Efforts to assess students' and teachers' understandings of nature of science have extended for over 50 years. During this time, numerous instruments have been developed that span the full range of assessments from the traditional to open-ended assessments with interviews. As one might expect, the development, use, and interpretation of these assessments have paralleled the scholarship on students’ and teachers’ understandings of nature of science. Consequently, such assessments have evidenced the same challenges and obstacles seen in the general research literature. This chapter will provide a rationale for the importance of teaching, and assessing, nature of science as well as a discussion of the construct. A comprehensive review and a critical analysis of the various assessments are also provided. Finally, an in-depth discussion of the contemporary issues regarding nature of science and its assessment is provided along with cautions regarding the future direction of nature of science assessment.
- Scientific Knowledge
- Scientific Theory
- Critical Incident
- Science Attitude
- Next Generation Science Standard
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2005). Developing deeper understandings of nature of science: The impact of a philosophy of science course on preservice teachers’ views and instructional planning. International Journal of Science Education, 27 (1), 15–42.
Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2012). Examining the sources for our understandings about science: Enduring conflations and critical issues in research on nature of science in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 34(3), 353–374.
Abd-El-Khalick, F., Belarmino, J., & Summers, R. (2012). Development and validation of a rubric to score the views of nature of science (VNOS) questionnaire. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), Indianapolis, IN.
Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N.G. (2000). The influence of history of science courses on students’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(10), 1057–1095.
Aikenhead, G. (1973). The measurement of high school students’ knowledge about science and scientists. Science Education, 57(4), 539–549.
Aikenhead, G., & Ryan, A. (1992). The development of a new instrument: “Views on science-technology-society” (VOSTS). Science Education, 76, 477–491.
Aikenhead, G., Ryan, A.G., & Fleming, R.W. (1987). High school graduates beliefs about science-technology-society: Methods and issues in monitoring student views. Science Education, 71, 145–161.
Akerson, V.L., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N.G. (2000). Influence of a reflective activity-based approach on elementary teachers’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37 (4), 295–317.
Allchin, D. (2011). Evaluating knowledge of the nature of (whole) science. Science Education, 95(3), 518–542.
Allchin, D. (2012). Toward clarity on Whole Science and KNOWS. Science Education, 96(4), 693–700.
Allen, H. Jr. (1959). Attitudes of certain high school seniors toward science and scientific careers. New York: Teachers College Press.
Alters, B.J. (1997). Whose nature of science? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(1), 39–55.
American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS]. (1990). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS]. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bell, R.L., Lederman, N.G. (2003). Understandings of the nature of science and decision making in science and technology based issues. Science Education, 87(3), 352–377.
Billeh, V. Y., & Hasan, O. E. (1975). Factors influencing teachers’ gain in understanding the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 12(3), 209–219.
Biological Sciences Curriculum Study [BSCS]. (1962). Processes of science test. New York: The Psychological Corporation.
Bronowski, J. (1956). Science and Human Values. New York: Harper & Row.
Center of Unified Science Education. (1974). The dimensions of scientific literacy. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University.
Central Association of Science and Mathematics Teachers (1907). A consideration of the principles that should determine the courses in biology in the secondary schools. School Science and Mathematics, 7, 241–247.
Chalmers, A. F. (1982). What is this thing called science? (2nd ed.). Queensland, Australia: University of Queensland Press.
Conant, J.B. (1951). On understanding science. New York: New American Library.
Cooley, W. W., & Klopfer, L. E. (1961). Test on understanding science. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Cotham, J., & Smith, E. (1981). Development and validation of the conceptions of scientific theories test. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 18(5), 387–396.
Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young peoples’ images of science. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
Duschl, R. A., & Grandy, R. (2012). Two Views About Explicitly Teaching Nature of Science. Science & Education, DOI 10.1007/s11191-012-9539-4
Elby, A., & Hammer, D. (2001). On the substance of a sophisticated epistemology. Science Education, 85 (5), 554–567.
Feyerabend, D. (1975). Against method. London: Verso Publishing.
Fraser, B. J. (1978). Development of a test of science-related attitudes. Science Education, 62, 509–515.
Fraser, B. J. (1980). Development and validation of a test of enquiry skills, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 17, 7–16.
Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2011). A family resemblance approach to the nature of science for science education. Science & Education, 20(7–8), 591–607.
Giere, R. N. (1988). Explaining science: A cognitive approach. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Gould, S. J., & Eldridge, N. (1977). Punctuated equilibria: The tempo and model of evolution reconsidered. Paleobiology, 3, 115–151
Hillis, S. R. (1975). The development of an instrument to determine student views of the tentativeness of science. In Research and Curriculum Development in Science Education: Science Teacher Behavior and Student Affective and Cognitive Learning (Vol. 3), Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Hrdy, S. B. (1986). Empathy, polyandry, and the myth of the coy female. In R. Bleier (Ed.), Feminist approaches to science (pp. 119–146). Perganon Publishers.
Hukins, A. (1963). A factorial investigation of measures of achievement of objectives in science teaching. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Alberta, Edmonton.
Hungerford, H. & Walding, H. (1974). The modification of elementary methods students’ concepts concerning science and scientists. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Science Teachers Association.
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.
Kimball, M. E. (1967–68). Understanding the nature of science: A comparison of scientists and science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 5, 110–120.
Klopfer, L. E., & Watson, F. G. (1957). Historical materials and high school science teaching. The Science Teacher, 24(6), 264–293.
Korth, W. (1969). Test every senior project: Understanding the social aspects of science. Paper presented at the 42nd Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching.
Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lakatos, I. (1970). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programs. In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Laudan, L. (1977). Progress and its problems. Berkeley: University of California Press.
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.
Lederman, N.G. (1998). The state of science education: Subject matter without context. Electronic Journal of Science Education [On-Line], 3(2), December. Available: http://unr.edu/homepage/jcannon/ejse/ejse.html
Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. In Abell, S.K. and N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Lederman, N., Abd-el-Khalick, F., Bell, R.L., & Schwartz, R.S. (2002). Views of Nature of Science Questionnaire: Towards valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 497–521.
Lederman, N.G., & Niess, M.L. (1997). The nature of science: Naturally? School Science and Mathematics, 97(1), 1–2.
Lederman, N. G., & O’Malley, M. (1990). Students’ perceptions of tentativeness in science: Development, use, and sources of change. Science Education, 74, 225–239.
Lederman, N. G., Wade, P. D., & Bell, R. L. (1998). Assessing understanding of the nature of science: A historical perspective. In W. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science and science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 331–350). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Liang, L.L., Chen, S., Chen, X., Kaya, O.N., Adams, A.D., Macklin, M., & Ebenezer, J. (2006). Student understanding of science and scientific inquiry: revision and further validation of an assessment instrument. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), San Francisco, CA.
Lovejoy, C.O. (1981). The origin of man. Science, 211, 341–350.
Matthews, M.R. (2012). Changing the focus: From nature of science (NOS) to features of science (FOS). In M.S. Khine (Ed.), Advances in nature of science research: Concepts and methodologies. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
Mead, M., & Métraux, R. (1957). Image of the Scientist among High-School Students. Science, 126, 384–390.
Meichtry, Y. J. (1992). Influencing student understanding of the nature of science: Data from a case of curriculum development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 389–407.
Moore, R., & Sutman, F. (1970). The development, field test and validation of an inventory of scientific attitudes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 7, 85–94.
National Research Council [NRC]. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council [NRC]. (2011). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press
National Science Teachers Association [NSTA]. (1982). Science-technology-society: Science education for the 1980s. (An NSTA position statement). Washington, DC.
Niaz, M. (2009). Critical appraisal of physical science as a human enterprise: Dynamics of scientific progress. Milton Keynes: Springer.
Nott, M., & Wellington, J. (1995). Probing teachers’ views of the nature of science: How should we do it and where should we be looking? Proceedings of the Third International History, Philosophy, and Science Teaching Conference, 864–872.
Ogunniyi, M. B. (1982). An analysis of prospective science teachers’ understanding of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 19(1), 25–32.
Osborne, J., Collins, S., Ratcliffe, M., Millar, R., & Duschl, R. (2003). What “ideas-about-science” should be taught in school science? A Delphi study of the expert community. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(7), 692–720.
Popper, K. R. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. New York: Harper & Row.
Popper, K. R. (1963). Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge. London: Routledge.
Popper, K. R. (1988). The open universe: An argument for indeterminism. London: Routledge.
Roberts, D.A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S.K. Abell & N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 729–780). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Rubba, P. (1976). Nature of scientific knowledge scale. School of Education, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana.
Rudolph, J.L. (2003). Portraying epistemology: School science in historical context. Science Education, 87 (1), 64–79.
Sandoval, W. A. (2005). Understanding students’ practical epistemologies and their influence on learning through inquiry. Science Education, 89(5), 634–656.
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.
Schwirian, P. M. (1968). On measuring attitudes toward science. Science Education, 52, 172–179.
Scientific Literacy Research Center. (1967). Wisconsin inventory of science processes. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin.
Shamos, M.H. (1984). Exposure to science vs. scientific literacy. Journal of College Science Teaching, 13(5), 333–393.
Showalter, V. (1974). What is unified science education? Program objectives and scientific literacy, Prism II, 2(3–4), 1–6.
Stice, G. (1958). Facts about science test. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
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.
Smith, M. U., & Scharmann, L. C. (1999). Defining versus describing the nature of science: A pragmatic analysis for classroom teachers and science educators. Science Education, 83, 493–509.
Swan, M.D. (1966). Science achievement as it relates to science curricula and programs at the sixth grade level in Montana public schools. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 4, 102–123.
Welch, W. W. (1967). Science process inventory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Welch, W.W. (1969). Curriculum evaluation. Review of Educational Research, 39(4), 429–443.
Welch, W. W., & Pella, M. O. (1967–68). The development of an instrument for inventorying knowledge of the processes of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 5(1), 64.
Wheeler, S. (1968). Critique and revision of an evaluation instrument to measure students’ understanding of science and scientists. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
Wilson, L. (1954). A study of opinions related to the nature of science and its purpose in society. Science Education, 38(2), 159–164.
Wong, S. L., & Hodson, D. (2009). From the horse’s mouth: What scientists say about scientific investigation and scientific knowledge. Science Education, 93, 109–130.
Wong, S.L. & Hodson, D. (2010). More from the horse’s mouth: What scientists say about science as a social practice. International Journal of Science Education, 32(11), 1431–1463.
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lederman, N.G., Bartos, S.A., Lederman, J.S. (2014). The Development, Use, and Interpretation of Nature of Science Assessments. In: Matthews, M. (eds) International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7654-8_29
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-7653-1
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-7654-8
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)