Understanding Levels of Prospective Science Teachers on the Nature of Science
Suleyman Yaman 1  
,  
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
Karaelmas University, Eregli Education Faculty, Science Education Department, Zonguldak, Turkey
2
Maltepe University, Istanbul, Turkey
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Suleyman Yaman   

Karaelmas University, Eregli Education Faculty, Science Education Department, Zonguldak, Turkey
Publish date: 2017-10-13
 
International Journal of Physics and Chemistry Education 2010;2(2):95–109
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
The aim of this study is to determine whether the understandings levels of prospective science teachers on the nature of science are dependent on differences in grade level and gender. This study utilizes VOSTS scale, which was developed by Aikenhead and Ryan, and adapted by Chan in order to determine viewpoints of prospective teachers on the nature of science. Eighteen multiple-choice questions from this scale were translated and adapted into Turkish from English by researchers, who also conducted a preliminary work on the validity and reliability of the scale. The adapted scale was applied to 80 prospective science teachers, who were not included in the sample of this study and the reliability coefficient of the scale was found to be 0.81. Then the scale is applied to 201 prospective teachers who are enrolled in the science education program. The statistical analysis of the results demonstrated that while views of the prospective science teachers on nature of science are not significantly correlated with differences in grade level and gender, there were significant variations among these views. In this study, it was determined that prospective teachers had certain misconceptions on nature of science with respect to specific issues including hierarchical relationships between concepts of hypothesis, theory, law, and universal scientific method; that they relied predominantly on positivist paradigm; and that they espoused the traditional approach to science in understanding and interpreting nature of science.
 
REFERENCES (40)
1.
Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R.L., & Lederman, N.G. (1998). The nature of science and instructional practice: Making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82, 417-436.
 
2.
Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N.G. (1999, September). Success of the attempts to improve science teachers' conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the literature. The 5th International History, Philosophy and Science Teaching Conference, Como, Italy.
 
3.
Aikenhead, G. S., & Ryan, A.G. (1992). The development of a new instrument: “Views on Science- Technology-Society” (VOST). Science Education, 76, 477-491.
 
4.
Aguirre, J. M., Haggerty, S. M., & Linder, C. J. (1990). Student-teachers’ conceptions of science, teaching and learning: A case study in preservice science education. International Journal of Science Education, 12, 381-390.
 
5.
Akerson, V.L., Buzzeli, C.A., & Donnelly, L.A. (2010). On the nature of teaching nature of science: Preservice early childhood teachers’ instruction in preschool and elementary settings. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(2), 213–233.
 
6.
Aslan, O., Yalçın, N., & Taşar, M.F. (2009). The views oft he teachers of the science and technology on the nature of science. Ahi Evran University Journal of Education Faculty, 10(3), 1-8.
 
7.
Bağcı-Kılıç, G. (2002). World and science teaching in Turkey. Fifth National Congress of Science and Mathematics Education, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
 
8.
Balkı, N., Çoban, A.K., & Aktaş, M. (2003). View about elementary students' science and scientists. Uludağ University Journal of Education Faculty, 17(1), 11-17.
 
9.
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, 352-377.
 
10.
Bell, R.L., Lederman, N.G., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2000). Developing and acting upon one's conception of the nature of science: A follow-up study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 3(6), 563-581.
 
11.
Berberoğlu, G., & Kalender, İ. (2005). Investigation of student achievement across years, school types and region: The SSE and PISA analyses. Journal of Educational Science and Practice, 4(7), 24-35.
 
12.
Bianchini, J.A., & 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.
 
13.
Braisher, T.L., Symonds, M.R.E., & Gemmell, N.L. (2005). Publication success in nature and science is not gender dependent. BioEssays, 27, 858-859.
 
14.
Chen, S. (2001). Prospective teachers’ views on the nature of science and science teaching. PhD Thesis, Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Indiana University.
 
15.
Cheung, K. C., & Toh, K. A. (1990). In the eyes of the beholder: Beginning teachers’ conception of the nature of science and science teaching. Singapore: The Annual Conference of the Educational Research Association.
 
16.
Discenna, J. L., & Howse, M. A., (1998). Biology and physics students’ beliefs about science and science learning in non-traditional classrooms. San Diego, CA: The Annual Meeting of American Educational Research Association.
 
17.
Donnelly, J. (1999). Interpreting differences: The educational aims of teachers of science and history, and their implication. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31, 17-41.
 
18.
Eflin, J. T., Glennan, S., & Reisch, G. (1999). The Nature of science: A perspective from the philosophy of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 36, 107-116.
 
19.
Gallagher, J.J. (1991). Prospective and practicing secondery school teachers’knowledge and beliefs about the philosophy of science. Science Education, 75, 121-133.
 
20.
Kang, S., Scharmann, C. L., & Noh, T. (2005). Examining students’ views on the nature of science: Results from Korean 6th, 8th, and 10th graders. Science Education, 89, 314-334.
 
21.
Kılıç, K., Sungur, S., Çakıroğlu, J., & Tekkaya, C. (2005). Ninth grade students’ understanding of the nature of scientific knowledge. Hacettepe University Journal of Education Faculty, 28, 127-133.
 
22.
Koray, Ö., Bahadır, H., & Geçgin, F. (2006). The states of being represented of science process’s skills in the course books of chemistry and chemistry curriculums at the class 9th. Karaelmas University Journal of Social Science, 2(4), 147-156.
 
23.
Kuhn, T. (1982). Bilimsel devrimlerin yapısı [The structure of scientific revolutions]. (N. Kuyaş, Trans.), İstanbul: Alan Publishing.
 
24.
Kurt, H., Kaya, B., Ateş, A., & Kılıç, S. (2009). The biological literacy of biology teacher candidates. Selçuk University Journal of Ahmet Keleşoğlu Education Faculty, 27, 17-30.
 
25.
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, 331-359.
 
26.
Lederman, N.G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R.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.
 
27.
Matthews, M. R. (1998). In defense of modest goals when teaching about the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 35, 161-174.
 
28.
McComas, W.F., Clough, M.P., & Almazroa, H. (2006). The role and character of the nature of science in science education. In J. Gilbert (Ed.), Science education: Major themes in education, (p. 28-58), Abington: Routledge.
 
29.
Meichtry, Y. J. (1993). The impact of science curricula on students views about the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(5), 429-443.
 
30.
Palmquist, B.C., & Finley, F.N. (1997). Preservice teachers’ views of the nature of science during a postbaccalaureate science teaching program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(6), 595-615.
 
31.
Pomeroy, D. (1993). Implications of teachers’ beliefs about the nature of science: Comparison of the beliefs of scientist, secondary science teachers, and elementary teachers. Science Education, 77, 261-278.
 
32.
Renner, J.W. & Marek, E.A. (1990). An educational theory base for science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(3), 241-246.
 
33.
Snow, C.P. (2001). İki kültür [The two cultures]. (T. Birkan, Trans), Ankara: Tubitak Publishing.
 
34.
Taşar, M.F. (2002). The views about science survey. Fifth National Congress of Science and Mathematics Education, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
 
35.
Terzi, A.R. (2005). A research on scientific epistemological beliefs of university students. Afyon Kocatepe University Journal of Social Science, 7(2), 288-311.
 
36.
Tsai, C.C. (2002). Nested epistemologies: Science teachers’ beliefs af teaching, learning and science. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 771-783.
 
37.
Tsai, C.C. (2006). Reinterpreting and reconstructing science: Teachers’ view changes toward the nature of science by courses of science education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 363-375.
 
38.
Tunç-Şahin, C., & Köksal, M.S. (2010). How are the perceptions of high school students and teachers on NOS as a knowledge type presented in schools in terms of “importance” and “interest”? International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 5(1), 105-126.
 
39.
Turgut, H. (2009). Prospective science teachers’ conceptions about scientific knowledge and method. Journal of Turkish Educational Sciences, 7(1), 165-184.
 
40.
Wood, R.L. (1972). University education student's understanding of the nature and processes of science. School Science and Mathematics, 72(1), 73-79.
 
eISSN:1306-3049