Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Design of Chemistry Teacher Education Course on Nature of Science

  • Published:
Science & Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To enhance students’ understanding of nature of science (NOS), teachers need adequate pedagogical content knowledge related to NOS. The educational design research study presented here describes the design and development of a pre-service chemistry teacher education course on NOS instruction. The study documents two iterative cycles of problem analysis, design, implementation, and evaluation. The main aims of the study were (1) to create an in-depth and detailed description of the process used in the development of the course and the design solutions produced, and (2) to evaluate how the design solutions affected participants’ commitment to teach NOS. Based on the problem analysis based on challenges recognized from the previous research, three design solutions were produced: (1) definition of central dimensions of domain-specific NOS for chemistry education, (2) teaching cycle for explicit and structured opportunities for reflection and discussion, and (3) design assignments to translate NOS understanding into classroom practice. The major data-sources used in the evaluation of the design solutions were the four in-depth interviews conducted after the course. Based on the evaluation, the design solutions supported internalizing understanding of NOS and transforming the understanding to instruction. Supporting the implementation of new innovative teaching practices such as NOS instruction in pre-service teacher education is a challenge. However, the success of the participants in implementing NOS instruction demonstrates, that a pre-service teacher education course can be successful in producing early adopters of NOS instruction and thus might be one of the first steps in injecting NOS instruction into the curriculum.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See e.g. Adúriz-Bravo and Izquierdo-Aymerich (2009), Hodson (2003), Matthews (2004), McComas and Olson (1998).

  2. See e.g. Abd-El-Khalick (2005), Waters-Adams (2006), Niaz (2009), Adúriz-Bravo and Izquierdo-Aymerich (2009).

  3. See e.g. Abd-El-Khalick et al. (1998), Aikenhead (2006), Bell et al. (2000), Niaz (2009).

  4. See e.g. Bell et al. (2004), Dede (2004), Edelson (2002), Juuti and Lavonen (2006), Plomp (2009).

  5. For a detailed description of the programme see Aksela (2010).

  6. In Finland, comprehensive school typically starts the year child turns 7. Chemistry starts on the fifth year of comprehensive school, but is usually taught then by a primary school teacher. Chemistry teachers start teaching on the seventh year of comprehensive school.

  7. People involved in the design process included a professor of education and a senior lecturer of inorganic chemistry, who have also contributed to the previously published papers from the research project in question—see Vesterinen et al. (2009, 2011).

  8. During the initial problem analysis, a fourth challenge was also recognized. It has been argued that a discrete course on NOS might disconnect from science content and thus possibly dilute its relevance (see e.g. McComas et al. 1998). This challenge was acknowledged by arranging research group visits and by engaging practicing scientists in the group discussions. The description and evaluation of this aspect of the course has been presented in Vesterinen and Aksela (2009).

  9. See e.g. Abd-El-Khalick (1998), Lederman et al. (2002), Osborne et al. (2003), Niaz (2008).

  10. See e.g. Erduran (2001), Erduran and Scerri (2002), Lombardi and Labarca (2007), Sjöström (2007).

  11. See Zeidler (1997), Abd-El-Khalick et al. (1998), Abd-El-Khalick and Lederman (2000a), Abd-El-Khalick and Akerson (2004).

  12. See e.g. Abd-El-Khalick and Lederman (2000b), Irwin (2000), Lin and Chen (2002), Kolstø (2008).

  13. Pure in the sense that it is lacking interest in the quest for fundamental understanding unlike use-inspired fundamental research. For more discussion on the issue see Stokes (1997), Vesterinen and Aksela (2009).

  14. As in other Nordic countries, gender equity in Finland is exceptionally high. In Nordic countries, female participation in politics and the labor market is among the highest in the world. However, the number of women entering studies in science and engineering is low. Women seem to be turning their backs on science and engineering. This is not because of the lack of self-confidence, but rather due to value orientations and emotional and personal factors. Girls seem not to relate to the culture and ideals of science presented in traditional school science (Sjøberg 2000b). Thus, narrow perceptions of who does science and how science is done seem to discourage many qualified individuals from studying science even in countries with high gender equity. Discussion about the barriers of science as well as examples of women scientists discussed in the plan of instruction designed by the participants might inspire more women to take part in science (see e.g. Harding 1991).

  15. Even though teachers’ conceptions of good teaching and their own teaching is not straightforward, changes in teacher’s conceptions of good teaching are sine qua non for changing the teaching approach of the teacher. Thus influencing conceptions of good teaching is prerequisite of implementing new teaching approaches such as NOS instruction. About the importance of intention to teach NOS for the success in NOS instruction (see Lederman et al. 2001).

References

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F. (1998). The influence of history of science courses on students’ conceptions of the nature of science. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Oregon State University, Oregon.

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2005). Developing deeper understandings of nature of science: The impact of a philosophy of science course on preservice science teachers’ views and instructional planning. International Journal of Science Education, 27, 15–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Akerson, V. L. (2004). Learning about nature of science as conceptual change: Factors that mediate the development of preservice elementary teachers’ views of nature of science. Science Education, 88, 785–810.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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, 417–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000a). Improving science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 665–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000b). The influence of history of science courses on students’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 1057–1095.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adúriz-Bravo, A., & Izquierdo-Aymerich, M. (2009). A research-informed instructional unit to teach the nature of science to pre-service science teachers. Science & Education, 18, 1177–1192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aikenhead, G. S. (2006). Science education for everyday life: Evidence-based practice. New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aksela, M. (2010). Evidence-based teacher education: Becoming a lifelong research-oriented chemistry teacher? Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 11, 84–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York, NY: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bannan, B. (2009). The integrative learning design framework: An illustrated example from the domain of instructional technology. In T. Plomp & N. Nieveen (Eds.), An introduction to educational design research (pp. 53–71). Enschede: SLO, Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, J., & Hodson, D. (2001). Pedagogical content knowledge: Toward a fuller understanding of what good science teachers know. Science Education, 85, 426–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartholomew, H., Osborne, J., & Ratcliffe, M. (2004). Teaching students ‘ideas-about-science’: Five dimensions of effective practice. Science Education, 88, 655–682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, P., Hoadley, C. M., & Linn, M. C. (2004). Design-based research in education. In M. C. Linn, E. A. Davis, & P. Bell (Eds.), Internet environments for science education (pp. 73–85). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, R. L., Lederman, N. G., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2000). Developing and acting upon one’s conception of the nature of science: A follow-up study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 536–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bianchini, J. A., & Solomon, E. M. (2003). Constructing views of science tied to issues of equity and diversity: A study of beginning science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 53–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, C., & Peterson, P. (1986). Teacher’s thought process. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 255–296). New York, NY: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clough, M. (2007). Teaching the nature of science to secondary and post-secondary students: Questions rather than tenets. The Pantaneto Forum, 25. http://www.pantaneto.co.uk/issue25/clough.htm. Accessed May 2012.

  • Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32, 9–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, B. A. (1999). Is it realistic to expect a preservice teacher to create an inquiry-based classroom? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 10, 175–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, B. A. (2007). Learning to teach science as inquiry in the rough and tumble of practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 613–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among the five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalgety, J., Coll, R. K., & Jones, A. (2003). Development of chemistry attitudes and experiences questionnaire (CAEQ). Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 649–668.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, K. S. (2003). ‘Change is hard’: What science teachers are telling us about reform and teacher learning of innovative practices. Science & Education, 87, 3–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dede, C. (2004). If design-based research is the answer, what is the question? A commentary on Collins, Joseph, and Soloway in the JLS special issue on design-based research. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13, 105–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32, 5–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doyle, W., & Ponder, G. A. (1977). The practicality ethic in teacher decision-making. Interchange, 8, 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edelson, D. C. (2002). Design research: What we learn when we engage in design. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11, 105–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erduran, S. (2001). Philosophy of chemistry: An emerging field with implications for chemistry education. Science & Education, 10, 581–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erduran, S., & Scerri, E. (2002). The nature of chemical knowledge and chemical education. In J. K. Gilbert, O. De Jong, R. Justi, D. F. Treagust, & J. Van Driel (Eds.), Chemical education: Towards research-based practice (pp. 7–28). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnish National Board of Education. (2003). National core curriculum for upper secondary schools 2003. Helsinki: Finnish National Board of Education.

  • Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. London: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fullan, M., & Stiegelbauer, S. (1991). The new meaning of educational change. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gravemeijer, K., & Cobb, P. (2006). Design research from a learning design perspective. In J. van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research (pp. 17–51). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. G. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking of women’s lives. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D. (2003). Time for action: Science education for an alternative Future. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 645–670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D. (2008). Towards scientific literacy: A teachers’ guide to the history, philosophy and sociology of science. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

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

  • Hollingsworth, S. (1989). Prior beliefs and cognitive change in learning to teach. American Educational Research Journal, 26, 160–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Höttecke, D., Henke, A., & Riess, F. (2010). Implementing history and philosophy in science teaching: Strategies, methods, results and experiences from the European HIPST project. Science & Education (published online December 10, 2010).

  • Höttecke, D., & Riess, F. (2009). Developing and implementing case studies for teaching science with the help of history and philosophy: Framework and critical perspectives on ‘HIPST’—A European approach for the inclusion of history and philosophy in science teaching. Paper presented at the tenth international history, philosophy, and science teaching conference, University of Notre Dame, South Bend, USA, June 24–28, 2009.

  • Höttecke, D., & Silva, C. C. (2011). Why implementing history and philosophy in school science education is a challenge: An analysis of obstacles. Science & Education, 20, 293–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huberman, A. M., & Miles, M. B. (1994). Data management and analysis methods. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irwin, A. R. (2000). Historical case studies: Teaching the nature of science in context. Science Education, 84, 5–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. B. (1997). Examining the validity structure of qualitative research. Education, 118, 282–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Johnson Holubec, E. (1990). Circles of learning: Cooperation in the classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Juuti, K., & Lavonen, J. (2006). Design-based research in science education. NorDiNa: Nordic Studies in Science Education, 3, 54–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, A. E. (2006). Quality criteria for design research: Evidence and commitments. In J. van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research (pp. 3–7). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, A. E. (2009). When is design research appropriate? In T. Plomp & N. Nieveen (Eds.), An introduction to educational design research (pp. 73–87). Enschede: SLO, Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development.

  • Kiikeri, M., & Ylikoski, P. (2004). Tiede tutkimuskohteena—filosofinen johdatus tieteentutkimukseen [Science as a research subject—Philosophical introduction to science studies]. Helsinki: Gaudeamus Kirja.

  • Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolb, D. A., & Fry, R. (1975). Toward an applied theory of experiential learning. In C. Cooper (Ed.), Theories of group process (pp. 33–57). London: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolstø, S. D. (2008). Science education for democratic citizenship through the use of the history of science. Science & Education, 17, 977–997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koszalka, T. A., Breman, J., & Moore, M. K. (1999). Sharing lesson planning over the World Wide Web: Important components. Journal of Education and Information Technologies, 4, 143–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kovac, J. (2004). The ethical chemist: Professionalism and ethics in science. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G. (1999). Teachers’ understanding of the nature of science and classroom practice: Factors that facilitate or impede the relationship. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 916–929.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 497–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G., Schwartz, R. S., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Bell, R. L. (2001). Pre-service teachers’ understanding and teaching of nature of science: An intervention study. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 1, 135–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, E. (2006). Cooperative learning in the science classroom. Science Teacher, 73(5), 34–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, H.-S., & Chen, C.-C. (2002). Promoting preservice chemistry teachers’ understanding about the nature of science through history. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 773–792.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Cuba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lombardi, O., & Labarca, M. (2007). The philosophy of chemistry as a new resource for chemistry education. Journal of Chemical Education, 84, 187–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luft, J. A. (2001). Changing inquiry practices and beliefs: The impact of an inquiry-based professional development programme on beginning and experiences secondary teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 517–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markic, S., Valanides, N., & Eilks, I. (2006). Freshman science student teachers’ beliefs on science teaching and learning: A mixed methods study. In I. Eilks & B. Ralle (Eds.), Towards research-based science teacher education (pp. 29–40). Aachen: Shaker Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, M. R. (2004). Thomas Kuhn’s impact on science education: What lessons can be learned? Science Education, 88, 90–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, M. R. (2012). Changing the focus: From nature of science (NOS) to features of science (FOS). In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Advances in nature of science research: Concepts and methodologies (pp. 3–26). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • McComas, W. F. (2004). Keys to teaching the nature of science. Science Teacher, 71(9), 24–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • McComas, W. F., & Almazroa, H. (1998). Nature of science in science education: An introduction. Science & Education, 7, 511–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McComas, W. F., Clough, M. P., & Almazroa, H. (1998). A review of the role and character of the nature of science in science education. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 3–39). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • McComas, W. F., & Olson, J. K. (1998). The nature of science in international science education documents. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 41–52). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKenney, S., Nieveen, N., & van den Akker, J. (2006). Design research from a curriculum perspective. In J. van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research (pp. 3–7). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millar, R. (2004). The role of practical work in the teaching and learning of science. Paper prepared for the meeting High school science laboratories: Role and vision. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.

  • Munby, H., Cunningham, M., & Lock, C. (2000). School science culture: A case study of barriers to developing professional knowledge. Science Education, 84, 193–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niaz, M. (2008). What ‘ideas-about-science’ should be taught in school science? A chemistry teachers’ perspective. Instructional Science, 36, 233–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niaz, M. (2009). Progressive transitions in chemistry teachers’ understanding of nature of science based on historical controversies. Science & Education, 18, 43–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nieveen, N. (2009). Formative evaluation in educational design research. In T. Plomp & N. Nieveen (Eds.), An introduction to educational design research (pp. 89–101). Enschede: SLO, Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development.

  • Nieveen, N., McKenney, S., & van den Akker, J. (2006). Educational design research: The value of variety. In J. van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research (pp. 151–158). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nott, M., & Wellington, J. (1998). A programme for developing understanding of the nature of science in teacher education. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 293–313). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oikkonen, J., Lavonen, J., Krzywacki-Vainio, H., Aksela, M., Krokfors, L., & Saarikko, H. (2007). Pre-service teacher education in chemistry, mathematics and physics. In E. Pehkonen, M. Ahtee, & J. Lavonen (Eds.), How Finns learn mathematics and science (pp. 49–69). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J., Collins, S., Ratcliffe, M., Millar, R., & Duschl, R. (2003). What ‘ideas-about-science’ should be taught in school science? A Delphi study of the expert community. Journal of Research in Science Education, 40, 692–720.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J., Duschl, R., & Fairbrother, R. (2002). Breaking the mould? Teaching science for public understanding. A report commissioned by the Nuffield Foundation. http://www.kcl.ac.uk/content/1/c6/01/32/03/breaking.pdf. Accessed May 2012.

  • Plomp, T. (2009). Educational design research: An introduction. In T. Plomp & N. Nieveen (Eds.), An introduction to educational design research (pp. 9–35). Enschede: SLO, Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Punch, K. F. (2005). Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogan, J. M., & Grayson, D. J. (2003). Towards a theory of curriculum implementation with particular reference to science education in developing countries. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1171–1204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of innovations. Glencoe: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W.-M., Tobin, K., Carambo, C., & Dalland, C. (2004). Coteaching: Creating resources for learning and learning to teach in urban high schools. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 882–904.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, T., McPherson, S., & Martin, A. K. (2001). Coherence and collaboration in teacher education reform. Canadian Journal of Education, 26, 37–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, R. S., & Lederman, N. G. (2002). ‘It’s the nature of the beast’: The influence of knowledge and intentions on learning and teaching nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 205–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheldon, K. M., & Houser-Marko, L. (2001). Self-concordance, goal attainment, and the pursuit of happiness: Can there be an upward spiral? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 152–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sjøberg, S. (2000a). Naturvetenskap som allmänbildning—en kritisk ämnesdidaktik [Scientific literacy—A critical subject didactic]. Lund: Studentliteratur.

  • Sjøberg, S. (2000b). ‘Science for all’: Time for a paradigm shift. In R. Millar, J. Leach, & J. Osborne (Eds.), Improving science education: The contribution of research. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sjöström, J. (2007). The discourse of chemistry (and beyond). HYLE: International Journal for Philosophy of Chemistry, 13, 83–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, J., Duveen, J., Scot, L., & McCarthy, S. (1992). Teaching about the nature of science through history: Action research in the classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 409–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, C.-C. (2002). Nested epistemologies: Science teachers’ beliefs of teaching, learning and science. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 771–783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tynjälä, P., Mason, L., & Lonka, K. (Eds.). (2001). Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Understanding Science. (2009). University of California, Museum of Paleontology. http://www.understandingscience.org. Accessed May 2012.

  • van den Akker, J., Gravemeijer, K., McKenney, S., & Nieveen, N. (2006). Introducing educational design research. In J. van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research (pp. 3–7). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vesterinen, V.-M., & Aksela, M. (2009). A novel course of chemistry as a scientific discipline: How do prospective teachers perceive nature of chemistry through visits to research groups? Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 10, 132–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vesterinen, V.-M., Aksela, M., & Lavonen, J. (2011). Quantitative analysis of representations of nature of science in Nordic upper secondary school textbooks using framework of analysis based on philosophy of chemistry. Science & Education (published online (pre-print) October 18, 2011).

  • Vesterinen, V.-M., Aksela, M., & Sundberg, M. R. (2009). Nature of chemistry in the national frame curricula for upper secondary education in Finland, Norway and Sweden. NorDiNa, 5, 200–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vesterinen, V.-M., Pernaa, J., & Aksela, M. (2012). Evaluation of educational design methodology utilizing concept mapping. In C. Bruguière, A. Tiberghien, & P. Clément (Eds.), E-book proceedings of the ESERA 2011 conference, Lyon France: Science learning and citizenship (pp. 142–146). http://lsg.ucy.ac.cy/esera/e_book/base/ebook-esera2011.pdf. Accessed May 2012.

  • Waters-Adams, S. (2006). The relationship between understanding the nature of science and practice: The influence of teachers’ beliefs about education, teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 919–944.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeichner, K. (1996). Teachers as reflective practitioners and the democratization of school reform. In K. Zeichner, S. Melnick, & M. L. Gomez (Eds.), Currents of reform in preservice teacher education (pp. 199–214). New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. L. (1997). The central role of fallacious thinking in science education. Science Education, 81, 483–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the (former and current) pre-service teachers who took part in the study, and especially to the four teachers who agreed to be in-depth interviewed. The authors would also like to acknowledge the thorough and insightful comments of the anonymous referees and our distinguished colleagues professor Jari Lavonen and doctor Johannes Pernaa, who helped us immensely in improving this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Unit of Chemistry Teacher Education, Department of Chemistry, University of Helsinki, 00014, Helsinki, Finland

    Veli-Matti Vesterinen & Maija Aksela

Authors
  1. Veli-Matti Vesterinen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maija Aksela
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Veli-Matti Vesterinen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vesterinen, VM., Aksela, M. Design of Chemistry Teacher Education Course on Nature of Science. Sci & Educ 22, 2193–2225 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9506-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9506-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation