into science education, fostering a sense of community and encouraging students to become active participants in scientific research. It also highlights the value of dialogic social gatherings to enhance critical thinking and scientific literacy.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial media/Countering misinformation: This theme is particularly relevant in the era of digital information. It addresses the importance of equipping students with the skills to critically evaluate scientific information available on social media platforms critically, thereby countering misinformation and promoting scientific literacy.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eFuture-focused/Transformative Vision: This category focuses on preparing students for the future by fostering a transformative vision of science. It emphasizes the need for science education to equip students with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to address future challenges and contribute to societal progress.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCategorization of studies based on critical implications\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\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 \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTheme\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudy\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePromoting Actions/ Actions towards Environmental Challenges/ Agency\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHolbrook et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), Tasquier et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), Kubisch et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), Hodson (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), Bateman et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), PISA 2025 Science Framework (Draft) (2023), White et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), Tan \u0026amp; Koh (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), Fortus et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAttitude towards science\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBellov\u0026aacute; et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), Queiruga-Dios et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntegration of Citizen Science in Science Curriculum/ Dialoguic Social Gatherings (DSGs)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eL\u0026uuml;sse et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), Queiruga-Dios et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), D\u0026iacute;ez-Palomar et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial media/ Countering misinformation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBelova et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), Billingsley \u0026amp; Heyes (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), Osborne \u0026amp; Pimentel (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), Tseng et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFuture focused/ Transformative Vision\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePietrocola et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), Tapio (2023), Valladares (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), Elhai (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eRevised Scientific Literacy Framework\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter thoroughly assessing the relevant studies, we have reorganized the Scientific Literacy framework. The primary modifications were made to the fourth aspect, which pertains to Science-Technology-Society-Environment (STSE) interactions, and the fifth aspect, which has been reimagined as \u0026lsquo;Affective engagement with science\u0026rsquo; rather than the \u0026lsquo;affective side of science.\u0026rsquo; Furthermore, we are introducing a sixth aspect, 'Environmental Awareness and Responsibility.' These revisions have been executed by drawing insights from relevant recent scholarly contributions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eRevised Scientific Literacy Framework\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\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 \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAspects of Scientific Literacy\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescriptors\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAspect 1: The Knowledge of Science\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Recall and apply scientific knowledge, facts, concepts, principles, laws, hypotheses, theories, and models.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAspect 2: The investigative nature of science\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Use scientific methods and processes such as observation, measurement, classification, inference, recording, and data analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Communicate scientific ideas effectively through various means, such as writing, speaking, graphs, tables, and charts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Propose appropriate experimental designs and evaluate their suitability for investigating scientific questions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAspect 3: Science as a way of knowing\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Understand the importance of science's empirical nature and objectivity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Apply inductive and deductive reasoning to analyze cause-and-effect relationships.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Recognize the relationship between evidence and proof in scientific inquiry.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Acknowledge the role of self-examination and critical thinking in scientific understanding.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAspect 4: Science, Technology, Society, and Environment (STSE) interaction\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Understand the impact of science and technology on society and the environment.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Explore the interrelationships between science, society, technology, and the environment.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Identify, counter misinformation, and be open-minded.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAspect 5: Affective Engagement with Science\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAspect 6. Environmental Awareness and Responsibility\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Develop a personal interest in science and scientific phenomena.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Actively engage in science-related activities and discussions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Demonstrate curiosity, enthusiasm, and a positive attitude towards science and scientific inquiry.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Construct and evaluate models representing scientific phenomena in the real world.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Engage in discussions and manage emotions when addressing controversial issues.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Consider the ethical and moral implications of scientific advancements.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Take a critical, evidence-informed perspective on personal and socially relevant environmental issues.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Recognize the scientific and social complexity underlying environmentally sustainable actions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Show concern regarding environmental challenges, sustainable living, equity, and social justice issues.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Evaluate the role of science and other factors in sustainability practices.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Promote environmentally sustainable practices and demonstrate a sense of personal agency.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e● Research, evaluate, and use scientific information to inform decision-making and take appropriate action.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe restructuring of Aspects 4, 5, and 6 aims to ensure that each facet of the framework addresses unique and clearly defined elements. In this regard, Aspect 4 now emphasizes cultivating a comprehensive understanding of science and technology\u0026apos;s societal and environmental impacts. Aspect 5 is dedicated to \u0026quot;affectively\u0026quot; engaging with science, highlighting its significance. Lastly, Aspect 6 focuses on sustainability practices, environmental awareness, and responsibility.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eScience, Technology, Society, and Environment (STSE)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis aspect has been reconceptualized to focus more explicitly on the interrelationships between science, technology, society, and the environment. It emphasizes understanding the impact of science and technology on society and the environment, addressing science-related social and environmental issues. We suggest a new descriptor: \u0026lsquo;Identify, counter misinformation and be open-minded.\u0026rsquo; Research shows that students frequently encounter difficulties incorporating scientific knowledge into everyday thought processes (Aikenhead, 2006). We must motivate students to seek and rely on scientific knowledge and expertise, even when it challenges their existing beliefs. Simultaneously, we should instill in students the ability to critically evaluate scientific claims when necessary. In essence, fostering open-mindedness within the science classroom is of paramount importance. This approach is essential for equipping our students with the skills to become proficient assessors of scientific information, enabling them to engage effectively with the world (Sharon \u0026amp; Baram‐Tsabari, 2020).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAffective engagement with science\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe renaming of the fifth aspect of the Scientific Literacy Framework from \u0026quot;Affective Side of Science\u0026quot; to \u0026quot;Affective Engagement with Science\u0026quot; signifies a notable shift in perspective. This change underscores the importance of active involvement and emotional connection with scientific concepts and practices rather than merely emphasizing an individual\u0026apos;s feelings and attitudes toward science. For science education to be effective, it should promote the acquisition of scientific knowledge and the development of positive attitudes, self-efficacy, and motivation toward science, which are essential for lifelong learning and scientific literacy (David et al.,2022). Revising and reevaluating science education policies to include \u0026lsquo;affective\u0026rsquo; goals is necessary for improving science education.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe previous descriptors, such as \u0026quot;Having environmental awareness\u0026quot; and \u0026quot;Taking responsible action for the environment,\u0026quot; have been replaced by descriptors that encourage individuals to \u0026quot;Develop a personal interest in science and scientific phenomena\u0026quot; and \u0026quot;Actively engage in science-related activities and discussions.\u0026quot; This shift acknowledges that scientific literacy is not just about passive recognition but about fostering a proactive and engaged relationship with science. David et al. (2022) delve into the gap between knowledge and behavior and question whether having scientific knowledge leads to rational and informed decision-making in various aspects of life. It presents examples, such as people with knowledge of environmental issues still making environmentally harmful choices. It highlights that knowledge does not always translate into behavior, and \u0026nbsp;there is often a divide between knowing what is scientifically best and implementing that knowledge in practice. The descriptor \u0026lsquo;Construct and evaluate multiple models representing scientific phenomena in the real world\u0026rsquo;\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eis introduced to counter this. The multiple-model approach in science education involves engaging students in scientific and socio-scientific modeling activities. Scientific models help students understand the underlying scientific phenomena, while socio-scientific models encourage them to apply scientific knowledge to broader social contexts. This approach bridges the gap between disciplinary knowledge and real-world decision-making, ultimately contributing to students\u0026apos; scientific literacy development (Ke et al., 2021). It highlights the dynamic interaction between science and society, fostering critical thinking and informed decision-making on complex societal issues.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIncluding descriptors like \u0026quot;Actively engage in science-related activities and discussions\u0026quot; highlights the importance of hands-on learning and participation. This aspect aligns with modern pedagogical approaches that emphasize learning by doing. Engaging in science-related activities encourages individuals to apply theoretical knowledge to real-world situations, enhancing their comprehension and retention of scientific principles. The revised framework emphasizes the significance of emotional engagement in science. Demonstrating \u0026quot;curiosity, enthusiasm, and a positive attitude towards science and scientific inquiry\u0026quot; acknowledges that emotions play a vital role in motivating individuals to explore and understand the natural world. This emotional connection can lead to a more profound and lasting interest in science. \u0026quot;Engage in discussions and manage emotions when addressing controversial issues\u0026quot; is a critical addition to the framework. It recognizes that scientific literacy involves understanding facts and the ability to evaluate and discuss complex and often contentious scientific topics critically. Effective communication and emotional intelligence in these discussions are essential for informed decision-making. \u0026quot;Develop a personal interest in science and scientific phenomena\u0026quot; underscores the idea that scientific literacy is not one-size-fits-all. It acknowledges that individuals have unique interests and passions within science. Encouraging personal exploration and discovery can lead to more motivated and self-directed learners. While the previous framework mentioned \u0026quot;global issues,\u0026quot; the revised version emphasizes active involvement and discussions regarding global scientific challenges. This aligns with the increasing importance of science in addressing global problems such as climate change, pandemics, and sustainability. Renaming the fifth aspect to \u0026quot;Affective Engagement with Science\u0026quot; and the accompanying descriptors reflects a contemporary understanding of scientific literacy beyond passive attitudes towards active engagement, personalization, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence. This shift acknowledges scientific knowledge\u0026apos;s dynamic and evolving nature and its central role in addressing complex issues in today\u0026apos;s world.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEnvironmental Awareness and Responsibility\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis new aspect has been introduced to focus distinctly on sustainability practices and taking responsible actions. It underscores the importance of adopting a critical, evidence-informed viewpoint regarding environmental issues that are both personal and socially relevant, acknowledging the intricate scientific and social dimensions inherent in sustainable behaviors, demonstrating environmental awareness, and considering matters of fairness and social justice while also assessing the contribution of science to sustainable practices, and promoting environmentally responsible behaviors. Action-focused climate change education can transform science education into a more inclusive, collaborative, and culturally transformative process that addresses sustainability challenges and supports both human life and ecosystem health in the face of environmental degradation (Trott \u0026amp; Weinberg, 2020). Trott and Weinberg (2020) argue against framing science education in the context of global competition and dominance, calling for a departure from unsustainable practices like competition and consumerism. They promote a reimagined purpose for science education that emphasizes collaborative processes to create sustainable futures in the present. Engaging children in climate change education and action is seen as a means to enhance their interest in science and empower them to shape a more sustainable future.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusions and Implications ","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn this study, we have presented an updated framework for scientific literacy that builds upon existing frameworks while incorporating new aspects from recent literature. The updated framework offers a comprehensive approach to developing scientific literacy, encompassing acquiring scientific knowledge, applying scientific inquiry and investigation skills, developing reasoning abilities, understanding STSE interactions, and promoting sustainability practices.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe implications of this updated framework are significant for science education and curriculum development. Educators can utilize this framework to guide the design of science curricula that foster scientific literacy and promote sustainability practices. By aligning instructional strategies and assessment methods with the framework, educators can create learning experiences that engage students in scientific inquiry, critical thinking, and decision-making processes related to real-world issues. Furthermore, the framework has implications for policy development in science education. Policymakers can use this framework to inform the development of standards and guidelines. By integrating sustainability and environmental considerations into science education policies, policymakers can contribute to developing environmentally responsible citizens equipped to address the pressing challenges of our time.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eImplementing and evaluating this updated framework in educational settings should be a priority for future research. Application-based studies can provide insights into the framework\u0026apos;s effectiveness in fostering scientific literacy and promoting sustainable behaviors among students. Additionally, further exploration of instructional strategies, professional development opportunities for educators, and integration of authentic, real-world contexts can enhance the implementation of the framework.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt is important to note that this framework is not intended to replace existing frameworks but to build upon them and provide a more comprehensive and up-to-date approach to scientific literacy. Incorporating sustainability and environmental responsibility reflects the increasing recognition of the urgent need to address environmental challenges and promote sustainable practices.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Statements and Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.\u003c/p\u003e\n"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAikenhead G. \u003cem\u003eScience education for everyday life: evidence-based practice.\u003c/em\u003e Teachers College Press; 2006.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAltheide, D. L., \u0026amp; Schneider, C. J. (2012). \u003cem\u003eQualitative media analysis\u003c/em\u003e (Vol. 38). Sage publications.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAtkin, J. M. \u0026amp; Black, P. (2003). Inside science education reform. Teacher College Press.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAmerican Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS] (1991). Project 2061\u0026mdash; Science for all Americans. Washington, DC. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBateman, K. M., Steele, D., \u0026amp; Sexton, C. M. (2021). Sustainability science education: our animalistic response-ability. \u003cem\u003eCultural studies of science education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e(3), 841\u0026ndash;855. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-021-10039-7\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBouJaoude, S. (2002). Balance of scientific literacy themes in science curricula: The case of Lebanon. International Journal of Science Education, 24(2), 139\u0026ndash;156.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBellov\u0026aacute;, R., Bal\u0026aacute;žov\u0026aacute;, M., \u0026amp; Tomč\u0026iacute;k, P. (2021). Are attitudes towards science and technology related to critical areas in science education? \u003cem\u003eResearch in Science \u0026amp; Technological Education, 41\u003c/em\u003e, 1117 - 1132.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBelova, N., Krause, M., \u0026amp; Siemens, C. (2022). Students\u0026rsquo; Strategies When Dealing with Science-Based Information in Social Media\u0026mdash;A Group Discussion Study. \u003cem\u003eEducation Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(9), 603. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12090603\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBillingsley, B., \u0026amp; Heyes, J.M. (2022). Preparing students to engage with science‐ and technology‐related misinformation: The role of epistemic insight. \u003cem\u003eThe Curriculum Journal\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBybee R.W. (1997). Towards an understanding of scientific literacy. In: W. Gr\u0026auml;ber \u0026amp; C. Bolte. (Eds.). Scientific Literacy. An international symposium (pp. 37\u0026ndash;68). Institut F\u0026uuml;r die P\u0026auml;dagogik der Naturwissenschaften (IPN): Kiel, Germany.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCansiz, M., \u0026amp; Cansiz, N. (2019). Reconceptualizing and field testing the scientific literacy framework by exploring the aspect of scientific literacy in Turkish science curriculum. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 18(5), 681-691. https://doi.org/10.33225/ jbse/19.18.681\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCavagnetto, A.R., Hand, B.M., \u0026amp; Premo, J. (2020). Supporting student agency in science. \u003cem\u003eTheory Into Practice, 59\u003c/em\u003e, 128 - 138.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChiappetta, E. L., Fillman, D. A., \u0026amp; Sethna, G. H. (1991). Procedures for conducting content analysis of science textbook. Houston, TX: University of Houston, Department of Curriculum and Instruction. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChiappetta, E., Sethna, G., \u0026amp; Fillman, D. (1993). Do middle school life science textbooks provide a balance of scientific literacy themes? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 787\u0026ndash;797.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDeBoer, G. E. (2000). Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Research in Science Teaching\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e37\u003c/em\u003e(6), 582-601. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200008)37:6\u0026lt;582::AID-TEA5\u0026gt;3.0.CO;2-L\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eD\u0026iacute;ez-Palomar, J., Font Palomar, M., Aubert, A., \u0026amp; Garc\u0026iacute;a-Yeste, C. (2022). Dialogic Scientific Gatherings: The Promotion of Scientific Literacy Among Children. \u003cem\u003eSAGE Open, 12\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eElhai, J. (2023). Science Literacy: A More Fundamental Meaning. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Microbiology \u0026amp; Biology Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e24\u003c/em\u003e(1). https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.00212-22\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFeinstein, N. (2010). Salvaging science literacy. \u003cem\u003eScience Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e95\u003c/em\u003e(1), 168-185. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20414\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFortus, D., Lin, J., Neumann, K., \u0026amp; Sadler, T.D. (2022). The role of affect in science literacy for all. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Science Education, 44\u003c/em\u003e, 535 - 555.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHeiskanen, E. (2006). Encounters between ordinary people and environmental science \u0026ndash; A transdisciplinary perspective on environmental literacy. The Journal of Transdisciplinary Environmental Studies, 5(1 \u0026ndash;2), 1 \u0026ndash;13\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHodson, D. (2020). Going Beyond STS Education: Building a Curriculum for Sociopolitical Activism. \u003cem\u003eCanadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education\u003c/em\u003e, pp. 1\u0026ndash;31.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHolbrook, J., \u0026amp; Rannikmae, M. (2009). The Meaning of Scientific Literacy. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 4, 275-288.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHolbrook, J., Chowdhury, T. B., \u0026amp; Rannikm\u0026auml;e, M. (2022). A Future Trend for Science Education: A Constructivism-Humanism Approach to Trans-Contextualisation. \u003cem\u003eEducation Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(6), 413. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12060413\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHurd, P. D. (1958). Science literacy: Its meaning for American schools. \u003cem\u003eEducational leadership\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e(1), 13-16.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKe, L., Sadler, T. D., Zangori, L., \u0026amp; Friedrichsen, P. J. (2021). Developing and Using Multiple Models to Promote Scientific Literacy in the Context of Socio-Scientific Issues. \u003cem\u003eScience \u0026amp; education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e30\u003c/em\u003e(3), 589\u0026ndash;607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00206-1\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKubisch, S., Krimm, H., Liebhaber, N., Oberauer, K., Deisenrieder, V., Parth, S., Frick, M., St\u0026ouml;tter, J., \u0026amp; Keller, L. (2022). Rethinking Quality Science Education for Climate Action: Transdisciplinary Education for Transformative Learning and Engagement. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e7\u003c/em\u003e, 838135. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.838135\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLi, Y., \u0026amp; Guo, M. (2021). Scientific Literacy in Communicating Science and Socio-Scientific Issues: Prospects and Challenges. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e, 758000. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.758000\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eL\u0026uuml;sse, M., Brockhage, F., Beeken, M., \u0026amp; Pietzner, V. (2022). Citizen science and its potential for science education. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Science Education, 44\u003c/em\u003e, 1120 - 1142.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMateja Ploj Virtič (2022) Teaching science \u0026amp; technology: components of scientific literacy and insight into the steps of research, International Journal of Science Education, 44:12, 1916-1931, DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2022.2105414\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOECD. (2019). \u0026ldquo;PISA 2018 Science Framework\u0026rdquo;, in PISA 2018 Assessment and Analytical Framework. Http://Www.Oecd.Org/, 97\u0026ndash;118. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOECD(2023). \u0026quot;PISA 2025 Scientific Literacy Framework Draft.\u0026quot; OECD, [May 2023], [PISA 2025 SCIENCE FRAMEWORK (DRAFT) (oecd.org)].\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOsborne, J., \u0026amp; Pimentel, D. (2023). Science education in an age of misinformation. \u003cem\u003eScience Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e107\u003c/em\u003e(3), 553-571. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21790\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePietrocola, M., Rodrigues, E., Bercot, F., \u0026amp; Schnorr, S. (2021). Risk Society and Science Education: Lessons from the Covid-19 Pandemic. \u003cem\u003eScience \u0026amp; education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e30\u003c/em\u003e(2), 209\u0026ndash;233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00176-w\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eQueiruga-Dios, M.\u0026Aacute;., L\u0026oacute;pez-I\u0026ntilde;esta, E., Diez-Ojeda, M., S\u0026aacute;iz-Manzanares, M.C., \u0026amp; V\u0026aacute;zquez Dorr\u0026iacute;o, J.B. (2020). Citizen Science for Scientific Literacy and the Attainment of Sustainable Development Goals in Formal Education. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRasa, T., Lavonen, J., \u0026amp; Laherto, A. (2023). Agency and Transformative Potential of Technology in Students\u0026apos; Images of the Future: Futures Thinking as Critical Scientific Literacy. \u003cem\u003eScience \u0026amp; Education\u003c/em\u003e. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-023-00432-9\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRola Khishfe (2014) A Reconstructed Vision of Environmental Science Literacy: The case of Qatar, International Journal of Science Education, 36:18, 3067-3100, DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2014.951980\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRoberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In Abell, S. K. \u0026amp; Lederman, N. G. (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 729\u0026ndash;780). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSharon, A.J., \u0026amp; Baram‐Tsabari, A. (2020). Can science literacy help individuals identify misinformation in everyday life? \u003cem\u003eScience Education, 104\u003c/em\u003e, 873-894.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShowalter, V. (1974). What is united science education? Part 5: Program objectives and scientific literacy. \u003cem\u003ePRism\u003c/em\u003e 2, 3\u0026ndash;4.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSolomon, J. (2005). School science and the future of scientific culture. In Levinson, R. \u0026amp; Thomas, J. (Eds.). Science Today, (pp. 80\u0026ndash;85). Routledge. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTan, M., \u0026amp; Koh, T. S. (2023). Learning to become ignorant: Improving the quality of epistemic knowledge in science education. \u003cem\u003eScience Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e107\u003c/em\u003e(1), 9\u0026ndash;27. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21753\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTasquier, G., Knain, E., \u0026amp; Jornet, A. (2022). Scientific Literacies for Change Making: Equipping the Young to Tackle Current Societal Challenges. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e7\u003c/em\u003e, 689329. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.689329\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTrott, C.D., \u0026amp; Weinberg, A.E. (2020). Science Education for Sustainability: Strengthening Children\u0026rsquo;s Science Engagement through Climate Change Learning and Action. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTseng, A. S., Bonilla, S., \u0026amp; MacPherson, A. (2021). Fighting \u0026ldquo;bad science\u0026rdquo; in the information age: The effects of an intervention to stimulate evaluation and critique of false scientific claims. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Research in Science Teaching\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e58\u003c/em\u003e(8), 1152-1178. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21696\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eValladares, L. Scientific Literacy and Social Transformation. \u003cem\u003eSci \u0026amp; Educ\u003c/em\u003e 30, 557\u0026ndash;587 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00205-2\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWhite, P., et al. (2023), \u0026quot;Agency in the Anthropocene: Supporting document to the PISA 2025 Science Framework\u0026quot;, \u003cem\u003eOECD Education Working Papers\u003c/em\u003e, No. 297, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/8d3b6cfa-en\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"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":"Scientific Literacy, Scientific Literacy framework, Science Education","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4347536/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4347536/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eScientific literacy is a crucial goal of science education that must adapt to the needs of the time. Different scientific literacy frameworks (such as the PISA 2018 scientific literacy framework; Cansiz \u0026amp; Cansiz, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) have been used for evaluating textbooks to evaluate the content. However, in recent years, a significant body of literature about contemporary challenges, such as \u0026lsquo;environmental issues, misinformation, science denial, responsible and transformative actions,\u0026rsquo; has emerged, necessitating an update to the current framework. This paper seeks to address this research gap by critically reviewing and synthesizing the recent literature on scientific literacy. This research paper proposes a reconstructed scientific literacy framework for evaluating textbooks that align with science education's evolving needs and challenges by analyzing and incorporating the latest insights, also considering the latest PISA 2025 framework. After careful analysis, considering the Cansiz \u0026amp; Cansiz (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) framework as the base, descriptors of the aspect \u0026lsquo;Interaction of STSE\u0026rsquo; have been reconceptualized, the aspect \u0026lsquo;Affective side of science\u0026rsquo; has been reconceptualized as \u0026lsquo;Affective engagement with science,\u0026rsquo; and the addition of a new aspect, \u0026lsquo;Environmental awareness and responsibility\u0026rsquo; dedicated explicitly to environmental challenges and suitable actions, is suggested. The reconstructed framework will serve as a valuable resource for educators, policymakers, and researchers to enhance the teaching and assessment of scientific literacy in educational settings. The findings of this research have the potential to contribute to the ongoing discourse on scientific literacy and provide valuable guidance for future curriculum development and educational practices.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Reimagining Scientific Literacy: A Framework for Future-Focused Science Education","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-05-03 06:41:48","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4347536/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":1}],"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":"0d35fa19-7865-4d13-9a7e-bd67befa90e5","owner":[],"postedDate":"May 3rd, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-06-11T11:46:22+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-4347536","link":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-025-10269-7","journal":{"identity":"research-in-science-education","isVorOnly":false,"title":"Research in Science Education"},"publishedOn":"2025-06-10 00:00:00","publishedOnDateReadable":"June 10th, 2025"},"versionCreatedAt":"2024-05-03 06:41:48","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1007/s11165-025-10269-7","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-025-10269-7","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-4347536","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-4347536","identity":"rs-4347536","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}