Reading Adapted Scientific Literature: A Theoretical and Qualitative Assessment of its Potential for Promoting an Understanding of Nature of Science

Thomas Waitz; Hilko Aljets

doi:10.51724/ijpce.v17i1.374

Authors

Thomas Waitz Georg-August-University Goettingen https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4098-1224
Hilko Aljets University of Goettingen https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7464-0535

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51724/ijpce.v17i1.374

Keywords:

adapted scientific literature, scientific literature

Abstract

Reading authentic scientific literature is expected to have many positive effects on students, including the communication of various aspects about nature of science. Many different approaches are discussed, e.g., using a research article unchanged, adding comments and explanations to an article, or changing and adapting it. Common to all approaches is the underlying premise that the characteristic properties of scientific literature can promote nature of science in educational settings. To support this premise, this article first links selected structural and rhetorical features of scientific literature to aspects of the nature of science. We then report on our qualitative study of how reading an adaptation of a scientific review affects pre-service teachers' understanding of nature of science. The examined features of scientific literature point to aspects of nature of science. After our intervention, we observed a shift in participants’ perception of the uncertainty of scientific knowledge, leading to a more accurate understanding, while changes on the empirical nature of scientific knowledge and as the subjectivity of scientists improved primarily among individual participants. From both a theoretical and an empirical point of view, our findings collectively suggest that engaging with authentic scientific literature in form of adapted literature can effectively promote an understanding of nature of science.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abd‐El‐Khalick, F. (2005). Developing deeper understandings of nature of science: The impact of a philosophy of science course on preservice science teachers’ views and instructional planning. International Journal of Science Education, 27(1), 15–42. doi: 10.1080/09500690410001673810

Abd‐El‐Khalick, F., & Akerson, V. L. (2009). The Influence of Metacognitive Training on Preservice Elementary Teachers’ Conceptions of Nature of Science. International Journal of Science Education, 31(16), 2161–2184. doi: 10.1080/09500690802563324

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(4), 417–436. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199807)82:4<417::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-E

Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). The Infuence of History of Science Courses on Students’ Views of Nature of Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(10), 1057–1095. doi: 10.1002/1098-2736(200012)37:10<1057::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-C

Akerson, V. L., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Influence of a Reflective Explicit Activity-Based Approach on Elementary Teachers’ Conceptions of Nature of Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(4), 295–317. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(200004)37:4<295::AID-TEA2>3.0.CO;2-2

Allchin, D. (2003). Scientific myth-conceptions. Science Education, 87(3), 329–351. doi: 10.1002/sce.10055

Allchin, D. (2011). Evaluating Knowledge of the Nature of (Whole) Science. Science Education, 95(3), 518–542. doi: 10.1002/sce.20432

Allchin, D. (2012). Toward Clarity on Whole Science and KNOWS. Science Education, 96(4), 693–700. doi: 10.1002/sce.21017

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. doi: 10.1002/sce.21111

Ariely, M., Livnat, Z., & Yarden, A. (2019). Analyzing the Language of an Adapted Primary Literature Article. Towards a Disciplinary Approach of Science Teaching Using Texts. Science & Education, 28(1–2), 63–85. doi: 10.1007/s11191-019-00033-5

Atanassova, I., Rey, F.-C., & Bertin, M. (2018). Studying Uncertainty in Science: A distributional analysis through the IMRaD structure. In European Language Resources Association (Ed.), Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2018). Paris. Retrieved from http://lrec-conf.org/workshops/lrec2018/W24/summaries/10_W24.html

Atkinson, D. (1999). Scientific Discourse in Sociohistorical Context: The Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 1675—1975. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Authors (2019) [deleted to maintain the integrity of the review process]

Authors (2023) [deleted to maintain the integrity of the review process]

Azninda, H., Raharjo, & Sunarti, T. (2021). Teachers’ Views about Nature of Science (NOS) Using Reconceptualised Family Resemblance Approach to Nature of Science (RFN) Questionnaire. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1747(1), 012019. doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1747/1/012019

Barak, M. (2023). Family Resemblance Approach in Science Education. Science & Education, 32(5), 1221–1225. doi: 10.1007/s11191-023-00456-1

Baram-Tsabari, A., & Yarden, A. (2005). Text genre as a factor in the formation of scientific literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(4), 403–428. doi: 10.1002/tea.20063

Bazerman, C. (1985). Physicists Reading Physics. Written Communication, 2(1), 3–23. doi: 10.1177/0741088385002001001

Bell, R. L. (2006). Perusing Pandora’s Box: Exploring The What, When, And How Of Nature Of Science Instruction. In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific Inquiry and Nature of Science: Implications for Teaching, Learning, and Teacher Education (pp. 427–446). Dordrecht: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-5814-1_19

Bertin, M., Atanassova, I., Gingras, Y., & Larivière, V. (2016). The invariant distribution of references in scientific articles. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(1), 164–177. doi: 10.1002/asi.23367

Braun, I., & Nückles, M. (2014). Scholarly Holds Lead Over Popular and Instructional: Text Type Influences Epistemological Reading Outcomes. Science Education, 98(5), 867–904. doi: 10.1002/sce.21117

Brill, G., & Yarden, A. (2003). Learning Biology through Research Papers: A Stimulus for Question-Asking by High-School Students. Cell Biology Education, 2(4), 266–274. doi: 10.1187/cbe.02-12-0062

Briones, R., Weichbrodt, C., Paltrinieri, L., Mey, I., Villinger, S., Giller, K., … Groot, B. L. (2016). Voltage Dependence of Conformational Dynamics and Subconducting States of VDAC-1. Biophysical Journal, 111(6), 1223–1234. doi: 10.1016/j.bpj.2016.08.007

Bugingo, J. B., Yadav, L. L., Mugisha, I. S., & Mashood, K. K. (2022). Improving Teachers’ and Students’ Views on Nature of Science Through Active Instructional Approaches: A Review of the Literature. Science & Education. doi: 10.1007/s11191-022-00382-8

Chappell, J., & Kacelnik, A. (2004). Selection of tool diameter by New Caledonian crows Corvus moneduloides. Animal Cognition, 7(2), 121–127. doi: 10.1007/s10071-003-0202-y

Cheung, K. K. C., & Erduran, S. (2023). A Systematic Review of Research on Family Resemblance Approach to Nature of Science in Science Education. Science & Education, 32(5), 1637–1673. doi: 10.1007/s11191-022-00379-3

Clough, M. P. (2007). Teaching the Nature of Science to Secondary and Post-Secondary Students: Questions Rather Than Tenets. The Pantaneto Forum, 25. Retrieved from http://pantaneto.co.uk/teaching-the-nature-of-science-to-secondary-and-post-secondary-students-questions-rather-than-tenets-michael-clough/

Cobern, W. W. (2020). Are we accidentally teaching students to mistrust science? Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 3(1), 1–2.

Cofré, H., 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), 205–248. doi: 10.1007/s11191-019-00051-3

Crismore, A., & Vande Kopple, W. J. V. (1997a). Hedges and Readers: Effects on Attitudes and Learning. In Hedging and Discourse (pp. 83–114). de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110807332.83

Crismore, A., & Vande Kopple, W. J. V. (1997b). The effects of hedges and gender on the attitudes of readers in the United States toward material in a science textbook. In Culture and Styles of Academic Discourse (pp. 223–247). de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110821048.223

Dagher, Z. R., & Erduran, S. (2016). Reconceptualizing the Nature of Science for Science Education. Science & Education, 25(1–2), 147–164. doi: 10.1007/s11191-015-9800-8

Dagher, Z. R., & Erduran, S. (2023). To FRA or not to FRA: What is the question for science education? Science & Education, 32(5), 1247–1264. doi: 10.1007/s11191-023-00425-8

Davoodi-Semiromi, A., Schreiber, M., Nalapalli, S., Verma, D., Singh, N. D., Banks, R. K., … Daniell, H. (2010). Chloroplast-derived vaccine antigens confer dual immunity against cholera and malaria by oral or injectable delivery. Plant Biotechnology Journal, 8(2), 223–242. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7652.2009.00479.x

Day, R. A. (1989). The Origins of the Scientific Paper: The IMRAD Format. American Medical Writers Association Journal, 4(2), 16–18.

Demirel, Z. M., Sungur, S., & Çakıroğlu, J. (2023). Science Teachers’ Views on the Nature of Science and its Integration into Instruction. Science & Education, 32(5), 1401–1433. doi: 10.1007/s11191-022-00409-0

Deng, F., Chen, D.-T., Tsai, C.-C., & Chai, C. S. (2011). Students’ views of the nature of science: A critical review of research. Science Education, 95(6), 961–999. doi: 10.1002/sce.20460

Dimopoulos, K., & Karamanidou, C. (2013). Towards a More Epistemologically Valid Image of School Science: Revealing the Textuality of School Science Textbooks. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Critical Analysis of Science Textbooks: Evaluating Instructional Effectiveness (1st ed., pp. 61–77). Dordrecht: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-4168-3_4

Eastwood, J. L., Sadler, T. D., Zeidler, D. L., Lewis, A., Amiri, L., & Applebaum, S. (2012). Contextualizing Nature of Science Instruction in Socioscientific Issues. International Journal of Science Education, 34(15), 2289–2315. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2012.667582

Erduran, S., Dagher, Z. R., & McDonald, C. V. (2019). Contributions of the Family Resemblance Approach to Nature of Science in Science Education. Science & Education, 28(3), 311–328. doi: 10.1007/s11191-019-00052-2

European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). (2022). Glyphosate: No change proposed to hazard classification [Press release]. Helsinki. Retrieved from https://echa.europa.eu/en/-/glyphosate-no-change-proposed-to-hazard-classification

European Commission. (2023). No qualified majority reached by Member States [Press release]. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. Retrieved from European Commission website: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/statement_23_5792

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). (2015). Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance glyphosate. EFSA Journal, 13(11). doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2015.4302

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). (2023). Glyphosate: No critical areas of concern; data gaps identified [Press release]. Parma. Retrieved from https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/news/glyphosate-no-critical-areas-concern-data-gaps-identified

Falk, H., Brill, G., & Yarden, A. (2008). Teaching a Biotechnology Curriculum Based on Adapted Primary Literature. International Journal of Science Education, 30(14), 1841–1866. doi: 10.1080/09500690701579553

Fang, Z. (2005). Scientific literacy: A systemic functional linguistics perspective. Science Education, 89(2), 335–347. doi: 10.1002/sce.20050

Fernández, N., Benitez, F., & Romero-Maltrana, D. (2022). Social Character of Science and Its Connection to Epistemic Reliability. Science & Education, 31(6), 1429–1448. doi: 10.1007/s11191-021-00290-3

Fricke, K., & Reinisch, B. (2023). Evaluation of Nature of Science Representations in Biology School Textbooks Based on a Differentiated Family Resemblance Approach. Science & Education, 32(5), 1583–1611. doi: 10.1007/s11191-023-00444-5

Galili, I. (2019). Towards a Refined Depiction of Nature of Science. Science & Education, 28(3–5), 503–537. doi: 10.1007/s11191-019-00042-4

Goldman, S. R., & Bisanz, G. L. (2002). Toward a Functional Analysis of Scientific Genres: Implications for Understanding and Learning Processes. In J. Otero, J. A. León, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The Psychology of Science Text Comprehension (1st ed., pp. 19–50). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91–108. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x

Guyton, K. Z., Loomis, D., Grosse, Y., El Ghissassi, F., Benbrahim-Tallaa, L., Guha, N., … Straif, K. (2015). Carcinogenicity of tetrachlorvinphos, parathion, malathion, diazinon, and glyphosate. The Lancet Oncology, 16(5), 490–491. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)70134-8

Hagen, R. (2023). Adaptierte Primärliteratur in der Hochschule—Einfluss auf Textverständnis und epistemologische Überzeugungen von Studierenden im ersten Studienabschnitt (Dissertation, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin). doi: 10.17169/refubium-37542

Hagen, R., Watermann, R., & Nückles, M. (2022). Der Einfluss wissenschaftlicher Textgenres auf das Textverständnis und epistemologische Überzeugungen bei Studierenden der Bildungswissenschaften. Swiss Journal of Educational Research, 44(2), 237–249. doi: 10.24452/sjer.44.2.6

Hagen, R., Watermann, R., & Nückles, M. (2023). Adapted primary literature among first-year students: Effects on text comprehension and epistemological beliefs. Manuscript.

Hamza, K., Wojcik, A., Arvanitis, L., Haglund, K., Lundegård, I., & Schenk, L. (2023). Nature of science in students’ discussions on disagreement between scientists following a narrative about health effects of the Fukushima Daiichi accident. International Journal of Science Education, 45(1), 22–42. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2022.2151327

Harmon, J. E. (1989). The Structure of Scientific and Engineering Papers: A Historical Perspective. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 32(3), 132–138. doi: 10.1109/47.31618

Harmon, J. E. (1992). Current Contents of Theoretical Scientific Papers. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 22(4), 357–375. doi: 10.2190/V051-8UKA-W8FJ-U54N

Harré, R. (1990). Some Narrative Conventions of Scientific Discourse. In C. Nash (Ed.), Narrative in Culture: The Uses of Storytelling in the Sciences, Philosophy, and Literature (pp. 83–102). London; New York: Routledge.

Hill, S. S., Soppelsa, B. F., & West, G. K. (1982). Teaching ESL Students to Read and Write Experimental-Research Papers. TESOL Quarterly, 16(3), 333–347. doi: 10.2307/3586633

Hodson, D. (2014). Nature of Science in the Science Curriculum: Origin, Development, Implications and Shifting Emphases. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching (pp. 911–970). Dordrecht: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-7654-8_28

Hoskins, S. G., Lopatto, D., & Stevens, L. M. (2011). The C.R.E.A.T.E. Approach to Primary Literature Shifts Undergraduates’ Self-Assessed Ability to Read and Analyze Journal Articles, Attitudes about Science, and Epistemological Beliefs. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 10(4), 368–378. doi: 10.1187/cbe.11-03-0027

Höttecke, D., & Allchin, D. (2020). Reconceptualizing nature‐of‐science education in the age of social media. Science Education, 104(4), 641–666. doi: 10.1002/sce.21575

Hyland, K. (1994). Hedging in academic writing and EAF textbooks. English for Specific Purposes, 13(3), 239–256. doi: 10.1016/0889-4906(94)90004-3

Hyland, K. (1998). Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: 10.1075/pbns.54

Hyland, K. (2000). Hedges, Boosters and Lexical Invisibility: Noticing Modifiers in Academic Texts. Language Awareness, 9(4), 179–197. doi: 10.1080/09658410008667145

Hyland, K. (2010). Constructing proximity: Relating to readers in popular and professional science. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(2), 116–127. doi: 10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.003

International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). (2015). Some Organophosphate Insecticides and Herbicides. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer.

Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2011). A Family Resemblance Approach to the Nature of Science for Science Education. Science & Education, 20(7), 591–607. doi: 10.1007/s11191-010-9293-4

Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2023). Revisiting the Foundations of the Family Resemblance Approach to Nature of Science: Some New Ideas. Science & Education, 32(5), 1227–1245. doi: 10.1007/s11191-022-00375-7

Jefferson, T., Wager, E., & Davidoff, F. (2002). Measuring the quality of editorial peer review. JAMA, 287(21), 2786–2790. doi: 10.1001/jama.287.21.2786

Jensen, J. D. (2008). Scientific Uncertainty in News Coverage of Cancer Research: Effects of Hedging on Scientists’ and Journalists’ Credibility. Human Communication Research, 34(3), 347–369. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2008.00324.x

Ju, H., Cho, E. H., & Paik, S.-H. (2023). Impact of Teaching Materials Based on the Family Resemblance Approach on Pre-service Chemistry Teachers’ Views of Nature of Science. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 9(1), 194–225. doi: 10.1163/23641177-bja10059

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. doi: 10.1002/tea.21305

Kararo, M., & McCartney, M. (2019). Annotated primary scientific literature: A pedagogical tool for undergraduate courses. PLoS Biology, 17(1), 3000103. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000103

Khishfe, R. (2022). Improving Students’ Conceptions of Nature of Science: A Review of the Literature. Science & Education, 32(6), 1887–1931. doi: 10.1007/s11191-022-00390-8

Khishfe, R., & Lederman, N. (2006). Teaching nature of science within a controversial topic: Integrated versus nonintegrated. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 395–418. doi: 10.1002/tea.20137

Kostøl, K. B., Bøe, M. V., & Skår, A. R. (2023). Nature of Science in Norway’s Recent Curricula Reform. Science & Education, 32(5), 1561–1581. doi: 10.1007/s11191-022-00399-z

Kronick, D. A. (1962). A History of Scientific and Technical Periodicals: The Origins and Development of the Scientific and Technological Press 1665-1790. New York, NY: Scarecrow Press.

Laslo, M., & Hartmann, M. (2023). Developing Scientific Communication Skills Using Primary Literature in an Undergraduate Cell Biology Course. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 24(2), e00186-22. doi: 10.1128/jmbe.00186-22

Lederman, J. S., Lederman, N. G., Bartos, S. A., Bartels, S. L., Meyer, A. A., & Schwartz, R. S. (2014). Meaningful assessment of learners’ understandings about scientific inquiry—The views about scientific inquiry (VASI) questionnaire. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(1), 65–83. doi: 10.1002/tea.21125

Lederman, N. G. (2006). Syntax Of Nature Of Science Within Inquiry And Science Instruction. In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific Inquiry and Nature of Science: Implications for Teaching, Learning, and Teacher Education (pp. 301–317). Dordrecht: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-5814-1_14

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 (1st ed., pp. 831–880). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

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. doi: 10.1002/tea.10034

Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2019). Teaching and learning nature of scientific knowledge: Is it Déjà vu all over again? Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(6). doi: 10.1186/s43031-019-0002-0

Lederman, N. G., Schwartz, R. S., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Bell, R. L. (2001). Pre-service Teachers’ Understanding and Teaching of Nature of Science: An Intervention Study. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 1(2), 135–160. doi: 10.1080/14926150109556458

Lee, C. J., Sugimoto, C. R., Zhang, G., & Cronin, B. (2013). Bias in peer review. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(1), 2–17. doi: 10.1002/asi.22784

Low, G. (1996). Intensifiers and Hedges in Questionnaire Items and the Lexical Invisibility Hypothesis. Applied Linguistics, 17(1), 1–37. doi: 10.1093/applin/17.1.1

Matkins, J. J., & Bell, R. L. (2007). Awakening the Scientist Inside: Global Climate Change and the Nature of Science in an Elementary Science Methods Course. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(2), 137–163. doi: 10.1007/s10972-006-9033-4

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. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-2457-0_1

Mayring, P. (2015). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Grundlagen und Techniken (12th ed.). Weinheim; Basel: Beltz.

McCartney, M., Wan, X., Griep, C. D., & Lighthall, N. R. (2023). Primary Scientific Literature Is Not Just for Students and Academics: A Study of Primary Source Modalities and Predictors of Learning across Adulthood. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 24(1). doi: 10.1128/jmbe.00122-22

McMahan, P., & McFarland, D. A. (2021). Creative Destruction: The Structural Consequences of Scientific Curation. American Sociological Review, 86(2), 341–376. doi: 10.1177/0003122421996323

Meadows, A. J. (1985). The scientific paper as an archaeological artefact. Journal of Information Science, 11(1), 27–30. doi: 10.1177/016555158501100104

Meadows, Arthur Jack. (1998). Communicating Research. San Diego: Academic Press.

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. doi: 10.1007/s11165-015-9503-9

Mourez, M., Kane, R. S., Mogridge, J., Metallo, S., Deschatelets, P., Sellman, B. R., … Collier, R. J. (2001). Designing a polyvalent inhibitor of anthrax toxin. Nature Biotechnology, 19(10), 958–961. doi: 10.1038/nbt1001-958

Müller, S., & Reiners, C. S. (2023). Pre-service Chemistry Teachers’ Views about the Tentative and Durable Nature of Scientific Knowledge. Science & Education, 32, 1813–1845. doi: 10.1007/s11191-022-00374-8

Myers, G. (1991). Stories and styles in two molecular biology review articles. In C. Bazerman & J. G. Paradis (Eds.), Textual Dynamics of the Professions: Historical and Contemporary Studies of Writing in Professional Communities (pp. 45–75). Univ of Wisconsin Press.

Myers, G. (1992). Textbooks and the sociology of scientific knowledge. English for Specific Purposes, 11(1), 3–17. doi: 10.1016/0889-4906(92)90003-S

Nicolaisen, J., & Frandsen, T. F. (2012). Consensus formation in science modeled by aggregated bibliographic coupling. Journal of Informetrics, 6(2), 276–284. doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2011.08.001

Norris, S. P., Stelnicki, N., & Vries, G. (2012). Teaching Mathematical Biology in High School Using Adapted Primary Literature. Research in Science Education, 42(4), 633–649. doi: 10.1007/s11165-011-9215-8

Okan, B., & Kaya, E. (2023). Exploring the Inclusion of Nature of Science in Turkish Middle School Science Textbooks. Science & Education, 32(5), 1515–1535. doi: 10.1007/s11191-022-00371-x

Osborne, J., & Pimentel, D. (2022). Science, misinformation, and the role of education. Science, 378(6617), 246–248. doi: 10.1126/science.abq8093

Ozgelen, S., Yilmaz-Tuzun, O., & Hanuscin, D. L. (2013). Exploring the Development of Preservice Science Teachers’ Views on the Nature of Science in Inquiry-Based Laboratory Instruction. Research in Science Education, 43(4), 1551–1570. doi: 10.1007/s11165-012-9321-2

Paré, G., Trudel, M.-C., Jaana, M., & Kitsiou, S. (2015). Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews. Information & Management, 52(2), 183–199. doi: 10.1016/j.im.2014.08.008

Pautasso, M. (2013). Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review. PLoS Computational Biology, 9(7), e1003149. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003149

Phillips, L. M., & Norris, S. P. (2009). Bridging the Gap Between the Language of Science and the Language of School Science Through the Use of Adapted Primary Literature. Research in Science Education, 39(3), 313–319. doi: 10.1007/s11165-008-9111-z

Popper, K. R. (1963). Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge. London: Routledge and Paul.

Rawlings, J. S. (2019). Primary Literature in the Undergraduate Immunology Curriculum: Strategies, Challenges, and Opportunities. Frontiers in Immunology, 10. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2019.01857

Regulation 2023/2660. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2660 of 28 November 2023 renewing the approval of the active substance glyphosate in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council and amending Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011. http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2023/2660/oj

Sadler, T. D., Chambers, F. W., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). Student conceptualizations of the nature of science in response to a socioscientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 387–409. doi: 10.1080/0950069032000119456

Schmid, K. M., Dunk, R. D. P., & Wiles, J. R. (2021). Early Exposure to Primary Literature and Interactions With Scientists Influences Novice Students’ Views on the Nature of Science. Journal of College Science Teaching, 50(6), 40–47.

Seung, E., Bryan, L. A., & Butler, M. B. (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. doi: 10.1007/s10972-009-9130-2

Shwed, U., & Bearman, P. S. (2010). The Temporal Structure of Scientific Consensus Formation. American Sociological Review, 75(6), 817–840. doi: 10.1177/0003122410388488

Sinding, C. (1996). Literary Genres and the Construction of Knowledge in Biology: Semantic Shifts and Scientific Change. Social Studies of Science, 26(1), 43–70. doi: 10.1177/030631296026001004

Sollaci, L. B., & Pereira, M. G. (2004). The introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRAD) structure: A fifty-year survey. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 92(3), 364–367.

Suppe, F. (1998). The Structure of a Scientific Paper. Philosophy of Science, 65(3), 381–405. doi: 10.1086/392651

Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings (1st ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Takimoto, M. (2015). Assertions and lexical invisibility in EFL learners’ academic essays. Journal of Pragmatics, 89, 85–99. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.09.009

Tarazona, J. V., Court-Marques, D., Tiramani, M., Reich, H., Pfeil, R., Istace, F., & Crivellente, F. (2017). Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: A review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its differences with IARC. Archives of Toxicology, 91(8), 2723–2743. doi: 10.1007/s00204-017-1962-5

Trautwein, U., Köller, O., & Baumert, J. (2001). Lieber oft als viel: Hausaufgaben und die Entwicklung von Leistung und Interesse im Mathematik-Unterricht der 7. Jahrgangsstufe. Zeitschrift Für Pädagogik, 47(5), 703–724. doi: 10.25656/01:4310

Voss, S., Kent-Schneider, I., Kruse, J., & Daemicke, R. (2023). Investigating the Development of Preservice Science Teachers’ Nature of Science Instructional Views Across Rings of the Family Resemblance Approach Wheel. Science & Education, 32(5), 1363–1399. doi: 10.1007/s11191-023-00418-7

Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophische Untersuchungen. Oxford: Blackwell.

Wonham, M. J., de-Camino-Beck, T., & Lewis, M. A. (2004). An epidemiological model for West Nile virus: Invasion analysis and control applications. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 271(1538), 501–507. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2003.2608

Wu, J. (2011). Improving the writing of research papers: IMRAD and beyond. Landscape Ecology, 26(10), 1345–1349. doi: 10.1007/s10980-011-9674-3

Yarden, A., Brill, G., & Falk, H. (2001). Primary literature as a basis for a high-school biology curriculum. Journal of Biological Education, 35(4), 190–195. doi: 10.1080/00219266.2001.9655776

Yarden, A., Phillips, L. M., & Norris, S. P. (2015). Adapted Primary Literature: The Use of Authentic Scientific Texts in Secondary Schools (1st ed.). Dordrecht: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-94-017-9759-7

Yeh, Y.-F., Dhurumraj, T., & Ramnarain, U. (2023). Representations of the Nature of Science in South African Physical Sciences Textbooks on Electricity and Magnetism. Science & Education, 32(5), 1537–1559. doi: 10.1007/s11191-022-00370-y