ARAŞTIRMA ÇIRAKLIĞI ARACILIĞIYLA ÖĞRENCİLERİN BİREYSEL VE EVRENSEL BİLİMİN DOĞASI ANLAYIŞLARI ARASINDA BAĞLANTILAR OLUŞTURMA

Öz

Bilimin doğası ile ilgili genel görüşe göre profesyonel bilim uygulamaları hakkında üst düzeyde anlayış geliştirme geleneksel okul düzeninde fen eğitiminin açık ve anlaşılır bir hedefi olmalıdır Lederman, 1992; Lederman, 2007 . Bu bakış açısı öğrencilerin tek bir bilimin doğası anlayışına sahip olmasını ifade etmektedir. Bazılarına göre ise okullardaki fen sınıflarının kültürü bir bilim laboratuvarından o kadar farklıdır ki öğrenciler apayrı iki farklı bilimin doğası görüşüne sahip olabilirler Hogan, 2000; Sandoval, 2005 . Biz ise lise düzeyinde bilimsel çalışmalara asistanlık yapma deneyiminin bu öğrencilere bilimin doğasını doğrudan öğrenebilecekleri bir bilim laboratuvarının parçası olma imkanı sağlayacağına inanıyoruz. Bu deneyim öğrencilerin kişisel bilimin doğası anlayışları ile evrensel bilimin doğası anlayışı arasındaki farklılığı giderebilir. Bu deneyimin öğrenme, öğretme ve bilimin doğasını değerlendirme açısından etkileri tartışıldı ve bir araştırma gündemi önerildi.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Bilimin doğası,Otantik deneyim,Araştırma asistanlığı/çıraklığı

Creating Links Between Students’ Personal and Global Understandings of Nature of Science Through Research Apprenticeships

Abstract

The standard view of Nature of Science NOS is that the development of sophisticated understandings of professional science practice can and should be an explicit goal of science education in traditional school settings Lederman, 1992; Lederman, 2007 . This perspective implies that students have one working conception of NOS. Others suggest that the culture of the science classroom is so different from the culture of a working science lab that students may hold two distinct views of NOS Hogan, 2000; Sandoval, 2005 . We believe that secondary students experiences in scientific research apprenticeships have the potential to allow these learners to become members of a working science lab where they truly experience an authentic form of science. These experiences may bridge the gap between students’ personal and global understandings of NOS. Implications for the teaching, learning, and assessment of NOS in these contexts is discussed and a research agenda is proposed

Keywords

• Nature of Science,Authenticity,Research Apprenticeships

Kaynakça

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS]. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy: A Project 2061 report. New York: Oxford University Press.
2. Alters, B.J. (1997). Whose nature of science? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(1), 39-55.
3. 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.
4. Akerson, V.L., & Volrich, M.L. (2006). Teaching nature of science explicitly in a first- grade internship setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 377- 394.
5. Barab, S., & Hay, K. (2001). Doing science at the elbows of experts: Issues related to the science apprenticeship camp. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(1), 70-102.
6. 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.
7. Bencze, L., & Hodson, D. (1999). Changing practice by changing practice: Toward more authentic science and science curriculum development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(5), 521-539.
8. Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.

9. Burgin, S.R., Sadler, T.D., & Koroly, M.J. (in review). High school student participation in scientific research apprenticeships: Variation in and relationships among student experiences and outcomes. Research in Science Education.
10. Charney, J., Hmelo-Silver, C.E., Sofer, W., Neigeborn, L., Coletta, S., & Nemeroff, M. (2007). Cognitive apprenticeship in science through immersion in laboratory practices. International Journal of Science Education, 29(2), 195-213.
11. Chinn, C.A., & Malhotra, B.A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86, 175- 218.
12. Cooley, W.W., & Klopfer, L.E. (1961). Test on understanding science. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
13. Helms, J.V. (1998). Science and/in the community: Context and goals in practical work. International Journal of Science Education, 20(6), 643-653.
14. Hogan, K. (2000). Exploring a process view of students’ knowledge about the nature of science. Science Education, 84, 51-70.
15. Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth grader’s views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551-578.
16. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17. Lawson, A.E. (1982). The nature of advanced reasoning and science instruction. Journal of Research in Science teaching, 19, 743-760.
18. 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.
19. 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 (pp. 831-880). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
20. Lederman, N.G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R.L., & Schwartz, R.S. (2002). View 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.
21. Lederman, N., Wade, P.D., & Bell, R.L. (1998). Assessing understanding of the nature of science: A historical perspective. In W.F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 331-350). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
22. Meichtry, Y.J. (1992). Influencing student understanding of the nature of science: Data from a case of curriculum development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 389-407.
23. Moss, D.M. (2001). Examining student conceptions of the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 23(8), 771-790.
24. National Research Council [NRC]. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.
25. 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.
26. Richmond, G., & Kurth, L.A. (1999). Moving form outside to inside: High school students’ use of apprenticeships as vehicles for entering the culture and practice of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(6), 677-697.
27. Ritchie, S.M., & Rigano, D.L. (1996). Laboratory apprenticeship through a student research project. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 799-815.
28. Sadler, T.D. (2009). Situated learning in science education: Socio-scientific issues as contexts for practice. Studies in Science Education, 45(1), 1-42.
29. Sadler, T.D., Burgin, S., McKinney, L., & Ponjuan, L. (2010). Learning science through research apprenticeships: A critical review of the literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 235-256.
30. Sadler, T. D., Chambers, W.F., & Zeidler, D.L.(2004). Student conceptualizations of the
31. nature of science in response to a socioscientific issue, International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 387-409.
32. Sandoval, W.A. (2005). Understanding students’ practical epistemologies and their influence on learning through inquiry. Science Education, 89, 634-656.
33. Schön, D.A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
34. Schön, D.A. (1987). Educationg the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
35. Smith, M., Lederman, N.G., Bell, R., McComas, W.F., & Clough, M. (1997). How great is the disagreement about the nature of science: A response to Alters. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 1101-1103.
36. Schwartz, R., & Lederman, N. (2008). What scientists say: Scientists’ view of nature of science and relation to science context. International Journal of Science Education, 30(6), 727-771.
37. Schwartz, R.S., Lederman, N.G., & Crawford, B.A. (2004). Developing view of nature of science in an authentic context: An explicit approach to bridging the gap between nature of science and scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88, 610- 645.
38. Wong, S.L., & Hodson, D. (2009). From the horse’s mouth: What scientists say about scientific investigation and scientific knowledge. Science Education, 93, 109- 130.
39. 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.
40. Zeidler, D. L., Walker, K. A., Ackett, W. A., & Simmons, M. L. (2002). Tangled up in views: Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific dilemmas. Science Education, 86, 343-367.