{"CACHEDAT":"2026-06-05 08:06:01","SLUG":"before-the-implementation-of-the-scilmi-framework-dewDwvuKD2","MARKDOWN":"## **Before the Implementation of the SciLMi Framework**\n\n \n\nBefore implementing the SciLMi framework in classroom, it is important to recognise that fostering Meta-Scientific Literacy (MSL) is not limited to teaching isolated skills. MSL development involves supporting students in navigate complex information environments, critically evaluating evidence and arguments, reflecting on ethical and societal dimensions of SSIs and engaging responsibly with diverse perspectives. The MSL competences develop gradually through repeated and meaningful learning experiences across subjects and over time. Teaching MSL therefore requires familiarity with the learners' dimension of the SciLMi framework, its structure and the interconnections between the different domains in the learners' dimension. Additionally, teachers need an understanding of socio-scientific issues and the complexity, uncertainty and controversy linked with these issues. The purpose of this part of the framework is to support teachers in understanding the SciLMi framework and designing activities based on the SciLMi framework and suggested methods.\n\n\nDeveloping MSL takes time, and it is important for teachers to recognise this from the beginning. These competences develop progressively through sustained practice and students can strengthen their competences when they come across disciplines (i.e. in language lessons, in science lessons, in history), year levels, and classroom experiences. For this reason, introducing the SciLMi framework into teaching should be seen as a continuous and long-term educational process rather than as a single or isolated lesson. Teachers are encouraged to begin with short, manageable activities (HOW) and gradually expand into their teaching. \n\n\n\n:::tip\nThe first step is that you (teacher or future teacher)\n\n* accept that MSL development takes time,\n* become aware of the Meta-Scientific Literacy (SciLMi) framework, its structure (D1–D4), and purpose,\n\n\n* understand socio-scientific issues (SSI) as: \n\n scientifically and socially grounded,\n\n controversial and dichotomous,\n\n ethically and emotionally charged, and\n\n locally and globally relevant.\n\n* are willing to reflect on your own information habits, values, sensitivities, and epistemic positioning \n\n:::\n\n\n## **The Learner's Dimension in the SciLMi Framework**\n\n\nThe Learners' Dimension in the SciLMi framework is a structured model designed to support teachers in helping students critically navigate the complex information landscape by using socio-scientific issues as the context. It is organised into four domains that describe which competences are needed from initial awareness to informed civic engagement. Each domain contains clearly defined goals that describe the key competences to be developed, and each goal is supported by practical \"HOW\" elements — short, concrete examples of classroom activities that illustrate how these goals can be achieved in practice. The framework has been developed collaboratively within the SciLMi project over two years, and was continuously refined through feedback gathered during multiple teacher trainings. The four domains of the learners' dimension are described below: \n\n**Domain 1 – Open up your mind** focuses on building awareness of the modern information environment. Learners explore how information is produced, distributed, and shaped by media systems, algorithms, and digital platforms. This domain presents competences in recognising information bubbles, identifying diverse sources, conducting effective searches, and selecting credible materials while remaining alert to misinformation and attention-grabbing strategies. \n\n**Domain 2 – Be wise / Think twice** strengthens learners' critical evaluation skills. Students should learn to assess the relevance of information, distinguish between claims and evidence, evaluate the quality and reliability of arguments, and detect bias and manipulation strategies. The emphasis is on analytical thinking, logical consistency, and recognising how language, framing, and media techniques can influence interpretation. \n\n**Domain 3 – Make up your mind** shows how learners form well-reasoned personal positions on socio-scientific issues. This domain guides students in comparing viewpoints with established scientific knowledge, understanding uncertainty, analysing impacts and trade-offs across social, environmental, economic, and ethical dimensions, and reflecting on stakeholder perspectives. Learners develop the ability to weigh evidence and construct informed, balanced judgements. \n\n**Domain 4 – Speak out and take action** presents how learners communicate their views responsibly and participate as active democratic citizens. Students should learn how to plan civic engagement, tailor messages to audiences, present evidence-based arguments, respond to counter-arguments, and select appropriate communication channels. The domain can help to promote constructive dialogue, responsible participation, and practical action related to socio-scientific issues. \n\n\n\n:::tip\n### Your take away message from the summary of the learners' dimension:\n\n* Use the four domains of the Learners' Dimension as a flexible guide for planning SciLMi lessons and activities.\n* Connect classroom activities explicitly to the framework domains:\n* Use the practical \"HOW\" examples from the SciLMi framework to link everyday classroom activities to broader Meta-Scientific Literacy goals.\n* Help students understand that MSL competences develop progressively over time through repeated practice across subjects and contexts.\n\n:::\n\n  \n\n## **What are socio-scientific issues?**\n\n\n\\\n[SSI - short.mp4 1920x1080](/api/attachments.redirect?id=65941ed9-039c-456a-8f35-ecd58e8eaad8)\n\n\n\n:::tip\n### What you should know about socioscientific issues:\n\n* Socioscientific issues (SSIs) are complex real-world issues at the intersection of science and society that involve uncertainty and controversy anc can work as good contexts to develop MSL.\n* Use SSIs to help students to critically evaluate information, justify their viewpoints and make decision.\n* Encourage openness and respect through the SSI by helping students appreciate that disagreement and uncertainty are aspects of socioscientific discussions.\n* Integrate SSIs across subjects to support critical thinking, ethical reflection, informed decision-making, and responsible democratic participation and the development of MSL.\n\n:::\n\n\nSocioscientific issues are complex, real-world problems that arise at the intersection of science and society and are characterised by controversy, uncertainty, and the presence of multiple competing perspectives. They are issues about which groups of people disagree and where consensus is difficult to achieve because proposed explanations or solutions are grounded in differing values, beliefs, and priorities. Such issues are typically ill-defined and value-laden, involving ethical, environmental, economic, political, cultural, and social dimensions, while also being shaped by incomplete or evolving scientific knowledge. Although SSIs are often described as controversial issues, it is important to distinguish between the two: while all socioscientific issues are controversial, not all controversial issues are socioscientific, as SSIs are specifically rooted in scientific understanding and its societal implications .\n\nSSIs differ from most traditional school science problems because they do not have single correct answers or clear solution procedures. Instead, they require individuals to weigh evidence, consider trade-offs, evaluate risks and benefits, and make informed judgements in situations where uncertainty persists. Decisions about SSIs therefore involve personal and collective value judgements, since there are no fixed ways for determining how different burdens and benefits should be prioritised. Learners must interpret data, analyse conflicting evidence, and justify their positions while acknowledging alternative viewpoints. This emphasis on judgement, reasoning, and ethical reflection makes SSIs particularly relevant for preparing students to participate responsibly as future citizens.\n\nExploring socioscientific issues extends beyond learning scientific facts; it aims to empower students to understand how science-related issues connect to their own lives and to the broader social world. Engaging with SSIs supports the development of informed decision-making, critical thinking, ethical reasoning, and civic participation and goes beyond the science classroom. Students learn to engage in dialogue, debate with openness and respect, appreciate diverse perspectives, and deal with complexity and uncertainty. this \n\nFor teachers across all subject areas — not only science educators — SSIs provide meaningful contexts for interdisciplinary learning. Issues such as climate change, public health, biotechnology, artificial intelligence, and sustainability involve scientific evidence alongside ethical considerations, economic interests, media representation, and policy decisions. Addressing SSIs in the classroom therefore supports citizenship education, media literacy, moral development, and critical engagement with contemporary global challenges. By integrating SSIs into teaching, educators help students become reflective thinkers who can justify their viewpoints with evidence, consider the perspectives of others, and participate constructively in societal discussions and decision-making processes.\n\n  \n\n\n:::tip\n### **What you may want to consider when choosing an SSI**\n\nIf you want to choose an SSI to use as a context for your teaching please consider the following:\n\n* What makes this issue controversial? This will help you consider multiple perspectives for the topic.\n\n\n* Where do you personally stand in relation to this issue and and why? This will help you identify your own biases.\n\n\n* Which aspects could be emotionally loaded in your classroom in relation to the topic? \n* Could the topic be of personal interest to one of the students?\n\n:::\n\n \n\nThe purpose of this reflection process is to make you conscious of your role in using SSIs as the context when introducing Meta-Scientific Literacies in your teaching. If you are looking for examples of SSI topics you can visit the SSI briefs that were developed by the SciLMi project: \n\n \n\n## **SSIs, personal identities and ethical perspectives**\n\n\nIn the context of SSI, you should be aware that classroom discussions often engage not only students' knowledge but also their personal identities, values, and beliefs. Topics, such as environmental responsibility, public health measures, emerging technologies, or social justice may connect to students' family backgrounds, cultural norms, or deeply held worldviews. As a result, SSI discussions can feel personal and may provoke strong emotional responses or defensiveness. Being aware of this dimension helps you to create supportive learning environments where diverse viewpoints are respected and dialogue remains constructive. Within the SciLMi Framework, this awareness is particularly important in Domain 3 — Make up Your Mind, where students are encouraged to weigh viewpoints, consider stakeholder perspectives, and reflect on trade-offs across societal dimensions. Recognising the personal dimension of SSI enables you to guide discussions carefully, ensuring that students learn to evaluate arguments and evidence without feeling that their identities are being judged.\n\n\n\n:::tip\n### Be aware that students may respond to SSIs emotionally and be prepared to: \n\n* Create a supportive classroom climate where students feel safe expressing different viewpoints.\n* Establish discussion rules before SSI activities:\n\n challenge ideas, not people,\n\n listen respectfully,\n\n use evidence to support opinions,\n\n allow others to finish speaking.\n* Remind students that disagreeing with an argument does not mean rejecting the person expressing it.\n\n:::\n\nYou should also be aware that ethical attitudes and responsible civic dispositions cannot be imposed through instruction alone; rather, they develop gradually through structured learning experiences that invite reflection, dialogue, and perspective-taking. Students build ethical understanding when they are given opportunities to examine multiple viewpoints, consider the impacts of decisions on different stakeholders, and justify their own positions using evidence and reasoning. This process aligns with the progression across the SciLMi framework: learners critically evaluate information and arguments in Domain 2 — Be wise / Think twice, form justified viewpoints in Domain 3 — Make up your mind, and learn to communicate and engage respectfully in Domain 4 — Speak out and take action. By designing activities that support a thoughtful dialogue rather than prescribing \"correct\" moral positions, teachers help students develop their own informed and responsible stances while strengthening the competences needed for democratic participation.\n\n\n\n:::tip\n### Practical considerations before discussing socioscientific issues\n\n* Reflect beforehand on your own values, assumptions, and possible biases related to the socioscientific issue you plan to discuss.\n* Prepare materials that include diverse viewpoints, conflicting evidence, and different types of information sources.\n* Consider in advance which parts of the topic may be emotionally sensitive or personally relevant for students.\n* Prepare strategies to redirect discussions from personal beliefs toward evidence, reasoning, and respectful argumentation when conversations become polarised.\n* Select classroom tasks that encourage students to consider the societal consequences of decisions for different groups and communities.\n* Plan opportunities for students to revisit and reconsider their viewpoints after examining new evidence or hearing alternative perspectives.\n\n:::\n\n  \n\n## **Understand that meta-scientific literacies take time to develop**\n\n\nMeta-Scientific Literacies (MSL) develop progressively and require sustained learning experiences over time. Competences such as identifying and selecting relevant information sources, evaluating the relevance and reliability of evidence, recognising scientific uncertainty, and weighing viewpoints are closely linked to students' cognitive and moral development. Learners gradually strengthen these abilities through repeated opportunities to analyse claims, interpret evidence, and reflect on how knowledge is constructed and communicated. For this reason, fostering MSL benefits from a whole-school approach in which these competences are addressed consistently across subjects, year levels, and learning contexts rather than in isolated lessons. When students regularly practise evaluating information, analysing argumentation, and reflecting on the societal dimensions of science, they progressively build the capacity to make justified judgements on complex issues.\n\n\n\n:::tip\n### Practical tips for supporting progressive MSL development\n\n* Integrate MSL competences regularly across lessons and subjects rather than treating them as isolated activities.\n* Revisit key competences progressively over time, such as evaluating sources, recognising misinformation, weighing evidence, and analysing viewpoints.\n* Explicitly connect classroom activities to relevant SciLMi framework domains.\n\n:::\n\n\nSSIs provide powerful contexts for developing MSL because they naturally connect evidence evaluation, argumentation, ethical reflection, and civic decision-making. SSIs, such as climate change, public health measures, artificial intelligence, or sustainable resource management, require learners to examine diverse information sources, distinguish between claims, evidence, and reasoning (CER), recognise uncertainty, analyse trade-offs, and consider different stakeholder viewpoints. These issues, therefore, create meaningful connections between disciplines: in language subjects, students can examine framing and rhetorical devices in information sources; in social studies, they can explore stakeholder positions and underlying values; in mathematics, they can investigate how numerical evidence is contextualised; and in arts subjects, students can analyse how visual elements influence interpretation. SSIs can help students understand that evaluating information and forming viewpoints are competences relevant across all areas of learning and are important to everyday life.\n\n\n\n:::tip\n### Practical tips for using SSIs across subjects and learning contexts\n\n* Use socioscientific issues (SSIs) as real-world contexts that naturally connect science, society, ethics, and decision-making.\n* Collaborate across subjects where possible so students encounter similar competences in different disciplinary contexts.\n* Combine competences from different framework domains within one activity when appropriate, for example evaluating evidence while reflecting on ethical trade-offs.\n* Use the practical \"HOW\" examples from the project to adapt activities to different subjects, age groups, and classroom contexts.\n\n:::\n\n\nThe framework enables teachers to foster sub-competences consistently over time. Teachers may focus on individual goals, such as selecting credible information sources or evaluating argument strength, or combine elements from different domains, such as analysing stakeholder viewpoints (Domain 3) while practising evidence evaluation (Domain 2). This flexibility supports cross-disciplinary teaching and allows competences to be revisited as students progress through school. By providing clearly structured goals supported by practical classroom examples (\"HOWs\"), the SciLMi framework helps you to integrate the development of Meta-Scientific Literacies into everyday teaching and supports students in becoming reflective, informed, and engaged members of democratic societies.\n\n\n  \n\n## **Understand the Claim Evidence Reasoning (CER) terminology**\n\n\nTo support your students in developing Meta-Scientific Literacies, you need a clear understanding of the terminology used in argumentation and of how arguments are structured. In everyday discussions, students often express opinions, but in educational settings we aim to move from personal opinions to justified viewpoints supported by evidence and reasoning. A widely used and accessible model for understanding the structure of arguments is the Claim–Evidence–Reasoning (CER) framework, developed by McNeill and Krajick (2012). In this model,\n\n• A **claim** is a statement that answers a question or expresses a viewpoint.\n\n• **Evidence** is the information that supports the claim (facts, data, examples, expert statements, statistics, documents).\n\n• **Reasoning** explains why the evidence supports the claim and shows the logical connection between them.\n\nUnderstanding this structure helps you to guide your students beyond simply stating what they think asks them to explaining why they think it and how they know it. CER helps students move from simply stating opinions to constructing justified viewpoints. Importantly, CER is not limited to science subjects — it is a flexible structure that supports reasoning and communication across all areas of learning.\n\n\n:::tip\n### You can introduce the CER structure through simple, interactive activities. \n\n\n* Prepare an SSI-related statement that allows for different viewpoints, for example: \"Artificial Intelligence is good for the environment.\"\n* Create a physical or visual \"agree–disagree\" line in the classroom where students can position themselves according to their initial viewpoint.\n* Anticipate that students' first responses will often be intuitive, emotional, or experience-based. Use this as an opportunity to introduce the concept of a claim.\n* Prepare \"evidence cards\" containing different types of information, such as:\n\n research findings,\n\n statistics,\n\n expert statements,\n\n case examples,\n\n media excerpts.\n* Include both strong and weak pieces of evidence so students can evaluate relevance and reliability.\n* Ask students to place evidence cards according to whether they support or challenge the statement.\n* Prepare guiding questions that help students explain why certain evidence supports a position, for example: \"How does this evidence support the claim?\"; \"Is this evidence strong enough?\"; \"What assumptions connect the evidence to the claim?\"\n* Use the activity to make the CER structure explicit:\n* Encourage students to revise or reconsider their viewpoints after examining the evidence and hearing alternative perspectives.\n* Conclude the activity with a reflection on how arguments are constructed and how evidence and reasoning influence decision-making on socioscientific issues.\n\n \\\n\n:::\n\n\nStudents should learn to distinguish between unsupported and justified claims by identifying whether a statement is simply an opinion or whether it is supported by evidence and reasoning (D2: distinguishing claims from CER components). As a teacher you should support students to evaluate the relevance of the evidence by examining whether the information directly addresses the claim and fits its scope (D2: assessing topical and logical fit). \n\n\n\n:::tip\n* Guide students on how to verify the reliability of evidence, for example by checking the credibility of information sources, comparing evidence with established scientific knowledge, and recognising possible distortions or omissions (D2: evaluating evidence reliability). \n* Students need practice in analysing the coherence of reasoning, ensuring that explanations logically connect evidence to claims and do not rely on unsupported assumptions or logical fallacies (D2: analysing reasoning coherence). \n\n:::\n\n\nBringing these elements together to enable learners to evaluate the overall strength of an argument by integrating the quality of the claim, the relevance and reliability of the evidence, and the clarity and logic of the reasoning (D2: evaluating argument strength).Using Claim–Evidence–Reasoning (CER) effectively requires careful planning that aligns with several goals of the SciLMi framework, particularly within Domain 2 — Be Wise & Think Twice and Domain 3 — Make up Your Mind. When designing learning activities, it is helpful to choose socio-scientific issues and guiding questions that allow for multiple defensible viewpoints, creating opportunities for students to compare positions and weigh arguments (D3: weighing viewpoints). Preparing varied and credible evidence materials enables students to practise evaluating the relevance and reliability of evidence (D2: evaluating evidence quality), while anticipating common misconceptions or weak reasoning helps teachers scaffold students' ability to construct coherent arguments (D2: analysing reasoning coherence).It is also helpful to plan structured prompts that make the components of argumentation explicit, such as asking students to identify their claim, the evidence supporting it, and the reasoning that connects the two. Visual organisers, colour-coding of CER elements, and collaborative discussion routines can further support students in recognising how arguments are structured and evaluated (D2: distinguishing CER components and evaluating argument strength). By modelling and practising CER across subjects, you and your colleagues support your students not only in constructing justified viewpoints but also in critically evaluating others' arguments and engaging more thoughtfully with complex socio-scientific issues (D3: forming informed viewpoints).\n\n\n## **Understand the importance of cross-disciplinary teaching**\n\nCross-disciplinary teaching is essential for developing students' Meta-Scientific Literacies because real-world socioscientific issues do most of the time not belong to a single subject area. Challenges, such as climate change, public health, artificial intelligence, or sustainable development, combine scientific evidence with ethical considerations, social impacts, economic interests, media representation, and policy decisions. Addressing such complexity requires students to draw on different types of knowledge and ways of thinking. The SciLMi framework reflects this reality by organising competences that are relevant across subjects: students learn to navigate the information landscape and evaluate information sources (D1: Open up your mind), critically assess argumentation and evidence (D2: Be wise / Think twice), weigh viewpoints and consider stakeholder perspectives (D3: Make up your mind), and communicate and engage responsibly in society (D4: Speak out and take action). These competences are not tied to one discipline but are strengthened when students encounter them repeatedly in different learning contexts. A cross-disciplinary approach, therefore, helps learners build coherent understanding, transfer skills across subjects, and see how knowledge connects to everyday life.\n\nCross-disciplinary teaching does not necessarily require large joint projects; it can begin with small, coordinated connections across subjects. For example, students exploring an environmental SSI might analyse scientific data in science lessons (D2: Scan before you trust), examine how the issue is framed in news articles in language lessons (D2: Read between the lines), investigate stakeholder positions and policy responses in social studies (D3: Take your stand), and design awareness materials in arts or media studies (D4: Argue persuasively). \n\n\n\n:::tip\n### Practical Tips for Teachers: Supporting Cross-Disciplinary SciLMi Teaching\n\n* Use socio-scientific issues (SSIs) that naturally connect different subjects (i.e. climate change, artificial intelligence)\n* Help students recognise that the SCiLMi competences are relevant across all subjects and everyday life.\n* Integrate SciLMi competences into existing lessons rather than treating them as additional content.\n* Start with small cross-disciplinary connections rather than large collaborative projects.\n* Explicitly connect classroom activities to relevant SciLMi domains, for example:\n\n evaluating sources and navigating information (Domain 1),\n\n analysing evidence and argumentation (Domain 2),\n\n weighing viewpoints and stakeholder perspectives (Domain 3),\n\n communicating responsibly and taking action (Domain 4).\n* Adapt SSI topics to your subject area. For example:\n\n language lessons: analyse framing, rhetoric, and source credibility,\n\n social studies: explore stakeholder perspectives and policy decisions, \n\n mathematics: interpret statistics and numerical evidence,\n\n arts or media studies: analyse visual communication and persuasive techniques.\n* Collaborate with colleagues by using shared guiding questions (from the SSI briefs), common evidence materials, or similar classroom discussion routines (that you can find in the [next section of the educators' dimension](/doc/during-the-implementation-outcI0RAXQ)).\n* Revisit similar competences across subjects so students experience how the same critical thinking skills apply in different contexts.\n* Frequently show students where the classroom activity (\"HOW\") is located within the SciLMi framework to support awareness of their own competence development.\n* Remind students that Meta-Scientific Literacy is a lifelong learning process that develops progressively through repeated practice, reflection, and engagement with complex real-world issues.\n\n:::\n\n\nAn example of a cross-disciplinary approach on an SSI is that of the global warming. The topics can be integrated into a traditional English classroom where students can develop reading skills by selecting and comparing sources for a class discussion on global warming. You may also choose a text on global warming and apply established reading strategies to help students prepare for a debate, panel discussion, or chat-show format. In addition, students can analyse the credibility of different sources by comparing evidence-based texts with texts that contain weak arguments or unsupported claims. Through this process, they can learn to identify indicators of source quality, such as the use of evidence, author expertise, and argumentative structure.  The same topic can also be approached in collaboration with a science teacher that will work with the students on the scientific credibility of the sources. Examples of cross-disciplinary lesson plans have been designed by the SciLMi team and are available on the project's website. \n\n\n\\\n\n:::tip\n# In a nut shell\n\n## Identify an SSI problem relevant to the curriculum of the subject\n\nIdentify a clear connection between the curriculum and the topic. The topic may relate to your subject in only one aspect — for example, through its controversial nature or its social dimension. Even this limited connection can already justify including it in your teaching. \n\n## Select texts, sources, media and materials to teach the SSI topic\n\n* Use the **SciLMi-Wiki** to find sources, texts, media and materials to teach the topic.\n* Add content from your own knowledge, teaching profession or relevant sources from other platforms.\n* Be careful with your materials and set a good example for your students. Make a note of the sources and mark pictures with where they come from. Pre-organise your selected sources, so students are able to engage in assessing their credibility.\n\n## Which meta-scientific literacies should be addressed? \n\n* **Use the SciLMi-list **of meta-scientific literacies and select one of the four areas ('Be wise & think twice', 'Open up your mind', Make up your mind', 'Speak out & take action').\n* Find out which literacy is connected to the SSI, the content of your subject or the other skills you want to teach in your lesson. For instance, if you teach Cicero, \"de re publica\", the area \"Speak out & take action\" may be addressed as students may discus the opportunities to take action to become a responsible democratic citizen.\n* Identify connections between your selected area and already established or well-known teaching strategies.\n* Integrate your own teaching experience with the selected area of meta-scientific literacies and your chosen SSI topic in order to design a concrete lesson plan. If you lack adaptable methods or teaching strategies, the list below may support you in structuring the lesson.\n\n## Select SciLMi teaching methods that engage students \n\n* Which competences do you want to foster? \n* Which methods could promote the competences (see part C in this wiki)? \n* Are there already lessons you know and which may work out very well to address the topic? Feel free to adjust them!\n* Do you already have some content-related lessons and just need modern methods to teach the content? Use the list of methods from the wiki to adjust them.\n* Do you want to create a whole new lesson for teaching the SSI and some SciLMi skills? Create a unique lesson taking the prepared techniques and/or using our guidelines. \n\n ## Prepare teaching material\n* Prepare carefully selected information sources and discussion materials that support critical engagement with the socioscientific issue (information can also be found in the wiki briefs). \n* Since many SSI topics involve conflicting viewpoints, misinformation, emotional appeals, and persuasive communication, you need to be prepared on how to support classroom discussions and activities. In the following section (During Implementation) you can find information about methods that can be applied in their lessons. \n* Use template to design lesson ==\\[LINK to lesson template\\]==\n\n:::","HTML":"

Before the Implementation of the SciLMi Framework

\n

Before implementing the SciLMi framework in classroom, it is important to recognise that fostering Meta-Scientific Literacy (MSL) is not limited to teaching isolated skills. MSL development involves supporting students in navigate complex information environments, critically evaluating evidence and arguments, reflecting on ethical and societal dimensions of SSIs and engaging responsibly with diverse perspectives. The MSL competences develop gradually through repeated and meaningful learning experiences across subjects and over time. Teaching MSL therefore requires familiarity with the learners' dimension of the SciLMi framework, its structure and the interconnections between the different domains in the learners' dimension. Additionally, teachers need an understanding of socio-scientific issues and the complexity, uncertainty and controversy linked with these issues. The purpose of this part of the framework is to support teachers in understanding the SciLMi framework and designing activities based on the SciLMi framework and suggested methods.

\n

Developing MSL takes time, and it is important for teachers to recognise this from the beginning. These competences develop progressively through sustained practice and students can strengthen their competences when they come across disciplines (i.e. in language lessons, in science lessons, in history), year levels, and classroom experiences. For this reason, introducing the SciLMi framework into teaching should be seen as a continuous and long-term educational process rather than as a single or isolated lesson. Teachers are encouraged to begin with short, manageable activities (HOW) and gradually expand into their teaching.

\n
\n
\n\n

The first step is that you (teacher or future teacher)

\n
    \n
  • accept that MSL development takes time,\n
    • \n
  • become aware of the Meta-Scientific Literacy (SciLMi) framework, its structure (D1–D4), and purpose,\n
    • \n
  • understand socio-scientific issues (SSI) as:\n

    scientifically and socially grounded, controversial and dichotomous, ethically and emotionally charged, and locally and globally relevant.

    \n
    • \n
  • are willing to reflect on your own information habits, values, sensitivities, and epistemic positioning\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

The Learner's Dimension in the SciLMi Framework

\n

The Learners' Dimension in the SciLMi framework is a structured model designed to support teachers in helping students critically navigate the complex information landscape by using socio-scientific issues as the context. It is organised into four domains that describe which competences are needed from initial awareness to informed civic engagement. Each domain contains clearly defined goals that describe the key competences to be developed, and each goal is supported by practical "HOW" elements — short, concrete examples of classroom activities that illustrate how these goals can be achieved in practice. The framework has been developed collaboratively within the SciLMi project over two years, and was continuously refined through feedback gathered during multiple teacher trainings. The four domains of the learners' dimension are described below:

\n

Domain 1 – Open up your mind focuses on building awareness of the modern information environment. Learners explore how information is produced, distributed, and shaped by media systems, algorithms, and digital platforms. This domain presents competences in recognising information bubbles, identifying diverse sources, conducting effective searches, and selecting credible materials while remaining alert to misinformation and attention-grabbing strategies.

\n

Domain 2 – Be wise / Think twice strengthens learners' critical evaluation skills. Students should learn to assess the relevance of information, distinguish between claims and evidence, evaluate the quality and reliability of arguments, and detect bias and manipulation strategies. The emphasis is on analytical thinking, logical consistency, and recognising how language, framing, and media techniques can influence interpretation.

\n

Domain 3 – Make up your mind shows how learners form well-reasoned personal positions on socio-scientific issues. This domain guides students in comparing viewpoints with established scientific knowledge, understanding uncertainty, analysing impacts and trade-offs across social, environmental, economic, and ethical dimensions, and reflecting on stakeholder perspectives. Learners develop the ability to weigh evidence and construct informed, balanced judgements.

\n

Domain 4 – Speak out and take action presents how learners communicate their views responsibly and participate as active democratic citizens. Students should learn how to plan civic engagement, tailor messages to audiences, present evidence-based arguments, respond to counter-arguments, and select appropriate communication channels. The domain can help to promote constructive dialogue, responsible participation, and practical action related to socio-scientific issues.

\n
\n
\n\n

Your take away message from the summary of the learners' dimension:

\n
    \n
  • Use the four domains of the Learners' Dimension as a flexible guide for planning SciLMi lessons and activities.\n
    • \n
  • Connect classroom activities explicitly to the framework domains:\n
    • \n
  • Use the practical "HOW" examples from the SciLMi framework to link everyday classroom activities to broader Meta-Scientific Literacy goals.\n
    • \n
  • Help students understand that MSL competences develop progressively over time through repeated practice across subjects and contexts.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

What are socio-scientific issues?

\n

SSI - short.mp4 1920x1080

\n
\n
\n\n

What you should know about socioscientific issues:

\n
    \n
  • Socioscientific issues (SSIs) are complex real-world issues at the intersection of science and society that involve uncertainty and controversy anc can work as good contexts to develop MSL.\n
    • \n
  • Use SSIs to help students to critically evaluate information, justify their viewpoints and make decision.\n
    • \n
  • Encourage openness and respect through the SSI by helping students appreciate that disagreement and uncertainty are aspects of socioscientific discussions.\n
    • \n
  • Integrate SSIs across subjects to support critical thinking, ethical reflection, informed decision-making, and responsible democratic participation and the development of MSL.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

Socioscientific issues are complex, real-world problems that arise at the intersection of science and society and are characterised by controversy, uncertainty, and the presence of multiple competing perspectives. They are issues about which groups of people disagree and where consensus is difficult to achieve because proposed explanations or solutions are grounded in differing values, beliefs, and priorities. Such issues are typically ill-defined and value-laden, involving ethical, environmental, economic, political, cultural, and social dimensions, while also being shaped by incomplete or evolving scientific knowledge. Although SSIs are often described as controversial issues, it is important to distinguish between the two: while all socioscientific issues are controversial, not all controversial issues are socioscientific, as SSIs are specifically rooted in scientific understanding and its societal implications .

\n

SSIs differ from most traditional school science problems because they do not have single correct answers or clear solution procedures. Instead, they require individuals to weigh evidence, consider trade-offs, evaluate risks and benefits, and make informed judgements in situations where uncertainty persists. Decisions about SSIs therefore involve personal and collective value judgements, since there are no fixed ways for determining how different burdens and benefits should be prioritised. Learners must interpret data, analyse conflicting evidence, and justify their positions while acknowledging alternative viewpoints. This emphasis on judgement, reasoning, and ethical reflection makes SSIs particularly relevant for preparing students to participate responsibly as future citizens.

\n

Exploring socioscientific issues extends beyond learning scientific facts; it aims to empower students to understand how science-related issues connect to their own lives and to the broader social world. Engaging with SSIs supports the development of informed decision-making, critical thinking, ethical reasoning, and civic participation and goes beyond the science classroom. Students learn to engage in dialogue, debate with openness and respect, appreciate diverse perspectives, and deal with complexity and uncertainty. this

\n

For teachers across all subject areas — not only science educators — SSIs provide meaningful contexts for interdisciplinary learning. Issues such as climate change, public health, biotechnology, artificial intelligence, and sustainability involve scientific evidence alongside ethical considerations, economic interests, media representation, and policy decisions. Addressing SSIs in the classroom therefore supports citizenship education, media literacy, moral development, and critical engagement with contemporary global challenges. By integrating SSIs into teaching, educators help students become reflective thinkers who can justify their viewpoints with evidence, consider the perspectives of others, and participate constructively in societal discussions and decision-making processes.

\n
\n
\n\n

What you may want to consider when choosing an SSI

\n

If you want to choose an SSI to use as a context for your teaching please consider the following:

\n
    \n
  • What makes this issue controversial? This will help you consider multiple perspectives for the topic.\n
    • \n
  • Where do you personally stand in relation to this issue and and why? This will help you identify your own biases.\n
    • \n
  • Which aspects could be emotionally loaded in your classroom in relation to the topic?\n
    • \n
  • Could the topic be of personal interest to one of the students?\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

The purpose of this reflection process is to make you conscious of your role in using SSIs as the context when introducing Meta-Scientific Literacies in your teaching. If you are looking for examples of SSI topics you can visit the SSI briefs that were developed by the SciLMi project: https://wiki.scilmi.eu/doc/ssi-briefs-N2up1DfBta)

\n

SSIs, personal identities and ethical perspectives

\n

In the context of SSI, you should be aware that classroom discussions often engage not only students' knowledge but also their personal identities, values, and beliefs. Topics, such as environmental responsibility, public health measures, emerging technologies, or social justice may connect to students' family backgrounds, cultural norms, or deeply held worldviews. As a result, SSI discussions can feel personal and may provoke strong emotional responses or defensiveness. Being aware of this dimension helps you to create supportive learning environments where diverse viewpoints are respected and dialogue remains constructive. Within the SciLMi Framework, this awareness is particularly important in Domain 3 — Make up Your Mind, where students are encouraged to weigh viewpoints, consider stakeholder perspectives, and reflect on trade-offs across societal dimensions. Recognising the personal dimension of SSI enables you to guide discussions carefully, ensuring that students learn to evaluate arguments and evidence without feeling that their identities are being judged.

\n
\n
\n\n

Be aware that students may respond to SSIs emotionally and be prepared to:

\n
    \n
  • Create a supportive classroom climate where students feel safe expressing different viewpoints.\n
    • \n
  • Establish discussion rules before SSI activities:\n

    challenge ideas, not people, listen respectfully, use evidence to support opinions, allow others to finish speaking.

    \n
    • \n
  • Remind students that disagreeing with an argument does not mean rejecting the person expressing it.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

You should also be aware that ethical attitudes and responsible civic dispositions cannot be imposed through instruction alone; rather, they develop gradually through structured learning experiences that invite reflection, dialogue, and perspective-taking. Students build ethical understanding when they are given opportunities to examine multiple viewpoints, consider the impacts of decisions on different stakeholders, and justify their own positions using evidence and reasoning. This process aligns with the progression across the SciLMi framework: learners critically evaluate information and arguments in Domain 2 — Be wise / Think twice, form justified viewpoints in Domain 3 — Make up your mind, and learn to communicate and engage respectfully in Domain 4 — Speak out and take action. By designing activities that support a thoughtful dialogue rather than prescribing "correct" moral positions, teachers help students develop their own informed and responsible stances while strengthening the competences needed for democratic participation.

\n
\n
\n\n

Practical considerations before discussing socioscientific issues

\n
    \n
  • Reflect beforehand on your own values, assumptions, and possible biases related to the socioscientific issue you plan to discuss.\n
    • \n
  • Prepare materials that include diverse viewpoints, conflicting evidence, and different types of information sources.\n
    • \n
  • Consider in advance which parts of the topic may be emotionally sensitive or personally relevant for students.\n
    • \n
  • Prepare strategies to redirect discussions from personal beliefs toward evidence, reasoning, and respectful argumentation when conversations become polarised.\n
    • \n
  • Select classroom tasks that encourage students to consider the societal consequences of decisions for different groups and communities.\n
    • \n
  • Plan opportunities for students to revisit and reconsider their viewpoints after examining new evidence or hearing alternative perspectives.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

Understand that meta-scientific literacies take time to develop

\n

Meta-Scientific Literacies (MSL) develop progressively and require sustained learning experiences over time. Competences such as identifying and selecting relevant information sources, evaluating the relevance and reliability of evidence, recognising scientific uncertainty, and weighing viewpoints are closely linked to students' cognitive and moral development. Learners gradually strengthen these abilities through repeated opportunities to analyse claims, interpret evidence, and reflect on how knowledge is constructed and communicated. For this reason, fostering MSL benefits from a whole-school approach in which these competences are addressed consistently across subjects, year levels, and learning contexts rather than in isolated lessons. When students regularly practise evaluating information, analysing argumentation, and reflecting on the societal dimensions of science, they progressively build the capacity to make justified judgements on complex issues.

\n
\n
\n\n

Practical tips for supporting progressive MSL development

\n
    \n
  • Integrate MSL competences regularly across lessons and subjects rather than treating them as isolated activities.\n
    • \n
  • Revisit key competences progressively over time, such as evaluating sources, recognising misinformation, weighing evidence, and analysing viewpoints.\n
    • \n
  • Explicitly connect classroom activities to relevant SciLMi framework domains.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

SSIs provide powerful contexts for developing MSL because they naturally connect evidence evaluation, argumentation, ethical reflection, and civic decision-making. SSIs, such as climate change, public health measures, artificial intelligence, or sustainable resource management, require learners to examine diverse information sources, distinguish between claims, evidence, and reasoning (CER), recognise uncertainty, analyse trade-offs, and consider different stakeholder viewpoints. These issues, therefore, create meaningful connections between disciplines: in language subjects, students can examine framing and rhetorical devices in information sources; in social studies, they can explore stakeholder positions and underlying values; in mathematics, they can investigate how numerical evidence is contextualised; and in arts subjects, students can analyse how visual elements influence interpretation. SSIs can help students understand that evaluating information and forming viewpoints are competences relevant across all areas of learning and are important to everyday life.

\n
\n
\n\n

Practical tips for using SSIs across subjects and learning contexts

\n
    \n
  • Use socioscientific issues (SSIs) as real-world contexts that naturally connect science, society, ethics, and decision-making.\n
    • \n
  • Collaborate across subjects where possible so students encounter similar competences in different disciplinary contexts.\n
    • \n
  • Combine competences from different framework domains within one activity when appropriate, for example evaluating evidence while reflecting on ethical trade-offs.\n
    • \n
  • Use the practical "HOW" examples from the project to adapt activities to different subjects, age groups, and classroom contexts.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

The framework enables teachers to foster sub-competences consistently over time. Teachers may focus on individual goals, such as selecting credible information sources or evaluating argument strength, or combine elements from different domains, such as analysing stakeholder viewpoints (Domain 3) while practising evidence evaluation (Domain 2). This flexibility supports cross-disciplinary teaching and allows competences to be revisited as students progress through school. By providing clearly structured goals supported by practical classroom examples ("HOWs"), the SciLMi framework helps you to integrate the development of Meta-Scientific Literacies into everyday teaching and supports students in becoming reflective, informed, and engaged members of democratic societies.

\n

Understand the Claim Evidence Reasoning (CER) terminology

\n

To support your students in developing Meta-Scientific Literacies, you need a clear understanding of the terminology used in argumentation and of how arguments are structured. In everyday discussions, students often express opinions, but in educational settings we aim to move from personal opinions to justified viewpoints supported by evidence and reasoning. A widely used and accessible model for understanding the structure of arguments is the Claim–Evidence–Reasoning (CER) framework, developed by McNeill and Krajick (2012). In this model,

\n

• A claim is a statement that answers a question or expresses a viewpoint.

\n

• Evidence is the information that supports the claim (facts, data, examples, expert statements, statistics, documents).

\n

• Reasoning explains why the evidence supports the claim and shows the logical connection between them.

\n

Understanding this structure helps you to guide your students beyond simply stating what they think asks them to explaining why they think it and how they know it. CER helps students move from simply stating opinions to constructing justified viewpoints. Importantly, CER is not limited to science subjects — it is a flexible structure that supports reasoning and communication across all areas of learning.

\n
\n
\n\n

You can introduce the CER structure through simple, interactive activities.

\n
    \n
  • Prepare an SSI-related statement that allows for different viewpoints, for example: "Artificial Intelligence is good for the environment."\n
    • \n
  • Create a physical or visual "agree–disagree" line in the classroom where students can position themselves according to their initial viewpoint.\n
    • \n
  • Anticipate that students' first responses will often be intuitive, emotional, or experience-based. Use this as an opportunity to introduce the concept of a claim.\n
    • \n
  • Prepare "evidence cards" containing different types of information, such as:\n

    research findings, statistics, expert statements, case examples, media excerpts.

    \n
    • \n
  • Include both strong and weak pieces of evidence so students can evaluate relevance and reliability.\n
    • \n
  • Ask students to place evidence cards according to whether they support or challenge the statement.\n
    • \n
  • Prepare guiding questions that help students explain why certain evidence supports a position, for example: "How does this evidence support the claim?"; "Is this evidence strong enough?"; "What assumptions connect the evidence to the claim?"\n
    • \n
  • Use the activity to make the CER structure explicit:\n
    • \n
  • Encourage students to revise or reconsider their viewpoints after examining the evidence and hearing alternative perspectives.\n
    • \n
  • Conclude the activity with a reflection on how arguments are constructed and how evidence and reasoning influence decision-making on socioscientific issues.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

Students should learn to distinguish between unsupported and justified claims by identifying whether a statement is simply an opinion or whether it is supported by evidence and reasoning (D2: distinguishing claims from CER components). As a teacher you should support students to evaluate the relevance of the evidence by examining whether the information directly addresses the claim and fits its scope (D2: assessing topical and logical fit).

\n
\n
\n\n
    \n
  • Guide students on how to verify the reliability of evidence, for example by checking the credibility of information sources, comparing evidence with established scientific knowledge, and recognising possible distortions or omissions (D2: evaluating evidence reliability).\n
    • \n
  • Students need practice in analysing the coherence of reasoning, ensuring that explanations logically connect evidence to claims and do not rely on unsupported assumptions or logical fallacies (D2: analysing reasoning coherence).\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

Bringing these elements together to enable learners to evaluate the overall strength of an argument by integrating the quality of the claim, the relevance and reliability of the evidence, and the clarity and logic of the reasoning (D2: evaluating argument strength).Using Claim–Evidence–Reasoning (CER) effectively requires careful planning that aligns with several goals of the SciLMi framework, particularly within Domain 2 — Be Wise & Think Twice and Domain 3 — Make up Your Mind. When designing learning activities, it is helpful to choose socio-scientific issues and guiding questions that allow for multiple defensible viewpoints, creating opportunities for students to compare positions and weigh arguments (D3: weighing viewpoints). Preparing varied and credible evidence materials enables students to practise evaluating the relevance and reliability of evidence (D2: evaluating evidence quality), while anticipating common misconceptions or weak reasoning helps teachers scaffold students' ability to construct coherent arguments (D2: analysing reasoning coherence).It is also helpful to plan structured prompts that make the components of argumentation explicit, such as asking students to identify their claim, the evidence supporting it, and the reasoning that connects the two. Visual organisers, colour-coding of CER elements, and collaborative discussion routines can further support students in recognising how arguments are structured and evaluated (D2: distinguishing CER components and evaluating argument strength). By modelling and practising CER across subjects, you and your colleagues support your students not only in constructing justified viewpoints but also in critically evaluating others' arguments and engaging more thoughtfully with complex socio-scientific issues (D3: forming informed viewpoints).

\n

Understand the importance of cross-disciplinary teaching

\n

Cross-disciplinary teaching is essential for developing students' Meta-Scientific Literacies because real-world socioscientific issues do most of the time not belong to a single subject area. Challenges, such as climate change, public health, artificial intelligence, or sustainable development, combine scientific evidence with ethical considerations, social impacts, economic interests, media representation, and policy decisions. Addressing such complexity requires students to draw on different types of knowledge and ways of thinking. The SciLMi framework reflects this reality by organising competences that are relevant across subjects: students learn to navigate the information landscape and evaluate information sources (D1: Open up your mind), critically assess argumentation and evidence (D2: Be wise / Think twice), weigh viewpoints and consider stakeholder perspectives (D3: Make up your mind), and communicate and engage responsibly in society (D4: Speak out and take action). These competences are not tied to one discipline but are strengthened when students encounter them repeatedly in different learning contexts. A cross-disciplinary approach, therefore, helps learners build coherent understanding, transfer skills across subjects, and see how knowledge connects to everyday life.

\n

Cross-disciplinary teaching does not necessarily require large joint projects; it can begin with small, coordinated connections across subjects. For example, students exploring an environmental SSI might analyse scientific data in science lessons (D2: Scan before you trust), examine how the issue is framed in news articles in language lessons (D2: Read between the lines), investigate stakeholder positions and policy responses in social studies (D3: Take your stand), and design awareness materials in arts or media studies (D4: Argue persuasively).

\n
\n
\n\n

Practical Tips for Teachers: Supporting Cross-Disciplinary SciLMi Teaching

\n
    \n
  • Use socio-scientific issues (SSIs) that naturally connect different subjects (i.e. climate change, artificial intelligence)\n
    • \n
  • Help students recognise that the SCiLMi competences are relevant across all subjects and everyday life.\n
    • \n
  • Integrate SciLMi competences into existing lessons rather than treating them as additional content.\n
    • \n
  • Start with small cross-disciplinary connections rather than large collaborative projects.\n
    • \n
  • Explicitly connect classroom activities to relevant SciLMi domains, for example:\n

    evaluating sources and navigating information (Domain 1), analysing evidence and argumentation (Domain 2), weighing viewpoints and stakeholder perspectives (Domain 3), communicating responsibly and taking action (Domain 4).

    \n
    • \n
  • Adapt SSI topics to your subject area. For example:\n

    language lessons: analyse framing, rhetoric, and source credibility, social studies: explore stakeholder perspectives and policy decisions, mathematics: interpret statistics and numerical evidence, arts or media studies: analyse visual communication and persuasive techniques.

    \n
    • \n
  • Collaborate with colleagues by using shared guiding questions (from the SSI briefs), common evidence materials, or similar classroom discussion routines (that you can find in the next section of the educators' dimension).\n
    • \n
  • Revisit similar competences across subjects so students experience how the same critical thinking skills apply in different contexts.\n
    • \n
  • Frequently show students where the classroom activity ("HOW") is located within the SciLMi framework to support awareness of their own competence development.\n
    • \n
  • Remind students that Meta-Scientific Literacy is a lifelong learning process that develops progressively through repeated practice, reflection, and engagement with complex real-world issues.\n
    • \n
\n
\n
\n

An example of a cross-disciplinary approach on an SSI is that of the global warming. The topics can be integrated into a traditional English classroom where students can develop reading skills by selecting and comparing sources for a class discussion on global warming. You may also choose a text on global warming and apply established reading strategies to help students prepare for a debate, panel discussion, or chat-show format. In addition, students can analyse the credibility of different sources by comparing evidence-based texts with texts that contain weak arguments or unsupported claims. Through this process, they can learn to identify indicators of source quality, such as the use of evidence, author expertise, and argumentative structure.  The same topic can also be approached in collaboration with a science teacher that will work with the students on the scientific credibility of the sources. Examples of cross-disciplinary lesson plans have been designed by the SciLMi team and are available on the project's website.

\n
\n
\n\n

In a nut shell

\n

Identify an SSI problem relevant to the curriculum of the subject

\n

Identify a clear connection between the curriculum and the topic. The topic may relate to your subject in only one aspect — for example, through its controversial nature or its social dimension. Even this limited connection can already justify including it in your teaching.

\n

Select texts, sources, media and materials to teach the SSI topic

\n
    \n
  • Use the SciLMi-Wiki to find sources, texts, media and materials to teach the topic.\n
    • \n
  • Add content from your own knowledge, teaching profession or relevant sources from other platforms.\n
    • \n
  • Be careful with your materials and set a good example for your students. Make a note of the sources and mark pictures with where they come from. Pre-organise your selected sources, so students are able to engage in assessing their credibility.\n
    • \n
\n

Which meta-scientific literacies should be addressed?

\n
    \n
  • Use the SciLMi-list of meta-scientific literacies and select one of the four areas ('Be wise & think twice', 'Open up your mind', Make up your mind', 'Speak out & take action').\n
    • \n
  • Find out which literacy is connected to the SSI, the content of your subject or the other skills you want to teach in your lesson. For instance, if you teach Cicero, "de re publica", the area "Speak out & take action" may be addressed as students may discus the opportunities to take action to become a responsible democratic citizen.\n
    • \n
  • Identify connections between your selected area and already established or well-known teaching strategies.\n
    • \n
  • Integrate your own teaching experience with the selected area of meta-scientific literacies and your chosen SSI topic in order to design a concrete lesson plan. If you lack adaptable methods or teaching strategies, the list below may support you in structuring the lesson.\n
    • \n
\n

Select SciLMi teaching methods that engage students

\n
    \n
  • Which competences do you want to foster?\n
    • \n
  • Which methods could promote the competences (see part C in this wiki)?\n
    • \n
  • Are there already lessons you know and which may work out very well to address the topic? Feel free to adjust them!\n
    • \n
  • Do you already have some content-related lessons and just need modern methods to teach the content? Use the list of methods from the wiki to adjust them.\n
    • \n
  • Do you want to create a whole new lesson for teaching the SSI and some SciLMi skills? Create a unique lesson taking the prepared techniques and/or using our guidelines.\n
    • \n
\n

Prepare teaching material

\n
    \n
  • Prepare carefully selected information sources and discussion materials that support critical engagement with the socioscientific issue (information can also be found in the wiki briefs).\n
    • \n
  • Since many SSI topics involve conflicting viewpoints, misinformation, emotional appeals, and persuasive communication, you need to be prepared on how to support classroom discussions and activities. In the following section (During Implementation) you can find information about methods that can be applied in their lessons.\n
    • \n
  • Use template to design lesson \\[LINK to lesson template\\]\n
    • \n
\n
\n
","UPDATEDAT":"2026-05-28T11:12:53.469Z","ID":"e2cdd1d0-994d-4d69-a358-3df6a5036108","TITLE":"Before the implementation of the SciLMi Framework"}