Investigating the relationship between teachers’ nature of science conceptions and their practice of inquiry science

Inquiry-based science has been the major theme of many national projects and has been used as a rationale for nationwide reform efforts in middle and secondary science education across the U.S. (e.g., AAAS, 1993; NRC, 1996, 2000; PSSC, 1956). National documents written by the proponents of the most recent reform efforts are increasingly recommending that science teachers use inquiry as the primary approach to teaching science (NRC, 1996; NSTA, 2003).

In addition to recommending inquiry as the primary approach to teaching science, developers of recent reform efforts in science education have also strongly suggested that teachers develop a sound understanding of the nature of science (NOS) (NRC 1996; NSTA, 2003). An understanding of NOS is necessary because it has been found that the actions of teachers are influenced by their perceptions of science as an enterprise and as a subject to be taught and learned. (Lederman, 2007; Ochanji, 2003). Similarly, teachers’ approaches to teaching science are influenced by their NOS conceptions (Bencze, et al., 2006; Karakas, 20009; Lotter, Harwood, & Bonner 2007; Southerland, Gess-Newsome, & Johnston, 2003; Tsai, 2002). However, the relationship between teachers’ NOS conceptions and their classroom practices is complicated and far from being linear (Akerson, Cullen, & Hanson, 2009; Southerland et al. 2003).

Inquiry Teaching

Although inquiry based science instruction is a key element of many reform efforts in the U.S, it is yet not perfectly clear what is meant by inquiry teaching and how successful inquiry teaching can be performed in K12 classrooms (Anderson, 2002). One of the main recommendations of many national reports (AAAS, 1993; NRC 2000) is to educate teachers to teach science as inquiry. It is especially important to understand what inquiry teaching means for practicing teachers, as they are the key players in successfully implementing science education reform.

In an attempt to define and describe inquiry science teaching, Edelson (1998) claims that in the simplest way, inquiry science teaching refers to the adaptation of science practice for classrooms. Science teaching through inquiry requires both the knowledge of content and methods, (Hart, 2002) and/or knowledge of subject matter and knowledge of pedagogy (Tobin, Tippins & Gallard, 1994). Inquiry teaching refers to a way of thinking (Schwab, 1964) that helps science teachers become more creative in designing and implementing science curricula.

Nature of Science (NOS)

In science education literature, NOS is used as an inclusive phrase to describe “scientific enterprise for science education” (McComas, Clough, & Almazroa, 1998, p. 4). Prior to the usage of NOS, scientific enterprise and relationship between scientific disciplines were studied as part of history and philosophy of science (McComas et al, 1998). Many educators use NOS “to describe the intersection of issues addressed by the philosophy, history, sociology, and psychology of science as they apply to and potentially impact science teaching and learning” (McComas et al, 1998, p. 5).

Typically, NOS refers to values and beliefs inherent to the development of scientific knowledge (Lederman, 1992). NOS also represents the value system embedded in scientific knowledge (Lederman, 1992; Abd-El-Khalick et al., 1998). Typical NOS studies seek an individual’s answers at least on the following five questions: (1) What is Science?; (2) How is science pursued?; (3)What is the nature of scientific knowledge?; (4) What are the values embedded in scientific knowledge?; and, (5) Who is a scientist?
Although the above questions seem to be simple and straightforward, answers to these questions can be quite diverse and complicated. Unfortunately, many Americans’ answers to the above questions are contaminated with misconceptions and, thus, do not represent the true nature of science or scientific knowledge (McComas, 1998).

How NOS Conceptions Relates to Teachers’ Inquiry Science Instruction

Specifically, in regard to the relationship between teachers’ NOS conceptions and their use of inquiry in their classroom, science education literature suggests that teachers’ NOS conceptions directly or indirectly influence their inquiry science instruction in a number of ways. First, Moscovici (1999) argues that science teachers’ views about NOS greatly influence their ability and willingness to bring inquiry science to the classroom. Unfortunately, not many teachers hold desired understandings of NOS (Abd-El-Khalick, & Lederman, 2000; Lederman, 1992; Pomeroy, 1993; Ryan & Aikenhead, 1992). However, teachers’ conceptions of the NOS are dynamic and open to change (Akerson & Hanuscin, 2007; Lederman, et al., 2002).

Second, teachers’ conception of NOS may also influence the type and quality of inquiry science instruction that takes place in science classrooms (Bencze, Bowen, & Alsop, 2006; Keys & Brian, 2001; Lotter et al., 2007; Roehrig & Luft, 2004; Trumbull, Scarano, & Bonney 2006; Tsai, 2002). In the following excerpt Yerrick, Parke, and Nugent (1997) highlights the influence of teachers’ NOS conceptions on their classroom practices:
Teachers who believe knowledge is a group of facts to be delivered to the student will simply concern themselves with the transmission of a completed package. In contrast, teachers who are concerned with the students’ interpretations of this knowledge will be interested in seeing how the knowledge is transformed by the students’ attempts to use the newly acquired knowledge. (p. 139)

In support of the above argument, Keys & Bryan (2001) found that teachers who hold the desired view of NOS are more likely to implement problem-based science instruction. Also, Trumbull et al., (2006) found that the teacher who held proximal view of NOS conceptions implemented more student led investigations than the teacher who held a distal view of NOS conceptions. Similarly, Lotter et al. (2007) found that teachers’ conceptions of science guided the teachers’ use of inquiry-based practices. Also, Bencze et al.,(2006), found that teachers’ use of inquiry practices in the classroom were reflective of their NOS conceptions.

Statement of the Problem

A literature review reveals that most studies on teachers’ NOS conceptions and inquiry beliefs investigated these concepts of teachers’ NOS conceptions and inquiry beliefs and practices as separate phenomena rather than understanding how one influences the other in detail. However, studies in the literature indicate that science teachers’ NOS conceptions and inquiry beliefs and practices are not separate entities and that they influence one another (Abd-El-Khalick, Boujaoude, Dushl, Lederman, Hofstein, Niaz, Tregust, &Tuan, 2004; Eick, 2000; Keys & Bryan, 2000; Lotter, et al., 2007; Moscovici, 1998; Tsai, 2002). Furthermore, Akerson et al. (2000) indicate that NOS views are byproducts of the inquiry process. Several studies (e.g. Bencze, Bowen, & Alsop, 2006; Keys & Bryan, 2000; Lotter et al, 2007; Moscovici, 1998; 1999; Schwartz, Lederman, & Crawford, 2004; Tsai 2002) address the relationship between teachers’ NOS conceptions and inquiry beliefs. In some of these studies the relationship between teachers’ NOS conceptions and inquiry science beliefs and practices either implicitly mentioned or was not explored in depth, which necessitates further research on the relationship (Eick, 2000; Moscovici, 1998; Tsai, 2002). As an example, concerning the relationship between science teachers’ NOS conceptions and inquiry beliefs, earlier studies indicate that inquiry science experience helps teachers understand the NOS and the NOS instruction (Akerson & Hanuscin, 2007; Lotter et al., 2007; Rosenthal, 1993).

Also, research on the relationship between teachers’ NOS conceptions and their classroom practices report conflicting results. On one hand, it has been documented in science education literature that the actions of teachers are influenced by their perceptions of science as an enterprise and as a subject to be taught and learned (Lotter et al., 2007; Roehrig & Luft, 2004). Similarly, many studies report that the design and implementation of science lessons reflect teachers’ NOS conceptions (Lotter, et al., 2007; Matson & Parsons, 1998; Southerland, et al., 2003; Rosenthal, 1993; Turner & Sullenger, 1998; Tsai, 2002).

On the other hand, there are studies in science education literature that suggests that teachers’ NOS conceptions do not necessarily influence their classroom practices (Abd-El Khalick et al., 1998; Duschl & Wright, 1989; Hipkins, Barker, & Bolstad 2005; Karakas, 2009; Lederman, 1999; Lederman & Zeidler, 1987). More research is needed to further establish the relationship between teachers’ NOS conceptions and their inquiry beliefs and practices in the classroom.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study is to understand how science teachers’ NOS conceptions relate to their beliefs about inquiry and influence their inquiry science practices in the classroom as revealed through online learning. The research questions that guided this study are:

How do teachers’ NOS conceptions influence their inquiry science practices in the classroom?

How does a change in the sophistication level of teachers' NOS concepts influence their inquiry science practices in the classroom?