Yıl: 2013 Cilt: 38 Sayı: 167 Sayfa Aralığı: 65 - 80 Metin Dili: Türkçe İndeks Tarihi: 29-07-2022

How do science teachers view and teach the nature of science? A classroom investigation

Öz:
Bu araştırmanın amacı, fen öğretmenlerinin bilimin doğası hakkındaki görüşlerini incelemek ve bu görüşlerin onların sınıf içi uygulamalarını nasıl etkilediğini belirlemektir. Araştırmanın katılımcıları Türkiye’deki bir büyükşehirde görev yapmakta olan 74 fen öğretmenidir. Öğretmenlerin bilimin doğası hakkındaki görüşleri, literatürde kısaca VOSTS olarak bilinen Bilim-Teknoloji-Toplum anketinden seçilmiş olan 18 madde ile değerlendirilmiştir. Öğretmenlerin görüşlerini sınıf uygulamalarına nasıl yansıttıklarını belirlemek amacıyla gönüllülük esasına dayalı olarak durum çalışmasına alınan beş öğretmen ile yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeler ve sınıf içi gözlemleri gerçekleştirilmiştir. Veri analizleri sonucunda, katılımcı öğretmenlerin bilimin doğasının birçok boyutu hakkında naif görüşlere sahip oldukları ortaya çıkmıştır. Aynı zamanda öğretmenlerin bu görüşlerinin sınıf uygulamalarına doğrudan etki etmediği görülmüştür. Katılımcı fen ve teknoloji öğretmenlerinin sınıf içi uygulamalarını belirleyen en önemli etkenlerin başında algılanan müfredat, okul idarecileri, öğrenci ve velilerin istek ve beklentileri ile sınav sistemi gösterilebilir.
Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Eğitim, Eğitim Araştırmaları

Fen öğretmenlerinin bilimin doğası görüşleri ve öğretimleri nasıldır? bir sınıf içi araştırması

Öz:
The purposes of this study were to investigate science teachers’ nature of science (NOS) views so as to determine how their views influence their instructional practices. Seventy four science teachers and five teachers in a big city in Turkey were selected purposefully as the sample of this study. A sub-set of 18 relevant items from Views on Science-Technology-Society (VOSTS) Questionnaire were used to assess teachers’ NOS views. Semi-structured interviews and class observations were conducted with these five “case” teachers in order to allow them fully express their views and instructional practices. The data analysis revealed that the participating science teachers held naïve views on many dimensions of the NOS. Furthermore, it was found that teachers’ views did not directly influence their classroom practices. We also observed that the perceived curriculum, the high stakes examinations, expectations of school administrators, students, and parents were the most important factors influencing teachers’ decisions regarding classroom practices.
Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Eğitim, Eğitim Araştırmaları
Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Boujaoude, S. (1997). An exploratory study of the knowledge base for science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(7), 673-699.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • Acat, M. B., Şişman, M., Aypay, A. & Karadağ, E. (2011). TIMSS 2007 Ulusal matematik ve fen raporu 8. Sınıflar (TIMSS 2007 National Mathematics and Science Report – 8th Grades). EARGED: Ankara.
  • Aikenhead, G. S. (1988). An analysis of four ways of assessing student beliefs about STS topics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(8), 607-629.
  • Aikenhead, G. S, & Ryan A. G. (1992). The development of a new instrument: “Views on science– technology–society” (VOSTS). Science Education, 76, 477–491.
  • Aikenhead, G. S., Ryan A. G., & Fleming, R. (1989). Views on science–technology–society (from CDN.mc.5). Saskatoon, Canada: University of Saskatchewan.
  • Akerson, V. L., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2003). Teaching elements of the nature of science. A yearlong case study of a fourth-grade teacher. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(10), 1025- 1049.
  • Akerson, V.L., & Hanuscin, D. (2007). Teaching the nature of science through inquiry: Results of a three-year professional development program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(5), 653-680.
  • American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for scientific literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Anıl, D. (2009). Uluslararası öğrenci başarılarını değerlendirme programında (PISA) Türkiye’deki öğrencilerin fen bilimleri başarılarını etkileyen faktörler. Eğitim ve Bilim, 34(152), 87-100.
  • Aslan, O. (2009). Fen ve Teknoloji Öğretmenlerinin Bilimin Doğası Hakkındaki Görüşleri ve Bu Görüşlerin Sınıf Uygulamalarına Yansımaları (Science and technology teachers’ views on nature of science and the reflections of these views in classroom activities). Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Gazi Üniversitesi: Ankara, Turkey.
  • Bartholomew, R. Anderson, D., & Moeed, A. (2012). Resilience of Science Teaching Philosophies and Practice in Early Career Primary Teaching Graduates. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 8(2), 103-112.
  • Bell, R. L., Blair, L. M., Crawford, B. A., & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Just do it? Impact of a science apprenticeship program on high school students’ understandings of the nature of science and scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(5), 487–509.
  • Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods (Second edition). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
  • Brickhouse, N. W. (1990). Teacher beliefs about the nature of science and their relationship to classroom practices. Journal of Teacher Education, 41, 53-62.
  • Chun, S. (2000). An examination of relationship among science teaching actions, beliefs, and knowledge of the nature of science. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Georgia University.
  • Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2000). The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (Second edition). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
  • Dogan, N. (2011). What Went Wrong? Literature Students are More Informed about the Nature of Science than Science Students. Education and Science, 36(159), 220-235.
  • Dogan, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2008). Turkish grade 10 students’ and science teachers’ conceptions of nature of science: A national study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(10), 1083-1112.
  • Doğan, N., Çakıroğlu, J., Çavuş, S., Bilican, K., & Arslan, O. (2011). Öğretmenlerin Bilimin Doğası Hakkındaki Görüşlerinin Geliştirilmesi: Hizmetiçi Eğitim Programının Etkisi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 40, 127-139.
  • Duschl, R. A., & Wright, E. (1989). A case study of high school teachers’ decision making models for planning and teaching science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26, 467-501.
  • Gallagher, J. J. (1991). Prospective and practicing secondary school science teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about the philosophy of science. Science Education, 75, 121-133.
  • Haidar, A. H. (1999). Emirates pre-service and in-service teachers’ views about the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(8), 807–822.
  • Irez, S. (2006). Are we prepared?: An assessment of preservice science teacher educators’ beliefs about nature of science. Science Education, 90(6), 1113 – 1143.
  • Irez, S. (2009). Nature of science as depicted in Turkish biology textbooks. Science Education, 93, 422-447.
  • Kang, S., Scharmann, L. C., & Noh, T. (2005). Examining students’ views on the nature of science: Results from Korean 6th, 8th, and 10th graders. Science Education, 89, 314–334.
  • Kilic, G. B. (2003). Üçüncü Uluslararası Matematik ve Fen Araştırması (TIMSS): Fen Öğretimi, Bilimsel Araştırma ve Bilimin Doğası. İlkögretim-Online, 2(1), 42-51.
  • 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.
  • Lederman, N. G. (1999). Teachers’ understanding of the nature of science and classroom practice: factors that facilitate or impede the relationship. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 916-929.
  • Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. In S.K. Abell and N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Maneesriwongul, W., & Dixon, J. K. (2004). Instrument translation process: A methods review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 48(2), 175-186.
  • McComas, W. F. (2000). The principal elements of the nature of science. Dispelling the myths. In W.F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies. Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • OECD & MEB (2010). PISA 2006 projesi ulusal nihaî rapor . EARGED: Ankara.
  • Mellado, V. (1997). Preservice teachers’ classroom practice and their conceptions of the nature of science. Science and Education, 6, 331-354.
  • Mellado, V., Bermejo, M. L., Blanco, L. J., & Ruiz, C. (2007). The classroom practice of a prospective secondary biology teacher and his conceptions of the nature of science and of teaching and learning science. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6, 37-62.
  • Ministry of National Education (MNE). (2005). İlkögretim 6. ve 7. ve 8. Sınıf Fen ve Teknoloji Dersi Ögretim Programları. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı
  • Moss, D. M., Abramsand, E.D., & Robb, J. (2001). Examining student conceptions of the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 23(8), 771- 790.
  • Murcia, K., & Schibeci, R. (1999). Primary student teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(11), 1123–1140.
  • National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • Ozden, M. (2007). Problems with science and technology education in Turkey. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 3(2), 157–161.
  • Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teacher’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307-332.
  • Palmquist, B. C., & Finley F. (1997). Preservice teachers’ views of the nature of science during a post baccalaureate science teaching program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 595-615.
  • Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. (Second edition). Newbury Park: Sage.
  • Rubba, P. A., & Harkness, W. L. (1993). Examination of preservice and in-service secondary science teachers’ beliefs about science-technology-society interactions. Science Education, 77(4), 407-431.
  • Rubba, P. A., Bradford, C. S., & Harkness, W. L. (1996). A new scoring procedure for the views on science-technology-society instrument. International Journal of Science Education, 18, 387–400.
  • Ruffus Doerr, A. M. (2010). Educating for the knowledge age: a collective case study of teachers’ beliefs in a problem based learning environment (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3412885)
  • Saad, R., & BouJaoude, S. (2012). The relationship between teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about science and inquiry and their classroom practices. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 8(2), 113-128.
  • Schwartz, R. E. (2004). Epistemological views in authentic science practice: A cross-discipline comparison scientist’s views of nature of science and scientific inquiry. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Oregon State University.
  • Solomon, J., Scott, L., & Duveen, J. (1996). Large-scale exploration of pupils’ understanding of the nature of science. Science Education, 80(5), 493-508.
  • Tasar, M. F. (2001). A case study of one novice college student’s alternative framework and learning of force and motion (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://etda.libraries.psu.edu/.
  • Tasar, M. F. (2006). Probing preservice teachers’ understandings of scientific knowledge by using a vignette in conjunction with a paper and pencil test. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 2(1), 53-70.
  • Taylor, J. A. (2001). Secondary school physics teachers’ conceptions of scientific evidence: a collective case study (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://etda.libraries.psu.edu/.
  • Tsai, C. C. (2002). Nested epistemologies: science teachers’ beliefs of teaching, learning and science. International Journal of Science Education, 24(8), 771–783.
  • Tuan, H., & Chin, C. (1999). What can inservice Taiwanese science teachers learn and teach about the nature of science? A paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Boston, MA.
  • Uzun, S., Bütüner, S. Ö., & Yiğit, N. (2010). A comparison of the results of TIMSS 1999-2007: The most successful five countries-Turkey sample. İlköğretim Online, 9(3), 1174-1188.
  • Vazquez-Alonso, A., & Manassero-Mas, M. A. (1999). Response and scoring models for the ‘Views on science–technology–society’ instrument. International Journal of Science Education, 21(3), 231–247.
  • Yakmaci, B. (1998). Science (biology, chemistry and physics) teachers’ views on the nature of science as a dimension of scientific literacy. Unpublished master’s thesis, Bogazici University: İstanbul.
  • Yalvac, B., & Crawford, B. A. (2002). Eliciting prospective science education students conceptions of nature of science. Proceedings of the 2002 AETS Annual International Meeting, Charlotte, NC.
  • Yalvac, B. (2005). On-line peer review and college students’ understanding of the nature of science (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://etda.libraries.psu.edu/.
APA ASLAN O, Taşar M (2013). How do science teachers view and teach the nature of science? A classroom investigation. , 65 - 80.
Chicago ASLAN Oktay,Taşar Mehmet Fatih How do science teachers view and teach the nature of science? A classroom investigation. (2013): 65 - 80.
MLA ASLAN Oktay,Taşar Mehmet Fatih How do science teachers view and teach the nature of science? A classroom investigation. , 2013, ss.65 - 80.
AMA ASLAN O,Taşar M How do science teachers view and teach the nature of science? A classroom investigation. . 2013; 65 - 80.
Vancouver ASLAN O,Taşar M How do science teachers view and teach the nature of science? A classroom investigation. . 2013; 65 - 80.
IEEE ASLAN O,Taşar M "How do science teachers view and teach the nature of science? A classroom investigation." , ss.65 - 80, 2013.
ISNAD ASLAN, Oktay - Taşar, Mehmet Fatih. "How do science teachers view and teach the nature of science? A classroom investigation". (2013), 65-80.
APA ASLAN O, Taşar M (2013). How do science teachers view and teach the nature of science? A classroom investigation. Eğitim ve Bilim, 38(167), 65 - 80.
Chicago ASLAN Oktay,Taşar Mehmet Fatih How do science teachers view and teach the nature of science? A classroom investigation. Eğitim ve Bilim 38, no.167 (2013): 65 - 80.
MLA ASLAN Oktay,Taşar Mehmet Fatih How do science teachers view and teach the nature of science? A classroom investigation. Eğitim ve Bilim, vol.38, no.167, 2013, ss.65 - 80.
AMA ASLAN O,Taşar M How do science teachers view and teach the nature of science? A classroom investigation. Eğitim ve Bilim. 2013; 38(167): 65 - 80.
Vancouver ASLAN O,Taşar M How do science teachers view and teach the nature of science? A classroom investigation. Eğitim ve Bilim. 2013; 38(167): 65 - 80.
IEEE ASLAN O,Taşar M "How do science teachers view and teach the nature of science? A classroom investigation." Eğitim ve Bilim, 38, ss.65 - 80, 2013.
ISNAD ASLAN, Oktay - Taşar, Mehmet Fatih. "How do science teachers view and teach the nature of science? A classroom investigation". Eğitim ve Bilim 38/167 (2013), 65-80.