Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Describing teachers' conceptual ecologies for the nature of science

2006; Wiley; Volume: 90; Issue: 5 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1002/sce.20153

1098-237X

Sherry A. Southerland, Adam Johnston, Scott Sowell,

Education and Critical Thinking Development

Science EducationVolume 90, Issue 5 p. 874-906 LearningFree Access Describing teachers' conceptual ecologies for the nature of science Sherry A. Southerland, Corresponding Author Sherry A. Southerland [email protected] Department of Middle and Secondary Education, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306-4490, USADepartment of Middle and Secondary Education, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306-4490, USASearch for more papers by this authorAdam Johnston, Adam Johnston Department of Physics, Weber State University, 2508 University Circle, Ogden, UT 84408-2508, USASearch for more papers by this authorScott Sowell, Scott Sowell Department of Teacher Education, Cleveland State University, 2121 Euclid Ave., RT 1319, Cleveland, OH 44115-2214, USASearch for more papers by this author Sherry A. Southerland, Corresponding Author Sherry A. Southerland [email protected] Department of Middle and Secondary Education, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306-4490, USADepartment of Middle and Secondary Education, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306-4490, USASearch for more papers by this authorAdam Johnston, Adam Johnston Department of Physics, Weber State University, 2508 University Circle, Ogden, UT 84408-2508, USASearch for more papers by this authorScott Sowell, Scott Sowell Department of Teacher Education, Cleveland State University, 2121 Euclid Ave., RT 1319, Cleveland, OH 44115-2214, USASearch for more papers by this author First published: 27 April 2006 https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20153Citations: 29AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Abstract This research focused on the interactionist conceptual ecologies of inservice teachers and how these ecologies influenced these teachers' conceptual frameworks for the nature of science (NOS). The participants in the study were five teachers enrolled in a graduate course focused on NOS. Data included participants' responses to open-ended and Likert scale surveys, interviews, writing prompts, and participant observations of classroom sessions. We propose a model of the interaction of the prominent components of teachers' conceptual ecologies for NOS, one in which learning dispositions, understandings of the broad enterprise of science, and orientation to learning and learners are understood to shape teachers' conceptual frameworks for NOS. The complex ties between NOS conceptions and goals, affect, dispositions, and beliefs speak to the inclusion of the bounded nature of science as a central aspect of NOS for practicing teachers. Teachers' dispositions toward learning this construct are linked to their conceptions of the boundaries of science as well as their understanding of the role of NOS in their own teaching. We argue that a recognition of the bounded nature of science foregrounds actions of a teacher's learning disposition, thus potentially minimizing the influence of their religious beliefs. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Sci Ed 90:874–96, 2006 REFERENCES AAAS. (1990). Project2061: Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press. AAAS. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press. Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Akerson, V. L. (2004). Learning as conceptual change: Factors mediating the development of preservice elementary teachers' views of nature of science. Science Education, 88(5), 785– 810. 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(4), 295– 317. Alsop, S. (2005). The affective dimensions of cognition: Studies from education in the sciences. The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishing. Alsop, S., & Watts, M. (1997). Sources from a Somerset village: A model for informal learning about radiation and radioactivity. Science Education, 81, 633– 650. Beeth, M., & Hewson, P. W. (1999). Learning goals in an exemplary science teacher's practice: Cognitive and social factors in teaching for conceptual change. Science Education, 83, 738– 760. Blanks, L. (2000). A metacognitive learning cycle: A better warranty for student understanding? Science Education, 84, 487– 506. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J., & Jarvis, W. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 197– 253. Cobern, W. W. (1993). College students' conceptualizations of nature: An interpretive world view analysis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 935– 952. Demastes-Southerland, S., Good, R., & Peebles, P. (1995). Students' conceptual ecologies and the process of conceptual change in evolution. Science Education, 79(6), 637– 666. Dole, J. A., & Sinatra, G. M. (1998). Reconceptualizing change in the cognitive construction of knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 33(2/3), 109– 128. Duschl, R. (1990). Restructuring science education: The role of theories and their importance. New York: Teachers College Press. Elby, A., & Hammer, D. (2001). On the substance of a sophisticated epistemology. Science Education, 85, 554– 567. Erwin, T. D. (1983). The scale of intellectual development: Measuring Perry's scheme. Journal of College Student Personnel, 24, 6– 12. Gess-Newsome, J. (2002). The use and impact of explicit instruction about the nature of science and science inquiry in an elementary science methods course. Science Education, 11(1), 55-- 67. Good, R. (2005). Scientific and religious habits of mind: Irreconcilable tensions in the curriculum. New York: Peter Lang. Gregoire, M. (2003). Is it a challenge or a threat? A dual-process model of teachers' cognition and appraisal processes during conceptual change. Educational Psychology Review, 15(2), 147– 179. Hennessey, M. (1991). Analysis of conceptual change and status change in sixth graders' concepts of force and motion. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI. Hennessey, M. (1993). Students' ideas about their conceptualization: Their elicitation through instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Atlanta, GA. Hewson, P. W., & Thorley, N. R. (1989). The conditions of conceptual change in the classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 541– 553. Johnston, A., & Southerland, S. A. (2001, March). Conceptualizing the nature of science: Extrarational evaluations of tiny atoms, round planets, and big bangs. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, St. Louis, MO. Khishefe, R., & Abd-El-Khaick, F. (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(7), 551– 578. Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions ( 2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Lakatos, I. (1970). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programs. In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 91– 196). London: Cambridge University Press. LeCompte, M. D., & Preissle, J. (1993). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research ( 2nd ed.). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Lederman, N. (1998). The state of science education: Subject matter without context. Electronic Journal of Science Education, ISSN 1087-3430, 3(2). http://unr.edu/homepage/jcannon/ejse/ejsev3n2.html. Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students' and teachers' conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26(9), 771– 783. Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners' conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 497– 521. Lee, O., & Anderson, C. W. (1993). Task engagement and conceptual change in middle school science classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 30, 585– 610. Loving, K., & Foster, A. (2000). The religion in the science classroom issue: Seeking graduate student conceptual change. Science Education, 84, 445– 468. Matthews, M. (1994). Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. New York: Routledge. McComas, W., Clough, M. P., & Almazroa, H. (1998). The role and character of the nature of science in science education In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 3– 39). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. McComas, W. F. (2000). Nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies. The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. McComas, W. F., & Olson, J. K. (1998). The nature of science in international standards documents. In W. F. McComas (Ed.). The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 41– 52). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. NRC (National Research Council). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Pintrich, P. R. (1999). Motivational beliefs as resources for and constraints on conceptual change. In W. Schnotz, S. Vosniadou, & M. Carretero (Eds.), New perspectives on conceptual change (pp. 33– 50). New York: Pergamon. Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal-orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulated learning (pp. 451-- 502). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Pintrich, P. R., Marx, R. W., & Boyle, R. A. (1993). Beyond cold conceptual change: The role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Review of Educational Research, 63, 167– 199. Poole, M. (1996). … for more and better religious education. Science Education, 5(2), 165– 174. Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66, 211– 227. Riggs, I., & Enochs, L. (1990). Toward the development of an elementary teacher's science teaching efficacy belief instrument. Science Education, 74, 625– 638. Rudolph, J. L. (2000). Reconsidering the 'nature of science' as a curriculum component. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32, 403– 419. Sa, W., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (1999). The domain specificity and generality of belief bias in reasoning and judgment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(3), 497– 510. Scharmann, L. C. (1990). Enhancing an understanding of the premises of evolutionary theory: The influence of a diversified instructional strategy. School Science and Mathematics, 90, 91– 100. Schommer, M. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 498– 504. Siegel, H. (1997). Science education: Multicultural and universal. Interchange, 28(2&3), 97– 108. Sinatra, G. (2005). The "warming trend" in conceptual change research: The legacy of Paul R. Pintrich. Educational Psychologist, 40(2), 107– 115. Sinatra, G. M., & Pintrich, P. R. (2003). Intentional conceptual change. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Sinatra, G. M., Southerland, S. A., McConaughy, F., & Demastes, J. (2003). Intensions & belief in student understanding of biological evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(5), 510– 528. Smith, M. U., & Scharmann, L. C. (1999). Defining versus describing the nature of science: A pragmatic analysis for classroom teachers and science educators. Science Education, 83(4), 493– 509. Sommerville, J. (1941). Umbrellaology, or methodology in social science. Philosophy of Science, 8, 557– 566. Southerland, S. A. (2000). Epistemic universalism and the shortcomings of curricular multicultural science education. Science Education, 9, 289– 307. Southerland, S. A., Gess-Newsome, J., & Johnston, A. (2003a). Portraying science in the classroom: How scientists' beliefs are manifested in classroom practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(7), 669– 691. Southerland, S. A., Settlage, J., Johnston, A., Scuderi, A., & Meadows, L. (2003b, March). Development and application of a web-based NOS instrument: Making students aware of their NOS conceptions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of National Association for Research in Science Teaching International Conference, Philadelphia, PA. Southerland, S. A., & Sinatra, G. (2005). The shifting roles of acceptance and dispositions in understanding biological evolution. In S. Alsop (Ed.), Beyond Cartesian dualism: Encountering affect in the teaching and learning of science (pp. 69– 78). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishing. Southerland, S. A., Smith, M., & Cummins, C. L. (2000). What do you mean by that? Using structured interviews to assess science understanding. In J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee, & J. P. Novak (Eds.), Assessing science understanding: A human constructivist view (pp. 72– 95). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Stanley, W. B., & Brickhouse, N. M. (1994). Multiculturalism, universalism, and science education. Science Education, 78, 387– 398. Stanovich, K. E. (1999). Who is rational? Studies of individual differences in reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1997). Reasoning independently of prior belief and individual differences in actively open-minded thinking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 342– 357. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1998). Individual differences in rational thought. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 161– 188. Strike, K. A., & Posner, G. J. (1992). A revisionist theory of conceptual change. In R. A. Duschl & R. J. Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of science, cognitive psychology, and educational theory and practice (pp. 147– 176). New York: State University of New York. Toulmin, S. (1972). Human understanding: The collective use and evolution of concepts. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press. Tsai, C. C. (2002). Nested epistemologies: Science teachers' beliefs of teaching, learning and science. International Journal of Science Education, 24(8), 771– 783. Venville, G., & Treagust, D. (1998). Exploring conceptual change in genetics using a multidimensional interpretive framework. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(9), 1031– 1055. Citing Literature Volume90, Issue5September 2006Pages 874-906 ReferencesRelatedInformation