Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

The Korean Association for Science Education (한국과학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparative Analysis of the Presentation of the Nature of Science (NOS) in Korea and US Elementary Science Textbooks

한국과 미국 초등학교 교과서에 나타난 과학의 본성 비교 분석

  • Received : 2013.12.13
  • Accepted : 2014.05.26
  • Published : 2014.05.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The national reform document, Science for All Americans (AAAS, 1990), and the Next Generation Science Standards (NRC, 2012) emphasize the importance of the nature of science in guiding science educators in accurately portraying science to students. Therefore, it is important that textbook materials convey an accurate conception of the nature of science. This study employs content analysis to examine the content of textbooks in US and Korea elementary science textbooks with regard to the four aspects of the nature of science: (a) nature of scientific knowledge; (b) nature of scientific inquiry; (c) nature of scientific thinking; and (d) nature of interactions among science, technology, and society (Chiappetta, Fillman, & Sethna, 2004). Intercoder reliability was determined by calculating Cohen's kappa (Cohen, 1960). Findings show that while US elementary science textbooks are not balanced in presenting the four aspects of the nature of science regardless of the publishing companies, the presentation of the nature of science in Korean elementary science textbooks have better balanced treatment of the four themes across the grade levels. On the other hand, both US and Korean elementary science textbooks are attempting to convey an idea of what science is by emphasizing scientific knowledge and investigation.

Keywords

References

  1. Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). The influence of history of science on students' view of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(10), 1057-1095. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200012)37:10<1057::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-C
  2. Akerson, V. L., Buzzelli, C., & Donnelly, L. A. (2010). On the nature of teaching nature of science: Preservice early childhood teachers' instruction in preschool and elementary settings. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(2), 213-233.
  3. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for scientific literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
  4. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1990). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
  5. Butzow, C. M., & Butzow, J.W. (2000). Science through children's literature: An integrated approach. (2nded.). Englewood, CO: Teacher Ideas Press.
  6. Chiappetta, Ganesh, Lee, & Phillips. (2006). Examination of science textbook analysis research conducted on textbooks published over the past 100 year in the United States. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco, CA.
  7. Chiappetta, E. L., & Fillman, D. A. (2005). Analysis of five high school biology textbooks used in the United States for inclusion of the nature of science.Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching meeting. Dallas, TX.
  8. Chiappetta, E. L., Fillman, D. A., & Sethna, G. H. (2004). Procedures for conducting content analysis of science textbooks. Department of Curriculum and Instruction, University of Houston. (Original work published 1991).
  9. Chiappetta, E. L., Fillman, D. A., & Sethna, G. H. (1991). A method to quantify major themes of scientific literacy in science textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(8), 713-725. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660280808
  10. Chrisman, D. G. (1984). Science education and national development. Science Education, 68(5), 563-569. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730680506
  11. Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(April), 37-46. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000104
  12. Dole, J.A., & Johnson, V. R. (1981). Beyond the textbook: Science Literature for young children, Journal of Reading, 24(1), 579-582.
  13. Harcourt. (2000). Science, Grades 1,2,3,4,& 5. New York: Author
  14. Houghton Mifflin (2001). Science Discovery Works, Grade 1,2,3,4,& 5. New York: Author.
  15. Lederman, N. G. (2002). The state of science education: Subject matter without context. Electronic Journal of Science Education [On-Line], 3(2), Retrieved December 5, 2006 from. http://unr.edu/homepage/jcannon/ejse/ejse.html
  16. Lee, Y. H. (2013a). A mixed-methods analysis of the presentation about the nature of science (NOS) in high school biology textbooks: using both quantitative and qualitative analysis. National Teacher Education Journal, 6(1), 85-100.
  17. Lee, Y. H. (2013b). Nature of science (NOS) presentation in the introductory chapters of Korean high school life science I textbooks using a qualitative content analysis. Journal of Curriculum Study in Education, 17(1), 173-197.
  18. Lee, Y. H. (2013c). A proposal of inclusive framework of the nature of science (NOS) based on the 4 themes of scientific literacy for K-12 school science. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(3), 553-569. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2013.33.3.553
  19. Lee, Y. L. (2007). How do the high school biology textbooks present the nature of science? Doctoral Dissertation. Houston, TX: University of Houston.
  20. Magraw-Hill. (2002). Science, Grade 1,2,3,4, & 5. Columbus, OH: Author.
  21. McDonald, C. V. (2010). The influence of explicit nature of science and argumentation instruction on preservice teachers'views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(9), 1137-1164. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20377
  22. McFadden, C. P. (1982). Science education in the USSR. Science Education, 66(1), 123-137. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730660114
  23. Ministry of Education and Science Technology (MEST) (2010). Elementary science textbooks 3rd-4th grades. Seoul: Ministry of Education and Science Technology.
  24. Ministry of Education and Science Technology (MEST) (2011). Elementary science textbooks 5th-6th grades. Seoul: Ministry of Education and Science Technology.
  25. Moss, B. (1991). Children's nonfiction trade books: A complement to content area texts. The Reading Teacher, 45, 26-32.
  26. National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  27. National Research Council (NRC). (2012). A framework for K-12 science education, DC: National Academy Press.
  28. 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21005
  29. Scott Foreman. (2001). Science, Grade 1,2,3,4, & 5. Glenview, IL: Author.
  30. Swarts, F.A., Anderson, O.R., Swetz, F. J. (1994). Evolution in secondary school biology textbooks of the PRC, the USA, and the latter stages of the USSR. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(5), 475-505.
  31. Wirszup, I. (1981). The Soviet challenge. Educational Readership, 38(5), 358-360.
  32. Yager, R. E. (1983). The importance of terminology in teaching K-12 science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(6), 577-588. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660200610

Cited by

  1. 우리나라 생명과학 관련 분야 재미 과학자들은 어떻게 과학의 본성을 이해하고 있는가? vol.34, pp.7, 2014, https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2014.34.7.0677
  2. Analysis of Nature Of Science on the history of science in Middle School Science Textbooks by the 2009 Science Curriculum vol.19, pp.2, 2015, https://doi.org/10.24231/rici.2015.19.2.389
  3. Analysis of the Presentation for the Nature of Science in Life Science Chapters ofthe 2009 Revised Middle School Science Textbooks vol.44, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.15717/bioedu.2016.44.1.25
  4. An Analysis of the Nature of Science Included in the First Grade of Middle School Science Textbook for the 2009 Revised Curriculum vol.21, pp.3, 2017, https://doi.org/10.24231/rici.2017.21.3.225
  5. 2015 개정 교육과정 통합과학 교과서의 과학의 본성(NOS) 분석 vol.44, pp.3, 2020, https://doi.org/10.21796/jse.2020.44.3.273
  6. Exploratory content analysis: Whiteness in Korean middle school science textbooks vol.13, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1080/2005615x.2021.1919962