The Relationship Between Science Teachers (2)

This article was downloaded by: [New York University]

On: 14 January 2015, At: 20:41

Publisher: Routledge

Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered

office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UKAfrican Journal of Research in

Mathematics, Science and Technology

Education

Publication details, including instructions for authors and

subscription information:The Relationship Between Science

Teachers' Understandings of the

Nature of Science and their Classroom

Practices

Raj Kurup

aa

Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth, SouthAfrica

Published online: 06 Mar 2014.

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,

and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,

内容需要下载文档才能查看

Downloaded by [New York University] at 20:41 14 January 2015

AfricanJournalofResearchinMathematics,ScienceandTechnologyEducation,2014

Vol.18,No.1,52–62,http://wendang.chazidian.com/10.1080/10288457.2014.889791

©2014SouthernAfricanAssociationforResearchinMathematics,ScienceandTechnology

Education

(SAARMSTE)

TheRelationshipBetweenScienceTeachers’

UnderstandingsoftheNatureofScienceandtheir

ClassroomPractices

RajKurup*

Downloaded by [New York University] at 20:41 14 January 2015 NelsonMandelaMetropolitanUniversity,PortElizabeth,SouthAfrica*email:Raj.Kurup@nmmu.ac.zaAnadequateunderstandingoftheNatureofScience(NOS)hasbecomeincreasinglyimportantforscienceteachersinthecontextoftherecentcurriculumrevisionsbeingimplementedinGradesR–9inSouthAfricanschools.ThisstudyexploredtheNOSconceptionsandthein?uenceoftheseconceptionsontheclassroompracticeoftwogroupsofpractisingscienceteachers—agroupofthreeteacherswhoreceivedexplicitinstructioninNOSinasemester-long(36h)professionaldevelopmentprogrammeandanalternativegroupofthreeteacherswhohadnotreceivedanyexplicitinstructioninNOSpreviously.Thequantitativedatagatheredfromtheresponsestoa12-itemLikert-scalequestionnaireandthequalitativedatafromsemi-structuredinterviewswereanalysedtoseektheteachers’viewsonsixNOSaspectsrelatedtotheepistemologicalandontologicalnatureofscience.Avideo-tapedsciencelessonofeachteacherwasanalysedusingaclassroomobservationscheduletoexaminetheextenttowhicheachofthesixNOSaspectstargetedwasmediatedintheclassroom.Amixed-methodsapproachhasbeenadoptedinthisstudy.TheresultsindicatethattheteacherswhoreceivedexplicitinstructioninNOSdisplayedbetterunderstandingsinsomeaspectsofNOScomparedwiththosewhowerenotexposedtoNOSinstruction.Neverthelessteachersfrombothgroupscontinuetoexperiencedif?cultiesinmediatinginformednotionsofthesocio-culturalin?uenceonthescienti?centerprise,theroleofimaginationandcreativityinscienti?cprocessandthepurposeofanddistinctionbetweentheoriesandlaws.Implicationsofthe?ndingsforin-serviceteacherprogrammesandrecommendationsforfurtherresearcharesuggested.Keywords:NatureofScience;explicitNOSinstruction;in-servicescienceteachers

IntroductionandTheoreticalBackground

TheemphasisofthecurriculumchangesintherecentpastinSouthAfrica(DepartmentofEducation,RSA,2002,2003;DepartmentofBasicEducation,RSA,2011)hasbeentopromotescienti?cliteracyinlearnersingradesR–9.Asimilarfocusontheimprovementofscienti?cliteracyinschoolshadbeenadvocatedelsewhereinthecurriculumreformsinthepastthreedecades(e.g.AmericanAssociationfortheAdvancementofScience,1993;NationalCurriculumCouncil,1991).Numerousstudies(Leder-man,1999;Schwartz&Lederman,2002;Wang&Schmidt,2001;Liangetal.,2009)havearguedforanadequateunderstandingoftheNatureofScience(NOS)asaprerequisiteforachievingscienti?cliteracy.Furthermore,researchersinscienceeducation(Akerson,Morris&McDuf?e,2006;Clough,2011)suggestthataninformedviewofNOSwillassistlearnerstoappreciatethecontentinscienceinsteadofsciencebeingperceivedasacollectionoffacts,principlesandlawstoberote-learned.AccordingtoLederman(1992)NOSreferstothevaluesandassumptionsthatunderpinthedevel-opmentofscienti?cknowledge.Althoughtherehasbeenmuchdebateamongphilosophersofscience,AfricanJournalofResearchinMathematics,ScienceandTechnologyEducationisco-publishedbyUnisaPressandRoutledge,Taylor&FrancisGroup

TheRelationshipBetweenScienceTeachers’UnderstandingsoftheNatureofScienceandtheirClassroomPractices53scienceeducators,curriculumdevelopersandresearchersontheepistemologicalandontologicalissueswithrespecttoNOS,thereappearstobea‘sharedwisdom’(Lederman,Abd-El-Khalick,Bell&Schwartz,2002)ora‘consensusview’(Clough,2006;Irzik&Nola,2011)thatcertainaspectsofNOSshouldbecoveredinthesciencecurriculum.Amongothers,theNOSconceptsconsideredtoberelevantforscienceeducationrelatingtothenatureofscienti?cknowledgeandscienti?centerprisearethatscienti?cknowledgeistentative(durableandreliablebutnotabsolute),empirical(basedonobservationsofthenaturalworld),theory-laden(priortheoreticalassumptionsmayin?uencecreationofknowledge),andinvolveshumanimaginationandcreativity(generationofknowledgeisnotentirelyalogicalandorderlyprocess),andthatscienti?cendeavoursarein?uencedbytheprevailingsocialandculturalvalues.Additionally,therelationshipsandfunctionsofscienti?ctheoriesandlaws,thedis-tinctionbetweenobservationandinference,andcounteringthemisconceivednotionthatscientistsfollowasequentialstep-by-stepprocess(‘Scienti?cMethod’)inthedevelopmentofknowledge,havebeenidenti?edasimportantcomponentsofamodernsciencecurriculum.

TherevisedsciencecurriculuminSouthAfricaaimsatthedevelopmentofscienti?cliteracyinlearnersandismadeexplicitinthestatementthat‘NaturalSciencesintheSeniorPhaseiscom-pulsoryforalllearners.Itisthereforecriticalinpromotinganddevelopingscienti?cliteracy,aslear-nersmayelectnottocontinuewithoneofthesciencesubjectsbeyondGrade9’(DepartmentofBasicEducation,RSA,2011,p.7).Tomeettherequirementsoftherevisedsciencecurriculum,ithasbecomeimportantforSouthAfricanscienceteacherstodevelopadequateunderstandingsoftheNOSconceptsmentionedaboveandtotranslatetheinformedunderstandingsintoclassroompractice.

Overtheyearsdifferentapproachesachievingvaryinglevelsofsuccesshavebeenadoptedtoimproveteachers’andlearners’understandingsofNOS.However,researchindicatesthatpro-fessionaldevelopmentprogrammesonexplicit,re?ectiveinstructionofNOSthatengageteachersinscienti?cinquiry(Akerson&Hanuscin,2007;Saad&BouJaoude,2012;Herman,Clough&Olson,2013)andcovercomponentsonthehistoryandphilosophyofscience(Abd-El-Khalick&Leder-man,2000;Linneman,Kurup,Webb&Bantwini2003;Ogunniyi,2006;Vhurumuku,2010)havebeeneffectiveinenhancingteachers’conceptionsinNOS.AccordingtoSchwartzandLederman(2002),explicit-re?ectiveinstructionintheNOSinvolvestheteachingandassessmentofNOSconceptsascognitiveoutcomeswhichshouldincludeappropriatecasestudiesfromhistory,philosophyandsociologyofscience(Abd-El-Khalick,2005).

AteacherwhohasasophisticatedunderstandingofNOSisnotnecessarilyabletotranslatethisknowledgeintoclassroompractice.Lederman(1999)concludedthatthemediationofNOSunder-standingsinaclassroomiscontingentupontheteacher’srecognitionofNOSasanimportantcognitiveoutcomeinalesson.However,Waters-Adams(2006)suggestedthatteachers’classroompracticeisin?uencedbytheirtacitbeliefsabouteducation,teachingandlearningandnotbytheirespousedviewsofNOS.Somestudies(Abd-El-Khalick&Lederman,2000;Lederman,2007;Hermanetal.,2013)haveindicatedthatteachers’classroompracticesgenerallydonotre?ecttheirinformedviewsofNOS,whereasotherstudies(Akerson&Hanuscin,2007;Wahbeh&Abd-El-Khalick,2013)havereportedteacherstobesuccessfulinteachingcertainaspectsofNOStotheirlearners.Forexample,WahbehandAbd-El-Khalick(2013)foundthat,whileteachersweresuccessfulinteachingabouttheempirical,socio-culturalandtentativeaspectsofNOS,theywerelesssuccessfulintranslatingNOSconceptsrelatedtoscienti?cmethod,thenatureoftheoriesandlaws,andthetheory-ladennatureofinterpretationsofdata.

AsurveyofNOSliteratureintheAfricancontextindicatesthatthefocusofthestudieshasbeenonexploringteachers’viewsonNOS(Dekkers&Mnisi,2003;Dekkers,2006;Ogunniyi,2006)andunder-graduatestudents’understandingsofNOS(Ibrahim,Buf?er&Lubben,2009;Vhurumuku,2010).Studies(Ogunniyi,2006;Vhurumuku,2010)revealedthatexplicit-re?ectiveinstructioninNOSconsti-tutingelementsofhistoryandphilosophyofscienceandscienti?cinquiryactivities(Dekkers,2006)assistedinimprovingparticipants’understandingsofNOS.However,students’ideasinrelationtoepistemicaspectsofNOS(e.g.experimentsarenecessaryto‘prove’theoreticalclaims)wereresistanttochange(Vhurumuku,2010).Ibrahimetal.(2009)foundthat,althoughasubstantialnumberofstu-dents(44%)displayedinformedunderstandingsofNOS,someparticipantssubscribedtolessDownloaded by [New York University] at 20:41 14 January 2015

54Kurupinformednotionssuchasthatlawsandtheoriesare‘?xed’and‘stable’awaitingdiscovery,andthatscientistsadheretoasetmethodingeneratingknowledge.However,littleattentionhasbeengiventoinvestigatingtherelationshipbetweenteachers’NOSconceptionsandtheirclassroompracticeinSouthAfrica.

Inviewofthediscussionsabove,thisreportisguidedbythefollowingresearchquestions:

1.WhatunderstandingsofNOSareheldbyagroupofscienceteacherswhowereexposedtoexpli-

citinstructioninNOSthroughaprofessionaldevelopmentprogrammeascomparedwithanothergroupofscienceteacherswhowerenotparticipantsintheprogramme?

2.Whatisthein?uenceoftheexplicitinstructioninNOSintheclassroompracticeoftheteachersin

theprofessionaldevelopmentprogramme?

Downloaded by [New York University] at 20:41 14 January 2015 MethodThisstudyadoptedamixed-methodapproachgroundedinthetheoreticalframeworkofpragmatism(Johnson&Onwuegbuzie,2004;Cresswell&PlanoClark,2007).Asthisstudyseekstoinvestigateteachers’conceptionsofNOSandhowtheseconceptionsin?uencetheirclassroompractice,quan-titativeandqualitativemethodswereconductedsequentiallywithmore‘weight’beinggiventothequalitativedataassuggestedbyCresswellandPlanoClark(2007).Theteachersintheexplicitinstructiongroupattendedlecturesinasemester-long,36h(12sessionseachof3h)NatureofSciencemoduleaspartofatwo-yearprofessionaldevelopmentprogrammeinscienceeducation.Themodulewaslecturedbyuniversitylecturerswhoengagedteachersinre?ectivegroupactivitiesonvariousaspectsoftheNOSmoduleandtheteacherswererequiredtowritecriticalessaysintheformofassignmentsonissuesrelatedtoNOS.Theassessmentinthemoduleincludedbothfor-mativeandsummativecomponentsontheNOSconceptscoveredandtheimplicationsofthecon-ceptsforteaching.AbriefoutlineofthekeythemeswhichformedthecorecurriculumoftheNOScourseisgiveninTable1.Table1:MainthemesoftheNOScourseDomain‘Scienti?cmethod’MajorideasHistoricaloriginsofinductivismCritiqueofinductivismandthefallacyofasingle‘scienti?cmethod’Falsi?cationismCritiqueoffalsi?cationistapproach

ThomasKuhn’s‘paradigm’concept

Therevisionarynatureofscienti?cknowledge

Theroleofimaginationandcreativity

Peerreviewmechanismstoevaluatescienti?cknowledge(Bauer?ltermodel)

Distinctionbetweenobservationandinference

In?uenceoftheoreticalassumptionsininterpretingdata

Differentinterpretationsofthesamedata

Thepurposeofanddistinctionbetweentheoriesandlaws

Scienti?ctheoriesashumanconstructions

Tentativenatureoftheories

Scientistsarein?uencedbysocial,culturalandpoliticalfactors

Scientistsresistparadigmshift

Relationshipbetweenscienceandtechnology

Impactofscienceandtechnologyonsociety

RoleofindigenousknowledgesystemswhenteachingscienceinmulticulturalclassroomsDevelopmentofscienti?cknowledgeObservationandinferenceScienti?ctheoriesandlawsSocialaspectsofscienceS–T–Sissues