Views of Social Studies Teachers on Scientific Research Methodology

Year 2021, Volume: 8 Issue: 4, 64 - 83, 01.12.2021

Hüseyin Bayram

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.21.79.8.4

Cited By: 5

Abstract

Scientific method is one means by which knowledge is created. The goal of the social studies course is to teach the methodology used by these sciences in accessing the subject information along with the information they provide from social sciences. Therefore, social studies teachers should be aware of the scientific research methodology so that they can teach according to this purpose. In this study, the focus was on how teachers consider scientific research. This study aimed to investigate social studies teachers' views on scientific research methodology. It adopted phenomenology, one of the qualitative research designs. Maximum diversity sampling and criterion sampling were used to determine the study group. Data collection consisted of two stages. In the first stage, the Views about Scientific Inquiry Questionnaire (VASI) was applied. The second stage included a semi-structured interview form prepared by the researcher. Data were analysed via the descriptive analysis technique. The codes were classified under the headings in the VASI form. Findings showed that views of social studies teachers regarding scientific research methodology were mostly wrong and inadequate. Based on the findings, recommendations were made to social studies teachers, administrators, and the officials of the Council of Higher Education (CoHE). These suggestions were as follows: Teachers need to learn about scientific research methodology, school administrators should implement programs such as in-service training for teachers on a related subject, and CoHE officials should add more content about scientific research methodology to social studies teacher training programs.

Keywords

Social Studies teaching, Social Studies teachers, scientific research methodology, views of teachers

References

• Akerson, V. L., & Donnelly, L. A. (2008). Relationships among learner characteristics and preservice elementary teachers’ views of nature of science. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 20(1), 45–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03174702
• Anggraeni, N., Adisendjaja, Y. H., & Amprasto, A. (2017). Profile of high school students’ understanding of scientific inquiry. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 895, No. 1, p. 012138). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/895/1/012138
• Asay, L. D., & Orgill, M. K. (2010). Analysis of essential features of inquiry found in articles published in the science teacher, 1998-2007. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21, 57–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-009-9152-9
• Astor-Jack, T., McCallie, E., & Balcerzak, P. (2007). Academic and informal science education practitioner views about professional development in science education. Science Teacher Education, 91(4), 604–628. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20205
• Bianchini, J. A., & Colburn, A. (2000). Teaching the nature of science through inquiry to prospective elementary teachers: A tale of two researchers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(2), 177–209. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1098-2736(200002)37:2<177::aid-tea6>3.0.co;2-y
• Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, K. E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2010). Research methods. [Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri]. Ankara: Pegem Academy Publishing.
• Cho, H., Han, I., Kim, H., & Yang, I. (2008). Analysis of elementary teachers’ views on barriers in implementing inquiry-based instructions. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 28(8), 901–921. Retrieved from https://www.koreascience.or.kr/article/JAKO200817347315232.pdf
• Choi, A., Seung, E., & Kim, D. (2019). Science teachers’ views of argument in scientific inquiry and argument-based science instruction. Research in Science Education, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-9861-9
• Chu, S., Chow, K., Tse, S. K., & Kuhlthau, C. C. (2008). Grade 4 students' development of research skills through ınquiry-based learning projects. School Libraries Worldwide, 14(1), 10-37. Retrieved from https://www.iasl-online.org/Resources/Documents/slw/v14/14_1chu.pdf
• Crook, C., & Garratt, D. (2005). The positivist paradigm in contemporary social science research. (Eds. B. Somekh & C. Lewin). In Research methods in the social sciences, (pp. 207-214). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
• Çigdemoglu, C., & Köseoğlu, F. (2019). Improving science teachers’ views about scientific ınquiry. Science & Education 28, 439–469. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00054-0
• Eliyahu, E. B., Assaraf, O. B. Z., & Lederman, J. S. (2020). Do not just do science inquiry, understand it! The views of scientific inquiry of Israeli Middle school students enrolled in a scientific reserve course. Research in Science Education, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-020-09925-x
• Flick, L. B. (2000). Cognitive scaffolding that fosters scientific inquiry in middle level science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 11(2), 109-129. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1009464707968
• Glesne, C. (2016). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. New Jersey: Pearson.
• Honebein, P. C. (1996). Seven goals for the design of constructivist learning environments. (Ed. B. G. Wilson). In Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design, (pp. 11-24). New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications.
• Hull, D. L. (2010). Science as a process: An evolutionary account of the social and conceptual development of science. University of Chicago Press.
• Hyland, K. (1998). Hedging in scientific research articles (Vol. 54). John Benjamins Publishing.
• Jackson, J. (2016). How to develop a research proposal. (Ed. Z. Hua). In Research methods intercultural communication. (pp. 187-202). New Jersey: Wiley Blackwell Puclications.
• Kaboub, F. (2008). Positivist paradigm. Encyclopaedia of Counselling, 2(2), 343. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412963978.n249
• Karışan, D., Bilican, K., & Şenler, B. (2017). Opinion questionnaire about scientific inquiry: adaptation to Turkish, validity and reliability study. [Bilimsel sorgulama hakkında görüş anketi: Türkçeye uyarlama, geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması]. İnönü University Journal of the Faculty of Education (INUJFE), 18(1). https://doi.org/10.17679/inuefd.307053
• Katz, J. J. (1997). Realistic rationalism. Cambridge: MIT Press
• 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10036
• Kim, B. (2001). Social constructivism. Emerging Perspectives on Learning,Tteaching, and Technology, 1(1), 16. Retrieved from https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/From-Emerging-Perspectives-on-Learning%2C-Teaching-Kim/159d941e1ae28a612e5a8c3253c56d7626701e50?p2df
• Leblebicioğlu, G., Metin, D., Çapkınoğlu, E., Çetin, P. S., Eroğlu, D. E., & Schwartz, R. (2017). Changes in students’ views about nature of scientific inquiry at a science camp. Science & Education, 26(7–9), 889–917. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-017-9941-z
• Lederman, J. S., Lederman, N. G., Bartels, S. L., & Jimanez, J. P. (2019). Understandings of scientific inquiry: An international collaborative investigation of grade seven students. Bridging Research and Practice in Science Education, 189–201. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17219-0_12
• Lederman, J. S., Lederman, N. G., Bartos, S. A., Bartels, S. L., Meyer, A. A., & Schwartz, R. S. (2014). Meaningful assessment of learners’ understandings about scientific inquiry—The views about scientific inquiry (VASI) questionnaire. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(1), 65–83. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21125
• Liang, L. L., Chen, S., Chen, X., Kaya, O. N., Adams, A. D., Macklin, M., & Ebenezer, J. (2009). Preservice teachers’views about nature of scientific knowledge development: An international collaborative study. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7(5), 987-1012. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-008-9140-0
• Luehmann, A. L., & Markowitz, D. (2007). Science teachers’ perceived benefits of an out-of-school enrichment programme: Identity needs and university affordances. International Journal of Science Education, 29(9), 1133–1161. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600944429
• Matthews, M. R. (2012). Changing the focus: From nature of science (NOS) to features of science (FOS). In Advances in nature of science research (pp. 3-26). Springer, Dordrecht.
• McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2008). Scientific explanation: Characterizing and evaluating the effect of teachers’ instructional practices on student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 53–78. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20201
• MEB (2018). Social Studies 4, 5, 6, & 7th classes curriculum. [Sosyal Bilgiler 4,5,6 ve 7. sınıf programı]. Ankara: Presidential of Training & Discipline.
• Monteiro, B. A. P., Martins, I., de Souza Janerine, A., & de Carvalho, F. C. (2016). The issue of the arrangement of new environments for science education through collaborative actions between schools, museums and science centres in the Brazilian context of teacher training. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11, 419–437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-014-9638-4
• Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2007). Sampling designs in qualitative research: Making the sampling process more public. Qualitative Report, 12(2), 238-254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-006-9000-3
• Park, Y.-S. (2010). Secondary beginning teachers’ views of scientific inquiry: With the view of hands-on, minds-on, and hearts-on. Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 31(7), 798–812. https://doi.org/10.5467/jkess.2010.31.7.798
• Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
• Ravetz, I. R. (1999). What is post-normal science. Futures the Journal of Forecasting Planning and Policy, 31(7), 647-654. Retrieved from http://www.andreasaltelli.eu/file/repository/Editorials2.pdf
• Roth, WM., McGinn, M.K. & Bowen, G.M. (1998). How prepared are preservice teachers to teach scientific inquiry? Levels of performance in scientific representation practices. Journal of Science Teacher Education 9, 25-48. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1009465505918
• Russell, B. (1935). Religion and science. London: Oxford University Press.
• Sampson, V., & Blanchard, M. R. (2012). Science teacher and scientific argumentation: trends in views and practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(9), 1122–1148. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21037
• Stokking, K., Schaaf, M., Jaspers, J., & Erkens, G. (2004). Teachers' assessment of students' research skills. British Educational Research Journal, 30(1), 93-116. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920310001629983
• Şenler, B. (2015). Middle school students’ views of scientific inquiry: An international comparative study. Science Education International, 26(2), 166-179. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1064039
• Tsai, C. C. (2007). Teachers’ scientific epistemological views: The coherence with instruction and students’ views. Science Education, 91(2), 222–243. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20175
• Wahbeh, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2014). Revisiting the translation of nature of science understandings into ınstructional 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
• Wilson, E. B. (1990). An introduction to scientific research. Massachusetts: Courier Corporation.
• Yu, J. C., & Yang, H. J. (2010). Incorporating museum experience into an in-service programme for science and technology teachers in Taiwan. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 20(4), 417–431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-009-9101-0