Analysis of Articles on the Nature of Science between 2015 and 2022

Year 2024, Volume: 11 Issue: 4, 215 - 234, 07.07.2024

Fatma Kübra Uyar , Remziye Uludağ Kırçıl , Şafak Uluçınar Sağır

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.24.57.11.4

Abstract

It is evident that knowing the nature of science is a requirement for “science education”, which serves as the basis of conscious citizenship. For this reason, articles concerning the nature of science that were published in the Web of Science and EBSCOhost database between 2015 and 2022 were examined in this study in order to establish a broad framework and develop a research road map. A qualitative design approach and a descriptive review method were used. The keywords "Nature of Science (NoS) and Science Education" and "Teaching of Nature of Science (NoS) and Science Education" were used. The majority of the 107 articles on the nature of science that have been examined preferred qualitative research designs, and "Science & Education" is the publication that has published the most articles on the subject in 2017-2018-2020, pre-service teachers were mostly preferred as the sample group, it was applied to groups of “21-50” people as the sample group, open reflective approach was preferred as the teaching approach, the most commonly used method-technique was “discussion”, the activities used in the articles were generally standard, semi-structured interview form was preferred as the evaluation tool and “VNOS-C” was deployed as the questionnaire. Studies may be conducted within the boundaries of further lectures on the topic and internationally published theses.

Keywords

nature of science,, science education,, meta-synthesis,

References

• Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2013). Teaching with and about nature of science, and science teacher knowledge domains. Science & Education, 2(2), 2087–2107.
• Adedoyin, A. O., & Bello, G. (2017). Conceptions of the nature of science held by undergraduate pre-service biology teachers in south-west Nigeria. Malaysian. Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 5(1), 1–9.
• Aksöz, B., Kaya, E., & Çilekrenkli, A. (2023). A science teachers’s autoethnographic reflections on teaching nature of science. Science & Education, 1-34.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-023-00462-3
• Allchin, D. (2014). From science studies to scientific literacy: A view from the classroom. Science & Education, 23(9), 1911-1932.
• Ampatzidis, G. & Ergazaki, M. (2023). Using the history of the super-organismic-plant-community concept to help students understand the nature of science. Science & Education, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-023-00433-8
• Ayvacı, H. Ş., & Akdemir, E. (2017). Examination of theses published since 2013 in the field of nature of science in terms of different variables. Van Yüzüncü Yıl University Faculty of Education Journal, 14(1), 1178-1218.
• Bell, R. L., Matkins, J. J., & Gansneder, B. M. (2011). Impacts of contextual and explicit instruction on preservice elementary teachers’ understandings of the nature of science. Journal on Research in Science Teaching, 48(4), 414–436.
• Birkle, C., Pendlebury, D. A., Schnell, J., & Adams, J. (2020). Web of Science as a data source for research on scientific and scholarly activity. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(1), 363–376. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00018
• Caymaz, B. (2022). Investigation of theses on teaching of the nature of science and published between 2005-2020 in Turkey. Inonu University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 23(2), 755-786. https://doi.org/10.17679/inuefd.988205
• Çalık, M. (2019). Alanyazın tarama (Literature review). H. Özmen & O. Karamustafaoğlu (Ed.), Eğitimde Araştırma Yöntemleri (Research Methods in Education) (s.19-39) içinde Pegem Akademi (in Pegem Academy).
• Celik, S., & Bayrakceken, S. (2012). The influence of an activity-based explicit approach on the Turkish prospective science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(4), 75–95. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte. 2012v 37n4.3
• Chen, F. D. T., Tsai, C. C., & Chai, C. C. S. (2011). Students’ views of the nature of science: A critical review of research. Science Education, 9(5), 961–999.
• Clough, M. P. (2018). Teaching and learning about the nature of science. Science and Education, 27, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-018-9964-0
• Cobem, W.W. (1991). ‘Introducing teachers to the philosophy of science’. Journal of Science Teacher Education. (2), 45-47.
• Cobern, W.W., & Cathleen C. Loving, C.C. (2002). The card exchange: Introducing the philosophy of science. In Mc Comas, W.F. (Ed.), The nature of science in science education rationales and strategies (pp.73-88). Kluwer Academic Publishers.
• Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research Methods in Education (6th ed.). London and New York, NY: Routledge Falmer.
• Demirel, Z. M., Sungur, S., & Çakıroğlu, J. (2023). Science teachers’ views on the nature of science and its integration into instruction. Science & Education, 32(5), 1401-1433.
• Deng, F., Chen, D. T., Tsai, C. C., & Chai, C. S. (2011). Students' views of the nature of science: A critical review of research. Science Education, 95(6), 961-999.
• Dorji, K., Jatsho, S, Choden, P., & Tshering, P. (2022). Bhutanese science teachers’ perceptions of the nature of science: A cross-sectional study. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary. Science Education Research, 4(4), 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-021-00044-9
• Driver, R., Leach, J., & Millar, R. (1996). Young people's images of science. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
• Duc- Dat, N., Van-Bien, N.,& Kraus, S. (2023). The impact of the curriculum on pre-service physics teachers’ nature of science conceptions. Science & Education,1-26.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-023-00430-x
• Erdaş, E., Doğan, N.,& İrez, S. (2016). Evaluation of studies on the nature of science conducted in Turkey between 1998 and 2012. Kastamonu Education Journal, 24(1), 17-36.
• Ferreira, S., & Morais, A. M. (2013). The Nature of science in science curricula: Methods and concepts of analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 35(16), 2670–2691. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.621982
• Fricke, K., & Reinisch, B. (2023). Evaluation of nature of science representations in biology school textbooks based on a differentiated family resemblance approach. Science & Education, 32, 1538-1611. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-023-00444-5
• García-Carmona, A., Vázquez, A., & Manassero, M. A. (2011). Estado actual y perspectivas de la ensenanza de la naturaleza de la ciencia: Unarevisión de lascreencias y obstáculos del profesorado [Current status and prospects about teaching the nature of science: A review of teachers’ beliefs and obstacles]. Enseñanza De Las Ciencias, 29(3), 403-412.
• Golabek, C., & Amrane-Cooper, L. (2011). Trainee teachers’perceptions of the nature of science and implications for pre-service teacher training in England. Research in Secondary Teacher Education, 1(2), 9-13.
• Goren, D., & Kaya, E. (2023). How is students’ understanding of nature of science related with their metacognitive awareness?. Science & Education, 32(5), 1471-1496.
• Halai, N., & McNicholl, J. (2004). Teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A comparative study from Pakistan and UK. School Science Review, 86(314), 93-100.
• Hanson, R. (2015). Identifying students’ alternative concepts in basic chemical bonding: A case study of teacher trainees in the University of Education, Winneba. International Journal of Innovative Research and Development, 4(1), 115-122.
• Holbrook, J., & M. Rannikmae. (2007) The nature of science education for enhancing scientific literacy. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1347-1362.
• Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2011). A family resemblance approach to the nature of science for science education. Science & Education, 20(7), 591–607.
• İnce, K., & Sözgelen, S. (2015). Examining the studies conducted in the field of nature of science in the last 10 years in terms of different variables. Mersin University Faculty of Education Journal, 11(2), 447-468. https://doi.org/10.17860/efd.77894
• Jayarajah, K., Saat, R. M. & Rauf, R. A. A. (2014). A review of science, technology, engineering & mathematics (STEM) education research from 1999–2013: A Malaysian perspective. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 10(3), 155-163.
• Kaya, E., & Erduran, S. (2016). From FRA to RFN, or how the family resemblance approach can be transformed for curriculum analysis on nature of science. Science & Education, 25, 1115–1133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-016-9861-3
• Khishfe, R. (2023). Relationship between nature of science and argumentation: A follow-up study. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 21(4), 1081-1102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-022-10307-0
• Kızkapan, O., Nacaroğlu, O. & Saylan-Kırmızıgül, A. (2023). Pre-service science teachers’ epistemic beliefs, nature of science views, and beliefs in pseudoscience. Science & Education, 1-18.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-023-00450-7
• Kim, S., & Irving, K. (2010). History of science as an instructional context: Student learning in genetics and nature of science. Science & Education, 19(2), 187–215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-009-9191-9
• Kite, V., Park, S., McCance, K., & Seung, E. (2020): Secondary science teachers’ understandings of the epistemic nature of science practices. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 32(3), 243-264. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2020.18087 57
• Laugksch, R. C. (2000). Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview. Science Education, 84(1), 71-94.
• Leach, J., Driver, R., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1997). A study of progression in learning about 'the nature of science': Issues of conceptualization and methodology. International Journal of Science Education, 19(2), 147-166.
• Lederman, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (1998). Avoiding de-natured science: Activities that promote understandings of the nature of science. In The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 83-126). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
• Lederman, N. G. (2013). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. In Handbook of research on science education (pp. 831-879). Routledge.
• Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2014). Research on teaching and learning of nature of science. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. 2, pp. 600–620). Routledge
• Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views 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.
• Lederman, N. G., Lederman, J. S., & Antink, A. (2013). Nature of science and scientific inquiry as contexts for the learning of science and achievement of scientific literacy. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 1(3), 138–147.
• 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.
• Lin, T. C., Lin, T. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2014). Research trends in science education from 2008 to 2012: A systematic content analysis of publications in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 36(8), 1346-1372.
• Ma, H. (2009). Chinese secondary school science teachers’ understanding of the nature of science emerging from their views of nature. Research in Science Education, 39(5), 701–724.
• McComas, W. F. (2020). Principal elements of nature of science: Informing science teaching while dispelling the myths. In Nature of science in science instruction (pp. 35-65). Springer, Cham.
• McComas, W. F., Almazroa, H., & Clough, M. P. (1998). The nature of science in science education: An introduction. Science & Education,7(6), 511-532.
• McComas, W. F., & Clough, M. P. (2020). Nature of science in science instruction: Meaning, advocacy, rationales, and recommendations. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), Nature of science in science instruction: science: philosophy, history and education (pp. 1-17). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57239-6_1
• McDonald, C.V. (2017). Exploring nature of science and argumentation in science education. InBen Akpan (Ed.),Science education: a global perspective. (pp. 7-43.) Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32351-0_2
• Mesci, G., Yeşildağ-Hasançebi, F., & Tuncay-Yüksel, B. (2023). Argumentation based nature of science instruction: Influence on pre-service science teachers’ NOS views and practicing. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13, 104231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104231
• Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook qualitative data analysis. London: SAGE
• Miranda R., & Garcia-Carpintero E. (2019). Comparison of the share of documents and citations from different quartile journals in 25 research areas. Scientometrics, 121, 479–501.
• Mudavanhu, Y., & Zezerwa, N. (2017). The views of nature of science expressed by in-service teachers who were learning history and philosophy of science. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 7(3), 39–48.
• Mulvey, B. K., & Bell, R. L. (2017). Making learning last: Teachers’ long-term retention of improved nature of science conceptions and instructional rationales. International Journal of Science Education, 39(1), 62–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1267879
• National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. The National Academies Press.
• NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. The National Academy Press.
• Nur, E. M., & Fitnat, K. (2015). Explicit-reflective teaching nature of science as embedded within the science topic: Interactive historical vignettes technique. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 3(6), 40–49.
• Ocak, İ., & Yeter, F. (2018). Examination of national theses and articles on "nature of science" studied between 2006 and 2016. Journal of Theoretical Education Science, 11(3), 522-543.
• OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 assessment and analytical framework. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/b25ef ab8-en
• Onijamowo, O. T. (2010). Senior school chemistry student misconceptions and alternative conceptions of selected chemistry concepts in Kogi State Nigeria. Unpublished master Dissertation. University of Ilorin, Nigeria.
• Ornek, F., Miranda, R., & Orbay, M. (2021). Investigating the journal impact factor of special education journals indexed in the Social Sciences Science Edition from Web of Science. Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals, Winter, 110–132.
• Öztürk, E.,& Uçuş, Ş. (2015). Nature of science lessons, argumentation and scientific discussions among students in science class: A case study in a successful school. Journal of Education in Science Environment and Health, 1(2), 102.
• Paraskevopoulou, E., & Kolipoulos, D. (2011). Teaching the nature of science through the Millikan – Ehrenhaft dispute. Science and Education, 20, 943–960. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-010-9308-1
• Piliouras, P., Plakitsi, K., Seroglou, F., & Papantonium, G. (2017). Teaching explicitly and reflecting on elements of nature of science: A discourse – focused professional development program with fifth-grade teachers. Research in Science Education, 48, 1221–1246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9600-4
• Pranckute, R. (2021). Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The titans _ of bibliographic information in today’s academic world. Publications, 9(1),12. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9010012
• Sormunen, K., & Köksal, M. S. (2014). Advanced science students’ understandings on nature of science in Finland. European Journal of Educational Research, 3(4), 167–176.
• Suri, H Clarke, D. (2009). Advancements in research systhesis methods: From a methodologically inclusive perspective. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 395-430.
• Summers, R. (2023). Appraising instructional materials from teachers pay teachers for features of NGSS design and nature of science representations. Research in Science Education, 54(3), 523-546.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-023-10146-1
• Taber, K. S. (2008). Towards a curricular model of the Nature of Science. Science & Education, 17, 179–218.
• Taşkın, T. (2021). Examination of articles on the nature of science in terms of various variables. Abant İzzet Baysal University Faculty of Education Journal, 21(1), 1-20.
• Torres, J., & Vasconcelos, C. (2015). Nature of science and models: Comparing Portuguese prospective teacher’s views. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(6), 1473–1494.
• Uluçınar-Sağır, Ş., & Kılıç, Z. (2013). The effect of scientific discussion-oriented teaching on primary school students' understanding of the nature of science. Hacettepe University Faculty of Education Journal, 44, 308-318.
• UNESCO. (2016). Science for Sustainable Development. Policy Brief by the Scientific Advisory Board of the UN Secretary-General.
• United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development. 70th Session. A/RES/70/1. UN-General Assembly. New York.
• Üçer-Erdemir, A. & Dinçol-Özgür, S. (2023). A descriptive content analysis of theses on the nature of science in Turkey. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 22(86), 683-713. https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.1224689
• Vázquez-Alonso, Á., García-Carmona, A., Manassero-Mas, M. A., &Bennāssar-Roig, A. (2013). Science teacher’s thinking about the nature of science: A new methodological approach to its assessment. Research in Science Education, 43, 781–808. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-012-9291-4
• Voss, S., Kent-Schneider, I., Kruse, J., & Daemicke, R. (2023). Investigating the development of pre-service 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
• Wei, L., Gao, B., Wang, J., Jiang, C., Zhang, X., & Ping, X. (2023). Research on the nature of science in China’s current high school physics textbooks. Science & Education, 1-17.
• Witucki, A., Beane, W., Pleasants, B., Dai, P., & Rudge, D. W. (2023). An explicit and reflective approach to teaching nature of science in a course-based undergraduate research experience. Science & Education.1-29.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-023-00441-8
• Xiang, J., & Han, C. (2023). Effect of STSE approach in high school students’ understanding of nature of science. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-023-10053-0
• Yalvac, B., Tekkaya, C., Cakiroglu, J., &Kahyaoglu, E. (2007). Turkish pre-service science teachers’ views on Science–Technology–Society Issues. International Journal of Science Education, 29(3), 331–348.
• Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri(Qualitative research methods in the social science). Ankara: Seçkin Pub.
• Yang, H., & Tate, M. (2012). A descriptive literature review and classification of cloud computing research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 31(2), 35-60. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.03102
• Yücel Dağ, M., & Taşar, M. F. (2016). More interactive historical vignettes. Contemporary Educational Researches Journal. 8(1), 53-60.