A Prerequisite in Science Education: Understanding Nature of Science

Öz

In this time that scientific and technologic developments improve with amazing speed, the quality and effectiveness of science education that students received in schools has gained greater importance in order to keep up with current developments. Since 1980s, America and many European countries as the main aim of science program have determined to train each student as “scientifically literate” person who has scientific thinking skills, rather than transmitting them more scientific knowledge thorough science education. Understanding the nature of science is an essential aspect of scientific literacy (AAAS, 1993). Throughout the world in recent years, there has been great tendency regarding teachers and students’ understanding of science, and the reform acts in the area of science education emphasized enhancing teachers and students’ understanding of nature of science. In our country, new program, which is put into practice in 2004–2005 academic year, attracts attention to the nature of science. Parallels to these developments, this article argues the past and current understanding of science, the importance of nature of science in terms of effective science education and teaching of it to students in the light of research findings.

Key words: Nature of science, positive science, post-modern science, science education.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• -

Fen Eğitiminde Bir Önkoşul: Bilimin Doğasını Anlama

Öz

ÖZET
Bilimsel ve teknolojik gelişmelerin baş döndürücü hızla ilerlediği günümüzde, çağa
ayak uydurmak için okullarda öğrencilerin aldığı fen eğitiminin niteliği ve kalitesi daha
fazla önem kazanmıştır. 1980’li yıllardan beri, Amerika ve pek çok Avrupa ülkesi fen eğitimi
ile öğrencilere daha fazla bilimsel bilgi aktarmak yerine, her öğrenciyi bilimsel düşünme
becerilerine sahip “bilim/fen okur-yazarı” bireyler olarak yetiştirmeyi fen programlarında
temel hedef olarak belirlemişlerdir. Bilim okur-yazarlığının da önemli ve vazgeçilmez
parçasını öğrencilerin bilimin doğasını anlamaları oluşturmaktadır (AAAS, 1993). Son
yıllarda dünyada, öğretmenlerin ve öğrencilerin bilim anlayışı konusuna çok fazla önem
verilmekte ve fen eğitimi alanında yapılan reform hareketlerinde öğretmen ve öğrencilerin
bilimin doğası hakkındaki anlamalarını geliştirme gerekliliği vurgulanmaktadır. Ülkemizde
de 2004–2005 öğretim yılından itibaren uygulanan yeni program bilimin doğası konusunun
önemine dikkat çekmektedir. Bu gelişmelere paralel olarak, bu makalede önceki ve bugün
geçerli olan bilim anlayışı üzerinde durulacak, bilimin doğası konusunun etkili bir fen
eğitimi açısından önemi ve öğrencilere öğretimi araştırmaların ışığında tartışılacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Bilimin doğası, pozitif bilim, post-modern bilim, fen eğitimi

Kaynakça

1. 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, 417436. Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2001). Embedding nature of science in preservice elementary science courses: Abandoning scientism, but… Journal of Science Teacher Education, 12(3), 215-233. Akerson, V., Morrison, J., & McDuffie, A. (2006). One course is not enough: Preservice elementary teachers’ retention of improved views of nature of science, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(2), 194-213. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1989). Science for all Americans: Summary, Washington, D.C: AAAS. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Benchmarks for scientific literacy. New York: Oxford University Press. Brickhouse N.W. (1990). Teachers’ beliefs about the nature of science and their relationship to classroom practice. Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 53-62. Brickhouse, N., Dagher, Z., Letts, W., & Shipman, H. (2000). Diversity of students’ views about evidence, theory, and the interface between science and religion in an astronomy course. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(4), 340-362. Chalmers, A. (1997). Bilim dedikleri bilimin doğası, statüsü ve yöntemleri üzerine bir değerlendirme (Çev. Hüsamettin Arslan), Ankara: Vadi Yayınları. 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. Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R. & Scott, P. (1996). Young People’s Images of Science, Open University Press, Buckingham. Doğan, N., Çakıroğlu, J., Bilican, K. & Çavuş, S. (2009). Bilimin doğası ve öğretimi. Ankara: Pegem Akademi. Gordon, M. (2005). Sosyoloji sözlüğü. Ankara: Bilim ve Sanat Yayınları. Güzel, C. (Der-Çev.) (1998). Sağduyu filozofu: Popper. Ankara: Bilimve Sanat Yayınları. 73 Hanuscin, D., Akerson, V., & Phillipson-Mower, T. (2006). Integrating nature of science instruction into a physical science content course for preservice elementary teachers: NOS views of teaching assistants, Science Education, 90(5), 912-035. Harlen, W. (1996). The teaching of science in primary schools (2nd ed.). London: David Fulton Publishers Ltd. Hawking, S. W. (1988). A brief history of time. London: Bantam Books. Lederman, N. G. & Lederman, J. S. (2004). Project ICON: A professional development project to promote teachers' and students' knowledge of nature of science and scientific inquiry. In Buffler, A. & Laugksch, R. (Eds.) Proceedings of the 12th annual conference of the Southern African Association for research in Mathematics, Science and technology education. Durban: SAARMSTE. Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. Abell, S. & Lederman, N. (Eds.) Handbook of Research on Science Education. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. McComas, W. F. (1998). The principal elements of the nature of science: Dispelling the yths. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers Merdin, S. (1996). Tanrıya Koşan Fizik. İstanbul: Timaş Yayınları. Millar R. (1996). Towards a science curriculum for public understanding, School Science Review, 77, 7-18. Minstrell, J., van Zee, E. H. (2000). Inquiry into inquiry learning and teaching in science. Washington, DC.: American Association for the Advancement of Science. National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Research Council. National Research Council (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. NSTA. (1982). Science-technology-society: Science education for the 1980's. Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association. Özden, Y. ve Şimşek, H. (1998). Davranışçılıktan oluşturmacılığa: Öğrenme paradigmasının dönüşümü ve Türk eğitimi. Bilgi ve Toplum, 1, 71-82 . 74 Özden, Y. (2002). Eğitimde yeni değerler. Eğitimde dönüşüm. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık. Scarnati, J. T. (1993). Tracks revisited. Science and Children, 30(6), 23-25. Schwartz, R.S., Akom, G., Skjold, B., Hong, H. H., Kagumba, R. & Huang, F. (2007). A change in perspective: Science education graduate students’ reflections on learning about NOS. Paper presented at the international meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA. April 15-18, 2007. 22 Mart 2008 tarihinde http://homepages.wmich.edu/ ~rschwart/docs/A_ change_in_perspectivearst07schwartz.pdf adresinden ulaşılmıştır. Schwartz, R. S., Lederman, N. G., & Crawford, B. A. (2004). Developing views 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(4), 610-645. Türkdoğan, O. (2000). Bilimsel araştırma metodolojisi, İstanbul: Timaş Yayınları. Wheeler-Toppen, J.L. (2005). Teaching NOS Tenets: Is it time for a change? Paper presented at the Association of Science Teacher Educators (ASTE) 2005 Conference, Colorado Springs, CO. January 19-23. Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations. Translated by Anscombe G. E. M., Oxford: Blackwells.