$\require{mediawiki-texvc}$

연합인증

연합인증 가입 기관의 연구자들은 소속기관의 인증정보(ID와 암호)를 이용해 다른 대학, 연구기관, 서비스 공급자의 다양한 온라인 자원과 연구 데이터를 이용할 수 있습니다.

이는 여행자가 자국에서 발행 받은 여권으로 세계 각국을 자유롭게 여행할 수 있는 것과 같습니다.

연합인증으로 이용이 가능한 서비스는 NTIS, DataON, Edison, Kafe, Webinar 등이 있습니다.

한번의 인증절차만으로 연합인증 가입 서비스에 추가 로그인 없이 이용이 가능합니다.

다만, 연합인증을 위해서는 최초 1회만 인증 절차가 필요합니다. (회원이 아닐 경우 회원 가입이 필요합니다.)

연합인증 절차는 다음과 같습니다.

최초이용시에는
ScienceON에 로그인 → 연합인증 서비스 접속 → 로그인 (본인 확인 또는 회원가입) → 서비스 이용

그 이후에는
ScienceON 로그인 → 연합인증 서비스 접속 → 서비스 이용

연합인증을 활용하시면 KISTI가 제공하는 다양한 서비스를 편리하게 이용하실 수 있습니다.

'과학의 본성' 교육 -그 다원성 고찰-
A Study on the Plurality of Nature of Science in Science Education 원문보기

한국과학교육학회지 = Journal of the Korean association for science education, v.38 no.5, 2018년, pp.721 - 738  

조은진 (서울대학교) ,  김찬종 (서울대학교) ,  최승언 (서울대학교)

초록
AI-Helper 아이콘AI-Helper

최근 유수 과학교육연구자들은 세계 여러 나라의 과학교육 현장은 물론, 과학교육 연구 전통에서 과학의 본성 교육의 중심축을 형성해 온 '합의 과학의 본성 관점'에 대한 비판과 옹호 및 대안적 견해들을 갑론을박 형세로 제기하고 있다. 합의 과학의 본성 관점은 다각적인 경로를 통해 NOS 교육 표준화를 위해 구축한 '보편적 과학 지식의 본성'에 해당한다. 그 교의에는 과학 지식의 잠정성, 주관성, 이론 의존성, 법칙과 이론, 관찰과 추론, 상상력과 창의성, 사회문화적 착근성 주제 등이 포함되며, 몇 가지 선언적 문장으로 구성된 리스트 형식을 취하고 있다. 본 연구자는 지금까지의 서구 과학교육 연구 내 NOS 개념화 전통은 물론, 현 시점에서 논의되는 NOS 교육의 동향을 파악하는 것이 현대적이며 미래 지향적 과학적 소양인 교육을 위해 필수적이라고 판단하였다. 이에 먼저 문헌 연구를 통해, 특히 과학에 대한 전체론적 인식론을 주창해 온 저명 과학교육 연구자들이 제시한 합의 NOS 관점에 대한 논쟁과 비판의 요지를 파악하여 제시하였다. 이어 과학의 본성이 갖는 본유적 가치는 다양한 학문적 렌즈를 통해 과학이 기능하는 실제 방식을 표현하는데 있으므로, 그러한 기능을 충분히 수행하도록 이끌 수 있는 과학의 본성 개념에 다가가기 위해, 여러 대안적 과학의 본성의 내용 요소에 대한 제안 및 과학의 본성 교육에 대한 의견들을 살펴 보았다. 즉 '과학의 본성 개념이 갖는 논쟁적 요소에 대한 교수', '비판적 과학의 본성', '비판적 사고력 과학의 본성', '전체 과학', '과학의 특성', '재개념화 된 가족유사성 접근 과학의 본성' 등을 고찰하여, 현대적 과학철학과 과학지식사회학에 기반을 두어 과학의 본성 내용 지식의 보편성과 다원성을 중심으로 그 함의를 제시하였다.

Abstract ▼ AI-Helper 아이콘AI-Helper

Nature of Science(NOS) has been a well-organized focus of science education and one of the key elements in defining and cultivating scientific literacy for more than a century. In recent years, a specific description of NOS, which is often known as 'the consensus view of NOS', has become very influe...

주제어

#합의 과학의 본성 관점   #대안적 과학의 본성 관점들   #다원성  

표/그림 (10)

질의응답

핵심어 질문 논문에서 추출한 답변
합의 과학의 본성 관점은 무엇인가? 최근 유수 과학교육연구자들은 세계 여러 나라의 과학교육 현장은 물론, 과학교육 연구 전통에서 과학의 본성 교육의 중심축을 형성해 온 '합의 과학의 본성 관점'에 대한 비판과 옹호 및 대안적 견해들을 갑론을박 형세로 제기하고 있다. 합의 과학의 본성 관점은 다각적인 경로를 통해 NOS 교육 표준화를 위해 구축한 '보편적 과학 지식의 본성'에 해당한다. 그 교의에는 과학 지식의 잠정성, 주관성, 이론 의존성, 법칙과 이론, 관찰과 추론, 상상력과 창의성, 사회문화적 착근성 주제 등이 포함되며, 몇 가지 선언적 문장으로 구성된 리스트 형식을 취하고 있다.
과학 교육 공동체 내에서 NOS에 대한 의견 중 일치하는 부분은 무엇인가? 과학교육 공동체는 과학적 소양을 갖춘 시민을 양성하기 위해서 학생들의 바람직한 NOS 이해를 필수적 목표로 교육해야 한다는 데의견 일치를 보여 왔다(Bybee, 1997, Driver et al., 1996, Matthew,2012).
21C 과학교육 변화양상인 과학적소양, 비전 II는 무슨 의미인가? 달리 표현하여, ‘과학 소양, 비전 I(Science Literacy, Vision I)’과 ‘과학적소양, 비전 II(Scientific Literacy, Vision II)’를 구분하는 것이 중요하다고 주장되기도 한다(Roberts, 2007; Roberts & Bybee, 2014). 전자는 과학 교과 영역 내 학문적 내용을 강조하는 것이고, 후자는 특정맥락에 내재된 ‘과학 기반 사회적 쟁점(socioscientific issues, 이하SSI)’1)에 대한 개인적인 의사결정 능력을 포함하여 과학교육에 대해보다 폭 넓은 접근 방식을 강조하는 것이다(Karisan & Zeidler, 2017). 그러한 현대적 의미의 과학적 소양을 중시하는 근거에는 국가의 경제복지와 사회 정의를 지원하고 사회에서 행동을 취하는데 기반이 되는과학 및 기술 지식의 가치가 포함된다(DeBoer, 2000; Hodson, 2003;Roberts, 2007).
질의응답 정보가 도움이 되었나요?

참고문헌 (142)

  1. Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2001). Embedding Nature of Science Instruction in Preservice Elementary Science Courses: Abandoning Scientism, But... Journal of Science Teacher Education, 12(3), 215-233. 

    상세보기 crossref

  2. Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2012a). Teaching with and about nature of science, and science teacher knowledge domains. Science & Education, 22(9), 2087-2107. 

  3. Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2012b). Examining the sources for our understandings about science: enduring conflations and critical issues in research on nature of science in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 34(3), 353-374. 

    상세보기 crossref

  4. Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2012c). Nature of science in science education: toward a coherent framework for synergistic research and development. In B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Springer international handbooks of education: vol. 24. Second international handbook of science education (pp. 1041-1060). Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media B. V. 

  5. 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. 

    상세보기 crossref

  6. Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000a). Improving science teachers' conceptions of the nature of science: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 665-701. 

    상세보기 crossref

  7. 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. 

    상세보기 crossref

  8. Abd-El-Khalick, F., Waters, M., & Le, A. P. (2008). Representations of nature of science in high school chemistry textbooks over the past four decades. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(7), 835-855. 

    상세보기 crossref

  9. Acevedo-Diaz, J. A., & Garcia-Carmona, A. (2016). >. Tendencias sobre la naturaleza de la ciencia en la educacion cientifica. Revista Eureka sobre Ensenanza y Divulgacion de las Ciencias, 13(1), 3-19. 

    crossref

  10. Ackerson, V., & Donnelly, L. A. (2008). Relationships among learner characteristics and preservice teachers' views of the nature of science. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 20(1), 45-58. 

    상세보기 crossref

  11. Aikenhead, G. S., & Ryan, A. G. (1992). The development of a new instrument: 'Views on Science-Technology-Society'(VOSTS). Science Education, 76(5), 477-491. 

    상세보기 crossref

  12. Allchin, D. (1997). Rekindling phlogiston: From classroom case study to interdisciplinary relationships. Science & Education, 6(5), 473-509. 

    상세보기 crossref

  13. Allchin, D. (2011). Evaluating knowledge of the nature of (whole) science. Science Education, 95(3), 518-542. 

    상세보기 crossref

  14. Allchin, D. (2013). Teaching the nature of science. Perspectives and resources. St. Paul, MN: SHiPS Education Press. 

  15. Allchin, D. (2017). Beyond the consensus view: Whole science. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 17(1), 18-26. 

    상세보기 crossref

  16. Alters, B. J. (1997). Whose nature of science?. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(1), 39-55. 

    상세보기 crossref

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

  18. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (1993). Benchmarks for scientific literacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 

  19. Bazzul, J. (2017). From Orthodoxy to Plurality in the Nature of Science (NOS) and Science Education: A Metacommentary. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 17(1), 66-71. 

    상세보기 crossref

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

  21. Bybee, R. W. (2011). Scientific and engineering practices in K-12 classrooms. Science Teacher, 78(9), 34-40. 

    상세보기

  22. Carter, L. (2008). Globalization and science education: The implications of science in the new economy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(5), 617-633. 

    상세보기 crossref

  23. Chang, Y., Chang, C., & Tseng, Y. (2010). Trends of science education research: an automatic content analysis. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19, 315-332. 

    상세보기 crossref

  24. Cheong, Y. W. (2014). Law, Theory, and Principle: Confusion in the Normative Meaning and Actual Usage. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 34(5), 459-468. 

    원문보기 상세보기 crossref

  25. Clough, M. P. (2007). Teaching the Nature of Science to Secondary and Post-Secondary Students: Questions Rather Than Tenets, The Pantaneto Forum, Issue 25, January. Republished (2008) in the California Journal of Science Education, 8(2), 31-40. 

  26. Clough, M. P. (2011). Teaching and assessing the nature of science. The Science Teacher, 78(6), 56-60. 

    상세보기

  27. Dagher, Z. R., & Erduran, S. (2014). Laws and explanations in biology and chemistry: Philosophical perspectives and educational implications. In International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (pp. 1203-1233). Springer, Dordrecht. 

  28. Dagher, Z. R., & Erduran, S. (2016). Reconceptualizing the nature of science: Why does it matter? Science & Education, 25(1 & 2), 147-164. 

    상세보기 crossref

  29. Dagher, Z. R., & Erduran, S. (2017). Abandoning patchwork approaches to nature of science in science education. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 17(1), 46-52. 

    상세보기 crossref

  30. 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(6), 582-601. 

    상세보기 crossref

  31. Deng, F., Chen, D. T., Tsai, C. C., & Chai, C. S. (2011). Students' views of the nature of science: A critical review of research. Science Education, 95(6), 961-999. 

    상세보기 crossref

  32. Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young People's Images of Science. Buckingham: Open University Press. 

  33. Duschl, R. A. (1994). Research on the history and philosophy of science. In D. L. Gabriel (Ed.) Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (Volume II), (pp. 443-465). New York, NY: MacMillan. 

  34. Duschl, R. A., & Grandy, R. E. (2011). Demarcation in science education: Toward an enhanced view of scientific method. In S. R. Taylor & M. Ferrari (Eds.), Epistemology and Science Education: Understanding the Evolution vs. Intelligent Design Controversy, (pp. 3-19). New York: Routledge. 

  35. Duschl, R. A., & Grandy, R. E. (2013). Two views about explicitly teaching nature of science. Science & Education, 22, 2109-2139. 

    상세보기 crossref

  36. Eflin, J. T., Glennan, S., & Reisch, G. (1999). The Nature of Science: A Perspective from the Philosophy of Science, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(1):107-117. 

    상세보기 crossref

  37. Elby, A., & Hammer, D. (2001). On the substance of a sophisticated epistemology. Science Education, 85(5), 554-567. 

    상세보기 crossref

  38. Ennis, R. H. (1969). Logic in teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 

  39. Erduran, S. (2014). Beyond Nature of Science: The Case for Reconceptualising" Science" for Science Education. Science Education International, 25(1), 93-111. 

  40. Erduran, S. (2016). Visualising the nature of science: beyond textual pieces to holistic images in science education. In K. Hahl, K. Juuti, J. Lampiselka, J. Lavonen, & A. Uitto (Eds.), Cognitive and affective aspects in science education research: selected papers from the ESERA 2015 conference. Dordrecht: Springer. 

  41. Erduran, S., & Dagher, Z. (2014a). Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education: Scientific knowledge, practices and other family categories. Dordrecht: Springer. 

  42. Erduran, S., & Dagher, Z. (2014b). Regaining focus in Irish junior cycle science: Potential new directions for curriculum development on nature of science. Irish Educational Studies, 33(4), 335-350. 

    상세보기 crossref

  43. Erduran, S., & Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2007). Argumentation in science education: Recent developments and future directions. Dordrech: Springer. 

  44. Erduran, S., Kaya, E., & Dagher, Z. R. (2018). From Lists in Pieces to Coherent Wholes: Nature of Science, Scientific Practices, and Science Teacher Education. In Science Education Research and Practice in Asia-Pacific and Beyond (pp. 3-24). Singapore: Springer. 

  45. Feyerabend, P. (1962). Knowledge without foundations. Oberlin: Oberlin College. 

  46. Finson, K. D. (2002). Drawing a scientist: What we do and do not know after fifty years of drawings. School Science and Mathematics, 102(7), 335-345. 

    상세보기 crossref

  47. Giere, R. N. (1985). Constructive realism. Images of Science, 75-98. 

  48. Good, R., & Shymansky, J. (2001). Nature-of-science literacy in Benchmarks and Standards: Postmodern/relativist or modern/realist? Science & Education, 10, 173-185. 

    상세보기 crossref

  49. Grandy, R. E., & Duschl, R. A. (2008). Consensus: Expanding the scientific method and school science. Teaching Scientific Inquiry: Recommendations for Research and Implementation, 304-325. 

  50. Harding, P., & Hare, W. (2000). Portraying science accurately in classrooms: Emphasizing open-mindedness rather than relativism. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(3), 225-236. 

    상세보기 crossref

  51. Hodson, D. (1991). Philosophy of science and science education. In M. Matthews (Ed.) History, philosophy and science teaching. Toronto: OISE Press/Columbia University Press. 

  52. Hodson, D. (1998). Teaching and learning science: Towards a personalized approach. UK: McGraw-Hill Education. 

  53. Hodson, D. (2003). Time for action: Science education for an alternative future. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 645-670. 

    상세보기 crossref

  54. Hodson, D. (2008). Towards scientific literacy: A teachers' guide to the history, philosophy and sociology of science. Taipei: Sense Publishers. 

  55. Hodson, D. (2009). Teaching and learning about science: Language, theories, methods, history, traditions and values. Taipei: Sense Publishers. 

  56. Hodson, D. (2014). Nature of science in the science curriculum: Origin, development, implications and shifting emphases. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching, (pp. 911-970). Dordrecht: Springer. 

  57. Hodson, D., & 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. 

    상세보기 crossref

  58. Hogan, K., & Maglienti, M. (2001). Comparing the epistemological underpinnings of students' and scientists' reasoning about conclusions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(6), 663-687. 

    상세보기 crossref

  59. Irez, S. (2009). Nature of science as depicted in Turkish biology textbooks. Science Education, 93(3), 422-447 

    상세보기 crossref

  60. Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2011a). A family resemblance approach to the nature of science for science education. Science & Education, 20, 591-607. 

    상세보기 crossref

  61. Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2011b). A family resemblance approach. Plenary presentation session with N. Lederman titled: Current philosophical and educational issues in nature of science (NOS) research, and possible future directions. Presented at the International History, Philosophy, and Science Teaching (IHPST) Conference, Thessaloniki, Greece. 

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

  63. Kampa, N., & Koller, O. (2016). German national proficiency scales in biology: Internal structure, relations to general cognitive abilities and verbal skills. Science Education, 100(5), 903-922. 

    상세보기 crossref

  64. 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. 

    상세보기 crossref

  65. Karisan, D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2017). Contextualization of nature of science within the socioscientific issues framework: A review of research. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 5(2), 139-152. 

  66. Kaya, E., & Erduran, S. (2016). From FRA to RFN, or how the Family Resemblance Approach can be transformed for science curriculum analysis on nature of science. Science & Education, 25(9-10), 1115-1133. 

    상세보기 crossref

  67. Kaya, E., Erduran, S., Akgun, S., & Aksoz, B. (2017). Nature of Science in Teacher Education: A Holistic Approach. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 11(2). 

  68. Khishfe, R. (2012). Nature of science and decision-making. International Journal of Science Education, 34(1), 67-100. 

    상세보기 crossref

  69. Kim, M. (2016). Educational Effects of the Integrated Science Developed Under the 2009 Revised National Curriculum: Focused on Student's Views on Nature of Science and Science-Technology-Society Relationship, Interest in Science, and Science Aspiration (Master's thesis). Seoul National University. Seoul. Korea. 

  70. Kim, H. (1997). Sociological understanding of science and technology. Science, Philosophy & Culture, 20, 223-238. 

  71. Kotter, M., & Hammann, M. (2017). Controversy as a Blind Spot in Teaching Nature of Science. Science & Education, 26(5), 451-482. 

    상세보기 crossref

  72. Kwak Y. (2001). Theoretical background of constructivist epistemology. Journal of Korean Earth Sience Society, 22(5). 427-447. 

  73. Lakatos, I. (1970). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. Criticism and the growth of knowledge, 4, 91-196. 

  74. Laudan, L., Donovan, A., Laudan, R., Barker, P., Brown, H., Leplin, J., ... & Wykstra, S. (1986). Scientific change: Philosophical models and historical research. Synthese, 69(2), 141-223. 

    상세보기 crossref

  75. 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. 

    상세보기 crossref

  76. Lederman, N. G. (2006). Syntax of nature of science within inquiry and science instruction. In Scientific inquiry and nature of science (pp. 301-317). Springer: Dordrecht. 

  77. Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, future. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education, (pp. 831-879). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum. 

  78. Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire (VNOS): Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497-521. 

    상세보기 crossref

  79. 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. 

    상세보기 crossref

  80. Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2014). Research on teaching and learning of nature of science. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Volume II), (pp. 1739-1815). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum. 

  81. Lederman, J. S., Lederman, N. G., Bartos, S. A., Bartels, S. L., Meyer, A. A., & Schwartz, R. S. (2014). Meaningful assessment of learners' understandings about scientific inquiry-The views about scientific inquiry (VASI) questionnaire. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(1), 65-83. 

    상세보기 crossref

  82. Lee, J-W, Park, Y-S, & Jeong, D-H. (2016). Exploring the level of nature of science and its degree of revising curriculums: The case of the 7th and 2009 revised curriculums. Journal of Korean Society of Earth Science Education, 9(2), 217-232. 

    원문보기 상세보기 crossref

  83. Lee, S. J. (2008) A Study of Future-oriented Practical Arts(Technology and Home Economics) Curriculum. Korean Association of Practical Arts Education, 21(3), 21-39. 

  84. Martins, A. F. P. (2015). Natureza da Ciencia no ensino de ciencias: uma proposta baseada em "temas" e "questoes". Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Fisica, 32(3), 703-737. 

    상세보기 crossref

  85. Matthews, M. R. (1994). Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. Routledge: Psychology Press. 

  86. Matthews, M. R. (1997). Editorial. Science & Education, 6(4), 323-329. 

    상세보기 crossref

  87. Matthews, M. R. (2001). How pendulum studies can promote knowledge of the nature of science. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 10(4), 359-368. 

    상세보기 crossref

  88. Matthews, M. R. (2012). Changing the focus: from nature of science (NOS) to features of science (FOS). In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Advances in nature of science research. Concepts and methodologies (pp. 3-26). Dordrecht: Springer. 

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

  90. McCain, K. (2016). The nature of scientific knowledge: An explanatory approach. Switzerland: Springer. 

  91. McComas, W. F. (1996). Ten myths of science: Reexamining what we think we know about the nature of science. School Science and Mathematics, 96(1), 10-16. 

    상세보기 crossref

  92. McComas, W. F. (2005). Teaching the nature of science: What illustrations and examples exist in popular books on the subject. In Eighth International History, Philosophy & Science Teaching (IHPST) Conference, Leeds, UK (July 15-18). 

  93. McComas, W. F. (2008). Seeking historical examples to illustrate key aspects of the nature of science. Science & Education, 17(2-3), 249-263. 

    상세보기 crossref

  94. McComas, W. F., & Olson, J. K. (1998). The nature of science in international education standards documents. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 53-70). Dordrecht: Kluwer. 

  95. Meichtry, Y. J. (1993). The impact of science curricula on student views about the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(5), 429-443. 

    상세보기 crossref

  96. Merton, R. K. (1973). The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago press. 

  97. Millar, R. (2006). Twenty first century science: Insights from the design and implementation of a scientific literacy approach in school science. International Journal of Science Education, 28(13), 1499-1521. 

    상세보기 crossref

  98. Ministry of Education (MOE). (2015). 2015 revised national curriculum of science. Seoul: Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. 

  99. Mirowski, P., & Sent, E. M. (2008). The commercialization of science and the response of STS. In E. J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch (Ed.), Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, (pp. 635-689). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 

  100. Moss, P. A., Phillips, D. C., Erickson, F. D., Floden, R. E., Lather, P. A., & Schneider, B. L. (2009). Learning from our differences: A dialogue across perspectives on quality in education research. Educational Researcher, 38 (7), 501-517. 

    상세보기 crossref

  101. Musgrave, A. (1998). Realism versus constructive empiricism. In M. Curd & J. A. Cover (Eds.), Philosophy of science: The central issues (pp. 1088-1113). New York: Norton. 

  102. National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. 

  103. National Research Council (NRC). (2012). A framework for K-12 science education, DC: National Academy Press. 

  104. National Science Teachers Association (NSTA). (1982). Science-Technology-Society: Science Education for the 1980s (An NSTA position statement). Washington, DC: Author. 

  105. Neumann, K., Fischer, H. E., & Kauertz, A. (2010). From PISA to educational standards: The impact of large-scale assessments on science education in Germany. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8, 545-563. 

    상세보기 crossref

  106. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. 

  107. Noh, T., Kim, Y., Han, S., & Kang, S. (2002). Elementary school students' views on the nature of science. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 22(4), 882-891. 

  108. Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2009). Scientific literacy. The Cambridge handbook of literacy, 271-285. 

  109. NW. (2014). Kernlehrplan fur die Sekundarstufe II, Gymnasium, Gesamtschule in Nordrhein-Westfalen. MSW: Philosophie. 

  110. Oliveira, A. W., Akerson, V. L., Colak, H., Pongsanon, K., & Genel, A. (2012). The implicit communication of nature of science and epistemology during inquiry discussion. Science Education, 96(4), 652-684. 

    상세보기 crossref

  111. Osborne, J. F. (2007). Science Education for the Twenty First Century. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 3(3). 

    상세보기

  112. Osborne, J. F. (2014). Teaching scientific practices: Meeting the challenge of change. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(2), 177-196. 

    상세보기 crossref

  113. Osborne, J. F. (2017). Going beyond the consensus view: A response. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 17(1), 53-57. 

    상세보기 crossref

  114. Osborne, J. F., 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. 

    상세보기 crossref

  115. Polanyi, M. (2002/1969). The republic of science: Its political and economic theory. From knowing and being. Reproduced in P. Mirowsky & E. M. Sent (Eds.), Science bought and sold: Essays in the economics of science (pp. 465-485). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 

  116. 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. 

    상세보기 crossref

  117. Resnik, D. B. (2007). The price of truth: How money affects the norms of science. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 

  118. Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Volume I), (pp. 729-780). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 

  119. Roberts, D. A., & Bybee, R. W. (2014). Science and scientific literacy. In N. G. Lederman (Ed.), Handbook of research on science education (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge. 

  120. Rudge, D. W., & Howe, E. M. (2013). Whither the VNOS?. Aprendendo ciencia, 225. 

  121. Rudolph, J. L. (2000). Reconsidering the 'nature of science' as a curriculum component. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(3), 403-419. 

    상세보기 crossref

  122. Ryder, J. (2001). Identifying science understanding for functional scientific literacy. Studies in Science Education, 36, 1-42. 

    상세보기 crossref

  123. Ryder, J. (2009). Enhancing engagement with science/technology-related issues. In A. T. Jones & M. J. deVries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education, (pp. 287-296). Rotterdam/Taipei: Sense Publishers. 

  124. Ryder, J., Leach, J., & Driver, R. (1999). Undergraduate Science Students' Images of Science, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(2), 201-220. 

    상세보기 crossref

  125. Sadler, T. D. (2009). Situated learning in science education: socio-scientific issues as contexts for practice. Studies in Science Education, 45(1), 1-42. 

    상세보기

  126. Salomon, J. (1985). Science as a commodity-policy changes, issues and threats. In M. Gibbons & B. Wittrock (Eds.), Science as a commodity, (pp. 78-98). Harlow, UK: Longman. 

  127. Settlage, J., Madsen, A., & Rustad, K. (2005). Inquiry Science, Sheltered Instruction, and English Language Learners: Conflicting Pedagogies in Highly Diverse Classrooms. Issues in Teacher Education, 14(1), 39-57. 

  128. SL (2008). Lehrplan. MfB: Philosophie. 

  129. 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(4), 493-509. 

    상세보기 crossref

  130. Stanley, W. B., & Brickhouse, N. W. (2001). Teaching sciences: The multicultural question revisited. Science Education, 85(1), 35-49. 

    상세보기 crossref

  131. Swinbank, E. & Taylor, J. (2007). Perspectives on Science. The History, Philosophy and Ethics of Science. Teachers' Resource File, Oxford: Heinemann. 

  132. van Dijk, T. A. (2011). Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction (Vol. I). Singapore: Sage Publishing. 

  133. van Fraassen, B. C. (1998). Arguments concerning scientific realism. In M. Curd & J. A. Cover (Eds.), Philosophy of science: The central issues, (pp. 1064-1087). New York: Norton. 

  134. Wheeler-Toppen, J. L. (2005). Teaching NOS Tenets: Is it time for a change? Paper presented at the Association of Science Teacher Educators (ASTE) 2005 Conference, Colorado Springs, CO. January 19-23. 

  135. Wittgenstein, L. (2009). Philosophical investigations. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 

  136. Wong, S. L., & Hodson, D. (2010). More from the horse's mouth: What scientists say about science as a social practice. International Journal of Science Education, 32(11), 1431-1463. 

    상세보기 crossref

  137. Yacoubian, H. A. (2012). Towards a philosophically and a pedagogically reasonable nature of science curriculum. Alberta: University of Alberta. 

  138. Yacoubian, H. A. (2015). A framework for guiding future citizens to think critically about nature of science and socioscientific issues. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 15(3), 248-260. 

  139. Yang, C., Kim, M., & Noh, T. (2015). The Influences of Integrated Science developed Under the 2009 Revised National Curriculum on Students' Views on Nature of Science and Science-Technology-Society Relationship, Interest in Science, and Science Aspiration. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 35(4), 549-555. 

    원문보기 상세보기 crossref

  140. Yang, S. (2019, in progress). Representations of Nature of Science in New Korean Science Textbooks: The Case of 'Science Laboratory Experiment' (Master's thesis). Seoul National University. Seoul. Korea. 

  141. Zammito, J. H. (2004). A nice derangement of epistemes: Post-positivism in the study of science from Quine to Latour. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 

  142. Ziman, J. (2000). Are debatable scientific questions debatable?. Social Epistemology, 14(2-3), 187-199. 

    상세보기 crossref

저자의 다른 논문 :

LOADING...

관련 콘텐츠

오픈액세스(OA) 유형

FREE

Free Access. 출판사/학술단체 등이 허락한 무료 공개 사이트를 통해 자유로운 이용이 가능한 논문

이 논문과 함께 이용한 콘텐츠

섹션별 컨텐츠 바로가기

AI-Helper ※ AI-Helper는 오픈소스 모델을 사용합니다.

AI-Helper 아이콘
AI-Helper
안녕하세요, AI-Helper입니다. 좌측 "선택된 텍스트"에서 텍스트를 선택하여 요약, 번역, 용어설명을 실행하세요.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.

선택된 텍스트

맨위로