Advertisement

Journal of Science Education and Technology

, Volume 21, Issue 3, pp 353–369 | Cite as

Embedding Nature of Science in Teaching About Astronomy and Space

  • Khajornsak BuaraphanEmail author
Article

Abstract

Science teachers need an adequate understanding of nature of science (NOS) and the ability to embed NOS in their teaching. This collective case study aims to explore in-service science teachers’ conceptions of NOS and the embeddedness of NOS in their teaching about astronomy and space. Three science teachers participated in this study. All participants attended the NOS workshop based on an explicit-reflective approach. They were asked to respond to the Myths of Science Questionnaire on three different occasions, i.e., at the beginning and the end of the NOS workshop and a semester after the workshop. Classroom observation, interviews after teaching, and a collection of related documents were also employed to collect data. The data were analyzed using a constant comparative method. The results revealed two important assertions. First, science teachers’ conceptions of NOS are stable and resistant to change. However, an explicit-reflective approach employed in the NOS workshop, to some extent, promoted science teachers’ understanding and reasoning about NOS. Second, science teachers’ conceptions of NOS are not directly related to their classroom practices. With different degrees of NOS understanding, all participants taught NOS implicitly and missed most of the opportunities to address aspects of NOS embedded in the topics they taught. The implications of these findings are also discussed.

Keywords

Nature of science Pedagogical content knowledge Science teacher Astronomy and space Education reform 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by Kasetsart University Research and Development Institute (KURDI), Thailand. Any opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author.

References

  1. Abd-El-Khalick F, Akerson VL (2004) Learning as conceptual change: Factors mediating the development of preservice elementary teachers’ views of nature of science. Sci Educ 88:785–810CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abd-El-Khalick F, Akerson V (2009) The influence on metacognitive training on preservice elementary teachers’ conceptions of nature of science. Int J Sci Educ 16(1):2161–2184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Abd-El-Khalick F, BouJaoude S (1997) An exploratory study of the knowledge base for science teaching. J Res Sci Teach 34(7):673–699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Abd-El-Khalick F, Lederman NG (2000) Improving science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: a critical review of the literature. Int J Sci Educ 22:665–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Abd-El-Khalick F, Bell RL, Lederman NG (1998) The nature of science and instructional practice: making the unnatural natural. Sci Educ 82:417–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Akerson VL, Abd-El-Khalick F (2003) Teaching elements of nature of science: a yearlong case study of a fourth grade teacher. J Res Sci Teach 40(10):1025–1049CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Akerson VL, Abd-El-Khalick F, Lederman NG (2000) Influence of a reflective explicit activity-based approach on elementary teachers’ conceptions of nature of science. J Res Sci Teach 37(4):295–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Akerson VL, Hanson DL, Cullen TA (2007) The influence of guided inquiry and explicit instruction on K-6 teachers’ views of nature of science. J Sci Teacher Educ 18:751–772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Akerson VL, Cullen TA, Hanson DL (2009a) Fostering a community of practice through a professional development program to improve elementary teachers’ views of nature of science and teaching practice. J Res Sci Teach 46(10):1090–1113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Akerson VL, Townsend SJ, Donelly LA, Hanson DL, Tira P, White O (2009b) Scientific modeling for inquiring teacher network (SMIT’N): the influence on elementary teachers’ views of nature of science, inquiry, and modeling. J Sci Teacher Educ 20:21–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Akindehin F (1988) Effect of an instructional package on preservice science teachers’ understanding of nature of science and acquisition of science-related attitudes. Sci Educ 72:73–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993) Science for all Americans. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Bartholomew H, Osborne J, Ratcliffe M (2004) Teaching students “ideas-about-science”: five dimensions of effective practice. Sci Educ 88:655–682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Behnke FL (1961) Reactions of scientists and science teachers to statements bearing on certain aspects of science and science teaching. Sch Sci Math 61:193–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Billeh VY, Hassan OE (1975) Factors affecting teachers gain in understanding the nature of science. J Res Sci Teach 12:67–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Brickhouse NW (1990) Teachers’ beliefs about the nature of science and their relationship to classroom practice. J Teach Educ 41(3):53–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Brush SG (1989) History of science and science education. Interchange 20:60–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Buaraphan K (2009a) Pre-service and in-service science teachers’ responses and reasoning about the nature of science. Educ Res Rev 4(11):561–581Google Scholar
  19. Buaraphan K (2009b) Thai inservice science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science. J Sci Math Educ Southeast Asia 32(2):188–217Google Scholar
  20. Buaraphan K (2011) The promotion of science teachers' understanding about nature of scientific knowledge through explicit-reflective workshop. Int J Learn (in press)Google Scholar
  21. Cakiroglu J, Dogan N, Bilican K, Cavus S, Arslan O (2009) Influence of in-service teacher education program on science teachers’ views of nature of science. Int J Learn 16(10):597–605Google Scholar
  22. Carey LR, Strauss AN (1968) An analysis of the understanding of the nature of science by prospective secondary science teachers. Sci Educ 52:358–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Coll RK, Dahsah C, Faikhamta C (2010) The influence of educational context on science learning: a cross-national analysis of PISA. Res Sci Technol Educ 28(1):3–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Craven JA, Hand B, Prain V (2002) Assessing explicit and tacit conceptions of the nature of science among preservice elementary teachers. Int J Sci Educ 24(8):785–802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Creswell JW (2007) Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  26. Dogan N, Abd-El-Khalick F (2008) Turkish grade 10 students’ and science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: a national study. J Res Sci Teach 45(10):1083–1112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Driver R, Leach J, Miller A, Scott P (1996) Young people images of science. Open University Press, PennsylvaniaGoogle Scholar
  28. Fensham PJ (2009) The link between policy and practice in science education: the role of research. Sci Educ 93:1076–1095CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Glaser BG, Strauss AL (1967) The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. Aldine Publishing Company, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  30. Haidar AH (1999) Emirates pre-service and in-service teachers’ views about the nature of science. Int J Sci Educ 21(8):807–822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hanuscin DL, Lee MH, Akerson VL (2010). Elementary teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for teaching the nature of science. Sci Educ. doi: 10.1002/sce.20404
  32. Henze I, van Driel JH, Verloop N (2008) Development of experienced science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge of models and the solar system and the universe. Int J Sci Educ 10(13):1321–1342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Institute for the Promotion of Teaching Science and Technology (2002) National science curriculum standards. Institute for the Promotion of Teaching Science and Technology, BangkokGoogle Scholar
  34. Khishfe R, Lederman N (2007) Relationship between instructional context and views of nature of science. Int J Sci Educ 8(18):939–961CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. King B (1991) Beginning teachers’ knowledge of and attitudes toward history and philosophy of science. Sci Educ 75:135–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lederman NG (1992) Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: a review of the research. J Res Sci Teach 29(4):331–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lederman NG (1999) Teachers’ understanding of the nature of science and classroom practice: factors that facilitate or impede the relationship. J Res Sci Teach 36(8):916–929CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lederman N, Abd-El-Khalick F (1998) Avoiding de-natured science: activities that promote understanding of the nature of science. In: McComas WF (ed) The nature of science in science education: rationales and strategies. Kluwer, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  39. Lederman NG, Zeidler DL (1987) Science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: do they really influence teaching behavior? Sci Educ 71(5):721–734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lunn S (2002) ‘What we think we can safely say…’: primary teachers’ views of the nature of science. Br Educ Res J 28(5):649–672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Matthews MR (2007) Models in science and in science education: an introduction. Sci Educ 16:647–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. McComas WF (1998) The principal elements of the nature of science: dispelling the myths. In: McComas WF (ed) The nature of science in science education: rationales and strategies. Kluwer, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  43. McComas WF (2008) Seeking historical examples to illustrate key aspects of the nature of science. Sci Educ 17:249–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McComas WF, Clough MP, Almazroa H (1998) The role and character of the nature of science in science education. In: McComas WF (ed) The nature of science in science education: rationales and strategies. Kluwer, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  45. Mellado V, Bermejo ML, Blanco LJ, Ruiz C (2007) The classroom practice of a prospective secondary biology teacher and his conceptions of the nature of science and of teaching and learning science. Int J Sci Math Educ 6:37–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Miles MB, Huberman MA (1984) Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods. Sage, Newbury Park, CAGoogle Scholar
  47. Ministry of Education (1992) Primary Curriculum B.E. 2521 (Revision B.E. 2533). The Religious Affairs Publisher, BangkokGoogle Scholar
  48. Ministry of Education (2001) Basic Education Curriculum B.E. 2544 (2001). The Printing House of Express Transportation Organization of Thailand, BangkokGoogle Scholar
  49. National Research Council (1996) National science education standards. National Academy Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  50. Office of the National Education Commission (1999) The National Education Act B.E. 2542. Pimdeekarnpim, BangkokGoogle Scholar
  51. Ogunniyi MB (1982) An analysis of prospective science teacher’s understanding of the nature of science. J Res Sci Teach 19(1):25–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Posnanski TJ (2010) Developing understanding of the nature of science within a professional development program for inservice elementary teachers: project nature of elementary science teaching. J Sci Teacher Educ 21:589–621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Public Relation Department (2008). IPST cooperates with TRF and Chulalongkorn University for reforming astronomy education in Thailand. National News Bureau of ThailandGoogle Scholar
  54. Rampal A (1992) Images of science and scientists: a study of school teachers’ views of characteristics of scientists. Sci Educ 76(4):415–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rubba PA, Harkness WL (1993) Examination of preservice and in-service secondary science teachers’ beliefs about science–technology–society interactions. Sci Educ 77(4):407–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sarkar MA, Gomes JJ (2010) Science teachers’ conceptions of nature of science: the case of Bangladesh. Asia Pac Forum Sci Learn Teach 11(1):1–17Google Scholar
  57. Schwartz R, Lederman N (2002) “It’s the nature of the beast”: the influence of knowledge and intentions on learning and teaching nature of science. J Res Sci Teach 39(3):205–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Schwartz RS, Lederman NG, Crawford BA (2004) Developing views of nature of science in an authentic context: an explicit approach to bridging the gap between nature of science and scientific inquiry. Sci Educ 88:610–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Shulman LS (1986) Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Educ Res 15(2):4–14Google Scholar
  60. Smith MU, Scharmann LC (1999) Defining versus describing the nature of science: a pragmatic analysis for classroom teachers and science educators. Sci Educ 83:493–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Soydhurum P (2004) IPST in the pass year. IPST Mag 32(131):8–11Google Scholar
  62. Tairab HH (2001) How do pre-service and in-service science teachers view the nature of science and technology? Res Sci Technol Educ 19(2):235–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Taylor I, Barker M, Jones A (2003) Promoting mental model building in astronomy education. Int J Sci Educ 25(10):1205–1225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Trumbull DJ, Scarano G, Bonney R (2006) Relationships among two teachers’ practices and beliefs, conceptualizations of the nature of science, and their implementation of student independent inquiry projects. Int J Sci Educ 28(14):1717–1750CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Waters-Adams S (2006) The relationship between understanding of the nature of science and practice: the influence of teachers’ beliefs about education, teaching and learning. Int J Sci Educ 28(8):919–944CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Innovative LearningMahidol UniversityBangkokThailand

Personalised recommendations