Teaching the Nature of Science at University: Knowledge-to-Practice Brief

TEACHING SCIENCE AT UNIVERSITY KNOWLEDGE-TO-PRACTICE BRIEF #12
What is the nature of science?
Understanding the nature of science is knowing what science is
and how scientists work. This means understanding that:
•scientific knowledge relies heavily upon empirical
evidence – this refers to both quantitative and qualitative
data. Even highly theoretical concepts must have a clear
basis in observational or experimental data to be
considered valid.
•science involves more than the accumulation of hundreds
of observations. Knowledge is derived from a combination
of observation and inference. However there is not one
scientific method, but many scientific methodologies.
•all scientific knowledge is subject to change in light of new
evidence and new ways of thinking. What makes an idea
scientific is the goal of maximum explanatory and
predictive power combined with its falsifiability.
•there is a difference between!induction and deduction. So
we must characterize and instantiate the types of inferential
reasoning that are acceptable in science and what
problems and opportunities this presents in public
understanding.
•creativity is a source of innovation and inspiration in
science. Scientists use creativity and imagination
throughout their investigations.
For a complete list of references plus links, please go to: https://www.coursera.org/learn/teachingscience/resources/DUygt!
This brief will…
• Explain what the nature of
science (NOS) is.
• Make the case that we should
teach not only science but also
about science
• Show the most common myths
about the nature of science
• Provide ideas how to teach
about the nature of science
Get the terms right
Most students mix-up the terms:
law, theory, and hypothesis.
A law is a description of
relationships or patterns in
nature consistently observed in
nature; often expressed in
mathematical terms.
A scientific theory is a well-
supported explanation of natural
phenomena. In short: a law
describes what happens, a theory
why it happens.
In our everyday lives the word
“hypothesis” means an
“intelligent guess.” However in
science, hypotheses are based
on theory; supported by lines of
evidence; and are based on the
prior experience, background
knowledge, and observations of
the scientists.
TEACHING THE NATURE OF SCIENCE
From teaching science to teaching about science
Teaching science at university traditionally focuses on the
technical contents of science, that is, the theories, generalizations,
laws and models that are described in textbooks. However, to
become a scientist it takes more than that: students need to
develop accurate views of what science is, including the types of
questions science can answer, how science differs from other
disciplines, and the strengths and limitations of scientific
knowledge.
You can find our MOOC at: www.coursera.org/learn/teachingscience

TEACHING SCIENCE AT UNIVERSITY KNOWLEDGE-TO-PRACTICE BRIEF #12
For a complete list of references plus links, please go to: https://www.coursera.org/learn/teachingscience/resources/DUygt!
What to try
Be Explicit
Doing hands-on activities is not
teaching about the nature of
science. Explicit instruction is
central to effective nature of
science instruction. This requires
discussion and reflection on the
characteristics of scientific
knowledge and the scientific
enterprise (Bell et al., 2003),
(Khishfe & Abd-El-Khalick, 2002).
Connect to Context
Students need to experience
specific activities designed to
highlight particular aspects of the
nature of science. Inquiry
activities, socio-scientific issues,
and episodes from the history of
science are proven to be helpful.
Link to Inquiry
By linking instruction about the
nature of science to lessons
involving skills (like observe,
measure, infer, classify, predict
etc.), students can learn about
science as they learn the skills
necessary to do science.
Resources
•Keys to teaching the Nature of
Science
•Seven principles on the nature
of science (Lederman, 2007)
•From Nature of Science to
Features of Science
Broader context
Teaching the nature of science
makes your students become
more reflective and even better
researchers. As a “byproduct“:
understanding the nature of
science increases students
interest and engagement.
Myths about the nature of science
Many students hold alternative conceptions about what science is
and how it works. This section explains and corrects some of the
most common myths your students are likely have trouble with:
The scientific method!
Perhaps the most commonly held myth about the nature of
science is that there is a universal scientific method, with a
common series of steps that all scientists follow. The steps usually
include defining the problem, forming a hypothesis, making
observations, testing the hypothesis, drawing conclusions, and
reporting results.
Experiments are the main route to knowledge!
Science does involve investigation of some sort, but experiments
are just one of many different approaches used. In a number of
science disciplines, such as geology, cosmology, or medicine,
experiments are either not possible, insufficient, unnecessary, or
unethical.
Science proves ideas!
Popular media often talks about “scientific proof”. However,
accumulated evidence can never provide absolute proof – it can
only ever provide support. A single negative finding is enough to
overturn a scientific hypothesis or theory.
Science is procedural and not creative!
Many students see science as following a series of steps and
being dry, uninspiring, and unimaginative. However creativity is
found in all aspects of scientific research, from coming up with a
question, creating a research design, interpreting and making
sense of findings, or looking at old data in new ways.
Scientists are objective!
Students often search for the objective, scientific argument. But
in reality, scientists cannot be objective given their background
knowledge, scientific conceptions, and experiences. Like all
observers, they have a myriad of preconceptions and biases that
they will bring to every observation and interpretation they make.
Hard sciences are more scientific than soft sciences.!
Often students think that hard science (e.g., chemistry and
physics) are more trustworthy than soft sciences (e.g., psychology
and sociology) because they use more rigorous, quantitative
methods. In fact, the rigor of a scientific study has much more to
do with the investigator's approach than with the discipline. Many
psychology studies, for example, are carefully controlled, rely on
large sample sizes, and are highly quantitative.