Abstract
The term “science practice” has drawn increasing attention in the current science education literature. In this study, the methodology of content analysis was adopted to examine the presentation of science practice in 20 historical cases compiled in a popular science book. Three aspects and eight categories of science practice constitute the analytical framework. As a result of the qualitative analysis, 17 meanings (sub-categories) under the eight science practices were found in the book. In the quantitative analysis, it was found that “investigating practices” was more commonly presented than “sense-making practices” and “critiquing practices” and that the most frequent are traditional practices of “planning and carrying out investigations,” “analyzing and interpreting data,” and “asking questions.” The findings are significant in providing implications for understanding the notion of science practice and for the design of educational teaching materials in promoting science practice in schools.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
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.
Allchin, D., Andersen, H. M., & Nielsen, K. (2014). Complementary approaches to teaching nature of science: integrating student inquiry, historical cases, and contemporary cases in classroom practice. Science Education, 98(3), 461–486.
Berg, L. B., & Lune, H. (2017). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (9th ed.). New York: Pearson.
Berland, L. K., Schwarz, C. V., Krist, C., Kenyon, L., Lo, A. S., & Reiser, B. J. (2016). Epistemologies in practice: making science practices meaningful for students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(7), 1082–1112.
Bernard, R. H., Wutich, A., & Ryan, W. G. (2017). Analyzing qualitative data systematic approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Bybee, R. W. (2011). Scientifc and engineering practices in K–12 classrooms: understanding a framework for K–12 science education. Science and Children, 49(4), 6–10.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: a practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage Publications.
Davis, E. A., & Krajcik, J. S. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34(3), 3–14.
Duschl, R. (1990). Restructuring science education: the important of theories and their development. New York: Teacher College Press.
Erduran, S., & Dagher, Z. (2014). Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education: scientific knowledge, practices and other family categories. Dordrecht: Springer.
Ford, M. J., & Forman, E. A. (2006). Redefining disciplinary learning in classroom contexts. Review of Research in Education, 30, 1–32.
Gooday, G., Lynch, J. M., Wilson, K. G., & Barsky, C. K. (2008). Does science education need the history of science? Isis, 99(2), 322–330.
Greca, I. M., & Moreira, M. A. (2000). Mental models, conceptual models, and modelling. International Journal of Science Education, 22(1), 1–11.
Irwin, R. A. (1996). A survey of the historical aspects of science in school textbooks. School Science Review, 78, 101–107.
Irwin, A. R. (2000). Historical case studies: teaching the nature of science in context. Science Education, 84(1), 5–26.
Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2011). A family resemblance approach to the nature of science for science education. Science & Education, 20(7), 591–607.
Klopfer, L. E. (1969). The teaching of science and the history of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6, 87–95.
Leite, L. (2002). History of science in science education: development and validation of a checklist for analysing the historical content of science textbooks. Science & Education, 11(4), 333–359.
Liu, X., Ma, D., Kong, Q., & Jiang, X. (2006). Overturning: 20 scientific experiments that have reshaped the commonsense. Shanghai: Shanghai Wenhua Press (in Chinese).
McNeill, K. L., Katsh-Singer, R., & Pelletier, P. (2015). Assessing science practices: moving your class along a continuum. Science Scope, 39(4), 21.
McNeill, K. L., Lowenhaupt, R. J., & Katsh-Singer, R. (2018). Instructional leadership in the era of the NGSS: Principals’ understandings of science practices. Science Education, 102, 452–473.
Michaels, S., Shouse, A. W., & Schweingruber, H. A. (2007). Ready, set, science! Putting research to work in K-8 science classrooms. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Monk, M., & Osborne, J. (1997). Placing the history and philosophy of science on the curriculum: a model for the development of pedagogy. Science Education, 81(4), 405–424.
NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: for states, by states. Washington: The National Academies Press.
Niaz, M. (2014). Science textbooks: the role of history and philosophy of science. In International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (pp. 1411–1441). Dordrecht: Springer.
NRC (National Research Council). (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Osborne, J. (2011). Science teaching methods: a rationale for practices. School Science Review, 98(343), 93–103.
Osborne, J. (2014). Teaching science practices: meeting the challenge of change. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(2), 177–196.
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.
Passmore, C., Schwarz, C., & Mankowski, J. (2017). Developing and using models. In C. V. Schwarz, C. Passmore, & B. J. Reiser (Eds.), Helping students make sense of the world using next generation science and engineering practices (pp. 109–135). Arlington: National Science Teachers Association Press.
Pruitt, S. L. (2014). The next generation science standards: the features and challenges. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(2), 145–156.
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.
Stemler, S. (2001). An overview of content analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 7(17), 137–146.
Stroupe, D. (2015). Describing “science practice” in learning settings. Science Education, 99(6), 1033–1040.
Wandersee, J. H. (1992). The historicality of cognition: implications for science education research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 423–434.
Wei, B., Li, Y., & Chen, B. (2013). Representations of nature of science in selected histories of science in the integrated science textbooks in China. School Science and Mathematics, 113 (4), 170–179.
Wei, B., & Li, X. (2017). Science teachers' perceptions of experimentation: Implications for reconstructing school practical work. International Journal of Science Education, 39, 1775–1794.
White, B. Y., Collins, A., & Frederiksen, J. R. (2011). The nature of scientific meta-knowledge. In Models and modeling (pp. 41–76). Dordrecht: Springer.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
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.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wei, B., Wang, Y. The Presentation of Science Practice in Twenty Historical Cases. Sci & Educ 30, 365–380 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00172-0
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00172-0