Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Examining the Representations of NOS in Educational Resources

An Analysis of Lesson Plans Aligned with the Next Generation Science Standards

  • SI: nature of science
  • Published:
Science & Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Researchers have raised concerns about teachers’ ability to embed nature of science (NOS) in their science instruction, a complicated situation that is certainly impacted by the availability of adequate resources to assist K-12 science teachers. In light of the implementation of the ideas from the Framework for K-12 Science Education and the Next Generation Science Standards in the USA, this study sought to identify and evaluate resources aimed at guiding NOS instruction. A search of the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) database for Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS)-aligned instructional resources resulted in an analytical sample of eight lessons. All materials accompanying these lessons were analyzed for their representations of 10 NOS aspects. The evaluation of these materials revealed a prevalence of implicit, naïve representations in the sample lessons (60.4% of all NOS aspects addressed). Examination of the connections to NOS in these lessons leads to a set of recommendations to improve the quantity and quality of NOS representations in future NGSS-aligned instructional resources. The analytical approach used and the issues raised about the presentation and treatment of NOS in precollege lessons are of interest to the broader science education community.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The term “inquiry” is largely absent from the Framework and the NGSS. Anderson (2016) explained that the range of meanings ascribed to the term and its narrow interpretation (equating use of the term inquiry to “The Scientific Method”) in American precollege settings as contributing to this shift.

  2. The NGSS@NSTA curators include both classroom teachers and NGSS writers identified through a competitive application process. They receive regular training and use the EQuIP rubric to evaluate resources and offer exemplars of both the kinds of resources American educators now need and the process by which educators can take existing materials and adjust them to support NGSS instruction (NSTA, 2014).

  3. Connections between specific performances expectations and NOS can be seen when reviewing the NGSS in text (NGSS Lead States 2013) or online (e.g., www.ngss.nsta.org); however, these connections would not relate to a specific resource, contain limited information to help teachers convey these NOS ideas, and require additional effort on the part of the teacher.

References

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2014). The evolving landscape related to assessment of nature of science. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (2nd ed., pp. 621–650). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: a critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 665–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., Waters, M., & Le, A. (2008). Representations of nature of science in high school chemistry textbooks over the past four decades. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(7), 835–855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., Belarmino, J., Brunner, J., Le, A., Myers, J. Y., Summers, R., Wahbeh, N., Waight, N., Waters, M., & Zeineddin, A. (2017a). A longitudinal analysis of the prominence and representations of nature of science in U.S. high school chemistry, biology, and physics textbooks. In C. McDonald & F. Abd-El-Khalick (Eds.), Representations of nature of science in school science textbooks: global perspectives. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., Myers, J. Y., Summers, R., Brunner, J., Waight, N., Wahbeh, N., Zeineddin, A., & Belarmino, J. (2017b). A longitudinal analysis of the extent and manner of representations of nature of science in U.S. high school biology and physics textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(1), 82–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akerson, V. L., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. S. (2003). Teaching elements of nature of science: a year long case study of a fourth grade teacher. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 1025–1049.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akerson, V. L., Weiland, I. S., Pongsanon, K., & Nargund, V. (2011). Evidence-based strategies for teaching nature of science to young children. Journal of Kırşehir Education, 11(4), 61–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akerson, V. L., Weiland, I. S., Nargund-Joshi, V., & Pongsanon, K. (2014). Becoming an elementary teacher of nature of science: lessons learned for teaching elementary science. In Science teacher educators as K-12 teachers (pp. 71–87). Dordrecht, Springer.

  • Allchin, D. (2013). Teaching the nature of science. Perspectives and resources. St. Paul: SHiPS Education Press.

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1990). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science (n.d.-a). Fossils 1: fossils and dinosaurs. Retrieved 7 April 2018 http://sciencenetlinks.com/lessons/fossils-1-fossils-and-dinosaurs/.

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science (n.d.-b). Fossils 2: uncovering the facts. Retrieved 7 April 2018 http://sciencenetlinks.com/lessons/fossils-2-uncovering-the-facts/.

  • American Geosciences Institute (n.d.). What can fossil footprints tell us?. Retrieved 7 April 2018 https://www.americangeosciences.org/education/k5geosource/activities/investigations/fossils/what-can-fossil-footprints-tell-us.

  • Anderson, K. J. M. (2016). Changes in how we see scientific inquiry [Blog post]. Retrieved 6 June 2018 from http://www.nstacommunities.org/blog/2016/09/15/changes-in-how-we-see-scientific-inquiry/.

  • Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1996). Reform by the book: what is—or might be—the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform? Educational Researcher, 25(9), 6–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartos, S. A., & Lederman, N. G. (2014). Teachers’ knowledge structures for nature of science and scientific inquiry: conceptions and classroom practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(9), 1150–1184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, R. L., Lederman, N. G., & Abd‐El‐Khalick, F. (2000). Developing and acting upon one's conception of the nature of science: A follow‐up study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(6), 563–581.

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biointeractive, Howard Hughes Medical Institute (n.d.). The day the Mesozoic died. Retrieved 7 April 2018 https://www.hhmi.org/biointeractive/day-mesozoic-died.

  • Brunner, J. L., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2017). Representations of nature of science in US elementary science trade books. In Representations of nature of science in school science textbooks (pp. 147–163). New York: Routledge.

  • Bybee, R. W. (2014). NGSS and the next generation of science teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25, 211–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Capps, D. K., & Crawford, B. A. (2013). Inquiry-based instruction and teaching about nature of science: are they happening? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24, 497–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clough, M. P. (2008). Teaching the nature of science to secondary and post-secondary students: questions rather than tenets. California Journal of Science Education, 8(2), 31–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, E. A., & Krajcik, J. S. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34(3), 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demirdöğen, B., Hanuscin, D. L., Uzuntiryaki-Kondakci, E., & Köseoğlu, F. (2016). Development and nature of preservice chemistry teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for nature of science. Research in Science Education, 46, 575–612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flammer, L. (2014). Science surprises. Indianapolis: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanuscin, D. L., Lee, M. H., & Akerson, V. L. (2011). Elementary teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for teaching the nature of science. Science Education, 95(1), 145–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herman, B. C., Clough, M. P., & Olson, J. K. (2013). Association between experienced teachers’ NOS implementation and reform-based practices. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(7), 1077–1102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D., & Wong, S. L. (2017). Going beyond the consensus view: broadening and enriching the scope of NOS-oriented curricula. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 17(1), 3–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hottecke, D., & Silva, C. C. (2011). Why implementing history and philosophy in school science education is a challenge: an analysis of obstacles. Science & Education, 20(3–4), 293–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Integrated Teaching and Learning Program, College of Engineering, University of Colorado Boulder (2018). Dinosaur breath. Retrieved 7 April 2018 https://www.teachengineering.org/activities/view/cub_carbon_lesson01_activity1.

  • Kampourakis, K. (2016). The “general aspects” conceptualization as a pragmatic and effective means to introducing students to nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(5), 667–682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karisan, D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2017). Contextualization of nature of science within the socioscientific issues framework: a review of research. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 5(2), 139–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khishfe, R. (2012). Nature of science and decision-making. International Journal of Science Education, 34(1), 67–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khishfe, R. (2013). Transfer of nature of science understandings into similar contexts: promises and possibilities of an explicit reflective approach. International Journal of Science Education, 35(17), 2928–2953.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry oriented instruction on sixth-graders’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 551–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khishfe, R., & Lederman, N. (2006). Teaching nature of science within a controversial topic: integrated versus nonintegrated. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 395–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krajcik, J., Codere, S., Dahsah, C., Bayer, R., & Mun, K. (2014). Planning instruction to meet the intent of the next generation science standards. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(2), 157–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: past, present, and future. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 831–879). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (1998). Avoiding de-natured science: activities that promote understandings of the nature of science. In W. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: rationales and strategies. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

  • Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. (2014a). Is nature of science going, going, going, gone? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25, 235–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. (2014b). Research on teaching and learning of nature of science. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (2nd ed., pp. 600–620). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, H.-S., & Chen, C.-C. (2002). Promoting preservice chemistry teachers’ understanding about the nature of science through history. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(9), 773–792.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lombard, M., Snyder-Duch, J., & Bracken, C. C. (2002). Content analysis in mass communication research: An assessment and reporting of intercoder reliability. Human Communication Research, 28, 587–604.

  • McComas, W. F. (Ed.). (2000). The nature of science in science education rationales and strategies. The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • McComas, W., & Nouri, N. (2016). The nature of science and the next generation science standards: analysis and critique. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 1–22.

  • National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences (2016). Climate change: a human health perspective. Retrieved 7 April 2018 https://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/assets/docs_a_e/climate_change_and_human_health_lesson_plan_a_508.pdf.

  • National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Teachers Association. (2000). NSTA position statement: the nature of science. Retrieved August 1, 2015 from http:///www.nsta.org/.

  • NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niaz, M. (2016). History and philosophy of science as a guide to understanding nature of science. Revista Científica, 1(24).

  • Okeanos Explorer Education Materials Collection, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (n.d.). The methane circus. Retrieved 7 April 2018 https://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/okeanos/edu/lessonplans/media/09methanecircus.pdf.

  • Oliveira, A. W., Akerson, V. L., Colak, H., Pongsanon, K., & Genel, A. (2012). The implicit communication of nature of science and epistemology during inquiry discussion. Science Education, 96(4), 652–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, J. K. (2018). The inclusion of the nature of science in nine recent international science education standards documents. Science & Education, 27(7–8), 637–660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J. (2017). Going beyond the consensus view: a response. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 17(1), 53–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • PBS Learning Media (n.d.). Plate tectonics. Retrieved 7 April 2018. https://prairiepublic.pbslearningmedia.org/resource/ess05.sci.ess.earthsys.lp_platetectonics/plate-tectonics/#.WvRvFKKGOAQ.

  • Peters, E. E. (2009). Developing content knowledge in students through explicit teaching of the nature of science: influences of goal setting and self-monitoring. Science & Education, 21(6), 881–898.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roblin, N. P., Schunn, C., & McKenney, S. (2018). What are critical features of science curriculum materials that impact student and teacher outcomes? Science Education, 102(2), 260–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudge, D. W., & Howe, E. M. (2009). An explicit and reflective approach to the use of history to promote understanding of the nature of science. Science & Education, 18(5), 561–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryder, J., & Banner, I. (2011). Multiple aims in the development of a major reform of the national curriculum for science in England. International Journal of Science Education, 33(5), 709–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T. D., Chambers, F. W., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). Student conceptualizations of the nature of science in response to a socioscientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 387–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sawchuk, S. (2018). Educators scramble for texts to match science standards. Education Week. Retrieved 6 June 2018 https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2018/06/06/educators-scramble-for-texts-to-match-science.html.

  • Wahbeh, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2014). Revisiting the translation of nature of science understandings into instructional practice: teachers’ nature of science pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 36, 425–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2018). Ambitious science teaching. Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yacoubian, H. A., & BouJaoude, S. (2010). The effect of reflective discussions following inquiry-based laboratory activities on students’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(10), 1229–1252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Teaching, Leadership, and Professional Practice, University of North Dakota, 338 Education, 231 Centennial Dr Stop 7189, Grand Forks, ND, 58202-7189, USA

    Ryan Summers

  2. School of Education, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

    Fouad Abd-El-Khalick

Authors
  1. Ryan Summers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fouad Abd-El-Khalick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ryan Summers.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Summers, R., Abd-El-Khalick, F. Examining the Representations of NOS in Educational Resources. Sci & Educ 28, 269–289 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-018-0018-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-018-0018-4

Search

Navigation