Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Development and Application of Learning Materials to Help Students Understand Ten Statements Describing the Nature of Scientific Observation

  • Published:
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Observing scientific events or objects is a complex process that occurs through the interaction between the observer’s knowledge or expectations, the surrounding context, physiological features of the human senses, scientific inquiry processes, and the use of observational instruments. Scientific observation has various features specific to this process. In this study, we describe the nature of scientific observation in 10 statements that have been emphasized by educators, philosophers, and psychologists and discuss their educational implications. To help students understand these 10 statements, learning materials were developed and tested with 110 10th-grade students. The results for almost all statements showed that students’ agreement on the nature of scientific observation increased after studying the materials, and the agreement was found to be stable because it had not decreased 6 weeks later. We conclude on this basis that the difficult philosophical and psychological concepts involved in scientific observation can be taught effectively to high school students if we develop and use activities appropriate to their level that can further their understanding.

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
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adelson, E. H. (1993). Perceptual organization and the judgment of brightness. Science, 262, 2042–2044.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akerson, V. L., Morrison, J. A., & McDuffie, A. R. (2006). One course is not enough: Preservice elementary teachers’ retention of improved views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(2), 194–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aydeniz, M., & Bilican, K. (2014). What do scientists know about the nature of science? A case study of novice scientists’ view of NOS. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(5), 1083–1115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartholomew, H., Osborne, J., & Ratcliffe, M. (2004). Teaching pupils “ideas-about-science”: Five dimensions of effective practice. Science Education, 88(5), 655–682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartos, S. A., & Lederman, N. G. (2014). Teachers’ knowledge structure for nature of science and scientific inquiry: Conceptions and classroom practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(9), 1150–1184.

    Article  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bianchini, J., & Colburn, A. (2000). Teaching the nature of science through inquiry to prospective elementary teachers: A tale of two researchers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(2), 177–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boring, E. G. (1930). A new ambiguous figure. American Journal of Psychology, 42(3), 444–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, W. F., & Lambert, B. L. (2000). The theory-ladenness of observation and the theory-ladenness of the rest of the scientific process. Philosophy of Science, 68(3), s176–s186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, H. I. (1977). Perception, theory and commitment: The new philosophy of science. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunge, M. (1998). Philosophy of science, volume 2: From explanation of justification. London, UK: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, B., Lubben, F., & Dlamini, Z. (2000). Learning science through contexts: Helping pupils make sense of everyday situations. International Journal of Science Education, 22(3), 239–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chalmers, A. F. (1986). What is this thing called science? An assessment of the nature and status of science and its methods. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating in inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86(2), 175–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cropley, A. J. (2003). Creativity in education & learning: A guide for teachers and educators. London, UK: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darian, S. (2003). Understanding the language of science. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donnelly, J. (2001). Contested terrain or unified project? ‘the nature of science’ in the National Curriculum for England and Wales. International Journal of Science Education, 23(2), 181–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Driver, R. (1988). The pupil as scientist? Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young peoples’ images of science. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eberbach, C., & Crowley, K. (2009). From everyday to scientific observation: How children learn to observe the biologist’s world. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 39–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feyerabend, P. (1976). Against method: Outline of an anarchistic theory of knowledge. London, UK: Humanities Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fodor, J. (1984). Observation reconsidered. Philosophy of Science, 51(1), 23–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford, D. J. (2005). The challenges of observing geologically: Third graders’ descriptions of rock and mineral properties. Science Education, 89(2), 276–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gale, G., & Walter, E. (1973). Kordig and the theory-ladenness of observation. Philosophy of Science, 40(3), 415–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia-Mila, M., & Andersen, C. (2007). Developmental change in notetaking during scientific inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 29(8), 1035–1058.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerrig, R. J., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2008). Psychology and life (8th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson Education, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillies, D. (1993). Philosophy of science in the twentieth century: Four central themes. Cambridge, UK: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, R. L. (1997). Eye and brain: The psychology of seeing (5th ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanson, N. R. (1961). Patterns of discovery: An inquiry into the conceptual foundations of science. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haslam, F. & Gunstone, R. (1997). Ideas about observation held by science educators. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of Australasian Science Education (ASERA), Adelaide, Australia.

  • Heath, T. (1980). Observation, perception and education. European Journal of Science Education, 2(2), 155–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heidelberger, M. (2003). Theory-ladenness and scientific instruments in experimentation. In H. Radder (Ed.), The philosophy of scientific experimentation (pp. 138–151). Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Herman, B. C., & Clough, M. P. (2016). Teachers’ longitudinal NOS understanding after having completed a science teacher education program. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(1), 207–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D. (1998). Is this really what scientists do? In J. Wellington (Ed.), Practical work in school science: Which way now? (pp. 93–108). London, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, W., & Adey, P. (2002). A scientific creativity test for secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 389–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keys, C. W., Hand, B., Prain, V., & Collins, S. (1999). Using the science writing heuristic as a tool for learning from laboratory investigations in secondary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(10), 1065–1084.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders’ view of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, I., Park, Y., Park, J., Song, J., & Choi, K. (2005). An introduction to physics education II. Seoul, South Korea: Bookshill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kosso, P. (1989). Science and objectivity. The Journal of Philosophy, 86(5), 245–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakatos, I. (1994). Falsification and the methodology of scientific programmes. In J. Worrall & G. Currie (Eds.), The methodology of scientific research programs: Philosophical papers, Vol. 1 (pp. 8–101). London, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (1998). Avoiding de-natured science: Activities that promote understandings of the nature of science. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in history of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 83–126). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, G. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire: 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 

  • Loewenthal, K. M. (2001). An introduction to psychological tests and scales. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Taylor & Francis Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, M. R. (1998). In defense of modest goals when teaching about the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(2), 167–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milner, B. (1986). Why teach science and why to all? In J. Nellist & B. Nicholl (Eds.), ASE science teachers’ handbook (pp. 1–39). London, UK: Hutchinson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education [MOE] (2015). Science curriculum (MOE Report No. 2015–74 [Extra No. 9]). Retrieved from http://www.ncic.re.kr/nation.dwn.ogf.inventoryList.do?orgAttNo=10000078.

  • Ministry of Education [MOE] (2017). Educational system: Secondary education. Retrieved from http://english.mest.go.kr/sub/info.do?m=020103&s=english.

  • Morgan, M. S. (2011). Seeking parts, looking for wholes. In L. Daston & E. Lunbeck (Eds.), Histories of scientific observation (pp. 303–325). Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers, D. G. (1993). Exploring psychology (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Worth Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nam, J., Choi, A., & Hand, B. (2011). Implementation of the science writing heuristic (SWH) approach in 8th grade science classrooms. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(5), 1111–1133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Science Teachers Association [NSTA] (2000). NSTA position statement: The nature of science. Retrieved from http://www.nsta.org/about/positions/natureofscience.aspx.

  • Park, J., & Kim, I. (2004). Classification of students’ observational statements in science. In R. Nata (Ed.), Progress in Education, Vol. 13 (pp. 139–154). New York, NY: Nova Science Publishers, Inc..

  • Park, J., & Lee, I. (2004). Analyzing cognitive or non-cognitive factors involved in the process of physics problemsolving in an everyday context. International Journal of Science Education, 26(13), 1577–1595.

  • Park, J., & Kim, D. (2008). Development of teaching materials for the nature of science and pilot application to scientifically gifted students. Journal of Korean Association for Science Education, 28(2), 169–179.

  • Park, J., & Kim, S. (2010). Investigation of science teachers’ and students’ comprehension of theory-laden scientific observation. Journal of Korean Association for Science Education, 30(1), 157–169.

  • Park, D.-Y., & Logsdon, D. (2015). Effects of modeling instruction on descriptive writing and observational skills in middle school. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(1), 71–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, J., Kim, I., Kim, M., & Lee, M. (2001). Analysis of students’ processes of confirmation and falsification of their prior ideas about electrostatics. International Journal of Science Education, 23(12), 1219–1236.

  • Pinch, T. (1985). Towards an analysis of scientific observation: The externality and evidential significance of observational reports in physics. Social Studies of Science, 15(1), 3–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pylyshyn, Z. W. (2006). Seeing and visualizing: It’s not what you think. London, UK: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramachandran, V. S., & Blakeslee, S. (1998). Phantoms in the brain: Probing the mysteries of the human mind. New York, NY: Harper Collins Publishers, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Rees, G., Russell, C., Frith, C. D., & Driver, J. (1999). Inattentional blindness versus inattentional amnesia for fixated but ignored words. Science, 286(5449), 2504–2507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandoval, W. A. (2005). Understanding students’ practical epistemologies and their influence on learning through inquiry. Science Education, 89(4), 634–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandoval, W. A., & Reiser, J. (2004). Explanation-driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88(3), 345–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schauble, L., Glaser, R., Duschl, R. A., Schulze, S., & John, J. (1995). Students’ understanding of the objectives and procedures of experimentation in the science classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(2), 131–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toth, E. E., Suthers, D. D., & Lesgold, A. (2002). “Mapping to know”: The effects of representational guidance and reflective assessment on scientific inquiry. Science Education, 86(2), 264–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weisberg, R. W. (2006). Creativity: Understanding innovation in problem solving, science, invention, and the arts. Hoboken, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Wellington, J., & Osborne, J. (2001). Language and literacy in science education. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Windschitl, M., & Andre, T. (1998). Using computer simulations to enhance conceptual change: The roles of constructivist instruction and student epistemological belief. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(2), 145–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Physics Education, College of Education, Chonnam National University, Buk-Gu, Yong-Bong-Ro, 77, Gwangju, 61186, South Korea

    Sangsoo Kim & Jongwon Park

Authors
  1. Sangsoo Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jongwon Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jongwon Park.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kim, S., Park, J. Development and Application of Learning Materials to Help Students Understand Ten Statements Describing the Nature of Scientific Observation. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 16, 857–876 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9823-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9823-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation