This inaugural handbook documents the distinctive research field that utilizes history and philosophy in investigation of theoretical, curricular and pedagogical issues in the teaching of science and mathematics. It is contributed to by 130 researchers from 30 countries; it provides a logically structured, fully referenced guide to the ways in which science and mathematics education is, informed by the history and philosophy of these disciplines, as well as by the philosophy of education more generally. The first handbook to cover the (...) field, it lays down a much-needed marker of progress to date and provides a platform for informed and coherent future analysis and research of the subject. -/- The publication comes at a time of heightened worldwide concern over the standard of science and mathematics education, attended by fierce debate over how best to reform curricula and enliven student engagement in the subjects There is a growing recognition among educators and policy makers that the learning of science must dovetail with learning about science; this handbook is uniquely positioned as a locus for the discussion. -/- The handbook features sections on pedagogical, theoretical, national, and biographical research, setting the literature of each tradition in its historical context. Each chapter engages in an assessment of the strengths and weakness of the research addressed, and suggests potentially fruitful avenues of future research. A key element of the handbook’s broader analytical framework is its identification and examination of unnoticed philosophical assumptions in science and mathematics research. It reminds readers at a crucial juncture that there has been a long and rich tradition of historical and philosophical engagements with science and mathematics teaching, and that lessons can be learnt from these engagements for the resolution of current theoretical, curricular and pedagogical questions that face teachers and administrators. (shrink)

This article presents an analysis of how scientists are portrayed in the Lebanese national science textbooks. The purpose of this study was twofold. First, to develop a comprehensive analytical framework that can serve as a tool to analyze the image of scientists portrayed in educational resources. Second, to analyze the image of scientists portrayed in the Lebanese national science textbooks that are used in Basic Education. An analytical framework, based on an extensive review of the relevant literature, was constructed that (...) served as a tool for analyzing the textbooks. Based on evidence-based stereotypes, the framework focused on the individual and work-related characteristics of scientists. Fifteen science textbooks were analyzed using both quantitative and qualitative measures. Our analysis of the textbooks showed the presence of a number of stereotypical images. The scientists are predominantly white males of European descent. Non-Western scientists, including Lebanese and/or Arab scientists are mostly absent in the textbooks. In addition, the scientists are portrayed as rational individuals who work alone, who conduct experiments in their labs by following the scientific method, and by operating within Eurocentric paradigms. External factors do not influence their work. They are engaged in an enterprise which is objective, which aims for discovering the truth out there, and which involves dealing with direct evidence. Implications for science education are discussed. (shrink)

Nature of science has for a long time been regarded as a key component in science teaching. Much research has focused on students’ and teachers’ views of NOS, while less attention has been paid to teachers’ perspectives on NOS teaching. This article focuses on in-service science teachers’ ways of talking about NOS and NOS teaching, e.g. what they talk about as possible and valuable to address in the science classroom, in Swedish compulsory school. These teachers are, according to the national (...) curriculum, expected to teach NOS, but have no specific NOS training. The analytical framework described in this article consists of five themes that include multiple perspectives on NOS. The results show that teachers have less to say when they talk about NOS teaching than when they talk about NOS in general. This difference is most obvious for issues related to different sociocultural aspects of science. Difficulties in—and advantages of—NOS teaching, as put forth by the teachers, are discussed in relation to traditional science teaching, and in relation to teachers’ perspectives on for which students science teaching will be perceived as meaningful and comprehensible. The results add to understanding teachers’ reasoning when confronted with the idea that NOS should be part of science teaching. This in turn provides useful information that can support the development of NOS courses for teachers. (shrink)

Chemistry textbooks are the most popular teaching material in schools. They can contribute significantly to the attainment of scientific educational goals. Internationally, educational reforms in science subjects are adopting newer practices such as Engineering Design Processes for addressing real-world requirements. This study, conducted in Saudi Arabia, employed a qualitative and quantitative content analysis method to evaluate the level of the EDP incorporated in the tenth grade chemistry textbook and accompanying student’s experiments’ guidebook. The results found the inclusive mean for EDP (...) was 1.05, which indicated incorporation was found to be at level one. This inclusion EDP in chemistry textbooks has been rated as novice or deficient, which indicates that it does not fulfill the majority of the requirements for inclusion as suggested by NGSS. (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)