Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Science Teachers’ Views on the Nature of Science and its Integration into Instruction

  • Article
  • Published:
Science & Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was twofold: first, to investigate science teachers’ views about the nature of science (NOS); and second, to examine science teachers’ views about their NOS integration into instruction. Reconceptualized family resemblance approach to nature of science (RFN) is used as a theoretical and analytical framework. The participants of this study included 13 in-service science teachers in Turkey, and the data were collected through semi-structured interviews. It is noticed that teachers used scientific practices and scientific methods interchangeably. Participants provided detailed explanations regarding the social-institutional system of science. Participants’ views and interpretations were compatible with the RFN framework, which can show that they were aware of the social aspect of science. Concerning the NOS integration into instructions, findings revealed that teachers who had spent more time on NOS tended to include or thought it is important to include NOS into science lessons. Based on the results, it is suggested that the RFN framework can be used as both an analytical and theoretical framework to investigate teachers’ understanding of NOS.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • AAAS. (1989). Science for all Americans. American Association for the Advancement of Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., & BouJaoude, S. (1997). An exploratory study of the knowledge base for science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(7), 673–699.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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, 417–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aikenhead, G. S. (2007). Expanding the research agenda for scientific literacy. In C. Linder et al. (Eds.), Promoting scientific literacy: Science education research in transaction. Uppsala: Geotryckeriet.

  • Akerson, V., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10119

  • Akerson, V. L., & Hanuscin, D. L. (2007). Teaching nature of science through inquiry: Results of a 3-year professional development program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(5), 653–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akerson, V. L., Pongsanon, K., Park, R., Meredith, A., Carter, I., & Galindo, E. (2017). Exploring the use of lesson study to develop elementary preservice teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for teaching nature of science. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(2), 293–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akgün, S. (2018). University students’ understanding of the nature of science (Unpublished Masters thesis). Bogazici University.

  • Aksöz, B. (2019). The effects of pre and in-service training on teachers’ understanding of the nature of science (Unpublished Masters thesis). Bogazici University.

  • Allchin, D. (2011). Evaluating knowledge of the nature of (whole) science. Science Education, 95(3), 518–542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aslan, O. (2009). Fen ve teknoloji öğretmenlerinin bilimin doğası hakkındaki görüşleri ve bu görüşlerin sınıf uygulamalarına yansımaları (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). Gazi Üniversitesi.

  • Aslan, O., & Taşar, M. F. (2013). How do science teachers view and teach the nature of science? A classroom investigation. Eğitim ve Bilim, 38(167), 65–80.

  • Aslan, O., Yalçın, N., & Taşar, M. F. (2009). Fen ve teknoloji öğretmenlerinin bilimin doğası hakkındaki görüşleri. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty, 10(3), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Understandings of the nature of science and decision making on science and technology based issues. Science Education, 87(3), 352–377. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandon, R. (1994). Theory and experiment in evolutionary biology. Synthese, 99(1), 59–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01064530

  • Brickhouse, N. (1989). The teaching of the philosophy of science in secondary classrooms: Case studies of teachers’ personal theories. International Journal of Science Education, 11(4), 437–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069890110408

  • Chang, Y. H., Chang, C. Y., & Tseng, Y.-H. (2010). Trends of science education research: An automatic content analysis. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19(4), 315–331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-009-9202-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chun, S. (2000). An examination of relationship among science teaching actions, beliefs, and knowledge of the nature of science (Doctoral dissertation). Georgia University.

  • Çilekrenkli, A. (2019). Teaching reconceptualised family resemblance approach to nature of science in lower secondary classrooms (Unpublished Masters thesis). Bogazici University.

  • Clough, M. P., & Olson, J. K. (2012). Impact of a nature of science and science education course on teachers’ nature of science classroom practices. In M. Khine (Eds.), Advances in nature of science research (pp. 247–266). Springer.

  • Cofré, H., Núñez, P., Santibáñez, D., Pavez, J. M., Valencia, M., & Vergara, C. (2019). A critical review of students’ and teachers’ understandings of nature of science. Science & Education, 28, 205–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00051-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demirdogen, B., Hanuscin, D. L., Uzuntiryaki-Kondakci, E., & Koseoglu, F. (2015). Development and nature of preservice chemistry teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for nature of science. Research in Science Education, 46, 575–612. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-015-9472-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dogan, N. (2011). What went wrong? Literature students are more informed about the nature of science than science students. Eğitim Ve Bilim, 36(159), 220–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Driver, R., Leach, J., Miller, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. PA, Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duschl, R. A. (1994). Research on the history and philosophy of science. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 443–465). Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duschl, R. A., & Wright, E. (1989). A case study of high school teachers’ decision making models for planning and teaching science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26(6), 467–501. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660260602

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erduran, S., & Dagher, Z. R. (2014). Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education: Scientific knowledge, practices and other family categories. Springer.

  • Erduran, S., Mugaloglu, E., Kaya, E., Saribas, D., Ceyhan, G., & Dagher, Z. (2016). Learning to teach scientific practices: A professional development resource. University of Limerick, Ireland.

  • Erduran, S., Kaya, E., Cilekrenkli, A., Akgün, S., & Aksöz, B. (2021). Perceptions of nature of science emerging in group discussions: A comparative account of pre-service teachers from Turkey and England. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 19, 1375–1396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-020-10110-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, J. J. (1991). Prospective and practicing secondary school science teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about the philosophy of science. Science Education, 75, 121–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guerra-Ramos, M. T. (2012). Teachers’ ideas about the nature of science: A critical analysis of research approaches and their contribution to pedagogical practice. Science & Education, 21(5), 631–655. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-011-9395-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hacieminoglu, E. (2014). In-service teachers’ perceptions regarding their practices related to integrating nature of science: Case study. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 1268–1273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D. (1999). Going beyond cultural pluralism: Science education for sociopolitical action. Science Education, 83(6), 775–796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollon, R. E., Roth, K. J., & Anderson, Ch. W. (1991). Science teachers’ conceptions of teaching and learning. Advances in Research on Teaching, 2, 145–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ioannidou, O., & Erduran, S. (2021). Beyond hypothesis testing: Investigating the diversity of scientific methods in science teachers’ understanding. Science & Education, 30(2), 345–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irez, S. (2009). Nature of science as depicted in Turkish biology textbooks. Science Education, 93, 422–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2011). A family resemblance approach to the nature of science for science education. Science & Education, 20(7–8), 591–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irzık, G., & Nola, R. (2014). New directions for nature of science research. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (pp. 999–1021). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jansen, H. (2010). The logic of qualitative survey research and its position in the field of social research methods. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 11(2).

  • Kaya, S. (2019). Enhancing pre-service science teachers’ understanding of how science works in society. The role of economics and entrepreneurship in nature of science. (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). University of Limerick.

  • Kaya, E., & Erduran, S. (2016). From FRA to RFN, or how the family resemblance approach can be transformed for science curriculum analysis on nature of science. Science & Education, 25(9–10), 1115–1133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaya, E., Erduran, S., Aksoz, B., & Akgun, S. (2019). Reconceptualised family resemblance approach to nature of science in pre-service science teacher education. International Journal of Science Education, 41(1), 21–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, B. B. (1991). Beginning teachers’ knowledge of and attitudes toward history and philosophy of science. Science Education, 75(1), 135–141. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730750112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klopfer, L. E., & Cooley, W. W. (1963). The history of science cases for high schools in the development of student understanding of science and scientists. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1(1), 33–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10036

  • Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leden, L., Hansson, L., Redfors, A., & Ideland, M. (2015). Teachers’ ways of talking about nature of science and its teaching. Science & Education, 24(9–10), 1141–1172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-015-9782-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 331–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G. (1999). Teachers’ understanding of the nature of science and classroom practice: Factors that facilitate or impede a relationship. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 916–929.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G. (2004). Syntax of nature of science within inquiry and science instruction. In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific Inquiry and Nature of Science Kluwer Academic Publishers  pp. 301–317.

  • Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education Erlbaum.  pp. 831–879

  • Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire (VNOS): Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, M. (1998). In defense of modest goals when teaching about the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(2), 161–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, M. (2014). International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching. Springer, Netherlands.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • McComas, W., & Olson, J. (1998). The nature of science in international science education standards documents. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education. Science & Technology Education Library (pp. 41–52). Springer.

  • McComas, W. F., Clough, M. P., & Almazroa, H. (1998). The role and character of the nature of science in science education. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 3–39). Kluwer Academic.

  • McComas, W.F., Clough, M.P., & Nouri, N. (2020). Nature of science and classroom practice: A review of the literature with implications for effective nos instruction. In: McComas, W. (eds) Nature of Science in Science Instruction. Science: Philosophy, History and Education 67–111. Springer.

  • Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mıhladız, G., & Doğan, A. (2013). Science teachers’ views about NOS and the place of NOS in science teaching. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 3476–3483.

  • Milli Egitim Bakanligi. (2013). İlkogretim Fen Bilimleri Dersi (3., 4., 5., 6., 7. ve 8. Siniflar) Ogretim Programi. Ankara.

  • National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Teachers Association. (2000). NSTA position statement: The nature of science. Arlington.

  • Niaz, M. (2009). Progressive transitions in chemistry teachers’ understanding of nature of science based on historical controversies. Science & Education, 18(1), 43–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okan, B., & Kaya, E. (2022). Exploring the inclusion of nature of science in Turkish middle school science textbooks. Science & Education.

  • Ozden, M., & Cavlazoglu, B. (2015). Nature of science in Turkish elementary science education curriculum: An investigation of 2005 and 2013 curricula. Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 3, 40–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Sage.

  • Sadler, T., & Zeidler, D. (2005). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 112–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saldaña, J. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, R. S., & Lederman, N. G. (2002). “It’s the nature of the beast”: The influence of knowledge and intentions on learning and teaching nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(3), 205–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. U., Lederman, N. G., Bell, R. L., McComas, W. F., & Clough, M. P. (1997). How great is the disagreement about the nature of science: A response to Alters. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(10), 1101–1103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vazquez-Alonso, A., Garcia-Carmona, A., Manassero-Mas, M. A., & Bennassar-Roig, A. (2012). Science teachers’ thinking about the nature of science: A new methodological approach to its assessment. Research in Science Education, 43, 781–808.

  • Wahbeh, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2014). Revisiting the translation of nature of science understandings into instructional practice: Teachers’ nature of science pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 36(3), 425–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein, L. (1958). The blue and brown books. Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This article is part of a master thesis submitted to Middle East Technical University.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey

    Zeynep Merve Demirel, Semra Sungur & Jale Çakıroğlu

Authors
  1. Zeynep Merve Demirel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Semra Sungur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jale Çakıroğlu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zeynep Merve Demirel.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1. Codes on teachers’ views about the definition of the NOS

Aspects

Child-code

Explanation of the code

Aims and Values

Serving to humanity

Meeting the needs of society, contributing to public welfare, and to the development of economy and technology

 

Produce knowledge*

Producing knowledge to pursue the unknown, with the aim of sharing it with people

 

Value-free and ethics

Science should be free-from all values and boundaries or science should be conducted under certain values and moral issues including rights of the people and animals

 

Honesty

Scientists being honest about the data and results they provide

 

Objective, clarity, and free from bias

Characteristics of scientific claims that scientists present which are independent from particular groups biases

 

Other

The role of aims and values in the scientific process. Doing activities that encouraging students to engage in discussions related to scientific aims and values

Methods and methodological rules

Steps of the scientific method *

  • Stating a problem

  • Forming hypothesis

  • Doing research

  • Data collection

  • Testing

  • Experimentation and observation

The universal steps scientists follow during scientific studies

 

Hypothesis

The role of forming hypothesis in scientific studies

 

Domain-specific methods  • Historical evidence  • Observational evidence

Different methods used in different branches of science

 

Methodological rules;

 
 

  Controlled experiments

Making sure to set up the same conditions and controlling the variables to minimize the occurrence of possible errors

 

  Considering different opinions

Recognizing different opinions during the research

 

  Ethical considerations

Certain values that include concerning the rights of the subjects

Scientific Practices

Communication

Engaging arguments and discourse related to findings

 

Creative thinking*

Thinking differently, developing new solutions to problems

 

Critical thinking*

Ability to question, analyze, make informed judgments and decisions

 

Observation

A scientific practice of gathering data using all senses through attentive watching, noticing, or making inference from people or objects

 

Experimentation

A scientific practice of conducting investigations carried out through testing, manipulating variables to produce and collect reliable data

Scientific Knowledge

Testable*

Information that is gathered through sets of scientific methods

 

Universally acceptable*

It is believed and accepted by everyone without no disagreement

 

Tentative *

Changes in scientific knowledge with new evidence

 

Trustworthy*

Reliable knowledge that has been justified by various methods

 

Consistency*

Acquiring the same results when the study is repeated in different times and places

 

Laws

 
 

  as proved theories

Theories become laws when enough evidence is collected

 

  as an observed phenomenon

A form of scientific knowledge that describes the relationships among the observed phenomena in the natural world

 

Theories

 
 

  as proved hypotheses

A hypothesis becomes theories when they are proved

 

  as unconfirmed prediction

Theories are predictions that have not reached certainty

 

  as explanationsModels 

A form of scientific knowledge that explains how natural phenomena work

 

  as visualization

A form of scientific knowledge that is a representation of the system of ideas

Social-Institutional system of science

Social and cultural context

The effect of the social and cultural context of societies on scientific processes

 

Ethos

Attitudes that scientists are expected to display during their scientific activities

 

Dissemination of scientific knowledge

Sharing and publishing the findings of scientific studies through various events

 

Social organizations

Institutions where scientists work such as universities, research centers

 

Political powers

Effect of politicians and ideology of governments on scientific processes

 

Financial system

The role of economic resources and funding in scientific studies

Appendix 2. Codes on teachers’ views on NOS integration into their instruction

Aspects

Child-code

Explanation of the code

Aims and Values

Lack of student interest

Would not integrate because students would not be interested in this side of science

 

Difficult to teach

It is both difficult to teach for teachers and learn for students, especially in middle school

 

Examples from the history of science

Incorporating the history of science into the instructional process, such as providing historical information about the origins and the development of the scientific studies

 

Daily life examples

Mentioning the controversial recent events in the country and the world

 

Activities involving consideration of aims and values

Doing activities that encourage students to engage in discussions related to scientific aims and values

Methods and methodological rules

Complicated

It is hard for the student to understand because it is complicated and abstract

 

Insufficient laboratory conditions

Cannot integrate experimental methods because the laboratory conditions are insufficient

 

Limited time

The number of science lessons is not enough to allocate time to elaborate the aspect

 

High curricular load

Primary concerns about covering the high number of objectives in the curriculum limits teachers instruction

Scientific Practices

Necessary

Considers necessary for students to learn because it would promote students to gain self-confidence and make familiarize with the scientific procedures

 

Explicit integration

Directs students' attention to the practices and their roles in the process

 

Implicit integration

Teachers make demonstrations or ask students to perform certain practices such as observation, experimentation; however, they do not deliberately give details and make explanations overtly

 

Insufficient resources

Due to limited conditions in the schools cannot practice scientific practices such as experiments

Scientific Knowledge

Inadequate understanding

Teachers do not hold adequate understanding about the characteristics and the forms of scientific knowledge to teach confidently

 

Hard to teach

The concepts are compelling for teachers to teach

 

Emphasis on models

Compared to laws and theories, emphasis is mostly given to the representation of the scientific models in the lessons

 

Inadequate guidance in textbooks

The given content is not clear enough for teachers on how to include and relate to the development of scientific knowledge in their instruction

Social-Institutional system of science

Not useful

It is not useful for students to learn this aspect because it is not fun and would not attract students' attention

 

Necessary

Considered necessary for students to learn this concept because it would raise students' awareness related to science's different aspect

 

No curricular emphasis

Do not integrate because there are no objectives in the curriculum

 

Science projects

Teachers include this aspect with having students to involve in science projects

Appendix 3. Semi-structured interview questions

Interview Questions

The aim of this study to get your views about science education. There are no right or wrong answers. Your identity will not be revealed in any way, and your answers will be used for research purposes only. Therefore, I request you to answer the questions sincerely. If you allow me, I would like to record the conversation.

  1. 1.

    How old are you?

  2. 2.

    How many years have you been teaching?

  3. 3.

    What grade levels do you teach?

  4. 4.

    Which program did you graduate from? What is the latest degree you have? (master’s/doctorate)

  5. 5.

    Did you receive any lesson/course about the nature of science, history of science or philosophy of science?

    When did you receive?

    Can you provide any details about the content of the lesson/course?

  6. 6.

    Have you read any book related to the nature of science, history of science or philosophy of science?

    Can you give any details about the content?

  7. 7.

    What do you think of when I say aims of science?

  8. 8.

    What do you think of when I say values of science?

  9. 9.

    What are the roles of aims and values in science?

  10. 10.

    Do you think aims and values of science should be taught to middle school students?

    How would students benefit from learning aims and values of science? Or would they? Please explain

  11. 11.

    How aims and values of science can be integrated in science lessons?

    Do you think you make connection to aims and values of science in your lessons? If yes can you give examples?

  12. 12.

    .What do you think of when I say scientific methods?

  13. 13.

    Do you think data collection methods scientists use differ? How?

    In non-experimental methods how scientists collect and verify their data?

  14. 14.

    What should scientists pay attention to minimize the errors that would occur?

  15. 15.

    Do you think scientific methods should be taught to middle school students?

    How would students benefit from learning aims and values of science? Or would they? Please explain

  16. 16.

    How scientific methods can be integrated in science lessons?

    Do you think you make connection to scientific methods in your lessons? If yes, can you give examples?

  17. 17.

    What do you think of when I say scientific practices? If you are not familiar with the term what do you think of science process skills?

    Do you think are there common/different practices used in all branches of science? what are they?

  18. 18.

    Do you think scientific practices should be taught to middle school students?

    How would students benefit from learning scientific practices? Or would they? Please explain

  19. 19.

    How scientific practices can be integrated in science lessons?

    Do you think you make connection to scientific practices in your lessons? If yes, can you give examples?

  20. 20.

    What do you think of when I say scientific knowledge? What makes knowledge scientific?

  21. 21.

    What are the characteristics of scientific knowledge?

  22. 22.

    What are the types of scientific knowledge?

    What are the characteristics of scientific laws? Are there any laws that have changed or lost their validity? If so, can you explain what would cause this?

    What are the characteristics of scientific theories? Are there any theories that have changed or lost their validity? If so, can you explain what would cause this?

    What are the characteristics of scientific models? In what purpose scientific models are used?

  23. 23.

    Do you think characteristics of scientific knowledge and the types of scientific knowledge should be taught to middle school students?

    How would students benefit from learning scientific knowledge? Or would they? Please explain

  24. 24.

    How the characteristics and the types of scientific knowledge can be integrated in science lessons?

    Do you think you make connection to the different types of scientific knowledge practices in your lessons? If yes, can you give examples?

  25. 25.

    What do you think of when I say social-institutional system of science?

    What kind of professional activities do scientists do? Could you give some examples?

    Do you think is there a relationship between science and political structure of the authority? What kind of relationship do you think exist? How is science affected from this ?

    Do you think is there a relationship between science and financial systems?

    What do you think how scientists share their research?

    What do you think how scientists should behave with their colleagues and during their scientific activities?

  26. 26.

    Do you think social-institutional system of science should be taught to middle school students?

    How would students benefit from learning social-institutional system of science? Or would they? Please explain

  27. 27.

    How social-institutional system of science can be integrated in science lessons?

    Do you think you make connection to the social-institutional system of science in your lessons? If yes, can you give examples?

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Demirel, Z.M., Sungur, S. & Çakıroğlu, J. Science Teachers’ Views on the Nature of Science and its Integration into Instruction. Sci & Educ 32, 1401–1433 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00409-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00409-0

Search

Navigation