 |
Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume 15, Issue 2, Article 6 (Dec., 2014) |
Enhancing students’ understanding of the nature of science (NOS) is crucial for achieving scientific literacy and a major and significant goal of all recent reform movements in science education (American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS, 1989, 1993); National Research Council (NRC, 1996)). Science teachers’ views about the NOS are very important in the present efforts of the Ministry of Education in Bahrain to reform science education as well. Teacher preparation programs in the Middle East before the educational reform mostly focused on teaching scientific knowledge with selected education courses. Pre-service science teachers were not exposed to the epistemology and philosophy of science. On the other hand, only a small part of a methodology course covered the NOS as a topic, but it was taught using a Baconian view (Haidar, 1999) not a constructivist view. According to the Bacanion view, scientists can observe and predict what is happening in the world from an objective perspective. The only way to learn scientific knowledge is through induction. In other words, scientists should be objective and they cannot use their imagination and creativity. Scientific knowledge is not tentative and lacks creativity and imagination (Chalmers, 1999).
In the Middle East, most in-service teachers, pre-service teachers, and students are not familiar with the NOS. They generally have a Baconian perspective that scientific knowledge is obtained by induction from conducting experiments (Kalman, 2010), a relatively naïve view about the NOS. Students and teachers rely heavily on science textbooks that present science as a collection of facts and principles and use cookbook activities that portray the resulting products of science without referring to how the scientific knowledge was developed. Students can see only the products, but not the process. Even some university professors still hold naïve views about the NOS. (BouJaoude, 1996; Pomeroy, 1993).
Research studies have shown that students hold naive views of the NOS despite the fact that the importance of the NOS has been accepted in the science education community and emphasized in the science courses and science method courses (Horner & Rubba, 1979; Larochelle & Desautels, 1991; Mackay, 1971; Rubba, Horner, & Smith, 1981; Akerson & Hanuscin, 2007; Khishfe, 2008; Bell & Lederman, 2003). In addition, studies have shown that pre-service science teachers, as well as in-service science teachers, do not have adequate conceptions of the NOS (Seung, Bryan, & Butler, 2009). One of the reasons is the lack of emphasis or less emphasis on the NOS in the science courses and science method courses in most teacher preparation programs (Matkins, Bell, Irving, & McNall, 2002). To promote students’ understanding of the NOS, different curricular and research studies were developed and conducted, however it was found that these attempts were not completely effective in promoting students’ understanding of the NOS (Crumb, 1965; Jungwirth, 1970; Meichtry, 1992; Trent, 1965; Welch & Walberg, 1972; Khishfe, 2008). Abd-El-Khalick and Lederman (2000) stated that these attempts were ineffective because it was assumed that students would learn the NOS automatically as a result of studying science by inquiry activities. In other words, students learn best the aspects of the NOS through explicit-reflective instruction as compared to implicitly through experiences simply “doing” science (Lederman, 2007).
In addition, most teacher education programs try to include several NOS lessons in the science teaching method courses like our pre-service science teaching method courses at Bahrain Teachers College in Teaching and Learning General Science 1, Teaching and Learning Biology 1, Teaching and Learning Chemistry 1, or Teaching and Learning Physics 1. That is, most pre-service science teachers receive their primary NOS learning in the science teaching method courses. However, little effort has been made to develop a module that is suitable for teaching the NOS in the science teaching methods courses (Seung et al., 2009).
Based on experience with in-service and pre-service science teachers, it was noticed that most held naive views of the NOS consistent with the Baconian views about science and some resistance to change those beliefs. Research shows that science teachers who hold naive views about science may not be able to implement reform in science education. If the current reform in science education in Bahrain has to succeed, it would be helpful to know science teachers’ beliefs about the nature of science.
In this paper, pre-service science teachers’ views about the nature of science enables us to consider what pre-service science teachers are likely to communicate about the NOS in their professional practice when they become science teachers after their completions of PGDE (Post Graduate Diploma in Education). This provides insights into pre-service teachers’ starting points about their views of the NOS and how they develop and build views about the NOS that are more pedagogically sound. The analysis provides a framework to characterize pre-service science teachers’ views about the NOS in their discourse. The framework is based on the data collection and results of the data, as well as aspects of the NOS. The nature of science (NOS) and its characteristics were defined based on the way scientific knowledge is developed (Lederman, 2007; Abd-El-Khalick, B ell, & Lederman, 1998; Lederman, N,G. et al., 2001; Khishfe, 2008; Seung et. al, 2009) as seen in Figure 1 reported in the literature. The paper is concluded by drawing out some important implications of this research for science teacher education.
The current PGDE secondary science teacher education programme at Bahrain Teachers College in Bahrain, instituted after the educational reform in 2008, is a one-year full time programme. In-service teachers have already had one year to three years teaching experience, but without pedagogical knowledge background. Most just have a BS degree in sciences like physics, chemistry, and biology, and were then selected to the PGDE programme based on criteria of Ministry of Education in Bahrain. This PGDE programme includes Teaching and Learning General Science 1, which covers the following topics: Nature of Science, planning for science teaching, learning theories, and contemporary teaching approaches. It also includes Teaching and Learning Physics 1 and 2, Teaching and Learning Chemistry 1 and 2, Teaching and Learning Biology 1 and 2. These courses also cover almost all the same topics, but as specifically relates to the subject matter. Based on pre-service science teachers’ background, they will be taking some of these courses. For example, if their background is physics, they should take Teaching and Learning Science 1 and Teaching and Learning Physics 1 and 2. The nature of science is covered in week 2(3h) in Teaching and Learning General Science 1 and Teaching and Learning Biology 1. If students’ background is physics or chemistry, they will not be exposed to the NOS topic more than once. It discusses three aspects if science: fundamental of science, principles of science, and characteristics of science.
The Teaching and Learning General Science 1 course was used in this study, as it was the only available context in which to investigate the influence of approaches to the NOS teaching. The basic assumption of this preliminary study was that the inclusion of an explicit-reflective approach would contribute to developing pre-service science teachers’ understanding of the NOS. It was offered in the first semester (Fall 2008) of the PGDE programme to pre-service science teachers. Along with this course, they took either Teaching and Learning Biology 1 or Teaching and Learning Chemistry 1, based on their background. There were no students whose background was physics.
The interactive/dialogic approach in interactive lecture was used to explore students’ knowledge (Chin, 2007). The goal was to encourage students to elaborate on their thinking and assist them to construct conceptual knowledge about the NOS (VanZee & Minstrell, 1997b).The classroom was designed by the instructor of the course with round tables because contemporary teaching approaches require moving from lecture mode to cooperative mode and interactive-engagement approach. During round-table small group discussions, students conducted hands-on and minds-on activities regarding the NOS that could promote science knowledge construction.
Purpose of study and research questions
Current approaches in Science Education are to allow students to develop an understanding of the nature of science, fundamental scientific concepts, and the ability to structure, analyze, reason, and communicate effectively. They should pose, solve, and interpret scientific problems, set goals, regulate their own learning by doing science, and learn to reason scientifically (NRC, 2000; Rutherford & Ahlgren, 1991). This study considered views of the nature of science (NOS) of pre-service science teachers and instructional practice to promote pre-service science teachers’ appropriate nature of science views. This study was guided by the following questions:
- What were pre-service science teachers’ views of the NOS?
- What was the influence of the explicit constructivist-inquiry oriented approach on pre-service science teachers’ views of the NOS?
- How did pre-service science teachers’ understanding of the NOS develop from pre- to post- tests?
In general, the NOS is related to the epistemology of science, science as a way of knowing, or the values and beliefs inherent to the development of scientific knowledge (Lederman, 1992). In the literature, especially in Science for All Americans (AAAS, 1989), pedagogically important aspects of the NOS are highly developed (See Figure 1). In this study, the focus was on Bahraini pre-service science teachers’ understanding of the considered aspects of the NOS.
