Learning nature of science concepts through a research apprenticeship program: A comparative study of three approaches

Abstract

The merits of three approaches (explicit, reflective and implicit) to Nature of Science (NOS) teaching and learning in the context of a summer research experience on high school student participants' NOS ideas were explored in this study. The effectiveness of explicit over implicit approaches has been demonstrated in school contexts, but less empirical evidence exists regarding the comparative merits of these approaches when the practices that learners engage in are highly authentic in terms of their alignment with professional science and the context where they take place. The Authentic Experiences in Science Program (AESP), a summer program at a major research university, offered a unique context for an investigation of these issues. In the AESP, high school students worked for an extended period of time in a research laboratory on an authentic research project accompanied by out-of-laboratory seminars. A modified form of the Views of Nature of Science (VNOS) Questionnaire was administered to 30 participants of the AESP at the beginning and again at the end of the program. Additionally, six participants experiencing one of the three approaches were interviewed and observed as they participated in laboratory research. Results revealed that the explicit approach was generally more influential in this context. However, some students experiencing one of the other two approaches did exhibit changes in NOS understandings, and these changes seemed to be associated with favorable dimensions of the laboratory placements. These results support the argument that engaging students in highly authentic forms of scientific and engineering practices can be influential as a context for reflecting on NOS. Our results also speak to the power of explicit approaches to NOS teaching and learning when accompanying learner involvement in highly authentic science and engineering research. # 2015

Upper-level undergraduate chemistry students’ goals for their laboratory coursework

“…Another study suggests that reflection alone may not be sufficient to bring students’ goals into alignment with instructors’ goals. Instructors who wish their students to progress from the novice beliefs to expert‐like beliefs regarding the nature of science need to explicitly expose their students to their views in addition to student reflection; reflection alone was not enough to change students’ views (Burgin & Sadler, ).…”

Changing How We Teach Acid-Base Chemistry

“…As Burgin and Sadler ( 2016 ) mentioned, the prevalent model for teaching NoS in school has been referred to as the explicit/reflective approach (Lederman 2007 ). In this approach, the priority object of study is to teach the great consensus about the nature of science (tentativeness, creativity, ...) to avoid the main distorted views of science.…”

“…At the same time, in chemistry courses, some topics such as atomic structure, the periodic table, or acid-base are often introduced through their historical developments. This history of chemistry topics present in curricula allows the design of authentic scientific practices (implicit approach Burgin and Sadler 2016 ).…”

“A ton of faith in science!” Nature and role of assumptions in, and ideas about, science and epistemology generated upon watching a sci-fi film

“…Ideas about science include, but also are not limited to, conceptions of scientific content, views of scientific practices, and values and beliefs inherent to the development of scientific knowledge—that is, “NOS” (Lederman & Zeidler, ). For the purposes of this manuscript, the most pertinent NOS aspects regarding participant ideas about science (given our findings) include the following beliefs: (i) scientific claims rely upon empirical evidence (empirical NOS); (ii) scientists’ observations are always motivated by and acquire meaning in light of certain theoretical perspectives (theory‐laden NOS); (iii) scientific knowledge is reliable and durable, but never absolute or certain (tentative NOS); (iv) scientific theories are well‐established, highly substantiated, predictive, and internally consistent systems of explanation (nature of scientific theories); and (v) science affects and is affected by various cultural elements and spheres, including political factors and power structures (social and cultural embeddedness of science) (Abd‐El‐Khalick, ; Burgin & Sadler, ; Lederman, Abd‐El‐Khalick, Bell, & Schwartz, ). It must be stressed, however, that while we were mindful of these NOS aspects, we were also very cautious not to so readily confine our interpretation of participants’ ideas about science to any one targeted framework or domain in order to allow leeway for any personal, nuanced views from participants about science, whether tenable or not, to come to full actualization, especially during participant interviews.…”