Abstract
The use of explicit and reflective (ER) instruction to promote student nature of science (NOS) understanding has emerged as the best practice in science classrooms. Despite this, teaching explicitly about NOS rarely occurs in college science courses. College lecture courses typically focus on conceptual learning objectives, while laboratories, usually taught by graduate teaching assistants (GTAs), focus on conceptual and procedural learning objectives. Although colleges increasingly use inquiry-based investigations, some still rely on expository investigations. We experimentally explored the use of an ER instruction in inquiry and expository biology laboratories to determine if this technique would be successful in a college science environment. We found that GTAs’ ability to foster meaningful class discussions was an important factor in effective implementation of an ER instruction at the college level. Our chapter relates our experiences to others interested in fostering NOS understanding in students in their college classes.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2006). Over and over again: College students’ views of nature of science. In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science (pp. 389–425). The Netherlands: Springer.
Abd-El-Khalick, F. S., & Akerson, V. L. (2004). Learning as conceptual change: Factors mediating the development of preservice elementary teachers’ views of nature of science. Science Education, 88(5), 785–810.
Abd-El-Khalick, F. S., Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (1998). The nature of science as instructional practice: Making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82(4), 417–437.
Aikenhead, G., Ryan, A., & Fleming, R. (1989). Views on science–technology–society (from CDN.mc.5). Saskatoon, Canada: Department of Curriculum Studies, University of Saskatchewan.
Akerson, V. L., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. S. (2003). Teaching elements of nature of science: A yearlong case study of a fourth grade teacher. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(10), 1025–1049.
Akerson, V. L., Abd-El-Khalick, F. S., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). The influence of a reflective activity-based approach on elementary teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(4), 295–317.
Akerson, V. L., & Volrich, M. (2006). Teaching nature of science explicitly in a first grade internship setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 377–394.
Alberts, B. (2009). Redefining science education. Science, 323(5913), 437.
Bell, R. L., Blair, L. M., Crawford, B. A., & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Just do it? Impact of a science apprenticeship program on high school students’ understandings of the nature of science and scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(5), 487–509.
Berland, L. K., & Reiser, B. J. (2009). Making sense of argumentation and explanation. Science Education, 93(1), 26–55.
Bezzi, A. (1999). What is this thing called geoscience? Epistemological dimensions elicited with the repertory grid and their implications for scientific literacy. Science Education, 83(6), 675–700.
Colburn, A. (1997, Fall). How to make lab activities more open ended. California Science Teacher Association Journal, 4–6. Available: http://www.exploratorium.eduAFI/resources/workshops/lab_activities.html.
Committee on Prospering in the Global Economy of the 21st Century. (2007). Rising Above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Dagher, Z. R., Brickhouse, N. W., Shipman, H., & Letts, W. J. (2004). How some college students represent their understandings of the nature of scientific theories. International Journal of Science Education, 26(6), 735–755.
Driver, R., & Oldham, V. (1985). A constructivist approach to curriculum development. Studies in Science Education, 13, 105–122.
Fleming, R. (1988). Undergraduate science students’ vies on the relationship between science, technology and society. International Journal of Science Education, 10(4), 449–463.
Gess-Newsome, J. (2002). The use and impact of explicit instruction about the nature of science and science inquiry in an elementary science methods course. Science and Education, 11(1), 55–67.
Gilbert, S. W. (1991). Model building and a definition of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(1), 73–80.
Hanuscin, D. L., Akerson, V. L., & Phillipson-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.
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88(1), 28–54.
Khishfe, R. (2008). The development of seventh graders’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(4), 470–496.
Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. S. (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth-graders’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551–578.
Kurdziel, J. P., & Libarkin, J. C. (2003). Research methodologies in science education: Training graduate teaching assistants to teach. Journal of Geoscience Education, 51(3), 347–351.
Lederman, N. G. (1998). The state of science education: Subject matter without context. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 3(1), 1–12.
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.
Lederman, N. G., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. S. (1998). Avoiding de-natured science: Activities that promote understandings of the nature of science. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education (pp. 83–126). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F. S., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (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.
Luft, J. A., Kurdziel, J. P., Roehrig, J. H., & Turner, J. (2004). Growing a garden without water: Graduate teaching assistants in introductory science laboratories at a doctoral/research university. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(3), 211–233.
McComas, W. F., & Cox-Petersen, A. M. (1999). Enhancing undergraduate science instruction—The G-Step approach: Capitalizing on the pedagogical strengths of science educators and the content expertise of science TAs. Journal of College Science Teaching, 29(2), 120–125.
National Science Foundation. (1998). Shaping the future, volume II: Perspectives on undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology (NSF 98-128). Arlington, VA.
Osborne, J. (2010). Arguing to learn in science: The role of collaborative, critical discourse. Science, 328, 463–466.
Ryder, J., & Leach, J. (1999). University science students’ experiences of investigative project work and their images of science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(9), 945–956.
Sadava, D., Heller, H. C., Orians, G. H., Purves, W. K., & Hillis, D. M. (2008). Life: The science of biology (8th ed.). Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.
Schwartz, R. S., & Lederman, N. (2008). What scientists say: Scientists’ views of nature of science and relation to science context. International Journal of Science Education, 30(6), 721–771.
Sundberg, M. D., Armstrong, J. E., & Wischusen, E. W. (2005). A reappraisal of the status of introductory biology laboratory education in U.S. colleges and universities. The American Biology Teacher, 67(9), 525–529.
van Zee, E. H., & Minstrell, J. (1997). Reflective discourse: Developing shared understandings in a high school physics classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 19(2), 209–228.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank their many collaborators at Miami University, Oxford, OH, as well as acknowledge support from the University and from the National Science Foundation (Award DUE-0736786).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schussler, E.E., Bautista, N.U. (2012). Learning About Nature of Science in Undergraduate Biology Laboratories. In: Khine, M. (eds) Advances in Nature of Science Research. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2457-0_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2457-0_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-2456-3
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-2457-0
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)