Research Matters - to the Science Teacher
No 9004 March 1, 1990
Improving Students' Understanding of the Nature of
Science
Norman Lederman, Professor of Science Education,
Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR
Introduction
Scientific literacy is a primary aim for science education in the
1980's. An important component of scientific literacy is an adequate
conception of the nature of science. Three decades of research on
students' conceptions of the nature of science-the values,
assumptions, and processes upon which scientific knowledge is
based-have given us little more than the knowledge that we are
unhappy with the conceptions possessed by our students. Researchers
have assumed that a significant positive relationship exists between
teachers' conceptions and changes in students' conceptions. This
assumption has remained virtually untested.
The initial purpose of this research was to assess the validity of
the assumption that teachers' and students' conceptions are
significantly related. Secondly, and most importantly, this research
identifies classroom variables that are related to changes in
students' conceptions of science.
Method
For this study 18 senior high school biology teachers and their
students were selected randomly from nine public schools. All
instruction followed the New York State Regents biology syllabus
which is college preparatory in its orientation. Both teachers and
students were tested on the "Nature of Scientific Knowledge Scale"
before and after instruction. This scale measures a respondent's
conception of the nature of scientific knowledge. In addition,
intensive qualitative classroom observations were made in each of the
classrooms between pre-and posttests. Subsequent analysis of
classroom transcripts permitted both qualitative and quantitative
comparisons between classrooms showing large changes in students'
conceptions and those showing little change.
Results and Conclusions
Correlations between teachers' and students' Nature of Scientific
Knowledge scores were low and did not support the contention that
changes in students' conceptions of science are related to their
teachers' conception of the nature of science. This result does not
imply that a teacher is able to teach what he/she does not
understand, but rather that beyond some essential level of knowledge
or understanding a teacher's viewpoint is not significantly related
to change in students' viewpoints. This reinforces the importance of
teacher behavior and classroom climate with respect to
students outcomes. Indeed, it invites the question asked by the major
portion of this research: What classroom variables are related to
changes in students' conceptions of science?
We have called teachers/classrooms that showed large conceptual
changes by students successful. We found that they had frequent
inquiry-oriented questioning with little emphasis on rote
memory/recall and seat work. Teachers in these classrooms were
pleasant, supportive, and frequently used humor and anecdotes to
promote instruction and establish a healthy rapport. As might be
expected, successful classrooms were more often characterized by
attentive students who were actively engaged with materials and
subject matter. Explicit comments by teachers concerning the
tentative, testable, and amoral aspects of scientific knowledge were
common. Successful teachers/classrooms appeared to stress depth,
breadth, and accuracy of content more often that the unsuccessful
teachers/classrooms.
Implications for Science Education
The lack of a significant relationship between teachers'
conceptions of science and changes in students' viewpoints clearly
directs attention to the importance of a teacher's classroom behavior
and the classroom atmosphere he/she establishes. Although teachers
have been criticized in the past for failure to promote adequate
student conceptions of science and are currently being rather
strongly urged to do so, they have not been offered any useful advice
on how to accomplish such an important goal.
An interesting issue is raised when one considers the current
interplay between the "back to basics" and "scientific literacy"
movements. Researchers have commented on the positive effects of
drill and emphasis on lower-level understandings with respect to
simple/concrete student understandings consistent with the intent of
the "back to basics" movement. However, attention to drill and
lower-level understandings were found in this study to be detrimental
to students' conception of science, while stress on higher level
understandings and inquiry were strongly associated with changes in
students' conceptions of science. Since an adequate understanding of
the nature of science is an attribute of the scientifically literate
individuals the situation is ironic. The current educational
atmosphere is placing stress on achieving both content outcomes and
the more abstract "nature of science" outcomes, but it appears that
different teaching techniques are needed for these outcomes. Since
teachers are often evaluated on the basis of students' scores on
achievement tests which predominantly measure lower-level knowledge,
the plea for increased student scientific literacy may be asking for
the accomplishment of the impossible!
It is clear that teachers who want to increase students'
understanding of the nature of science and thus increase their
scientific literacy must pay careful attention to what they say and
do in the classroom and to the kind of classroom climate they
establish. It is not enough for a teacher to have an adequate concept
of the nature of science; he or she must communicate it to
students.
Research Matters - to the Science Teacher
is a publication of the National Association
for Research in Science Teaching
|