Pre-Service Primary School Teachers’ Application of the Features of the Nature of Science to Socioscientific
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Published
Feb 28, 2023
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to determine which features of the nature of science pre-service primary school teachers refer to while making a decision on a socioscientific issue at the end of the explicit reflective nature of science education. For this purpose, an exploratory qualitative research design was used in the study. The research group comprised 77 pre-service primary school teachers in their third year of studies at a public university. The study was carried out within the scope of the “Science and Technology Teaching” course. As a data collection tool, the socioscientific scenario “Babies with Three Parents” was used. Content analysis and descriptive analysis were used to analyze the data. According to the findings of the study, pre-service primary school teachers have a good level of ability to use the features of the nature of science, the changeable nature of scientific knowledge, and the fact that it is based on observation and experimentation when deciding on a socioscientific issue. Furthermore, pre-service class teachers primarily used the subjectivity and creativity features of scientific knowledge as well as the features of observation.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Keywords
Nature of Science (NOS), Socioscientific Issues (SSIs), Pre-service Primary School Teachers
References
ACARA. (2014). F-10 Curriculum / Science Learning Area. Retrieved on 12-August-2014, Available at: http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/science
Akgün, Z. (2015). Classroom teachers opinions for the nature of science: söke town example. Unpublished Master Thesis. Adnan Menderes University Social Sciences Institute.
Akerson, V. L., Pongsanon, K., Rogers, M. A. P., Carter, I., & Galindo, E. (2017). Exploring the use of lesson study to develop elementary preservice teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for teaching nature of science. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(2):293-312. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9690-x
Alkış Küçükaydın, M. (2019). The investigation of the relationship between the attitude towards socioscientific issues and inquiry skills of primary teacher candidates. Millî Eğitim, 49(225), 181-200.
Appleton, K. (2002). Science activities that work: Perceptions of primary school teachers. Research in Science Education, 32:393-410. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020878121184
Atalay, N. & Çaycı, B. (2017). Examination of opinion and attitudes of class teacher candidates on socioscientific issues by different variables. Eskişehir Osmangazi University Turkic World Application and Research Center (ESTÜDAM). Education Journal, 2(2):35-45. Available at: https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/estudamegitim/issue/40297/481300
Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Understandings of the natüre of science and decision making on science and technology based issues. Science Education, 87(3):352-377. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10063
DeCorte, E. (2003). Transfer as the productive use of acquired knowledge, skills and motivations. Current Directions of Psychological Science, 12(4):142-146. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.01250
Espeja, A.G., & Lagaron, D.C. (2015). Socio-scientific issues (SSI) in initial training of primary school teachers: Pre-service teachers’ conceptualization of SSI and appreciation of the value of teaching SSI. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 196:80-88. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.015
Evagorou, M., Jimenez-aleixandre, M. P., & Osborne, J. (2012). “Should we kill the grey squirrels?” A study exploring students’ justifications and decision-making. International Journal of Science Education, 34(3):401-428. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.015
Fitzgerald, A. (2012). Science in primary schools: Examining the practices of effective primary science teachers. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-858-2
Gomley, K., Birdsall, S., France, B. (2019). Socio-scientific issues in primary schools. Teaching and Learning, 2:11- 19. https://doi.org/10.18296/set.0139
Gregory, J. B. (2010). Employee coaching: The importance of the supervisor/subordinate relationship and related constructs (Electronic Dissertation). Available at: http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=akron1267548406
Han Tosunoğlu Ç., & İrez S. (2019). A Pedagogical Model for Teaching Socioscientific Issues. Journal of Higher Education and Science, 9(3):384-401. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5961/jhes.2019.340
Hodson, D. (2011). Scientific literacy revisited. Looking to the future: Building a curriculum for social activism (pp. 1-31). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-472- 0_1
Işık Öner, A., Kadıoğlu Ateş, H., Vatansever Bayraktar, H. (2020). Investigation of pre-service teachers’ perceptions of the nature of science. The Journal of Social Sciences, 7(46):20-36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29228/SOBIDER.43385
Karisan, D. & Zeidler, D.L. (2017). Contextualization of nature of science within the socioscientific issues framework: A review of research. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 5(2):139-152. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18404/ijemst.270186
Kathlke, R. M. (2014). Generic qualitative approach: Pitfalls and benefits of methodological mixology. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 13:37-52. Available at: http://journals.sagepub.com/home/IJQ
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: https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20137
Khishfe, R. (2012). Nature of science and decision-making. International Journal of Science Education, 34(1):67-100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.559490
Khishfe, R. (2012a). Relationship between nature of science understandings and argumentation skills: a role for counterargument and contextual factors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(4):429-537. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/TEA.21012
Khishfe, R. (2013). Transfer of nature of science understandings into similar contexts: Promises and possibilities of an explicit reflective approach. International Journal of Science Education, 35(17):2928-2953. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.672774
Kutluca, A.Y., Aydın, A. (2017). Changes in pre-service science teachers’ understandings after being involved in explicit nature of science and socioscientific argumentation processes. Science & Education, 26:637-668. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-017-9919-x
Levinson, R. (2006). Towards a theoretical framework for teaching controversial socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 28:1201-1224. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600560753
Liu, S.-Y., Lin, C.-S., & Tsai, C.-C. (2011). College students’ scientific epistemological views and thinking patterns in socioscientific decision making. Science Education, 95(3):497-517. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20422
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, 18:137-163. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-006-9033-4
National Research Council [NRC] (1996). National Science Education Standarts. National Academy Press.
NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academy Press.
O’Brien, B. C., Harris, I. B., Beckman, T. J., Reed, D. A., & Cook, D. A. (2014). Standards for reporting qualitative research: A synthesis of recommendations. Academic Medicine, 89:1245-1251. Available at: https://journals.lww.com/academicmedicine/pages/default.aspx
Osborne, J. (2008). Engaging young people with science: Does science education need a new vision? School Science Review, 89(328):67.
Öztürk, N. & Yenilmez Türkoğlu, A. (2018). Pre-service Science Teachers’ Knowledge and Views about Several Socio-Scientific Issues after Peer-Led Discussions. Elementary Education Online, 17(4):2030-2048 . DOI: https://doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2019.506944
Percy, W. H., Kostere, K., & Kostere, S. (2015). Generic qualitative research in psychology. The Qualitative Report, 16:76-85. Available at: https://tqr.nova.edu
Pezaro, C., Wright, T., Gillies, R. (2014). Pre-service primary teachers’ argumentation in socioscientific issues. Proceedings of the Frontiers in Mathematics and Science Education Research Conference 1-3 May 2014, Famagusta, North Cyprus.
Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.):Handbook of research on science education (pp. 729-780). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Sadler, T.D., Chambers, F.W. and Zeidler, D.L. (2002, April). Investigating the crossroads of socioscientific issues, the nature of science, and critical thinking. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching Annual Meeting in New Orleans, LA.
Sadler, T. D., Chambers, F. W., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). Student conceptualisations of the nature of science in response to a socioscientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4):387-409. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000119456
Sadler, T. D. (2009). Situated learning in science education: socioscientific issues as contexts for practice. Studies in Science Education, 45(1):1-42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260802681839
Taşdere, A., Kır, M., Yiğit, N. (2014). The prımary preservıce teachers’ vıews about the nature of scıentıfıc knowledge. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 3(3):189-200.
Wahbeh, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2014). Revisiting the Translation of Nature of Science Understandings into Instructional Practice: Teachers’ nature of science pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 36(3):425-466. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.786852
Walker, K. A., & Zeidler, D. L. (2007). Promoting discourse about socioscientific issues through scaffolded inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11):1387-1410. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690601068095
Yalaki, Y. (2016). Teaching the nature of science through activities. 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th grades. (Extended 2nd Edition). Ankara: Pegem Academy
Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2008). Social and ethical issues in science education: A prelude to action. Science & Education, 17(8):799-803. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-007-9130-6
Zeidler, D. L., Walker, K. A., Ackett, W. A. ve Simmons, M. L. (2002). Tangled up in views: Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific dilemmas. Science Education, 86(3):343-367. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10025
Zeidler, D. L., Applebaum, S. M., & Sadler, T. D. (2011). Enacting a socioscientific issues classroom: Transformative transformations. In T. D. Sadler (Eds):Socio-scientific issues in the classroom (pp. 277-305). Netherlands: Springer.
Zeidler, D. L. (2014). Socioscientific issues as a curriculum emphasis. In N. G. Lederman, & S. K. Abell (Eds.):Handbook of research on science education (pp. 697-726). New York, NY: Routledge.
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1):35-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008
Akgün, Z. (2015). Classroom teachers opinions for the nature of science: söke town example. Unpublished Master Thesis. Adnan Menderes University Social Sciences Institute.
Akerson, V. L., Pongsanon, K., Rogers, M. A. P., Carter, I., & Galindo, E. (2017). Exploring the use of lesson study to develop elementary preservice teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for teaching nature of science. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(2):293-312. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9690-x
Alkış Küçükaydın, M. (2019). The investigation of the relationship between the attitude towards socioscientific issues and inquiry skills of primary teacher candidates. Millî Eğitim, 49(225), 181-200.
Appleton, K. (2002). Science activities that work: Perceptions of primary school teachers. Research in Science Education, 32:393-410. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020878121184
Atalay, N. & Çaycı, B. (2017). Examination of opinion and attitudes of class teacher candidates on socioscientific issues by different variables. Eskişehir Osmangazi University Turkic World Application and Research Center (ESTÜDAM). Education Journal, 2(2):35-45. Available at: https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/estudamegitim/issue/40297/481300
Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Understandings of the natüre of science and decision making on science and technology based issues. Science Education, 87(3):352-377. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10063
DeCorte, E. (2003). Transfer as the productive use of acquired knowledge, skills and motivations. Current Directions of Psychological Science, 12(4):142-146. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.01250
Espeja, A.G., & Lagaron, D.C. (2015). Socio-scientific issues (SSI) in initial training of primary school teachers: Pre-service teachers’ conceptualization of SSI and appreciation of the value of teaching SSI. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 196:80-88. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.015
Evagorou, M., Jimenez-aleixandre, M. P., & Osborne, J. (2012). “Should we kill the grey squirrels?” A study exploring students’ justifications and decision-making. International Journal of Science Education, 34(3):401-428. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.015
Fitzgerald, A. (2012). Science in primary schools: Examining the practices of effective primary science teachers. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-858-2
Gomley, K., Birdsall, S., France, B. (2019). Socio-scientific issues in primary schools. Teaching and Learning, 2:11- 19. https://doi.org/10.18296/set.0139
Gregory, J. B. (2010). Employee coaching: The importance of the supervisor/subordinate relationship and related constructs (Electronic Dissertation). Available at: http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=akron1267548406
Han Tosunoğlu Ç., & İrez S. (2019). A Pedagogical Model for Teaching Socioscientific Issues. Journal of Higher Education and Science, 9(3):384-401. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5961/jhes.2019.340
Hodson, D. (2011). Scientific literacy revisited. Looking to the future: Building a curriculum for social activism (pp. 1-31). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-472- 0_1
Işık Öner, A., Kadıoğlu Ateş, H., Vatansever Bayraktar, H. (2020). Investigation of pre-service teachers’ perceptions of the nature of science. The Journal of Social Sciences, 7(46):20-36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29228/SOBIDER.43385
Karisan, D. & Zeidler, D.L. (2017). Contextualization of nature of science within the socioscientific issues framework: A review of research. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 5(2):139-152. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18404/ijemst.270186
Kathlke, R. M. (2014). Generic qualitative approach: Pitfalls and benefits of methodological mixology. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 13:37-52. Available at: http://journals.sagepub.com/home/IJQ
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: https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20137
Khishfe, R. (2012). Nature of science and decision-making. International Journal of Science Education, 34(1):67-100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.559490
Khishfe, R. (2012a). Relationship between nature of science understandings and argumentation skills: a role for counterargument and contextual factors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(4):429-537. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/TEA.21012
Khishfe, R. (2013). Transfer of nature of science understandings into similar contexts: Promises and possibilities of an explicit reflective approach. International Journal of Science Education, 35(17):2928-2953. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.672774
Kutluca, A.Y., Aydın, A. (2017). Changes in pre-service science teachers’ understandings after being involved in explicit nature of science and socioscientific argumentation processes. Science & Education, 26:637-668. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-017-9919-x
Levinson, R. (2006). Towards a theoretical framework for teaching controversial socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 28:1201-1224. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600560753
Liu, S.-Y., Lin, C.-S., & Tsai, C.-C. (2011). College students’ scientific epistemological views and thinking patterns in socioscientific decision making. Science Education, 95(3):497-517. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20422
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, 18:137-163. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-006-9033-4
National Research Council [NRC] (1996). National Science Education Standarts. National Academy Press.
NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academy Press.
O’Brien, B. C., Harris, I. B., Beckman, T. J., Reed, D. A., & Cook, D. A. (2014). Standards for reporting qualitative research: A synthesis of recommendations. Academic Medicine, 89:1245-1251. Available at: https://journals.lww.com/academicmedicine/pages/default.aspx
Osborne, J. (2008). Engaging young people with science: Does science education need a new vision? School Science Review, 89(328):67.
Öztürk, N. & Yenilmez Türkoğlu, A. (2018). Pre-service Science Teachers’ Knowledge and Views about Several Socio-Scientific Issues after Peer-Led Discussions. Elementary Education Online, 17(4):2030-2048 . DOI: https://doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2019.506944
Percy, W. H., Kostere, K., & Kostere, S. (2015). Generic qualitative research in psychology. The Qualitative Report, 16:76-85. Available at: https://tqr.nova.edu
Pezaro, C., Wright, T., Gillies, R. (2014). Pre-service primary teachers’ argumentation in socioscientific issues. Proceedings of the Frontiers in Mathematics and Science Education Research Conference 1-3 May 2014, Famagusta, North Cyprus.
Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.):Handbook of research on science education (pp. 729-780). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Sadler, T.D., Chambers, F.W. and Zeidler, D.L. (2002, April). Investigating the crossroads of socioscientific issues, the nature of science, and critical thinking. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching Annual Meeting in New Orleans, LA.
Sadler, T. D., Chambers, F. W., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). Student conceptualisations of the nature of science in response to a socioscientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4):387-409. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000119456
Sadler, T. D. (2009). Situated learning in science education: socioscientific issues as contexts for practice. Studies in Science Education, 45(1):1-42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260802681839
Taşdere, A., Kır, M., Yiğit, N. (2014). The prımary preservıce teachers’ vıews about the nature of scıentıfıc knowledge. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 3(3):189-200.
Wahbeh, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2014). Revisiting the Translation of Nature of Science Understandings into Instructional Practice: Teachers’ nature of science pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 36(3):425-466. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.786852
Walker, K. A., & Zeidler, D. L. (2007). Promoting discourse about socioscientific issues through scaffolded inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11):1387-1410. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690601068095
Yalaki, Y. (2016). Teaching the nature of science through activities. 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th grades. (Extended 2nd Edition). Ankara: Pegem Academy
Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2008). Social and ethical issues in science education: A prelude to action. Science & Education, 17(8):799-803. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-007-9130-6
Zeidler, D. L., Walker, K. A., Ackett, W. A. ve Simmons, M. L. (2002). Tangled up in views: Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific dilemmas. Science Education, 86(3):343-367. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10025
Zeidler, D. L., Applebaum, S. M., & Sadler, T. D. (2011). Enacting a socioscientific issues classroom: Transformative transformations. In T. D. Sadler (Eds):Socio-scientific issues in the classroom (pp. 277-305). Netherlands: Springer.
Zeidler, D. L. (2014). Socioscientific issues as a curriculum emphasis. In N. G. Lederman, & S. K. Abell (Eds.):Handbook of research on science education (pp. 697-726). New York, NY: Routledge.
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1):35-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008
How to Cite
Saka, M. (2023). Pre-Service Primary School Teachers’ Application of the Features of the Nature of Science to Socioscientific. Science Insights Education Frontiers, 14(2), 2059–2075. https://doi.org/10.15354/sief.23.or092
Issue
Section
Original Article
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.