Integration of democratic values in natural sciences education: A Literature Review of the last 50 Years

Santiago Monsalve-Silva; Gabriel Otalvaro-García; Laura Sofía Cajica Velandia; Ana Dolores Vargas Sánchez

doi:10.12688/f1000research.154069.1

Home Browse Integration of democratic values in natural sciences education: A...

ALL Metrics

Views

Downloads

Get PDF

Get XML

Export

▬

✚

Systematic Review

Integration of democratic values in natural sciences education: A Literature Review of the last 50 Years

[version 1; peer review: 1 approved with reservations, 1 not approved]

Santiago Monsalve-Silva^1,2, Gabriel Otalvaro-García¹, Laura Sofía Cajica Velandia¹, Ana Dolores Vargas Sánchez ¹

PUBLISHED 20 Aug 2024

Author details Author details

¹ Faculty of Education, Universidad de La Sabana, Chía, Cundinamarca, Colombia
² Faculty of Engineering, Universidad de La Sabana, Chia, Cundinamarca, Colombia

Santiago Monsalve-Silva
Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Project Administration, Resources, Software, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Gabriel Otalvaro-García
Roles: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Laura Sofía Cajica Velandia
Roles: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Resources, Validation, Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Ana Dolores Vargas Sánchez
Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Supervision, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing

OPEN PEER REVIEW

REVIEWER STATUS

This article is included in the Research on Research, Policy & Culture gateway.

Abstract

This study examines how democratic values have been promoted through natural sciences education over the last 50 years, providing a comprehensive analysis based on a systematic review of relevant literature. The central problem addressed is understanding the role of natural science education in fostering democratic values such as equity, participation, critical thinking, and ethical responsibility. This research aims to identify and analyze strategies, methodologies, and transformative experiences that contribute to the promotion of democratic values. This study employs the PRISMA methodology to ensure a rigorous and structured systematic review. Data were collected from multiple databases using detailed Boolean equations. Tools such as ScientoPy and VOSviewer were used for data preprocessing, clustering, and network visualization, followed by qualitative analysis to categorize the findings. Educational programs in natural sciences have increasingly integrated democratic values, fostering a culture of inclusivity and participation; the incorporation of ICT has enhanced equity and participation, while civic education has been fundamental in developing critical and informed citizens; citizen science initiatives have empowered students to engage in democratic deliberation and address epistemic injustice; cooperative learning methods in science classes have effectively promoted gender equity and inclusion; and emphasis on sustainability and environmental justice in science education has promoted democratic values and empowered students to take action on global challenges. In conclusion, natural science education is an effective vehicle for promoting democratic values, but it is an understudied field. By integrating practices that emphasize inclusivity, critical thinking, and ethical responsibility, science education not only enhances students’ scientific understanding but also prepares them to be active, informed, and responsible citizens.

Keywords

education, democratic values, natural sciences, civil education

Corresponding author: Ana Dolores Vargas Sánchez

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information: We thank the Universidad de La Sabana (Research group Technologies for Academia –Proventus (Project ID: 24427211) for the support received in the preparation of this article.
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Copyright: © 2024 Monsalve-Silva S et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

How to cite: Monsalve-Silva S, Otalvaro-García G, Cajica Velandia LS and Vargas Sánchez AD. Integration of democratic values in natural sciences education: A Literature Review of the last 50 Years [version 1; peer review: 1 approved with reservations, 1 not approved]. F1000Research 2024, 13:940 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.154069.1) First published: 20 Aug 2024, 13:940 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.154069.1) Latest published: 12 Sep 2025, 13:940 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.154069.4)

Introduction

Colombia and the world have faced historical crises due to armed conflicts, development processes, and the influence of global ideologies. Events such as the Second World War, the Cold War, and the Latin American dictatorships stand out, whose effects have left a mark on generations’ thinking and behavior. However, despite their negative impact, these events are fundamental for developing a reflective, scientific, and proactive society. Hence, an urgent need arises to cultivate a culture of peace that encompasses various dimensions of social coexistence, environmental preservation, personal growth, and interactions between individuals and knowledge.¹

The United Nations (UN), through UNESCO, has proposed recommendations to achieve world peace and contribute to human development through education.² It promotes comprehensive education that transcends educational standards and is applied in all contexts and levels, including rural, urban, conventional, and nonconventional areas, targeting people of all ages and social classes.³

In its 42nd General Conference meeting, UNESCO³ declared a series of aspects aimed at facilitating and promoting education for a culture of peace in all contexts. These aspects are based on current challenges in environmental, social, scientific, and technological areas.

In the 21st century, peace is redefined as an active process beyond conflict avoidance, emphasizing the appreciation of human dignity and mutual care for ourselves, others, and the planet. Educational systems play a crucial role in fostering this new understanding. They must equip individuals with the knowledge and skills to address climate crises sustainably, promote global citizenship through cooperation and dialog, and advance gender equality by ensuring equal access to education. In addition, in the digital age, media and digital literacy are paramount, enabling informed decision-making, critical thinking, and ethical online behavior.³

Cabezudo and Haavelsrud⁴ established that to perform peace education processes, it is essential to start with a series of fundamental ideas. These include understanding the meaning of “peace,” the role of the community in its construction, and the expected impacts in the short, medium, and long term. Progress has been made in defining the concept of peace, moving away from the traditional idea of simply “the absence of violence and the presence of social justice, participation, and diversity” (p. 10). Peace is understood as a process of freedom that recognizes the learning capacity of each individual and the importance of the sociocultural context in which they find themselves.⁵ Dialog plays a crucial role in building this culture of peace, as it is both an act of human recognition and an ontological and epistemological necessity to seek truth together with others. Thus, it is recognized that building a peaceful society is not solely the responsibility of the social sciences, but all disciplines must address the challenges and issues raised, maintaining a close link between education for peace and a culture based on respect for human rights, non-violence, and dialog, thus promoting peaceful relationships and continuous transformation.⁶

Therefore, education for peace is based on a series of pillars that facilitate the construction of a culture of peace. These pillars are known as the dimensions of education for a culture of peace.⁷ In this case, we focus on the dimension of democratic values, as mentioned by Cerdas-Agüero.⁸ Democratic exercise must always be accompanied by values and good attitudes, with the main ones being predisposition, conviction, and willingness to act coherently and responsibly. Likewise, ethical reflection and the expression of values are crucial for democratic life, especially in societies facing crises of civility and lack of positive values, which can lead to demoralization and confusion.

Given the above, it is crucial to recognize the strategies implemented in the last 50 years in peace education and its integration with current issues from the framework of sustainable development, taking into account international documents such as the UNESCO declaration on a culture of peace, whose central axis is the prioritization of a peaceful, integral, and sustainable society, providing a roadmap for the world and the achievement of the goals proposed in the document. Scientific disciplines play a fundamental role in promoting a culture of peace; therefore, this study analyzes the promotion of democratic values through the natural sciences using a scientometric methodology in databases covering the last 50 years. This is done to answer the following research question: “How have democratic values been promoted through the natural sciences in the last 50 years?”

Methods

In this study, the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methodology was adopted to ensure a rigorous and structured systematic review.⁹ The specific objectives of the study were initially defined to guide the selection and analysis of relevant literature. Subsequently, the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the studies were clearly established to focus on the most pertinent and high-quality publications.⁹ For data collection, exhaustive searches were conducted across Scopus and Web of Science databases using a detailed search strategy with Boolean equations, as shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Boolean equations.

No.	Boolean equation
1	(“Science“ OR ”Natural Science“ OR ”Environmental education”) AND “democratic values”
2	(“Natural Science“ OR ”Environmental education”) AND “democratic values”
3	(“Natural Science“ OR ”Environmental education”) AND “learning” AND “democratic values”
4	(“STEM“ OR ”STEAM”) AND (“curriculum“ OR ”curricula“ OR ”education“ OR ”learning”) AND “democratic values”
5	(“Science“ OR ” Natural science“ OR ”Environmental education”) AND (“curriculum“ OR ”curricula“ OR ”learning”) AND “democratic values”

The study selection process was conducted using a two-stage approach, in which studies were initially filtered on the basis of titles and abstracts, followed by full-text evaluation for those that met the preliminary criteria: the relationship with democratic values and the relationship with education in natural sciences; the first filter focused on identifying studies that promote or evaluate the integration of democratic values such as equity, justice and citizen participation within the educational context, and the second filter addressed the specific connection with natural sciences education, seeking research that explores effective methodologies, content, and pedagogical practices in natural sciences teaching. This process is illustrated in a PRISMA flowchart (Figure 1) that reflects the stages of selection and the reasons for study exclusion. Three reviewers performed a quick reading of the articles, focusing on summary, objective, methodology and results, they worked independently and then a second review was carried out analyzing the same criteria. Data extraction was performed independently by three reviewers to avoid bias, and any disagreements were resolved through discussion.

Figure 1. PRISMA flowchart for the literature review.

The extracted data were synthesized using tools such as ScientoPy^® version 2.1.3 and VOSviewer^® version 1.6.20 for preprocessing, subsequently facilitating the identification of clusters and interactions among the contents and authors. Finally, a qualitative analysis was conducted where six categories were defined, with each article being classified into a category, thus providing a comprehensive and systematic assessment of the existing literature, yielding well-founded conclusions.version 1.6.20 for preprocessing, subsequently facilitating the identification of clusters and interactions among the contents and authors. Finally, a qualitative analysis was conducted where six categories were defined, with each article being classified into a category, thus providing a comprehensive and systematic assessment of the existing literature, yielding well-founded conclusions.

To ensure the methodological rigor of this study under the PRISMA guidelines, the methods used to assess the risk of bias in the included studies were detailed thoroughly. Multiple independent reviewers were assigned to each study to ensure objectivity, and in cases of discrepancies, a third reviewer was consulted. Automated tools were utilized when necessary, particularly in the analysis and construction of clusters.

Regarding the synthesis methods, data extraction processes were employed, identifying primary outcomes, categorizing results, and deciding the eligibility of studies for each synthesis. This included tabulating the characteristics of each article and comparing them with the planned categories.

In terms of data preparation for presentation or synthesis, all articles were downloaded and systematically organized in MS Excel, where the analysis and categorization processes were conducted. For tabulating and visualizing results, the previously described tools were used to present the results of individual studies and syntheses. Sensitivity analyses were conducted, and possible causes of heterogeneity among the results were explored. For assessing the risk of bias due to missing results, a comprehensive reading of the findings with artificial intelligence was performed to confirm the identified ideas.

The data from the literature review process, integration of democratic values in natural sciences education, the PRISMA checkboard and the process flow diagram have been published by Ref. 10 and are located in the availability section.

Results

According to the methodology outlined above, the following section presents an overview of the results obtained from the preprocessing, the networks constructed with the selected articles, and the findings from each category.

Current trends identified

First, during preprocessing, the evolution and distribution of scientific production from various countries over time is identified, as shown in Figure 2. The line graph on the left shows an exponential growth in scientific document production from the United States, particularly noticeable since 2000. In comparison, other countries such as the United Kingdom, Spain, the Russian Federation, Sweden, Turkey, China, Brazil, Denmark, and Germany also show an increase in the number of published documents, albeit more moderately. Notably, nations like China and Brazil have significantly intensified their document production in the last two decades.

Figure 2. Scientific production.

Source: the authors, made in ScientoPy.

The scatter plot on the right illustrates the recent activity (2022-2023) of these countries in terms of scientific publications. Although some countries show a lower percentage of recently published documents, the average number of documents published per year during this period is relatively high for some, a recent intensification in their research efforts. This analysis not only allows appreciation of the historical trajectory of scientific production from the selected countries but also helps identify current trends in their contributions to the global scientific corpus.

Subsequently, an analysis of trends by topic in documentary production from 1980 to 2025 was conducted, as shown in Figure 3. In the line graph, the field of “Government & Law” has experienced significant exponential growth, particularly starting in 2005 and continuing with a marked increase until 2025. Other fields such as “Education & Educational Research,” “Social Sciences-Other Topics,” and “International Relations” also show a steady increase, albeit less pronounced.

Figure 3. Trends by topic.

Source: the authors, made in ScientoPy.

Regarding the scatter plot, which assesses the recent activity of these fields in 2022-2023, it can be seen that “Government & Law” not only dominates in terms of cumulative growth but also in recent annual average production, indicating a high ongoing activity in this field. Other fields, while having fewer cumulative documents, show a respectable average of recently published documents per year, a renewed or emerging interest in these topics.

Similarly, a trend analysis using keywords was conducted, as shown in Figure 4. First, in the line graph on the left, the field of “democracy” shows a prominent exponential growth, especially after 2005, peaking in 2025. Other topics such as “Democratic values”, “Political participation”, and “Democratization” also exhibit a notable increase over time, although on a more moderate scale. Fields like “education” and “Human rights” demonstrate steady but less dramatic growth.

Figure 4. Trends by key words.

Source: the authors, made in ScientoPy.

In the scatter plot on the right, which assesses recent publication activity (2022-2023) in these topics, it is evident that “democracy” not only leads in terms of cumulative growth but also maintains a high average of documents per year in the recent period, indicating a sustained and robust interest in studies on democracy. Topics such as “Democratic values” and “Political participation” show a significant percentage of recent documents, reflecting renewed focus on these themes in contemporary literature.

Subsequently, from the selected articles that help to address the research question, a network of keywords was constructed in VOSviewer (Figure 5), demonstrating how various themes related to education, democracy, and science are interconnected across seven main clusters.

Figure 5. Key words network.

Source: the authors, made in VosViewer.

The first cluster emphasizes citizenship education and encompasses aspects such as democratic values and inclusive education, highlighting the importance of integrating democratic principles into educational training to foster active social participation. The second cluster explores the relationship between science and citizenship, underscoring the role of the Internet in scientific dissemination and how it affects communication and transparency in the public sphere.

The third cluster links civics education with higher education and knowledge, proposing a synergy between civic training and advanced pedagogy. Meanwhile, the fourth cluster focuses on communication via social media, examining topics such as epistemic trust and transparency, and how these factors influence public perception and trust toward institutions. The fifth cluster connects democracy with environmental education and evolutionary biology, illustrating how educational approaches in science can complement and enhance understanding and participation in democratic practices, especially in the context of sustainability.

The sixth cluster addresses ethics, equality, and learning, underlining the relevance of these values in education and their impact on social and cultural development. Finally, the seventh cluster focuses on attitudes and education, exploring how predispositions toward learning and teaching affect educational processes.

This network provides a comprehensive view of how the interaction between these themes can generate new perspectives and opportunities for integrating the concepts of democracy, science, and education. It also highlights the importance of interdisciplinarity in the study of education and democracy, showing how different fields can collaborate to promote a more informed and participative society.

A network of collaborations among various authors was subsequently constructed (Figure 6), represented by several colored nodes. These nodes indicate groups of authors who frequently co-publish or are thematically related. Each node in the diagram represents an author, and the lines connecting the nodes indicate collaborations between them. The different colors assigned to the nodes may represent different fields of study, institutions, or simply co-authorship groups that have collaborated closely on several research projects.

Figure 6. Authors network.

Source: the authors, made in VosViewer.

The network shows low collaboration among various researchers, indicating a limited shared interest in integrating democratic values into science education. This organization suggests a multidisciplinary approach, where different aspects of science and democracy are addressed from various angles without effective integration.

The red cluster shows a group of authors who collaborate closely with each other, suggesting a cohesive approach and possibly a joint project or a series of publications related to specific topics within the study of democracy and natural sciences. Other clusters that demonstrate collaboration are the green, light blue, and orange clusters.

Each study was independently reviewed by two reviewers, and in cases of discrepancy, a third reviewer intervened to reach a consensus. The risk of bias assessment focused on aspects such as category selection, result extraction, outcome assessor blinding, and the handling of incomplete data. For the synthesis of the studies, key characteristics such as study design, sample size, educational context, and main outcomes were analyzed. The included studies varied in terms of methodological approach. Most studies showed a low risk of bias in critical areas.

Possible causes of heterogeneity among study results were investigated through collaborator network analysis and cluster analysis with keywords. Differences in contexts and methodologies used were the main sources of heterogeneity. Additionally, studies that used qualitative versus quantitative approaches showed heterogeneous results in terms of effectiveness and perception of democratic values.

Development of teaching strategies, methodologies, and techniques

In the first instance, this category aims to classify articles that discuss and/or propose innovative approaches to teaching natural sciences in conjunction with democratic values, including innovative pedagogical methods and the integration of technologies in the classroom through interdisciplinary approaches. Initially, educational theory and philosophy were considered as the academic foundation for the relationship between education and politics, portraying the teacher and their methodologies as symbols of empowerment and social change, allowing for a series of criticisms and innovations in the educational systems of countries around the world, prioritizing students and their role in society.¹¹ The development of these methodologies has progressed as education was initially conceived as an alternative for social development (which is not wrong, but nowadays it is not limited solely to this field), incorporating democratic values into the school curriculum¹²; Likewise, these types of models have been reconsidered over time, demonstrating how education provides the necessary tools to develop a democratic reflection exercise, thus promoting critical and thoughtful citizenship by integrating all disciplines, in this case, the natural sciences. Erduran and Kaya¹³ proposed a series of questions for science teachers to promote scientific skills to achieve the goal of a critical and integral society regarding democratic values and how it can be achieved through various pedagogical models proposed in the research.

It is also important to recognize what Plaza De La Hoz¹⁴ proposed, whose investigation delves into the evolving dynamic between educational authority and democratic values considering the integration of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). Its dual objective is to analyze recent scholarly works concerning the impact of ICT on pedagogical authority and to corroborate these insights through empirical observation. Contrary to prevalent critical perspectives, the investigation posits that ICT serves to bolster teacher authority, albeit in a transformed manner, transitioning from a predominantly authoritative stance to one that is more demonstrative. Thus, corroborating the way in which not only education but also its approaches, strategies, and didactics have been advancing alongside political and social development.

Transformative experiences in the promotion of democratic values in natural sciences

Contrary to what has been exposed, but to great surprise, methodologies with a positive impact have not stood out according to this study, since only one investigation belonging to Esiobu¹⁵ has been found. This study investigates the impact of cooperative learning on promoting peace, equality, and equity in science classrooms, which are essential for sustainable development within a democratic framework. Through a gender equity and peace questionnaire, we found that cooperative learning effectively fosters equity and peace among genders in the biology classroom. This establishes a strong relationship between the Sustainable Development Goals and the development of scientific thinking in the classroom, thus promoting democratic values within the institution.

Presence of democratic values in scientific formal education programs

The integration of science into educational programs has become pivotal for developing scientific skills within communities, particularly in areas concerning the environment and community health. Through cienciometric tracking, a wide array of documents emphasizing the significance of promoting environmental education for ecosystem conservation and fostering democratic values for sustainable development have been identified.¹⁶ However, this challenge is not confined to classrooms; it also poses a dilemma for policymakers, as environmental governance is essential for devising strategies that safeguard the environment and biodiversity through effective governance.¹⁷

Presently, environmental education is on the rise, with natural sciences focusing on sustainable applications and explanations of environmental phenomena. This interdisciplinary field permeates all areas of knowledge because of its versatility and is closely linked to democracy and its values. Terms such as democracy and environmental justice are addressed, empowering educators, students, and policymakers to reconsider their impact on preserving the world.¹⁸ Environmental education is incomplete without action, as highlighted by Mogensen and Schnack,¹⁹ who underscore the crucial role of action in sustainable development processes in society. Since 1980, this component has been integrated into Denmark’s educational programs, resulting in significant shifts in population dynamics and bolstering democratic values regarding the environment across all knowledge domains.

Despite science being fundamental for societal development, uncertainties persist regarding sustainable development, biodiversity conservation, and the contribution of democratic values to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals.²⁰ The emergence of new technologies offers opportunities for scientific and social innovation, prompting educational and governmental institutions to develop action plans to consolidate scientific knowledge within communities. It is imperative to not overlook the importance of democratic values in ensuring global sustainable development²¹^,²²

Democracy: a journey

The importance of integrating democratic values into various fields of knowledge has been emphasized; however, it is crucial to specify which types of democratic values should be promoted through different research. Initially, these values must be enhanced through active participation; nevertheless, highlighted challenges in student motivation, fewer female candidates and representatives, and gender biases favoring male candidates have been identified. Female students faced obstacles and lacked democratic campaign methods; however, they challenged gender norms by supporting female candidates.²³

Similarly, new technologies pose a fresh challenge to democratic values. The emergence of digital disruptions, particularly facilitated by platforms like social media, presents a notable obstacle to democratic principles and collective wisdom. Concerns such as misinformation, political biases, and increasing distrust in institutions have the potential to undermine the efficacy of collaborative endeavors. Safeguarding the pivotal role of collective participation in confronting contemporary challenges requires immediate action to address issues like inclusivity, openness, and group dynamics.²⁴ Recent surges in antivaccine activism and other antiscience trends have converged with rising antisemitism. A clear example of this phenomenon arose during the COVID-19 pandemic, as far-right elements often employed Nazi imagery to criticize vaccinations and even blamed the Jewish people for COVID-19 and vaccine profiteering. These parallels with historical persecution underscore the urgent need for action.²⁵

Moreover, democratic values are linked to science in society. Initially, the focus was on reflecting on the relevance of scientific disciplines in democracy, and vice versa, integrating the foundations of both natural and social sciences, reaching scientific and democratic philosophy, and presenting points of disagreement or agreement.²⁶ In essence, both fields of knowledge are interdependent, considering that natural sciences provide explanations for phenomena that facilitate or challenge human development; likewise, social sciences provide knowledge regarding human behavior and society, relating aspects such as justice, equity, and recognition of various ethnicities and populations.

These sciences are at the forefront of exercising democratic values concerning the environment, gender, and sustainable development.²⁷ Thus, in democratic societies, the threat of populism persists, but science can help mitigate this risk. By upholding shared values like honesty and universalism, science serves as moral leadership, preventing the rise of populism. Additionally, science contributes to a system of checks and balances that limit executive power. However, an excess or deficiency of science can lead to democratic failures, highlighting the need to reaffirm democratic values. Meanwhile, a study on tenured academics’ experiences in science communication reveals their commitment to sharing knowledge beyond academia, despite the challenges it poses to their academic work. They engage in various writing practices driven by a desire to educate and democratize scientific knowledge. Further research and training programs are required to enhance science communication skills among future scientists.²⁸^–³⁰

Civic education

Civic education seeks to promote critical awareness of social, political, and environmental issues, fostering respect for diversity and a commitment to the common good. As noted by Matusevych and Shevchuk,³¹ civic education is a fundamental tool for building trust across various domains, with the aim of developing social responsibility grounded in ethical principles and the pursuit of the common good. This approach not only aims to inform students about their rights and duties as citizens but also motivates them to actively participate in society and contribute to its improvement.

Similarly, education for citizenship focuses on preparing citizens to navigate the dynamism of modern societies. According to Neoh,³² it is crucial that curricula are designed to reflect the objectives and developmental needs of contemporary society. This necessitates a constant adaptation of educational content to ensure that students are well equipped to face contemporary challenges, such as globalization, digitalization, and environmental changes.

However, Feu et al.,³³ underscored the importance of addressing key concepts in a unified manner within the educational sphere. According to this study, for the teaching-learning process to be effective, it is essential that all educational actors (teachers, students, administrators) share a common and cohesive understanding of the principles and objectives of civic education. This ensures that the values and knowledge imparted are coherent, facilitating their internalization and practical application by students.

Teacher training

In this category, strategies for initial and ongoing teacher training are analyzed to prepare educators for classroom challenges by integrating democratic values such as equality, inclusion, and mutual respect into their pedagogical practice. Johnston³⁴ suggests that leadership, the pursuit of democratic values, and the structural and cultural dimensions of school organization are fundamental for continuous societal improvement. It is crucial to define the roles of formal school leaders, teachers, and other school staff to create an educational environment that supports democratic objectives.

Additionally, Yazici³⁵ presented a study on the democratic values of prospective teachers using the Democratic Teacher Values Scale. The study indicates that future teachers exhibit high levels of democratic values in terms of solidarity, the right to education, and freedom. This study underscores the need to incorporate these values into teacher training programs so that teachers can effectively promote a learning environment that reflects these principles. It concludes that factors such as the university attended and the father’s educational background significantly impact these values, highlighting the importance of a comprehensive and contextualized approach to teacher training.

Finally, Gökçe³⁶ and Dogru and Demirbas³⁷ explored teachers’ perceptions and expectations regarding the parameters of rights, freedoms, and responsibilities within democracy. Gökçe revealed a significant discrepancy between the observations and expectations of prospective teachers concerning these values, indicating an urgent need to align educational practices with democratic ideals. On the other hand, Dogru and Demirbas found a positive and moderate relationship between teachers’ perceptions of multicultural competence and their democratic values, suggesting that strengthening these values can enhance teachers’ ability to manage classroom diversity. Both studies emphasize the importance of teacher training that not only imparts knowledge but also fosters a culture of justice, respect for differences, and equity.

Discussion

First, there is a clear convergence on the notion that education should transcend the mere transmission of technical knowledge, incorporating democratic values essential for the development of a more just and participatory society. The integration of ICT, civic education, and service-learning are prominent strategies that promote equity, participation, and the moral and intellectual development of students. Scientific argumentation and deliberative democracy are presented as complementary methods that enrich teaching and foster critical and participatory understanding among students.

Friis¹² and Plaza de la Hoz¹⁴ highlight how ICT can enhance equity and participation in education, demonstratively reinforcing pedagogical authority. Abernathy and Forestal,³⁸ along with Iskhakova et al.,³⁹ emphasize the need for civic and political education to cultivate informed and engaged citizens by employing both extracurricular events and innovative approaches to political education. Wirth⁴⁰ and Erduran and Kaya⁴¹ explored the intersection between science and democracy, proposing that scientific education should include practices of argumentation and democratic deliberation to develop critical and participatory skills. Finally, Óscar, Celina, and Jesús⁴² advocated service-learning as a methodology that combines academic learning with community service, fostering social responsibility and civic engagement.

Feu et al.⁴³ addressed the need for a precise and multifaceted understanding of democracy within the educational sphere, highlighting four dimensions: governance, habitance, alterity, and ethos. This framework can be applied to science education to promote an inclusive and participatory school culture, thereby fostering ethical responsibility and respect for diverse perspectives.

Thornton and Jaeger⁴⁴ complement this vision by emphasizing civic responsibility within higher education. They argue that promoting scientific knowledge and skills for societal benefit and appreciation for diversity are pertinent to science education, which can contribute to forming students aware of their societal roles.

Conversely, Purevdagva et al.⁴⁵ underscored the importance of fact checking and critical thinking in scientific education. Educating students about the significance of critically evaluating and understanding the world is essential for fostering informed and engaged citizenship.

Herzog and Lepenies⁴⁶ mention that citizen science can promote deliberative democracy and address epistemic injustice. Integrating active student participation in dialog about the direction and impact of scientific research encourages scientifically informed and engaged citizens.

Esiobu⁴⁷ demonstrated how cooperative learning in science classroom can promote gender equity and inclusion. By showing that this methodology can overcome gender barriers and promote equality, cooperative learning is essential for democratic education.

Additionally, Federowicz and Terepyshchyi⁴⁸ support this vision by highlighting how integrating democratic values into the Polish educational system can facilitate cultural understanding, civic engagement, and social inclusion. As Thornton and Jaeger⁴⁴ mention, civic responsibility within higher education is an approach applicable to natural sciences that promotes the use of scientific knowledge for societal benefit and fosters an appreciation for diversity.

However, Sorgner⁴⁹ discusses the relationship between scientific authority and democratic participation in decision making. He addresses the balance of expert knowledge with the inclusion of diverse perspectives and democratic values in scientific education to prepare students for engaging in critical dialogs about science and society.

Manias et al.⁵⁰ discussed the need for transparency and accountability in the use of AI in governance. They emphasize the importance of educating natural science students about ethical and democratic principles concerning technology, promoting a critical understanding of how technology can be ethically and responsibly designed and used.

As Schroeder⁵¹ mentions, science should appeal to democratic values, meaning the values of the public or their representatives, to maintain or even strengthen public trust in scientific research. He emphasizes the importance of integrating democratic values into scientific education.

Thus, the integration of democratic values into education has significant implications for educational policies and pedagogical practices. To develop a more equitable and democratic society, it is essential to implement policies that promote equity and accessibility in education using innovative technologies and methodologies. Furthermore, fostering civic and political education from an early age is crucial for developing informed and engaged citizens.

In this way, the practices of democratic deliberation and argumentation in scientific education can enrich students’ understanding of the interconnection between science and democracy, preparing them to actively participate in scientific and political debates. Similarly, service-learning, as a pedagogical methodology, offers a practical approach to integrating academic learning with community service, promoting democratic values, and developing personal and professional competencies in students.

Conclusions

The findings suggest that the promotion of democratic values through science is an under-researched area; however, it is inferred to be a multidimensional process that includes the incorporation of inclusive practices, the fostering of critical thinking, gender equity, ethical responsibility, and civic participation. These approaches not only enhance the quality of scientific education but also prepare students to become informed and engaged citizens in a democratic society.

Furthermore, the importance of developing curricula and educational policies that integrate democratic values into the teaching of natural sciences is emphasized. This not only improves scientific education but also strengthens democracy by preparing students to be active, critical, and responsible citizens.

The incorporation of information and communication technologies (ICT) has been a key element in promoting equity and participation in education. Friis and Plaza de la Hoz demonstrate how ICT can reinforce pedagogical authority and facilitate more inclusive and participatory education. Additionally, civic education, as noted by Purevdagva et al., is fundamental in forming informed and engaged citizens capable of critically evaluating information and participating in scientific and political debates.

Herzog and Lepenies emphasize the importance of integrating active student participation in scientific research, to foster a scientifically informed and engaged citizenry. This approach enables students to better understand the relationship between science and social values, thereby promoting greater involvement in scientific decision-making.

Finally, promoting civic and political education from an early age, as well as incorporating practices of democratic deliberation and argumentation in scientific education, can enrich students’ understanding of the interconnection between science and democracy.

Ethics and consent

Ethical approval and consent were not required

Data availability

Underlying data

No data associated with this article.

Extended data

S. Monsalve-Silva, J. G., Otalvaro-García, L. S, Cajica Velandia, & A. D., Vargas Sánchez. Extended data Integration of democratic values in natural sciences education [Data set]. Zenodo. 2024. doi: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13229007.¹⁰

The project contains the following extended data:

Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal

References

1. Cabrera LJ, Corcione MA, Figueroa EC, et al.: On narratives and memory: a reflection on the Colombian armed conflict from military history. Revista Científica General José María Córdova. Oct. 2018; 16(24): 177–201. Publisher Full Text
2. UNESCO: Lo que debe saber sobre la Recomendación de la UNESCO sobre la Educación para la Paz, los Derechos Humanos y el Desarrollo Sostenible. Lo que debe saber sobre la Recomendación de la UNESCO sobre la Educación para la Paz, los Derechos Humanos y el Desarrollo Sostenible. 2023. Accessed: May 05, 2024. Reference Source
3. UNESCO: “UNESCO in brief,” UNESCO in brief. Accessed: May 16, 2024. Reference Source
4. Cabezudo A, Haavelsrud M: Repensar la educación para la cultura de paz. PROSPECTIVA. Revista de Trabajo Social e Intervención Social. Oct. 2010; (15): 71–104. Publisher Full Text
5. Muñoz FA: La paz imperfecta en un universo en conflicto. La paz imperfecta. Granada: Instituto de la Paz y los Conflictos de la Universidad de Granada; 2001; pp. 21–66.
6. Carrillo I: La educación en valores democráticos en los manuales de la asignatura Educación para la Ciudadanía. Revista De Educacion, Número extraordinario. 2011; pp. 137–159. Accessed: May 05, 2024. Reference Source
7. de Vasco G : Educación para la convivencia y la paz en los centros escolares de la CAPV. Eusko Jaurlaritzaren Argitalpen Zerbitzu Nagusia. 2004. Accessed: May 16, 2024. Reference Source
8. Cerdas-Agüero E: Desafíos de la educación para la paz hacia la construcción de una cultura de paz. Revista Electrónica Educare. 2015; 19(2): 135–154. Publisher Full Text
9. Page MJ, et al.: The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Int. J. Surg. Apr. 2021; 88: 105906. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
10. Monsalve-Silva S, Otalvaro-García JG, Cajica Velandia LS, et al.: Extended data Integration of democratic values in natural sciences education. Zenodo. [Dataset]. 2024. Publisher Full Text
11. Wirth AG: Exploring Linkages between Dewey’s Educational Philosophy and Industrial Reorganization.May 1981; 2(2): 121–140. Publisher Full Text
12. Friis CS: A critical evaluation of the Danish national ICT strategy. Economic & Social Review. 1997; 28(3): 261–276. Accessed: May 16, 2024. Reference Source
13. Erduran S, Kaya E: Scientific Argumentation and Deliberative Democracy: An Incompatible Mix in School Science? Theory into Practice. Oct. 2016; 55(4): 302–310. Publisher Full Text
14. Plaza de la Hoz J: Autoridad docente y Nuevas Tecnologías: cambios, retos y oportunidades. Revista complutense de educación. 2018; 29(1): 269–285. 1130-2496. Accessed: May 16, 2024. ISSN-e 1988-2793. Reference Source
15. Esiobu GO: Achieving gender equity in science class: Shift from competition to cooperative learning. Multicultural Education & Technology Journal. Nov. 2011; 5(4): 244–257. Publisher Full Text
16. Fieri J: Learning to care: a focus for values in health and environmental education. Health Education Research Theory. 1997; 12(4): 437–447. Accessed: May 16, 2024. Publisher Full Text Reference Source
17. Sampford C: Environmental governance for biodiversity. Environmental Science & Policy. Feb. 2002; 5(1): 79–90. Publisher Full Text
18. Locke S: Environmental education for democracy and social justice in Costa Rica. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education. May 2009; 18(2): 97–110. Publisher Full Text
19. Mogensen F, Schnack K: The action competence approach and the ‘new’ discourses of education for sustainable development, competence and quality criteria. Environmental Education Research. 2010; 16(1): 59–74. Publisher Full Text
20. Lacey H: Science, Respect for Nature, and Human Well-Being: Democratic Values and the Responsibilities of Scientists Today. Found. Sci. Mar. 2016; 21(1): 51–67. Publisher Full Text
21. Kumar R, Singh S: Aspects of Science Education in India: A Synoptic Review and Possible Directions for the Future. Current Science. May 2018; 114(09): 1825–1828. Publisher Full Text
22. Johnson BJ, Gore N: What do the professions ‘profess’? Comparing architecture and planning codes of ethics. Architectural Science Review. Nov. 2016; 59(6): 449–464. Publisher Full Text
23. Erdol TA: An Analysis of High School Students’ Participation in Decision Making Mechanisms in Terms of Gender. Egitim ve Bilim. 2018; 43(196): 151–170. Publisher Full Text
24. Suran S, et al.: Building Global Societies on Collective Intelligence: Challenges and Opportunities. Digital Government: Research and Practice. Dec. 2022; 3(4): 1–6. Publisher Full Text
25. Hotez P: On Antiscience and Antisemitism. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine. Jun. 2023; 66(3): 420–436. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
26. Benda L, Benda L: Experts and Laymen in a Democratic Society: Three Perspectives on the Issue of Democratization of Science. Teorie vědy/Theory of Science. Jul. 2015; 37(1): 3–28. Publisher Full Text
27. Pollo S: Life sciences, democracy, and gender issues [Scienze del vivente, democrazia e questioni di genere]. Not Polit. Jan. 2020; 36(139): 60–69.
28. Negretti R, Persson M, Sjöberg-Hawke C: Science stories: researchers’ experiences of writing science communication and the implications for training future scientists. International Journal of Science Education, Part B. Jul. 2022; 12(3): 203–220. Publisher Full Text
29. Collins H, Evans R: Populism and Science. Epistemology & Philosophy of Science. Dec. 2019; 56(4): 200–218. Publisher Full Text
30. Weinberg J, Elliott KC: Science, Expertise, and Democracy. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal. Jun. 2012; 22(2): 83–90. Publisher Full Text
31. Matusevych T, Shevchuk D: DEVELOPING RESPONSIBLE CI-TIZENS IN NEW REALITIES: THE CASE OF SCIENCE EDUCATION. Youth Voice Journal. Jan. 2022; 2022(Special): 45–53.
32. Neoh JY: Citizenship and democratic education in the time of rising nationalism: Implications for citizenship education from the cases of Australia and Singapore. Citizenship Teaching and Learning. Oct. 2021; 16(3): 361–379. Publisher Full Text
33. Feu J, Serra C, Canimas J, et al.: Democracy and Education: A Theoretical Proposal for the Analysis of Democratic Practices in Schools. Studies in Philosophy and Education. Nov. 2017; 36(6): 647–661. Publisher Full Text
34. Johnston BJ: Types of educational leadership in a postindustrial society. Urban Rev. 1996; 28(3): 213–232. Publisher Full Text
35. Yazıcı K: An analysis of social studies prospective teachers’ democratic values in relation to various variables|Request PDF. Egitim Ve Bilim-education and Science. 2011; 36(159): 165–178. Accessed: May 16, 2024. Reference Source
36. Gökçe F: Democracy and Democracy Education in the Parameters of Rights, Freedoms, Equality and Responsibilities. American International Journal of Contemporary Research. 2013; 3(10). Accessed: May 16, 2024. Reference Source
37. Said Doğru M, Demirbaş İ: The Relationship Between Perceptions of Multicultural Competence and Democratic Values. Journal of International Students. Feb. 2021; 11(1): 24–40. Publisher Full Text
38. Abernathy C, Forestal J: Civics Across Campus: Designing Effective Extracurricular Programming. Journal of Political Science Education. Jan. 2020; 16(1): 3–27. Publisher Full Text
39. Iskhakova NH, Chuprii LV, Lyasota LI, et al.: Innovative Approaches of Political Education in Ukraine: On the Example of Developed Western Democracies. AJIS. Mar. 2020; 9(2): 127. Publisher Full Text
40. Wirth AG: Exploring Linkages between Dewey’s Educational Philosophy and Industrial Reorganization.May 1981; 2(2): 121–140. Publisher Full Text
41. Erduran S, Kaya E: Scientific Argumentation and Deliberative Democracy: An Incompatible Mix in School Science? Theory into Practice. Oct. 2016; 55(4): 302–310. Publisher Full Text
42. Óscar CB, Celina SG, Jesús RMP: Service-learning as a new methodological teaching trend in physical education and sport sciences. Journal of Physical Education and Sport. Apr. 2018; 18: 335–341. Publisher Full Text
43. Feu J, Serra C, Canimas J, et al.: Democracy and Education: A Theoretical Proposal for the Analysis of Democratic Practices in Schools. Studies in Philosophy and Education. Nov. 2017; 36(6): 647–661. Publisher Full Text
44. Thornton CH, Jaeger AJ: A new context for understanding civic responsibility: Relating culture to action at a research university. Research in Higher Education. Dec. 2007; 48(8): 993–1020. Publisher Full Text
45. Purevdagva C, Zhao R, Huang PC, et al.: A machine-learning based framework for detection of fake political speech. Proceedings - 2020 IEEE 14th International Conference on Big Data Science and Engineering, BigDataSE 2020. Dec. 2020; pp. 80–87. Publisher Full Text
46. Herzog L, Lepenies R: Citizen Science in Deliberative Systems: Participation, Epistemic Injustice, and Civic Empowerment. Minerva. Dec. 2022; 60(4): 489–508. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
47. Esiobu GO: Achieving gender equity in science class: Shift from competition to cooperative learning. Multicultural Education & Technology Journal. Nov. 2011; 5(4): 244–257. Publisher Full Text
48. Federowicz M, Terepyshchyi S: Democratic Values in Education: A Theoretical Examination of Ukrainian Children and Youth in Polish Schools Post-February 2022. Studia Warmińskie. Dec. 2023; 60: 45–60. Publisher Full Text
49. Sorgner H: Challenging Expertise: Paul Feyerabend vs. Harry Collins & Robert Evans on democracy, public participation and scientific authority: Paul Feyerabend vs. Harry Collins & Robert Evans on scientific authority and public participation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A. Jun. 2016; 57: 114–120. Publisher Full Text
50. Manias G, et al.: AI4Gov: Trusted AI for Transparent Public Governance Fostering Democratic Values. Proceedings - 19th International Conference on Distributed Computing in Smart Systems and the Internet of Things, DCOSS-IoT 2023. 2023; pp. 548–555. Publisher Full Text
51. Schroeder SA: Democratic Values: A Better Foundation for Public Trust in Science. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science. Jun. 2021; 72(2): 545–562. Publisher Full Text

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 4

VERSION 4 PUBLISHED 20 Aug 2024

Author details Author details

¹ Faculty of Education, Universidad de La Sabana, Chía, Cundinamarca, Colombia
² Faculty of Engineering, Universidad de La Sabana, Chia, Cundinamarca, Colombia

Santiago Monsalve-Silva
Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Project Administration, Resources, Software, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Gabriel Otalvaro-García
Roles: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Laura Sofía Cajica Velandia
Roles: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Resources, Validation, Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Ana Dolores Vargas Sánchez
Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Supervision, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing

Competing interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information

We thank the Universidad de La Sabana (Research group Technologies for Academia –Proventus (Project ID: 24427211) for the support received in the preparation of this article.
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Article Versions (4)

version 4

Revised

Published: 12 Sep 2025, 13:940

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.154069.4

version 3

Revised

Published: 07 Apr 2025, 13:940

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.154069.3

version 2

Revised

Published: 20 Jan 2025, 13:940

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.154069.2

version 1

Published: 20 Aug 2024, 13:940

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.154069.1

© 2024 Monsalve-Silva S et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Download

Export To

metrics

	Views	Downloads
F1000Research	-	-
PubMed Central Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.	-	-

Citations

SEE MORE DETAILS

CITE

how to cite this article

Monsalve-Silva S, Otalvaro-García G, Cajica Velandia LS and Vargas Sánchez AD. Integration of democratic values in natural sciences education: A Literature Review of the last 50 Years [version 1; peer review: 1 approved with reservations, 1 not approved]. F1000Research 2024, 13:940 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.154069.1)

NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

track

receive updates on this article

Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Version 1

VERSION 1

PUBLISHED 20 Aug 2024

Views

Reviewer Report 05 Dec 2024

Anissa Lestari Kadiyono, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, West Java, Indonesia

Not Approved

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.169050.r338091

STUDY AIM:

This study examines how democratic values have been promoted through natural sciences education over the last 50 years, providing a comprehensive analysis based on a systematic review of relevant literature.
However, the

STUDY AIM:

This study examines how democratic values have been promoted through natural sciences education over the last 50 years, providing a comprehensive analysis based on a systematic review of relevant literature.
However, the problems that occur are not depicted so what is the problem with democratic values and why through natural sciences education.

Introduction:

The research was opened by giving a statement that “Colombia and the world have faced historical crises due to armed conflicts, development processes, and the influence of global ideologies. Events such as the Second World War, the Cold war, and the Latin American dictatorships stand out, whose effects have left a mark on generations’ thinking and behavior. However, despite their negative impact, these events are fundamental for developing a reflective, scientific, and proactive society. Hence, an urgent need arises to cultivate a culture of peace that encompasses various dimensions of social coexistence, environmental preservation, personal growth, and interactions between individuals and knowledge”. This is not clear to illustrate the problem of the importance of democratic values. Explain the context of the research and the importance of the problem so that democratic values need to be researched.
Overall, natural science education has no basis in theory or application. It is necessary to explain what is the content of this education, both in content and in process, and what kind of gap research this research can fill.
There is no relevant research and connection with previous research (novelty and merit)

RESULTS:
In the result section, several important points have not been presented in the article, namely:

The explanation of the research results is based on the results of a systematic literature review and lacks an additional explanation of previous research and how these results are explained to the phenomena in the field.
This study only presents data with little information. There should be many things that can be elaborated on in this research.

DISCUSSION:
In the discussion section, no in-depth elaboration of research results was found, especially regarding the discussion of the uniqueness of the results found in this study.

CONCLUSION:
Improve the conclusion section to be more compact and summarize the research.

Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated?

Partly
Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review?

Partly
If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.)

Yes

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Psychology; Industrial & Organizational Psychology; Entrepreneurship; Gender; Human Capital; Organizational Behavior

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to state that I do not consider it to be of an acceptable scientific standard, for reasons outlined above.

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 20 Jan 2025

Ana Dolores Vargas Sánchez, Faculty of Education, Universidad de La Sabana, Chía, Colombia

20 Jan 2025

Author Response
We are grateful for the reviewer's comments and observations, as they have been extremely beneficial to our article.

The subsequent elements have been modified:
- The introduction's final
... Continue reading
We are grateful for the reviewer's comments and observations, as they have been extremely beneficial to our article.

The subsequent elements have been modified:

The introduction's final three paragraphs were examined. Details regarding the investigation's objective are provided.

The introduction elaborated on and established the specific issue.

The content of natural science education and the void that this research can address were clarified.

The introduction was enhanced by the inclusion of references to the historical development of literature.

The results were supplemented with relationships that were based on previous research, and the manner in which these relationships elucidated the phenomena in the field.

An endeavor was made to establish a more direct connection between the results and the discussion.

The conclusions section has been revised to be more succinct.

Thank you.
We are grateful for the reviewer's comments and observations, as they have been extremely beneficial to our article.

The subsequent elements have been modified:

The introduction's final three paragraphs were examined. Details regarding the investigation's objective are provided.

The introduction elaborated on and established the specific issue.

The content of natural science education and the void that this research can address were clarified.

The introduction was enhanced by the inclusion of references to the historical development of literature.

The results were supplemented with relationships that were based on previous research, and the manner in which these relationships elucidated the phenomena in the field.

An endeavor was made to establish a more direct connection between the results and the discussion.

The conclusions section has been revised to be more succinct.

Thank you.
Competing Interests: None Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 20 Jan 2025

Ana Dolores Vargas Sánchez, Faculty of Education, Universidad de La Sabana, Chía, Colombia

20 Jan 2025

Author Response
We are grateful for the reviewer's comments and observations, as they have been extremely beneficial to our article.

The subsequent elements have been modified:
- The introduction's final
... Continue reading
We are grateful for the reviewer's comments and observations, as they have been extremely beneficial to our article.

The subsequent elements have been modified:

The introduction's final three paragraphs were examined. Details regarding the investigation's objective are provided.

The introduction elaborated on and established the specific issue.

The content of natural science education and the void that this research can address were clarified.

The introduction was enhanced by the inclusion of references to the historical development of literature.

The results were supplemented with relationships that were based on previous research, and the manner in which these relationships elucidated the phenomena in the field.

An endeavor was made to establish a more direct connection between the results and the discussion.

The conclusions section has been revised to be more succinct.

Thank you.
We are grateful for the reviewer's comments and observations, as they have been extremely beneficial to our article.

The subsequent elements have been modified:

The introduction's final three paragraphs were examined. Details regarding the investigation's objective are provided.

The introduction elaborated on and established the specific issue.

The content of natural science education and the void that this research can address were clarified.

The introduction was enhanced by the inclusion of references to the historical development of literature.

The results were supplemented with relationships that were based on previous research, and the manner in which these relationships elucidated the phenomena in the field.

An endeavor was made to establish a more direct connection between the results and the discussion.

The conclusions section has been revised to be more succinct.

Thank you.
Competing Interests: None Close
Report a concern

Views

Reviewer Report 03 Oct 2024

Genç Osman ilhan, Yildiz Teknik Universitesi, Istanbul, İstanbul, Turkey

Approved with Reservations

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.169050.r323025

The article addresses the integration of the democratic values in natural science education in a well-organized document. The rationale and the objectives of the article are stated with references to government and union documents, which are among the strengths of the study. The rationale is supported with the UNESCO and EU documents; but the academic literature leading to the creation of this study is not explained through. The existing literature on the topic is recommended to be thoroughly presented and discussed in the "Introduction" part.
Another strength of the article is the construction and reporting of the methodology. The PRISMA methodology enabled the researcher to conduct the systemic review in a consistent and effective way. Also, the manuscript provides detailed information on the selection of the data and the analysis.
The results part is enriched with sourceful data and visual tools such as figures. In the "discussion" part, the author(s) presented the existing literature on the topic. However, discussing the results of the study with the literature would be more convincing and effective. The results need to be matched with the references given in the manuscript and discussed through.
In the conclusion part, the author refers to Herzog and Lepenies without a reference number. It needs to be revised and corrected.
The article is well-designed and contributory to the field. However, the introduction and discussion parts need to be worked through. The discussions on the significant topics such as democracy, civic education and the others need to be discussed with references to the existing data rather than summarization

Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated?

Partly
Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review?

Partly
If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.)

Not applicable

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Social studies education, civics education, history and education, museum education

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 20 Jan 2025

Ana Dolores Vargas Sánchez, Faculty of Education, Universidad de La Sabana, Chía, Colombia

20 Jan 2025

Author Response
The reviewer's comments have been extremely beneficial in improving the content. We are grateful for their input.
We changed as follows:
- The introduction encompassed a more detailed examination
... Continue reading
The reviewer's comments have been extremely beneficial in improving the content. We are grateful for their input.
We changed as follows:

The introduction encompassed a more detailed examination of the more specific literature.

Reviewed and changed, the discussion included writers to the outcomes.

Reviewing and changing the conversation allowed the issues of democracy, civic education, and others more importance.

The reference that shown discrepancies has been corrected.

Thank you.
The reviewer's comments have been extremely beneficial in improving the content. We are grateful for their input.
We changed as follows:

The introduction encompassed a more detailed examination of the more specific literature.

Reviewed and changed, the discussion included writers to the outcomes.

Reviewing and changing the conversation allowed the issues of democracy, civic education, and others more importance.

The reference that shown discrepancies has been corrected.

Thank you.
Competing Interests: None Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 20 Jan 2025

Ana Dolores Vargas Sánchez, Faculty of Education, Universidad de La Sabana, Chía, Colombia

20 Jan 2025

Author Response
The reviewer's comments have been extremely beneficial in improving the content. We are grateful for their input.
We changed as follows:
- The introduction encompassed a more detailed examination
... Continue reading
The reviewer's comments have been extremely beneficial in improving the content. We are grateful for their input.
We changed as follows:

The introduction encompassed a more detailed examination of the more specific literature.

Reviewed and changed, the discussion included writers to the outcomes.

Reviewing and changing the conversation allowed the issues of democracy, civic education, and others more importance.

The reference that shown discrepancies has been corrected.

Thank you.
The reviewer's comments have been extremely beneficial in improving the content. We are grateful for their input.
We changed as follows:

The introduction encompassed a more detailed examination of the more specific literature.

Reviewed and changed, the discussion included writers to the outcomes.

Reviewing and changing the conversation allowed the issues of democracy, civic education, and others more importance.

The reference that shown discrepancies has been corrected.

Thank you.
Competing Interests: None Close
Report a concern

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 4

VERSION 4 PUBLISHED 20 Aug 2024

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

	Invited Reviewers
	1	2	3
Version 4 (revision) 12 Sep 25			read
Version 3 (revision) 07 Apr 25	read	read	read
Version 2 (revision) 20 Jan 25		read
Version 1 20 Aug 24	read	read

Genç Osman ilhan, Yildiz Teknik Universitesi, Istanbul, Turkey
Anissa Lestari Kadiyono, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia
John Mart Elesio, Holy Cross of Davao College, Davao, Philippines

Comments on this article

All Comments(0)

Add a comment

Browse by related subjects

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

2 Views

23 Sep 2025 | for Version 4

John Mart Elesio, Holy Cross of Davao College, Davao, Philippines

2 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved

The research article is good for publication.

References

1. Monsalve-Silva S, Otalvaro-García G, Cajica Velandia L, Vargas Sánchez A: Integration of Democratic Values in Natural Sciences Education: a Review of the Literature of the Last 50 Years. F1000Research. 2025; 13. Publisher Full Text

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Science Education

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

10 Views

05 Sep 2025 | for Version 3

John Mart Elesio, Holy Cross of Davao College, Davao, Philippines

10 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved With Reservations

This research aims to identify and analyze strategies, methodologies, and transformative experiences that contribute to the promotion of democratic values.

Please align your conclusions to the objective of the study. What are the strategies and methodologies develop? What transformative experiences that the study find out? Please elaborate how the research be useful to the reader.

Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated?

Yes
Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Not applicable
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review?

Partly
If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.)

Yes

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Science Education

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

6 Views

03 May 2025 | for Version 3

Anissa Lestari Kadiyono, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, West Java, Indonesia

6 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved With Reservations

This article is included in the Research on Research, Policy & Culture gateway. Therefore, it is necessary to discuss from the perspective of cultural fields and policies that can be produced from this research.

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Psychology; Industrial & Organizational Psychology; Gender; Human Capital; Organizational Behavior

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

5 Views

30 Apr 2025 | for Version 3

Genç Osman ilhan, Yildiz Teknik Universitesi, Istanbul, İstanbul, Turkey

5 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved

I have checked the revisions of the author and I would like to inform you that the revisions are made appropriately. The article can be approved now, based on the criteria and journal's principles.

I hope this information is helpful to the author. I would like to congratulate the author for fulfilling every revision and providing a richer literature both in the introduction and discussion parts.

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Social studies education, civics education, history and education, museum education

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

14 Views

07 Feb 2025 | for Version 2

Anissa Lestari Kadiyono, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, West Java, Indonesia

14 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Not Approved

Abstract:

In the abstract, the problems that occur still are not depicted so what is the problem with democratic values, and why through natural sciences education.

Introduction:
Still, there is no improvement from this review:

The research was opened by stating that “Colombia and the world have faced historical crises due to armed conflicts, development processes, and the influence of global ideologies. Events such as the Second World War, the Cold War, and the Latin American dictatorships stand out, whose effects have left a mark on generations’ thinking and behavior. However, despite their negative impact, these events are fundamental for developing a reflective, scientific, and proactive society. Hence, an urgent need arises to cultivate a culture of peace that encompasses various dimensions of social coexistence, environmental preservation, personal growth, and interactions between individuals and knowledge”. This is not clear to illustrate the problem of the importance of democratic values. Explain the context of the research and the importance of the problem so that democratic values need to be researched.
Overall, natural science education has no basis in theory/ application. It is necessary to explain what is the content of this education both in content and in process and what kind of gap research this research can fill.

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Psychology; Industrial & Organizational Psychology; Gender; Human Capital; Organizational Behavior

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

18 Views

05 Dec 2024 | for Version 1

Anissa Lestari Kadiyono, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, West Java, Indonesia

18 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Not Approved

STUDY AIM:

This study examines how democratic values have been promoted through natural sciences education over the last 50 years, providing a comprehensive analysis based on a systematic review of relevant literature.
However, the problems that occur are not depicted so what is the problem with democratic values and why through natural sciences education.

Introduction:

The research was opened by giving a statement that “Colombia and the world have faced historical crises due to armed conflicts, development processes, and the influence of global ideologies. Events such as the Second World War, the Cold war, and the Latin American dictatorships stand out, whose effects have left a mark on generations’ thinking and behavior. However, despite their negative impact, these events are fundamental for developing a reflective, scientific, and proactive society. Hence, an urgent need arises to cultivate a culture of peace that encompasses various dimensions of social coexistence, environmental preservation, personal growth, and interactions between individuals and knowledge”. This is not clear to illustrate the problem of the importance of democratic values. Explain the context of the research and the importance of the problem so that democratic values need to be researched.
Overall, natural science education has no basis in theory or application. It is necessary to explain what is the content of this education, both in content and in process, and what kind of gap research this research can fill.
There is no relevant research and connection with previous research (novelty and merit)

RESULTS:
In the result section, several important points have not been presented in the article, namely:

The explanation of the research results is based on the results of a systematic literature review and lacks an additional explanation of previous research and how these results are explained to the phenomena in the field.
This study only presents data with little information. There should be many things that can be elaborated on in this research.

Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated?

Partly
Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review?

Partly
If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.)

Yes

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Psychology; Industrial & Organizational Psychology; Entrepreneurship; Gender; Human Capital; Organizational Behavior

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Author Response

20 Jan 2025

Ana Dolores Vargas Sánchez, Faculty of Education, Universidad de La Sabana, Chía, Colombia

We are grateful for the reviewer's comments and observations, as they have been extremely beneficial to our article.

The subsequent elements have been modified:

The introduction's final three paragraphs were examined. Details regarding the investigation's objective are provided.
The introduction elaborated on and established the specific issue.
The content of natural science education and the void that this research can address were clarified.
The introduction was enhanced by the inclusion of references to the historical development of literature.
The results were supplemented with relationships that were based on previous research, and the manner in which these relationships elucidated the phenomena in the field.
An endeavor was made to establish a more direct connection between the results and the discussion.
The conclusions section has been revised to be more succinct.

Thank you.

View more View less

Competing Interests

None

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

32 Views

03 Oct 2024 | for Version 1

Genç Osman ilhan, Yildiz Teknik Universitesi, Istanbul, İstanbul, Turkey

32 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Approved With Reservations

Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated?

Partly
Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review?

Partly
If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.)

Not applicable

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Social studies education, civics education, history and education, museum education

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:

Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested

Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.

Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

[1] 1. Cabrera LJ, Corcione MA, Figueroa EC, et al.: On narratives and memory: a reflection on the Colombian armed conflict from military history. Revista Científica General José María Córdova. Oct. 2018; 16(24): 177–201. Publisher Full Text

[2] 2. UNESCO: Lo que debe saber sobre la Recomendación de la UNESCO sobre la Educación para la Paz, los Derechos Humanos y el Desarrollo Sostenible. Lo que debe saber sobre la Recomendación de la UNESCO sobre la Educación para la Paz, los Derechos Humanos y el Desarrollo Sostenible. 2023. Accessed: May 05, 2024. Reference Source

[3] 3. UNESCO: “UNESCO in brief,” UNESCO in brief. Accessed: May 16, 2024. Reference Source

[4] 4. Cabezudo A, Haavelsrud M: Repensar la educación para la cultura de paz. PROSPECTIVA. Revista de Trabajo Social e Intervención Social. Oct. 2010; (15): 71–104. Publisher Full Text

[5] 5. Muñoz FA: La paz imperfecta en un universo en conflicto. La paz imperfecta. Granada: Instituto de la Paz y los Conflictos de la Universidad de Granada; 2001; pp. 21–66.

[6] 6. Carrillo I: La educación en valores democráticos en los manuales de la asignatura Educación para la Ciudadanía. Revista De Educacion, Número extraordinario. 2011; pp. 137–159. Accessed: May 05, 2024. Reference Source

[7] 7. de Vasco G : Educación para la convivencia y la paz en los centros escolares de la CAPV. Eusko Jaurlaritzaren Argitalpen Zerbitzu Nagusia. 2004. Accessed: May 16, 2024. Reference Source

[8] 8. Cerdas-Agüero E: Desafíos de la educación para la paz hacia la construcción de una cultura de paz. Revista Electrónica Educare. 2015; 19(2): 135–154. Publisher Full Text

[9] 9. Page MJ, et al.: The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Int. J. Surg. Apr. 2021; 88: 105906. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[10] 10. Monsalve-Silva S, Otalvaro-García JG, Cajica Velandia LS, et al.: Extended data Integration of democratic values in natural sciences education. Zenodo. [Dataset]. 2024. Publisher Full Text

[11] 11. Wirth AG: Exploring Linkages between Dewey’s Educational Philosophy and Industrial Reorganization.May 1981; 2(2): 121–140. Publisher Full Text

[12] 12. Friis CS: A critical evaluation of the Danish national ICT strategy. Economic & Social Review. 1997; 28(3): 261–276. Accessed: May 16, 2024. Reference Source

[13] 13. Erduran S, Kaya E: Scientific Argumentation and Deliberative Democracy: An Incompatible Mix in School Science? Theory into Practice. Oct. 2016; 55(4): 302–310. Publisher Full Text

[14] 14. Plaza de la Hoz J: Autoridad docente y Nuevas Tecnologías: cambios, retos y oportunidades. Revista complutense de educación. 2018; 29(1): 269–285. 1130-2496. Accessed: May 16, 2024. ISSN-e 1988-2793. Reference Source

[15] 15. Esiobu GO: Achieving gender equity in science class: Shift from competition to cooperative learning. Multicultural Education & Technology Journal. Nov. 2011; 5(4): 244–257. Publisher Full Text

[16] 16. Fieri J: Learning to care: a focus for values in health and environmental education. Health Education Research Theory. 1997; 12(4): 437–447. Accessed: May 16, 2024. Publisher Full Text Reference Source

[17] 17. Sampford C: Environmental governance for biodiversity. Environmental Science & Policy. Feb. 2002; 5(1): 79–90. Publisher Full Text

[18] 18. Locke S: Environmental education for democracy and social justice in Costa Rica. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education. May 2009; 18(2): 97–110. Publisher Full Text

[19] 19. Mogensen F, Schnack K: The action competence approach and the ‘new’ discourses of education for sustainable development, competence and quality criteria. Environmental Education Research. 2010; 16(1): 59–74. Publisher Full Text

[20] 20. Lacey H: Science, Respect for Nature, and Human Well-Being: Democratic Values and the Responsibilities of Scientists Today. Found. Sci. Mar. 2016; 21(1): 51–67. Publisher Full Text

[21] 21. Kumar R, Singh S: Aspects of Science Education in India: A Synoptic Review and Possible Directions for the Future. Current Science. May 2018; 114(09): 1825–1828. Publisher Full Text

[22] 22. Johnson BJ, Gore N: What do the professions ‘profess’? Comparing architecture and planning codes of ethics. Architectural Science Review. Nov. 2016; 59(6): 449–464. Publisher Full Text

[23] 23. Erdol TA: An Analysis of High School Students’ Participation in Decision Making Mechanisms in Terms of Gender. Egitim ve Bilim. 2018; 43(196): 151–170. Publisher Full Text

[24] 24. Suran S, et al.: Building Global Societies on Collective Intelligence: Challenges and Opportunities. Digital Government: Research and Practice. Dec. 2022; 3(4): 1–6. Publisher Full Text

[25] 25. Hotez P: On Antiscience and Antisemitism. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine. Jun. 2023; 66(3): 420–436. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[26] 26. Benda L, Benda L: Experts and Laymen in a Democratic Society: Three Perspectives on the Issue of Democratization of Science. Teorie vědy/Theory of Science. Jul. 2015; 37(1): 3–28. Publisher Full Text

[27] 27. Pollo S: Life sciences, democracy, and gender issues [Scienze del vivente, democrazia e questioni di genere]. Not Polit. Jan. 2020; 36(139): 60–69.

[28] 28. Negretti R, Persson M, Sjöberg-Hawke C: Science stories: researchers’ experiences of writing science communication and the implications for training future scientists. International Journal of Science Education, Part B. Jul. 2022; 12(3): 203–220. Publisher Full Text

[29] 29. Collins H, Evans R: Populism and Science. Epistemology & Philosophy of Science. Dec. 2019; 56(4): 200–218. Publisher Full Text

[30] 30. Weinberg J, Elliott KC: Science, Expertise, and Democracy. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal. Jun. 2012; 22(2): 83–90. Publisher Full Text

[31] 31. Matusevych T, Shevchuk D: DEVELOPING RESPONSIBLE CI-TIZENS IN NEW REALITIES: THE CASE OF SCIENCE EDUCATION. Youth Voice Journal. Jan. 2022; 2022(Special): 45–53.

[32] 32. Neoh JY: Citizenship and democratic education in the time of rising nationalism: Implications for citizenship education from the cases of Australia and Singapore. Citizenship Teaching and Learning. Oct. 2021; 16(3): 361–379. Publisher Full Text

[33] 33. Feu J, Serra C, Canimas J, et al.: Democracy and Education: A Theoretical Proposal for the Analysis of Democratic Practices in Schools. Studies in Philosophy and Education. Nov. 2017; 36(6): 647–661. Publisher Full Text

[34] 34. Johnston BJ: Types of educational leadership in a postindustrial society. Urban Rev. 1996; 28(3): 213–232. Publisher Full Text

[35] 35. Yazıcı K: An analysis of social studies prospective teachers’ democratic values in relation to various variables|Request PDF. Egitim Ve Bilim-education and Science. 2011; 36(159): 165–178. Accessed: May 16, 2024. Reference Source

[36] 36. Gökçe F: Democracy and Democracy Education in the Parameters of Rights, Freedoms, Equality and Responsibilities. American International Journal of Contemporary Research. 2013; 3(10). Accessed: May 16, 2024. Reference Source

[37] 37. Said Doğru M, Demirbaş İ: The Relationship Between Perceptions of Multicultural Competence and Democratic Values. Journal of International Students. Feb. 2021; 11(1): 24–40. Publisher Full Text

[38] 38. Abernathy C, Forestal J: Civics Across Campus: Designing Effective Extracurricular Programming. Journal of Political Science Education. Jan. 2020; 16(1): 3–27. Publisher Full Text

[39] 39. Iskhakova NH, Chuprii LV, Lyasota LI, et al.: Innovative Approaches of Political Education in Ukraine: On the Example of Developed Western Democracies. AJIS. Mar. 2020; 9(2): 127. Publisher Full Text

[40] 40. Wirth AG: Exploring Linkages between Dewey’s Educational Philosophy and Industrial Reorganization.May 1981; 2(2): 121–140. Publisher Full Text

[41] 41. Erduran S, Kaya E: Scientific Argumentation and Deliberative Democracy: An Incompatible Mix in School Science? Theory into Practice. Oct. 2016; 55(4): 302–310. Publisher Full Text

[42] 42. Óscar CB, Celina SG, Jesús RMP: Service-learning as a new methodological teaching trend in physical education and sport sciences. Journal of Physical Education and Sport. Apr. 2018; 18: 335–341. Publisher Full Text

[43] 43. Feu J, Serra C, Canimas J, et al.: Democracy and Education: A Theoretical Proposal for the Analysis of Democratic Practices in Schools. Studies in Philosophy and Education. Nov. 2017; 36(6): 647–661. Publisher Full Text

[44] 44. Thornton CH, Jaeger AJ: A new context for understanding civic responsibility: Relating culture to action at a research university. Research in Higher Education. Dec. 2007; 48(8): 993–1020. Publisher Full Text

[45] 45. Purevdagva C, Zhao R, Huang PC, et al.: A machine-learning based framework for detection of fake political speech. Proceedings - 2020 IEEE 14th International Conference on Big Data Science and Engineering, BigDataSE 2020. Dec. 2020; pp. 80–87. Publisher Full Text

[46] 46. Herzog L, Lepenies R: Citizen Science in Deliberative Systems: Participation, Epistemic Injustice, and Civic Empowerment. Minerva. Dec. 2022; 60(4): 489–508. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[47] 47. Esiobu GO: Achieving gender equity in science class: Shift from competition to cooperative learning. Multicultural Education & Technology Journal. Nov. 2011; 5(4): 244–257. Publisher Full Text

[48] 48. Federowicz M, Terepyshchyi S: Democratic Values in Education: A Theoretical Examination of Ukrainian Children and Youth in Polish Schools Post-February 2022. Studia Warmińskie. Dec. 2023; 60: 45–60. Publisher Full Text

[49] 49. Sorgner H: Challenging Expertise: Paul Feyerabend vs. Harry Collins & Robert Evans on democracy, public participation and scientific authority: Paul Feyerabend vs. Harry Collins & Robert Evans on scientific authority and public participation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A. Jun. 2016; 57: 114–120. Publisher Full Text

[50] 50. Manias G, et al.: AI4Gov: Trusted AI for Transparent Public Governance Fostering Democratic Values. Proceedings - 19th International Conference on Distributed Computing in Smart Systems and the Internet of Things, DCOSS-IoT 2023. 2023; pp. 548–555. Publisher Full Text

[51] 51. Schroeder SA: Democratic Values: A Better Foundation for Public Trust in Science. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science. Jun. 2021; 72(2): 545–562. Publisher Full Text

Integration of democratic values in natural sciences education: A Literature Review of the last 50 Years

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Methods

Table 1. Boolean equations.

Figure 1. PRISMA flowchart for the literature review.

Results

Current trends identified

Figure 2. Scientific production.

Figure 3. Trends by topic.

Figure 4. Trends by key words.

Figure 5. Key words network.

Figure 6. Authors network.

Development of teaching strategies, methodologies, and techniques

Transformative experiences in the promotion of democratic values in natural sciences

Presence of democratic values in scientific formal education programs

Democracy: a journey

Civic education

Teacher training

Discussion

Conclusions

Ethics and consent

Data availability

Underlying data

Extended data

References

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

Comments on this article

Browse by related subjects

Competing Interests Policy

Stay Updated