indonesian preservice chemistry teachers’ views …fmipa.unj.ac.id/smte/sites/default/files... ·...

15
21/11/2015 1 INDONESIAN PRESERVICE CHEMISTRY TEACHERS’ VIEWS ABOUT THE NATURE OF SCIENCE (NOS) SRI RAHAYU Department of Chemistry Faculty of Mathematics & Science Universitas Negeri Malang (UM) Email: [email protected] http://www.um.ac.id/en/ Invited Paper for 8th SMTE International Conference on 21-24 November 2015 held at Sari Pan Pacifik Hotel, Jakarta, Indonesia Job: Lecturer & Coordinator of Study Program for Master and Doctor in Chemistry Education, Graduate School of UM Institution: Chemistry Department, Faculty of Mathematics & Science, Universitas Negeri Malang (UM) Education: Bachelors in Chemistry Education (IKIP Malang) Master in Science Education (Deakin University, Australia) Doctor of Philosophy in Science Education (Okayama University (Joint Graduate School, Japan) Teaching Duty: General Chemistry Research Methods in Chemistry Education Chemistry Instructional Program Development Assessment in Chemistry Education

Upload: others

Post on 05-Jul-2020

2 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: INDONESIAN PRESERVICE CHEMISTRY TEACHERS’ VIEWS …fmipa.unj.ac.id/smte/sites/default/files... · SRI RAHAYU Department of Chemistry Faculty of Mathematics & Science Universitas

21/11/2015

1

INDONESIAN PRESERVICE CHEMISTRY

TEACHERS’ VIEWS ABOUT THE NATURE OF

SCIENCE (NOS)

SRI RAHAYU

Department of Chemistry

Faculty of Mathematics & Science

Universitas Negeri Malang (UM)

Email: [email protected]

http://www.um.ac.id/en/

Invited Paper for 8th SMTE International Conference on 21-24 November 2015 held at Sari Pan Pacifik Hotel, Jakarta, Indonesia

Job: Lecturer & Coordinator of Study

Program for Master and Doctor

in Chemistry Education, Graduate

School of UM

Institution: Chemistry Department,

Faculty of Mathematics & Science,

Universitas Negeri Malang (UM)

Education:

Bachelors in Chemistry Education (IKIP

Malang)

Master in Science Education (Deakin

University, Australia)

Doctor of Philosophy in Science Education

(Okayama University (Joint Graduate

School, Japan)

Teaching Duty:

General Chemistry

Research Methods in Chemistry Education

Chemistry Instructional Program

Development

Assessment in Chemistry Education

Page 2: INDONESIAN PRESERVICE CHEMISTRY TEACHERS’ VIEWS …fmipa.unj.ac.id/smte/sites/default/files... · SRI RAHAYU Department of Chemistry Faculty of Mathematics & Science Universitas

21/11/2015

2

About Me Research Interest Thema:

Scientific Literacy in Chemistry Education Imroving students’ HOTS in Chemistry Conceptual Change Approach for

Remediating & Preventing Misconceptions in Chemistry

International Publications:

Rahayu, S & Tytler, R. (1999). Progression in primary school children's conceptions of burning.... Researchin Science Education, 29(3), 295-312

Rahayu, S & Kita, M. (2010). An analysis of Indonesianand Japane.... International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8 (4), 667-688.

Rahayu, S., Treagust, D. F., Chandrasegaran, A.L., Kita, M., & Ibnu, S. (2011). Assessment of electrochemical concepts... Research in Science and Technological Education, 29(2), 169-188.

Rahayu, S., Chandrasegaran, A. L., Treagust, D.F., Kita, M., & Ibnu, S. (2011). Understanding acid-base concept...International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9 (6), 1439-1458

Rahayu, S. 2015. How to evaluate affective dimension in Chemistry Education. In Kahveci, M. & Orgill, M. (Eds). Affective dimensions in chemistry education. Nederland: Springer

INTRODUCTION

METHOD

RESULT & DISCUSSION

IMPLICATION

Indonesian Preservice Chemistry Teachers’ Views About NOS

Page 3: INDONESIAN PRESERVICE CHEMISTRY TEACHERS’ VIEWS …fmipa.unj.ac.id/smte/sites/default/files... · SRI RAHAYU Department of Chemistry Faculty of Mathematics & Science Universitas

21/11/2015

3

Scientific

literacy

It is commonly portrayed as the ability to make

informed decisions on science and technology–

based issues.

It is linked to deep understandings of scientific

concepts, the processes of scientific inquiry, and

the nature of science (NOS).

Is an effort to reform education.

Is attempts at developing scientific literacy by

incorporating local wisdoms and the learning outcomes

(cognitive, affective and skills ) (BNSP, 2013).

is to strengthen teaching learning process by using

scientific inquiry as a teaching approach (i.e. teachers

are urged to implement the steps of observing,

questioning, collecting data, reasoning and

communicating).

The use of scientific inquiry will help to ensure that students

develop a deep understanding of science and scientific

inquiry since they learn through inquiry how to do science,

learn about the nature of science and learn the science

content.

Indonesian context

Page 4: INDONESIAN PRESERVICE CHEMISTRY TEACHERS’ VIEWS …fmipa.unj.ac.id/smte/sites/default/files... · SRI RAHAYU Department of Chemistry Faculty of Mathematics & Science Universitas

21/11/2015

4

Effective Chemistry

Teaching

Strengthening teachers’

understanding of NOS

Prerequisite for

Strong Understandings

of NOS

Familiar with what scientist do &

think

(Prospective)

Chemistry Teacher

When implementing

scientific inquiry

IS typically refers to the epistemology of science, science as a way of knowing, or the values and assumptions inherent to the development of scientific knowledge (Lederman, 1992, 2007).

is a fundamental domain for guiding scienceeducators in accurately portraying science tostudents (McComas, Clough & Almazroa, 2002,p.5).

Therefore, students’ understanding of the NOS, its presuppositions, values, aims, and limitations should be encouraged and this is one of important goals of science teaching.

THE NATURE OF SCIENCE (NOS)

Page 5: INDONESIAN PRESERVICE CHEMISTRY TEACHERS’ VIEWS …fmipa.unj.ac.id/smte/sites/default/files... · SRI RAHAYU Department of Chemistry Faculty of Mathematics & Science Universitas

21/11/2015

5

1. SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE IS NECESSARY TO INVOLVE OBSERVATION

AND INFERENCE.

Observations are descriptive statements about natural

phenomena that are “directly” accessible to the senses

and about which several observers can reach consensus

with relative ease (Lederman, Lederman, & Antink, 2013).

By contrast, inferences are statements about phenomena

that are not “directly” accessible to the senses (Lederman,

Lederman, & Antink, 2013). The inference is the result of a

mental process which attempts to explain or speculate

about that observation.

Scientific models (e.g. atom, molecules) are inferred

constructs that help to explain observable phenomena.

Therefore, the scientific models are not copies of reality.

Scientific theories are analogous to scientific models in the

sense that theories are inferred explanations for observable

phenomena (McComas, 1998).

Laws are statements or descriptions of what happens among

observable phenomena (Lederman, Lederman, & Antink,

2013: Robertson, 2009). For example, the law of conservation

of mass in chemistry.

Theories generally provide mechanisms that explain the

things we observe. For example, the kinetic molecular theory

serves to explain phenomena that relate to changes in the

physical states of matter, others that relate to the rates of

chemical reactions, and still other phenomena that relate to

heat and its transfer. The kinetic theory of gases qualifies as a

theory because it provides a mechanism rather than just a

description of results. The kinetic theory of gases will never

become a law. If a theory is any good, it explains a law. The

highest award for a theory is that it is a good theory, not that

it becomes a law (Robertson, 2009).

2. THERE IS A CRUCIAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN SCIENTIFIC LAWS AND THEORIES.

Page 6: INDONESIAN PRESERVICE CHEMISTRY TEACHERS’ VIEWS …fmipa.unj.ac.id/smte/sites/default/files... · SRI RAHAYU Department of Chemistry Faculty of Mathematics & Science Universitas

21/11/2015

6

This means that science is based on and/or derived

from observations of the world around us from

which interpretations are made. Scientists depend

on empirical evidence to produce scientific

knowledge. Any scientific explanation must be

consistent with empirical evidence, and new

evidence brings the revision of scientific

knowledge.

3. SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE IS EMPIRICALLY BASED.

Scientists do strive to be objective, but it is just not

possible to make truly objective observations and

interpretations without any bias. Individual scientist have

theoretical commitments, beliefs, previous knowledge,

training, experiences, and expectations actually influence

their work (Lederman, 2007, p. 834). Different scientists can

interpret the same datasets differently. All these background

factors form a mind-set that affects the problems scientists

investigate and how they conduct their investigations. This

scientist mind-set account for the role of subjectivity in the

production of scientific knowledge.

4. SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE IS SUBJECTIVE (THEORY-LADEN)

Page 7: INDONESIAN PRESERVICE CHEMISTRY TEACHERS’ VIEWS …fmipa.unj.ac.id/smte/sites/default/files... · SRI RAHAYU Department of Chemistry Faculty of Mathematics & Science Universitas

21/11/2015

7

Science affects and is affected by the various

elements (e.g. politics, economics, power structures,

religion and philosophy) and intellectual spheres of the

culture in which it is embedded” (Lederman et al.,

2002, p. 501). The values of the culture also determine

what and how science is conducted, interpreted,

accepted, and utilized (Schwartz, Lederman, &

Crawford, 2004: 613). The practice of acupuncture, for

example, was not accepted by western science until

western science explanations for the success of

acupuncture could be provided (Lederman, 2007:

834), Therefore, the direction and the products of

science will be also influenced by the society and the

culture in which the science is conducted.

5. SCIENCE AS A HUMAN ENTERPRISE IS PRACTICED

IN THE CONTEXT OF A LARGER CULTURE, AND ITS

SCIENTISTS ARE THE PRODUCT OF THAT CULTURE.

Scientist use a systematic approach called scientific inquiry in an

effort to answer their questions of interest. The approach includes

traditional science processes (e.g. observing, inferring, classifying,

predicting, measuring, questioning, interpreting and analyzing

data), scientific reasoning and critical thinking to develop

scientific knowledge (Lederman & Lederman, 2012). There is no

prescribed sequence of the approach or a stricky determined

way to answer the question or to solve a problem. Scientific

problems can be solved by different methods and the selection of

a successful method is determined by conditions (Lederman et

al., 2002; McComas & Olson, 1998; Osborne et al., 2003).

Therefore, the scientific method steps drawn in the school

textbooks or university textbooks is not the only method that leads

to reliable results.

6. THERE IS NO UNIVERSAL STEP-BY-STEP SCIENTIFIC METHOD

Page 8: INDONESIAN PRESERVICE CHEMISTRY TEACHERS’ VIEWS …fmipa.unj.ac.id/smte/sites/default/files... · SRI RAHAYU Department of Chemistry Faculty of Mathematics & Science Universitas

21/11/2015

8

Scientific claims change as new evidence, made possible

through advances in theory and technology, is brought to

bear on existing theories or laws, or as old evidence is

reinterpreted in the light of new theoretical advances or

shifts in the directions of established research programs.

Tentativeness in science does not only arise from the fact

that scientific knowledge is inferential, creative, and socially

and culturally embedded. There are also compelling logical

arguments that lend credence to the notion of

tentativeness in science.

7. SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE INCLUDING “FACTS,”

THEORIES, AND LAWS, IS TENTATIVE AND SUBJECT TO

CHANGE ALTHOUGH IT IS RELIABLE AND DURABLE

Research Question:

What are prospective chemistry teachers’ view

of the NOS, particularly with regard to the

general aspects of NOS such as the

tentativeness, empirical-based, observation and

inference, creativity, subjective, universal

scientific method, scientific theory and laws,

socially and culturally embedded?

The findings of this study may inform stakeholders about the

current state of prospective chemistry teachers’ understanding of

the NOS and, subsequently, inform the design and

implementation of program and curricula that promote

understanding of the NOS at the teacher education level.

Page 9: INDONESIAN PRESERVICE CHEMISTRY TEACHERS’ VIEWS …fmipa.unj.ac.id/smte/sites/default/files... · SRI RAHAYU Department of Chemistry Faculty of Mathematics & Science Universitas

21/11/2015

9

Participants

64 prospective chemistry teachers (a 3-year Teachers’

preparation program at the State University of Malang

Indonesia.

The subject was chosen as convenient sample.

According to Carey and Stauss (1970), students’

understanding about the nature of science did not

depend on the number of college science courses

they had taken, or their grade point average.

Therefore, the use of any grade could not influence

their current understandings of nature of science. The

participants had taken almost all of the compulsory

requirements in chemistry (e.g., general, organic,

analytical, inorganic, and physical chemistry,

biochemistry). They took also the chemistry teaching

methods and learning and instructions courses.

The survey instrument was a questionnaire called the

Nature of Science Profile (NOSP) (Table 1).

The questionnaire consisted of 17 open ended

questions which were adopted from: View of NOS

form-B (VNOS-B) (Lederman, 2002), VNOS-C

instruments (Lederman, Khalick, Bell, dan Renee,

2002), open ended questionnaires (Lederman, Abd-

El- Khalick, Bell, & Schwartz, 2002; Abd-El-Khalik &

Dogan, 2008), and interview protocol (Lederman,

Khalick, dan Bell, 1998).

The questionnaire addressed 8 aspects of NOS: the

tentativeness, empirical-based, observation and

inference, creativity, subjective, universal scientific

method, scientific theory and laws, socially and

culturally embedded. The questionnaire was

validated by a chemistry educator in terms of

wording.

The Instrument

Page 10: INDONESIAN PRESERVICE CHEMISTRY TEACHERS’ VIEWS …fmipa.unj.ac.id/smte/sites/default/files... · SRI RAHAYU Department of Chemistry Faculty of Mathematics & Science Universitas

21/11/2015

10

NOSP questionnaires were administered to 93 Year 3

undergraduate students at State University of Malang,

only complete responses were counted as research data

and the data were collected from 64 undergraduate

students.

15 Selected participants were interviewed using structure

interview procedures.

Each response in each item was then recoded and

triangulated with interview responses.

Data Collection and Analysis

In data analysis, the author read each response

carefully and interpreted it into three groups: (1)

informed views; (2) partly informed views; and (3)

naïve views. These categories were adapted from

Dogan & Abd-El-Khalick (2008). After that, the author

asked a chemistry educator to independently

analyze the subset data and ask to categorize into

the three groups. The agreement rate of both

researcher and chemistry educator was 98%. The

disagreement of interpretation was resolved through

the discussion.

This co-judging was done to improve the reliability of

the findings. Table 2 shows illustrative examples of

responses to NOSP items within the three categories.

Table 2

Illustrative examples of

responses to NOSP items

Page 11: INDONESIAN PRESERVICE CHEMISTRY TEACHERS’ VIEWS …fmipa.unj.ac.id/smte/sites/default/files... · SRI RAHAYU Department of Chemistry Faculty of Mathematics & Science Universitas

21/11/2015

11

Table 3. Percentages of students’ responses in each aspect of

NOS within the three categories.

NOS Aspect No.

Item

Category

(Total responses= 1088) Total

Informed

Views

Partly Informed

Views

Naïve Views

Tentative (subject to change) 1 40(62.5%) 19(29.7%) 5(7.8%) 64(100%)

2 47(73.4%) 15(23.4%) 2(3.1%) 64(100%)

Empirically based 3 39(60.1%) 22(34.4%) 3(4.7%) 64(100%)

4 44(68.8.0%) 15(23.4.2%) 5(7.8%) 64(100%)

Observation and inference 5 18(28.1%) 11(17.2%) 35(54.7%) 64(100%)

6 22(34.4%) 13(20.3%) 29(45.3%) 64(100%)

Inference, imagination, &

creativity

7 45(70.3%) 7(10.9%) 12(18.8%) 64(100%)

8 47(73.4%) 5(7.8%) 12(18.8%) 64(100%)

Subjective (theory laden) 9 59(92.2%) 4(6.3%) 1(1.6%) 64(100%)

10 54(84.4%) 6(9.4%) 4(6.3%) 64(100%)

Step-by-step scientific

method

11 5(7.8%) 2(3.1%) 57(89.1%) 64(100%)

12 4(6.3%) 1(1.6%) 59(92.2%) 64(100%)

Scientific theories and laws. 13 2(3.1%) 2(3.1%) 60(93.8%) 64(100%)

14 2(3.1%) 1(1.6%) 61(95.3%) 64(100%)

15 1(1.6%) 1(1.6%) 62(96.9%) 64(100%)

Socially and culturally

embedded

16 55(85.9%) 3(4.7%) 6(9.4%) 64(100%)

17 63(98.4%) 1(1.6%) 0(0.0%) 64(100%)

Total: 1088

The results of the study show that the

distribution of students’ responses among the

‘‘informed’’, ‘‘partly informed’’ and ‘‘naïve ’’

categories were varied across questions or

lack of coherence.

Most of the students (ranged between 60% -

98%) hold “informed views” of NOS in the

aspects of: tentativeness; empirical-based;

inference, imagination, & creativity;

subjective (theory laden); and socially and

culturally embedded.

In the contrary, most of the students (ranged

between 89% - 97%) hold “naïve views” of

NOS in the aspects of: step-by-step scientific

method and scientific theories and laws.

Page 12: INDONESIAN PRESERVICE CHEMISTRY TEACHERS’ VIEWS …fmipa.unj.ac.id/smte/sites/default/files... · SRI RAHAYU Department of Chemistry Faculty of Mathematics & Science Universitas

21/11/2015

12

For the NOS aspect of observation and inference, it

could be seen that they hold mixed views between

naïve (averaged 50%), informed (averaged 18%) and

partly informed views (averaged 19%).

Similar findings on the lack of coherence of NOS views

had also hold by in-service secondary science teachers

reported by other studies (e.q. Abd-El-Khalick and

BouJaoude (1997), particularly on the aspect of

relationship between scientific theories and laws and

the existence of a universal step-by-step scientific

method.

Furthermore, they reported that although all participants

expressed some views that were consistent with current

conceptions of NOS, the larger majority held naive views

of crucial NOS aspects, such as relationship between

scientific theories and laws, and the existence of a

universal step-by-step scientific method. Their findings

were rather similar to the findings of this study.

EXAMPLES OF STUDENTS’ RESPONSES

“A theory is a tested explanation of basic natural phenomena. Note that we cannot prove a theory absolutely. It is always possible that further experiments will show the theory to be limited or that someone will develop a better theory”.

“a law is a concise statement or mathematical equation about a fundamental relationship or regularity of nature”. (Ebbing & Gammon, 2009:4)

Aspek NOS: Relationship between scientific theories

and laws,

“A theory is a well-tested, unifying principle that explains a body of facts and the laws based on them. Theories are the cornerstone of our understanding of the natural world at any given time. Remember, though, that theories are inventions of the human mind. Theories can and do change as new facts are uncovered.” law—a concise verbal or mathematical statement of a behavior or a relation that seems always to be the same under the same conditions” (Kotz, Treichel& Townsend, 2012:4) “.

Kotz, C., John, Treichel, M., Paul, & Townsend, R., John. 2012. hemistry & Chemical Reactivity, Eighth Edition. USA : Brooks/Cole.

Ebbing, D., Darrel & Gammon, D., Steven. 2009. General Chemistry Ninth Edition. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Page 13: INDONESIAN PRESERVICE CHEMISTRY TEACHERS’ VIEWS …fmipa.unj.ac.id/smte/sites/default/files... · SRI RAHAYU Department of Chemistry Faculty of Mathematics & Science Universitas

21/11/2015

13

The Questions:

1. Is there a difference between a scientific theory and a scientific law? Explain

your answer!

2. Is it possible that a scientific theory turns into a scientific law when

supported by evidence? Explain your answer.

3. Does a scientific law have high status that a scientific theory? Explain

your answer.

Examples of Students’ Responses (Naive views):

“ Yes, law is regularity form while a theory is statement. A theory can change while a law has higher position than theory” (for Q3)

“Yes, because in constructing a theory, at the beginning a hypotheses is constructed then examined and if it is continuouslyproved the hypotheses will become a theory. A theory that continuously proved can change into a law” (for Q2)

“Law is a development of a theory supported by evidences and has beed proven.” (for Q1)

Aspek NOS: the existence of a universal step-by-

step scientific method

Silberberg & Martin (2010: 8) stated that “If we

could break down a “typical” modern scientist’s

thought processes, we could organize them into

an approach called the scientific method. This

approach is not a stepwise checklist, but rather

a flexible process of creative thinking and testing

aimed at objective, verifiable discoveries about

how nature works. Note, however, that there is

no typical scientist and no single method, and

that luck or a “flash” of insight can and often has

played a key role in scientific discovery.

Silberberg, S.,Martin. 2010. Principles of General Chemistry. New York:

McGraw-Hill.

Page 14: INDONESIAN PRESERVICE CHEMISTRY TEACHERS’ VIEWS …fmipa.unj.ac.id/smte/sites/default/files... · SRI RAHAYU Department of Chemistry Faculty of Mathematics & Science Universitas

21/11/2015

14

Students’ Responses (Naive views):

“Yes. All scientists use the same scientific method to solve problems because the scientific method has been patent that make the result valid” (for Q1)

“Yes, because the steps in scientific method can facilitate scientists in their research and the research will have direction”. (for Q2)

Yes, correct. Because step-by-step in scientific method has been a very scientifically complete research and each researcher must follow the established method although his research is not always successful. (for Q1)

1. Do all scientists especially in the field of chemistry use similar

scientific method when they solve problems?

2. The best scientists/chemists are those who follow the steps of

the scientific method. Explain what you think about this

statement.

The questions:

The study show that the distribution of students’ responses among

the ‘‘informed’’, ‘‘partly informed’’ and ‘‘naïve ’’ categories were

varied across questions or lack of coherence. Therefore, it is

important to strenghten students’ conceptions of NOS, especially on

the aspect of observation and inference, relationship between

scientific theories and laws and the existence of a universal step-by-

step scientific method as they should implement scientific inquiry

based on the New curriculum 2013.

However, simply possessing valid conceptions of NOS does not

necessarily result in improved student conceptions of science

content. Teachers or prospective teachers should also stress on

higher level thinking skills, problem solving, and frequent higher level

questioning (Lederman, 1992).

Therefore, asking teachers to learn about, experience, and reflect on

inquiry-based instruction in conjunction with explicit instruction on the

NOS may be a valuable strategy to improve teachers’ views of the

NOS (Schwartz, Lederman, and Crawford, 2004),

Page 15: INDONESIAN PRESERVICE CHEMISTRY TEACHERS’ VIEWS …fmipa.unj.ac.id/smte/sites/default/files... · SRI RAHAYU Department of Chemistry Faculty of Mathematics & Science Universitas

21/11/2015

15