Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

The Korean Association for Science Education (한국과학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

An Analysis of Preservice Science Teachers' Contextualized NOS Lesson Planning from the Perspectives of Pedagogical Content Knowledge

PCK 관점에서 예비과학교사의 맥락적 NOS 수업 계획 분석

  • Received : 2023.10.13
  • Accepted : 2023.11.24
  • Published : 2023.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In this study, we analyzed contextualized NOS lessons planned by preservice teachers from the perspectives of PCK. Eight preservice teachers who had completed all of the curriculum at the College of Education located in Seoul participated in the study. CoRe and teaching and learning guidance were collected. Interviews were also conducted. We used analytical induction to analyze the collected data. The analyses of the results revealed that the NOS learning goals selected by the preservice teachers were different depending on the context of the NOS lessons. In addition, the preservice teachers were unable to sufficiently explain the value of learning NOS. All of the preservice teachers were worried that their students would not understand NOS properly, and they faced various difficulties in dealing with NOS and science content. They thought that if their students conducted experiments, errors could cause problems for students learning NOS. Meanwhile, they guessed their students' preconceptions and misconceptions of NOS based on their experience. The preservice teachers also thought that their students' concept of science and cognitive development stage would affect their NOS learning. Although the preservice teachers used various strategies to teach NOS, NOS was often not explicitly addressed. Also, they were reluctant to evaluate NOS in lessons. Based on the above results, educational implications for preservice teacher education were proposed.

이 연구에서는 예비과학교사가 계획한 맥락적 NOS 수업을 PCK 관점에서 분석하였다. 서울특별시에 소재한 사범대학에서 교육과정을 모두 이수한 예비과학교사 8명이 연구에 참여하였다. 이들이 작성한 CoRe와 교수학습 지도안을 수집하고 면담을 실시하였다. 분석적 귀납법을 활용하여 수집한 자료를 분석하였다. 연구 결과, 예비교사들이 학습 목표로 선택한 NOS는 수업 주제보다는 NOS를 가르치는 맥락에 따라 다르게 나타났다. 또한 예비교사들은 NOS 학습의 가치를 잘 답변하지 못했다. 모든 예비교사가 학생들이 NOS를 잘 이해하지 못할 것을 우려하였으며, NOS를 과학 내용과 함께 다룬다는 점에서 많은 어려움을 느꼈다. 예비교사들은 학생들이 직접 실험을 하면 오차로 인해 학생들이 NOS를 배우는 데 문제가 생길 것이라고 생각하였다. 한편 예비교사들은 자신의 경험을 근거로 학생들의 NOS에 대한 선개념과 오개념을 추측하였으며, 과학 개념이나 학생의 인지 발달 단계가 NOS 학습에 영향을 미칠 것이라고 생각하기도 했다. 교수 전략 측면에서 NOS를 가르치기 위해 다양한 전략을 사용했음에도 불구하고 NOS를 명시적으로 다루지는 않는 경우가 많았다. 평가전략 측면에서도 수업에서 다루는 NOS를 평가하지 않으려는 모습이 나타났다. 이상의 결과를 바탕으로 예비교사 교육을 위한 시사점을 제안하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). 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
  2. Aikenhead, G. S. (2006). Science education for everyday life: Evidence-based practice. Teachers College Press.
  3. Akerson, V. L., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2003). Teaching elements of nature of science: A yearlong case study of a fourth grade teacher. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(10), 1025-1049. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10119
  4. Allchin, D. (2014). From science studies to scientific literacy: A view from the classroom. Science & Education, 23(9), 1911-1932. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-013-9672-8
  5. Allchin, D., Andersen, H. M., & Nielsen, K. (2014). Complementary approaches to teaching nature of science: Integrating student inquiry, historical cases, and contemporary cases in classroom practice. Science Education, 98(3), 461-486.
  6. Bell, R. L., Lederman, N. G., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2000). Developing and acting upon one's conception of the nature of science: A follow-up study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(6), 563-581. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200008)37:6<563::AID-TEA4>3.0.CO;2-N
  7. Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. (2006). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Allyn & Bacon.
  8. Byun, T., Baek, J., Shim, H.-P., & Lee, D. (2019). An investigation on the implementation of the 'Scientific Inquiry Experiment' of the 2015 Revised Curriculum. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 39(5), 669-679.
  9. Cho, Y., & Choi, W. (2018). Comparison of pre-service science teachers' epistemological views and pre-service science teachers' responses on the discrepant cases. School Science Journal, 12(3), 297-308. https://doi.org/10.15737/SSJ.12.3.201810.297
  10. Clough, M. P. (2006). Learners' responses to the demands of conceptual change: Considerations for effective nature of science instruction. Science & Education, 15(5), 463-494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-005-4846-7
  11. Cofre, H., Nunez, P., Santibanez, D., Pavez, J. M., Valencia, M., & Vergara, C. (2019). A critical review of students' and teachers' understandings of nature of science. Science & Education, 28(3-5), 205-248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00051-3
  12. Demirdogen, B., Hanuscin, D. L., Uzuntiryaki-Kondakci, E., & Koseoglu, F. (2016). Development and nature of preservice chemistry teachers' pedagogical content knowledge for nature of science. Research in Science Education, 46(4), 575-612.
  13. French, M. (2012). Using the Science Museum's 'Mystery Boxes' as a model for science and 'How science works'. School Science Review, 94(347), 15-16.
  14. Gess-Newsome, J. (2015). A model of teacher professional knowledge and skill including PCK: Results of the thinking from the PCK summit. In A. Berry, P. Friedrichsen, & J. Loughran (Eds.), Re-examining pedagogical content knowledge in science education (pp. 28-42). Routledge Press.
  15. Han, S., Lee, I., Kang, S., & Noh, T. (2011). An investigation of elementary school teachers' epistemological beliefs about science on the bases of their strategies for coping with critical incidents. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 30(1), 61-70.
  16. Hanuscin, D. L., Lee, M. H., & Akerson, V. L. (2011). Elementary teachers' pedagogical content knowledge for teaching the nature of science. Science Education, 95(1), 145-167. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20404
  17. Kang, K.-H. (2013). Analysis of pre-service science teachers' views on the philosophy of science. Journal of Education Science, 15(1), 69-84.
  18. Kang, K.-H. (2020). The effect of science history learning and lesson demonstration using science history on pre-service biology teachers' perception about the nature of science. Biology Education, 48(2), 155-167. https://doi.org/10.15717/BIOEDU.2020.48.2.155
  19. 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
  20. Khishfe, R., & Lederman, N. (2006). Teaching nature of science within a controversial topic: Integrated versus nonintegrated. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 395-418. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20137
  21. Kim, M., Kim, H., & Noh, T. (2022). An analysis of pre-service science teachers' NOS lesson planning and demonstration: In the context of 'Science Inquiry Experiment' developed under the 2015 Revised National Curriculum. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society, 66(2), 150-162. https://doi.org/10.5012/JKCS.2022.66.2.150
  22. Kim, M., Kim, H., Jang, J., & Noh, T. (2023). A case study on science teachers' implementation of nos assessments in 'scientific inquiries in the history' of science inquiry experiment. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 43(3), 191-207.
  23. Kim, M., Shin, H., Noh, T. (2020). An exploration of science teachers' NOS-PCK: Focus on Science Inquiry Experiment. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 40(4), 399-413.
  24. Kim, S. Y. (2010). Exploring preservice science teachers' views of the nature of science: biology vs. non-biology teachers. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 30(2), 206-217.
  25. Kim, S. Y. (2016). Construction of preservice biology teachers' NOS pedagogical content knowledge within biology teaching context. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 36(1), 147-158. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2016.36.1.0147
  26. Kim, S. Y. (2020). The effect of PCK based NOS program using the context of science inquiry experiment for preservice science teachers. Biology Education, 48(1), 76-87.
  27. Leden, L., Hansson, L., Redfors, A., & Ideland, M. (2015). Teachers' ways of talking about nature of science and its teaching. Science & Education, 24(9-10), 1141-1172.
  28. 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
  29. 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
  30. Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. Handbook of Research on Science Education, 2, 831-879.
  31. Lee, J., Park, Y., & Jeong, D. (2016). Exploring the level of nature of science and its degree of revising curriculums: The case of the 7th and 2009 Revised Curriculums. Journal of Korean Society of Earth Science Education, 9(2), 217-232. https://doi.org/10.15523/JKSESE.2016.9.2.217
  32. Lim, C.-H., Kim, H.-J., Lee, S.-H. (2004). Preservice and inservice teachers' perception on the nature of science. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 23(4), 297-304.
  33. Loughran, J. (2006). Developing a pedagogy of teacher education: Understanding teaching and learning about teaching. Routledge.
  34. Loughran, J., Mulhall, P., & Berry, A. (2008). Exploring pedagogical content knowledge in science teacher education. International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1301-1320.
  35. Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education (pp. 95-132). Kluwer.
  36. McComas, W. F., & Nouri, N. (2016). The nature of science and the next generation science standards: Analysis and critique. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 27(5), 555-576.
  37. Ministry of Education (MOE) (2015). 2015 Revised Science National Curriculum. Seoul: Ministry of Education.
  38. Ministry of Education (MOE) (2022). 2022 Revised Science National Curriculum. Sejong: Ministry of Education.
  39. Moon, K.-W., & Kim, Y.-S. (2009). Secondary biology teachers' experiences and opinions of experiments on photosynthesis and respiration. The Korean Journal of Biological Education, 37(2), 269-286. https://doi.org/10.15717/bioedu.2009.37.2.269
  40. Nam, J., Mayer, V. J., Choi, J., & Lim, J. (2007). Pre-service science teachers' understanding of the nature of science. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 27(3), 253-262.
  41. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  42. Nott, M., & Wellington, J. (1998). Eliciting, interpreting and developing teachers' understandings of the nature of science. Science & Education, 7, 579-594. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008631328479
  43. Olson, J. K. (2018). The inclusion of the nature of science in nine recent international science education standards documents. Science & Education, 27(7), 637-660.
  44. Padilla, K., & van Driel, J. (2011). The relationships between PCK components: The case of quantum chemistry professors. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 12(3), 367-378.
  45. Park, E., & Hong, H.-G. (2011). Analyzing science-gifted middle school students' understandings of nature of science (NOS). Journal of Gifted/Talented Education, 21(2), 391-405. https://doi.org/10.9722/JGTE.2011.21.2.391
  46. Park, S., & Chen, Y.-C. (2012). Mapping out the integration of the components of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): Examples from high school biology classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(7), 922-941.
  47. Sahin, E. A., & Deniz, H. (2016). Exploring elementary teachers' perceptions about the developmental appropriateness and importance of nature of science aspects. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 11(9), 2673-2698.
  48. Schwartz, R. S., & Lederman, N. G. (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
  49. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Research, 15(2), 4-14. https://doi.org/10.2307/1175860
  50. Song, J., Kang, S., Kwak, Y., Kim, D., Kim, S., Na, J., ... Joung, Y. (2019). Contents and features of 'Korean Science Education Standards (KSES)' for the next generation. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 39(3), 465-478.
  51. Sweeney, S. J. (2010). Factors affecting early elementary (K-4) teachers' introduction of the nature of science: A national survey. [Unpublished doctoral dissentation]. University of Arkansas.
  52. Williams, J., Eames, C., Hume, A., & Lockley, J. (2012). Promoting pedagogical content knowledge development for early career secondary teachers in science and technology using content representations. Research in Science & Technological Education, 30(3), 327-343. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2012.740005