PEN Academic Publishing   |  ISSN: 1554-5210

Original article | International Journal of Progressive Education 2020, Vol. 16(2) 262-278

What Messages a Documentary and Biographical Film Give About the Nature of Science to Prospective Science Teachers?

Davut Sarıtaş

pp. 262 - 278   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2020.241.18   |  Manu. Number: MANU-1907-04-0001.R1

Published online: April 02, 2020  |   Number of Views: 58  |  Number of Download: 161


Abstract

In this study, the experience of prospective science teachers, who watched a cinema film adapted from the life story of a well-known scientist for the first time in an informal environment, was examined. Answers of two questions were sought in the study; (1) what aspects of the nature of science did the prospective science teachers experience through which scenario elements of the film? (2) how do pre-service teachers interpret these experiences? In this study, being conducted based on hermeneutic phenomenology design; the data were collected through focus group interviews with semi-structured questions prepared by taking into consideration the aspects of the nature of science. Participants were 29 (23 girls, 6 boys) prospective science teachers. The collected data were analyzed by qualitative methods. The findings showed that the participants experience and interpret some aspects of the nature of science through specific scenario elements (representations). It was determined that participants highlighted certain sections (e.g. process of discovery, social reaction) in the story. It was observed that the participants correlated these sections with the nature of science in a positive or negative way and interpret them. The results show that these kinds of films adopted from history of science, which are recommended in the literature, can give positive messages about the nature of science.  In addition, it was observed that the film caused misconceptions about the nature of science, especially due to the scenario. Therefore, it can be said that such films produced for different purposes may lead to some problems in the teaching of the nature of science. From this point of view, even if such films are used, it is obvious that rather than an informal environment, it is necessary to integrate these films into a more structured learning environment where inappropriate messages given by the film can be seen critically.

Keywords: Nature of Science, History of Science, Prospective Science Teachers, Documentary and Biographical Film, Hermeneutic Phenomenology


How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Saritas, D. (2020). What Messages a Documentary and Biographical Film Give About the Nature of Science to Prospective Science Teachers? . International Journal of Progressive Education, 16(2), 262-278. doi: 10.29329/ijpe.2020.241.18

Harvard
Saritas, D. (2020). What Messages a Documentary and Biographical Film Give About the Nature of Science to Prospective Science Teachers? . International Journal of Progressive Education, 16(2), pp. 262-278.

Chicago 16th edition
Saritas, Davut (2020). "What Messages a Documentary and Biographical Film Give About the Nature of Science to Prospective Science Teachers? ". International Journal of Progressive Education 16 (2):262-278. doi:10.29329/ijpe.2020.241.18.

References
  1. Abd-El-Khalick, F. & Lederman, N.G. (2000). The influence of history of science courses on students’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(10), 1057-1095. [Google Scholar]
  2. Allchin, D. (2003), Scientific myth-conceptions. Sci. Ed., 87, 329–351. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce. 10055 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  3. American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS]. (1990). Science for all Americans. A Project 2061 Report. New York: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  4. American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS]. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy: A Project 2061 Report. New York: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  5. Barnett, M., Wagner, H., Gatling, A., Anderson, J., Houle, M. & Kafka, A. (2006). The impact of science fiction films on student understanding of science. Journal of Science Education and Technology. 15 (2), 179-191. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/166420/. [Google Scholar]
  6. Bixler, A. (2007). Teaching evolution with the aid of science fiction. The American Biology Teacher, 69(6), 337-340. https://doi.org/10.1662/0002-7685(2007)69[337:TEWTAO]2.0.CO;2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  7. Cavanaugh, T.W. & Cavanaugh, C. (2004). Teach science with science fiction films: A guide for teachers and library media specialist. Worthington, Ohio: Linworth Publishing, Inc. [Google Scholar]
  8. Çakmakcı, G. (2017). Using video vignettes of historical episodes for promoting pre-service teachers' ideas about the nature of science. Science Education International,28 (1),7-29. [Google Scholar]
  9. Dale, E., Fannie W. D., Charles F. H., Jr. & Etta, S. (1937). Motion pictures in education: a summary of the literature, Source book for teachers and administrators. New York: The H.W. Wilson Company, 1937.  [Google Scholar]
  10. Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. [Google Scholar]
  11. Dhingra, K. (2003). Thinking about television science: How students understand the nature of science from different program genres. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(2), 234–256. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10074 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  12. Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R. & Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Buckingham: Open University. [Google Scholar]
  13. Duschl, R. & Grandy, R. (2012). Two views about explicitly teaching nature of science. Science & Education, 22, 2109-2139.http://www.bu.edu/hps-scied/files/2012/10/Duschl-HPS-Two-Views-on-Explicitly-Teaching-NoS.pdf [Google Scholar]
  14. Gerber, B. L. & Marek, E. A. (2001). Development of an informal learning opportunities assay. International Journal of Science Education, 23 (6), 569-583. [Google Scholar]
  15. Irzik, G. & Nola, R. (2011). A family resemblance approach to the nature of science for science education. Science & Education, 20(7-8), 591-607. [Google Scholar]
  16. Jarvie, I. C. (1970). Movies and society, New York: Basic Books, Inc. https://anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1525/aa.1972.74.6.02a00170 [Google Scholar]
  17. Kapucu, S.M. (2016). An examination of the documentary film “Einstein and Eddington” in terms of nature of science themes, philosophical movements, and concepts. International Journal of Progressive Education, 12 (2), 34-46. http://www.inased.org/v12n2/ijpev12n2.pdf [Google Scholar]
  18. Khishfe, R. & Abd-El-Khalick, F. S. (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry oriented instruction on sixth graders’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551–578. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10036 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  19. Laverty, S. M. (2003). Hermeneutic phenomenology and phenomenology: a comparison of historical and methodological considerations. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 2 (3), 21–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690300200303 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  20. Laprise, S. & Winrich, C. (2010). The impact of science fiction films on student interest in science. Journal of College Science Teaching, 40 (2),45-49. [Google Scholar]
  21. Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: past, present, and future. In Abell, S. K., & Lederman, N. G. (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 831-879). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [Google Scholar]
  22. Lederman, N.G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R.L. & Schwartz, R. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 497-521. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10034 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  23. Lin, H. & Chen, C. (2002). Promoting preservice chemistry teachers’ understanding about the nature of science through history. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(9), 773–792. [Google Scholar]
  24. Logan, R. A. (2001). Science mass communication. Science Communication, 23(2), 135– 163. http://journals.sagepub.com/toc/scxb/23/2 [Google Scholar]
  25. Martin, P. (Director). (2008). Einstein and Eddington. UK: BBC. [Google Scholar]
  26. Matthews, M.R. (2015). Science teaching: the contribution of history and philosophy of science (20th anniversary revised and expanded edition). New York: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  27. McComas W.F. (1998) The Principal elements of the nature of science: dispelling the myths. In McComas W.F. (eds) The nature of science in science education. Science & Technology Education Library, vol 5. Springer, Dordrecht [Google Scholar]
  28. McComas, W. F. (1996), Ten myths of science: re-examining what we think we know about the nature of science. School Science and Mathematics, 96, 10–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1996.tb10205.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  29. McComas, W.F., Clough, M.P. & Almazroa, H. (1998). The role and character of the nature of science in science education. In McComas (Ed.) The Nature of science in science education: rationales and strategies (3-39), The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. [Google Scholar]
  30. Moylan, T. (2018). Scraps of the untainted sky; science fiction, utopia, dystopia. (1st Ed.) New York: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  31. Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage [Google Scholar]
  32. Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. (2nd ed.). Calif.: SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar]
  33. Ministry of Turkish National Education [MONE] (2005). İlköğretim fen ve teknoloji dersi (4. ve 5. sınıflar) öğretim programı. [Elementary science and technology course (4th and 5th Grades) Curriculum]. Ankara: Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı Yayınları [Google Scholar]
  34. Ministry of Turkish National Education [MONE] (2006). İlköğretim fen ve teknoloji dersi (6,7. ve 8. sınıflar) öğretim programı. [Elementary science and technology course (4th and 5th grades) Curriculum]. Ankara: Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı Yayınları [Google Scholar]
  35. National Research Council [NRC]. (1996).  National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. [Google Scholar]
  36. National Research Council. [NRC]. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. [Google Scholar]
  37. National Research Council. [NRC].(2013) Next generation science standards: for states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18290. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  38. National Science Foundation, [NSF]. (2000). Indicators: Science and Engineering 2000. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation. [Google Scholar]
  39. Niaz, M. (2016). History and philosophy of science as a guide to understanding nature of science. Revista Científica, 24, 7-16. Doi: 10.14483/udistrital.jour.RC.2016.24.a1 [Google Scholar]
  40. O’Connor, E. J. (1987) Teaching history with film and television. American Historical Association [Google Scholar]
  41. Özcan, H. (2013). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının fen içeriği ile ilişkilendirilmiş bilimin doğası konusundaki pedogojik alan bilgilerinin gelişimi. Unpublished Master Thesis. Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara [Google Scholar]
  42. Öztürk, Ö.F. (2017). The impact of science-fiction movies on the self- efficacy perceptions of their science literacy of science teacher candidates. Educational Sciences:Theory & Practice, 17 (5), 1573-1603. http://doi.org//10.12738/estp.2017.5.0058 [Google Scholar]
  43. Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd Ed.). London: Sage Publications, Inc. [Google Scholar]
  44. Reichenbach, H. (2006). Bilim felsefesinin doğuşu. [The rise of scientific philosophy] (Trs.C. Yıldırım), Ankara: Bilgi Yayınevi. (The original of the work was published in 1951).  [Google Scholar]
  45. Robertson, J. P. (1995). Screenplay pedagogy and the interpretation of unexamined knowledge in pre-service primary teaching: Taboo. The Journal of Culture and Education 1, 25–60. [Google Scholar]
  46. Schwab, J. (1964). The structure of the natural sciences. In Ford, G.W., Pugno, L. (eds.) The structure of knowledge and the curriculum. Chicago: Rand McNally. [Google Scholar]
  47. Segall, A.E. (2002). Science fiction in the engineering classroom to help teach basic concepts and promote the profession. Journal of Engineering Education, October 419-423. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2002.tb00727.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  48. Settlage, J. & Southerland, S. (2007). Teaching science to every child: using culture as a starting point. Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.  [Google Scholar]
  49. Seckin Kapucu, M., Cakmakci, G. & Aydogdu, C. (2015). The influence of documentary films on 8th grade students’ views about nature of science. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 15(3), 797- 808. [Google Scholar]
  50. Shaw, D.G. & Dybdahl, C.S. (2000). Science and the popular media. Science Activities, 22-31, Summer. [Google Scholar]
  51. Smith, M. U., Lederman, N. G., Bell, R. L., McComas, W. F. & Clough, M. P. (1997). How great is the disagreement about the nature of science? A response to Alters. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(10), 1101-1103. [Google Scholar]
  52. Smith, M.U. & Scharmann, L.C. (1999). Defining versus describing the nature of science: A pragmatic analysis for classroom teachers and science educators. Science Education, 83, 493-509. [Google Scholar]
  53. Smith, V., Scott, J. & Coskrey, W. (1990). Teaching the science in science fiction. Annual meeting of the American association for the advancement of science. New Orleans, LA, February 15-20. [Google Scholar]
  54. Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. [Google Scholar]
  55. Sürmeli, H. (2012). Examination the effect of science fiction films on science education students’ attitudes towards STS Course. Procedia- Social and Behavioural, 47, 1012–1016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.771 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  56. Tan. C. (2006). Philosophical reflections from the silver screen; Using films to promote reflection in pre-service teachers. Reflective Practice, 7 (4), 483-497.  [Google Scholar]
  57. Trier, J. (2002). Exploring the concept of “habitus” with preservice teachers through the use of popular school films. Interchange, 33 (3), 237-260. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1020941318001 [Google Scholar]
  58. Vidal, F. (2018). Introduction: from “the popularization of science through film” to “the public understanding of science”. Science in Context 31 (1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1017/S026988971800008X [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  59. Yenice,N. (Ed.) (2015). Bilimin doğasının gelişimi ve öğretimi [Development and teaching of nature of science], Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık [Google Scholar]
  60. Yıldırım, C. (1985). Bilim felsefesi [Philosophy of science]. İstanbul: Remzi Kitabevi. [Google Scholar]
  61. Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (9. Baskı). Ankara: Seçkin. [Google Scholar]