Fen Eğitiminde Bilimin Doğası Üzerine Eğilim Gösteren Temalar: VOSviewer ile Bibliyometrik Bir Analiz

Yıl 2024, , 480 - 502, 27.12.2024

Serpil Kara

https://doi.org/10.17522/balikesirnef.1548266

Öz

Bu araştırmada, fen eğitiminde bilimin doğası üzerine eğilim gösteren temaların belirlenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda Web of Science-WoS veri tabanı kullanılmıştır. Bilimsel inovatif alanındaki araştırma eğilimlerini tanımlamak ve sistematik bir şekilde haritalamak ve bu ağdaki entelektüel ilişkileri belirlemek amacıyla bibliyometrik yaklaşım benimsenmiş ve VOSviewer yazılım programı kullanılmıştır. Bu kapsamda çalışmaya 2013-2023 yılları baz alınmış, WoS veri tabanında Education & Educational Research’ ve ‘Education Scientific Disciplines’ kategorileri seçilmiş ve sonuçların dökümünde elde edilen diğer yayın kategorileri çıkarılarak sadece makale türündeki çalışmalar veri setine dahil edilerek nihayetinde toplamda 263 makale incelenmiştir. Elde edilen bulgulara göre, ‘Education & Educational Research’ WoS kategorisinin ön planda olduğu, yıllara göre yapılan yayınların artıp azalan bir eğilim gösterdiği, en fazla çalışma yapan yazar Erduran S., en fazla atıf alan yazarın Lederman, N. G ve aralarında toplam bağlantı gücü en fazla yazarın ise Erduran, S olduğu, en fazla yayının ‘Research in Scıence Educatıon’ dergisinde yer aldığı, anahtar kelimelerden “nature of science”, “science education” den sonra en sık “scientific literacy” ve “history of science” kelimelerinin; makalelerin özetlerinde yer alan en sık tekrar eden kelimelerin ise questionnaire ve interview kelimelerinin kullanıldığı ve son olarak ise toplam bağlantı gücü açısından ilk üçte yer alan ve aynı zamanda en fazla atıf alan ülkeler sırasıyla ABD, İngiltere ve Türkiye olarak tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Bilimin doğası, fen eğitimi, bibliyometrik analiz, VOSviewer, bilim tarihi ve bilimsel okuryazarlık

Trending Themes on the Nature of Science in Science Education: A Bibliometric Analysis with VOSviewer

Öz

This study aimed to identify themes that indicate trends in the nature of science (NoS) in science education. The Web of Science (WoS) database was used for this purpose. A bibliometric approach was adopted, and the VOSviewer software was used to identify and systematically map research trends in the field of scientific innovation and to identify intellectual relationships in this network. In this context, the study covered the years 2013-2023. The categories “Education & Educational Research” and “Education Scientific Disciplines” were selected in the WoS database, and only article-type studies were included by excluding other publication categories obtained in the breakdown of the results. Finally, 263 articles were analyzed . According to the findings, the “Education Educational Research” WoS category is at the forefront. The publications made according to the years show alternating trends of increase and decrease. Lederman, N.G. is the author with the highest number of citations. Erduran, S. is the author with the highest number of studies and the highest total link strength. The majority of publications were in the journal “Research In Science Education.” The words “scientific literacy” and “history of science” were used most frequently after “nature of science” and “science education” among the keywords. The most frequently repeated words in the abstracts of the articles were "questionnaire" and "interview". Finally, the countries ranked in the top three in terms of total link strength and the most cited countries were the USA, England, and Türkiye, respectively.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Nature of science, science education, bibliometric analysis, VOSviewer, history of science and scientific literacy

Kaynakça

• 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690050044044
• Adsiz, E., & Yiğit Kutluca, A. (2023). Teachers’ views on the teaching of science process skills through integrated science and mathematics activities: Effect of the nature of science understandings. Educational Academic Research, 48(1), 27-41. https://doi.org/10.5152/AUJKKEF.2023.1023067
• Agrifoglio, R., Metallo, C., & di Nauta, P. (2021). Understanding knowledge management in public organizations through the organizational knowing perspective: a systematic literature review and bibliometric Analysis. Public Organization Review, 21, 137–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-020-00480-7
• American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy: A project 2061 report. Oxford University.
• Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: an R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959-975. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
• Ayvacı, H. Ş., & Akdemir, E. (2017). An examination of theses in the field of nature of science published from 2013 in terms of different variables. YYU Journal of Education Faculty, 14(1), 1178-1218. http://dx.doi.org/10.23891/efdyyu.2017.43
• Bell, R. L., & Clair, T. L. S. (2015). Too little, too late: Addressing the nature of science in early childhood education. In K. C. Trundle & M. Saçkes (Eds.). Research in early childhood science education (pp. 125–141). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9505-0_6
• Bett, N. N., Piccolo, C., Roberson, N. D., Charbonneau, A. J., & Addison, C. J. (2023). Students’ views on the nature of science in an interdisciplinary first-year science program: Content analysis of a weekly reflection activity. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 11. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.11.10
• Bugingo, J. B., Yadav, L. L., Mugisha, I. S., & Mashood, K. K. (2024). Improving teachers’ and students’ views on nature of science through active instructional approaches: a review of the literature. Science & Education, 33, 29–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00382-8
• Caramaschi, M., Cullinane, A., Levrini, O., & Erduran, S. (2022). Mapping the nature of science in the Italian physics curriculum: From missing links to opportunities for reform. International Journal of Science Education, 44(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.2017061
• 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, 1637–1673. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00379-3
• Comarú, M. W., Lopes, R. M., Braga, L. A. M., Batista Mota, F., & Galvão, C. (2021). A bibliometric and descriptive analysis of inclusive education in science education. Studies in Science Education, 57(2), 241-263. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2021.1897930
• CoHE. (2018). Fen bilgisi öğretmenliği lisans programı. https://www.yok.gov.tr/Documents/Kurumsal/egitim_ogretim_dairesi/Yeni-Ogretmen-Yetistirme-Lisans-Programlari/Fen_Bilgisi_Ogretmenligi_Lisans_Programi.pdf
• Crowther, D. T., Lederman N.G. & Lederman, J. S. (2005). Methods and strategies: understanding the true meaning of nature of science. Science and Children, 43(2), 50-52. https://my.nsta.org/resource/7842/methods-and-strategies-understanding-the-true-meaning-of-nature-of-science
• Çakıcı, Y. (2009). A prerequisite in science education: Understanding nature of science. M.Ü. Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 29, 57-74. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/maruaebd/issue/370/2114
• Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
• Effendi, D. N., Irwandani, Anggraini, W., Jatmiko, A., Rahmayanti, H., Ichsan, I. Z., & Rahman, M. M. (2021). Bibliometric analysis of scientific literacy using VOS viewer: Analysis of science education. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1796, Article 012096. https://doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1796/1/012096
• Gören, D. & Kaya, E. (2023). The relationship between students’ understanding of nature of science and their metacognitive awareness. Boğaziçi University Journal of Education. 40-2(2). 315-336. https://doi.org/10.52597/buje.1123164
• Gülmez Güngörmez, H. & Akgün, A. (2020). Student’s opinions about nature of science activities embedded in process oriented guided inquiry learning method. Electronic Journal of Education Sciences, 9(18), 128-148. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/ejedus/issue/58123/718234
• Hansson, L., & Leden, L. & Thulin, S. (2020). Book talks as an approach to nature of science teaching in early childhood education. International Journal of Science Education, 42(12), 2095-2111. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1812011
• Hwang, G. J., Lai, C. L., & Wang, S. Y. (2015). Seamless flipped learning: A mobile technology-enhanced flipped classroom with effective learning strategies. Journal of Computers in Education, 2, 449-473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-015-0043-0
• Jaenudin, I., Aisyiah, P.N., Suryani, R., & Widodod, A. (2021). Content analysis of the nature of science on elementary thematic textbooks 2013 curriculum. Premiere Educandum: Jurnal Pendidikan Dasar dan Pembelajaran, 11(2), 227 – 242. https://doi.org/10.25273/pe.v11i2.9187
• Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., Rodriguez, A. B., & Duschl, R. A. (2000). “Doing the lesson” or “doing science”: Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757–792. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-237X(200011)84:6<757::AID-SCE5>3.0.CO;2-F
• Karataş Öztürk, S., Işık, H. & Alpaslan, M. M. (2023). Examination of middle school students’ views on the nature of scientific knowledge in the context of learning activities. The Journal of Buca Faculty of Education, 57,1555-1580. https://doi.org/10.53444/deubefd.1274069
• Kaya, E. & Erduran, S. (2016). Yeniden kavramsallaştırılmış “Aile Benzerliği Yaklaşımı”: Fen eğitiminde bilimin doğasına bütünsel bir bakış açısı. Part B: Türk Fen Eğitimi Dergisi, 13(2), 77-90.
• Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551–578. http://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10036
• Kurt, G., & Kaya, E. (2023). Reconceptualized family resemblance to the nature of science in the science curriculum and teachers’ views. The Journal of Buca Faculty of Education, 57, 1780-1807. https://doi.org/10.53444/deubefd.1289427
• Kurtuluş, M. A., & Bilen, K. (2021). A bibliometric analysis on nature of science: a review of the research between 1986-2019. Scientific Educational Studies, 5(1), 47-65. https://doi.org/10.31798/ses.941238
• Lederman, N. G. (2007). Pedagogy and the practice of science. International Journal of Science Education, 29(7), 931-934. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697680601043290
• Li, B., & Xu, Z. (2022). A comprehensive bibliometric analysis of financial innovation. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraˇ zivanja, 35(1), 367–390. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2021.1893203
• Librea-Carden, M. R., Mulvey, B. K., Borgerding, L. A., Wiley, A. L., & Ferdous, T. (2021). ‘Science is accessible for everyone’: Preservice special education teachers’ nature of science perceptions and instructional practices. International Journal of Science Education, 43(6), 949–968. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.1893857
• Librea-Carden, M.R., & Mulvey, B.K. (2023). The potential of nature of science (NOS) in special education (SPED): Preservice teachers’ conceptions, plans, and identified NOS implications for SPED. Research in Science Education, 53, 1097–1118. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-023-10125-6
• Maryanti, R., Nandiyanto, A. B. D., Hufad, A., Sunardi, S. Husaeni, D. N. A., & Husaeni, D. F. A. (2023). A computational bibliometric analysis of science education research using vosviewer. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, 18(1), 301- 309. https://jestec.taylors.edu.my/Vol%2018%20Issue%201%20February%20%202023/18_1_20.pdf
• McComas, W. F. (2004). Keys to teaching the nature of science: Focusing on the nature of science in the science classroom. The Science Teacher, 71(9), 24-27. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262450010
• NGSS Lead States. (2013). The next generation science standards. National Academy Press.
• Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The Prisma Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151(4), 264–269. https:// doi. org/10. 7326/ 0003- 4819- 151-4- 20090 8180- 00135
• MoNE. (2018). Fen bilimleri dersi öğretim programı (ilkokul ve ortaokul 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ve 8. sınıflar).
• NRC (National Research Council). (1996). National science education standards. National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.17226/4962
• Okan, B., & Kaya, E. (2023). A content analysis of the representation of the nature of science in a Turkish science textbook. In: Carvalho, G.S., Afonso, A.S., Anastácio, Z. (eds) Fostering scientific Citizenship in an Uncertain World. Contributions from Science Education Research, 13. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32225-9_5
• Ozan, F., & Uluçınar Sağır, Ş. (2020). The effect of stem activities to the secondary school students opinions on the nature of science. Journal of STEAM Education, 3 (2), 32-43. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/1188146#764293]-1188146.pdf
• Öztürk, E., & Kaptan, F. (2014 A view on “ESERA 2009” science education researches conferance and its content studies about nature of science, argumentation, history, philosophy and sociology of science. Kastamonu Education Journal, 22(2), 649-672. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/kefdergi/issue/22602/241502
• Pradana, M., Elisa, H. P., & Syarifuddin, S. (2023). The growing trend of Islamic fashion: A bibliometric analysis. Cogent Social Sciences, 9(1), 2184557. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2184557
• Prahani, B. K., Rizki, I. A., Suprapto, N., Irwanto, I., & Kurtulus, M. A. (2024). Mapping research on scientific creativity: A bibliometric review of the literature in the last 20 years. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 52, 101-495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101495
• Pranckute, R. (2021). Web of Science (WoS) and scopus: The titans of bibliographic information in today’s academic world. Publications, 9, 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/ publications9010012
• Sarkar, A., Wang, H., Rahman, A., Memon, W. H., & Qian, L. (2022). A bibliometric analysis of sustainable agriculture: based on the Web of Science (WOS) platform. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29, 38928–38949. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-19632-x
• Solehuddin, M., Muktiarni, M., Rahayu, N. I., & Maryanti, R. (2022). Counseling guidance in science education: Definition, literature review, and bibliometric analysis. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, (Special Issue on ISCoE2022), 1- 13. https://jestec.taylors.edu.my/Special%20Issue%20ISCoE%202022_1/ISCoE%201_01.pdf
• Sönmez, H., & Hastürk, G. H. (2020). Bibliographic analysis of doctoral level thesis studies in science education domain in Turkey. Journal of Human Science Researches , 9(5), 3174-3194. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/1099718
• Stadermann, H. K. E., & Goedhart, M. J. (2020). Secondary school students’ views of nature of science in quantum physics. International Journal of Science Education, 42(6), 997–1016. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1745926
• Suryani, R., Widodo, A., & Sujana A. (2022). Content analysis of the nature of science in the thematic learning book for lower grade elementary school 2013 curriculum. Proceeding The 4th International Conference on Elementary Education, 4(1), 596-608.
• Takriti, R. A., Erduran, S., Tairab, H., Kaya, E., Alhosani, N., Rabbani, L., & Alamirah, I. (2024). Translation and validation of a questionnaire for measuring teachers’ views on nature of science. Research in Science &Technological Education, 42(3), 812–827. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2022.2138846
• Taşkın, T. (2021). An examination on nature of science studies in terms of different variables. Bolu Abant İzzet Baysal University Journal of Faculty of Education, 21(1), 1-20. https://dx.doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2021.21.60703-794024
• Tosun, C. (2024). Analysis of the last 40 years of science education research via bibliometric methods. Science & Education, 33, 451–480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00400-9
• 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.786852
• Widowati, A., Widodo, E., Anjarsari, P., & Setuju (2017). The development of scientific literacy through nature of science (NoS) within inquiry based learning approach. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 909, Article 012067. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/909/1/012067
• Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2022). VOSviewer manual (version 1.6.18. CWTS Meaningful Metrics. https://www.vosviewer.com/documentation/Manual_VOSviewer_1.6.8.pdf
• 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 32,1363–1399 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-023-00418-7
• Yacoubian, H. A. (2021). Students’ views of nature of science. Science & Education, 30, 381–408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00179-7
• Yanuarti, E.A., & Suprapto, N. (2021). Ten years of research on history of science (physics): A bibliometric analysis. Studies in Philosophy of Science and Education, 2(1), 7-16. https://doi.org/10.46627/sipose.v2i1.66