Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education (한국초등과학교육학회지:초등과학교육)

The Korean Elementary Science Education Society (한국초등과학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Suggesting The NOS Flow Map for an Instruction of Nature of Science

과학의 본성 교육을 위한 NOS Flow Map 제안

  • Received : 2013.12.30
  • Accepted : 2014.02.26
  • Published : 2014.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

이 연구의 목적은 인지적 전략인, 갈등도(Oh, 2011)를 기반으로 학생들이 명시적으로 과학의 본성(NOS)의 교육을 돕기 위하여 과학의 본성요소뿐만 아니라 과학의 역사를 담은 NOS Flow Map을 개발 제안하는 것이다. 예비적으로 과학의 본성의 교육을 위해 제안한 NOS Flow Map을 사용에 대한 이해를 탐색하기 위하여, 자신들의 NOS 이해를 강화하기 위해 우리가 제안한 NOS Flow Map의 유용성에 대한 예비 초등교사들의 인식를 조사하였다. 과학의 본성에 대한 중요한 관점들은 Kuhn의 과학철학과 역사가 아주 잘 일치된다. 즉 Kuhn의 과학혁명의 예로 가장 중요한 Copernicus의 혁명과정이 과학의 본성 중요한 요소들과 잘 일치됨을 보여준다. 따라서 이 연구에서 인지갈등을 통한 NOS 흐름도는 과학의 소양교육을 강화하는데 명시적이고 반성적인 도구이며 유망한 방법이라고 조심스럽게 제안한다.

Keywords

References

  1. Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2006). Over and over again: college students' views of nature of science, In L.B. Flick and N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific Inquiry and Nature of Science (pp. 389-425). The Netherlands: Springer.
  2. Abd-El-Khalick, F. & Lederman, N. G. (2000a). Improving science teachers' conceptions of the nature of science:A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 665-701. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690050044044
  3. Abd-El-Kalick, F. & Lederman, N. G. (2000b). The influence of history of science courses on students' views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(10), 1057-1095. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200012)37:10<1057::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-C
  4. Akerson, V. L. & Abd-El-Khalick, F. S. (2003). Teaching elements of nature of science: Yea long case study of a fourth grade teacher. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 1025-1049. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10119
  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. Akerson, 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(2), 194-213. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20099
  7. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (AAAS) (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy: A Project 2061 report. New York: Oxford University Press.
  8. Bartholomew, H., Osborne, J. & Ratcliffe, M. (2004). Teaching students "ideas-about-science": Five dimensions of effective practice. Science Education, 88, 655-682. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10136
  9. Benson, G. D. (1989). Epistemology and science curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 21(4), 329-344. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027890210403
  10. Brown, H. I. (1977). Perception, theory and commitment:The new philosophy of science. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  11. Buaraphan, K. (2012). Embedding nature of science in teaching about astronomy and space. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21, 353-369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9329-9
  12. Cleminson, A. (1990). Establishing an epistemological base for science teaching in the light of contempory notions of the nature of science and how children learn science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(5), 429-445. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660270504
  13. Chalmers, A. F. (1982). What is this thing called science? (2nd edition). Miton Keynes: Open University Press.
  14. Chalmers, A. F. (1999). What is this thing called science? (3rd edition). Cambridge: Hackett Publishing, Inc.
  15. Dass, P. M. (2005). Understanding the nature of scientific enterprise (NOSE) through a discourse with its history:the influence of an undergraduate 'history of science' course. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 3(1), 87-115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-004-3225-1
  16. Duschl, R. A. (1990). Restructuring science education: The importance of theories and their development. New York: Teachers college press.
  17. Eflin, J. T., Glennan, S. & Reisch, G. (1999). The nature of science: A perspective from the philosophy of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(1), 107-116. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199901)36:1<107::AID-TEA7>3.0.CO;2-3
  18. Giere, R. N. (1999). Science without laws. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  19. Hashweh, M. Z. (1986). Toward an explanation of conceptual change. European Journal of Science Education, 8, 229-249. https://doi.org/10.1080/0140528860080301
  20. Hull, D. L. (1998). Science as a process: an evolutionary account of the social and conceptual development of science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  21. Irwin, A. R. (2000). Historical case studies: Teaching the nature of science in context. Science Education, 84(1), 5-26. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200001)84:1<5::AID-SCE2>3.0.CO;2-0
  22. Jenkins, E. W. (1994). HPS and school science education: remediation or reconstruction? International Journal of Science Education, 16(6), 613-623. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069940160601
  23. Kuhn, T. S. (1959). The essential tension: Traditional and innovation in scientific research. The third University of Utah Research Conference on the Identification of Scientific Talent, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, Reprinted in his The Essential Tension, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp.225-239.
  24. Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolution (1st edition), Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
  25. Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolution (2nd edition), Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
  26. Kuhn, T. S. (1977). The essential tension. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  27. Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions (3rd Edition), Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  28. Jenkins, E. W. (1994). HPS and school science education: remediation or reconstruction? International Journal of Science Education, 16(6), 613-623. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069940160601
  29. Lederman, N. G. (2007, reprint 2010 by Routledge). Nature of Science: Past, present, and future. In K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education. Mahwah (pp.831-880), New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  30. Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L. & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of NOS questionnaire toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners' conceptions of NOS. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 497-521. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10034
  31. Lin, H. & Chen, C. (2002). Promoting preservice chemistry teachers' understanding about the nature of science through history. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(9), 773-792. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10045
  32. Matthews, M. (1992). History, philosophy, and science teaching: The present rapprochement, Science & Education, 1, 11-47. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00430208
  33. Matthews, M. (1994). Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. New York: Rutledge.
  34. Matthews, M. (2002). Thomas Kuhn's impact on science education: What lessons can be learned? Science Education, 88, 90-118.
  35. Matthews, M. (2004). Thomas Kuhn's impact on science education: What lessons can be learned? Science Education, 88(3), 90-118. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10111
  36. Monk, M. & Osborne, J. (1997). Placing the history and philosophy of science on the curriculum: A model for the development for pedagogy. Science Education, 81(4), 405-424. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199707)81:4<405::AID-SCE3>3.0.CO;2-G
  37. National Research Council (NRC) (1996). National science education standards. Washington. DC: National Academic Press.
  38. Niaz, M. (1995). Cognitive conflict as a teaching strategy in solving chemistry problems: A dialectic-contstructivist perspective. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 959-970. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660320907
  39. Niaz, M. & Maza, A. (2011). Nature of science in general chemistry textbooks. New York: Springer.
  40. Oh, J.-Y. & Lederman, N. G. (2014). Suggesting an explicit flow map for the nature of science. 2014 Kase International Conference (p.143), at Daegu Unversity, Korea, Feb.13-15, 2014.
  41. Oh, J.-Y. (2012). Suggesting a flow map of the nature of science for sciences education, The paper presented in the International Conference of the ICSE 2012 conference in Nanjing, China (Oct. 12-15, 2012).
  42. Oh, J.-Y. (2011). Using an enhanced conflict map in the classroom (photoelectric effect) based on Lakatosian Heuristic Principle Strategies. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9, 1135-1166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9252-1
  43. Pearsall, N. R., Skipper, J. E. & Mintzes, J. J. (1997). Knowledge restructuring in the life sciences: A longitudinal study of conceptual change in biology. Science Education, 81, 193-215. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199704)81:2<193::AID-SCE5>3.0.CO;2-A
  44. Posner, G., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W. & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211-277. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730660207
  45. 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, 610-645. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10128
  46. 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
  47. Sharrock, W. & Read, R. (2002). KUHN: Philosopher of scientific revolution. Malden. MA: Polity Press c/o Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
  48. Solomon, J., Duveen, J., Scott, 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(4), 409-421. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660290408
  49. Tsai, C.-C. (2000). Enhancing science instruction: the use of 'conflict map'. International Journal of Science Education, 22(3), 285-302. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006900289886
  50. Tsai, C.-C. & Chang, C.-Y. (2005). Lasting effects of instruction guided by the conflict map: Experimental study of learning about the causes of the seasons. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(10), 1089-1111. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20089
  51. Vigoureux, J. M. (2003). Les pommes de Newton. Paris: Albin Michel S.A., (Trans. Hee-Jung Lee, (2005), Newton's Apple, NuRim book(Seoul)).
  52. Westfall, R. S. (1971). The construction of modern science. New York: John Willey & Sons, Inc.