| 1. Science teachers have an inaccurate view of the nature of science. Carey & Strauss (1970) 2. Students show many misconceptions of the nature of science (e.g.
naive empiricism, laws are mature theories, science is objective,
science gives necessary truths, etc.) 3. When students and teachers are compared, they both seem to score
equally poorly on nature of science assessments. 4. Science textbooks and scientific papers distort the nature of
science. 5. Pupils' views about the philosophy of science are influenced
by the way in which they are taught science even if their teacher
does not attempt to do so explicitly. 6. Preservice or inservice courses emphasizing the nature of science
can result in significant gains in teacher scores on instruments designed
to measure understanding of this concept. 7. Where attempts have been made to include teaching about the history
and philosophy of science, they have been found effective in improving
the students' understanding of this concept. |
References
Akindehin, 'Folajimi (1988). Effect of an Instructional Package on Preservice Science Teachers' Understanding of the Nature of Science and Acquisition of ScienceRelated Attitudes. Science Education, 72 (1), 7382.
Barufaldi, J. P., Bethel, L. J. and Lamb, W. G. (1977). The Effect of a Science Methods Course on the Philosophical View of Science Among Elementary Education Majors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 14 (4), 289294.
Bookwatch: A Candid Review of Science Textbooks (1989). William V. Mayer and William J. Bennetta (Eds.).
Carey, Russell L. and Strauss, Nyles G. (1970). An Analysis of Experienced Science Teachers' Understanding of the Nature of Science. School Science and Mathematics, 70, 366376.
Cawthron, E. R. and Rowell, J. A. (1978). Epistemology and Science. Studies in Science Education, 5, 3159.
Clough, Michael P. (1995a). Longitudinal Understanding of the Nature of Science as Facilitated by an Introductory High School Biology Course. Proceedings of the Third International History, Philosophy, and Science Teaching Conference. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, October 29 - November 1.
Clough, Michael P. (1995b). How to Accurately Portray the Nature of Science While Teaching Science Content. Proceedings of the Third International History, Philosophy, and Science Teaching Conference. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, October 29 - November 1.
Cossman, George W. (1969). The Effects of a Course in Science and Culture for Secondary School Students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6 (3), 274283.
Crumb, G. H. (1965). Understanding of Science in High School Physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 3 (3), 246250.
Dibbs, David Roderick (1982). An Investigation into the Nature and Consequences of Teachers' Implicit Philosophies of Science. Doctoral Dissertation, The University of Aston in Birmingham.
Klopfer, L. E. and Cooley, W. W. (1963). The History of Science Cases for High Schools in the Development of Student Understandings of Science a Report of the HOSC Instruction Project. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1 (1), 3347.
MacKay, L. D. (1971). Development of Understanding About the Nature of Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 8 (1), 5766.
Meredith, H. M. and Ashton, B. G. (1969). Attitudes to Science and Scientists. School Science Review, 51, 1519.
Miller, P. E. (1963). A Comparison of the Abilities of Secondary Teachers and Students of Biology to Understand Science. Proceedings of the Iowa Academy of Sciences, 70, 510513.
Rowell, J. A. and Cawthron, E. R. (1982). Image of Science: An Empirical Study. European Journal of Science Education, 4 (1), 7994.
Ryan, A.G. and Aikenhead, G.S. (1992). Students' Preconceptions about the Epistemology of Science. Science Education, 76(6):559-580.
Schmidt, Donald J. (1967).Test On Understanding Science: A Comparison Among Several Groups. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 5 (4), 365366.
EDSS 450C
