Abstract
Many nature of science (NOS) studies have demonstrated that teachers can improve their understandings of NOS with explicit and reflective instruction; however, the field has relied heavily on qualitative methods. Because qualitative studies can be difficult to compare across studies and contexts, our study sought to determine if a quantitative instrument, Students’ Understanding of Science and Scientific Inquiry (SUSSI) (Liang et al., 2008), could detect differences in NOS understandings that might make large studies and comparisons across studies easier. This study investigated changes in 60 elementary teachers’ NOS views during a year-long extensive science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) professional development program designed for elementary teachers. We found four NOS constructs (Social and Cultural, Collaborative, Creative and Imagination, and Scientific Method) out of the eight on the SUSSI had an acceptable Cronbach’s alpha values and we found that quantitative assessment could detect interesting differences in participants’ NOS views from pre- to post-assessment.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Change history
20 April 2021
The original version of this article unfortunately contained typesetting mistake. One of the references still reads "Authors 2019" and should be corrected to "Kruse et al. 2019". This version is now updated reflecting the correct bibliographic information.
References
Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Akerson, V. L. (2004). Learning as conceptual change: factors mediating the development of preservice elementary teachers’ views of nature of science. Science Education, 88(5), 785–810.
Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Akerson, V. L. (2009). The influence of metacognitive training on preservice elementary teachers’ conceptions of nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 31(16), 2161–2184.
Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving science teachers' conceptions of nature of science: a critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 665–701.
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.
Akerson, V. L., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. S. (2005). “How should i know what scientists do?—I am just a kid”: fourth-grade students’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 17(1), 1–11.
Akerson, V. L., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Influence of a reflective explicit activity-based approach on elementary teachers’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(4), 295–317.
Akerson, V. L., Cullen, T. A., & Hanson, D. L. (2009). Fostering a community of practice through a professional development program to improve elementary teachers’ views of nature of science and teaching practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(10), 1090–1113.
Akerson, V. L., & Hanuscin, D. L. (2007). Teaching nature of science through inquiry: results of a 3-year professional development program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(5), 653–680.
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.
Akerson, V. L., Weiland, I., Rogers, M. P., Pongsanon, K., & Bilican, K. (2014). Exploring elementary science methods course contexts to improve preservice teachers’ NOS of science conceptions and understandings of NOS teaching strategies. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 10(6), 647–665.
Allchin, D. (2011). Evaluating knowledge of the nature of (whole) science. Science Education, 95(3), 518–542.
American Association for the Advancement of Sciences [AAAS]. (1989). Science for all Americans: Project 2061. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Bell, R. L., Matkins, J. J., & Gansneder, B. M. (2011). Impacts of contextual and explicit instruction on preservice elementary teachers’ understandings of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(4), 414–436.
Bell, R. L., Mulvey, B. K., & Maeng, J. L. (2016). Outcomes of nature of science instruction along a context continuum: preservice secondary science teachers’ conceptions and instructional intentions. International Journal of Science Education, 38(3), 493–520.
Capps, D., & Crawford, B. (2013). Inquiry-based instruction and teaching about nature of science: are they happening? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(3), 497–526.
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.
Clough, M. P. (2007). Teaching the nature of science to secondary and post-secondary students: questions rather than tenets. Pantaneto Forum, 25.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cofré, H., Núñez, P., Santibáñez, D., Pavez, J. M., Valencia, M., & Vergara, C. (2019). A critical review of students’ and teachers’ understandings of nature of science. Science & Education, 28, 205–248.
Dagher, Z. R., & Erduran, S. (2016). Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education. Science & Education, 25(1–2), 147–164.
Deniz, H., & Akerson, V. L. (2013). Examining the impact of a professional development program on elementary teachers’ views of nature of science and nature of scientific inquiry, and science teaching efficacy beliefs. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 17(3), 1–19.
Donnelly, L., & Argyle, S. (2011). Teachers’ willingness to adopt nature of science activities following a physical science professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22(6), 475–490.
Herman, B., & Clough, M. P. (2016). Teachers’ longitudinal NOS understanding after having completed a science teacher education program. International Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 14, 207–227.
Herman, B. C., Clough, M. P., & Olson, J. K. (2013). Teachers’ nature of science implementation practices 2-5 years after having completed an intensive science education program. Science Education, 97(2), 271–309.
Holliday, G., Lederman, J., & Lederman, N. (2014). “Wow! Look at that!”: discourse as a means to improve teachers’ science content learning in informal science institutions. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(8), 935–952.
Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2011). A family resemblance approach to the nature of science for science education. Science & Education, 20(7–8), 591–607.
Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2014). New directions for nature of science research. In International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (pp. 999–1021). Dordrecht: Springer.
Kaya, S. (2012). An examination of elementary and early childhood pre-service teachers’ nature of science views. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 581–585.
Kaya, E., Erduran, S., Aksoz, B., & Akgun, S. (2019). Reconceptualised family resemblance approach to nature of science in pre-service science teacher education. International Journal of Science Education, 41(1), 21–47.
Kruse, J., Kent-Schneider, I., Voss, S., Zacharski, K., & Rockefeller, M. (2020). Investigating the effect of NOS question type on students’ NOS responses. Research in Science Education, 1–18.
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.
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.
Liang, L. L., Chen, S., Chen, X., Kaya, O. N., Adams, A. D., Macklin, M., & Ebenezer, J. (2008). Assessing preservice elementary teachers views on the nature of scientific knowledge. A dual response instrument. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 9(1), 1–20.
McComas, W. F. (2004). Keys to teaching the nature of science. Science Teacher, 71(9), 24–27.
Mesci, G., & Schwartz, R. (2017). Changing preservice science teachers’ views of nature of science: why some conceptions may be more easily altered than others. Research in Science Education, 47(2), 329–351.
National Research Council [NRC]. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: for states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Nunnally, J., & Bernstein, I. H. (1967). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill Higher, Inc..
Shim, M. K., Young, B. J., & Paolucci, J. (2010). Elementary teachers’ views on the nature of scientific knowledge: a comparison of inservice and preservice teachers. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 14(2).
Ward, G. G., & Haigh, M. (2017). Challenges and changes: developing teachers’ and initial teacher education students’ understandings of the nature of science. Research in Science Education, 47(6), 1233–1254.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Edgerly, H.S., Kruse, J.W. & Wilcox, J.L. Quantitatively Investigating Inservice Elementary Teachers’ Nature of Science Views. Res Sci Educ 52, 1467–1480 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-021-09993-7
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-021-09993-7