A Study on Demonstration of the Nature of Science in Science Textbooks: History and Philosophy of Science Perspectives
Abstract
Many scholars in the teaching of science put forth that the perennial target of science education is to teach the nature of science (NOS), and science textbooks play a crucial role in the teaching of the nature of science (NOS). Understanding the nature of science is said to be effective when both understanding science concepts and doing science. Numerous studies focus on the teaching of NOS. This study investigates the effect of a science content that is prepared in history and philosophy of science (HPS) perspective on the NOSÂ understandings of pre-service science teachers. 34 sophomore pre-service science teachers participated in the study. The quasi-experimental method was used by employing a pre-test, an intervention, and a post-test which is the same as the pre-test. The intervention involved the presentation of science content from the HPS perspective in six weeks long of discussions. Data were collected through a survey that revealed categorical views regarding the characteristics of the NOS. The results showed that the demonstration of atom theories in the HPS perspective gave a positive effect on the pre-service science teachers in understanding the NOS.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Abd El-Khalick, F., Myers, J. Y., Summers, R., Brunner, J., Waight, N., Wahbeh, N., . . . Belarmino, J. (2017). A longitudinal analysis of the extent and manner of representations of nature of science in U.S. high school biology and physics textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1(54), 82-120.
Allchin, D. (2013). Teaching the Nature of Science. Perspectives and Resources. St. Paul: Ships Education Press.
Allchin, D. (2017). Beyond the consensus view: Whole science. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 1(17), 18-26.
ACARA (2015). Australian Curriculum and Reporting Authority. Australian curriculum: Science F-10. Sydney: Commonwealth of Australia.
Bağ, H., (2006). Genel Kimya-I. Pegem A Yayıncılık, Ankara.
Blanco, R., & Niaz, M. (1997). Epistemological beliefs of students and teachers about the Nature of science: from ‘baconian inductive ascent’ to the ‘irrelevance’ of scientific laws. Instructional Science, 3(25), 203-231.
Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1976). The design and conduct of true experiments and quasi-experiments in field settings. In M. D. Dunnette, Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (pp. 223-326). Goodyear Publishing Company.
DiGiuseppe, M. (2014). Representing nature of science in a science textbook: Exploring author-editor-publisher interactions. International Journal of Science Education, 36(7), 1061–1082.
Duschl, R. A., & Grandy, R. (2013). Two views about explicitly teaching nature of science. Science & Education, 9(22), 2109-2139.
Erduran, S., & Dagher, Z. R. (2014). Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education. Dordrecht: Springer.
Fogleman, J., McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2011). Examining the effect of teachers' adaptations of a middle school science inquiryâ€oriented curriculum unit on student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(2), 149-169.
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.
Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2011). A family resemblance approach to the nature of science for science education. Science & Education, 20(7–8), 591–607.
Kahveci, A. (2010). Quantitative analysis of science and chemistry textbooks for indicators of reform: A complementary perspective. International Journal of Science Education, 32(11), 1495–1519.
Kampourakis, K. (2016). The “general aspects†conceptualization as a pragmatic and effective means to introducing students to nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(5), 667–682.
Kloser, M. (2013). Exploring high school biology students’ engagement with more or less epistemologically considerate texts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(10), 1232–1257.
Lakatos, I. (1980). The methodology of scientific research programmes. Cambridge: Cambridge university press.
Lin, H.-S. (1998). Promoting pre-service science teachers' understanding about the nature of science through history. Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (p. 1). Sandago: CA.
Lin, H.â€S., & Chen, C.â€C. (2002). Promoting preservice chemistry teachers' understanding about the nature of science through history. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(9), 773-792. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10045
McDonald, C. V. (2017). Exploring representations of nature of science in Australian junior secondary school science textbooks: A case study of genetics. In C. V. McDonald & F. Abd-El-Khalick (Eds.), Representations of nature of science in school science textbooks: A global perspective (pp. 98–117). London: Routledge.
McDonald, C. V., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2017). Representations of nature of science in school science textbooks. In C. V. McDonald & F. Abd-El-Khalick (Eds.), Representations of nature ofscience in school science textbooks: A global perspective (pp. 1–19). London: Routledge.
Monk, M., & Osborne, J. (1997). Placing the history and philosophy of science on the curriculum: A model for the development of pedagogy. Science Education, 4(81), 405-424.
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
NGSS (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies 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, 5(82), 527-552.
Niaz, M. (2009). Progressive transitions in chemistry teachers’ understanding of nature of science based on historical controversies. Science & Education, 1(18), 43-65.
Niaz, M. (2016). History and philosophy of science as a guide to understanding nature of science. Revista Scientifica, 1(24), 7-16.
Niaz, M., & Arelys, M. (2011). Nature of science in general chemistry textbooks. In Nature of Science in General Chemistry Textbooks (pp. 1-37). Dordrecht: Springer.
Niaz, M., & CoÅŸtu, B. (2009). Presentation of atomic structure in Turkish general chemistry textbooks. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 3(10), 233-240.
Niaz, M., & Maza, A. (2011). Nature of science in general chemistry textbooks. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
Niaz, M., Klaassen, S., Mcmillan, B. A., & Metz, D. (2010). Leon Cooper’s Perspective on Teaching Science: An Interview Study. Science & Education, 1(19), 39-54. doi:DOI: 10.1007/s11191-008-9175-1
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, 7(40), 692-720.
Park, W., Yang, S., & Song, J. (2019). When modern physics meets nature of science: The representation of nature of science in general relativity in new Korean physics textbooks. Science & Education, 28(9-10), 1055-1083.
Patterson, A., Roman, D., Friend, M., Osborne, J., & Donovan, B. (2017). Reading for meaning: The foundational knowledge every teacher of science should have. International Journal of Science Education, 3(40), 1-17.
Pearl, J., & Mackenzie, D. (2018). The Book of Why: The New Science of Cause and Effect. Basic Books.
Rodriguez, M. A., & Niaz, M. (2004). A reconstruction of structure of the atom and its implications for general physics textbooks: A history and philosophy of science perspective. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 3(13), 409-424.
Roseman, J. E., Stern, L., & Koppal, M. (2010). A method for analyzing the coherence of high school biology textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(1), 47–70.
Schwab, J. J. (1962). The teaching of science as enquiry. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Şendur, G., Polat, M., & Kazancı, C. (2017). Does a course on the history and philosophy of chemistry have any effect on prospective chemistry teachers’ perceptions? The case of chemistry and the chemist. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 4(18), 601-629. doi:DOI: 10.1039/C7RP00054E
Seung, E.-S., Bryan, L. A., & Nam, J.-H. (2009). Korean pre-service teachers' understanding about the nature of science (NOS). Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education, 3(29), 314-328.
Vesterinen, V-M., Akesla, M., & Lavonen, J. (2013). 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, 22, 1839–1855.
Yang, S., Park, W., & Song, J. (2020). Representations of nature of science in new Korean science textbooks: The case of ‘scientific inquiry and experimentation’. In Science Education in the 21st Century (pp. 19-35). Springer, Singapore.
Yustina, Y., Halim, L., & Mahadi, I. (2020). The Effect of'Fish Diversity'Book in Kampar District on the Learning Motivation and Obstacles of Kampar High School Students through Online Learning during the COVID-19 Period. Journal of Innovation in Educational and Cultural Research, 1(1), 7-14.
