Exploring the Effects of Explicit Science Process Skill Instructions on Primary School Pre-service Science Teachers Nature of Science Conception
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2025.180406Keywords:
Four component instructional design, Explicit skill instruction, Nature of science, Science process skillAbstract
Informed Nature of Science (NOS) conception is among the professional competencies of science teachers. As a result, extensive research is being conducted on the development of NOS conceptions among pre-service science teachers (PSSTs). However, it remains a significant challenge, particularly because NOS is a meta-concept that necessitates higher-order cognitive skills. In this study, we explored the influence of explicit Science Process Skill (SPS) instruction on the PSST's NOS conception using a quasi-experimental pretest-posttest design with experimental and control groups. SPS is instructed using the four-component instructional design (4C/ID) model. Findings indicated that PSSTs had a less informed conception of NOS, its various themes, and laws vs. theories and methodologies in scientific investigation. Observation and inference, the tentativeness of scientific theories/knowledge, the existence of creativity and imagination in science, and scientific methodology were significant themes of NOS.
On the other hand, laws vs. theories and society and cultural influence on science themes do not show significant improvements. This study demonstrated that explicit SPS instruction is a better framework for developing specific themes of NOS conception. However, it also highlighted the limitations of a single method in altering entire themes, emphasizing the need for an appropriate method for each theme.
References
AAAS (1967) Science: a process approach, Washington, DC: AAAS.
Abd-El-Khalick, F. and Akerson, V. L. (2004) ‘Learning as conceptual change: Factors mediating the development of preservice elementary teachers’ views of nature of science,’ Science Education, Vol. 88, No. 5, pp. 785–810. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10143
Abd‐El‐Khalick, F. and Akerson, V. (2009) ‘The Influence of Metacognitive Training on Preservice Elementary Teachers’ Conceptions of Nature of Science’, International Journal of Science Education, Vol. 31, No. 16, pp. 2161–2184. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802563324
Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2013) ‘Teaching with and about nature of science, and science teacher knowledge domains, Science & Education’, Vol. 22, No. 9, pp. 2087–2107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9520-2
Abell, S. and Lederman, N. (eds.) (2007) Handbook of research on science education, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Aktamis, H. and Ergin, O. (2008) ‘The Effect of Scientific Process Skills Education on Student’s Scientific Creativity, Scientific Attitude and Academic Achievements’, Asia Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 1-21. Retrieved from: https://www.eduhk.hk/apfslt/v9_issue1/aktamis/index.htm
Allchin, D., Andersen, H. M. and Nielsen, K. (2014) ‘Complementary Approaches to Teaching Nature of Science: Integrating Student Inquiry, Historical Cases, and Contemporary Cases in Classroom Practice’, Science and Education, Vol. 98, No. 3, pp. 461–486. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21111
Anderson, R. D. (2002) ‘Reforming Science Teaching: What research says about inquiry’, Journal of Science Teacher Education’, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 1–12 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015171124982
Aslan, S.T. and Kilic, H. E. (2022) ‘Explicit Teaching of Science Process Skills: Learning Outcomes and Assessments of Pre-service Science Teachers’, Mimbar Sekolah Dasar, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 446–465. https://doi.org/10.53400/mimbar-sd.v9i3.45795
Bell, R. L., Matkins, J. J. and Gansneder, B. M. (2011) ‘Impacts of contextual and explicit instruction on preservice elementary teachers’ understandings of the nature of science’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 48, No. 4, pp. 414–436. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20402
Bell, R. L., Mulvey, B. K. and Maengc, J. L. (2016) ‘Outcomes of nature of science instruction along a context continuum: preservice secondary science teachers’ conceptions and instructional intentions’, International Journal of Science Education, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 493–520. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1151960
Bybee, R. W. (2013) The case for STEM education: challenges and opportunities, Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
Capps, D. K. and Crawford, B. A (2013) ‘Inquiry-based professional development: What does it take to support teachers in learning about inquiry and nature of science?’, International Journal of Science Education, Vol. 35, No. 12, pp. 1947–1978. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.760209
Cofre, H., Nunez, P., Santibanez, D., Pavez, J. M., Valencia, M. and Vergara, C. (2019) ‘A Critical Review of Students’ and Teachers’ Understandings of Nature of Science’, Science and Education, Vol. 28, No. 3–5, pp. 205–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00051-3
Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2018) Research methods in education, 8th ed., Abingdon: Routledge.
Coil, D., Wenderoth, M.P., Cunningham, M. and Dirks, C. (2010) ‘Teaching the Process of Science: Faculty Perceptions and an Effective Methodology’, CBE-Life Sciences Education, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 524–535. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.10-01-0005
Dean, D. and Kuhn, D. (2007) ‘Direct instruction vs. discovery: The long view’, Science Education, Vol. 91, No. 3, pp. 384–397. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20194
DebBurman, S. K. (2002) ‘Learning how scientists work: experiential research projects to promote cell biology learning and scientific process skills’, Cell Biology Education, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 154–172. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.02-07-0024
Dirks, C. and Cunningham, M. (2006) ‘Enhancing diversity in science: is teaching science process skills the answer?’, CBE Life Science Education, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 218–226. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.05-10-0121
Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R. and Scott, P. (1996) Young people’s images of science, Buckingham: Open University Press.
Erduran, S. and Kaya, E. (2018) ‘Drawing Nature of Science in Pre-service Science Teacher Education: Epistemic Insight Through Visual Representations’, Research in Science Education, Vol. 48, No. 6, pp. 1133–1149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9773-0
Erduran, S. and Dagher, Z. (2014) Reconceptualizing the nature of science in science education, Dordrecht: Springer.
Fraser, B., Tobin, K. and McRobbie, C. (eds.) (2012) Second international handbook of science education, Dordrecht: Springer.
Gizaw, G. G. & Sota, S. S. (2023) ‘Improving science process skills of students: A review of literature’, Science Education International, Vol. 34, No. 3, pp. 216–224. https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v34.i3.5
Gizaw, G. G., Sota, S. S., Zinabu, S. A. and Adamu, D. W. (2025) ‘Exploring Nature of Science Understanding, Science Self-efficacy and Their Relationships Among Secondary School Pre-service Science Teachers in Ethiopia’, Science and Education, Vol. 34, No. 5, pp. 2991–3014. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-024-00543-x
Herman, B. C. and Clough, M. P. (2016) ‘Teachers’ longitudinal NOS understanding after having completed a science teacher education program’, International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 207–227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-014-9594-1
Jaina, J., Limb, B. K. and Abdullah, N. (2013) ‘Pre-service teachers’ conceptions of the Nature of Science: 6th International Conference on University Learning and Teaching’, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 90, pp. 203–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.07.083
Kampourakis, K. (2016) ‘The “general aspects” conceptualization as a pragmatic and effective means to introducing students to nature of science’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 53, No. 5, pp. 667–682. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21305
Khishfe, R. and Abd-El-Khalick, F. (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, Vol. 39, No. 7, pp. 551–578. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10036
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J. and Clark, R. E. (2006) ‘Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching’, Educational Psychologist, Vol. 41, No. 2, pp. 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1
Klahr, D. and Li, J. (2005) ‘Cognitive research and elementary science instruction: From the laboratory, to the classroom, and back’, Journal of Science Education and Technology, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 217–238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-005-4423-5
Kruit, P. M., Oostdam, R. J., Van den Berga, E. and Schuitema, J. A. (2018) ‘Effects of explicit instruction on the acquisition of students’ science inquiry skills in grades 5 and 6 of primary education’, International Journal of Science Education, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 421–441. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1428777
Lazonder, A. W. and Harmsen, R. (2016) ‘Meta-analysis of inquiry-based learning: Effects of guidance’, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 86, No. 3, pp. 681–718. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315627366
Lederman, N. G. and Lederman, J. S. (2019) ‘Teaching and learning nature of scientific knowledge: is it Deja vu all over again?’, Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, Vol. 1, No. 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0002-0
Liang, L. L., Chen, S., Chen, X., Kaya, K. O., Adams, A. D., Macklin, M. and Ebeneze, J. (2008) ‘Assessing pre-service elementary teachers’ views on the nature of scientific knowledge: a dual-response instrument’, Asia-Pacific Forum for Science Learning and Teaching, Vol. 9, pp. 1–20. Retrieved from: https://www.eduhk.hk/apfslt/v9_issue1/liang/index.htm
Liang, L. L., Chen, S., Chen, X., Kaya, O. N., Adams, A. D., Macklin, M. and Ebenezer, J. (2009) ‘Preservice teachers’ views about nature of scientific knowledge development: An international collaborative study’, International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, Vol. 7, No. 5, pp. 987–1012. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-008-9140-0
Matthews, M. (ed.) (2014) International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching, Dordrecht: Springer.
Mesci, G. and Schwartz, R. S. (2017) ‘Changing Preservice Science Teachers’ Views of Nature of Science: Why Some Conceptions May be More Easily Altered than Others’, Research in Science Education, Vol. 47, No. 2, pp. 329–351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-015-9503-9
Mesci, G. (2020) ‘The influence of PCk-based NOS teaching on pre-service science teachers’ NOS views’, Science & Education, Vol. 29, No. 3, pp. 743–769. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00117-7
Miller, M. C. D., Montplaisir, L. M., Offerdahl, E. G., Cheng, F. and Ketterling, G. L. (2010) ‘Comparison of Views of the Nature of Science between Natural Science and Non-science Majors’, CBE-Life Sciences Education, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 45–54.
https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.09-05-0029
Mutisya, S., Rotich, S. and Rotich, P. (2013) ‘Conceptual Understanding of Science Process Skills and Gender Stereotyping: A Critical Component for Inquiry Teaching of Science in Kenya’s Primary Schools’, Asian Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 359–369.
National Research Council (2014) Developing assessments for the next generation science standards, Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Neumann, K., Kind, V. and Harms, U. (2019) ‘Probing the amalgam: the relationship between science teachers’ content, pedagogical and pedagogical content knowledge’, International Journal of Science Education, Vol. 41, No. 7, pp. 847–861. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1497217
Ozgelen, S. (2012) ‘Students’ science process skills within a cognitive domain framework. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics’, Science and Technology Education, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 283–292. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2012.846a
Shah, P. and Hoeffner, J. (2002) ‘Review of graph comprehension research: implications for instruction’, Educational Psychology Review, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 47–69. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013180410169
Susanti, R., Anwar, Y. and Ermayanti, E. (2018) ‘Profile of science process skills of Preservice Biology Teacher in General Biology Course’, Journal of Physics: Conference Series, Vol. 1006, No. 1, p. 012003. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1006/1/012003
Tanner, K. D. (2012) ‘Promoting student metacognition’, CBE-Life Sciences Education, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 113–120. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-03-0033
Van Merrienboer, J. J. G., Clark, R. E. and De Croock, M. B. M. (2002) ‘Blueprints for Complex Learning: The 4C/ID-Model’, Educational technology research and Development, Vol. 50, No. 2, pp. 39–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504993
Wang, M., Gao, S., Gui, W., Ye, J. and Mi, S. (2023) ‘Investigation of Pre-service Teachers’ Conceptions of the Nature of Science Based on the LDA Model’, Science and Education, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 589–615. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00332-4
Zimmerman, C. (2000) ‘The development of scientific reasoning skills’, Developmental Review, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 99–149. https://doi.org/10.1006/drev.1999.0497
Zion, M., Schwartz, R. S., Rimerman-Shmueli, E. and Adler, I. (2020) ‘Supporting teachers’ understanding of nature of science and inquiry through personal experience and perception of inquiry as a dynamic process’, Research in Science Education, Vol. 50, No. 4, pp. 1281–1304. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9732-9
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Gidele Gito, Solomn Sorsa, Samuel Assefa , Deribe Workineh
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors declare with this manuscript intended for publication to ERIES Journal that:
- all co-authors agree with the publication of the manuscript even after amendments arising from peer review;
- all co-authors agree with the posting of the full text of this work on the web page of ERIES Journal and to the inclusion of references in databases accessible on the internet;
- no results of other researchers were used in the submitted manuscript without their consent, proper citation, or acknowledgement of their cooperation or material provided;
- the results (or any part of them) used in the manuscript have not been sent for publication to any other journal nor have they already been published (or if so, that the relevant works are cited in this manuscript);
- submission of the manuscript for publication was completed in accordance with the publishing regulations pertaining to place of work;
- experiments performed comply with current laws and written consent of the Scientific Ethics Committee / National Animal Care Authority (as is mentioned in the manuscript submitted);
- grant holders confirm that they have been informed of the submitted manuscript and they agree to its publication.
Authors retain copyright and grant ERIES Journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the published work with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in ERIES Journal. Moreover, authors are able to post the published work in an institutional repository with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in ERIES Journal. In addition, authors are permitted and encouraged to post the published work online (e.g. institutional repositories or on their website) as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
