This study investigated the influence of an explicit and reflective inquiry‐oriented compared with an implicit inquiry‐oriented instructional approach on sixth graders' understandings of nature of science (NOS). The study emphasized the tentative, empirical, inferential, and imaginative and creative NOS. Participants were 62 sixth‐grade students in two intact groups. The intervention or explicit group was engaged in inquiry activities followed by reflective discussions of the target NOS aspects. The comparison or implicit group was engaged in the same inquiry activities. However, these latter activities included no explicit references to or discussion of any NOS aspects. Engagement time was balanced for both groups. An open‐ended questionnaire in conjunction with semistructured interviews was used to assess participants' NOS views before and at the conclusion of the intervention, which spanned 2.5 months. Before the intervention, the majority of participants in both groups held naive views of the target NOS aspects. The views of the implicit group participants were not different at the conclusion of the study. By comparison, substantially more participants in the explicit group articulated more informed views of one or more of the target NOS aspects. Thus, an explicit and reflective inquiry‐oriented approach was more effective than an implicit inquiry‐oriented approach in promoting participants' NOS conceptions. These results do not support the intuitively appealing assumption that students would automatically learn about NOS through engagement in science‐based inquiry activities. Developing informed conceptions of NOS is a cognitive instructional outcome that requires an explicit and reflective instructional approach. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 39: 551–578, 2002

This study investigated the influence of two different explicit instructional approaches in promoting more informed understandings of nature of science (NOS) among students. Participants, a total of 42 students, comprised two groups in two intact sections of ninth grade. Participants in the two groups were taught environmental science by their regular classroom teacher, with the difference being the context in which NOS was explicitly taught. For the “integrated” group, NOS instruction was related to the science content about global warming. For the “nonintegrated” group, NOS was taught through a set of activities that specifically addressed NOS issues and were dispersed across the content about global warming. The treatment for both groups spanned 6 weeks and addressed a unit about global warming and NOS. An open‐ended questionnaire, in conjunction with semistructured interviews, was used to assess students' views before and after instruction. Results showed improvements in participants' views of NOS regardless of whether NOS was integrated within the regular content about global warming. Comparison of differences between the two groups showed “slightly” greater improvement in the informed views of the integrated group participants. On the other hand, there was greater improvement in the transitional views of the nonintegrated group participants. Therefore, the overall results did not provide any conclusive evidence in favor of one approach over the other. Implications on the teaching and learning of NOS are discussed. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 43: 395–418, 2006

No abstract

No abstract

The study investigated the relationship of high school students' understandings about nature of science (NOS) aspects and their argumentation skills in relation to two controversial socioscientific issues. The study was conducted in five schools selected from different geographical areas in Beirut, Lebanon. Participants were 219 grade 11 students. Students in all the schools were administered a survey that consisted of two scenarios that addressed the controversial socioscientific issues about genetically modified food and water fluoridation. The two scenarios were followed by questions relating to argumentation and NOS. The study used a mixed methods approach where quantitative and qualitative measures were employed. Analysis involved participants' views of the target NOS aspects (subjective, tentative, and empirical) and their argumentation components (argument, counterargument, and rebuttal). The Pearson analyses showed strong correlations between the counterargument, compared to argument and rebuttal, and the three NOS aspects. Further, the chi‐square analyses showed significant differences in participants' argumentation skills and NOS understandings between the two scenarios. Qualitative data from questionnaires and interviews further confirmed these findings. Two central implications for the teaching of NOS and argumentation skills were discussed in terms of highlighting the role of counterarguments and considering contextual factors that involve issue exposure and familiarity, prior content knowledge, and personal relevance. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 49: 489–514, 2012