The Epistemic Structure of Ethnoscience and Scientific Argumentation Research in Elementary Science Education: A Hybrid Bibliometric and Systematic Review

Abstract

Scientific argumentation plays a central role in science education by supporting reasoning, evidence evaluation, and knowledge construction. However, limited attention has been given to how ethnoscience and culturally grounded knowledge are positioned within scientific argumentation research. This study examines the intellectual development, thematic structure, and epistemic configuration of ethnoscience and scientific argumentation research in elementary science education. A hybrid approach integrating bibliometric analysis, systematic literature review, and epistemic synthesis was employed. The dataset consisted of 386 Scopus indexed publications published between 1984 and April 2026. Bibliometric mapping was conducted using VOSviewer, while 20 selected studies were analyzed through thematic coding. The findings reveal substantial growth in scientific argumentation research, accompanied by thematic expansion across pedagogical, epistemic, socio-scientific, and technology enhanced learning domains. Despite this growth, scientific knowledge remains the dominant epistemic authority, whereas local, indigenous, and heritage based knowledge are primarily positioned as contextual resources rather than legitimate sources of evidence. Five epistemic gaps were identified: legitimacy, representation, authority, integration, and participation. Based on these findings, this study proposes the concept of an epistemic hierarchy of knowledge sources to explain the unequal positioning of scientific and culturally grounded knowledge within scientific argumentation research. The findings contribute to a deeper understanding of knowledge legitimacy in science education and provide directions for developing more pluralistic and culturally responsive approaches to scientific argumentation.