Journals / Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri / 2010 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 4

The impact of the issue of demarcation on pre-service teachers' beliefs on the nature of science

Bilim sözde-bilim ayrımı tartışmasının öğretmen adaylarının bilimin doğası inanışlarına etkisi

Pages
2571–2614
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results of the research indicated that the context designed was eff ective in developing the nature of science understandings in various dimensions such as science as an enterprise, experiments, observations, theories, laws, models, scientific methods and the role of socio-cultural values in science.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The arguments about the dimensions of nature of science and the strategies for teaching it are still controversial.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this research, as part of these arguments, a context based on the issue of demarcation of science from pseudoscience was off ered and questioned for its eff ectiveness in nature of science teaching.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results of the research indicated that the context designed was eff ective in developing the nature of science understandings in various dimensions such as science as an enterprise, experiments, observations, theories, laws, models, scientific methods and the role of socio-cultural values in science.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The arguments about the dimensions of nature of science and the strategies for teaching it are still controversial. In this research, as part of these arguments, a context based on the issue of demarcation of science from pseudoscience was off ered and questioned for its eff ectiveness in nature of science teaching. The research was planned for an educational term and astrology was examined as a case in this context for the criteria proposed by philosophers. A questionnaire composed of open-ended questions which was analyzed qualitatively and used as data source. The results of the research indicated that the context designed was eff ective in developing the nature of science understandings in various dimensions such as science as an enterprise, experiments, observations, theories, laws, models, scientific methods and the role of socio-cultural values in science.

Özet

Fen eğitiminin önemli bileşenlerinden birisi olan bilimin doğasının alt boyutları ve bunların öğrenme ortamlarına nasıl taşınabileceği tartışılmaya devam etmektedir. Bu araştırmada, söz konusu tartışma kapsamında, bilim sözde-bilim ayrımı üzerine yapılandırılmış bir bağlam önerilerek bunun öğretmen adaylarının bilimin doğası inanışlarının geliştirilmesindeki etkililiği sorgulanmıştır. Söz konusu bağlam bir dizi felsefi ekolün ayrım için önerdiği ölçütler esas alınarak astroloji örnek olayı üzerine yapılandırılmış ve bir öğretim dönemi boyunca devam eden süreçte veri kaynağı olarak açık uçlu sorulardan oluşmuş bir form hem öntest hem de sontest şeklinde kullanılarak elde edilen veriler nitel olarak analiz edilmiştir. Araştırma sonuçları bir girişim olarak bilim, deney, gözlem, teoriler, yasalar, modeller, bilimsel yöntem ve sosyo-kültürel değerlerin bilimdeki rolü gibi alt boyutlarda adayların inanışlarını geliştirebildiklerini dolayısıyla planlanan bağlamın etkili olduğunu göstermiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

TURGUT, H., AKÇAY, H., İREZ, O. S. (2010). The impact of the issue of demarcation on pre-service teachers' beliefs on the nature of science. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 4, 2571–2614. https://ajindex.com/articles/346422

References (12)

  1. Abd-El-Khalick, F. (1998). The infl uence of history of science courses on students’ conceptions of the nature of science. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Oregon State University, Oregon. 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.
  2. Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000a). The infl uence of history of science courses on students’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 1057-1095.
  3. Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000b). Improving science teachers’ conceptions of nature of science: A critical review of literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 665-701.
  4. Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2001, November). Do history of science courses infl uence college students’ views of nature of science? Paper presented at the 6th annual International History and Philosophy in Science Teaching Conference, Denver, CO. Abd-El-Khalick, 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.
  5. Afonso, A. S., & Gilbert, J. K. (2010). Pseudo-science: A meaningful context for assessing nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 32 (3), 329-348.
  6. Aikenhead, G. S. (1997). Toward a first nations cross-cultural science and technology curriculum. Science Education, 81, 217-238.
  7. Akerson, V. L., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Infl uence of refl ective explicit activity-based approach on elementary teachers’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 295-317.
  8. Akindehin, F. (1988). Eff ect of an instructional package on preservice science teachers’ understanding of the nature of science and acquisition of science-related attitudes. Science Education, 72 (1), 73-82.
  9. Alters, B. J. (1997). Whose nature of science? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 39-55.
  10. Anderson, P. F. (1983). Marketing, scientific progress and scientific method. Journal of Marketing, 47, 18-31.
  11. Bartholomew, H., Osborne, J., & Ratcliff e, M. (2004). Teaching students ‘ideas about science’: Five dimensions of eff ective practice. Science Education, 88, 655-682.
  12. Bauer, H. H. (2002). Pathological science is not scientific misconduct nor is it pathological. International Journal for Philosophy of Che