The reviewed articles were evaluated in terms of revealing the conceptual framework of the study in a way that reflects the characteristics of pragmatism. Accordingly, nine studies were determined to be High (Table 7). For example, A11 used the following features of pragmatism:
Utilitarianism:
…Thus, this study aims to explore the current status of science teaching and learning within the context of contemporary KSA science education reform efforts.”
Functional:
The Course System, in which some of the teachers participating in this study teach, is a new Saudi system of teaching whose most prominent feature is the opportunity for students to finish secondary school in 2.5 years instead of 3 years, achieved by adding two summer classes .”
Transferable:
Students’ perceptions of their outcome-based learning environment provide insights into how Saudi Arabia’s educational reform efforts are functioning for science educators and teachers .”
We determined that 12 of the articles were Moderate. For example, the pragmatism features in A4’s study are:
Pluralist:
Critical thinking skills are measured to determine the students’ level of critical thinking ability, to give feedback to students on critical thinking, to motivate students to be critical thinkers, to inform teachers about their successes in teaching critical thinking, to make research on critical thinking and to inform schools about developing critical thinking skills of students, etc .”
Problem solver:
Tests developed for different purposes have been used to measure critical thinking skills. However, as one of the most effective ways, the necessity of using these techniques together to examine critical thinking skills has been emphasized.”
On the other hand, we evaluated A1 in the low category: “Social contexts for learning make learners’ thinking apparent to teachers and peers so that it can be examined, questioned, and built on. This study was therefore undertaken to examine science teacher educators’ predominant instructional technologies, in the context of teacher education in Israel.”
The five studies did not explain the theoretical information using pragmatism-specific features, so they were considered Not Applicable (Table 7).