Advertisement

Of Course Scientists Haven’t Seen Dinosaurs on the Beach: Turkish Kindergartners’ Developing Understanding of the Nature of Science Through Explicit–Reflective Instruction

  • Ümran Alan
  • Serap Erdoğan
Article

Abstract

Although the importance of nature of science (NOS) instruction for learners as young as kindergartners is emphasised in a great number of documents and studies, very little research has been conducted in early childhood contexts. Thus, researchers are still not able to see a comprehensive picture of young children’s understandings of NOS. The purpose of this qualitative study is to investigate kindergartners’ developmental ability to comprehend tenets of NOS. Using an explicit–reflective approach and activities designed to develop their understandings of NOS, we instructed eight kindergartners for 10 days over the course of a month to document changes in their thinking. To this end, they were interviewed individually using Young Children’s Views of Science before and after instruction. The results indicate that generally, the kindergartners had an inadequate understanding of NOS before instruction but had developed it by the end of instruction. Each child’s understanding of the individual aspects of NOS developed to different degrees, creative NOS improving most substantially. This study corroborates that kindergartners are not developmentally constrained to develop informed NOS understandings. On the contrary, they are able to develop an informed understanding of NOS that can be improved by the implementation of explicit–reflective instruction.

Keywords

Early childhood education Nature of science Explicit–reflective instruction 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by Anadolu University Scientific Research Projects Commission under the Grant No. 1304E071.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 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(2), 417–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 665–701.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690050044044.
  3. 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.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690902717283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 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, 537–549.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9312-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Akerson, V. L., Buzzelli, C. A., & Donnelly, L. A. (2008). Early childhood teachers’ views of nature of science: The influence of intellectual levels, cultural values, and explicit reflective teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(6), 748–770.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Akerson, V. L., Buzzelli, C. A., & Donnelly, L. A. (2010). On the nature of teaching nature of science: Preservice early childhood teachers’ instruction in preschool and elementary settings. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(2), 213–233.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20323.Google Scholar
  7. Akerson, V. L., & Volrich, M. L. (2006). Teaching nature of science explicitly in a first-grade internship setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 377–394.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Project 2061: Science for all Americans. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  9. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1990). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bell, R. L., & St. Clair, T. L. S. (2015). Too little, too late: Addressing nature of science in early childhood education. In K. Cabe Trundle, M. Saçkes (Eds.), Research in early childhood science education (pp. 125–141). Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods. Boston, MA: Pearson.Google Scholar
  12. Çakıcı, Y., & Bayır, 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Doğan, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2008). Turkish grade 10 students’ and science teachers’ conceptions of nature of science: A national study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(10), 1083–1112.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Doğan, N., & Özcan, M. B. (2010). Tarihsel yaklaşımın 7.sınıf öğrencilerinin bilimin doğası hakkındaki görüşlerinin geliştirilmesine etkisi. [Influence of historical perspective approach on 7th grade students’ views about nature of science] Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(4), 187–208. Retrieved from http://dergipark.ulakbim.gov.tr/aeukefd/article/view/5000086411/5000080365.
  15. Erdogan, R., Cakiroglu, J., & Tekkaya, C. (2006). Investigating Turkish Pre-service science teachers’ views of the nature of science. In C. V. Sunal & K. Mutua (Eds.), Research on education in Africa, The Caribbean and the Middle East (pp. 273–285). Greenwich: Information Age Publishing Inc.Google Scholar
  16. Jenkins, S., & Page, R. (2009). What do you do with a tail like this? Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.Google Scholar
  17. Kaya, S. (2012). An examination of elementary and early childhood pre-service teachers’ nature of science views. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 581–585.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 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.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10036.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Khishfe, R., & Lederman, N. G. (2006). Teaching nature of science within a controversial topic: Integrated versus non-integrated. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 395–418.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Klopfer, L. (1969). The teaching of science and the history of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6, 87–95.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660060116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Küçük, M. (2006). Bilimin doğasını ilköğretim 7. sınıf öğrencilerine öğretmeye yönelik bir çalışma [A study toward teaching the nature of science for seventh grade primary students] (Doctoral dissertation). Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon. Retrieved from https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezSorguSonucYeni.jsp.
  22. Lederman, J. S., & Lederman, N. G. (2010). Development of a valid and reliable protocol for the assessment of early childhood students’ conceptions of nature of science and scientific inquiry. In M. F. Taşar & G. Çakmakçı (Eds.), Contemporary science education research: International perspectives (pp. 227–236). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.Google Scholar
  23. Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions about the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 331–359.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660290404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lederman, N. G., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (1998). Avoiding denatured science: Activities that promote understandings of the nature of science. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 83–126). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  25. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  26. Metz, K. E. (1995). Reassesment of developmental constraints on children’s science instruction. Review of Educational Research, 65(2), 93–127.  https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543065002093.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Metz, K. E. (2004). Children’s understanding of scientific inquiry: Their conceptualization of uncertainty in investigations of their own design. Cognition and Instruction, 22(2), 219–290.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci2202_3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Metz, K. E. (2011). Young children can be sophisticated scientists. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(8), 68–71.  https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171109200815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [Ministry of National Education]. (1994). Anasınıfı programı [Kindergarten education program]. İstanbul: Milli Eğitim Basımevi.Google Scholar
  30. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [Ministry of National Education]. (2002). 36–72 aylık çocuklar için okul öncesi eğitim programı [Preschool education program for 36–72 month children]. İstanbul: Ya-Pa Yayınları.Google Scholar
  31. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [Ministry of National Education]. (2005). İlköğretim fen ve teknoloji dersi öğretim programı [Elementary science and technology education program]. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Yayınları.Google Scholar
  32. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [Ministry of National Education]. (2006). 36–72 aylık çocuklar için okul öncesi eğitim programı [Preschool education program for 36–72 month children]. İstanbul: Morpa.Google Scholar
  33. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [Ministry of National Education]. (2013). İlköğretim kurumları fen bilimleri dersi öğretim programı [Elementary school science education program]. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Yayınları.Google Scholar
  34. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [Ministry of National Education]. (2013). Okul öncesi eğitim programı. [Preschool education program]. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı.Google Scholar
  35. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [Ministry of National Education]. (2017). Fen bilimleri dersi öğretim programı [Elementary science education program]. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Yayınları.Google Scholar
  36. Ministry of National Education (2016). National education statistics: Formal education 2015/’16. Retrieved from http://sgb.meb.gov.tr/www/resmiistatistikler/icerik/64.
  37. National Association of Education of Young Children, (2005). NAEYC Early Childhood Program Standards. Retrieved from http://www.naeyc.org/positionstatements.
  38. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.Google Scholar
  39. National Science Teachers Association. (2000). NSTA position statement: The nature of science. Retrieved from http://www.nsta.org/about/positions/natureofscience.aspx .
  40. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States, Appendix HUnderstanding the scientific enterprise: The nature of science in the Next Generation Science Standards. Retrieved from http://www.nextgenscience.org.
  41. Quigley, C., Pongsanon, K., & Akerson, V. L. (2011). If we teach them, they can learn: Young student’s views of nature of science during an informal science education program. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22, 129–149.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-010-9201-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Türkmen, L., & Yalçın, M. (2001). Bilimin doğası ve eğitimdeki önemi [Nature of science and its importance in education]. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 3(1), 189–195. Retrieved from http://www.sbd.aku.edu.tr/III1/16.pdf.
  43. Walls, L. (2009). A critical hermeneutic study: Third grade elementary African American studentsviews of the nature of science (Doctoral dissertation). Purdue University, Indiana.Google Scholar
  44. Walls, L. (2016). Awakening a dialogue: A critical race theory analysis of US nature of science research from 1967 to 2013. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(10), 1546–1570.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Early Childhood Education, College of EducationAnadolu UniversityEskisehirTurkey

Personalised recommendations