The influence of guided inquiry and explicit instruction on K-6 teachers' views of nature of science

Journal of Science Teacher Education

Volumn 18, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 751-772

  Akerson, Valarie L ^a   Hanson, Deborah L ^b   Cullen, Theresa A ^c  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b HANOVER COLLEGE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA   (United States)

Author keywords

Elementary; Inquiry; Nature of science; Physics; Professional development; Science

Indexed keywords

EID: 34848893109     PISSN: 1046560X     EISSN: 15731847     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10972-007-9065-4     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Abd-El-Khalick, F. S. (2002). Rutherford's enlarged: A content-embedded activity to teach about nature of science. Physics Education, 37(1), 64-68.
2. Abd-El-Khalick, F. S., & Akerson, V. L. (2004). Learning about nature of science as conceptual change: Factors that mediate the development of preservice elementary teachers' views of nature of science. Science Education, 88, 785-810.
3. Abd-El-Khalick, F. S., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving science teachers' conceptions of the nature of science: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 665-701.
4. Akerson, V. L., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). The influence of a reflective activity-based approach on elementary teachers' conceptions of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 295-317.
5. Akerson, V. L., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. S. (2003). Teaching elements of nature of science: A year-long case study of a fourth-grade teacher. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 1025-1049.
6. Akerson, V. L., & Hanuscin, D. (2003, March). Primary teachers' abilities to teach via scientific inquiry while making elements of nature of science explicit. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia, PA.
7. Akerson, V. L., & Hanuscin, D. (2005, March). Teaching the nature of science through inquiry: The results of a three-year professional development program. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Dallas, TX.
8. Akerson, V. L., Morrison, J. A., & McDuffie, R. A. (2006). One course in not enough: Preservice teachers' retention of improved views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 194-213.
9. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
10. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy: A Project 2061 report. New York: Oxford University Press.
11. Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2003). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
12. Coburn, A. (2004). How to make lab activities more Open ended. Retrieved February 18, 2004 from http://www.exploratorium.edu/ifi/resources/workshops/ lab_activities.html
13. DeBoer, G. E. (1991). A history of ideas in science education: Implications for practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
14. Gallagher, J. J. (1991). Perspective and practicing secondary school science teachers' knowledge and beliefs about the philosophy of science. Science Education, 75, 121-134.
15. Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. S., (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders' views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 551-578.
16. King, B. B. (1991). Beginning teachers' knowledge of and attitudes toward history and philosophy of science. Science Education, 75, 135-141.
17. Kielborn, T. L., & Gilmer, P. J. (Eds.) (1999). Meaningful science: Teachers doing inquiry + teaching science. Tallahassee, FL: SERVE.
18. Kruger, C., Palacio, D., & Summers, M. (1992). Surveys of English primary teachers' conceptions of force, energy, and materials. Science Education, 76, 339-351.
19. Kruger, C., & Summers, M. (1989). An investigation of some primary teachers' understanding of changes in materials. School Science Review, 71(255), 17-27.
20. Lawrenz, F. (1986). Misconceptions of physical science concepts among elementary school teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 86, 654-660.
21. Lederman, J. S., & Khisfhe, R. (2002). Views of the nature of science, Form D. Unpublished manuscript, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago.
22. Lederman, J., & Ko, E. (2004). Views of nature of science, Form E. Unpublished manuscript, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago.
23. Lederman, N. G., & O'Malley, M. (1990). Students' perceptions of tentativeness in science: Development, use, and sources of change. Science Education, 74, 225-239.
24. Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students' and teachers' conceptions about the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 331-359.
25. Lederman, N. G., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (1998). Avoiding de-natured science: Activities that promote understandings of the nature of science. In W. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies. (pp. 83-126). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
26. Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. (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, 497-521.
27. McComas, W. (1996). Ten myths of science: Reexamining what we think we know about the nature of science. School Science and Mathematics, 91(1), 10-16.
28. McDermott, L. C. (1990). A perspective on teacher preparation in physics and other sciences: The need for special science courses for teachers. American Journal of Physics, 58, 734-742.
29. McDermott, L. C., & DeWater, L. S. (2000). The need for special science courses for teachers: Two perspectives. In J. Minstrell & E. H. Van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science. (pp. 242-257). Washington DC: AAAS.
30. McDermott, L. C., & The Physics Education Group at University of Washington. (1996). Physics by inquiry. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
31. McDermott, L. C., Shaffer, P. S., & Constantinou, C. P. (2000). Preparing teachers to teach physics and physical science by inquiry. Physics Education, 35, 411-416.
32. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
33. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
34. National Science Teachers Association. (2000). NSTA position statement: The nature of science. Retrieved March 18, 2003, from http://www.nsta.org/ 159&psid=22
35. 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.
36. Pierce, W. (2001). Inquiry made easy. Science and Children, 39(8), 39-41.
37. Schwartz, R. S., Lederman, N. G., & Crawford, B. A. (2004). Developing views of science in an authentic context: An explicit approach to bridging the gap between nature of science and scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88, 610-645.
38. Smith, D. C., & Neale, D. C. (1989). The construction of subject matter knowledge in primary science teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 5(1), 1-20.
39. Welch, W. W., Klopfer, L. E., & Aikenhead, G. E. (1981). The role of inquiry in science education: Analysis and recommendations. Science Education, 65, 33-50.
40. Willis, J., & Ross, T. (1994). Earthlets explained by Professor Xargle (2nd ed.). New York: Dutton Children's Books.
41. Young, E. (2002). Seven blind mice. New York: Penguin Putnam Books for Young Readers.