Abstract
This article presents a qualitative study of the understanding of various epistemic and non-epistemic aspects of the nature of science (NOS), based on analysis of the historical case of Semmelweis and childbed fever. To this aim, an activity was designed which consisted of: (1) reading of a narrative of the case without instruction and discussion in small group about several questions related to NOS aspects alluded in the text; (2) an instructor-mediated critical discussion (whole class session) of the groups’ initial responses to the questions, and (3) rethinking the groups’ first responses after whole class discussion. The activity was implemented as part of the training of prospective biology teachers (PBTs), taking an explicit and reflective approach. The effectiveness of the activity was analysed by seeking to answer the following research questions: (1) What ideas do PBTs have about the NOS aspects dealt with after a first reflective reading of the historical case? (2) What changes have taken place in their ideas about those aspects once the activity has been completed? To evaluate the PBTs’ learning, a rubric was applied by means of a process of inter-rater analysis. The results showed improvement in the understanding of both the epistemic and non-epistemic NOS aspects addressed, with this improvement being remarkable in some cases. The article concludes by highlighting the didactic utility of this NOS learning and teaching activity, and proposing suggestions for improvements in future implementations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
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. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.629013.
Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2013). Teaching with and about nature of science, and science teacher knowledge domains. Science & Education, 22(9), 2087–2107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9520-2.
Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). The influence of history of science course on students’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(10), 1057–1095. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200012)37:10<1057::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-C.
Acevedo, J. A. (1998). Análisis de algunos criterios para diferenciar entre ciencia y tecnología. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 16(3), 409–420.
Acevedo, J. A. (2006). Modelos de relaciones entre ciencia y tecnología: un análisis social e histórico. Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias, 3(2), 198–219. https://doi.org/10.25267/Rev_Eureka_ensen_divulg_cienc.2006.v3.i2.03.
Acevedo, J. A. (2008). El estado actual de la naturaleza de la ciencia en la didáctica de las ciencias. Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias, 5(2), 178–198. https://doi.org/10.25267/Rev_Eureka_ensen_divulg_cienc.2008.v5.i2.02.
Acevedo, J. A. (2009). Enfoques explícitos versus implícitos en la enseñanza de la naturaleza de la ciencia. Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias, 6(3), 355–386. https://doi.org/10.25267/Rev_Eureka_ensen_divulg_cienc.2009.v6.i3.04.
Acevedo, J. A. (2010). Formación del profesorado de ciencias y enseñanza de la naturaleza de la ciencia. Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias, 7(3), 653–660. https://doi.org/10.25267/Rev_Eureka_ensen_divulg_cienc.2010.v7.i3.04.
Acevedo-Díaz, J. A., & García-Carmona, A. (2016a). «Algo antiguo, algo nuevo, algo prestado » . Tendencias sobre la naturaleza de la ciencia en la educación científica. Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias, 13(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.25267/Rev_Eureka_ensen_divulg_cienc.2016.v13.i1.02.
Acevedo-Díaz, J. A., & García-Carmona, A. (2016b). Rosalind Franklin y la estructura del ADN: un caso de historia de la ciencia para aprender sobre la naturaleza de la ciencia. Revista Científica, 25, 162–175. https://doi.org/10.14483/udistrital.jour.RC.2016.25.a2.
Acevedo-Díaz, J. A., & García-Carmona, A. (2016c). Uso de la historia de la ciencia para comprender aspectos de la naturaleza de la ciencia. Fundamentación de una propuesta basada en la controversia Pasteur versus Liebig sobre la fermentación. Revista Iberoamericana de Ciencia, Tecnología y Sociedad, 11(33), 203–226.
Acevedo-Díaz, J. A., & García-Carmona, A. (2017). Controversias en la historia de la ciencia y cultura científica. Madrid: Los Libros de la Catarata.
Acevedo-Díaz, J. A., García-Carmona, A., & Aragón, M. M. (2016a). Un caso de historia de la ciencia para aprender naturaleza de la ciencia: Semmelweis y la fiebre puerperal. Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias, 13(2), 408–422. https://doi.org/10.25267/Rev_Eureka_ensen_divulg_cienc.2016.v13.i2.13.
Acevedo-Díaz, J. A., García-Carmona, A., & Aragón, M. M. (2016b). La controversia Pasteur versus Pouchet sobre la generación espontánea: un recurso para la formación inicial del profesorado en la naturaleza de la ciencia desde un enfoque reflexivo. Ciência & Educação, 22(4), 913–933. https://doi.org/10.1590/1516-731320160040006.
Acevedo-Díaz, J. A., García-Carmona, A., & Aragón, M. M. (2017). Historia de la ciencia para enseñar naturaleza de la ciencia: Una estrategia para la formación inicial del profesorado de ciencia. Educación Química, 28(3), 140–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eq.2016.12.003.
Adúriz-Bravo, A., & Izquierdo, M. (2009). A research-informed instructional unit to teach the nature of science to pre-service science teachers. Science & Education, 18(9), 1177–1192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-009-9189-3.
Allchin, D. (2003). Scientific myth-conceptions. Science Education, 87(3), 329–351. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10055.
Allchin, D. (2004a). Pseudohistory and pseudoscience. Science & Education, 13(3), 179–195. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCED.0000025563.35883.e9.
Allchin, D. (2004b). Should the sociology of science be rated X? Science Education, 88(6), 915–933. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20026.
Allchin, D. (2011). Evaluating knowledge of the nature of (Whole) science. Science Education, 95(3), 518–542. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20432.
Bybee, R. W. (1997). Achieving scientific literacy: From purposes to practices. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Clough, M. P. (2011a). Teaching and assessing the nature of science. The Science Teacher, 78(6), 56–60.
Clough, M. P. (2011b). The story behind the science: Bringing science and scientists to life in post-secondary science education. Science & Education, 20(7–8), 701–717. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-010-9310-7.
Collins, H. M., & Pinch, T. (1996). El gólem. Lo que todos deberíamos saber acerca de la ciencia. Barcelona: Crítica.
Colyer, C. (2000). Death in a Viennese maternity ward. Journal of College Science Teaching, 29, 297–300.
COSCE [Confederación de Sociedades Científicas de España]. (2011). Informe Enciende: Enseñanza de las Ciencias en la Didáctica escolar para edades tempranas en España. Madrid: COSCE.
Dagher, Z. R., & Erduran, S. (2016). Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education. Why does it matter? Science & Education, 25(1–2), 147–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-015-9800-8.
Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
Eurydice. (2011). Science education in Europe: National policies, practices and research. Brussels: EACEA P9 Eurydice. Retrieved from: http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice.
Forato, T. C. M., Martins, R. A., & Pietrocola, M. A. (2011). Historiografia e natureza da ciência na sala de aula. Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física, 28(1), 27–59. https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-7941.2011v28n1p27.
García-Carmona, A., & Acevedo, J. A. (2016a). Concepciones de estudiantes de profesorado de Educación Primaria sobre la naturaleza de la ciencia: Una evaluación diagnóstica a partir de reflexiones en equipo. Revista Mexicana de Investigación Educativa, 21(69), 583–610.
García-Carmona, A., & Acevedo, J. A. (2016b). Learning about the nature of science using newspaper articles with scientific content: A study in initial primary teacher education. Science & Education, 25(5–6), 523–546. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-016-9831-9.
García-Carmona, A., & Acevedo-Díaz, J. A. (2017). Understanding the nature of science through a critical and reflective analysis of the controversy between Pasteur and Liebig on fermentation. Science & Education, 26(1), 65–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-017-9876-4.
García-Carmona, A., Vázquez, A., & Manassero, M. A. (2012). Comprensión de los estudiantes sobre naturaleza de la ciencia: Análisis del estado actual de la cuestión y perspectivas. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 30(1), 23–34.
Gillies, D. (2005). Hempelian and Kuhnian approaches in the philosophy of medicine: The Semmelweis case. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 36(1), 159–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsc.2004.12.003.
Golabek, C., & Cooper, L. A. (2011). Trainee teachers’ perceptions of the Nature of Science and implications for pre-service teacher training in England. Research in Secondary Teacher Education, 1(2), 9–13.
Hempel, C. G. (1966). Philosophy of natural science. Oxford: Prentice-Hall.
Hodson, D. (2014). Learning science, learning about science, doing science: Different goals demand different learning methods. International Journal of Science Education, 36(15), 2534–2553. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.899722.
Irwin, A. R. (2000). Historical case studies: Teaching the nature of science in context. Science Education, 84(1), 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200001)84:1<5::AID-SCE2>3.0.CO;2-0.
Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2014). New directions for nature of science research. In M. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (pp. 999–1021). Dordrecht: Springer.
Justi, R., & Mendonça, P. C. C. (2016). Discussion of the controversy concerning a historical event among pre-service teachers. Contributions to their knowledge about science, their argumentative skills, and reflections about their future teaching practices. Science & Education, 25(7–8), 795–822. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-016-9846-2.
Lederman, N. G., 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 nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497–521. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10034.
Lederman, N. G., Antink, A., & Bartos, S. (2014). Nature of science, scientific inquiry, and socio-scientific issues arising from genetics: A pathway to developing a scientifically literate citizenry. Science & Education, 23(2), 285–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9503-3.
Lederman, N. G., Bartos, S. A., & Lederman, J. S. (2014). The development, use, and interpretation of nature of science assessments. In M. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (pp. 971–997). Dordrecht: Springer.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Longino, H. E. (1990). Science as social knowledge: Values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Martins, A. F. P. (2015). Natureza da Ciência no ensino de ciências: uma proposta baseada em “temas” e “questões”. Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física, 32(3), 703–737. https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-7941.2015v32n3p703.
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 (pp. 3–26). Dordrecht: Springer.
Matthews, M. R. (2015). Science teaching: The contribution of history and philosophy of science (20th Anniversary Revised and Expanded ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Matthews, M. R. (2017). Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education (Book review). Studies in Science Education, 53(1), 105–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2016.1258108.
McComas, W. F. (2008). Seeking historical examples to illustrate key aspects of the nature of science. Science & Education, 17(2–3), 249–263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-007-9081-y.
McComas, W. F., & Kampourakis, K. (2015). Using the history of biology, chemistry, geology, and physics to illustrate general aspects of nature of science. Review of Science, Mathematics and ICT Education, 9(1), 47–76.
McComas, W. F., & Olson, J. K. (1998). The nature of science in international science education standards documents. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 41–52). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
McMullin, E. (1987). Scientific controversy and its termination. In H. T. Engelhardt Jr. & A. L. Caplan (Eds.), Scientific controversies. Case studies in the resolution and closure of disputes in science and technology (pp. 49–91). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Monk, M., & Osborne, J. (1997). Placing the history and philosophy of science on the curriculum: A model for the development of pedagogy. Science Education, 81(4), 405–424. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199707)81:4<405::AID-SCE3>3.0.CO;2-G.
National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
NGSS. (2013). The next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
Numbers, R. L., & Kampourakis, K. (Eds.). (2015). Newton’s apple and other myths about science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD]. (2009). Assessment framework-key competencies in reading, mathematics and science. Paris: OCDE.
Osborne, J. F., 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10105.
Persson, J. (2009). Semmelweis’s methodology from the modern stand-point: intervention Studies and causal ontology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 40(3), 204–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsc.2009.06.003.
Rudge, D. W., Cassidy, D. P., Fulford, J. M., & Howe, E. M. (2014). Changes observed in views of nature of science during a historically based unit. Science & Education, 23(9), 1879–1909. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9572-3.
Rudge, D. W., & Howe, E. M. (2009). An explicit and reflective approach to the use of History to promote understanding of the nature of Science. Science & Education, 18(5), 561–580. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-007-9088-4.
Salmerón, L. (2013). Actividades que promueven la transferencia de los aprendizajes: Una revisión de la literatura. Revista de Educación, No. Extra. https://doi.org/10.4438/1988-592x-re-2013-ext-253.
Seale, C. (1999). The quality of qualitative research. Introducing qualitative methods series. London: Sage.
Shamos, M. H. (1995). The myth of scientific literacy. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Shibley, I. A. (2003). Using newspapers to examine the nature of science. Science & Education, 12(7), 691–702. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025687424931.
Thuillier, P. (1988). D’Archimède à Einstein: les faces cachées de l’invention scientifique. Paris: Libraire Arthéme Fayard.
Vallverdú, J., & Izquierdo, M. (2010). Error y conocimiento: un modelo filosófico para la didáctica de la ciencia. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 28(1), 47–60.
Vázquez, A., García-Carmona, A., Manassero, M. A., & Bennàssar, A. (2013). Science teachers’ thinking about the nature of science: A new methodological approach to its assessment. Research in Science Education, 43(2), 781–808. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-012-9291-4.
Vázquez, A., & Manassero, M. A. (2013). La comprensión de un aspecto de la naturaleza de ciencia y tecnología: Una experiencia innovadora para profesores en formación inicial. Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias, 10(No. Extraord), 630–648. https://doi.org/10.25267/Rev_Eureka_ensen_divulg_cienc.2013.v10.iextra.10.
Williams, C. T., & Rudge, D. W. (2016). Emphasizing the history of genetics in an explicit and reflective approach to teaching the nature of science. A pilot study. Science & Education, 25(3–4), 407–427. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-016-9821-y.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Lead editor: Ralph Levinson.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Aragón-Méndez, M.M., Acevedo-Díaz, J.A. & García-Carmona, A. Prospective biology teachers’ understanding of the nature of science through an analysis of the historical case of Semmelweis and childbed fever. Cult Stud of Sci Educ 14, 525–555 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-018-9868-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-018-9868-y