International Association of Educators   |  ISSN: 1949-4270   |  e-ISSN: 1949-4289

Original article | Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 2020, Vol. 15(2) 104-121

Informal Effect of The Biographical Film on The Views of Prospective Science Teachers on Nature of Science

Davut Sarıtaş & Mahmut Polat

pp. 104 - 121   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2020.251.6   |  Manu. Number: MANU-2003-09-0004.R1

Published online: June 20, 2020  |   Number of Views: 130  |  Number of Download: 581


Abstract

In this study, the effects of a documentary and a biographical film, which was watched in an informal environment, on the prospective science teachers’ nature of science (NOS) views were examined. The study conducted according to the mixed research methodology. The data were obtained through the open-ended questionnaire prepared by considering the consensus aspects of the NOS. The participants were shown a documentary-style biographical film about a cross-section of the life of a famous scientist. The findings show that there are changes in the participants' views on some of the consensus aspects of the nature of science. Some of these were in the desired direction, but the retention was weak. Also, some of the changes are in an undesirable direction such as to create a science myth. According to the results, it can be thought that films adapted from the history of science can be used to teach the nature of science. Since films produced for different purposes such as art and entertainment may cause problems in teaching the nature of science, it can be suggested to use such films in a more structured learning environment.

Keywords: Nature of Science, History of Science, Prospective Science Teachers, Biographical Film


How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Saritas, D. & Polat, M. (2020). Informal Effect of The Biographical Film on The Views of Prospective Science Teachers on Nature of Science . Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 15(2), 104-121. doi: 10.29329/epasr.2020.251.6

Harvard
Saritas, D. and Polat, M. (2020). Informal Effect of The Biographical Film on The Views of Prospective Science Teachers on Nature of Science . Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 15(2), pp. 104-121.

Chicago 16th edition
Saritas, Davut and Mahmut Polat (2020). "Informal Effect of The Biographical Film on The Views of Prospective Science Teachers on Nature of Science ". Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 15 (2):104-121. doi:10.29329/epasr.2020.251.6.

References
  1. Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000a). Improving science teachers’ conceptions of nature of science: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 665-701. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690050044044 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  2. Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N.G. (2000b). The influence of history of science courses on students’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(10), 1057-1095. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200012)37:10<1057::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-C [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  3. 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199807)82:4<417::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-E [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  4. Abeyasekera, S. (2005) Quantitative analysis approaches to qualitative data: why, when and how? In J.D. Holland & J. Campbell (Eds.), Methods in development research; combining qualitative and quantitative approaches (pp. 97-106). ITDG Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  5. Akerson V. L., & Volrich M.V. (2006). Teaching nature of science explicitly in a first-grade internship setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 377-394.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20132 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  6. Allchin, D. (2003). Scientific myth-conceptions. Science Education, 87, 329–351. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10055 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  7. Allchin, D. (2017). Beyond the consensus view: whole science, Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 17(1), 18-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2016.1271921  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  8. Aydemir, S., & Demirkan, O. (2018). Gender-aware media literacy training: a needs analysis study for prospective teachers. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 13(1), 6-30. https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2018.137.1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  9. Barnett, M., Wagner, H., Gatling, A., Anderson, J., Houle, M., & Kafka, A. (2006). The impact of science fiction films on student understanding of science. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(2), 179-191. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/166420/. [Google Scholar]
  10. Brunner, J. L., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2020). Improving nature of science instruction in elementary classes with modified science trade books and educative curriculum materials. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57, 154-183. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21588 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  11. Bixler, A. (2007). Teaching evolution with the aid of science fiction. The American Biology Teacher, 69(6), 337-340. https://doi.org/10.1662/0002-7685(2007)69[337:TEWTAO]2.0.CO;2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  12. Çakmakcı, G. (2017). Using video vignettes of historical episodes for promoting pre-service teachers' ideas about the nature of science. Science Education International, 28(1),7-29. [Google Scholar]
  13. Celebi, M.C., & Copur, K.D. (2019). The relationship between media literacy levels and problem solving skills of secondary school teachers - the case of Nigde province. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 14(4), 237-255. https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2019.220.14 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  14. Cavanaugh, T.W., & Cavanaugh, C. (2004). Teach science with science fiction films: A guide for teachers and library media specialist. Linworth Publishing, Inc. [Google Scholar]
  15. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Sage. [Google Scholar]
  16. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Sage. [Google Scholar]
  17. Creswell, J.W. (2006). Understanding mixed methods research, (Chapter 1). http://www.sagepub.com/upm-data/10981_Chapter_1.pdf [Google Scholar]
  18. Dhingra, K. (2003). Thinking about television science: How students understand the nature of science from different program genres. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(2), 234–256. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10074 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  19. Duschl, R., & Grandy, R. (2012). Two views about explicitly teaching nature of science. Science & Education, 22, 2109-2139. http://www.bu.edu/hps-scied/files/2012/10/Duschl-HPS-Two-Views-on-Explicitly-Teaching-NoS.pdf [Google Scholar]
  20. George, D., & Mallery, P. (2001). SPSS for windows. step by step. A Pearson Education Company. [Google Scholar]
  21. Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(3), 255–274.  http://www.jstor.org/stable/1163620 [Google Scholar]
  22. Hodson, H., & 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2016.1271919 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  23. Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2011). A family resemblance approach to the nature of science for science education. Science & Education, 20(7-8), 591-607. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-010-9293-4 [Google Scholar]
  24. Jarvie, I. C. (1970). Movies and society. Basic Books, Inc. https://anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1525/aa.1972.74.6.02a00170 [Google Scholar]
  25. Johnson, B., & Turner, L. A. (2003). Data collection strategies in mixed methods research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research (pp. 297-319). Sage. [Google Scholar]
  26. Kapucu, S.M. (2016). An examination of the documentary film “Einstein and Eddington” in terms of nature of science themes, philosophical movements, and concepts. International Journal of Progressive Education, 12(2), 34-46. http://www.inased.org/v12n2/ijpev12n2.pdf [Google Scholar]
  27. Kavak, N., Tufan, Y., & Demirelli, H. (2006). Fen-teknoloji okuryazarlığı ve informal fen eğitimi: gazetelerin potansiyel rolü. GÜ, Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 26(3), 17-28. http://www.gefad.gazi.edu.tr/tr/issue/6752/90787 [Google Scholar]
  28. Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. S. (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.10036 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  29. Laprise, S., & Winrich, C. (2010). The impact of science fiction films on student interest in science. Journal of College Science Teaching, 40(2),45-49. [Google Scholar]
  30. 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.3660290404 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  31. 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 Associates. [Google Scholar]
  32. 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.10034 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  33. Lewenstein, B. (1995). Science and the media. In S. Jasanoff, G. E. Markle, J. C. Peterson, & T. Pinch (Eds), Handbook of science and technology studies (pp. 343-360). Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412990127 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  34. Lin, H., & Chen, C. (2002). Promoting preservice chemistry teachers’ understanding about the nature of science through history. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(9), 773–792. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10045 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  35. Logan, R. A. (2001). Science mass communication. Science Communication, 23(2), 135– 163. http://journals.sagepub.com/toc/scxb/23/2 [Google Scholar]
  36. Marsick, V. J., & Watkins, K. (1990). Informal and incidental learning in the workplace. London and New York: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  37. Martin, P. (Director). (2008). Einstein and Eddington. UK: BBC. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00ft62c [Google Scholar]
  38. Matthews, M.R. (2015). Science teaching: the contribution of history and philosophy of science (20th anniversary revised and expanded edition). Routledge [Google Scholar]
  39. McComas W.F. (1998) The Principal elements of the nature of science: dispelling the myths. In W.F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education (pp. 53-70). Science & Technology Education Library, vol 5. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47215-5_3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  40. McComas, W. F. & Olson, J. K. (2000). International Science Education Standards documents. In W.F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education rationales and strategies (pp 41-52). Kluwer Academic Publishers. [Google Scholar]
  41. McComas, W. F. (1996). Ten myths of science: re-examining what we think we know about the nature of science. School Science and Mathematics, 96, 10–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1996.tb10205.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  42. McComas, W.F., Clough, M.P., & Almazroa, H. (1998). The role and character of the nature of science in science education. In W.F. McComas (Ed.), The Nature of science in science education: rationales and strategies (pp. 3-39). Kluwer Academic Publishers. [Google Scholar]
  43. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. (2nd ed.). Sage. [Google Scholar]
  44. Ministry of Turkish National Education [MoNE], (2006). İlköğretim fen ve teknoloji dersi (6,7. ve 8. sınıflar) öğretim programı. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı Yayınları [Google Scholar]
  45. Ministry of Turkish National Education [MoNE], (2018). Fen bilimleri dersi öğretim programı. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı Yayınları [Google Scholar]
  46. National Research Council. [NRC], (2013) Next generation science standards: for states, by states. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18290. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  47. National Science Foundation, [NSF]. (2000). Indicators: Science and Engineering 2000. Washington. National Science Foundation. [Google Scholar]
  48. Niaz, M. (2016). History and philosophy of science as a guide to understanding nature of science. Revista Científica, 24, 7-16. http://doi.org/10.14483/udistrital.jour.RC.2016.24.a1 [Google Scholar]
  49. Osborne. J. (2017). Going beyond the consensus view: a response, Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 17(1), 53-57, https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2016.1271920 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  50. Özcan, H. (2013). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının fen içeriği ile ilişkilendirilmiş bilimin doğası konusundaki pedogojik alan bilgilerinin gelişimi. Unpublished Master Thesis. Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara [Google Scholar]
  51. Seckin Kapucu, M., Cakmakci, G., & Aydogdu, C. (2015). The influence of documentary films on 8th grade students’ views about nature of science. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 15(3), 797- 808. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2015.3.2186 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  52. Segall, A. E. (2002). Science fiction in the engineering classroom to help teach basic concepts and promote the profession. Journal of Engineering Education, October 419-423. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2002.tb00727.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  53. Şeker, H., & Welsh, L. C. (2006). The use of history of mechanics in teaching motion and force units. Science Education, 15(1), 55-89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-005-5987-4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  54. Settlage, J., & Southerland, S. (2007). Teaching science to every child: using culture as a starting point. Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.  [Google Scholar]
  55. Smith, V., Scott, J., & Coskrey, W. (1990). Teaching the science in science fiction. Annual meeting of the American association for the advancement of science. New Orleans, LA, February 15-20. [Google Scholar]
  56. Sürmeli, H. (2012). Examination the effect of science fiction films on science education students’ attitudes towards STS Course. Procedia- Social and Behavioural, 47, 1012–1016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.771 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  57. Tan. C. (2006). Philosophical reflections from the silver screen; Using films to promote reflection in pre-service teachers. Reflective Practice, 7(4), 483-497. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623940600987080 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  58. Torres, M., & Mercado, M. (2006). The need for critical media literacy in teacher education core curricula, Educational Studies, 39(3), 260-282. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326993es3903_5  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  59. Trier, J. (2002). Exploring the concept of “habitus” with preservice teachers through the use of popular school films. Interchange, 33(3), 237-260. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1020941318001  [Google Scholar]
  60. van Dijck, J. (2006). Picturizing science: The science documentary as multimedia spectacle. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 9(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367877906061162 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  61. Yenice, N. (Ed.). (2015). Bilimin doğasının gelişimi ve öğretimi. Anı Yayıncılık. [Google Scholar]