Journal of Elementary Science Education

, Volume 3, Issue 1, pp 13–22 | Cite as

Understanding the nature of science and attitudes toward science and science teaching of preservice elementary teachers in three preparation sequences

  • Harold Harty
  • John V. Samuel
  • Hans O. Andersen


This study examined differences among three elementary school science preservice teacher preparation course sequences with respect to three variables: understanding of the nature of science; attitudes toward science; and attitudes toward science teaching. Also, this study sought to ascertain whether correlations were present among these variables within each of the three course sequences: (1) Science-Process-Content/Methods-Field Sequence; (2) Science Process-Methods Sequence; and (3) Methods Sequence. Significant differences were found among the groups of preservice teachers in the three course sequences in terms of an understanding of the nature of science. Teachers completing the Science Process-Methods Sequence and Methods Sequence groups possessed a significantly greater understanding of the nature of science than teachers in the Science Process-Content/Methods-Field Sequence group. No significant differences were found among the three groups with respect to either attitudes toward science or attitudes toward science teaching. No significant correlations were found between understanding the nature of science and attitudes toward science or between attitudes toward science teaching within each of the two groups. Significant correlations were found between attitudes toward science and attitudes toward science teaching for all three groups. Suggestions for future research and implications for science content/process integration and preservice teacher preparation programs have also been discussed.


Science Teaching Preservice Teacher Science Teacher Prospective Teacher Elementary School Teacher 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Andersen, H. O., Harty, H., & Samuel, J. V. (1986). Nature of science, 1969 and 1984: Perspective of preservice secondary science teachers.School Science and Mathematics, 86, 43–50.Google Scholar
  2. Carey, R. L., & Stauss, N. G. (1970). An analysis of experienced science teachers' understanding of the nature of science.School Science and Mathematics, 70, 366–368.Google Scholar
  3. Duschl, R. A. (1983). The elementary level science methods course: breeding ground of an apprehension toward science? A case study.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 745–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975).Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  5. Gabel, D., Rubba, P., & Franz, J. (1977). The effect of early teaching and training experience on physics achievement, attitude toward science and science teaching and process skill proficiency.Science Education, 61, 503–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kerlinger, F. N. (1958). Progressivism and traditionalism: Some basic factors of educational attitudes.Journal of Social Psychology, 48, 111–135.Google Scholar
  7. Kimball, M. E. (1967). Understanding the nature of science: A comparison of scientists and science teachers.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 5, 110–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lazarowitz, R., Barufaldi, J., & Huntsberger, P. (1978). Student teachers' characteristics and favorable attitudes towards inquiry.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 15, 559–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Moore, R. W. (1973). The development, field test, and validation of scales to assess teachers' attitudes toward teaching elementary school science.Science Education, 57, 271–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Pella, M. O., O'Hearn, G. T., & Gale, C. W. (1966). Referents to scientific literacy.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 4, 199–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Piper, M. K., & Hough, L. (1979). Attitudes and open-mindedness of undergraduate students enrolled in a science methods course and a freshman physics course.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 16, 193–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Piper, J. K., & Moore, K. D. (1977). The effect of a physics course for elementary teachers on attitudes toward science of preservice elementary teachers. In M. K. Piper & K. D. Moore (Eds.),Attitudes toward Sciences (pp. 29–33). Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University, ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics and Environmental Education.Google Scholar
  13. Rubba, P. A., & Andersen, H. O. (1978). Development of an instrument to assess secondary school students' understanding of the nature of scientific knowledge.Science Education, 62, 449–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Rubba, P. A., Horner, J. K., & Smith, J. M. (1981). A study of two misconceptions about the nature of science among junior high school students.School Sciences and Mathematics, 81, 221–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Schmidt, D. (1964). Test on understanding science: A comparison among several groups.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2, 80–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Shrigley, R. L. (1974). The attitude of pre-service elementary teachers toward science.School Science and Mathematics, 74, 243–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Shrigley, R. L. (1978). The persuasive communication model: A theoretical approach for attitude change in science education.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 15, 335–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sunal, D. W. (1980). Effect of field experience during elementary methods courses on preservice teacher behavior.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 17, 17–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Weaver, H. M., Hounshell, P. B., & Coble, C. B. (1979). Effects of science methods courses with and without field experiences on attitudes of preservice elementary teachers.Science Education, 63, 655–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Netherlands 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harold Harty
    • 1
  • John V. Samuel
    • 2
  • Hans O. Andersen
    • 3
  1. 1.Fort Valley State CollegeFort Valley
  2. 2.Indiana UniversityBloomington
  3. 3.Professor of Science Education at Indiana UniversityBloomington

Personalised recommendations