Journals / Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi / 2022 / Cilt: 23 - Sayı: 1

How Do Preservice Science Teachers’ Personal Epistemological Beliefs Differ for Different Levels of Nature of Science Views?

Fen Bilimleri Öğretmen Adaylarının Epistemolojik İnançları Bilimin Doğası Görüşlerinin Farklı Düzeylerine Göre Nasıl Farklılaşır?

Pages
1042–1090
Publication Date
2022-04-29
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)

Implications for science teacher education were provided.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study focuses on exploring whether there are any differences in preservice science teachers’ personal epistemological beliefs for the levels of nature of science views (naïve, has merit, informed).
📊
Key Findings & Data:Based on Deniz (2011), two of the nature of science aspects, tentativeness of scientific knowledge and theory-driven nature of observations, were chosen for examining the relationships.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Implications for science teacher education were provided.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:2011 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Kişisel epistemolojik inançlar · Bilimin doğası görüşleri · Fen bilimleri öğretmen adayı

Abstract

This study focuses on exploring whether there are any differences in preservice science teachers’ personal epistemological beliefs for the levels of nature of science views (naïve, has merit, informed). Based on Deniz (2011), two of the nature of science aspects, tentativeness of scientific knowledge and theory-driven nature of observations, were chosen for examining the relationships. A total of 277 preservice science teachers participated to the study. Two instruments used: Epistemic Beliefs Inventory (Bendixen, Schraw, & Dunkle, 1998), and Views on Science-Technology-Society questionnaire (Aikenhead, Ryan, & Fleming, 1989) modified by Dogan and Abd-El-Khalick (2008). Mean values corresponding to the dimensions of epistemological beliefs revealed that the participants failed to demonstrate higher levels of sophistication. Differences were observed in the sophistication of the views on theory-driven nature of observations and tentativeness of scientific knowledge. The results revealed no statistically significant difference in the participants’ epistemological beliefs for the levels of views regarding tentativeness of scientific knowledge and theory-driven nature of observations. The possible reasons of the results regarding personal epistemological beliefs, nature of science views, and the nonsignificant differences for different levels of nature of science views were discussed in detail. Implications for science teacher education were provided.

Özet

Bu çalışma, katılımcıların epistemolojik inançlarının, bilimin doğası görüşlerinin farklı düzeyleri (yetersiz, kabul edilebilir, gerçekçi) için farklılık gösterip göstermediğini araştırmaktadır. Bu amaçla, Deniz (2011) tarafından ortaya koyulan kavramsal benzerliklere dayanarak, bilimin doğası görüşleri iki boyutta incelenmiştir; bilimsel bilginin değişebilirliği ve gözlemlerin teoriye dayalı doğası. Araştırmaya toplam 277 fen bilimleri öğretmen adayı katılmıştır. İki ölçme aracı kullanılmıştır: Bendixen, Schraw ve Dunkle (1998) tarafından geliştirilen Epistemik İnançlar Envanteri ve Doğan ve Abd-El-Khalick (2008) tarafından revize edilen Bilim-Teknoloji-Toplum Üzerine Görüşler Anketi. Elde edilen ortalama değerler, katılımcıların epistemolojik inançlarının gelişmiş düzeyde olmadığını göstermiştir. Katılımcıların, gözlemlerin teoriye dayalı doğası ve bilimsel bilginin değişebilirliği hakkındaki görüşlerinin farklı düzeylerde olduğu görülmüştür. Sonuçlara göre, katılımcıların epistemolojik inançları bilimsel bilginin değişebilirliği ve gözlemlerin teoriye dayalı doğasına ilişkin görüşlerin farklı seviyeleri için istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir farklılık göstermemiştir. Epistemolojik inançlar ve bilimin doğası görüşlerine dair elde edilen sonuçlar ve epistemolojik inançların bilimin doğası görüşlerinin farklı düzeyleri için anlamlı bir farklılık göstermemesinin olası sebepleri tartışılmıştır. Elde edilen bulguların öğretmen eğitimine yansımalarına yer verilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZTÜRK, N., AKYOL, G., YÜKSEL, B. T. (2022). How Do Preservice Science Teachers’ Personal Epistemological Beliefs Differ for Different Levels of Nature of Science Views?. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 23 - Sayı: 1, 1042–1090. https://ajindex.com/articles/390009

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2001). Embedding nature of science instruction in preservice elementary science courses: Abandoning scientism, but. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 12, 215–233.
  2. 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, 15–42.
  3. 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(4), 417–436.
  4. 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.
  5. Aikenhead, G., Ryan, A. & Fleming, R. (1989). Views on science–technology–society (from CDN.mc.5). Saskatoon, Canada: Department of Curriculum Studies, University of Saskatchewan. Akerson, V. L. & Buzzelli, C. A. (2007). Relationships of preservice early childhood teachers’ cultural values, ethical and cognitive developmental levels, and views of nature of science. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 19(1), 15–24.
  6. Akerson, V. L., Buzzelli, C. A. & Donnelly, L. A. (2008). Early childhood teachers’ views of nature of science: The influence of intellectual levels, cultural values, and explicit reflective teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(6), 748–770. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20236
  7. Akerson, V. L., Morrison, J. A. & Roth McDuffie, A. (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
  8. Assessment, Selection and Placement Center. (2018). Number of students and teaching stuff according to educational institutions for the 2017–2018 academic year. Ankara: OSYM. Retrieved from https://istatistik.yok.gov.tr/
  9. Aydın, S. & Çakıroğlu, J. (2010). Teachers’ views related to the new science and technology curriculum: Ankara case. Elementary Education Online, 9(1), 301–315.
  10. Bang, M. & Medin, D. (2010). Cultural processes in science education: Supporting the navigation of multiple epistemologies. Science Education, 94(6), 1008–1026. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20392
  11. Bartlett, M. S. (1954). A note on the multiplying factors for various chi square approximations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Soc