The cost of fashion: A didactic proposal based on a socioscientific problem

Downloads

Article abstract page views:  439  

DOI

https://doi.org/10.25267/Rev_Eureka_ensen_divulg_cienc.2025.v22.i3.3203

Info

Vol. 22 No. 3 (2025): 22(3), november 2024
Experiences, resources and other work
3203
Published: 06-11-2025
PlumX
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Authors

Abstract

One of the objectives of science education is to achieve functional scientific literacy that enables young people to be critical citizens in the face of the current environmental situation. Fast fashion is a trend in the textile industry to produce many garments in increasingly shorter periods of time, with the aim of offering diverse fashion products; this has environmental, economic, and sociocultural implications. This article presents the design and rationale for a teaching sequence framed within the socioscientific problem approach and argumentation. Through five teaching units, high school students had the opportunity to analyze a socioscientific problem surrounding the use of chemical substances in the production of fast fashion garments through the use of evidence. The purpose of the activities and some didactic implications are discussed. The proposal aims to guide the use of socioscientific problems to address complex issues of personal and social relevance in the science classroom.

Keywords

Argumentation Google Schoolar
Enviromental pollution Google Schoolar
Socioscientific problems Google Schoolar
Didactic design Google Schoolar
Critical thinking Google Schoolar

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Supporting Agencies  

Este trabajo fue apoyado y financiado a través de una beca doctoral de la primera autora, proporcionada por la Secre-taría de Ciencia, Humanidades, Tecnología e Innovación (SECIHTI) de México.

How to Cite

Orduña Martínez, L., & Guerra Ramos, M. T. (2025). The cost of fashion: A didactic proposal based on a socioscientific problem. Revista Eureka Sobre Enseñanza Y Divulgación De Las Ciencias, 22(3), 3203. https://doi.org/10.25267/Rev_Eureka_ensen_divulg_cienc.2025.v22.i3.3203

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Lorena Orduña Martínez, María Teresa Guerra Ramos

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Require authors to agree to Copyright Notice as part of the submission process. This allow the / o authors / is non-commercial use of the work, including the right to place it in an open access archive. In addition, Creative Commons is available on flexible copyright licenses (Creative Commons).

Reconocimiento-NoComercial
CC BY-NC

References

Baños-González, I., Esteve-Guirao, P., Ruiz-Navarro, A., García-Fortes, M. Á. y Valverde-Pérez, M. (2024). Exploratory study on the competencies in sustainability of secondary school students facing conflicts associated with ‘fast fashion’. Education Sciences, 14(7), 694. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14070694

Bardin, L. (2002). El análisis de contenido. Ediciones Akal.

Bravo, B., Puig, B. y Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2009). Competencias en el uso de pruebas en argumentación. Educación Química, 20(2), 137–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0187-893X(18)30020-X

Bravo, B. y Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2014). Articulación del uso de pruebas y el modelo de flujo de energía en los ecosistemas en argumentos de alumnado de bachillerato. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 32(3), 425–442. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/ensciencias.1281

Bravo, B. y Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2017). Developing an initial learning progression for the use of evidence in decision-making contexts. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16, 619–638. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9803-9

Cañero-Arias, J., Ferrer-Baldomero, A. B., Cano-Iglesias, M. J. y Franco-Mariscal, A. J. (2024). Secondary school students’ argumentation on energy production and consumption. En A. J. Franco-Mariscal (Ed.), Critical thinking in science education and teacher training. Contemporary trends and issues in science education (Vol. 64, pp. 123–138). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-78578-8_7

Cachon, G. P. y Swinney, R. (2011). The value of fast fashion: Quick response, enhanced design, and strategic consumer behavior. Management Science, 57(4), 778–795. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1100.1303

Driver, R., Newton, P. y Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287–312. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<287::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-A

Franco-Mariscal, A. J., Cano-Iglesias, M. J., España-Ramos, E. y Blanco-López, Á. (2024). The ENCIC-CT model for the development of critical thinking. En A. J. Franco-Mariscal (Ed.), Critical thinking in science education and teacher training. Contemporary trends and issues in science education (Vol. 64, pp. 3–42). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-78578-8_1

Frey, B., Ellis, J., Bilgren, J., Craig, J. y Ault, M. (2015). Development of a test of scientific argumentation. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 19(4), 1–18.

Garg, P. (2020). Introduction to fast fashion: Environmental concerns and sustainability measurements. En V. Shukla y N. Kumar (Eds.), Environmental concerns and sustainable development (pp. 409–427). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6358-0_18

Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (1998). Diseño curricular: Indagación y razonamiento con el lenguaje de las ciencias. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 16(2), 203–216. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/ensciencias.4126

Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2010). 10 ideas clave. Competencias en argumentación y uso de pruebas. Graó.

Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. y Erduran, S. (2007). Argumentation in science education: An overview. En M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre y S. Erduran (Eds.), Argumentation in science education (Vol. 35, pp. 3–27). Science & Technology Education Library. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2_1

Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. y Puig, B. (2022). Educating critical citizens to face post-truth: The time is now. En B. Puig y M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Critical thinking in biology and environmental education (pp. 3–19). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-92006-7_1

Kyle, W. C. (2020). Expanding our views of science education to address sustainable development, empowerment, and social transformation. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 2(2), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0018-5

Macalalag, A. Z., Kaufmann, A. y Van Meter, B. (2024). Socioscientific issues: Promoting science teachers’ pedagogy on social justice. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 6(28), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-024-00118-4

Osborne, J., Donovan, B., Henderson, B., MacPherson, A. y Wild, A. (2017). Arguing from evidence in middle school science. Corwin.

Popek, E. (2018). Environmental chemical pollutants. En E. Popek (Ed.), Sampling and analysis of environmental chemical pollutants (pp. 13–69). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-803202-2.00002-1

Rinehart, R., Duncan, R. y Chinn, C. (2014). Teacher's toolkit: A scaffolding suite to support evidence-based modeling and argumentation. Science Scope, 38(4), 70–77. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/ss14_038_04_70

Ripoll, J., Chasco, C. y Azcárate, J. (2013). Mejora de la redacción de textos argumentativos mediante estrategias autorreguladas. Pulso, 36, 175–187.

Sadler, T., Barab, S. y Scott, B. (2007). What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry? Research in Science Education, 37, 371–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9030-9

Sadler, T., Foulk, J. A. y Friedrichsen, P. J. (2017). Evolution of a model for socio-scientific issue teaching and learning. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science, and Technology, 5, 75–87. https://doi.org/10.18404/IJEMST.55999

Sanmartí, N. (2002). Organización y secuenciación de las actividades de enseñanza/aprendizaje. En J. L. Atienza y A. L. Martínez (Eds.), Didáctica de las ciencias en la educación secundaria obligatoria (pp. 169–202). Editorial Síntesis.

Simonneaux, L. (2007). Argumentation in socio-scientific contexts. En M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre & S. Erduran (Eds.), Argumentation in science education (pp. 179–199). Science & Technology Education Library.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2_9

Soares, A., Guieysse, B., Jefferson, B., Cartmell, E. y Lester, J. (2008). Nonylphenol in the environment: A critical review on occurrence, fate, toxicity and treatment in wastewaters. Environment International, 34(7), 1033–1049. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2008.01.004

Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press.

Zeidler, D. (2015). Socioscientific issues. En R. Gunstone (Ed.), Encyclopedia of science education (pp. 998–1003). Springer.

Zeidler, D., Herman, B. y Sadler, T. (2019). New directions in socioscientific issues research. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(11), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0008-7

Zeidler, D. y Khan, S. (2014). It's debatable. NSTA Press.

Zenteno-Mendoza, B. y Garritz, A. (2010). Secuencias dialógicas, la dimensión CTS y asuntos socio-científicos en la enseñanza de la química. Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias, 7(1), 2–25.