Abstract
The chapter advances the position that “nature of science” (NOS) in science education has often been described in terms of lists of statements that are fragmented and do not necessarily add to a coherent whole. In contrast, the argument made is that visualizing NOS in terms of images can help bring some coherence to how NOS is conceptualized and enacted in science education. Various visual accounts including the Science Eye and the Generative Images of Science are used to illustrate how text-based accounts on NOS can be extended to offer more holistic images of NOS that can have curricular utility. Examples of curricula including international comparative curriculum analysis illustrate how visual accounts can inform curriculum design, evaluation and revision.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
AAAS. (1989). Science for all Americans. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2012). Examining the sources for our understandings about science: Enduring conflations and critical issues in research on nature of science in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 34(3), 353–374.
Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving science teachers’ conceptions of nature of science: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 665–701.
Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (1998). The nature of science and instructional practice: Making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82(4), 417–436.
Ackerson, V., & Donnelly, L. A. (2008). Relationships among learner characteristics and preservice teachers’ views of the nature of science. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 20(1), 45–58.
Allchin, D. (2013). Teaching the nature of science: Perspectives and resources. St. Paul: SHiPs.
CDC [Curriculum Development Council]. (1998). Science syllabus for secondary 1–3. Hong Kong: CDC.
Chang, Y., Chang, C., & Tseng, Y. (2010). Trends of science education research: An automatic content analysis. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19, 315–332.
Clough, M. P. (2007, January). Teaching the nature of science to secondary and post-secondary students: Questions rather than tenets. The Pantaneto forum, issue 25, http://www.pantaneto.co.uk/issue25/front25.htm
Cooley, W., & Klopfer, L. (1963). The evaluation of specific educational innovations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1, 73–80.
Conant, J. (1961). Science and common sense. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Cotham, J., & Smith, E. (1981). Development and validation of the conceptions of scientific theories test. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 18(5), 387–396.
Dagher, Z., & Erduran, S. (2016). Reconceptualizing the nature of science: Why does it matter? Science & Education, 25(1 & 2), 147–164. doi:10.1007/s11191-015-9800-8.
Dagher, Z., & Erduran, S. (2017). Abandoning patchwork approaches to nature of science in science education. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 17(1), 46–52.
Department for Education and Skills and Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. (2006) Science. The National Curriculum for England, HMSO.
Duschl, R., & Grandy, R. (2013). Two views about explicitly teaching nature of science. Science & Education, 22, 2109–2139.
Erduran, S., & Dagher, Z. (2014a). Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education: Scientific knowledge, practices and other family categories. Dordrecht: Springer.
Erduran, S., & Dagher, Z. (2014b). Regaining focus in Irish junior cycle science: Potential new directions for curriculum development on nature of science. Irish Educational Studies, 33(4), 335–350.
Ford, M. (2008). ‘Grasp of practice’ as a reasoning resource for inquiry and nature of science understanding. Science & Education, 17, 147–177.
Grandy, R., & Duschl, R. (2007). Reconsidering the character and role of inquiry in school science: Analysis of a conference. Science & Education, 16(1), 141–166.
Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2011). A family resemblance approach to the nature of science. Science & Education, 20, 591–607.
Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2014). New directions for nature of science research. In M. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (pp. 999–1021). Dordrecht: Springer.
Justi, R., & Erduran, S. (2015). Characterizing nature of science: A supporting model for teachers. Paper presented at the international history, philosophy and science teaching biennial conference, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
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(9–10), 1115–1133. doi:.
Kimball, M. (1968). Understanding the nature of science: A comparison of scientists and science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 5, 110–120.
Klopfer, L. (1969). The teaching of science and the history of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6, 87–95.
Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 331–359.
Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire (VNOS): Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497–521.
Lederman, N. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, future. In S. Abell & N. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 831–879). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Matthews, M. (Ed.). (2014). Handbook of research on history, philosophy and sociology of science. Dordrecht: Springer.
McComas, W. F., & Olson, J. K. (1998). The nature of science in international science education standards documents. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 41–52). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
McComas, W. F., Clough, M. P., & Almazroa, H. (1998). The role and character of the nature of science in science education. Science & Education, 7(6), 511–532.
Milli Egitim Bakanligi (MEB). (2013). İlkogretim Fen Bilimleri Dersi (3., 4., 5., 6., 7. ve 8. Siniflar). Ankara: Ogretim Programi.
Olby, R. C. (1994). The path to the double helix: The discovery of DNA. New York: Dover Publications.
Rubba, P., & Anderson, H. (1978). Development of an instrument to assess secondary students’ understanding of the nature of scientific knowledge. Science Education, 62(4), 449–458.
Ryder, J., Leach, J., & Driver, R. (1999). Undergraduate science students’ images of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(2), 201–220.
Sandoval, W. A. (2005). Understanding students’ practical epistemologies and their influence on learning through inquiry. Science Education, 89(4), 634–656.
Salmon, M. H., Earman, J., Glymour, C., Lennox, J. G., Machamer, P., McGuire, J. E., Norton, J. D., Salmon, W. C., & Schaffner, K. F. (1992). Introduction to the philosophy of science. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Saribas, D., & Ceyhan, G. (2015). Learning to teach scientific practices: Pedagogical decisions and reflections during a course for pre-service science teachers. International Journal of STEM Education, 2(7), 1–13. doi:10.1186/s40594-015-0023-y.
Sayre, A. (2000/1975). Rosalind Franklin and DNA. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.
Scerri, E. (2000). Philosophy of chemistry: A new interdisciplinary field? Journal of Chemical Education, 77, 522–526.
Schwartz, R. S., Lederman, N. G., & Crawford, B. A. (2004). Developing views of nature of science in an authentic context: An explicit approach to bridging the gap between nature of science and scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88(4), 610–645.
Showalter, V. (1974). What is unified science education? Program objectives and scientific literacy (Part 5). Prisim II, 2(3), 1–3.
Yeh, Y. F., Erduran, S., & Hsu, Y. S. (2017, April). From fragments to wholes: Investigating the NOS in science curriculum in Taiwan. Paper presented at annual conference of NARST: A worldwide association for improving science teaching and learning through research, San Antonio, TX.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Erduran, S. (2017). Visualizing the Nature of Science: Beyond Textual Pieces to Holistic Images in Science Education. In: Hahl, K., Juuti, K., Lampiselkä, J., Uitto, A., Lavonen, J. (eds) Cognitive and Affective Aspects in Science Education Research. Contributions from Science Education Research, vol 3. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58685-4_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58685-4_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-58684-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-58685-4
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)