Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Enabling Factors of Preservice Science Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Nature of Science and Nature of Scientific Inquiry

  • Article
  • Published:
Science & Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The goal of this study was to explore the influencing factors of pre-service science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) for targeted aspects of nature of science (NOS) and nature of scientific inquiry (NOSI) in a 13-month teacher development program, through multiple data sources. The program included a research experience, a course on NOS/NOSI, and a teaching practicum. This was an exploratory multiple case study of two pre-service science teachers’ (Rose and Charlie) experiences and development. Data were collected in multiple ways including open-ended surveys, interviews, observations, lesson plans, reflections, and teaching documents. All data were analyzed in three stages for coding, category generation, and emergent themes. Throughout the program, the two pre-service teachers improved their understanding of NOS/NOSI and successfully enacted their PCK for NOS and NOSI into their teaching of middle-level science topics. Rose and Charlie used their informed knowledge of the subject matter, instructional strategies, assessment, and curriculum towards teaching NOS and NOSI to engage students in making predictions, supporting claims with evidence, and reflecting on NOS/NOSI aspects relevant to their investigations. Some additional factors, such as teacher self-efficacy, lesson planning, or general pedagogical knowledge, appeared to impact their teaching practicum. This study provides a description of how pre-service science teachers can develop PCK for NOS and NOSI over time and transfer their understandings to teach NOS and NOSI.

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

References

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (1998). The nature of science and instructional practice: making unnatural natural. Science Education, 82, 417–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abell, S. K. (2007). Research on science teacher knowledge. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1105–1149). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akerson, V., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Influence of a reflective activity-based approach on elementary teachers’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(4), 295–317.

    Google Scholar 

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

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy: A Project 2061 report. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Avery, L. M. & Carlsen, W. S. (2001). Knowledge, identify, and teachers’ multiple communities of practice. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, St. Louis, MO.

  • Bartholomew, H., Osborne, J., & Ratcliffe, M. (2002). Teaching students “ideas-about-science”: five dimensions of effective practice. Science Education, 88, 655–682.

    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, 9, 1150. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21168.

    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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, R. L., Mulvey, B. K., & Maeng, J. L. (2016). Outcomes of nature of science instruction along a context continuum: pre-service secondary science teachers’ conceptions and instructional intentions. International Journal of Science Education, 38(3), 493–520. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1151960.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berry, A., Loughran, J., & Van Driel, J. H. (2008). Revisiting the roots of pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1271–1279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry, A., Friedrichsen, P., & Loughran, J. (Eds.). (2015). Re-examining pedagogical content knowledge in science education. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315735665.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brickhouse, N.W. (1990). Teachers’ beliefs about the nature of science and their relationship to classroom practice. Journal of Teacher Education, 41, 53–62.

  • Clough, M. P. (2018). Teaching and learning about the nature of science. Science & Education, 27, 1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiappetta, E. L., & Koballa, T. R. (2009). Science instruction in the middle and secondary schools: Developing fundamental knowledge and skills, 7th edn. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

  • Davis, E. A., & Smithy, J. (2009). Beginning teachers moving toward effective elementary science teaching. Science Education, 1-26.

  • Eichenger, D. C., Abell, S. K., & Dagher, Z. R. (1997). Developing a graduate level science education course on the nature of science. Science & Education, 6, 417–429.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enochs, L.G. & Riggs, I.M. (1990)April. Further development of an elementary science teaching efficacy belief instrument: a preservice elementary scale. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. Atlanta, GA.

  • Erduran, S., & Dagher, Z. R. (2014). Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education: scientific knowledge, practices and other family categories. Berlin: Springer Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat06564a&AN=uga.9942768033902959&site=eds-live.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faikhamta, C. (2013). The development of in-service science teachers’ understandings of and orientations to teaching the nature of science within a PCK-based NOS course. Research in Science Education., 43, 847–869.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gess-Newsome, J. (2015). A model of teacher professional knowledge and skill including PCK: results of the thinking from the PCK summit. In A. Berry, P. Friedrichsen, & J. Loughran (Eds.), Re-examining pedagogical content knowledge in science education. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315735665.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gess-Newsome, J., & Lederman, N. G. (1995). Biology teachers’ perceptions of subject matter structure and its relationship to classroom practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(3), 301–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gess-Newsome, J., & Lederman, N. G. (1999). Examining pedagogical content knowledge: the construct and its implications for science education. Boston: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, P. L. (1990). Making of a teacher: teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanuscin, D., & Lee, E. J. (2009). Helping students understand the nature of science. Perspectives: Research and tips to support science education. Science & Children, 46(7), 56–57.

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanuscin, D. (2013). Critical incidents in the development of pedagogical content knowledge for teaching the nature of science: A prospective elementary teacher’s journey. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24, 933–956.

  • Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2014). New directions for nature of science research. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (pp. 999–1021). Dordrecht: Springer.

  • Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). The influence of explicit reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551–578.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kind, V. (2009). Pedagogical content knowledge in science education: perspectives and potential for progress. Studies in Science Education, 45(2), 169–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

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

    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 (pp. 83–126). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2004). Revising instruction to teach nature of science. The Science Teacher, 71(9), 36–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2012). Nature of scientific knowledge and scientific inquiry: building instructional capacity through professional development. In B. J. Fraser, K. G. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education, 335. Berlin: Springer International Handbooks of Education 24. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9041-7_24 © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2014). Research on teaching and learning of nature of science. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abel (Eds.), Handbook of research in science education (Vol. II). New York: Routledge.

    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.

  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loughran, J. J., Mulhall, P., & Berry, A. (2004). In search of pedagogical content knowledge in science: developing ways of articulating and documenting professional practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 370–391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loughran, J. J., Berry, A., & Mulhall, P. (2006). Understanding and developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: the construct and its implications for science education (pp. 95–132). Boston: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, M. (Ed.). (2014). Handbook of research on history, philosophy and sociology of science. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • McComas, W. F., Almazroa, H., & Clough, M. P. (1998). The nature of science in science education. Science & Education, 7(6), 511–532.

    Google Scholar 

  • MEB, (2018). Fen Bilimleri Dersi Ögretim Programı. [Science Teaching Curriculum Program]. Ankara, 2008 Retrieved March 2018 from http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/Dosyalar/201812312311937

  • Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • McComas, W. F. (2004). Keys to teaching the nature of science: focusing on the nature of science in the science classroom. The Science Teacher, 71(9), 24–27.

  • Miles, M., & Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Mesci, G. (2017). Factors Mediating Preservice Science Teachers’ Abilities and Teaching Experiences to Enact Their PCK for NOS and NOSI. International History, Philosophy and Science Teaching (IHPST), Ankara, Turkey

  • Mesci, G., & Schwartz, R. S. (2017). Changing preservice science teachers’ views of nature of science: why some conceptions may be more easily altered than others. Research in Science Education. 47(2), 329-351., Doi: 10.1007/s11165-015-9503-9 

  • National Research Council (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academic Press. 

  • NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: for states, by states. Washington, DC: National Academies. http://www.nextgenscience.org/next-generation-science-standards. Accessed 21 October 2013. 

  • Nilsson, P. (2008). Teaching for understanding—the complex nature of PCK in pre-service teacher education. International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1281–1299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson, P., & Loughran, J. (2012). Exploring the development of pre-service elementary teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(7), 699–721.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J., Collins, S., Ratcliffe, M., Millar, R., & Duschl, R. (2003). What “ideas-about-science” should be taught in school science? A Delphi study of the expert community. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(7), 692–720.

  • Park, S., & Oliver, J. S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualization of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals. Research in Science Education, 38(3), 261–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudolph, J. L. (2000). Reconsidering the ‘nature of science’ as a curriculum component. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(3), 403–419.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

  • Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and training: foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Southerland, S. A., Nadelson, L., Sowel, S., Saka, Y., Kahveci, M., & Granger, E. M. (2012). Measuring one aspect of teachers’ affective states: development of the science teachers’ pedagogical discontentment scale. School Science and Mathematics, 112(8).

  • Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basic of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

  • Schwartz, R. S., Lederman, N. G., & Crawford, B. A. (2004). Developing views of nature of science in an authentic context: an explicit approach to bridging the gap between nature of science and scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88(4), 610–646.

  • Schwartz, R. S. (2007). Beyond evolution: a thematic approach to teaching NOS in an undergraduate biology course. Proceedings of the international conference of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA. April 15–18.

  • Schwartz, R. S., & Lederman, N. (2008). What scientists say: Scientists’ views of nature of science and relation to science context. International Journal of Science Education, 30(6), 727–771.

  • Schwartz, R. S., Lederman, N. G., & Crawford, B. A. (2004). Developing views of nature of science in an authentic context: an explicit approach to bridging the gap between nature of science and scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88(4), 610–646.

  • Schwartz, R. S., Northcutt, C. K., Mesci, G., & Stapleton, S. (2013, April). Science research to science teaching: developing preservice teachers’ knowledge and pedagogy for nature of science and inquiry. Paper presented at the international conference of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Rio Grande, Puerto Rico.

  • Schwartz, R. S., Northcutt, C., Mesci, G., & Steplaton, S. (2014). Experiencing Research for Teaching Science [ExpeRTS]. Conference of the Association for Science Teacher Education (ASTE) San Antonio, Texas, A.B.D.

  • Van Driel, J. H., Verloop, N., & De Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 673–695.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Driel, J. H., Berry, A., & Meirink, J. (2014). Research on science teacher knowledge. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abel (Eds.), Handbook of research in science education (Vol. II). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verloop, N., Van Driel, J., & Meijer, P. (2001). Teacher knowledge and the knowledge base for teaching. International Journal of Educational Research, 35, 441–461.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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. 36:3, 425-466

  • Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: design and methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zembal-Saul, C., Krajcik, J., & Blumenfeld, P. (2002). Elementary student teachers’ science content representations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 443–463.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was produced from Gunkut Mesci’s doctoral dissertation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Mathematics and Science Education Department, Giresun University, Giresun, Turkey

    Günkut Mesci

  2. Middle and Secondary Education, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA

    Renee S. Schwartz

  3. Mallinson Institute for Science Education, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI, USA

    Brandy Ann-Skjold Pleasants

Authors
  1. Günkut Mesci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Renee S. Schwartz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Brandy Ann-Skjold Pleasants
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Günkut Mesci.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 5 Summary of lesson plan day 1
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mesci, G., Schwartz, R.S. & Pleasants, B.AS. Enabling Factors of Preservice Science Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Nature of Science and Nature of Scientific Inquiry. Sci & Educ 29, 263–297 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00090-w

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00090-w

Search

Navigation