nach oben

Technology, Knowledge and Learning

Erschienen in:

20.04.2024 | Original research

The Link Between Science Teacher Candidates’ Understandings of the Nature of Science and Their Epistemic Beliefs

verfasst von: Davut Sarıtaş, Oktay Kızkapan

Erschienen in: Technology, Knowledge and Learning | Ausgabe 3/2024

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Der Artikel geht der komplizierten Verbindung zwischen den epistemischen Überzeugungen der Kandidaten für naturwissenschaftliche Lehrtätigkeit und ihrem Verständnis des Wesens der Wissenschaft (NOS) nach. Sie beginnt mit der Definition epistemischer Überzeugungen und ihrer Bedeutung für die Bildung, insbesondere für die Förderung kritischen Denkens und wissenschaftlicher Kompetenz. Die Studie konzentriert sich auf das von Hofer und Pintrich vorgeschlagene mehrdimensionale epistemische Glaubensmodell, das Überzeugungen in Dimensionen wie Wissenssicherheit und Wissensbegründungen kategorisiert. Die Forschung zielt darauf ab, qualitativ zu untersuchen, wie diese Glaubenssätze das NOS-Verständnis von Pre-Service-Wissenschaftlern beeinflussen. Durch halbstrukturierte Interviews zeigt die Studie, dass viele Teilnehmer differenzierte epistemische Überzeugungen vertreten, die sie häufig mit Beispielen aus der Wissenschaft rechtfertigen. Die Ergebnisse deuten darauf hin, dass die allgemeinen epistemischen Überzeugungen der Teilnehmer eng mit ihrem Verständnis von NOS verknüpft sind, was darauf hindeutet, dass ihre Überzeugungen über Wissen und Wissen tief in ihren wissenschaftlichen Perspektiven verwurzelt sind. Der Artikel schließt mit der Betonung der Bedeutung des Verständnisses dieser Beziehung für die Verbesserung der naturwissenschaftlichen Ausbildung und schlägt weitere Forschungen vor, um die Kausalität zwischen epistemischen Überzeugungen und NOS zu untersuchen.

KI-Generiert

Diese Zusammenfassung des Fachinhalts wurde mit Hilfe von KI generiert.

Abstract

While the epistemic beliefs are defined as beliefs about knowledge and knowing, the nature of science (NOS) is about the epistemological and ontological foundations of science, how scientists work, how scientific knowledge is produced, how it is tested and validated and how society affects or reacts to science. In this study, the link between pre-service science teachers’ general epistemic beliefs (GEB) and their understanding of NOS was examined qualitatively. Hermeneutic phenomenological design was used in the study and the data were obtained from semi-structured interviews with five pre-service science teachers who participated voluntarily. In the analysis, the links of two different phenomena were reached from a single data set. As a result of the research, specific links were found between different types of general epistemic belief dimensions, which are mostly sophisticated, and NOS dimensions. These links were found to confirm many of the divergent relationships quantitatively identified in the literature. In addition, as an original result, it was seen that the relationships previously identified with quantitative methods could be qualitatively differentiated and some relationships not found in the literature could be possible. As a result of the study, it was determined that pre-service science teachers justified their beliefs with their understanding of science and scientific knowledge. When this case is analyses in the light of the literature, it can be explained by the possible influence of science which constitutes the context of the participants. It can be said that the participants approximated their general epistemic beliefs to scientific epistemology in the manner of domain-specific epistemic beliefs (DEB) and finally concretized them with statements emphasizing their understanding of NOS. Moreover, the results imply that participants can justify their developed epistemic beliefs through authorities, both personal and with reference to science, according to the epistemological nature of the knowledge implied. In this respect, the research proposes a testable scheme that reveals holistic connections between GEB and NOS. It also encourages further research into the possible direction of causality underlying the transitivity between GEB–DEB–NOS and scientific epistemological beliefs in its context.

Vorheriger Artikel Digital Teacher Training in the Portuguese National Plan for Digital Development at Schools: A Case Study

Nächster Artikel Tracing the Ontological Beliefs of Norwegian Educators Concerning Technology use in Early Childhood Education and Care

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Akerson, V. L. (2004). Learning as conceptual change: Factors that mediate the development of preservice elementary teachers’ views of nature of science. Science Education, 88(5), 785–810. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10143CrossRef

Adak, F., & Bakır, S. (2017). Science teachers and preservice science teachers’ scientific epistemological beliefs and opinions on the nature of science. Çukurova University Faculty of Education Journal, 46(1), 134–164. https://doi.org/10.14812/cuefd.309443CrossRef

Ağlarcı, O. (2014). The effect of teaching based on direct-reflective approach on chemistry teacher candidates’ views on the nature of science. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Marmara University, Institute of Educational Sciences.

Akerson, V., Buzzelli, C., & Donnelly, L. (2008). Early childhood teachers’ views of nature of science: The influence of intellectual levels, cultural values, and explicit reflective teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(6), 748–770. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20236CrossRef

Akerson, V. L., Carter, I., Pongsanon, K., & Nargund-Joshi, V. (2019). Teaching and learning nature of science in elementary classrooms. Science & Education, 28(3–5), 391–411. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00045-1CrossRef

Akerson, V. L., Morrison, J. A., & McDuffie, A. R. (2006). One course is not enough: Preservice elementary teachers’ retention of improved views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(2), 194–213. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20099CrossRef

Bejerano, M. J. M., Rada, B. G., Tabiolo, C. D. L., Cajocon, C. H. C., Cantonjos-Maglente, M. S., & Polinar, D. O. (2023). Exploring the connections between epistemological beliefs, worldviews, and psychological self-efficacy of preservice science teachers. Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities, 6(8s), 438–451.

Belotto, M. J. (2018). Data analysis methods for qualitative research: Managing the challenges of coding, interrater reliability, and thematic analysis. The Qualitative Report, 23(11), 2622–2633.

Boran, G. H. (2014). The effect of argumentation based science instruction on views of nature of science and epistemological beliefs. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Pamukkale University, Institute of Educational Sciences.

Borgerding, L., & Deniz, H. (2019). Nature of science views and epistemological views of college biology students. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 19, 290–303. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42330-019-00049-7CrossRef

Borgerding, L. A., Deniz, H., & Shevock, E. A. (2017). Evolution acceptance and epistemological views of college biology students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching., 54(4), 493–519. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.213740CrossRef

Buehl, M. M., Alexander, P. A., & Murphy, P. K. (2002). Beliefs about schooled knowledge: Domain specific or domain general? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27, 415–449. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.2001.1103CrossRef

Çetinkaya-Aydın, G., & Çakıroğlu, J. (2017). Learner characteristics and understanding nature of science. Science & Education, 26(7–9), 919–951. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-017-9939-6CrossRef

Chai, C. S., Deng, F., Wong, B., & Qian, Y. (2010). South China education majors’ epistemological beliefs and their conceptions of the nature of science. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 19(1), 111–125. https://doi.org/10.3860/taper.v19i1.1512

Chan, K. W., & Elliott, R. G. (2000). Exploratory study of epistemological beliefs of Hong Kong teacher education students: Resolving conceptual and empirical issues. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 28(3), 225. https://doi.org/10.1080/713650691CrossRef

Chappell, S. G. (2017). Plato. In S. Bernecker & K. Michaelian (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of philosophy of memory (pp. 385–395). Routledge.CrossRef

Chen, J. A., & Pajares, F. (2010). Implicit theories of ability of Grade 6 science students: Relation to epistemological beliefs and academic motivation and achievement in science. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(1), 75–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2009.10.003CrossRef

Cheng, M. M., Chan, K. W., Tang, S. Y., & Cheng, A. Y. (2009). Preservice teacher education students’ epistemological beliefs and their conceptions of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(2), 319–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.09.018CrossRef

Cho, M., Lankford, D. M., & Wescott, D. J. (2011). Exploring the relationships among epistemological beliefs, nature of science, and conceptual change in the learning of evolutionary theory. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 4(2), 313–322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12052-011-0324-7

Choung, H., Newman, T. P., & Stenhouse, N. (2020). The role of epistemic beliefs in predicting citizen interest and engagement with science and technology. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 10(3), 248–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2020.1774094CrossRef

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.

Çolak, H. (2009). Exploring the development of nature of science views and personal epistemologies of upper elementary and middle school students (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Indiana University, Department of Curriculum and Instruction.

Conley, A. M., Pintrich, P. R., Vekiri, I., & Harrison, D. (2004). Changes in epistemological beliefs in elementary science students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(2), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.01.004CrossRef

Conole, G., Dyke, M., Oliver, M., & Seale, J. (2004). Mapping pedagogy and tools for effective learning design. Computers and Education, 43(1–2), 17–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2003.12.018CrossRef

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.

Cullinane, A., & Erduran, S. (2023). Nature of science in preservice science teacher education–Case studies of Irish pre-service science teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 34(2), 201–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2022.2042978CrossRef

DeBacker, T. K., Crowson, H. M., Beesley, A. D., Thoma, S. J., & Hestevold, N. L. (2008). The challenge of measuring epistemic beliefs: An analysis of three self-report instruments. The Journal of Experimental Education, 76(3), 281–312. https://doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.76.3.281-314CrossRef

Deng, F., Chen, D., Tsai, C., & Chai, C. S. (2011). Students’ views of the nature of science: A critical review of research. Science Education, 95(6), 961–999. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20460CrossRef

Deniz, H. (2011). Searching for components of conceptual ecology that mediate development of epistemological beliefs in science. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(6), 743–749. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-010-9267-yCrossRef

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

Deryakulu, D., & Bıkmaz, F. H. (2003). The validity and reliability study of the epistemological belief scale. Journal of Educational Research, 2(4), 243–257.

Dinçol Özgür, S., & Temel, S. (2021). An examination of university students’ views of the nature of science based on their epistemological beliefs. Journal of Higher Education, 11(2), 438–444. https://doi.org/10.2399/yod.20.656321CrossRef

Dolphin, G. R., & Tillotson, J. W. (2015). “Uncentering” teacher beliefs: The expressed epistemologies of secondary science teachers and how they relate to teacher practice. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 10(2), 21–38. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijese.2015.228aCrossRef

Elby, A., & Hammer, D. (2001). On the substance of a sophisticated epistemology. Issues and Trends, 85, 554–567. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.1023

Eroğlu, S. E., & Güven, K. (2006). Examination of university students’ epistemological beliefs in terms of some variables. The Journal of Selcuk University Social Sciences Institute, 16, 295–312.

Gören, D., & Kaya, E. (2023). Students’ understanding of the nature of science and their metacognitive awareness. Boğaziçi University Journal of Education., 40–2(2), 315–336. https://doi.org/10.52597/buje.1123164CrossRef

Greene, J. A., Azevedo, R., & Torney-Purta, J. (2008). Modeling epistemic and ontological cognition: Philosophical perspectives and methodological directions. Educational Psychologist, 43(3), 142–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520802178458CrossRef

Greene, J. A., Sandoval, W. A., & Bråten, I. (2016). An introduction to epistemic cognition. In I. Bråten, J. Greene, & W. Sandoval (Eds.), Handbook of epistemic cognition (pp. 13–28). Routledge.CrossRef

Greene, J. A., Torney-Purta, J., & Azevedo, R. (2010). Empirical evidence regarding relations among a model of epistemic and ontological cognition, academic performance, and educational level. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 234–255. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017998CrossRef

Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Ectj, 29(2), 75–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02766777CrossRef

Hacıömeroğlu, G. (2011). Examining elementary preservice teachers’ epistemological beliefs as predictors of beliefs about mathematical problem solving. Buca Faculty of Education Journal, 30, 206–220.

Hofer, B. K. (1997). The development of personal epistemology: Dimensions, disciplinary differences, and instructional practices (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). University of Michigan.

Hofer, B. K. (2000). Dimensionality and disciplinary differences in personal epistemology. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(4), 378–405. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1026CrossRef

Hofer, B. K. (2001). Personal epistemology research: Implications for learning and teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology Review, 4(13), 353–383. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011965830686CrossRef

Hofer, B. K. (2004). Introduction: Paradigmatic approaches to personal epistemology. Educational Psychologist, 39(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3901_1CrossRef

Hofer, B. K. (2006). Domain specificity of personal epistemology: Resolved questions, persistent issues, new models. International Journal of Educational Research, 45, 85–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2006.08.006CrossRef

Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67, 88–140. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543067001088CrossRef

Işıksal, M., Kurt, G., Doğan, O., & Çakıroğlu, E. (2007). Epistemological conceptions of pre-service elementary mathematics teachers: Effects of university and grade level. Elementary Education Online, 6(2), 313–321.

Johnson, K., & Willoughby, S. (2018). Changing epistemological beliefs with nature of science implementations. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 14(1), 010110. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.14.010110CrossRef

Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1988). The computer and the mind: An introduction to cognitive science. Harvard University Press.

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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21305CrossRef

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(7), 551–578. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10036CrossRef

Kim, S. Y., & Hamdan Alghamdi, A. K. (2021). Saudi Arabian secondary school students’ views of the nature of science and epistemological beliefs: Gendered differences. Research in Science & Technological Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2021.1961721CrossRef

Kitchener, R. (2002). Folk epistemology: An introduction. New Ideas in Psychology, 20, 89–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-118X(02)00003-XCrossRef

Kızkapan, O., Nacaroğlu, O., & Kırmızıgül, A. S. (2023). Pre-service science teachers’ epistemic beliefs, nature of science views, and beliefs in pseudoscience. Science & Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-023-00450-7CrossRef

Koseoglu, P., & Köksal, M. S. (2015). Epistemological predictors of prospective biology teachers’ nature of science understandings. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(4), 751–763. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1383aCrossRef

Küçükaydın, M., Esen, S., Çite, H., & Geçer, S. (2023). Critical thinking, epistemological beliefs, and the sciencepseudoscience distinction among teachers. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 7(3), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202319566CrossRef

Laverty, S. M. (2003). Hermeneutic phenomenology and phenomenology: A comparison of historical and methodological considerations. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2(3), 21–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690300200303CrossRef

Lecourt ,D.(2006). Philosophy of science. (Trans. I. Ergüden). Dost Kitabevi. (Publication year of the original work 2001)

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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660290404CrossRef

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). Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.

Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. (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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10034CrossRef

Lederman, N. G., Antink, A., & Bartos, S. (2014). Nature of science, scientific inquiry, and socio-scientific issues arising from genetics: A pathway to developing a scientifically literate citizenry. Science & Education, 23(2), 285–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9503-3CrossRef

Mason, L. (2016). Psychological perspectives on measuring epistemic cognition. In I. Bråten, J. Greene, & W. Sandoval (Eds.), Handbook of epistemic cognition (pp. 375–392). Routledge.

Matthews, M. R. (2012). Changing the focus: From nature of science (NOS) to features of science (FOS). In Advances in nature of science research (pp. 3–26). Springer, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

McComas, W. F. (2002). Science and its myths. In M. Shermer (Ed.), The skeptics encyclopedia of pseudoscience (pp. 430–442). ABC CLIO Press.

McComas, W. F. (2014). Nature of science. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The language of science education: An expanded glossary of key terms and concepts in science teaching and learning (pp. 67–68). Sense Publishers.CrossRef

McComas, W. F., & Olson, J. K. (2000). Internatıonal science education standards documents. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education rationales and strategies (pp. 41–52). Kluwer (Springer) Academic Publishers.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Sage Publications.CrossRef

Muis, K. R., Bendixen, L. D., & Haerle, F. C. (2006). Domain-generality and domain-specificity in personal epistemology research: Philosophical and empirical reflections in the development of a theoretical framework. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 3–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9003-6CrossRef

Muis, K. R., Trevors, G., Chevrier, M., Greene, J. A., Sandoval, W., & Bråten, I. (2016). Epistemic climate for epistemic change. In J. A. Greene, W. A. Sandoval & I. Bråten (Eds.), Handbook of epistemic cognition (pp. 331–359). Routledge.

Munfaridah, N., Adiguna, S., & Purwaningsih, E. (2023). An exploration of teachers’ epistemological belief: A case from in-service and pre-service physics teachers in Bengkulu. KnE Social Sciences, 8(10), 362–372. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v8i10.13462CrossRef

Murat, A., & Erten, H. (2018). An evaluation of science teachers’ epistemological beliefs in terms of several variables. Turkish Journal of Educational Studies, 5(2), 38–63. https://doi.org/10.33907/turkjes.399224CrossRef

National Research Council (NRC). (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18290CrossRef

Ocak, İ. (2018). The relationship between teacher candidates’ views of the nature of science and their problem solving skills. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 419–432. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11329aCrossRef

Oksal, A., Şenşekerci, E., & Bilgin, A. (2006). Development of the central epistemological beliefs scale: The validity and reliability study. Journal of Uludag University Faculty of Education, 19(2), 371–381.

Özgelen, S. (2012). Exploring the relationships among epistemological beliefs, metacognitive awareness and nature of science. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 7, 409–431.

Özkal, K., Tekkaya, C., Sungur, S., Cakiroglu, J., & Cakiroglu, E. (2010). Elementary students’ scientific epistemological beliefs in relation to socio-economic status and gender. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(7), 873–885. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-009-9169-0CrossRef

Öztürk, N., Akyol, G., & Tuncay Yüksel, B. (2022). How do preservice science teachers’ personal epistemological beliefs differ for different levels of nature of science views? Kırşehir Education Faculty Journal, 23(1), 1042–1090.

Palmer, B., & Marra, R. M. (2008). Individual domain-specific epistemologies: Implications for educational practice. In Knowing, knowledge and beliefs: Epistemological studies across diverse cultures (pp. 325–350). Springer Netherlands

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2014). The miniature guide to critical thinking concepts and tools (7th ed.). Foundation for Critical Thinking Press.

Paulsen, M. B., & Wells, C. T. (1998). Domain differences in the epistemological beliefs of college students. Research in Higher Education, 39(4), 365–384. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018785219220CrossRef

Peffer, M. E., & Ramezani, N. (2019). Assessing epistemological beliefs of experts and novices via practices in authentic science inquiry. International Journal of STEM Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0157-9CrossRef

Perry, W.G. (1968). Patterns of development in thought and values of students in a liberal arts college a validation of a scheme. Harvard Univ., Cambridge, Mass. Bureau of Study Counsel. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED024315

Perry, W. G. (1981). Cognitive and ethical growth: The making of meaning. In A. Chickering (Ed.), The modern American college (pp. 76–116). Jossey-Bass.

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. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730770302CrossRef

Ryder, J., & Leach, J. (2006). Teaching about the epistemology of science in upper secondary schools: An analysis of teachers’ classroom talk. Science & Education, 17(23), 289–315. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-006-9007-0CrossRef

Schommer, M. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 498–504. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.3.498CrossRef

Schommer, M. (1993). Epistemological development and academic performance among secondary students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(3), 406–411. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.85.3.406CrossRef

Schommer-Aikins, M., & Duell, O. K. (2013). Domain specific and general epistemological beliefs: Their effects on mathematics. Revista De Investigación Educativa, 31(2), 330–330. https://doi.org/10.6018/rie.31.2.170911

Schraw, G., Bendixen, L. D., & Dunkle, M. E. (2002). Development and validation of the Epistemic Belief Inventory (EBI). In B. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 261–277). Lawrence Erlbaum.

Schwartz, R. S., & Lederman, N. G. (2002). ‘“It’s the nature of the beast”’: The influence of knowledge and intentions on learning and teaching nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(3), 205–236.CrossRef

Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information, 22(2), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-2004-22201CrossRef

Sinatra, G. M., Kienhues, D., & Hofer, B. K. (2014). Addressing challenges to public understanding of science: Epistemic cognition, motivated reasoning, and conceptual change. Educational Psychologist, 49(2), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.916216CrossRef

Smith, M., & Siegel, H. (2004). Knowing, believing, and understanding: What goals for science education? Science & Education, 13, 553–582. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCED.0000042848.14208.bfCrossRef

Southerland, S. A., Johnston, A., & Sowell, S. (2006). Describing teachers’ conceptual ecologies for the nature of science. Science Education, 90(5), 874–906. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20153CrossRef

Ståhl, T., Sormunen, E., & Mäkinen, M. (2021). Epistemic beliefs and internet reliance–is algorithmic authority part of the picture? Information and Learning Sciences, 122(11/12), 726–748. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-01-2021-0004CrossRef

Taşkın, Ç. (2012). Epistemological beliefs: As predictors of preservice teachers’ learning approaches. Mustafa Kemal University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 9(19), 273–285.

Tsai, C. C. (2000). Relationships between student scientific epistemological beliefs and perceptions of constructivist learning environments. Educational Research, 42(2), 193–205. https://doi.org/10.1080/001318800363836CrossRef

Tuncay-Yüksel, B., Yılmaz-Tüzün, Ö., & Zeidler, D. L. (2023). Epistemological beliefs and values as predictors of preservice science teachers’ environmental moral reasoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21889CrossRef

Üçer-Erdemir, A., & Dinçol Özgür, S. (2023). A descriptive content analysis of theses on the nature of science in Turkey. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 22(86), 683–713. https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.1224389CrossRef

Üztemur, S., Sevigen, E., Arıkan, B., & Çelik, V. G. (2021). A content analysis of epistemological beliefs in education in the Turkey context (2002–2020). Journal of Interdisciplinary Education: Theory and Practice, 3(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.47157/jietp.846148CrossRef

Wang, H. H., Hong, Z. R., She, H. C., Smith, T. J., Fielding, J., & Lin, H. S. (2022). The role of structured inquiry, open inquiry, and epistemological beliefs in developing secondary students’ scientific and mathematical literacies. International Journal of STEM Education, 9(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-022-00329-zCrossRef

Willoughby, S. D., & Johnson, K. (2017). Epistemic beliefs of non-STEM majors regarding the nature of science: Where they are and what we can do. American Journal of Physics, 85(6), 461–468. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.4979654CrossRef

Yıldırım, A. (1999). Qualitative research method. Education & Science, 23(112), 7–17.

Zeineddin, A., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2010). Scientific reasoning and epistemological commitments: Coordination of theory and evidence among college science students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(9), 1064–1093. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20368CrossRef

Titel: The Link Between Science Teacher Candidates’ Understandings of the Nature of Science and Their Epistemic Beliefs
verfasst von: Davut Sarıtaş
Oktay Kızkapan
Publikationsdatum: 20.04.2024
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: Technology, Knowledge and Learning / Ausgabe 3/2024
Print ISSN: 2211-1662
Elektronische ISSN: 2211-1670
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-024-09730-9

Parent and Family Support of Knowledge Acquisition in Reading Comprehension through Podcasts in English and Spanish

Original research

Improving US Elementary School Reading Comprehension through Knowledge Acquisition and Transformation

Original research

Inferencing in Reading Comprehension: Examining Variations in Definition, Instruction, and Assessment

Original research

Unleashing the Power of Predictive Analytics to Identify At-Risk Students in Computer Science

Original research

Co-Creation of Learning Technologies in School–University–Industry Partnerships: An Activity System Perspective

Original research

The Effect of a Teacher’s Mindset on the Cascading Zones of Proximal Development: A Systematic Review

Original research

Premium Partner

Marktübersichten

Die im Laufe eines Jahres in der „adhäsion“ veröffentlichten Marktübersichten helfen Anwendern verschiedenster Branchen, sich einen gezielten Überblick über Lieferantenangebote zu verschaffen.

Zur Marktübersicht

Bildnachweise

MKVS GbR/© MKVS GbR, Nordson/© Nordson, ViscoTec/© ViscoTec, BCD Chemie GmbH, Merz+Benteli/© Merz+Benteli, Robatech/© Robatech, Hermann Otto GmbH/© Hermann Otto GmbH, Ruderer Klebetechnik GmbH, Xometry Europe GmbH/© Xometry Europe GmbH, Atlas Copco/© Atlas Copco, Sika/© Sika, Medmix/© Medmix, Kisling AG/© Kisling AG, Dosmatix GmbH/© Dosmatix GmbH, Innotech GmbH/© Innotech GmbH, Hilger u. Kern GmbH, VDI Logo/© VDI Wissensforum GmbH, Dr. Fritz Faulhaber GmbH & Co. KG/© Dr. Fritz Faulhaber GmbH & Co. KG, BEINLICH PUMPEN GMBH/© BEINLICH PUMPEN GMBH

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"