As part of a teacher training project, 16 future chemistry teachers participated in a dramatisation activity, in which they discussed a controversy concerning an event from the history of science: the awarding of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry to Fritz Haber in 1918. Preparations for the role-play activity, the dramatisation of the mock trial, and the subsequent discussions were video-recorded. We also collected the written material produced by the pre-service teachers and the reflective journals they produced during their involvement with (...) the activity. This article discusses the contributions of such an experience to future teachers’ knowledge on aspects related to both nature of science and argumentation, as well as to their views on their future actions related to authentic teaching of and about science. The results show that such contributions were meaningful. (shrink)

Understanding nature of science is widely considered an important educational objective and views of NOS are closely linked to science teaching and learning. Thus there is a lively discussion about what understanding NOS means and how it is reached. As a result of analyses in educational, philosophical, sociological and historical research, a worldwide consensus about the content of NOS teaching is said to be reached. This consensus content is listed as a general statement of science, which students are supposed to (...) understand during their education. Unfortunately, decades of research has demonstrated that teachers and students alike do not possess an appropriate understanding of NOS, at least as far as it is defined at the general level. One reason for such failure might be that formal statements about the NOS and scientific knowledge can really be understood after having been contextualized in the actual cases. Typically NOS is studied as contextualized in the reconstructed historical case stories. When the objective is to educate scientifically and technologically literate citizens, as well as scientists of the near future, studying NOS in the contexts of contemporary science is encouraged. Such contextualizations call for revision of the characterization of NOS and the goals of teaching about NOS. As a consequence, this article gives two examples for studying NOS in the contexts of scientific practices with practicing scientists: an interview study with nanomodellers considering NOS in the context of their actual practices and a course on nature of scientific modelling for science teachers employing the same interview method as a studying method. Such scrutinization opens rarely discussed areas and viewpoints to NOS as well as aspects that practising scientists consider as important. (shrink)

Current curriculum demands require primary teachers to teach about the Nature of Science; yet, few primary teachers have had opportunity to learn about science as a discipline. Prior schooling and vicarious experiences of science may shape their beliefs about science and, as a result, their science teaching. This qualitative study describes the impact on teacher beliefs about science and science education of a programme where 26 New Zealand primary teachers worked fulltime for 6 months alongside scientists, experiencing the nature of (...) work in scientific research institutes. During the 6 months, teachers were supported, through a series of targeted professional development days, to make connections between their experiences working with scientists, the curriculum and the classroom. Data for the study consisted of mid- and end-of-programme written teacher reports and open-ended questionnaires collected at three points, prior to and following 6 months with the science host and after 6 to 12 months back in school. A shift in many teachers’ beliefs was observed after the 6 months of working with scientists in combination with curriculum development days; for many, these changes were sustained 6 to 12 months after returning to school. Beliefs about the aims of science education became more closely aligned with the New Zealand curriculum and its goal of developing science for citizenship. Responses show greater appreciation of the value of scientific ways of thinking, deeper understanding about the nature of scientists’ work and the ways in which science and society influence each other. (shrink)