Cover Image

Comparing Effects of Two Different Explicit–Reflective Instructions on Pre-School Prospective Teachers’ View about Nature of Science and Scientific Knowledge

Mustafa Metin

Abstract


This study aims to compare the effect of formative assessment with explicit-reflective instruction and explicit-reflective on pre-school prospective teachers' views about the nature of science and scientific knowledge. In this study, it was used a pretest-posttest nonequivalent control group design and the sample of the study consists of 66 pre-school prospective teachers in the 2nd grade. There are 33 of them were assigned control group and the others were assigned as the experimental group. Since the students could not be randomly grouped in the study, a quasi-experimental design was used. In this study, the nature of science scale (NOSS) and the attitude scale towards scientific knowledge (SKS) were used as pre-test, post-test and retention test.  In order to teach the students by using nature of science (NOS) and scientific knowledge (SK), open-reflective instruction was used in the control group, and open-reflective instruction and embedded formative assessment were applied in the experimental group. NOSS and SKS were used as a pre-test, post-test and retention-test in this study. In order to teach the students NOSS and SK, while Explicit-reflective instruction was applied in the control group, formative assessment embedded with Explicit-reflective instruction was applied experimental group.As a result of the study, it was determined that the formative assessment embedded with Explicit-reflective instruction was more positively and permanently changed on pre-school prospective teachers' view about NOS and SK than the other method


Full Text:

Download PDF

References


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(4), 417-436.

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, 665–701.

Akerson, V. L., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2005). How should I know what scientists do?—I am just a kid: Fourth grade students’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 17, 1–11.

Akerson, V. L., & Hanuscin D. L. (2007). Teaching nature of science through inquiry: Results of a 3-year professional development program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(5), 653–680.

Akerson, V. L., & Volrich, M. (2006). Teaching nature of science explicitly in a first grade internship setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 377-394.

Altındağ, C., (2010). Öğretmen adaylarına bilimin doğasını öğretmeye yönelik bir çalışma [A study to teach pre-service teachers the nature of science]. (Unpublished Master's Thesis). Pamukkale Üniversitesi Fen Bilimler Enstitütüsü, Denizli.

Ali, I., & Iqbal, M. H. (2013). Effect of formative assessment on students’ achievement in science. World Applied Sciences Journal, 26(5), 677-687.

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

Assessment for Learning Assessment Reform Group (ALARG). (2002). Pamphlet assessment for learning–beyond the Black Box. Retrieved from http://www.assessment-reform-group.org.uk

Ayvacı, H. Ş. (2007). Bilimin doğasının sınıf öğretmeni adaylarına kütle çekim konusu içerisinde farklı yaklaşımlarla öğretilmesine yönelik bir çalışma [A study on teaching the nature of science to prospective classroom teachers with different approaches within the subject of gravity]. (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Trabzon.

Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2004). Working inside the black box: Assessment for learning in the classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(1), 8-21.

Black, P., & William, D. (1998a). Inside the Black Box, raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139-148.

Black, P., & William, D. (1998b). Assessment and classroom learning, Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7-75.

Black, P., & William, D. (2002). Improved standards achieved by transforming assessment for learning. News Archive: Kings College London.

Black, P., & William, D. (2004). The formative purpose: assessment must first promote learning. In M. Wilson (Ed.), Towards coherence between classroom assessment and accountability (pp. 20–50). Chicago, IL: National Society for the Study of Education.

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment. Evaluation and Accountability, 21, 5–31.

Bell, B., & Cowie, B. (2001). The characteristics of formative assessment in science education. Science education, 85(5), 536-553.

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.

Biggs, J. B., & Watkins, D. (1996). Classroom Learning: Educational Psychology for the Asian Teacher. New York: Prentice-Hall.

Bonner, J. J. (2005). Which scientific method should we teach & When?. The American Biology Teacher, 67(5): 262-264.

Brookhart, M. S. (2001). Successful students’ formative and summative uses of assessment information. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 8(2), 153-169.

Bryant, S., & Timmins, A. (2002). Portfolio Assessment: An Instructional Guide (2nd edition). Hong Kong: Department of Curriculum & Instruction, HKIEd, Childers.

Bybee, R. W. (1997). Achieving scientific literacy: From purposed to practices. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Clarke S. (2001). Unlocking formative assessment: practical strategies for enhancing pupil’s learning in the primary classroom. London: Hodder & Stoughton Educational.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.

Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Crooks, T. J. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research, 58(4): 438-481.

DeBoer, G. E. (2000). Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 582–601.

Deniz, H., & Adibelli, E. (2015). Exploring how second grade elementary teachers translate their nature of science views into classroom practice after a graduate a level nature of science course. Research in Science Education, 45(6): 867-888.

Eş, H., & Sarıkaya, M. (2010). İlköğretim 6.sınıf fen ve teknoloji dersi “yaşamımızdaki elektrik” ünitesi kazanımları ile ilgili öğretmen görüşlerinin değerlendirilmesi [Evaluation of teachers' opinions about the achievements of the unit "electricity in our lives" in the 6th grade science and technology lesson in primary education.]. EJournal of New World Sciences Academy Education Sciences, 6(1), 32-45.

Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education. NewYork: McGraw-Hill.

Gallagher, J. J. (2000). Teaching for understanding and application of science knowledge. School Science and Mathematics, 100(6), 310-318.

Gess-Newsome, J. (2002). The use and ımpact of explicit ınstruction about the nature of science and science ınquiry in an elementary science methods course. Science & Education, 11, 55–67.

Gipps, C. (1994). Beyond testing: towards a theory of educational assessment. London: The Falmer Press.

Güneş, M. H., & Karaşah, Ş. (2016). Geçmişten günümüze fen eğitiminin önemi ve fen eğitiminde son yıllarda yapılan çalışmalar [The importance of science education from past to present and studies in science education in recent years]. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 5(3), 122-136.

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

Harlen, W., Brand, J., & Brown, R. (2003). Enhancing inquiry through formative assessment. San Francisco, CA: Exploratorium.

Harlen, W. & James, M. (1997), assessment and learning: differences and relationships between formative and summative assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 4(3): 365 –379.

Judd, C. M., Smith, E. R., & Kidder, L. H. (1991). Research methods in social relations (International Edition). Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Kang, S., Scharmann, L. C. & Noh, T. (2005). Examining students' views on the nature of science: results from Korean 6th, 8th, and 10th graders. Science Education, 89(2005, 314-334.

Keeley, P., Eberle, F., & Farrin, L. (2005). Uncovering student ıdeas in science, 25 formative assessment probes. California: Corwin & NSTA Press.

Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick. (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(7), 551–578.

Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4),331–359.

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.

Llewellyn, D. (2002). Inquiry within: implementing inquiry-based science standards. USA: Corwinn Pres, Inc. A Sage Publications Company.

McComas, W. F. (1998). The principal elements of the nature of science: Dispelling the myths. In W. F. McComas (Eds.). The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 53–70). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

McComas, W. F., Clough, M. P., & Almazora, H. (1998).The role and character of the nature of science in science education. In W. F. McComas (Eds.). The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 3–39). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Meline, T., & Wang, B. (2004). Effect-size reporting practices in AJSLP and other ASHA journals, 1999-2003. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 13, 202-207.

Metin, M. (2014). Okul öncesi dönemde fen eğitiminde ölçme değerlendirme [Assessment and evaluation in pre-school science education]. In M. Metin, & Ç. Şahin (Ed.) Örnek uygulamalarla okul öncesi dönemde fen eğitimi [Science education in pre-school period with sample applications], pp. 321-350. Ankara: Pegema Publishing.

Metin, M., & Birişçi, S. (2009). Biçimlendirici değerlendirmenin öğretmen adaylarının bilimsel süreç becerilerini geliştirmeye etkisi ve adayların değerlendirme hakkındaki düşünceleri [The effect of formative assessment on improving pre-service science teachers' scientific process skills and their thoughts on assessment.]. Çağdaş Eğitim Dergisi, 34(370), 31-39.

Metin, M., & Özmen, H. (2010). Biçimlendirici değerlendirmeye yönelik öğretmen adaylarının düşünceleri [Pre-service teachers' thoughts on formative assessment]. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 187, 293-310.

Mıhladız, G., & Doğan, A. (2017). Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Bilimin Doğası Konusundaki Pedagojik Alan Bilgilerinin Araştırılması [Investigation of Science Teacher Candidates' Pedagogical Content Knowledge on the Nature of Science]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 32(2), 380-395.

Moss, D. M., Abrams, E. D., & Robb, J. (2001). Examining student conception of the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 23(8), 771-790.

National Research Council (NRC). (1996). In M. S. E. Board (Ed.), Mathematics and science education around the world: What can we learn survey of mathematics and science opportunities (SMSO) and the third international mathematics and science study (TIMSS)?. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Science Teachers Association (NSTA). (2000). NSTA position statement: The nature of science. Retrieved March 18, 2003, from www.nsta.org/159&psid=22

Önen Öztürk, F. (2019). Fen Bilimleri Öğretmen Adaylarının Hazırladığı Bilim Tarihi Temelli Dramaların İncelenmesi [Analysis of Science History-Based Dramas Prepared by Science Teacher Candidates]. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi , 32(2).

Özgelen, S. (2013). Bilimin doğası ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi [Development of the nature of science scale]. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 21(2), 711-736.

Prima, E. C., Utari, S., Chandra, D. T., Hasanah, L., & Rusdiana, D. (2018). Heat and temperature experiment designs to support students' conception of the nature of science. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 8(4), 453-472. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse

Pomeroy, D. (1993). Implications of teachers’ beliefs about the nature of science: Comparison of the beliefs of scientists, secondary science teachers, and elementary teachers. Science Education, 77(3), 261–278.

Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research in science education. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Erlbaum Publishers.

Ryan, A. G., & Aikenhead, G. S. (1992). Students’ preconceptions about the epistemology of science. Science Education, 76, 559–580.

Stiggins, R. J. & Conklin, N. (1992). In Teachers’ Hands: Investigating the Practices of Classroom Assessment. State University of New York Press.

Torrance, H., & Pryor, J. (1998). Investigating Formative Assessment: Teaching, Learning and Assessment in the Classroom. Philadelphia: Open University Press.

Yıldırım, H. H. & Yıldırım, S. (2011). Hipotez testi, güven aralığı, etki büyüklüğü ve merkezi olmayan olasılık dağılımları üzerine [On hypothesis testing, confidence interval, effect size and decentralized probability distributions]. İlköğretim Online, 10(3), 1112-1123.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.17509/jsl.v5i1.33190

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Copyright (c) 2022 Mustafa Metin

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.


Published by Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
in collaboration with the Indonesian Society of Science Educators
2021