Prospective Teachers’ Perceptions of Science Theories: An Action Research Study

James P. Concannon, Patrick L. Brown, Erikka Brown

DuBray Middle School, St. Peters, USA.
Westminster College, Fulton, USA.

DOI: 10.4236/ce.2013.41011                

Abstract

This study investigates prospective teachers’ conceptions of science theories before and after instruction. Instruction focused specifically on prospective teachers’ misconceptions that theories are not used to predict, that laws are more important than theories, and that theories are simply hunches. The action research investigation was successful in helping students accommodate new information presented in the lesson and facilitated their understanding towards the accepted explanation of what a theory in science means; however, the vernacular misconception that “theories are hunches” persisted.

Keywords

Nature of Science; Theory; Prospective Teachers; Science Misconceptions

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	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, 417-436. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199807)82:4<417::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-E
[2]	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, 785-810. doi:10.1002/sce.10143
[3]	Abd-el-Khalik, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwarz, 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, 497-521. doi:10.1002/tea.10034
[4]	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, 295-317. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(200004)37:4<295::AID-TEA2>3.0.CO;2-2
[5]	Brophy, J., & Good, T. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.). New York: McMillan.
[6]	Bybee, R. W., Powell, J. C., & Trowbridge, L. W. (2008). Teaching secondary school science (9th ed.). Columbus, OH: Pearson Prentice Hall.
[7]	Center for Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Education (CSMEE). (1997). Science teaching reconsidered: A handbook. Washington DC: National Academies Press.
[8]	Clement, J., Brown, D. E., & Zietsman, A. (1989). Not all preconceptions are misconceptions: finding “anchoring” conceptions’ for grounding instruction on students’ intuitions. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 554-565. doi:10.1080/0950069890110507
[9]	Cochrane, B. (2003). Developing pre-service elementary teachers’ views of the nature of science (NOS): Examining the effectiveness of intervention types. Annual Meeting of the Association for the Education of Teachers of Science, St. Louis, MO: The Association for the Education of Teachers of Science.
[10]	Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
[11]	Driver, R., Squires, A., Rushworth, P., & Wood-Robinson, V. (1994). Making sense of secondary science: Research into children’s ideas. New York: Routledge Falmer.
[12]	Eaton, J. F., Anderson, C. W., & Smith, E. L. (1983). When students don’t know they don’t know. Science and Children, 20, 7-9.
[13]	Gess-Newsome, J. (2002). The use and impact of explicit instruction about the nature of science and science inquiry in and elementary science methods course. Science & Education, 11, 55-67. doi:10.1023/A:1013054823482
[14]	Keeley, P., Eberle, F., & Dorsey, C. (2008). Uncovering student ideas in science, volume 3: Another 25 formative assessment probes. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association.
[15]	Koenig, K., (Director), Koehler, D. (Producer), & Ingrao, A. (Assistant Producer) (2009). 400 years of the telescope: A journey of science, technology, and thought [television broadcast]. Red Lion, PA: Interstellar Studios Production, Public Broadcasting Service.
[16]	Kurdziel, J., & Libarkin, J. (2002). Research methodologies in science education: Students’ ideas about the nature of science. Journal of Geoscience Education, 50, 322-329.
[17]	Lederman, N. G. (1999). Teachers’ understanding of the nature of science and classroom practice: Factors that facilitate or impede the relationship. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 916-929.
[18]	Lemberger, J., Hewson, P. W., & Park, H. (1999). Relationship between prospective secondary teachers’ classroom practice and their conceptions of biology and of teaching science. Science Education, 83, 347-371. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199905)83:3<347::AID-SCE5>3.0.CO;2-Y
[19]	Liu, S., & Lederman, N. G. (2002). Taiwanese gifted students’ views of nature of science. School Science and Mathematics, 102, 114-123. doi:10.1111/j.1949-8594.2002.tb17905.x
[20]	McComas, W. F., Cox-Petersen, A., & Narguizian, P. (2001). The impact of experiential science learning on participants’ understanding of the nature of science. The Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, St. Louis, MO: National Association for Research in Science Teaching
[21]	Murcia, K., & Schibeci, R. (1999). Primary student teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 1123-1140. doi:10.1080/095006999290101
[22]	National Research Council (NRC) (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington DC: National Academies Press.
[23]	Nussbaum, J., & Novick, S. (1981). Brainstorming in the classroom to invent a model: A case study. School Science Review, 62, 771-778.
[24]	Osborne, R., Gilbert, J. K. (1980). A method for investigating concept understanding in science. European Journal of Science Education, 2, 311-321. doi:10.1080/0140528800020311
[25]	Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66, 211-227. doi:10.1002/sce.3730660207
[26]	Russell, T., & Martin, A. K. (2007). Learning to teach science. In S. Abell & N. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1151-1178). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[27]	Scharmann, L. C., & Smith, M. U. (2001). Further thoughts on defining versus describing the nature of science: A response to Niaz. Science Education, 85, 691-693. doi:10.1002/sce.1033
[28]	Smith, M. U., & Scharmann, L. C. (1999). Defining versus describing the nature of science: A pragmatic analysis for classroom teachers and science educators. Science Education, 83, 493-509. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199907)83:4<493::AID-SCE6>3.0.CO;2-U