1 |
DiGironimo, N. (2011). What is technology? Investigating student conceptions about the nature of technology. International Journal of Science Education, 33(10), 1337-1352.
DOI
|
2 |
Duschl, R. A., & Grandy, R. (2013). Two views about explicitly teaching nature of science. Science & Education, 22(9), 2019-2139.
DOI
|
3 |
Duschl, R., & Hamilton, R. (2011). Learning science. In R. Mayer & P. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (pp. 78-107). New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
|
4 |
Erduran, S., & Dagher, Z. R. (2014). Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education: scientific knowledge, practice and other family categories. Dordrecht: Springer.
|
5 |
Erduran, S., Dagher, Z. R., & McDonald, C. V. (2019). Contributions of the family resemblance approach to nature of science in science education. Science & Education, 28(3-5), 311-328.
DOI
|
6 |
Feyerabend, P. K. (2010). Against method. London: Verso.
|
7 |
Shapin, S. (1996). The scientific revolution. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
|
8 |
Shim, K.-C., Park, J.-S., Lee, G.-Y., Son, J.-W., Moon, H.-J., Park, J.-Y., et al. (2017). Science Laboratory Experiments. Seoul: Visang Education.
|
9 |
Giere, R. N. (1997). Understanding scientific reasoning. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.
|
10 |
Foucault, M. (1977). Language, counter-memory, practice: selected essays and interviews (D. F. Bouchard, & S. Simon, Trans.). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
|
11 |
Hodson, D. (2008). Towards scientific literacy : A teachers' guide to the history, philosophy and sociology of science. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
|
12 |
Waight, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2012). Nature of technology: Implications for design, development, and enactment of technological tools in school science classrooms. International Journal of Science Education, 34(18), 2875-2905.
DOI
|
13 |
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.
DOI
|
14 |
Tsai, C.-C., & Liu, S.-Y. (2005). Developing a multidimensional instrument for assessing students’ epistemological views toward science. International Journal of Science Education, 27(13), 1621-1638.
DOI
|
15 |
Waight, N. (2014). Technology knowledge: high school science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of technology. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12, 1143-1168.
DOI
|
16 |
Weedon, C. (1996). Feminist practice and poststructuralist theory. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
|
17 |
Wittgenstein, L. (1978). Philosophical investigations. London: Basil Blackwell & Mott.
|
18 |
Wittgenstein, L. (2001). Tractatus logico-philosophicus. London: Routledge.
|
19 |
Sismondo, S. (2010). An introduction to science and technology studies. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
|
20 |
Hodson, D., & Wong, S. L. (2014). From the Horse’s Mouth: Why scientists’ views are crucial to nature of science understanding. International Journal of Science Education, 36(16), 2639-2665.
DOI
|
21 |
Huh, K. (2012). On Michel Foucault’s concept of discours. Concept and communication, 9, 5-32.
|
22 |
Hunter, M., & Schaffer, S. (1989). Robert Hooke: New studies. Wolfeboro, NH: Boydell Press.
|
23 |
Irwin, A., & Wynne, B. (1996). Misunderstanding science? The public reconstruction of science and technology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
|
24 |
Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2014). New directions for nature of science research. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (Vol. 2, pp. 999-1021). New York: Springer.
|
25 |
Jammer, M. (1989). The conceptual development of quantum mechanics. Los Angeles, CA: Tomash Publishers.
|
26 |
Foucault, M. (1972). Archaeology of knowledge (A. M. S. Smith, Trans.). New York: Harper & Row.
|
27 |
Jenner, B., & Titscher, S. (2000). Methods of text and discourse analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
|
28 |
Khine, M. S. (2012). Advances in nature of science research: concepts and methodologies. Dordrecht: Springer.
|
29 |
Jho, H. (2014). Implications of science education as interdisciplinary education through the cases of scientists and artists in the modern era: Focus on the relationship between science and the arts. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 34(8), 755-765.
DOI
|
30 |
Jho, H. (2018). Trends in research on the nature of science: A bibliometric analysis with R-mapping tool. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 18(18), 937-956.
DOI
|
31 |
Kimball, M. E. (1968). Understanding the nature of science: A comparison of scientists and science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 5(2), 110-120.
DOI
|
32 |
Klopfer, L. E., & Cooley, W. W. (1963). The history of science cases for high schools in the development of student understanding of science and scientists: A report on the HOSG instruction project. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1(1), 33-47.
DOI
|
33 |
Kuhn, T. S. (2012). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
|
34 |
Kukla, A. (2000). Social constructivism and the philosophy of science. New York: Routledge.
|
35 |
Ladyman, J. (2002). Understanding philosophy of science. New York: Routledge.
|
36 |
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.
DOI
|
37 |
Lederman, N. G. (1998). Assessing the nature of science: What is the nature of our assessment? Science & Education, 7(6), 595-615.
DOI
|
38 |
Abi-El-Mona, I., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2011). Perceptions of the Nature and ‘Goodness’ of Argument among College Students, Science Teachers, and Scientists. International Journal of Science Education, 33(4), 573-605.
DOI
|
39 |
Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (1998). The nature of science and instructional practice: Making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82, 417-436.
DOI
|
40 |
Abd-El-Khalick, F., & 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(7), 665-701.
DOI
|
41 |
Aikenhead, G. S., & Ryan, A. G. (1992). The development of a new instrument: ‘Views on science-technology-society’ (VOSTS). Science Education, 76(5), 477-491.
DOI
|
42 |
Aldersey-Williams, H. (2011). Periodic tales: A cultural history of the elements, from Arsenic to Zinc. New York: Harper Collins.
|
43 |
American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy: A project 2061 report. New York: Oxford University Press.
|
44 |
Artieres, P. (2011). Michel Foucault. Paris: Herne.
|
45 |
Arya, A. P. (1998). Introduction to classical mechanics. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
|
46 |
Aydeniz, M., & Bilican, K. (2014). What do scientists know about the nature of science? A case study of novice scientists’ views of NOS. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(5), 1083-1115.
DOI
|
47 |
Bacon, F. (1994). Novum organum: With other parts of the great instauration. Chicago: Open Court.
|
48 |
Lee, S. W.-Y., & Tsai, C.-C. (2012). Students’ domain-specific epistemological beliefs: A comparison between biology and physics. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 21(2), 215-229.
|
49 |
Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & 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(6), 497-521.
DOI
|
50 |
Lederman, N. G., Wade, P., & Bell, R. L. (1998). Assessing understanding of the nature of science: a historical perspective. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: rationales and strategies (pp. 331-350). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
|
51 |
Levere, T. H., & Shea, W. R. (1990). Nature, experiment, and the sciences : essays on Galileo and the history of science. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
|
52 |
Liou, P.-Y. (2015). Developing an instrument for assessing students’ concepts of the nature of technology. Research in Science & Technological Education, 33(2), 162-181.
DOI
|
53 |
Liu, S.-Y., & Tsai, C.-C. (2008). Differences in the scientific epistemological views of undergraduate students. International Journal of Science Education, 30(8), 1055-1073.
DOI
|
54 |
Matthews, M. R. (1994). Science teaching: the role of history and philosophy of science. New York: Routledge.
|
55 |
Matthews, M. R. (1998). In defense of modest goals when teaching about the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(2), 161-174.
DOI
|
56 |
Matthews, M. R. (2012). Changing the focus: From nature of science to features of science. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Advances in nature of science research (pp. 3-26). Dordrecht: Springer.
|
57 |
Maudlin, T. (2010). The metaphysics within physics. New York: Oxford University Press.
|
58 |
Bady, R. J. (1979). Students’ understanding of the logic of hypothesis testing. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 16(1), 61-65.
DOI
|
59 |
Bauer, M. W., Allum, N., & Miller, S. (2007). What can we learn from 25 years of pus survey research? Liberating and expanding the agenda. Public Understanding of Science, 16(1), 79-95.
DOI
|
60 |
Bayir, E., Cakici, Y., & Ertas, O. (2014). Exploring natural and social scientists’ views of nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 36(8), 1268-1312.
|
61 |
Cho, E, Kim, C., & Choe, S. (2018). A study on the plurality of nature of science in science education. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 38(5), 721-738.
DOI
|
62 |
Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Understandings of the nature of science and decision making on science and technology based issues. Science Education, 87, 352-377.
DOI
|
63 |
Bensaude-Vincent, B., & Stengers, I. (1996). A history of chemistry. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
|
64 |
Bianchini, J. A., Whitney, D. J., Breton, T. D., & Hilton-Brown, B. A. (2002). Toward inclusive science education: University scientists views of students, instructional practices, and the nature of science. Science Education, 86(1), 42-78.
DOI
|
65 |
Clement, J. J. (2008). Creative model construction in scientists and students: The role of imagery, analogy, and mental simulation. Dordrecht: Springer.
|
66 |
Clement, J. J., & Rea-Ramirez, M. A. (2008). Model based learning and instruction in science (Models and modeling in science education). New York: Springer.
|
67 |
Ministry of Education (2015). National science curriculum. (Vol. 2015-74). Sejong: Ministry of Education.
|
68 |
Maudlin, T. (2012). Philosophy of physics: Space and time. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
|
69 |
McComas, W. F. (1998). The nature of science in science education: rationales and strategies. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
|
70 |
Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. London: King's College.
|
71 |
Mullis, I. V. S., & Martin, M. O. (2013). TIMSS 2015 assessment frameworks. http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2015/frameworks.html.
|
72 |
National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academic Press.
|
73 |
National Research Council (2012). Framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
|
74 |
Newman, H. B., & Ypsilantis, T. (1996). History of original ideas and basic discoveries in particle physics. New York: Plenum Press.
|
75 |
Newton, I. (1952). Optics: Or a treatise of the reflections, refractions, inflexions & colours of light. New York: Dover.
|
76 |
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2016). PISA 2015 assessment and analytical framework: science, reading, mathematic and financial literacy. Paris: OECD Publishing.
|
77 |
Collier, A. (1994). Critical realism : An introduction to Roy Bhaskar's philosophy. London: Verso.
|
78 |
Clough, M. P. (2006). Learners’ responses to the demands of conceptual change: Considerations for effective nature of science instruction. Science Education, 15, 463-494.
DOI
|
79 |
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.
DOI
|
80 |
Collette, A. T., & Chiappetta, E. L. (1989). Science instruction in the middle and secondary schools. Columbus, OH: Merrill Pub. Co.
|
81 |
Deng, F., Chen, D.-T., Tsai, C.-C., & Chai, C.-S. (2011). Students’ views of the nature of science: a critical review of research. Science Education, 95, 961-999.
DOI
|
82 |
Peters-Burton, E., & Baynard, L. R. (2013). Network analysis of beliefs about the scientific enterprise: A comparison of scientists, middle school science teachers and eighth-grade science students. International Journal of Science Education, 35(16), 2801-2837.
DOI
|
83 |
Constantinou, C., Hadjilouca, R., & Papadouris, N. (2010). Students’ epistemological awareness concerning the distinction between science and technology. International Journal of Science Education, 32(2), 143-172.
DOI
|
84 |
Cooley, W. W., & Klopfer, L. E. (1961). Test on understanding science. Princeton, NJ: Educating Test Service.
|
85 |
Cooper, M., & Hunter, M. (2006). Robert Hooke: tercentennial studies. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
|
86 |
Cushing, J. T. (1998). Philosophical concepts in physics: The historical relation between philosophy and scientific theories. New York: Cambridge University Press.
|
87 |
Porter, A. C. (2006). Curriculum assessment. In J. L. Green, G. Camilli, & P. B. Elmore (Eds.), Handbook of complementary methods in education research (pp. 141-159). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
|
88 |
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), 261-278.
DOI
|
89 |
Popper, K. R. (1963). Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge. London: Routledge.
|
90 |
Popper, K. R. (2002). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Routledge.
|
91 |
Ratcliffe, M., & Grace, M. (2003). Science education for citizenship: Teaching socio-scientific issues. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
|
92 |
Rubba, P. A., & Anderson, H. O. (1978). Development of an instrument to assess secondary school students understanding of the nature of scientific knowledge. Science Education, 62(4), 449-458.
DOI
|
93 |
Sankey, H. (2008). Scientific realism and the rationality of science. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
|
94 |
Schwartz, R. S., & Lederman, N. G. (2008). What Scientists Say: Scientists’ views of nature of science and relation to science context. International Journal of Science Education, 30(6), 727-771.
DOI
|
95 |
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.
DOI
|