在建构主义的影响下以课堂为主体对自然科学领域的研究外文翻译及原文.docx

在建构主义的影响下以课堂为主体对自然科学领域的研究外文翻译及原文.docx

《在建构主义的影响下以课堂为主体对自然科学领域的研究外文翻译及原文.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《在建构主义的影响下以课堂为主体对自然科学领域的研究外文翻译及原文.docx（14页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

在建构主义的影响下以课堂为主体对自然科学领域的研究外文翻译及原文

毕业论文英文文献翻译

学生姓名

:

系别

:

应用化学系

专业

:

化学

年级

:

2011级专接本

学号

:

指导教师

:

原文

题目：

TheinfluenceofconstructivismonnatureofScienceasanareaofresearchandasaclassroomsubject

MehmetKARAKAS

ScienceTeachingDepartment

ArtvinCoruhUniversity

ArtvinEigitimFakultesi

CayagiziMahallesiArtvin,TURKEY08000

E-mail:

mkarakas73@

Received19Mar.,2007

Revised21Sept.,2007

Abstract

ThispaperisangeneralarticleabouttheinfluenceofconstructivismonnatureofscienceConstructivismhasinfluencedresearchontheteachingandlearningofnatureofscience,aswellasactualteachingofthenatureofscienceideas.Intheareaofresearch,aconstructivistlearningtheoryperspectivehasinfluencedresearcherstoshiftfromusingquantitativeresearchtechniquestousingqualitativeresearchmethodsininvestigatingthenatureofscienceinthescienceclassrooms.Intheareaofpromotingtheteachingofthenatureofscience,aconstructivistlearningtheoryperspectivehasinfluencedscienceeducatorstoshiftfrommerelyemphasizingtheteachingofthehistoryofscienceinscienceclassroomstosequencingininstructioninsciencelessonsandpromotionofbetterteacherpreparationprogramsintheuniversities.

Introduction

Sciencecurriculavarywidelyamongcountries,states,schooldistricts,andindividualschools.Themostvividdifferencesareconcernedwiththeparticularsciencetopicsorconceptstobeincluded.Suchdifferencesincourseandcurricularcontentareunavoidable,aseachcoursemustpresentonlyasmallsampleofthescientificgeneralizationsandprinciplesdrawnfromaconsistentlyandrapidlyexpandingdiscipline（Lederman,1992）.Thereisnoconsensusamongscienceeducatorsconcerningthespecificcontenttobeincludedincontemporarysciencecoursesoreventhemethodsandstrategiesofinstructiontobeused.However,thereappearstobestrongagreementonatleastoneoftheobjectivesofscienceinstruction.Thedevelopmentofan“adequateunderstandingofthenatureofscience”oranunderstandingof“scienceasawayofknowing”continuestobeconvincinglyadvocatedasadesiredoutcomeofscienceinstruction（AmericanAssociationfortheAdvancementofScience（AAAS）,1989,Lederman,1992）.Althoughthe“natureofscience”hasbeendefinedinnumerousways,itmostcommonlyreferstothevaluesandassumptionsinherenttothedevelopmentofscientificknowledge（Lederman&Zeidler,1987）.Thischaracterizationneverthelessremainfairlygeneral,andphilosophersofscience,historiansofscience,sociologistsofscience,andscienceeducatorsarequicktodisagreeonaspecificdefinitionforthenatureofscience（NOS）.Suchdisagreement,however,shouldnotbesurprisinggiventhemultifacetedandcomplexnatureofthehumanendeavorwecallscience.Moreover,similartoscientificknowledge,conceptionsofNOSaretentativeanddynamic:

Theseconceptionshavechangedthroughoutthedevelopmentofscienceandsystematicthinkingaboutitsnatureandworkingsdidtoo（Abd-El-Khalick&Lederman,1998）.However,attheend,thereisanagreement（eventhroughnotcomplete）aboutnatureofscienceamongscienceeducatorsthatscientificknowledgeistentative（subjecttochange）,empiricallybased（basedonand/orderivedfromobservationsofthenaturalworld）,subjective（theory-laden）,partlytheproductofhumaninference,imagination,andcreativity（involvestheinventionofexplanation）,andsociallyandculturallyembedded.Alsotwoadditionalimportantaspectsarethedistinctionbetweenobservationsandinferences,andthefunctionsofandrelationshipsbetweenscientifictheoriesandlaws（Lederman,Abd-El-Khalick,Akerson,2000）.

TheaimofthispaperistolookathowoneparticularlearningperspectivehasinfluencedtheresearchonNOSandthewaythenatureofscienceistaughtbyreviewingsomerelevantNOSstudies.Manyresearcherstakingdifferentresearchperspectiveshavedoneresearchinthenatureofscience.Thispaperexamineshowaconstructivistlearningtheoryperspectivehasinfluencedresearchonthenatureofscience,aswellastheteachingandlearningofthenatureofscience.Indoingso,thispaperdividesintothreeparts.ThefirstpartlooksatthehistoricaldevelopmentofthenatureofscienceanddiscussesthecurrentstatusofresearchontheteachingandlearningofNOS,aswellastheteachingandlearningofNOSinpre-collegeclassrooms.SecondpartdiscusseshowconstructivismhasinfluencedresearchontheteachingandlearningofnatureofsciencebyexamininghowresearchintheareaofNOSwasconductedpriortotheuseofconstructivismasalearningtheoryperspective.Inthethirdpart,thepaperexaminestheinfluenceofconstructivismonteachingandlearningofnatureofscienceideasinclassroomsbyfirstexamininghowNOSwaspromotedpriortotheuseofconstructivism,andthencomparethiswithhowtheywerepromotedusingaconstructivistperspective.

ThenatureofScienceasacontentarea

ThelongevityofthenatureofscienceobjectiveinscienceeducationisattestedtobytheNationalSocietyfortheStudyofEducation（1960）andHurd（1960）whoclaimtheexistenceoftheobjectiveofteachingthenatureofscienceintheAmericanschoolsasearlyas1920.Actually,onecantracetheadvocacyforstudents'understandingsofnatureofsciencetothereportsoftheCentralAssociationofScienceandMathematicsTeachers（1907）inwhichastrongargumentwaspresentedforincreasedemphasisonthescientificmethodandtheprocessesofscience.Concernsforthedevelopmentofadequateunderstandingsonthenatureofscience“havewornmanyhats”throughtheyears（Lederman,1992）.Intheearly1900sthenatureofscienceobjectivewasexpressedintermsofincreasedemphasisonthescientificmethod“soastobettertrainstudents'mentalfaculties”（Hurd,1960）;inthe1960stheobjectivewaslinkedtotheadvocatedemphasisonscientificprocessandinquiry（Welch,1979）;andmostrecentlyithasbeenincludedasacriticalcomponentofscientificliteracy（AmericanAssociationfortheAdvancementofScience,1989;NationalScienceTeachersAssociation,1982）.Clearly,scienceeducatorsandscientistshavebeenextremelypersistentintheiradvocacyforimprovedstudentunderstandingofthenatureofscience.Indeed,Kimball（1968）hasreferredtothisobjectiveasoneofthemostcommonlystatedobjectivesforscienceeducationandSaunders（1955）wentsofarastodescribeitasthemostimportantpurposeofscienceteaching.

Researchrelatedtothenatureofsciencecanbeconvenientlydividedintofourrelated,butdistinct,linesofresearch:

（a）assessmentofstudentconceptionsofthenatureofscience;（b）development,use,andassessmentofcurriculadesignedto“improve”studentconceptionsofthenatureofscience;（c）assessmentof,andattemptstoimprove,teachers'conceptionsofthenatureofscience;and（d）identificationoftherelationshipamongteachers'conceptions,classroompractice,andstudents'conceptions（Lederman,1992）.

Althoughthebeliefintheimportanceofstudents'understandingsofthenatureofsciencehaspersistedthroughthetwentiethcenturyasmentionedabove,assessmentsofstudents'conceptionsdidnotstartuntil1954（Wilson,1954）.Initialassessmentsofstudents'conceptionsindicatedthatstudentsdidnotpossessadequateunderstandingsofNOSandledtotheconclusionthatscienceteachersmustnotbeattemptingtoteachnatureofscience.AsecondlineofresearchfocusingaroundcurriculumdevelopmentandassessmentwasinitiatedbyCooleyandKlopfer（1963）.Theresultsofthismovementwereambiguous.Thatis,thesamecurriculumwaseffectiveforoneteacherwithaparticulargroupofstudents,butnotforanotherteacherwithdifferentgroupofstudents.Theappropriateconclusionwasthattheindividualscienceteachermustmakeadifference.Predictably,asubsequentlineofresearchfocusedontheassessmentofteachers'conceptions.Disturbingly,therewasnoattempttofocusonthebehaviorsandotherclassroomvariablesrelatedtoindividualteachers.Theassessmentofteachers'conceptionsofthenatureofscienceindicatedthattheydidnotpossessthedesiredlevelofunderstanding（Lederman,1992）.Becauseteacherscannotbeexpectedtopurposefullyteachwhattheydonotunderstand,manyresearchersfocusedtheirattentiononthedevelopmentandassessmentoftechniquesdesignedtoimproveteachers'understandingsofNOS（Lederman,1992）.Unfortunately,theresultsofsuchattemptswereambiguousandthespecificvariablescontributingtoimprovedconceptionsofNOSremainedunknown.

Theabovementionedlinesofresearchwereinformedbytwobasicimplicitassumptions:

ateacher'sunderstandingofthenatureofscienceisrelatedtohis/herstudents'conceptionsandateacher'sinstructionalbehaviorsanddecisionsaresignificantlyinfluencedbyhis/herconceptionsofnatureofscience（Lederman,1992）.Recognitionoftheseassumptionsandtheresultsofgeneralresearchonteachingcontributedtoarefocusingofresearchers'attentionsonthetestingoftheseassumptionsandattemptstoderivethoseclassroomvariablesrelatedtochangesinstudents'conceptions（Brickhouse,1990）.Interestingly,Trent（1965）hadmadesuchrecommendations30yearsearlier.Asaconsequenceofthismorerecentresearch,itappearsthatthemostimportantvariablesthatinfluencestudents'beliefsaboutthenatureofsciencearethosespecificinstructionalbehaviors,activities,anddecisionsimplementedwithinthecontextofalesson.Itappearsthatcontinuedstressonhigher-levelthinkingskills,problemsolving,inquiry-orientedinstr