Improving science teachers’ conceptions of nature of science: A critical review of the literature

International Journal of Science Education

Volumn 22, Issue 7, 2000, Pages 665-701

  Abd El khalick, Fouad ^a   Lederman, Norman G ^b  

^a AMERICAN UNIVERSITY OF BEIRUT   (Lebanon)

^b OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0012797742     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: 14645289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09500690050044044     Document Type: Review

References (122)

1. (AAAS) American Association for the Advancement of Science (1990) Science for all Americans (New York: Oxford University Press).
2. (AAAS) American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993) Benchmarks for Science Literacy: A Project 2061 Report. (New York: Oxford University Press).
3. ABD-EL-KHALICK, F., BELL, R. L. and LEDERMAN, N. G. (1998) The nature of science and instructional practice: making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82, 417-437.
4. ABD-EL-KHALICK, F. and BOUJAOUDE, S. (1997) An exploratory study of the knowledge base for science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 673-699.
5. ABIMBOLA, I. O. (1983) The relevance of the ‘new’ philosophy of science for the science curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 83, 181-193.
6. AIKENHEAD, G. (1973) The measurement of high school students’ knowledge about science and scientists. Science Education, 57, 539-549.
7. AIKENHEAD, G., RYAN, A. and DESAUTELS, J. (1989) Monitoring student views on sciencetechnology- society issues: the development of multiple choice items. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco, CA, April.
8. AKINDEHIN, F. (1988) Effect of an instructional package on preservice science teachers’ understanding of the nature of science and acquisition of science-related attitudes. Science Education, 72, 73-82.
9. BALL, D. L. and MCDIARMID, G. W. (1990) The subject-matter preparation of teachers. In W. R. Houston (ed.) Handbook of Research on Teacher Education (New York: Macmillan), pp, 437-465.
10. BARNES, B. (1974) Scientific Knowledge and Sociological Theory (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul).
11. 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 elementay education majors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 14, 289-294.
12. BEHNKE, F. L. (1950) Reactions of scientists and science teachers to statements bearing on certain aspects of science and science teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 61, 193-207.
13. BILLEH, V. Y. and HASAN, O. E. (1975) Factors influencing teachers’ gain in understanding the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 12, 209-219.
14. BLOOR, D. (1976) Knowledge and Social Imagery (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul).
15. BORK, A. M. (1967) The Reed College M.A.T. Program in Science: A Study (Portland, OR: Reed College).
16. BRICKHOUSE, N. W. and BODNER, G. M. (1992) The beginning science teacher: classroom narratives of convictions and constraints. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 471-485.
17. BROADHURST, N. A. (1970) A study of selected learning outcomes of graduating high school students in South Australian schools. Science Education, 54, 17-21.
18. BROWN, S. and CLARKE, N. (1960) International Education in Physics (Michigan: Michigan Institute of Technology).
19. BRUSH, S. G. (1969) The role of history in the teaching of physics. The Physics Teacher, 7, 271
20. California Department of Education (1990) Science Framework for California Public Schools (Sacramento, CA: California Department of Education).
21. CAREY, R. L. and STAUSS, N. G. (1968) An analysis of the understanding of the nature of science by prospective secondary science teachers. Science Education, 52, 358-363.
22. CAREY, R. L. and STAUSS, N. G. (1969) An analysis of the relationship between prospective science teachers’ understanding of the nature of science and certain academic variables. Bulletin of the Georgia Academy of Science, 27, 148-158.
23. CAREY, R. L. and STAUSS, N. G. (1970) An analysis of experienced science teachers’ understanding of the nature of science. School Science and Mathematics, 70, 366-376.
24. CARNAP, R. (1937) The Logical Syntax of Language (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul).
25. Centre of Unified Science Education (1974) The Dimensions of Scientific Literacy (Columbus, OH: Ohio State University).
26. Central Association for Science and Mathematics Teachers (1907) A consideration of the principles that should determine the courses in biology in secondary schools. School Science and Mathematics, 7, 241-247.
27. COLLINS, H. M. (1985) Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Knowledge (2nd edn) (London: Sage).
28. CONANT, J. B. (1947) On Understanding Science: An Historical Approach (New Haven: Yale University Press).
29. COOLEY, W. W. and KLOPFER, L. E. (1961) Test on Understanding Science (Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service).
30. DICKINSON, V., ABD-EL-KHALICK, F. and LEDERMAN, N. G. (1999) The influence of a reflective activity-based approach on elementary teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Boston, MA, March.
31. DUSCHL, R. A. and WRIGHT, E. (1989) A case study of high school teachers’ decision making models for planning and teaching science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26, 467-501.
32. FEYERABEND, P. (1988) Against Method (New York: Verso).
33. GABEL, D. L., RUBBA, P. A. and FRANZ, J. R., (1977) The effect of early teaching and training experiences on physics achievement, attitude toward science and science teaching, and process skill proficiency. Science Education, 61, 503-511.
34. GIERE, R. N. (1988) Exploring Science: A Cognitive Approach (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press).
35. GRUBER, H. E. (1960) Science teachers and the scientific attitude: an appraisal of an academic year institute. Science, 132, 467-468.
36. GRUBER, H. E. (1963) Science as doctrine or thought? A critical study of nine academic year institutes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1, 124-128.
37. HABERMAS, J. (1972) Knowledge and Human Interest (trans J. Shapiro) (Boston: Beacon Press).
38. HAUKOOS, G. D. and PENICK, J. E. (1983) The influence of classroom climate on science process and content achievement of community college students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 629-637.
39. HAUKOOS, G. D. and PENICK, J. E. (1985) The effects of classroom climate on college science students: a replication study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22, 163-168.
40. HAYWOOD, H. (1927) Fundamental laws of chemistry. School Science Revuew, 9, 92.
41. HEWSON, M. G. and HEWSON, P. W. (1983) Effect of instruction using students’ prior knowledge and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 731-743.
42. HODSON, D. (1985) Philosophy of science, science and science education. Studies in Science Education, 12, 25-57.
43. HODSON, D. (1993) Philosophic stance of secondary school science teachers, curriculum experiences, and children’s understanding of science: some preliminary findings. Interchange, 24, 41-52.
44. JOHNSON, R. L. and PEEPLES, E. E. (1987) The role of scientific understanding in college: student acceptance of evolution. American Biology Teacher, 49, 96-98.
45. JONES, K. M. (1969) The attainment of understandings about the scientific enterprise, scientists, and the aims and methods of science by students in a college physical science course. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6, 47-49.
46. KIMBALL, M. E. (1967-68) Understanding the nature of science: a comparison of scientists and science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 5, 110-120.
47. KLOPFER, L. E. (1964) The use of case histories in science teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 64, 660-666.
48. KLOPFER, L. E. (1969) The teaching of science and the history of science. Journal of Research for Science Teaching, 6, 87-95.
49. KLOPFER, L. E. and COOLEY, W. W. (1963) The history of science cases for high schools in the development of student understanding of science and scientists. Journal of Research for Science Teaching, 1, 33-47.
50. KLOPFER, L. E. and WATSON, F. G. (1957) Historical materials and high school science teaching. The Science Teacher, 24, 264-293.
51. KUHN, T. S. (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press).
52. KUHN, T. S. (1970) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (2nd edn) (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press).
53. KUHN, T. S. (1977) The Essential Tension (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press).
54. LAKATOS, I. (1980) Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. In J. Worrall and G. Currie (eds) Imere Lakatos Philosophical Papers: Vol. 1. The Methodology of Scientific Research Programs (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) (pp. 8-101).
55. LANTZ, O. and KASS, H. (1987) Chemistry teachers’ functional paradigms. Science Education, 71, 117-134.
56. LATOUR, B. (1986) Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society (Milton Keynes: Open University Press).
57. LATOUR, B. and WOOLGAR, S. (1986) Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).
58. LAUDAN, L. (1977) Progress and its Problems (Berkley, LA: University of California Press).
59. LAVACH, J. F. (1969) Organization and evaluation of an inservice program in the history of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6, 166-170.
60. LAWSON, A. E. (1982) The nature of advanced reasoning and science instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 19, 743-760.
61. 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, 331-359.
62. LEDERMAN, N. G. (1999) Teachers’ understanding of the nature of science and classroom practice: factors that facilitate or impede the relationship. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 916-929.
63. LEDERMAN, N. G. and LATZ, M. S. (1995) Knowledge structures in the preservice science teacher: sources, development, interactions, and relationships to teaching. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 6, 1-19.
64. LEDERMAN, N. G. and O’MALLEY, M. (1990) Students’ perceptions of tentativeness in science: development, use, and sources of change. Science Education, 74, 225-239.
65. LEDERMAN, N. G., SCHWARTZ, R., ABD-EL-KHALICK, F. and BELL, R. L. (1999) Preservice teachers and their nature of science instruction: factors that facilitate success. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for the Research in Science Teaching, Boston, MA, March.
66. LEDERMAN, N. G., WADE, P. D. and BELL, R. L. (1998) Assessing understanding of the nature of science: a historical perspective. In W. McComas (ed.) The Nature of Science and Science Education: Rationales and Strategies (Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 331-350).
67. LONGINO, H. E. (1990) Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press)
68. LOVING, C. C. (1991) The scientific theory profile: a philosophy of science model for science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 823-838.
69. MACKAY, L. D. (1971) Development of understanding about the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 8, 57-66.
70. MATTHEWS, M. R. (1994) Science Teaching: The Role of History and Philosophy of Science (New York: Routledge).
71. MERILL, R. and BUTTS, D. (1969). Vitalizing the role of the teacher. In D. Butts (ed.) Designs for Progress in Science Education (Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association) pp. 35-42.
72. MERTON, R. K. (1949) Social Theory and Social Structure (New York: Free Press).
73. MILLAR, R. and OSBORNE, J. (eds) (1998). Beyond 2000: Science Education for the Future (London: King’s College).
74. MULKAY, M. J. (1979) Science and the Sociology of Knowledge (London: Allen & Unwin).
75. MULKAY, M. J. (1981) Action and belief or scientific discourse? A possible way of ending intellectual vassalage in social studies of science. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 11, 163-171.
76. (NRC) National Research Council (1996) National Science Education Standards (Washinton, DC: National Academic Press).
77. (NSTA) National Science Teachers Association (1982) Science-Technology-Society: Science Education for the 1980s (An NSTA position statement) (Washington, DC: NSTA).
78. O’BRIEN, G. E. and KORTH, W.W. (1991) Teachers’ self-examination of their understanding of the nature of science: a history and philosophy of science course responsive to science teachers’ needs. Journal of Research in Science Teacher Education, 2, 94-100.
79. OGUNNIYI, M. B. (1982) An analysis of prospective science teachers’ understanding of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 19, 25-32.
80. OGUNNIYI, M. B. (1983) Relative effects of a history/philosophy of science course on student teachers’ performance on two models of science. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1, 193-199.
81. OLSTAD, R. G. (1969) The effect of science teaching methods on the understanding of science. Science Education, 53, 9-11.
82. PINCH, T. J. (1986) Confronting Nature: The Sociology of Solar-Neutrino Detection (Dordrecht: Reidel).
83. POMEROY, D. (1993) Impliccations of teachers’ beliefs about the nature of science: comparison of the beliefs of scientists, secondary science teachers, and elementary teachers. Science Education, 77, 261-278.
84. POPPER, K. R. (1959) The Logic of Scientific Discovery (London: Hutchinson Education).
85. POPPER, K. R. (1970) Normal science and its dangers. In I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave (eds) Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 51-59.
86. POPPER, K. R. (1994) The Myth of the Framework: In Defense of Science and Rationality (London: Routledge).
87. RAMSEY, G. and HOWE, R. (1969) An analysis of research on instructional procedures in secondary school science. The Science Teacher, 36, 62-68.
88. REICHENBACH, H. (1938) Experience and Prediction (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
89. RILEY, J. P. II (1979) The influence of hands-on science process training on preservice teachers’ acquisition of process skills and attitude toward science and science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 16, 373-384.
90. ROBINSON, J. T. (1965) Science teaching and the nature of science. Journal of Reseacrch in Science Teaching, 3, 37-50.
91. ROBINSON, J. T. (1969) Philosophy of science: implications for teacher education. Journal of research in Science Teaching, 6, 99-104.
92. RORTY, R. (1991) Objectivity, Relativism, and Truth: Philosophical Papers (Vol. 1) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
93. ROWE, M. B. (1974) A humanistic intent: the program of preservice elementary education at the University of Florida. Science Education, 58, 369-376.
94. RUBBA, P. A. (1977) The development, field testing and validation of an instrument to assess secondary school students’ understandings of the nature of scientific knowledge. Dissertations Abstracts International, 38, 5378A (University Microfilms No. 78-00, 998).
95. RUBBA, P., HORNER, J. and SMITH, J. M. (1981) A study of two misconceptions about the nature of science among junior high school students. School Science and Mathematics, 81, 221-226.
96. RUSSELL, B. (1914) Our Knowledge of the External World (London: Allen & Unwin).
97. RUSSELL, T. L. (1981) What history of science, how much, and why? Science Education, 65, 51-64.
98. RUTHERFORD, J. F. (1964) The role of inquiry in science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2, 80-84.
99. SCHARMANN, L. C. (1988a) Locus of control: a discriminator of the ability to foster an understanding of the nature of science among preservice elemenatry teachers. Science Education, 72, 453-465.
100. SCHARMANN, L. C. (1988b) The influence of sequenced instructional strategy and locus of control on preservice elementary teachers’ understandings of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25, 589-604.
101. SCHARMANN, L. C. (1990) Enhancing the understanding of the premises of evolutionary theory: the influence of diversified instructional strategy. School Science and Mathematics, 90, 91-100.
102. SCHARMANN, L. C. and HARRIS, W. M., Jr. (1992) Teaching evolution: understanding and applying the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 375-388.
103. Scientific Literacy Research Center (1967) Wisconsin Inventory of Science Processes (Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin).
104. SHAPIN, S. (1996) The Scientific Revolution (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press).
105. SHAPIRO, B. L. (1996) A case study of change in elementary student teacher thinking during an independent investigation in science: learning about the ‘face of science that does not yet know.’ Science Education, 80, 535-560.
106. SHULMAN, L. S. (1986) Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4-14.
107. SHULMAN, L. S. (1987) Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-22.
108. SHYMANSKY, J. A. and PENICK, J. E. (1977) The use of systematic observations to improve college science laboratory. Science Education, 63, 195-203.
109. SOLOMON, J., DUVEEN, J., SCOT, L. and MCCARTHY, S. (1992) Teaching about the nature of science through history: action research in the classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 409-421.
110. SPEARS, J. and ZOLLMAN, D. (1977) The influence of structured versus unstructured laboratory on students’ understanding the process of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 14, 33-38.
111. STOFFLET, R. and STODDART, T. (1994) The ability to understand and use conceptual change pedagogy as a function of prior content learning experience. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 31-51.
112. TAMIR, P. and ZOHAR, A. (1991) Anthropomorphism and teleology in reasoning about biological phenomena. Science Education, 75, 57-68.
113. TREAGUST, D. F., DUIT, R. and FRASER, B. J. (1996) Overview: research on students’ preinstructional conceptions - the driving force for improving teaching and learning in science and mathematics. In D. F. Treagust, R. Duit and B. J. Fraser (eds) Improving Teaching and Learning in Science and Mathematics (New York: Teachers College Press), pp. 1-14.
114. TREMBATH, R. J. (1972) The structure of science. The Australian Science Teachers Journal, 18, 59-63.
115. VAN FRAASSEN, B. C. (1985) Empiricism in the philosophy of science. In P. M. Churchland and C. A Hooker (eds) Images of Science (Chicago: University of Chicago Press), pp. 245-308.
116. WELCH, W. W. and PELLA, M. O. (1967-68) The development of an instrument for inventorying knowledge of the processes of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 5, 64.
117. WELCH, W. W. and WALBERG, H. J. (1967-68) An evaluation of summer institute programs for physics teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 5, 105-109.
118. WELCH, W. W. and WALBERG, H. J. (1972) A national experiment in curriculum evaluation. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 373, 383.
119. WILSON, L. (1954) A study of opinions related to the nature of science and its purpose in society. Science Education, 38, 159-164.
120. WILSON, S. M., SHULMAN, L. S. and RICHERT, E. R. (1987) ‘150 different ways’ of knowing: Representation of knowledge in teaching. In J. Calderhead (ed.) Exploring Teachers’ Thinking (New York: Taylor and Francis).
121. WOOD, R. L. (1972) University education student’s understanding of the nature and process of science. School Science and Mathematics, 72, 73-79.
122. YAGER, R. E. and WICK, J. W. (1966) Three emphases in teaching biology: a statistical comparison of results. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 4, 16-20.