Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Promoting Young Learners’ NOS Views Through Place-Based SSI Instruction

  • Article
  • Published:
Science & Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Promoting a functional scientific literacy entails preparing people to effectively engage and make decisions regarding real-world socioscientfic issues (SSI) through consideration of the relevant products and processes of science, as well as social, cultural, environmental, and ethical factors. Students can develop a functional scientific literacy through place-based pedagogical approaches focused on real-world SSI that augment formal classroom instruction. This quasi-experimental triangulated mixed-methods study investigated how 50 fourth graders in an intervention group, in comparison to their 79 classmates, developed nature of science (NOS) views through experiencing a place-based Missouri River SSI education Program (MRSIP). Salient themes of the month-long MRSIP included Missouri River human impacts, pallid sturgeon decline and recovery, and how scientists investigate and manage those issues. Our findings demonstrate that the MRSIP participants and their non-participating classroom peers expressed NOS views ranging from those that were largely stereotypical (e.g., science must proceed by a set method in a laboratory) to those that transcended stereotypes (e.g., science proceeds by many methods implemented in various field settings). However, after students participated in the MRSIP, they expressed significantly more sophisticated non-stereotypical views about how scientists research and understand Missouri River SSI and the role science plays in resolving those issues. The comparison group of the MRSIP participating students’ classmates realized no such gains across the same time period. Pedagogical implications include how place-based SSI teaching can leverage young learners’ sense of place and augment their classroom experiences in ways that help them understand NOS and engage local SSI.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2012). Nature of science in science education: Toward a coherent framework for synergistic research and development.  In B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin, & McRobbie, C. (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education  2, 1041–1060. The Netherlands. Springer.

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (1998). The nature of science and instructional practice: Making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82(4), 417–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akerson, V., & Donnelly, L. A. (2010). Teaching Nature of Science to K-2 Students: What understandings can they attain? International Journal of Science Education, 32(1), 97–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akerson, V. L., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. S. (2005). “How should I know what scientists do? I am just a kid”: Fourth-grade students’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 17(1), 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akerson, V. L., Buck, G. A., Donnelly, L. A., Nargund-Joshi, V., & Weiland, I. S. (2011). The importance of teaching and learning nature of science in the early childhood years. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(5), 537–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akerson, V. L., Carter, I., Pongsanon, K., & Nargund-Joshi, V. (2019). Teaching and learning nature of science in elementary classrooms. Science & Education, 28(3), 391–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akerson, V. L., & Hanuscin, D. L. (2007). Teaching nature of science through inquiry: Results of a 3-year professional development program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 44(5), 653–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allchin, D. (2011). Evaluating knowledge of the nature of (whole) science. Science Education, 95(3), 518–542. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allchin, D., Andersen, H. M., & Nielsen, K. (2014). Complementary approaches to teaching nature of science: Integrating student inquiry, historical cases, and contemporary cases in classroom practice. Science Education, 98(3), 461–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Backhus, D. A., & Thompson, K. W. (2006). Addressing the nature of science in preservice science teacher preparation programs: Science educator perceptions. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17(1), 65–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banilower, E. R., Smith, P. S., Weiss, I. R., Malzahn, K. A., Campbell, K. M., & Weis, A. M. (2013). Report of the 2012 national survey of science and mathematics education. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research, Inc.

  • Barraza, L. (1999). Children’s drawings about the environment. EnvironmentalEducation Research 5(1), 49–66.

  • Birmingham, D., & Calabrese Barton, A. (2014). Putting on a green carnival: Youth taking educated action on socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(3), 286–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bland, D. (2012). Analysing children's drawings: applied imagination, International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 35(3), 235–242. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2012.717432

  • Bland, D. (2018). Using drawing in research with children: lessons from practice, International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 41(3), 342–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2017.1307957

  • Blank, R. K. (2013). Science instructional time is declining in elementary schools: What are the implications for student achievement and closing the gap? Science Education, 97(6), 830–847.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briggs, S. R., & Cheek, J. M. (1986). The role of factor analysis in the development and evaluation of personality scales. Journal of Personality, 54(1), 106–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brunner, J. L., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2020). Improving nature of science instruction in elementary classes with modified science trade books and educative curriculum materials. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57(2), 154–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cakici, Y., & Bayir, E. (2012). Developing children’s views of the nature of science through role play. International Journal of Science Education, 34(7), 1075–1091. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.647109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Capkinoglu, E., Yilmaz, S., & Leblebicioglu, G. (2020). Quality of argumentation by seventh-graders in local socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57(6), 827–855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1995). Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 309–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clough, M. P. (2006). Learners’ responses to the demands of conceptual change: Considerations for effective nature of science instruction. Science Education, 15(5), 463–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clough, M. P. (2007). Teaching the nature of science to secondary and post-secondary students: Questions rather than tenets. The Pantaneto Forum, 25. Retrieved April 15, 2013, from http://www.pantaneto.co.uk/issue25/front25.htm. Republished (2008) in the California Journal of Science Education, 8(2), 31 – 40.

  • Cohen, J. W. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.) Hilldale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

  • Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Sage Publications Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale Development: Theory and Applications. Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erduran, S., & Dagher, Z. R. (2014). Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education: Scientific knowledge, practices and other family categories. Dordrecht, Springer.

  • Erduran, S., Dagher, Z. R., & McDonald, C. V. (2019). Contributions of the family resemblance approach to nature of science in science education. Science & Education, 28(3), 311–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fincham, J. E. (2008). Response rates and responsiveness for surveys, standards, and the Journal. American journal of pharmaceutical education, 72, 2. https://doi.org/10.5688/aj720243

  • Gilbert, J. K., Bulte, A. M., & Pilot, A. (2011). Concept development and transfer in context-based science education. International Journal of Science Education, 33(6), 817–837.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruenewald, D. A., & Smith, G. A. (Eds.). (2008). Place-based education in the global age: Local diversity. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Herman, B. C. (2015). The influence of global warming science views and sociocultural factors on willingness to mitigate global warming, Science Education. 1(1), 1–38.

  • Herman, B. C. (2018). Students’ environmental NOS views, compassion, intent, and action: Impact of place-based socioscientific issues instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 55(4), 600 – 638.

  • Herman, B. C., Clough, M. P. & Olson, J. K. (2013a). Teachers’ NOS implementation practices two to five years after having completed an intensive science education program. Science Education (I.F.: 4.59) 97(2), 271 – 309.

  • Herman, B. C., Clough, M. P. & Olson, J. K. (2013b). Association between experienced teachers’ NOS implementation and general reform-based science teaching practices (GRBSTP). Journal of Science Teacher Education 24(7), 1077 – 1102.

  • Herman, B. C., Olson, J. K. & Clough, M. P. (2019). The role of informal support networks in teaching the nature of science. Research in Science Education, 49(1), 191–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9610-2

  • Herman, B. C., Newton, M. H., & Zeider, D. (2021). Impact of place-based socioscientific issues instruction on students’ contextualization of socioscientific orientations. Science Education, 105(4), 585–627. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21618

  • Hodson, D. (2009). Teaching and learning about science: Language, theories, methods, history, traditions and values. Sense.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Horn, R. (1998). Visual language: Global communication for the 21st century. Bainbridge Island, WA: MacroVU.

  • Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2011). A family resemblance approach to the nature of science for science education. Science and Education, 20(7), 591–607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-010-9293-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khishfe, R. (2014). Explicit nature of science and argumentation instruction in the context of socioscientific issues: An effect on student learning and transfer. International Journal of Science Education, 36(6), 974–1016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, G., Ko, Y., & Lee, H. (2020). The effects of community-based socioscientific issues program (SSI-COMM) on promoting students’ sense of place and character as citizens. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 18(3), 399–418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-09976-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruse, J. & Wilcox, J. (2011). Using historical science stories to illuminate nature of science ideas and reduce stereotypical views in a sixth grade classroom. Paper presented at the 2011 Association for Science Teacher Education, Minneapolis, MN.

  • Leblebicioglu, G., Abik, N. M., Capkinoglu, E., Metin, D., Dogan, E. E., Cetin, P. S., & Schwartz, R. (2019). Science camps for introducing nature of scientific inquiry through student inquiries in nature: Two applications with retention study. Research in Science Education, 49(5), 1231–1255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leden, L., & Hansson, L. (2019). Nature of science progression in school year 1–9: A case study of teachers’ suggestions and rationales. Research in Science Education, 49(2), 591–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. Handbook of Research on Science Education, 2, 831–879.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2014). Is nature of science going, going, going, gone? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25, 235–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liang, L. L., Chen, S., Chen, X., Kaya, O. N., Adams, A. D., Macklin, M., & Ebenezer, J. (2008). Assessing preservice elementary teachers’ views on the nature of scientific knowledge: A dual response instrument. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 9(1), 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Establishing Trustworthiness. Naturalistic Inquiry, 289, 331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, M. R. (2012). Changing the focus: From nature of science (NOS) to features of science (FOS). Advances in Nature of Science Research: Concepts and Methodologies, 9789400724(2004), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2457-0_1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McComas, W. F. (2004). Keys to teaching the nature of science. The Science Teacher, 71(9), 24.

    Google Scholar 

  • McComas, W. F., & Nouri, N. (2016). The nature of science and the next generation science standards: Analysis and critique. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 27(5), 555–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McComas, W. F. & Clough, M. P., (2020). Nature of science in science instruction: Meaning, advocacy, rationales, and recommendations. In McComas, W.F.., (Ed.) Nature of science in science instruction: Rationales and strategies. (pp. 3–22). Springer.

  • McNeill, K. L., & Martin, D. M. (2011). Claims, evidence, and reasoning: Demystifying data during a unit on simple machines. Science and Children, 48(8), 52–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson, P., & Loughran, J. (2012). Exploring the development of pre-service science elementary teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(7), 699–721.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, J. K. (2018). The inclusion of the nature of science in nine recent international science education standards documents. Science & Education, 27(7), 637–660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (2002). Two decades of developments in qualitative inquiry: A personal, experiential perspective. Qualitative Social Work, 1(3), 261–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Presley, M. L., Sickel, A. J., Muslu, N., Merle-Johnson, D., Witzig, S. B., Izci, K., & Sadler, T. D. (2013). A framework for socio-scientific issues based education. Science Educator, 22(1), 26–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quigley, C., Pongsanon, K., & Akerson, V. L. (2010). If we teach them, they can learn: Young students’ views of nature of science aspects to early elementary students during an informal science education program. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(7), 887–907.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rennie, L. J., & Jarvis, T. (1995). English and Australian children’s perceptions about technology. Research in Science & Technological Education, 13(1), 37–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, D. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education (pp. 729–780). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence.

  • Rogers, M. A. P., Roy, R., & Gerber, A. (2020). Using core science ideas to teach aspects of nature of science in the elementary grades. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), Nature of science in science instruction: Rationales and strategies (pp. 427–436). Springer.

  • Sadler, T. D. (2009). Situated learning in science education: Socio-scientific issues as contexts for practice. Studies in Science Education, 45(1), 1–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherz, Z., & Oren, M. (2006). How to change students’ images of science and technology. Science Education, 90, 966–985.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Semken, S., Ward, E. G., Moosavi, S., & Chinn, P. W. U. (2017). Place-based education in geoscience: Theory, research, practice, and assessment. Journal of Geoscience Education, 65(4), 542–562. https://doi.org/10.5408/17-276.1

  • Simonneaux, L. (2008). Argumentation in socio-scientific contexts. In S. Erduran & M. P. JimenezAleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 179–199). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan, S. (2009). Misuses of KR-20 and Cronbach’s Alpha reliability coefficients. Education and Science., 34(152), 101–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, K. (2007). Review of research: Children and their purple crayons: Understanding their worlds through their drawings. Childhood Education 84 (2), 96–102.

  • Walls, L. (2012). Third grade African American students’ views of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(1), 1–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, I. R., Banilower, E. R., McMahon, K. C., & Smith, P. S. (2001). Report of the 2000 national survey of science and mathematics education. Horizon Research Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wong, S. L., Hodson, D., Kwan, J., & Yung, B. H. W. Y. (2008). Turning crisis into opportunity: Enhancing student teachers’ understanding of nature of science and scientific inquiry through a case study of the scientific research in severe acute respiratory syndrome. International Journal of Science Education, 30(11), 1417–1439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. L. (2016). STEM education: A deficit framework for the twenty first century? A sociocultural socioscientific response. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11(1), 11–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education, 89(3), 357–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D., Herman, B. C., Ruzek, M., Linder, A. & Lin, S. S. (2013). Cross-cultural epistemological orientations to socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(3), 251–283.

  • Zeidler, D. L., Herman, B. C., & Sadler, T. D. (2019). New directions in socioscientific issues research. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(1), 1–9.

  • Zembal-Saul, C., McNeill, K. L., & Hershberger, K. (2013). What's your evidence?: Engaging K-5 children in constructing explanations in science. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Teaching, Learning, and Culture, College of Education and Human Development, Department of Biology, College of Science, Texas A & M University, College Station, TX, 77843, USA

    Benjamin C. Herman

  2. Department of Teaching, Learning, and Culture, College of Education and Human Development, Texas A & M University, College Station, TX, 77843, USA

    Sarah V. Poor

  3. Department of Learning, Teaching and Curriculum, College of Education and Human Development, University of Missouri, 321O Townsend Hall, Columbia, MO, 65211, USA

    Robert T. Oertli

  4. Missouri River Relief, 916 N College Ave #2, Columbia, MO, 65201, USA

    Kristen Schulte

Authors
  1. Benjamin C. Herman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sarah V. Poor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Robert T. Oertli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kristen Schulte
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Benjamin C. Herman.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

1.1 MISSOURI RIVER ASSESSMENT PART 1

figure a
figure b
figure c
figure d

1.2 MISSOURI RIVER ASSESSMENT PART 2

figure e
figure f
figure g
figure h

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Herman, B.C., Poor, S.V., Oertli, R.T. et al. Promoting Young Learners’ NOS Views Through Place-Based SSI Instruction. Sci & Educ 32, 947–992 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00353-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00353-z

Search

Navigation