Date: 01 Jan 2013
Changes Observed in Views of Nature of Science During a Historically Based Unit
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
Numerous empirical studies have provided evidence of the effectiveness of an explicit and reflective approach to the learning of issues associated with the nature of science (NOS) (c.f. Abd-El-Khalick and Lederman in J Res Sci Teach 37(10):1057–1095, 2000). This essay reports the results of a mixed-methods association study involving 130 preservice teachers during the course of a three class unit based upon the history of science using such an approach. Within the unit the phenomenon of industrial melanism was presented as a puzzle for students to solve. Students were explicitly asked to reflect upon several NOS issues as they developed and tested their own explanations for the “mystery phenomenon”. NOS views of all participants were characterized by means of surveys and follow-up interviews with a subsample of 17 participants, using a modified version of the VNOS protocol (c.f. Lederman et al. in J Res Sci Teach 39(6):497–521, 2002). An analysis of the survey results informed by the interview data suggests NOS views became more sophisticated for some issues, e.g., whether scientific knowledge requires experimentation; but not others, e.g., why scientists experiment. An examination of the interview data informed by our experiences with the unit provides insight into why the unit may have been more effective with regard to some issues than others. This includes evidence that greater sophistication of some NOS issues was fostered by the use of multiple, contextualized examples. The essay concludes with a discussion of limitations, pedagogical implications, and avenues for further research.
Abd-El-Khalick, F. (1998). The influence of history of science courses on student conceptions of the nature of science. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Oregon State University, Corvalis, OR.
Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2001). Do history of science courses influence college students’ views of the nature of science? In Paper presented at the 6th annual meeting of the International History, Philosophy and Science Teaching Group, Denver, CO.
Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R., & Lederman, N. (1998). The nature of science and instructional practice: Making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82(4), 417–436.CrossRef
Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. (2000). The influence of history of science courses on students’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(10), 1057–1095.CrossRef
Abell, S. K., & Smith, D. C. (1994). What is science? Preservice elementary teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 16(4), 475–487.CrossRef
Akerson, V. L., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. (2000). Influence of a reflective explicit activity-based approach on elementary teacher’s conceptions of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(4), 295–317.CrossRef
Allchin, D. (1993). Of squid hearts and William Harvey. Science Teacher, 60(7), 26–33.
Allchin, D. (2011). Evaluating knowledge of the nature of (whole) science. Science Education, 95(3), 518–542.CrossRef
American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS]. (1993). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
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.CrossRef
Clough, M. P. (2007). Teaching the nature of science to secondary and post-secondary students: Questions rather than tenets. Pantaneto Forum, 25 (Jan). URL: www.pantaneto.co.uk/issue25/clough.htm. Downloaded June 29, 2012.
Cotham, J. C., & Smith, E. L. (1981). Development and validation of the conceptions of scientific theories test. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 18(5), 387–396.CrossRef
Dagher, Z., & Boujande, S. (2005). Students’ perceptions of the nature of evolutionary theory. Science Education, 89(3), 378–391.CrossRef
DeBoer, G. E. (1991). A history of ideas in science education: Implications for practice. New York: Teachers College.
Deng, F., Chen, D.-T., Tsai, C.-C., & Chai, C.-S. (2011). Students’ views of the nature of science: A critical review of research. Science Education, 95(6), 961–999.CrossRef
Driver, R., & Oldham, V. (1986). A constructivist approach to curriculum development. Studies in Science Education, 13(1), 105–122.CrossRef
Elby, A., & Hammer, D. (2001). On the substance of a sophisticated epistemology. Science Education, 85(5), 554–567.CrossRef
Farrari, M., & Chi, M. (1998). The nature of naïve explanations of natural selection. International Journal of Science Education, 20(10), 1231–1256.CrossRef
Galili, I. (2012). Promotion of cultural content knowledge through the use of history and philosophy of science. Science & Education, 21(9), 1283–1316.CrossRef
Ginsberg, H. P. (1997). Entertaining the child’s mind: The clinical interview in psychological research and practice. New York: Harper Collins.CrossRef
Hanuscin, D. L., Akerson, V. L., & Philipson-Mower, T. (2006). Integrating nature of science instruction into a physical science content course for preservice elementary teachers: NOS views of teaching assistants. Science Education, 90(5), 912–935.CrossRef
Harris, M. (1986 ). The Aurelian or natural history of English insects; namely, moths and butterflies. Newnes, Twickenham, UK.
Hodges, J. L., & Lehmann, E. L. (1963). Estimation of location based on ranks. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 34(2), 598–611.CrossRef
Howe, E. M. (2004). Using the history of research on sickle-cell anemia to affect preservice teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI.
Howe, E. M., & Rudge, D. W. (2005). Recapitulating the history of sickle-cell anemia research: Improving students’ NOS views explicitly and reflectively. Science & Education, 14(3–5), 423–441.CrossRef
Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2011). A family resemblance approach to the nature of science for science education. Science & Education, 20(7–8), 567–607.
Jenkins, E. W. (1994). HPS and school science education: Remediation or reconstruction? International Journal of Science Education, 16(6), 613–623.CrossRef
Kettlewell, H. B. D. (1961). Evolution in progress. (Cinematographer N. Tinbergen)—sound popularization of the selection experiments film distributed by British Universities Film and Video Council, London.
Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit-oriented instruction on sixth graders’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551–578.CrossRef
Khishfe, R., & Lederman, N. (2007). Relation between instructional context and views of nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 29(8), 939–961.CrossRef
Kim, S. Y., & Irving, K. E. (2010). History of science as an instructional context: Student learning in genetics and the nature of science. Science & Education, 19(2), 187–215.CrossRef
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174.CrossRef
Lederman, N. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions about the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 331–359.CrossRef
Lederman, N. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. In S. K. Abell & N. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research in science education. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Lederman, N., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R., & 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(6), 497–521.CrossRef
Lederman, N., & O’Malley, M. (1990). Students’ perceptions of tentativeness of science: Development, use, and sources of change. Science Education, 74(2), 225–239.CrossRef
Lederman, N., Wade, P., & Bell, R. L. (1998). Assessing understanding of the nature of science: A historical perspective. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education. Netherlands: Kluwer.
Lin, H., & Chen, C.-C. (2002). Promoting preservice chemistry teachers understanding about the nature of science through history. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(9), 773–792.CrossRef
Matthews, M. R. (1994). Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. New York: Rutledge.
Maxwell, A. E. (1970). Comparing the classification of subjects by two independent judges. British Journal of Psychiatry, 116, 651–655.CrossRef
McComas, W. (1997). The discovery of nature of evolution by natural selection: Misconceptions and lessons from the history of science. American Biology Teacher, 59(8), 492–500.CrossRef
McComas, W. F., Almazroa, H., & Clough, M. P. (1998). The nature of science in science education. Science & Education, 7(6), 511–532.CrossRef
McDonald, C. V. (2010). The influence of explicit nature of science and argumentation instruction on preservice primary teachers’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(9), 1137–1164.CrossRef
Monk, M., & Osborne, J. (1997). Placing the history and philosophy of science on the curriculum: A model for the development of pedagogy. Science Education, 81(4), 405–424.CrossRef
Nagasawa, P. (2004). Epistemological relevations in students’ science writing. In Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Vancouver, Canada.
National Research Council [NRC]. (1996). National science education standards. National Academy Press, Washington D.C.
Palmquist, B., & Finley, F. (1997). Preservice teachers’ views of the nature of science during a post baccalaureate science teaching program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(6), 595–615.CrossRef
Rudge, D. W., Geer, U. C., & Howe, E. M. (2007). But is it effective? Assessing the impact of a historically-based unit. In Ninth international history, philosophy & science teaching (IHPST) conference, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada, Session 4.0.3. http://www.ucalgary.ca/ihpst07/abstracts_thu.htm.
Rudge, D. W., & Howe, E. M. (2009). An explicit and reflective approach to the use of history to promote understanding of the nature of science. Science & Education, 18(5), 561–580.CrossRef
Rudolph, J. L. (2000). Reconsidering the ‘nature of science’ as a curriculum component. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(3), 403–419.CrossRef
Settlage, J. (1994). Conceptions of natural selection: A snapshot of the sense-making process. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(5), 449–457.CrossRef
Southerland, S. A., Johnston, A., Sowell, S., & Settlage, J. (2005). Perhaps triangulation isn’t enough: A call for crystallization as a methodological referent in NOS research. In Paper presented at the AERA 2005 annual meeting (Montreal, Canada). http://digitalcommons.uconn.edu/terc_docs/1.
Stuart, A. (1955). A test for homogeneity of the marginal distributions in a two-way classification. Biometrika, 42(3–4), 412–416.CrossRef
Wilcoxon, F. (1945). Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biometrics Bulletin, 1(6), 80–83.CrossRef
Yacoubian, H. A., & BouJaoude, S. (2010). The effect of reflective discussions following inquiry-based laboratory activities on students’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(10), 1229–1252.CrossRef
- Changes Observed in Views of Nature of Science During a Historically Based Unit
Science & Education
Volume 23, Issue 9 , pp 1879-1909
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Department of Biological Sciences, The Mallinson Institute for Science Education, Western Michigan University, 3134 Wood Hall, Kalamazoo, MI, 49008-5410, USA
- 2. The Mallinson Institute for Science Education, Western Michigan University, 3134 Wood Hall, Kalamazoo, MI, 49008-5410, USA
- 3. Department of Education, Assumption College, 159 Kennedy Hall, 500 Salisbury Street, Worcester, MA, 01612, USA