Abstract
One key aspect of scientific literacy is to have a clear understanding of how scientists work. Understanding how scientists work, or scientific methodology, is an essential part of scientific literacy and the public understanding of science in general. Research indicates that a large majority of Americans do not understand how scientists work. Some argue that science textbooks are one source of this misunderstanding. Although it is impossible to attribute the public’s inaccurate views of scientific methodology to only textbooks, textbooks still serve as a resource for the standard science classroom. Several studies have looked at how science textbooks represent the nature of science and, more specifically, scientific methodology. However, the majority of this research has utilized quantitative methods for their analyses. In other words, much of this research tends to focus on whether, not how, textbooks present scientific methodology. To address this gap in the literature, this study developed a qualitative method to evaluate how textbooks present scientific methodology. In this chapter, I describe the methods used to develop an instrument to look at the quality of a textbook’s presentation of scientific methodology.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Abd-El-Khalick, F. S., Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (1998). The nature of science and instructional practice: Making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82, 417–436.
Abd-El-Khalick, F., Waters, M., & Le, A. P. (2008). Representations of nature of science in high school chemistry textbooks over the past four decades. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 835–855.
Alshamrani, S., & McComas, W. F. (2009, April). The context, accuracy and frequency of inclusion of key nature of science concepts in current secondary level physics textbooks. A paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Garden Grove, CA.
Altheide, D. L. (1996). Qualitative media analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford Press.
Bauer, H. (1994). Scientific literacy and the myth of the scientific method. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
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, 487–509.
Bell, R. L., Mulvey, B. K., & Maeng, J. (2012). Beyond understanding: Process skills as a context for nature of science instruction. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Advances in nature of science research: Concepts and methodologies (pp. 225–246). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Biggs, A., Hagins, W. C., Holliday, W. G., Kapicka, C. L., Lundgren, L., MacKenzie, A. H., et al. (2007). Glencoe biology. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies.
Binns, I. C. (2009). Representation of scientific methodology in secondary science textbooks. Doctoral dissertation. Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (Accession Order No. AAT 3400943).
Binns, I. C., & Bell, R. L. (2010, March). How secondary science textbooks present scientific methodology. A paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia, PA.
Blachowicz, J. (2009). How science textbooks treat scientific method: A philosopher’s perspective. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 60, 303–344.
Brito, A., Rodriguez, M. A., & Niaz, M. (2005). A reconstruction of development of the periodic table based on history and philosophy of science and its implications for general chemistry textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 84–111.
Bybee, R. W. (2004). Scientific inquiry and science teaching. In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science: Implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education (pp. 1–14). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
Chiappetta, E. L., & Fillman, D. A. (2007). Analysis of five high school biology textbooks used in the United States for inclusion of the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 29, 1847–1868.
Chiappetta, E. L., Fillman, D. A., & Sethna, G. H. (1991a). A method to quantify major themes of scientific literacy in science textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 713–725.
Chiappetta, E. L., Fillman, D. A., & Sethna, G. H. (1991b). Procedures for conducting content analysis of science textbooks. Houston, TX: University of Houston, Dept. of Curriculum and Instruction.
Chiappetta, E. L., Ganesh, T. G., Lee, Y. H., & Phillips, M. C. (2006, April). Examination of science textbook analysis research conducted on textbooks published over the past 100 years in the United States. A paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco.
Chiappetta, E. L., Sethna, G. H., & Fillman, D. A. (1993). Do middle school life science textbooks provide a balance of scientific literacy themes? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 787–797.
Decker, T., Summers, G., & Barrow, L. (2007). The treatment of geological time and the history of life on earth in high school biology textbooks. The American Biology Teacher, 69, 401–405.
DeSalle, R., & Heithaus, M. R. (2008). Holt biology. Orlando, FL: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Gericke, N. M., & Hagberg, M. (2010). Conceptual incoherence as a result of the use of multiple historical models in school textbooks. Research in Science Education, 40, 605–623.
Gibbs, A., & Lawson, A. E. (1992). The nature of scientific thinking as reflected by the work of biologists and by biology textbooks. The American Biology Teacher, 54, 137–152.
Guisasola, J., Almudi, J. M., & Furio, C. (2005). The nature of science and its implications for physics textbooks. Science Education, 14, 321–338.
Irez, S. (2009). Nature of science as depicted in Turkish biology textbooks. Science Education, 93, 422–447.
Kfishe, 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, 551–578.
Knain, E. (2001). Ideologies in school science textbooks. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 319–329.
Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
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: Implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education (pp. 301–317). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (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, 497–521.
Lumpe, A. T., & Beck, J. (1996). A profile of high school biology textbooks using scientific literacy recommendations. The American Biology Teacher, 58, 147–153.
Matkins, J. J., & Bell, R. L. (2007). Awakening the scientist inside: Global climate change and the nature of science in an elementary science methods course. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 137–163.
McComas, W. F. (1998). The principle elements of the nature of science: Dispelling the myths. In W. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science and science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 53–70). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
Mickey, K., Meaney, K., & Agostino, D. (2006). Print publishing for the school market 2007–2008. Stamford, CT: Simba Information.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Niaz, M. (1998). From cathode rays to alpha particles to quantum of action: A rational reconstruction of structure of the atom and its implications for chemistry textbooks. Science Education, 82, 527–552.
Niaz, M. (2000). A rational reconstruction of the kinetic molecular theory of gases based on history and philosophy of science and its implications for chemistry textbooks. Instructional Science, 28, 23–50.
Niaz, M. (2001a). How important are the laws of definite and multiple proportions in chemistry and teaching chemistry? – A history and philosophy of science perspective. Science Education, 10, 243–266.
Niaz, M. (2001b). A rational reconstruction of the origin of the covalent bond and its implications for general chemistry textbooks. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 623–641.
Niaz, M., Klassen, S., McMillan, B., & Metz, D. (2010). Reconstruction of the history of the photoelectric effect and its implications for general physics textbooks. Science Education, 94, 903–931.
Niaz, M., & Maza, A. (2011). Nature of science in general chemistry textbooks (Briefs in education). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
Phillips, M. C., & Chiappetta, E. L. (2007, April). Do middle school science textbooks present a balanced view of the nature of science? A paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA.
Reiff, R., Harwood, W. S., & Phillipson, T. (2002, January). A scientific method based upon research scientists’ conceptions of scientific inquiry. Paper presented at the annual national conference of the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science, Charlotte, NC.
Rodriguez, M. A., & Niaz, M. (2002). How in spite of rhetoric, history of chemistry has been ignored in presenting atomic structure in textbooks. Science Education, 11, 423–441.
Rodriguez, M. A., & Niaz, M. (2004). The oil drop experiment: An illustration of scientific research methodology and its implications for physics textbooks. Instructional Science, 32, 357–386.
Scharmann, L. C., Smith, M. U., James, M. C., & Jensen, M. (2005). Explicit reflective nature of science instruction: Evolution, intelligent design, and umbrellaology. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 16, 27–41.
Spiece, K. R., & Colosi, J. (2000). Redefining the “scientific method”. The American Biology Teacher, 62, 32–40.
Vesterinen, V.-M., Aksela, M., & Lavonen, J. (2012). Quantitative analysis of representations of nature of science in Nordic upper secondary school textbooks using framework of analysis based on philosophy of chemistry. Science & Education. doi:10.1007/s11191-011-9400-1. online first.
Weiss, I. R., Banilower, E. R., McMahon, K. C., & Smith, P. S. (2001). Report of the 2000 national survey of science and mathematics education. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research.
Weiss, I. R., Pasley, J. D., Smith, P. S., Banilower, E. R., & Heck, D. J. (2003). A study of K-12 mathematics and science education in the United States. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research.
Wilkinson, J. (1999). A quantitative analysis of physics textbooks for scientific literacy themes. Research in Science Education, 29, 385–399.
Yager, R. E. (1983). The importance of terminology in teaching k-12 science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 577–588.
Zitzewitz, P. W., Elliott, T. G., Haase, D. G., Harper, K. A., Herzog, M. R., Nelson, J. B., et al. (2009). Physics: Principles and problems. Columbus, OH: The McGraw-Hill Companies.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Binns, I.C. (2013). A Qualitative Method to Determine How Textbooks Portray Scientific Methodology. In: Khine, M. (eds) Critical Analysis of Science Textbooks. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4168-3_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4168-3_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-4167-6
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-4168-3
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)