English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

The objective of this work was to identify the extent of argumentative skills and establish the possible presence of levels of moral reasoning in the arguments produced by science teachers in training regarding Euthanasia as a socioscientific issue (SSI). Socioscientific issues are characterized by controversial topics, generating discussions involving values, moral reasoning and decision-making. To carry out this research, we used the focus group as a method of data collection. The focus group proved to be adequate for this research, since we sought to analyze the statements that emerged during the discussion among the participants. To analyze the data, we used Toulmin's argumentative methodological approach to build the argumentative layouts of each survey participant. In a second moment, each of these layouts was analyzed according to Kohlberg's taxonomy of moral reasoning. As results we found that the science teachers in training were able to build arguments, and that the levels of moral reasoning show us that few people rely on laws to make up their moral reasoning in the process of decision-making on euthanasia.

Raciocínio moral em questões sociocientíficas: argumentação de licenciandos de ciências sobre a eutanásia