Nature of science in science textbooks for vocational training in Norway

ABSTRACT

Background

Teaching and learning of nature of science (NOS) is an explicit goal in the core science curriculum in Norway. Yet there is little understanding of how the content of the current textbooks in certain educational pathways such as vocational training addresses NOS. Purpose: The aim of this study is to contribute to research on NOS in VET through exploring how the cognitive and epistemic aspects of NOS are addressed in end-of-chapter tasks in Norwegian science textbooks for vocational studies.

Design and Methods

In this paper, we use a particular characterisation of NOS based on the Family Resemblance Approach (FRA) to investigate the cognitive-epistemic aspects of NOS in the science textbooks aimed at vocational education in Norway. The cognitive-epistemic aspects are about the aims and values, methods, practices, and knowledge in science. Three key textbooks have been selected and analysed with a focus on end-of-chapter tasks.

Results

The results illustrate that NOS were almost absent in the tasks in all textbooks. Patterns across the coverage of NOS in the textbooks are discussed along with some implications for future studies.

KEYWORDS:

• Textbooks
• nature of science
• family resemblance approach

Introduction

In recent years, numerous international calls have been made for the development of students’ scientific literacy for informed citizenship (e.g. NGSS Lead States 2013; OECD 2015). There is a curriculum trend in making science relevant and meaningful for students by coordinating subject knowledge with scientific practices in context (NGSS Lead States 2013). Science education is thus increasingly aiming to enhance students’ understanding of science concepts, and enable them to make informed decisions about scientific issues. Knowledge of the way science works is requisite for such decision-making. Furthermore, an understanding of the nature of science (NOS) is a component of scientific literacy; therefore, NOS is considered an important component of science education (Holbrook and Rannikmae 2007; Laugksch 2000). Teaching particular issues, concepts, and principles in isolation, makes it challenging for students to make sense of these, and to transfer their knowledge to new problems and contexts (Bransford et al. 2000; Clark and Linn 2003). According to Akerson et al. (2011), NOS must be taught explicitly in order for students to gain an understanding of how science works and how scientific knowledge is constructed.

Yet, a challenge is that although curricula ought to govern what should be taught, many teachers use textbooks to define what they teach and hence textbooks define the content of science (Doyle 1983; Kahveci 2010; Valverde et al. 2002). One reason for this may be that teachers interpret the textbook as a direct translation of the curriculum and thus use it as an operationalization of the curriculum (Clandinin and Connelly 1992; Craig et al. 2008). Tasks at the end of the chapters are often used to summarize what the students should learn (Chiappetta and Fillman 2007; Kahveci 2010), hence end-of-chapters tasks may influence students’ understanding of science and NOS to a pronounced extent (Kesidou and Roseman 2002). This is a challenge because these tasks do not necessarily reflect the curriculum (Armbruster and Ostertag 1989; Solihati and Hikmat 2018; Andersson-Bakken, Jegstad, and Bakken 2020).

In Norway, a new national curriculum was implemented in primary and secondary schools in 2020. In order for the students to develop 21st-century skills, preparing them for society and future job markets, NOS is more emphasised in the current curriculum than in previous curricula. (Directorate for Education and Training 2019; Meld. St. 28, 2015–2016). In the wake of the new curriculum, major publishing companies in Norway have revised their science textbooks in order to match the new curriculum. However, textbook tasks often lack renewal even when a curriculum is revised (Glasnovic Gracin 2018; Yang, Liu, and Liu 2019). In a recent Norwegian study, Bakken and Andersson-Bakken (2021) found that tasks in textbooks for science and language arts in the General Studies Programmes (GSP) changed marginally with the implementation of the new curriculum.

Upper secondary education in Norway is divided into five GSP and ten Vocational Education and Training programmes (VET). Half of the students enter GSP, whereas the other half enters VET. A great challenge is that there in later years has been a large dropout rate among students in VET. The reason might be that students in VET do not experience mastery and meaning in the common core subjects such as natural science, mathematics, and social sciences (NOU 2008:18 2008).

Several studies indicate that VET students’ experiences of coherence between education and future occupation is important for their feeling of relevance and their motivation for studying (Goth, Landmark, and Schønfeldt 2014; Heggen and Terum 2013; Niemi and Rosvall 2013; Subotnik et al. 2009). Yet, this is not always the case. Vocational students experience school science as significantly less relevant and have lower mastery motivation in the subject than students enrolled in GSP (Elstad and Turmo 2009; NOU 2008, 18). One reason for this may have been that the curriculum was perceived as having little relevance to the vocational education the student had chosen (Nordby, M., Reitan, B., & Jónsdóttir, G., 2018). Another reason could be that many students in VET associate science textbooks with one-sided teaching methods and abstract knowledge and that this represents a subject that does not engage them (Knain 2003). Placing a greater focus on NOS in the revised curriculum could make the subject more relevant and motivating for VET students. The way sciences are taught has a great influence on students’ perception of the subject (e.g. Mohd Shahali et al. 2019), and since textbooks directs what and how teachers teach, the tasks must emphasize NOS for students to understand its relevance.

Although there is a body of research on curriculum and textbook analysis of NOS using the Family Resemblance Approach (FRA), there are no accounts of what type of content, or how, NOS may be covered in science textbooks for VET students internationally or in the context of Norway. Therefore, the aim of the study reported in this paper is to contribute to research on NOS in VET through exploring how the cognitive and epistemic aspects of NOS are addressed in end-of-chapter tasks in Norwegian science textbooks for vocational studies. Addressing NOS is concerned with the existence or lack of NOS in the tasks. We looked at what a task included in terms of FRA, however we did not investigate how these aspects were to be learned or taught.

Literature review

Nature of science and science textbooks

NOS is a substantial area of research in science education as evidenced by significant reviews (Lederman and Lederman 2014). Furthermore, NOS has been characterised from different perspectives including ‘Features of Science’ (Matthews 2012) and ‘Whole Science’ (Allchin 2011) as well as the ‘Consensus View’ (McComas et al., 1998; Abd-El-Khalick and Lederman 2000). Lederman (1992) refers to NOS as the values and assumptions fundamental to science and its knowledge development, which include independence of thought, creativity, tentativeness, empirically based, subjectivity, testability and cultural and social embeddedness.

A perspective about NOS is the FRA (Erduran and Dagher 2014b; Irzik and Nola 2014). This approach emphasises the resemblance between different domains of science as the main criterion for classifying them as ‘science’. At the same time, it stresses that while different sciences resemble each other in a way that the members of a biological family might, there are also differences between them. Specificity of particular domains are described by Irzik and Nola (2011) as follows:

Astronomical theories (before the advent of radio “telescopes”) appeal to human tele-scopic observations, but astronomy is not an experimental science; experiments are simply not possible in this field. Again consider the characteristic of making predictions. Again, most sciences aim to make predictions, especially novel predictions, but not all of them succeed. For example, celestial mechanics is very good indeed in predicting planetary positions. In contrast, even though evolutionary biology does a wonderful job of explaining the evolution of species, it has not produced any mathematically precise, novel predictions. Similarly, earthquake science does a good job of explaining why earthquakes occur, but so far it has failed to predict the times of major earthquakes, though it is pretty successful in predicting their locations (p.596).

Furthermore, FRA represents NOS as a cognitive-epistemic and social-institutional system (see Figure 1). As such, it is a meta-perspective on the different aspects of science that includes a range of categories related to the epistemic and cognitive aspects of science such as the aims and values, methods and practices of science and scientific knowledge, as well as the social-institutional aspects such as scientists’ professional activities, scientific ethos, social certification and dissemination of scientific knowledge, and social values.

Figure 1. The FRA Wheel (Erduran & Dagher, 2014b, p.28).

The FRA has been used in science education to develop strategies for teacher education (Erduran et al., 2018; Kaya et al. 2019), undergraduate teaching (Petersen et al. 2020) as well as an analytical tool for examining science (Yeh, Erduran, and Hsu 2019), STEM curricula (Couso and Simmaro 2020; Park, Wu, and Erduran 2020), and science assessments (Cheung 2020). Students’ understanding of NOS has been investigated from an FRA perspective at elementary (Akbayrak and Kaya 2020) and university level (Akgun and Kaya 2020). A series of studies have been conducted focusing on the analysis of textbooks (BouJaoude, Dagher, and Refai 2017; Park, Yang, and Song 2020).

Numerous studies have been conducted focusing on the analysis of science textbooks using the FRA framework. Park et al. (2020) analysed the number of statements in Korean physics textbooks that address different NOS categories. Using FRA as a theoretical framework, their study identifies that most textbooks did not cover the wider social, economic, and political mechanism of the scientific enterprise. In this study, the use of FRA enables a finer differentiation of which components of science as a social-institutional system were lacking in the textbooks. McDonald (2017) used FRA to investigate representations of NOS in Australian junior secondary school science textbooks, particularly focusing on biology textbooks. The author observed that although there were many opportunities for including NOS in the textbook content including aspects such as professional activities, social values of science, social certification and dissemination, NOS was little present.

BouJaoude, Dagher, and Refai (2017) analysed Lebanese textbooks for their depiction of NOS. Using FRA as an analytical framework, the authors demonstrated that there was variation in how the different subject textbooks covered key categories such as scientific methods. Earth science textbooks discuss scientific methods focusing on hypothesis testing involving experiments, missing opportunities that not all methods in earth science involve experiments. The physics textbook on the other hand did not address scientific methods but rather emphasised metacognitive components of scientific methodology.

Although NOS has been considered a significant component of the science curriculum in various parts of the world, there is paucity of analyses conducted in the context of Norway, and in relation to vocational training textbooks that are informed by the national curricula. Considering textbooks are often particular to the national context where they originate, it is worthwhile to review the broader curriculum development efforts in Norway in order to situate the Norwegian science textbooks in context.

Science curriculum development in Norway

The renewal of the curriculum in 2020 led to several changes, one of them being that NOS is explicitly emphasised, both in the core curriculum and in the science curriculum (Directorate for Education and Training 2019). Additionally, one of the core elements in science encompasses several competence aims describing knowledge, skills, and abilities related to the nature of science. Another renewal in the science curriculum is that about one-third of the competence aims in the vocational education programmes are programme specific and directed towards the various educational programs. The intention is to increase the relevance of the subject to the students.

VET is in general an under-researched domain (Liguori et al. 2019). In particular, there is limited understanding of how students in vocational pathways view NOS and indeed how they are introduced to NOS in textbooks. An adequate understanding of NOS is a prerequisite for all students’ scientific literacy, and hence important for their decisions about personal, occupational and societal issues (Lederman, Lederman, and Antink 2013). Given the large number of students in Norway who get their secondary education through VET, and the potential economic and non-economic impact these students competencies can have on society, the lack of research is unfortunate. Furthermore, it is worrying because it is crucial for VET students to have a coherent understanding of NOS before entering their future professions. As an example, students enrolled in the vocational program Health and Early Development, will work in fields where an understanding of NOS could be useful in recognizing whether certain approaches to treating physical or mental health problems are suitable.

Based on this concern, the empirical study described in the next sections investigates how end-of-chapter tasks in Norwegian textbooks aimed at vocational training programmes cover the cognitive-epistemic categories of NOS. The following research question is explored in this study: How do end-of-chapter tasks in science textbooks in vocational training in Norway address the cognitive and epistemic aspects of the nature of science?

Methodology

Research context

In Norway, children start school the year they become six, and natural science is a compulsory subject for all students from Year 1 through Year 11. This interdisciplinary subject includes chemistry, physics, biology, technology, and parts of the geosciences. National standards for primary and secondary school and vocational education and training are ensured through legislation, regulations, and curricula. The subject curricula, e.g. the natural sciences curriculum, describe the content and objectives of the subjects, and contribute to realise the broad purpose of primary and secondary education and training in Norway. Among the VETs, Health and Early Development has the largest proportion of students, enrolling more than a quarter of the VET students (Directorate for Education and Training 2020). Vocational education usually involves two years in an upper secondary school, followed by two years of apprenticeship in a training enterprise or public institution. The two years of upper secondary schooling focuses on some common core subjects (Norwegian, English, mathematics, physical education, natural sciences and social sciences), and subjects which cover trade-specific theory and practice. After two years as an apprentice, the student can get a certificate of apprenticeship that qualifies for a profession such as e.g. chef, carpenter, hairdresser, or electrician.

Selection of textbooks

In Norway, school science textbooks are based on the national curricula. Three publishers command the Norwegian school science textbook market sales (i.e. Aschehoug, Cappelen Damm and Gyldendal). To get a comprehensive and representative selection of textbooks, three Year 11 science textbooks for the VET programme Health and Early Development were analysed. One textbook from each of the three publishers were selected (Table 1). The science textbooks would be easily identifiable therefore; they are not anonymised in this study.

Table 1. Textbooks Published with the 2020 Curriculum. Chapter titles were translated from Norwegian to English by the authors.

Textbook title	Chapters	The publishers’ description of the textbook/resource
Naturfag for yrkesfag (Brandt et al. 2020)	Science The Nutrients Health and Lifestyle Substances and mixtures Microorganisms and health	Naturfag for yrkesfag consists of a joint book and digital content. The digital content is adapted to each individual education program.
Kosmos HS, RM. Lærebok naturfag yrkesfag vg1 for Helse- og oppvekst-fag, Restaurant- og matfag (Halvorsen, Boye, and Heskestad 2020)	Exploration Technology and sustainability Nutrients and diet Health and Lifestyle Microorganisms Substances in food and cosmetics	The textbook Kosmos HS, RM has associated digital resources on kosmos.cdu.no.
Senit naturfag YF. Helse- og oppvekstsfag (Juel et al. 2020)	Science Sustainable technology Substances around us Nutrients Diet and lifestyle	Senit YF is a book series with vocational books where themes and tasks are adapted to the vocational education programs.

Unit of analysis

All end-of-chapter tasks are clearly marked with a number or a letter. Naturfag consists of five chapters and 215 tasks, Kosmos has six chapters and 270 tasks, and Senit has five chapters and 221 tasks. The total number of end-of-chapter-tasks in the three books was 706. In some of these tasks, there were several subtasks, e.g. in Kosmos p. 61, task 2.3.6 consists of three subtasks: a, b, and c. The total number of subtask in the three books constituted 1103 (Table 2). The unit of analysis in this study was the subtasks in the end-of-chapter tasks. In the following, the unit of analysis will be referred to as ‘task’. References to these three books will be given by the name of the book, Naturfag, Kosmos, or Senit, plus the page number, e.g. ‘Naturfag, p. 23’.

Table 2. The number of subtasks analysed in each textbook.

Textbook title	Unit of analysis
Naturfag	N = 350
Kosmos	N = 493
Senit	N = 262
	Ntot = 1103

In addition to the end-of-chapter tasks, Senit has a section with ‘Read, write, discuss’ assignments in each chapter. Furthermore, all three textbooks have a section with experiments or explorative activities in each chapter. Neither of these were analysed in this study.

Data analysis

To answer the research question, the tasks were analysed twice. First to get an overview of which of the NOS categories in the cognitive-epistemic system in the FRA framework the tasks might address, secondly to identify tasks addressing the cognitive and epistemic aspects of the nature of science. We acknowledge that insights into the end-of the-chapter tasks cannot be generalized throughout the textbooks, as we do not know if or how NOS is covered elsewhere in the books.

Reliability

To ensure inter-coder reliability, three researchers coded 126 tasks independently, attempting to encode all tasks with a discrete coding of these four categories: aims and values, scientific practices, methods and methodological rules or scientific knowledge (Table 3). This was followed by a comparison of, and discussion as to, which category each of these task belonged, before the remaining tasks were coded by a pair of researchers. The focus was on what the tasks explicitly asked for in terms of scientific knowledge, methods, methodology, practices, aims, or values, without interpreting what the task implicitly could ask for. Tasks that were difficult to categorise were set aside and any disagreements or doubt was resolved in discussions were three of the researchers were present. Thereafter, all four researchers discussed and coded eight task in collaboration to determine whether a cognitive-epistemic aspect of NOS was addressed. Subsequently, three researchers coded all 1103 end-of-chapter tasks independently, before collectively comparing and discussing the coding. This iterative process of coding individually and in collaboration, combined with discussions, enabled a high inter-coder reliability.

Table 3. FRA categories and associated key words, based on the work of Kaya and Erduran (2016).

Categories	Description	Keywords
Aims and values	Neutrality, avoid bias. Accurate explanations. Sufficient, relevant, plausible data. Justify claims. Recognizing opposite ideas, responding to objections. Opposition to own ideas. Changing ideas and respecting ideas in light of evidence. Honesty.	Aim, value, goal, accuracy, objectivity
Scientific practices	Asking questions. Developing and using models. Analysing and interpreting data. Using mathematics and computational thinking. Engaging in argument from evidence. Obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information.	Observation, experimentation, data, explanation, model, argumentation, classification, prediction
Methods and methodological rules	Test hypothesis, measure parameters. Scientific investigations. Scientific knowledge based on empirical evidence.	Method, scientific method, inquiry, process, hypothesis, manipulation of variables
Scientific knowledge	Theories, laws and models are explanations that work together to generate and/or validate new knowledge. Products of the scientific enterprise.	Knowledge, scientific knowledge, formulation of knowledge, theory, law, model

Coding

First, each tasks was analysed in order to decide whether the tasks could be linked to any of the categories in the FRA framework described in Table 3 (Kaya and Erduran 2016). For methodological reasons, each task was discretly categorised, which meant that each task was assigned to one of four categories: aims and values, scientific practices, methods and methodology, or scientific knowledge. At this point, it was not assessed whether the task addressed a meta-perspective of NOS. In cases were one task could belong to two or more categories, the task was placed within the category that best described what the task required. An example is ‘Draw a model of the water molecule that shows that it is a dipole’ (Naturfag YF, aunivers.lokus.no). This could be coded as scientific knowledge, because it requires knowledge of the structure of the water molecule. However, this task could also be coded as scientific practice, because it requires the student to draw a model. Developing and using models is rooted in scientific practice, thus this task was coded as scientific practice.

Secondly, all tasks were reviewed and assessed whether they from a meta-perspective could be categorised into any of the four categories in the cognitive-epistemic system in the FRA framework (Table 3), and hence addressing NOS. To be categorised as a task addressing NOS, the task had to explicitly require the students to have knowledge about how scientific knowledge is created, such as ‘What kind of knowledge do we need [sustainable development], and how do we get this knowledge?’ (Kosmos, p.60). Tasks asking students to express their reflection on scientific practices or working methods were also categorised as addressing NOS. An example of this is ‘Why is it important to evaluate uncertainty?’ (Kosmos p.19). This task requires the students to have knowledge about the scientific practice ‘evaluating results’. In contrast the task ‘Calculate the average of the measurements 40 m – 36 m – 48 m – 37 m. Calculate the uncertainty’. (Naturfag, p.24) requires the students have calculation skills, which is a scientific practice. However, this task is not asking to take a meta-perspective on neither how nor why uncertainty should be calculated or evaluated, therefore this task was not coded as a task addressing NOS. An example of a task addressing NOS was ‘When can we decide that something has been scientifically documented?’ (Senit, p.35) This task entails an answer that describes methods in use to generate new knowledge, and hence explicitly requires a meta-level awareness.

Findings and results

Scientific knowledge

A total of 721 tasks were coded in the category scientific knowledge, which constitutes more than half (65%) of the tasks coded. Tasks coded in this category typically asked students to recall knowledge or information, and were often expressed as questions starting with ‘What is … ’ or ‘What happens … ’ such as ‘What is meant by uncertainty in measurements?’ (Kosmos, p.19) or ‘What happens to the excess of vitamins if we eat more than we need of 1) water-soluble vitamins 2) fat-soluble vitamins’ (Naturfag YF, p.57). Another typical task was asking students to recall an explanation; these tasks typically looked like ‘In what ways are infections transmitted?’ (Senit, p.115).

Despite the large number of tasks in the category scientific knowledge, only one of these tasks addressed scientific knowledge as NOS ‘What kind of knowledge do we need [sustainable development], and how do we get this knowledge?’ (Kosmos, p.60).

Scientific practices

The number of tasks coded as scientific practices was 271, which amounts to about a quarter of the tasks. Tasks in this category were characterised by requiring the students to use one or more of the scientific practice ‘to find out something’. In some tasks, students were asked to reason about a topic, and to do so, they needed to either use their prior knowledge or find information about the topic. An example of such task was ‘What can be the consequences of a one-sided diet?’ (Senit, p.193). Other tasks required the students to calculate the answer, like ‘Under favourable conditions, a bacterium can divide once every 30 minutes. Imagine that you start with one bacterium. How many bacteria will there be after 1 hour? 2 hours? 6 hours?’ (Naturfag YF, aunivers.lokus.no). Furthermore, these tasks would ask the students to make a drawing for the purpose of illustrating or explaining a scientific phenomenon, like ‘What is a bacterial cell’s structure? Draw a bacterial cell in schematic form’” (Naturfag YF, 3a/aunivers.lokus.no).

Ten tasks of the tasks in this category, addressed NOS. These were characterised by requiring the students to consider one or more of the scientific practices, such as in the following task asking for the student’s meta-perspective on the practice observation ”Most of us believe that we are objective when we describe and observe what we see, hear, taste and feel. That is rarely quite right. Study the figures. In what way are you ”tricked” by the various drawings, and to what extent do you think that our observations can be used as ”evidence”? (Naturfag YF, p.25). Another example was about getting students to reflect on what scientific argumentation is “What does it mean to use scientific argumentation?” (Senit, p.35).

Aims and values

There were 80 tasks coded as aims and values, this accounted for less than a tenth (7%) of the tasks. In this category the questions addressed e.g. critical thinking, source criticism, public health, sustainability, and conflicts of interest. The tasks were characterised by not requiring a definitive answer, instead the students were expected to come up with suggestions for solutions on various issues or topics, and to discuss and evaluate different points of view. Some of these tasks were designed to make students aware of how a society takes responsibility for e.g. the health of its inhabitants, such as this task ‘How can society facilitate the prevention of infectious diseases in the population?’ (Naturfag YF, p.26). Other tasks intended to raise awareness of how the countries of the world work together to achieve common aims, e.g. sustainable development ‘What was the purpose of establishing the UN’s sustainability goals?’ (Senit, p.81) or asked to reflect on e.g. their power as consumers and their power of influence ‘Who needs to take responsibility for your diet being sustainable? Is it politicians, teachers, friends, parents or yourself?’ (Kosmos, p.105).

None of the tasks addressed any aspects of NOS related to aims and values.

Methods and methodology

A total of 31 tasks were coded as methods and methodological rules. This constitutes 3% of all tasks. These tasks aimed for a more general perspective, or a meta-perspective, on scientific investigations and scientific methods than task coded within scientific practices. The most frequent type of task in this category asked the students to evaluate an inquiry process or describe a plan for an investigation.

Out of these 31 tasks, only 16 tasks were addressing NOS. Most of these tasks focused on students reflections on scientific investigations and scientific methods. In this task, the students are asked to make several hypotheses and thereafter explain how they would test their hypotheses ‘Scientific knowledge is a tool for understanding the world. Can you make hypotheses that explain some of these “phenomena”: A. Road salt causes ice and snow to melt. B. soda bottle with a screw cap placed in the freezer will crack. C. When you are out in the sun, black clothes will feel warmer than white clothes. How will you proceed to test your hypotheses?’ (Naturfag YF, p.24). The first sentence was not coded because it states a fact. The second part, ‘can you make hypotheses … ’, is an instructive task and was not coded as NOS, while the last part ‘how will you proceed … ’ explicitly addressed an aspect of methods, thus requiring a meta-level awareness, and therefore was coded as NOS.

NOS summarized

Combining the total number of tasks addressing the cognitive and epistemic aspects of NOS, reveals that this constitutes only 29 of 1103 tasks, or 3% of the tasks (Figure 2a). The overall distribution within the four categories: aims and values, scientific practices, methods and methodology, or scientific knowledge is shown in Figure 2b.

Figure 2. (a) The total number of tasks addressing the cognitive and epistemic aspects of NOS, constitutes 29 of 1103 tasks, or 3% of the tasks. (b) Number of tasks coded within each of the four categories in the cognitive-epistemic system of NOS.

Differences within the textbooks

Overall, the distribution of tasks was quite similar in the three textbooks. However, by comparing our findings from the different chapters in the books, an interesting pattern appeared; each of the three books had a first chapter called Science or Exploration. These first chapters typically covered topics such as scientific methods, use of models, characteristics of scientific knowledge, uncertainty, control of variables, reliability, validity, risk assessment, and how to write lab reports. This content could be described as domain-general, as opposed to the content in the remaining chapters in the books that were domain-specific. In the domain-specific chapters, a variety of science topics such as nutritians, chemical reactions, ecology, bacterica, and viruses was covered.

The majority (20 of 29) of the tasks coded as addressing the cognitive-epistemic aspects of NOS were found in these first chapter of the each book. The overall distribution of the tasks addressing the cognitive-epistemic categories of NOS in first chapters versus the overall distribution in the books is presented in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Distribution of tasks in the four cognitive-epistemic categories of NOS in first chapters versus the overall distribution in the books.

Discussion and implications

This paper contributes to investigations into textbook coverage of NOS in general, and in the context of vocational studies in Norway in particular. An empirical analysis of end-of-chapter tasks in vocational education textbooks was conducted to investigate how the cognitive-epistemic categories of NOS were addressed. Considering the recent science curriculum reforms in Norway, where NOS is being explicitly emphasised, this study is timely in reporting how the textbooks may or may not address the various categories of NOS.

Previous studies using FRA as an analytical tool (e.g. Cheung 2020; Kaya and Erduran 2016; Yeh, Erduran, and Hsu 2019) indicate that it is not only a relevant framework for text analysis but it also provides a lens for identifying what some missing components about NOS may be, thereby providing some potential recommendations for revision. Our finding that only a small proportion of tasks analysed addressed the cognitive-epistemic categories of NOS, is consistent with other studies based on the FRA approach in other parts of the world (BouJaoude, Dagher, and Refai 2017; McDonald 2017; Park, Yang, and Song 2020). A finding that is specific to this study is the distribution of tasks addressing the cognitive-epistemic aspects of NOS; most of these tasks were in the first chapter of each book that were domain-general nature of science. The lack of tasks addressing NOS in the chapters that were domain-specific can contribute to a perception that NOS is not an integrated part of the subject.

From previous studies, it is known that experiences of coherence between education and future occupation is important for the VET students’ perceived relevance of the subject (Heggen and Terum 2013; Niemi and Rosvall 2013). A risk of textbooks containing tasks primarily addressing scientific knowledge without addressing the NOS-aspect is that students might miss the sense of purpose of learning science and furthermore it could cause a limited understanding of how science works. If science is not taught in a coherent manner where different aspects of NOS are interrelated, it can be difficult for students to make sense of science and furthermore to transfer their knowledge to new problems and contexts (Bransford et al. 2000; Clark and Linn 2003; Erduran and Dagher 2014a).

Although we did not investigate how the aspects of NOS were to be learned or taught, the fact that tasks addressing NOS were clustered in the first chapter in each book is unfortunate because it points to some of the limitations in terms of how different aspects of NOS are covered in textbooks. For example, the relative underrepresentation of task addressing NOS provide information for textbook writers who can appropriate the content of future textbooks to have a more balanced representation of the different aspects of NOS.

We acknowledge the limitation of this study caused by analysing end-of-chapter tasks only and not the entire content of the textbooks. Any findings pertaining to the end-of-chapter tasks cannot be generalised to the whole textbooks, because we do not know the extent to which NOS might be covered elsewhere in the textbook. Even though the findings show an unbalanced representation of the different categories of NOS, these findings do not necessarily reflect how and to what extent NOS is emphasised in the textbooks. However, taking into account the potential end-of-chapter tasks can have on students understanding of NOS, the findings of this study are worrying. A lack of understanding of NOS can inhibit young people’s scientific literacy and impact on their decisions about personal, professional and societal issues (Lederman, Lederman, and Antink 2013). This is concerning because VET students start their professional careers sooner than GSP students, who often continue their education and enhance the likelihood of increasing their understanding of NOS. Given the large number of students who get their secondary education through VET, the concern is even greater if it turns out that the result from this study is representative for all textbook tasks in all VET programmes, However, more research is needed to determine whether this is actually the case.

Based on these results and our concerns about the limitations combined with the circumstance that VET is understudied; the authors recommend that research on NOS in textbooks for VET and VET in general should be prioritized in the future. Furthermore, it would be useful to differentiate which aspects of NOS may be more relevant for what purposes in VET, and identify particular FRA categories, if any, that might benefit more those students in vocational courses.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).