625
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

Understanding of Nature of Science (NOS) in pre-service teachers with different science content knowledge, before and after an intervention

ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon
Pages 125-143 | Received 08 Feb 2022, Accepted 23 Nov 2022, Published online: 01 Dec 2022

References

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2014). The evolving landscape related to assessment of nature of science. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. II, pp. 621–650). Routledge.
  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Akerson, V. (2009). The influence of metacognitive training on preservice elementary teachers’ conceptions of nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 31(16), 2161–2184. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802563324
  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Akerson, V. L. (2004). Learning as conceptual change: Factors mediating the development of preservice elementary teachers’ views of nature of science. Science Education, 88(5), 785–810. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10143
  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving science teachers’ conceptions of nature of science: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 665–701. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690050044044
  • Adúriz-Bravo, A., & Izquierdo-Aymerich, 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
  • Akerson, V., & Donnelly, L. (2010). Teaching nature of science to K-2 students: What understandings can they attain? International Journal of Science Education, 32(1), 97–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690902717283
  • Akerson, V. L., & Abd-el-Khalick, F. (2003). Teaching elements of nature of science: A yearlong case study of a fourth-grade teacher. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(10), 1025–1049. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10119
  • Akerson, V. L., Cullen, T. A., & y Hanson, D. L. (2009). Fostering a community of practice through a professional development program to improve elementary teachers’ views of nature of science and teaching practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(10), 1090–1113. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20303
  • Akerson, V. L., Cullen, T. A., & y Hanson, D. L. (2010). Experienced teachers’ strategies for assessing nature of science conceptions in the elementary classroom. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(6), 723–745. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-010-9208-x
  • Akgun, S., & Kaya, E. (2020). How do university students perceive the nature of science? Science & Education, 29(2), 299–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00105-x
  • Allchin, D. (2011). Evaluating knowledge of (whole) science. Science Education, 95(3), 518–542. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20432
  • Allchin, D. (2013). Teaching the nature of science: Perspectives and resources. SHiPS Education Press.
  • Allchin, D., Andersen, H. M., & Nielsen, K. (2014). Complementary approaches to teaching nature of science: Integrating student inquiry, historical cases, and contemporary cases in classroom practice. Science Education, 98(3), 461–486. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21111
  • Allen, G. E. (2015). How many times can you be wrong and still be right? T. H. Morgan, evolution, chromosomes, and the origins of modern genetics. Science & Education, 24(1), 77–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-013-9664-8
  • Allison, A. (2002). The discovery of resistance to malaria of sickle-cell heterozygotes. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 30(5), 279–287. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.2002.494030050108
  • Alter, B. J. (1997). Whose Nature of Science? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(1), 39–56.doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199701)34:1
  • Aikenhead, G., & Ryan, A. (1992). The development of a new instrument: “Views on Science-Technology-Society” (VOSTS). Science Education, 76, 477–491.
  • Aragón–Méndez, M. M., Acevedo–Díaz, J. A., & García–Carmona, A. (2019). Prospective biology teachers’ understanding of the nature of science through an analysis of the historical case of Semmelweis and childbed fever. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 14(3), 525–555. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-018-9868-y
  • Bell, R., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Lederman, N. G., McComas, W. F., & Matthews, M. R. (2001). The nature of science and science education: A bibliography. Science & Education, 10(1/2), 187–204. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008712616090
  • Bell, R. L., Matkins, J. J., & Gansneder, B. M. (2011). Impacts of contextual and explicit instruction on preservice elementary teachers’ understandings of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(4), 414–436. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20402
  • Bell, R. L., Mulvey, B. K., & Maeng, J. L. (2016). Outcomes of nature of science instruction along a context continuum: Preservice secondary science teachers’ conceptions and instructional intentions. International Journal of Science Education, 38(3), 493–520. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1151960
  • Bencze, L., Pouliot, C., Pedretti, E., Simonneaux, L., Simonneaux, J., & Zeidler, y. D. (2020). SAQ, SSI and STSE education: Defending and extending “science–in–context”. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 15(3), 825–851. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-019-09962-7
  • Central Association for Science and Mathematics Teachers. (1909). A Consideration of the Principlesthat Should Determine the Courses in Biology in Secondary Schools. School Science and Mathematics, 9, 241–247.
  • Cheung, K. K. C., & Erduran, S. (2022). A systematic review of research on family resemblance approach to nature of science in science education. Science & Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00379-3
  • Çilekrenkli, A., & Kaya, E. (2022). Learning science in context: Integrating a holistic approach to nature of science in the lower secondary classroom. Science & Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00336-0
  • Clough, M. P. (2011). 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
  • Cofré, H., Gonzalez–Weil, C., Santibáñez, D., Ahumada, G., Furman, M., Podesta, M. E., Camacho, J., Gallego, R., & Pérez, R. (2015). Science teacher education in South America: The case of Argentina, Chile, and Colombia. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 26(1), 45–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-015-9420-9
  • Cofré, H. L., Cuevas, E., & Becerra, B. (2017). The relationship between biology teachers’ understanding of the nature of science and the understanding and acceptance of the theory of evolution. International Journal of Science Education, 39(16), 2243–2260. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1373410
  • Cofré, H. L., Núñez, P., Santibáñez, D., Pavez, J. M., Valencia, M., & Vergara, C. (2019). A critical review of students’ and teachers’ understandings of nature of science. Science & Education, 28(3–5), 205–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00051-3
  • Cofré, H. L., Núñez, P., Santibáñez, D., Pavez, J., & Vergara, C. A. (2018). Theory, evidence, and examples about teaching nature of science and biology using history of science: A Chilean experience. In M. E. Brzezinski Prestes & C. C. Silva (Eds.), Teaching science with context: Historical, philosophical, sociological approaches (pp. 65–84). Springer.
  • Cofré, H. L., Vergara, C. A., Lederman, N. G., Lederman, J. S., Santibáñez, D. P., Jiménez, J. E., & Yancovic, M. A. (2014). Improving Chilean in-service elementary teachers’ understanding of nature of science using self-contained NOS and content embedded min-courses. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(7), 759–783. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-014-9399-7
  • Cofré, H. L., Vergara, C., Santibáñez, D., & Pavez, J. (2022). Preservice science teacher education around the globe: Trends, challenges, and future directions. In J. Luft & G. Jones (Eds.), Handbook of research on science teacher education (pp. 157–171). Taylor & Francis.
  • Cooley, W. W., & Klopfer, L. E. (1963). The evaluation of specific educational innovations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1(1), 73–80. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660010116
  • Cullinane, A., & Erduran, S. (2022). Nature of science in preservice science teacher education–case studies of Irish pre-service science teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2022.2042978
  • Dai, P., William, C. T., Witucki, A. M., & Rudge, D. W. (2021). Rosalind Franklin and the iscovery of the structure of DNA using historical narratives to help students understand nature of science. Science & Education, 30(3), 659–692. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00188-6
  • Edgerly, H., Kruse, J., & Wilcox, J. (2022). Investigating elementary teachers’ views, implementation, and longitudinal enactment of nature of science instruction. Science & Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00343-1
  • Erduran, S., Kaya, E., Cilekrenkli, A., Akgun, S., & Aksoz, B. (2021). Perceptions of nature of scienceemerging in group discussions: A comparative account of pre-service teachers from Turkey and England. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 19, 1375–1396.
  • Erduran, S., & Dagher, Z. (2014). Reconceptualizing the nature of science in science education. Springer.
  • Erduran, S., & Kaya, E. (2018). Drawing nature of science in pre-service science teacher education: Epistemic insight through visual representations. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1133–1149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9773-0
  • Erumit, B. A., & Akerson, V. L. (2022). Using children’s literature in the middle school science class to teach nature of science. Science & Education, 31(3), 713–737. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00274-3
  • Gallo, R., & Montanier, L. (1988). El SIDA en 1988 [AIDS in 1988]. Investigación y Ciencia, 147, 4–13.
  • García-Carmona, A. (2018). Improving pre-service elementary teachers’ understanding of the nature of science through an analysis of the historical case of Rosalind Franklin and the structure of DNA. Research in Science Education, 51(2), 347–373. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9798-4
  • 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(1-2), 65–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-017-9876-4
  • Griffiths, A., Miller, J., Suzuki, D., Lewontin, R., & Gelbart, W. (2008). Genética. McGraw Hill.
  • Hansson, L., Leden, L., & Thulin, S. (2020). Book talks as an approach to nature of science teaching in early childhood education. International Journal of Science Education, 42(12), 2095–2111. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1812011
  • Hodson, D., & Wong, S. (2017). Going beyond the consensus view: Broadening and enriching the scope of NOS-oriented curricula. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 17(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2016.1271919
  • Höttecke, D., & Allchin, D. (2020). Reconceptualizing nature-of-science education in the age of social media. Science Education, 104(4), 641–666. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21575
  • Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2011). A family resemblance approach to the nature of science for science education. Science & Education, 20(7), 591–607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-010-9293-4
  • 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21305
  • Kaya, E., & Erduran, S. (2016). From FRA to RFN, or how the family resemblance approach can be transformed for science curriculum analysis on nature of science. Science & Education, 25(9-10), 1115–1133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-016-9861-3
  • Khishfe, R. (2022). Nature of science and argumentation instruction in socioscientific and scientific contexts. International Journal of Science Education, 44(4), 647–673. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2050488
  • Krell, M., Koskab, J., Penninga, F., & Krüger, D. (2015). Fostering pre-service teachers’ about nature of science: Evaluation of a new STEM curriculum. Research in Science & Technological Education, 33(3), 344–365. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2015.1060411
  • Lapierre, D. (1991). Beyond love. Warner Books.
  • 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660290404
  • Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 831–879). Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R., & Schwartz, R. (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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10034
  • Lederman, N. G., & Druger, M. (1985). Classroom factors related to changes in students’ conceptions of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22(7), 649–662. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660220705
  • Liang, L. L., Chen, S., Chen, X., Kaya, O. N., Adams, A. D., Macklin, M., & Ebenezer, J. (2009). Preserviceteachers' views about nature of scientific knowledge development: An international collaborative study. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7(5), 987–1012.
  • Mackay, L. D. (1971). Development of understanding about the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 8(1), 57–66. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660080110
  • 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 (pp. 3–26). Springer.
  • McComas, W. F. (1996). Ten myths of science: Reexamining what we think we know about the nature of science. School Science and Mathematics, 96(1), 10–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1996.tb10205.x
  • McComas, W. F. (2020a). Nature of science instruction: Rationales and strategies. Springer International Publishing.
  • McComas, W. F. (2020b). Considering a consensus view of nature of science content for school science purposes. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), Nature of science instruction: Rationales and strategies (pp. 35–66). Springer International Publishing.
  • McComas, W. F., Clough, M. P., & Nouri, N. (2020). Nature of science and classroom practice: A review of the literature with implications for effective NOS instruction. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), Nature of science instruction: Rationales and strategies (pp. 67–111). Springer International Publishing.
  • McDonald, C. V. (2010). The influence of explicit nature of science and argumentation instruction on preservice primary teachers’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(9), 1137–1164. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20377
  • Mead, M., & Metraux, R. (1957). Image of the scientist among high-school students. Science, 126(3270), 384–390. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.126.3270.384
  • Mesci, G. (2020). The influence of PCk-based NOS teaching on pre-service science teachers’ NOS views. Science & Education, 29(3), 743–769. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00117-7
  • Mesci, G., & Schwartz, R. S. (2017). Changing preservice science teachers’ views of nature of science: Why some conceptions may be more easily altered than others. Research in Science Education, 47(2), 329–351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-015-9503-9
  • Morrison, J. A., & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Science teachers’ diagnosis and understanding of students’ preconceptions. Science Education, 87(6), 849–867. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10092
  • Mulvey, B. K., & Bell, R. L. (2017). Making learning last: Teachers’ long-term retention of improved nature of science conceptions and instructional rationales. International Journal of Science Education, 39(1), 62–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1267879
  • Mulvey, B. K., Chiu, J. L., Ghosh, R., & Bell, R. L. (2016). Special education teachers’ nature of science instructional experiences. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(4), 554–578. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21311
  • Murphy, C., Smith, G., & Broderick, N. (2021). A starting point: Provide children opportunities to engage with scientific inquiry and nature of science. Research in Science Education, 51(6), 1759–1793. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-9825-0
  • Nouri, N., & McComas, W. F. (2021). History of science (HOS) as a vehicle to communicate aspects of nature of science (NOS): Multiple cases of HOS instructors’ perspectives regarding NOS. Research in Science Education, 51(S1), 289–305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09879-9
  • Nyarko, S. C., & Rudge, D. W. (2022). Using the history of plate tectonics to teach the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2105977
  • 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10105
  • Paraskevopoulou, E., & Koliopoulos, D. (2011). Teaching the nature of science through the Millikan-Ehrenhaft dispute. Science & Education, 20(10), 943–960. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-010-9308-1
  • Pavez, J., Vergara, C. A., Santibáñez, D., & Cofré, H. L. (2016). Using a professional development program for enhancing Chilean biology teachers’ understanding of Nature of Science (NOS) and their perceptions about using history of science to teach NOS. Science & Education, 25(3-4), 383–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-016-9817-7
  • Peters-Burton, E. E., Parrish, J. C., & Mulvey, B. K. (2019). Extending the utility of the views of Nature of Science assessment through epistemic network analysis. Science & Education, 28(9-10), 1027–1053. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00081-x
  • Reinisch, B., & Krüger, D. (2018). Preservice biology teachers’ conceptions about the tentative nature of theories and models in biology. Research in Science Education, 48(1), 71–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9559-1
  • Robinson, J. T. (1965). Science teaching and the Nature of Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 3(1), 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660030107
  • Rubba, P. (1976). Nature of scientific knowledge scale, school of education. Indiana University, Bloomington.
  • Rubba, P. A., & Andersen, H. (1978). Development of an instrument to assess secondary school sudents’ understanding of the nature of scientific knowledge. Science Education, 62(4), 449–458. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730620404
  • 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
  • Seung, E., Bryan, L., & Butler, M. (2009). Improving preservice middle grades science teachers’ understanding of the nature of science using three instructional approaches. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20(2), 157–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-009-9130-2
  • 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), 1101–1104. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199712)34:10<1101::AID-TEA8>3.0.CO;2-V
  • Southerland, S. A., Johnston, A., & Sowell, S. (2006). Describing teachers’ conceptual ecologies for the nature of science. Science Education, 90(5), 874–906. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20153
  • Sturtevant, A. H. (1965). A history of genetics. Harper and Row.
  • van Dijk, E. (2011). Portraying real science in science communication. Science Education, 95(6), 1086–1100. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20458
  • Wang, M., Gao, S., Gui, W., Ye, J., & Mi, S. (2022). Investigation of pre–service teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science based on the LDA model. Science & Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00332-4
  • William, C. T., & Rudge, D. W. (2019). Effects of historical story telling on student understanding of nature of science. Science & Education, 28(9-10), 1105–1133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00073-x
  • Yacoubian, H. A. (2021). Students’ views of nature of science, a long-term study. Science & Education, 30(2), 381–408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00179-7
  • Zion, M., Schwartz, R. S., Rimerman-Shmueli, E., & Adler, I. (2020). Supporting teachers’ understanding of nature of science and inquiry through personal experience and perception of inquiry as a dynamic process. Research in Science Education, 50(4), 1281–1304. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9732-9

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.