DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

What Do Scientists Think about the Nature of Science? - Exploring Views of the Nature of Science of Korean Scientists Related with Life Science Area

우리나라 생명과학 관련 분야 재미 과학자들은 어떻게 과학의 본성을 이해하고 있는가?

  • Received : 2014.09.24
  • Accepted : 2014.10.31
  • Published : 2014.10.31

Abstract

Understanding of the nature of science (NOS) has been a consistent topic as one of the most important goals in science education for the past several decades. Even though there is a variety of research related with the NOS conducted in science education, few researches has been conducted for the conception of scientists regards to the nature of science (Bayir et al., 2014; Taylor et al., 2008; Wong & Hudson, 2008). Recently, researchers in science education turned their attention to identifying views of scientists about the nature of science since they recognized the importance of participation of scientists in science education (Southerland et al., 2003; Taylor et al., 2008). This study was conducted to examine the Korean scientists' views of the nature of science. Through the use of semi-structured questionnaire and in-depth interview the views of 35 scientists who belong to the Korean-American Scientists and Engineers Association (KSEA) regards to the nature of science were explored. Findings show that while the scientists have more informed views with respect to the tentativeness of scientific knowledge, cultural and social influence embedded in science, the limitation of science, and the collaboration of science with others, the scientists have more na${\ddot{i}}$ve views about the distinction between laws and theories, the existence of a universal scientific method, and the importance of imagination and creativity. As such, it can be assumed that the scientists cannot conceptualize their notion in a philosophical sense even though they are engaged in scientific work in reality (Bayir et al., 2014).

과학의 본성(Nature of Science)에 대한 이해는 오랜 시간동안 과학교육학계의 가장 중요한 연구 주제중의 하나가 되어 왔다. 지난 20여년간 과학교육에서 과학의 본성이 가지는 중요성에 의해 다양한 연구가 진행되어 왔음에도 불구하고 실제로 현장에서 과학 활동을 하고 있는 과학자들이 어떻게 과학의 본성을 인식하고 있는지에 대한 연구는 거의 없었다(Taylor et al., 2008; Wong & Hudson, 2008; Bayir et al., 2014). 최근에 들어서 과학교육 연구자들은 과학교육에서 과학자들의 긍정적 영향과 참여의 중요성을 인식하면서 과학자들의 과학의 본성에 대한 개념을 알아야 할 필요성을 말하고 있다(Southerland et al., 2003; Taylor et al., 2008). 이와 같은 필요성을 바탕으로 본 연구는 과학교육계에서 널리 인식된 과학의 본성 주요 측면이 실제 현장에서 과학 활동을 하는 과학자들에 의해서는 어떻게 인식되고 있는지를 조사하기 위하여 미국에서 활동하고 있는 재미한국 과학기술자협회(KSEA: Korean-American Scientists and Engineers Association) 소속의 과학자들 35명의 과학의 본성에 대한 견해를 조사하였다. 과학자들의 과학의 본성에 대한 견해는 과학적 소양에 근거한 4가지 영역의 과학의 본성 틀(Lee, 2013)을 기반으로 개방형 질문을 통한 설문지 작성 형식으로 이루어졌으며 전체 참여 과학자들의 설문 후 지원한 4명의 과학자를 심층 면담하였다. 연구 결과는 과학자들은 대부분의 영역에서 과학 교육에서 제시된 과학의 본성과 일치되는 견해를 갖고 있었으나 몇 가지 영역에서는 상반되는 견해를 보이는 것으로 분석되었다. 구체적으로 우리나라 과학자들은 과학교육에서 제시된 다양한 과학의 본성 측면 중에서 과학지식의 잠정성 및 가변성, 과학의 다양한 사회적 영향, 과학의 한계성, 그리고 과학 활동의 협력성 등의 과학의 본성은 비교적 잘 이해하고 있었으나 반면 다양한 과학지식의 차이, 과학 탐구의 다양성, 그리고 상상력 및 창의력의 중요성에 대해서는 이해가 부족한 모습을 보여주었다. 4가지 영역의 과학의 본성측면으로는 1. 과학 지식에 대한 본성에서는 약 60% 이상의 설문 참여 과학자들이 과학적 이론이 더 많은 증거로 뒷받침되면 과학적 법칙이 될 수 있다고 말하였으며 2. 과학의 탐구적 본성에서는 약 60%이상의 과학자들이 과학의 탐구 방법을 몇 가지 단계를 거치는 실험과정에 국한하는 매우 제한된 과학의 본성을 보여 주었다. 또한 3. 과학적 사고의 본성에서는 약 50% 과학자들이 과학 활동에 있어서 상상력에 의존하지 않는다고 견해를 보여주었다. 그러나 대부분의 과학자들은 4. STS적인 과학의 본성(Theme IV) 측면에서는 과학교육에서 제시하는 과학의 본성 견해와 높은 일치률(약 90%)로 같은 견해를 갖고 있음을 보여 주고 있다. 이것은 과학자들이 현장에서 과학 활동만으로 철학적 반성을 통한 모든 과학의 본성을 이해하기는 어렵지만(Bayir et al., 2014) 사회 속에서 직업 활동으로써 체험한 STS적인 과학의 본성 측면은 내면화한 것으로 판단된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Abd-El-Khalic, F. (2005). Developing deeper understandings of nature of science: The impact of a philosophy of science course on preservice science teachers' views and instructional planning. International Journal of Science Education, 27(1), 15-42. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690410001673810
  2. Abd-El-Khalic, F. (2006). Over and over again: College students' views of nature of science. In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science (pp. 389-425). Dordrecht: Springer.
  3. Abd-El-Khalic, F. S., & 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10143
  4. Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (1998). NOS and instructional practice: Making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82, 417-436. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199807)82:4<417::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-E
  5. Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Boujaoude, S. (1997). An exploratory study of the knowledge base for science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(7), 673-699. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199709)34:7<673::AID-TEA2>3.0.CO;2-J
  6. Abell, S., Martini, M., & George, M. (2001). 'That's what scientists have to do': Preservice elementary teachers' conceptions of the nature of science during a moon investigation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23(11), 1095-1109.
  7. Aguirre, J. M., Haggerty, S. M, & Linder, C. J. (1990). Student-teachers' conceptions of science, teaching and learning: A case study in preservice science education. International Journal of Science education, 12(4), 381-390. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069900120405
  8. Akerson, V. L., Buzzelli, C., & Donnelly, L. A. (2010). On the nature of teaching nature of science: Preservice early childhood teachers' instruction in preschool and elementary settings. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 213-233.
  9. Ackerson, V. L., Morrison, J. A., & McDuffie, A. R. (2006). One course is not enough: Preservice elementary teachers' retention of improved views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 194-213. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20099
  10. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for scientific literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
  11. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1990). Science for all Americans. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  12. Bayir, E., Cakici, Y., & Ertas, O. (2014). Exploring natural and social scientists' views of nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 36(8), 1286-1312. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.860496
  13. Bang, M., & Kim, H. (2010). The effects of explicit instruction about nature of science by elementary school student's cognitive level. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 29(3), 277-291.
  14. Bartholomew, H., Osborne, J., & Ratcliffe, M. (2004). Teaching pupils "ideas-about-science": Five dimensions of effective practice. Science Education, 88, 655-682. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10136
  15. Behnke, F. L. (1961). Reactions of scientists and science teachers to statements bearing on certain aspects of science and science teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 61, 193-207. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1961.tb08537.x
  16. Bell, R. L., Blair, L. M., Crawford, B. A., & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Just do it? Impact of a science apprenticeship program on high-school students' understanding of the nature of science and scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(3), 487-509.
  17. Cakici, Y., & Bayir, E. (2012). Developing children's views of the nature of science through the role play? International Journal of Science Education, 34(7), 1075-1091. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.647109
  18. Chiappetta, E. L., & Fillman, D. A. (2005). Analysis of five high school biology textbooks used in the United States for inclusion of the nature of science. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching meeting. Dallas, TX.
  19. Chiappetta, E. L., Sethna, G. H., & Fillman, D. A. (1991). A qualitative analysis of high school chemistry textbooks for scientific literacy themes and expository learning aids. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 936-951.
  20. Chiappetta, E. L., Fillman, D. A., & Sethna, G. H. (1991). A method to quantify major themes of scientific literacy in science textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 713-725. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660280808
  21. Chiappetta, E. L., & Koballa, T. R. (2004). Quizzing students on the myths of science. The Science Teacher, Nov, 58-61.
  22. Chiappetta, E. L., & Koballa, T. R. (2010). Science instruction in the middle and secondary schools, 7th ed. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Merrill.
  23. Cho, J., & Ju, D. (1996). Perceptions of science teachers about the nature of science. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 16(2), 200-209.
  24. Choi, J., Nam, J., Ko, M., & Ko, M. (2009). Developing middle school students' understanding of the nature of science through history of science. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 29(2), 221-239.
  25. Cobern, W. W., & Loving, C. C. (2002). Investigation of preservice elementary teachers' thinking about science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(10), 1016-1-31. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10052
  26. Collette, A., & Chiappetta, L. E. (1984). Science instruction in the middle and secondary schools. St. Louis, MO: Times Millor/Mosby.
  27. Duschl, R. (2000). Making the nature of science explicit. In R. Millar, J. Leach, & J. Osborne (Eds.), Improving science education: The contribution of research (pp. 187-206). Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
  28. Fedock, P., Zambo, R., & Cobern, W. (1996). The professional development of college science professors as science teacher educators. Science Education, 80(1), 5-19. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199601)80:1<5::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-N
  29. Ford, M. J., & Wargo, B. M. (2007). Routines, roles, and responsibilities for aligning scientific and classroom practices. Science Education, 91(1), 133-157. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20171
  30. Harding, P., & Hare, W. (2000). Portraying science accurately in classrooms: Emphasizing open-mindedness rather than relativism. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(3), 225-236. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(200003)37:3<225::AID-TEA1>3.0.CO;2-G
  31. Jeanpierre, B., Oberhauser, K., & Freeman, C. (2005). Characteristics of professional development that effect change in secondary science teachers' classroom practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(6), 668-690. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20069
  32. Kang, S., Scharmann, L. C., & Noh, T. (2005). Examining students' views on the nature of science: results from Korean 6th, 8th, and 10th graders. Science Education, 89, 314-334. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20053
  33. Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). The influence of explicit reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders' views of nature of science. Journal of research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551-578. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10036
  34. Kim, H., Choi, S., Hwang, H., Lee, J., KIm, S., & Lee, M. (2006). An analysis of middle school science textbooks based on scientific literacy. Journal of Korean Science Education, 26(4), 601-609.
  35. Kim, J., Jeon, R., & Paik, S. (2007). The analysis of the nature of science views of science textbook, science teacher, and high school students. Journal of Korean Science Education, 27(9), 809-817.
  36. Kim, J., Min, B., Lee, Y., Son, Y., Kim, D., & Kim, T. (2013). Comparative analysis of the nature of science reflected on the elementary school science textbooks of Korea, Japan, and the U.S. Journal of Research in Curriculum Instruction. 17(2). 619-644. https://doi.org/10.24231/rici.2013.17.2.619
  37. Kim, S. Y. (2010). Exploring preservice science teachers' views of the nature of science: biology vs. non-biology teachers. Journal of the Korean Science Education, 30(2), 206-217.
  38. Kim, H. J., & Kim, S. W. (2013). The characteristics of perceptual change of high school of the arts students through explicit instructions on the nature of science. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(2), 266-283. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2013.33.2.266
  39. Kim, S. Y., & Park, H. J. (2013). College students' understanding of nature of science: discipline and gender difference. Korean Association for Learner-centered Curriculum and Instruction, 13(6), 239-256.
  40. Kim, M., Nam, I., & Kwon, S. (2010). The relation of elementary school teachers' point of views about the organization of science curriculum and the nature of science. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education,29(3),243-251.
  41. Kim, J., Kim, S., Kim, D., Kim, H., & Paik, S. (2008). Analysis of elxplictly instructional effects about nature of science of elementary school students. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 27(3),261-272.
  42. 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(8), 916-929. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199910)36:8<916::AID-TEA2>3.0.CO;2-A
  43. 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660290404
  44. 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10034
  45. Lee, E. A., & Choi, S. H. (2002). Pre-service teachers' conceptions of the nature of science. Journal of Korean Earth Science Society, 23(2), 140-146.
  46. Lee, Y. H. (2007). How do the high school biology textbooks introduce the nature of science? (Doctoral dissertation). Houston, TX: University of Houston.
  47. Lee, Y. H. (2014). Comparative analysis of the presentation of the nature of science (NOS) in Korean and US elementary science textbooks. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 34(3), 207-212. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2014.34.3.0207
  48. Lee, Y. H. (2013a). A proposal of inclusive framework of the nature of science (NOS) based on the 4 themes of scientific literacy for K-12 school science. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(3), 553-569. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2013.33.3.553
  49. Lee, Y. H. (2013b). Nature of science (NOS) presentation in the introductory chapters of Korean high school life science I textbooks using a qualitative content analysis. Journal of Research in Curriculum Instruction, 17(1), 173-197. https://doi.org/10.24231/rici.2013.17.1.173
  50. Lee, Y., & Chiappetta, E. (2008). How do the high school biology textbooks introduce the nature of science? Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching meeting. Garden Grove, CA.
  51. Lee, Y., Son, Y., & Kim, K. (2014). Analysis of the presentation for the nature of science in elementary science textbooks using the four themes of scientific literacy. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 33(2), 207-216. https://doi.org/10.15267/keses.2014.33.2.207
  52. Lim, C., Kim, H., & Lee, S. (2004). Preservice and inservice teachers' perceptipon on the nature of science. Journal o Korean Elementary Science Education, 23(4), 294-304.
  53. Liu, S. Y., & Lederman, N. G. (2007). Exploring prospective teachers' worldviews and conceptions of nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 29, 1281-1307. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690601140019
  54. McComas, W. F. (2005). Seeking NOS standards: What content consensus exists in popular books on the nature of science? Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching meeting. Dallas, TX.
  55. McComas W. F. (1998). The principal elements of the nature of science: Dispelling the myths. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies. (pp. 53-70). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
  56. McDonald, C. V. (2010). The influence of explicit nature of science and argumentation instruction on preservice teachers' views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 1137-1164. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20377
  57. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MEST). (2012). Science education standards. Seoul: Ministry of Education and Science Technology.
  58. Nam, J., Mayer, V.J., Choi, J., & Lim, J. (2007). Pre-service science teacher's understanding of the nature of science. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 27(3), 253-262.
  59. National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  60. National Research Council (NRC). (2000). How people learn. Bridging research and practice. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  61. National Research Council (NRC). (2012). A framework for K-12 science education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  62. National Science Teachers Association (NSTA). (1982). Science-technology-society: Science education for the 1980s (An NSTA position statement). Washington, DC: Author.
  63. Noh, T., Kim, Y., Han, S., & Kang, S. (2002). Elementary school students' views on the nature of science. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 22(4), 882-891.
  64. Park, E., & Hong, H. K. (2011). Analyzing science-gifted middle school students' understanding of nature of science (NOS). The Korean Society for the Gifted and Talented, 21(2), 391-405. https://doi.org/10.9722/JGTE.2011.21.2.391
  65. Park, H., & Lee, K. (2005). University students' understanding of the nature of science. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 25(3), 390-399.
  66. Park, K. S., & Yu, M. H. (2013). The effects of 'science history based chemist inquiry program' on the understanding toward nature of science, scientific attitudes, and science career orientation of scientifically gifted high school students. The Korean Chemical Society, 57(6), 821-829. https://doi.org/10.5012/jkcs.2013.57.6.821
  67. Parker, L. C., Krockover, G. H., Lasher-Trapp, S., & Eichinger, D. C. (2008). Ideas about the nature of science held by undergraduate atmospheric science students. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 89, 1681-1688. https://doi.org/10.1175/2008BAMS2349.1
  68. Pomeroy, D. (1993). Implications of teachers' beliefs about the nature of science: Comparison of the beliefs of scientists, secondary science teachers, and elementary teachers. Science Education, 77(3), 261-273. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730770302
  69. Reiff, R. (2004). The methods of science: Exchanging myth for authenticity. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (Rev. ed). Great Britain: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  70. Rudolph, J. L. (2000). Reconsidering the 'nature of science' as a curriculum component. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(3), 403-419. https://doi.org/10.1080/002202700182628
  71. Ryan, A. G., & Aikenhead, G. S. (1992). Students' preconceptions about the epistemology of science. Science Education, 76, 559-580. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730760602
  72. Samarapungavan, A., Westby, E. L., & Bodner, G. M. (2006). Contextual epistemic development in science: A comparison of chemistry students and research chemists. Science Education, 90, 468-495. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20111
  73. Schwartz, R., & Lederman, N. (2002). "It's the nature of the beast": The influence of knowledge and intentions on learning and teaching nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(3), 205-236. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10021
  74. Schwartz, R., & Lederman, N. (2008). What scientists say: Scientists' views of nature of science and relation to science context. International Journal of Science Education, 30(6), 727-771. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701225801
  75. Seo, H., Hwang, J., & Kwak, D. (2010). An analysis of scientific literacy covered in the testing items on the biology section of the scholastic achievement test. Journal of Research in Curriculum Instruction, 14(3), 601-620. https://doi.org/10.24231/rici.2010.14.3.601
  76. Sotherland, S., Gess-Newsome, J., & Johnston, A. (2003). Portraying science in the classroom: The manifestation of scientists' beliefs in classroom practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(7), 669-691. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10104
  77. Taylor, A. R., Jones, M. G., Broadwell, B., & Oppewal, T. (2008). Creativity, inquiry, or accountability? Scientists' and teachers' perceptions of science education. Science Education, 92, 1058-1075. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20272
  78. Tsai, C. (2006). Teachers' sceitnific epistemological views: The coherence with instruction and students' views. Science Education, 91(2), 222-243.
  79. Varelas, M., House, R., & Wenzel, S. (2005). Begining teachers immersed into science: Scientist and science teacher identities. Science Education, 89(3), 492-516. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20047
  80. Walker, K. A., & Zeidler, D. L. (2007). Promoting discourse about socioscientific issues through scaffolded inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1387-1410. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690601068095
  81. Wong, S. L., & Hodson, D. (2008). From the horse's mouth: what scientists say about scientific investigation and scientific knowledge. Science Education, 93(1), 109-130.
  82. Yang, I., Han, K., Choi, H., Oh, C., & Cho, H. (2005a). Beginning elementary teachers' beliefs about the nature of science. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 24(2), 360-379.
  83. Yang, I., Han, K., Choi, H., Oh, C., & Cho, H. (2005b). Investigation of the relationships between beginning elementary teachers' beliefs about the nature of science, and science teaching and learning context. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 24(4), 399-416.

Cited by

  1. 기상 정보 전달자의 과학의 본성에 대한 인식 연구 vol.8, pp.2, 2015, https://doi.org/10.15523/jksese.2015.8.2.114
  2. Pre - service Biology Teachers‘ Understanding about Nature of the Scientific Inquiry - The Views about Scientific Inquiry (VASI) QuestIonnaire - vol.44, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.15717/bioedu.2016.44.2.191
  3. 국내 과학관 전시물에 반영된 과학의 본성(NOS) 특징 분석에 따른 프로그램 개발 및 이의 적용 vol.10, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.15523/jksese.2017.10.2.104
  4. 일반 고등학교 1학년 학생들의 과학적 탐구의 본성에 관한 이해 vol.41, pp.3, 2014, https://doi.org/10.5467/jkess.2020.41.3.273