A Model of Science to Base the Introduction of Aspects of Nature of Science in Teaching Contexts and to Analyse such Contexts

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.28976/1984-2686rbpec2020u617651

Keywords:

Nature of Science, Science Teaching, Theoretical Tool, Methodological Tool

Abstract

Some Science Education researchers have emphasised the importance of discussing aspects of Nature of Science, in a contextualised, and/or explicit, and/or integrated manner within science teaching. Distinct alternative approaches, known as contemporary and comprehensive ones, identify what to introduce in science teaching; however, none of them didactically characterise the meaning of such aspects of Nature of Science. Seeking to contribute to filling this gap, in this paper we have adopted one of these approaches as the theoretical background and have expanded it. For this, we have studied each of the disciplinary perspectives that are part in such an approach. Thus, we characterise such disciplinary perspectives, meaning that we identify and detail the meaning of the aspects of Nature of Science related to each of them, as well as their scopes and limitations. This also results in changes to its visual representation, an analogue-based one. As a result, the new approach can be used both by teachers, in planning more authentic teaching situations, and by researchers in analysing data collected in teaching contexts. Both functions are exemplified in this paper, being taken from some studies that have been, or are being, conducted. By discussing both functions, we identify consequences for science teaching in basic education, for teacher education and for research in the area.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2012). Nature of Science in Science Education: Towards a coherent framework for synergistic research and development. In B. J. Fraser, K. G. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second International Handbook of Science Education (pp. 1041–1060). Springer.

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. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199807)82:4%3C417::AID-SCE1%3E3.0.CO;2-E

Allchin, D. (2004). Should the Sociology of Science Be Rated X? Science Education, 86(6), 934–946. https://doi.org/910.1002/sce.20026

Allchin, D. (2011). Evaluating Knowledge of the Nature of (Whole) Science. Science Education, 95(3), 518–542. https://doi.org/510.1002/sce.20432

Allchin, D. (2012a). How Can History and Philosophy of Science Contribute to Understanding the Nature of Science for Scientific Literacy?: Mapping research needs. Paper presented at the Conference on How Can the HPS Contribute to Contemporary U.S., Boston, Massachusetts.

Allchin, D. (2012b). The Minnesota Case Study Collection: New Historical Inquiry Case Studies for Nature of Science Education. Science & Education, 21(9), 1263–1281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-011-9368-x

Allchin, D. (2013). Teaching the Nature of Science: Perspectives & Resources. SHiPS Educational Press.

Allchin, D. (2014). From Science Studies to Scientific Literacy: A view from the classroom. Science & Education, 23(9), 1911–1932. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-013-9672-8

Allchin, D. (2017). Beyond the Consensus View: Whole Science. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 17(1), 18–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.14922016.11271921

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/410.1002/sce.21111

Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2010). “Doing” Science versus “Being” a Scientist: Examining 10-and 11-year-old schoolchildren’s constructions of science through the lens of identity. Science Education, 94(4), 617–639. https://doi.org/610.1002/sce.20399

Bayir, E., Cakici, Y., & Ertas, O. (2014). Exploring Natural and Social Scientists’ Views of Nature of Science. International Journal of Science Education, 36(8), 1286–1312. https://doi.org/1210.1080/09500693.09502013.09860496

Cakici, Y., & Bayir, E. (2012). Developing Children’s Views of the Nature of Science through Role Play. International Journal of Science Education, 34(7), 1075–1091. https://doi.org/1010.1080/09500693.09502011.09647109

Carvalho, B., & Justi, R. (2019). O Caso Histórico Marie Curie: Investigando o Potencial da História da Ciência para Favorecer Reflexões de Professores em Formação sobre Natureza da Ciência [The Marie Curie Historical Case: Studying the Potential of History of Science to Support Pre-service Teachers' Reflections on Nature of Science]. Alexandria: Revista de Educação em Ciência e Tecnologia, 12(1), 351–373. http://dx.doi.org/310.5007/1982-5153.2019v5012n5001p5351

Cunningham, C. M., & Helms, J. V. (1998). Sociology of Science as a Means to a More Authentic, Inclusive Science Education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(5), 483–499. https://doi.org/410.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199805)199835:199805<199483::AID-TEA199802>199803.199800.CO;199802-L

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. https://doi.org/910.1002/sce.20460

Diamond Jr, A. M. (1996). The Economics of Science. Knowledge and Policy: The International Journal of Knowledge Transfer and Utilization, 9(2–3), 6–49.

Diamond Jr, A. M. (2008). Economics of Science. In S. N. Durlauf & E. Blume (Eds.), The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics Online (pp. 1–27). Palgrave Macmillan.

Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Open University Press.

Dunbar, K. (2002). Understanding the Role of Cognition in Science: The science as category framework. In P. Carruthers, S. Stich, & M. Siegal (Eds.), The Cognitive Basis of Science (pp. 154–170). Cambridge University Press.

Dunbar, K., & Blanchette, I. (2001). The in Vivo/in Vitro Approach to Cognition: The case of analogy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(8), 334–339. https://doi.org/310.1016/S1364-6613(1000)01698-01693

El-Hani, C. N., Machado, V. (2020). COVID-19: The need of an integrated and critical view. Ethnobiology and Conservation, 9(18), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.15451/ec2020-05-9.18-1-20

Erduran, S., & Dagher, Z. R. (2014). Reconceptualising the Nature of Science for Science Education: Scientific knowledge, practices and other family categories. Springer.

Erduran, S., Dagher, Z. R., & McDonald, C. V. (2019). Contributions of the Family Resemblance Approach to Nature of Science in Science Education: A Review of Emergent Research and Development. Science & Education, 28(3–5), 311–328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00052-2

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, 1133–1149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9773-0

Erduran, S., & Mugaloglu, E. (2013). Interactions of Economics of Science and Science Education: Investigating the implications for science teaching and learning. Science & Education, 22(10), 2405–2425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9519-8

Feist, G. J. (2012). The Psychology of Science is Off and Running but Where do We Go from Here? In R. W. Proctor, & E. J. Capaldi (Eds.), Psychology of Science: Implicit and Explicit Processes (pp. 13–39). Oxford University Press.

Feist, G. J., & Gorman, M. E. (1998). The Psychology of Science: Review and integration of a nascent discipline. Review of General Psychology, 2(1), 3–47. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.1032.1031.1033

Gentner, D. (1989). The mechanisms of analogical learning. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 199–241). Cambridge University Press.

Giere, R. N. (1992). Cognitive Models of Science. University of Minnesota Press.

Giere, R. N. (1998). Explaining Science: A cognitive approach. University of Chicago Press.

Giere, R. N. (2002). Scientific Cognition as Distributed Cognition. In P. Carruthers, S. Stich, & M. Siegal (Eds.), The Cognitive Basis of Science (pp. 285–299). Cambridge University Press.

Gilbert, J. (2004). Models and Modelling: Routes to a more authentic science education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(2), 115–130. https://doi.org/110.1007/s10763-10004-13186-10764

Gilbert, J., & Justi, R. (2016). Modelling-based Teaching in Science Education. Springer International Publishing.

Guerra-Ramos, M. T. (2012). Teachers’ ideas about the nature of science: A critical analysis of research approaches and their contribution to pedagogical practice. Science & Education, 21(5), 631–655. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-011-9395-7

Irzik, G. (2013). Introduction: Commercialization of academic science and a new agenda for science education. Science & Education, 22(10), 2375–2384. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-013-9583-8

Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2011). A Family Resemblance Approach to the Nature of Science for Science Education. Science & Education, 20(7–8), 591–607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-010-9293-4

Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2014). New Directions for Nature of Science Research. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching (pp. 999–1021). Springer.

Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Duschl, R. (2015). Epistemic Practices and Scientific Practices: Theoretical and Educational Challenges. Paper presented at the 11th Conference of the European Science Education Research Association, Helsinki, Finland.

Justi, R., Almeida, B., & Santos, M. (2019). Scientific Literacy: Going Beyond Decision-Making. Paper presented at the 13th Conference of the European Science Education Research Association, Bologna, Italy.

Justi, R., & Erduran, S. (2015). Characterizing Nature of Science: A supporting model for teachers. Paper presented at the Conference of the International History, Philosophy, and Science Teaching Group, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Justi, R., & Santos, M. (2019). Students’ Functional Understanding of Nature of Science: Contributions from a Film-based Teaching Activity. Paper presented at the 92nd Annual International Conference of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Baltimore, USA.

Kaya, E., & Erduran, S. (2016). From FRA to RFN: 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

Kaya, E., Erduran, S., Aksoza, B., & Akgun, S. (2019). Reconceptualised family resemblance approach to nature of science in pre-service science teacher education. International Journal of Science Education, 41(1), 21–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.09502018.01529447

Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic Cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Harvard University Press.

Knuuttila, T. (2013). Science in a New Mode: Good old (theoretical) science versus brave new (commodified) knowledge production? Science & Education, 22(10), 2443–2461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9498-9

Laraia, R. B. (2001). Culture: An Anthropologica. Jorge Zahar.

Latour, B. (1987). Science in Action. Harvard University Press.

Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory Life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton University Press.

Lederman, J. S., & Khishfe, R. (2002). Views of Nature of Science, Form D. Unpublished paper. Illinois Institute of Technology.

Lederman, J. S., & Ko, E. K. (2002). Views of Nature of Science, Form E. Unpublished paper. Illinois Institute of Technology.

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 (pp. 301–317). Springer.

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. https://doi.org/410.1002/tea.10034

Lima, R. R. (2017). Desenvolvimento do Conhecimento de Professores sobre Natureza da Ciência: Contribuições da história da ciência. [Development of Teachers' Knowledge on Nature of Science: Contributions from history of science (Masters dissertation), Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte. Retrieved from https://repositorio.ufmg.br/bitstream/1843/BUOS-AWGLUA/1/dissertac_a_o___rachel_rodrigues_lima.pdf

Marcus, G. E., & Fischer, M. (1986). Antropology as Cultural Critique: An experimental moment in the human sciences. University of Chicago Press.

Martins, A. F. P. (2015). Natureza da Ciência no ensino de ciências: uma proposta baseada em “temas” e “questões” [Nature of Science in Science Education: a proposal based on “themes” and “questions”]. Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física, 32(3), 703–737. http://dx.doi.org/10.5007/2175-7941.2015v32n3p703

Matthews, M. R. (1998). In Defense of Modest Goals when Teaching about the Nature of Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(2), 161–174, https://doi.org/110.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199802)199835:199802<199161::AID-TEA199806>199803.199800.CO;199802-Q

Matthews, M. R. (2012). Changing the Focus: From nature of science to features of science. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Advances in Nature of Science Research (pp. 3–26). Springer.

McComas, W. F. (2008). Seeking Historical Examples to Illustrate Key Aspects of the Nature of Science. Science & Education, 17(2–3), 249–263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-007-9081-y

Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. King’s College and London School of Education.

Moura, C., Camel, T., & Guerra, A. (2020). A Natureza da Ciência pelas Lentes do Currículo: Normatividade curricular, contextualização e os centidos de ensinar sobre Ciências [Nature of Science through Curriculum Theory' Lenses: Curricular Normativity, Contextualization and the Meaning of Teaching About Science]. Ensaio Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências, 22, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-21172020210114

Neiva, L. (2020). Desde Galileu, negação da ciência passou do campo religioso para o político, diz astrofísico [Since Galileo, denial od science has shifted from the religious to the political area, says astrophysicist]. https://www.uol.com.br/tilt/noticias/bbc/2020/05/30/desde-galileu-negacao-da-ciencia-passou-do-campo-religioso-para-o-politico-diz-astrofisico.htm

Nielsen, K. (2013). Scientific Communication and the Nature of Science. Science & Education, 22(9), 2067–2086. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9475-3

Olson, J. (2018). The Inclusion of the Nature of Science in Nine Recent International Science Education Standards Documents. Science & Education, 27(7–8), 637–660. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-018-9993-8

Osbeck, L. M., Nersessian, N. J., Malone, K. R., & Newstetter, W. C. (2011). Science as Psychology: Sense-making and identity in science practice. Cambridge University Press.

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/610.1002/tea.1010

Oxford Dictionary. (2016). Oxford Dictionary 2016 word of the year. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/word-of-the-year/word-ofthe-year-2016

Pickering, A. (1995). The Mangle of Practice: Time, agency, & science. The University of Chicago Press.

Roberts, D. A. (2011). Competing Visions of Scientific Literacy: The influence of a science curriculum policy image. In C. Linder, L. Östman, D. A. Roberts, P.-O. Wickman, G. Erickson, & A. Mackinnon (Eds.), Exploring the Landscape of Scientic Literacy (pp. 11–27). Routledge.

Rosenberg, A. (2005). Why Philosophy of Science? In A. Rosenberg (Ed.), The Philosophy of Science: A contemporary introduction (pp. 1–20). Routledge.

Santos, M. (2018). Uso da História da Ciência para Favorecer a Compreensão de Estudantes do Ensino Médio sobre Ciência [Use of History of Science to Support High School Students' Understanding about Science]. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências, 18(2), 641–668. https://doi.org/610.28976/21984-22686rbpec2018182641

Santos, M. (2019). Compreendendo Visões de Estudantes sobre Ciências e suas Relações com o Ensino Fundamentado em Modelagem em Contextos Cotidiano, Científico e Sociocientífico [Understanding Students' Views about Science and their Relations to Modelling-based Teaching in Routine, Scientific and Socio-scientific Contexts]. (Masters dissertation), Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte. https://repositorio.ufmg.br/bitstream/1843/BUOS-BBLJX2/1/disserta__o___monique_santos.pdf

Sasseron, L. H., & Carvalho, A. M. P. (2011). Alfabetização Científica: Uma revisão bibliográfica [Scientific Literacy:A bibliographical review]. Investigações em Ensino de Ciências, 16(1), 59–77.

Schwartz, R. S., Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2008). An Instrument to Assess Views of Scientific Inquiry: The VOSI questionnaire. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Baltimore, MD.

Shadish, W. R., Fuller, S., & Gorman, M. E. (1994). Social Psychology of Science: A conceptual and empirical eesearch program. In W. R. Shadish & S. Fuller (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Science (pp. 3–122). Guilford Press.

Shadish, W. R., Houts, A. C., Gholson, B., & Neimeyer, R. A. (1989). The Psychology of Science: An introduction. In B. Gholson, W. R. Shadish, R. A. Neimeyer, & A. C. Houts (Eds.), Pshychology of Science: Contributions to metascience (pp. 1–16). Cambridge University Press.

Siqueira, E. C. P. (2019). A Inserção e Discussão de Aspectos de Natureza da Ciência em Sala de Aula a partir do Filme O Menino que Descobriu o Vento [The Introduction and Discussion of Aspects of Nature of Science in Science Classes from the Film The Boy Who Harnessed the Wind]. (Undergraduation Final Essay), Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte.

van Dijk, E. M. (2011). Portraying Real Science in Science Communication. Science Education, 95(6), 1086–1100. https://doi.org/1010.1002/sce.20458

Vermeir, K. (2013). Scientific Research: Commodities or commons? Science & Education, 22(10), 2485–2510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9524-y

Weinstein, M. (2008). Finding Science in the School Body: Reflections on transgressing the boundaries of science education and the social studies of science. Science Education, 92(3), 389–403. https://doi.org/310.1002/sce.20267

Wong, S. L., & Hodson, D. (2010). More from the Horse’s Mouth: What scientists say about science as a social practice. International Journal of Science Education, 32(11), 1431–1463. https://doi.org/1410.1080/09500690903104465

Downloads

Published

2020-07-15

How to Cite

Santos, M. ., Maia, P., & Justi, R. (2020). A Model of Science to Base the Introduction of Aspects of Nature of Science in Teaching Contexts and to Analyse such Contexts. Brazilian Journal of Research in Science Education, 20(u), 617–651. https://doi.org/10.28976/1984-2686rbpec2020u617651

Issue

v. 20 (2020)

Section

Artigos

License

The authors are responsible for the veracity of the information provided and for the content of the papers.

The authors who publish in this journal fully agree with the following terms:

  • The authors attest that the work is unpublished, that is, it has not been published in another journal, event notices or equivalent.
  • The authors attest that they did not submit the paper to another journal simultaneously.
  • The authors retain the copyright and grant to RPBEC the right of first publication, with the work licensed simultaneously under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows the sharing of the work with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  • The authors attest that they own the copyright or the written permission from copyright owners of figures, tables, large texts, etc. that are included in the paper.
  • Authors are authorized to take additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (for example, to publish in institutional repository or as a book chapter), with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  • Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) after the publication in order to increase the impact and citation of published work.

In case of identification of plagiarism, inappropriate republishing and simultaneous submissions, the authors authorize the Editorial Board to make public what happened, informing the editors of the journals involved, any plagiarized authors and their institutions of origin.