Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

The Link Between Science Teacher Candidates’ Understandings of the Nature of Science and Their Epistemic Beliefs

  • Original research
  • Published:
Technology, Knowledge and Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

While the epistemic beliefs are defined as beliefs about knowledge and knowing, the nature of science (NOS) is about the epistemological and ontological foundations of science, how scientists work, how scientific knowledge is produced, how it is tested and validated and how society affects or reacts to science. In this study, the link between pre-service science teachers’ general epistemic beliefs (GEB) and their understanding of NOS was examined qualitatively. Hermeneutic phenomenological design was used in the study and the data were obtained from semi-structured interviews with five pre-service science teachers who participated voluntarily. In the analysis, the links of two different phenomena were reached from a single data set. As a result of the research, specific links were found between different types of general epistemic belief dimensions, which are mostly sophisticated, and NOS dimensions. These links were found to confirm many of the divergent relationships quantitatively identified in the literature. In addition, as an original result, it was seen that the relationships previously identified with quantitative methods could be qualitatively differentiated and some relationships not found in the literature could be possible. As a result of the study, it was determined that pre-service science teachers justified their beliefs with their understanding of science and scientific knowledge. When this case is analyses in the light of the literature, it can be explained by the possible influence of science which constitutes the context of the participants. It can be said that the participants approximated their general epistemic beliefs to scientific epistemology in the manner of domain-specific epistemic beliefs (DEB) and finally concretized them with statements emphasizing their understanding of NOS. Moreover, the results imply that participants can justify their developed epistemic beliefs through authorities, both personal and with reference to science, according to the epistemological nature of the knowledge implied. In this respect, the research proposes a testable scheme that reveals holistic connections between GEB and NOS. It also encourages further research into the possible direction of causality underlying the transitivity between GEB–DEB–NOS and scientific epistemological beliefs in its context.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Data availability

The data analyzed in the current study are not publicly available due to privacy and confdentiality restrictions. The data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Akerson, V. L. (2004). Learning as conceptual change: Factors that mediate the development of preservice elementary teachers’ views of nature of science. Science Education, 88(5), 785–810. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adak, F., & Bakır, S. (2017). Science teachers and preservice science teachers’ scientific epistemological beliefs and opinions on the nature of science. Çukurova University Faculty of Education Journal, 46(1), 134–164. https://doi.org/10.14812/cuefd.309443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ağlarcı, O. (2014). The effect of teaching based on direct-reflective approach on chemistry teacher candidates’ views on the nature of science. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Marmara University, Institute of Educational Sciences.

  • Akerson, V., Buzzelli, C., & Donnelly, L. (2008). Early childhood teachers’ views of nature of science: The influence of intellectual levels, cultural values, and explicit reflective teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(6), 748–770. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akerson, V. L., Carter, I., Pongsanon, K., & Nargund-Joshi, V. (2019). Teaching and learning nature of science in elementary classrooms. Science & Education, 28(3–5), 391–411. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00045-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akerson, V. L., Morrison, J. A., & McDuffie, A. R. (2006). One course is not enough: Preservice elementary teachers’ retention of improved views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(2), 194–213. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20099

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bejerano, M. J. M., Rada, B. G., Tabiolo, C. D. L., Cajocon, C. H. C., Cantonjos-Maglente, M. S., & Polinar, D. O. (2023). Exploring the connections between epistemological beliefs, worldviews, and psychological self-efficacy of preservice science teachers. Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities, 6(8s), 438–451.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belotto, M. J. (2018). Data analysis methods for qualitative research: Managing the challenges of coding, interrater reliability, and thematic analysis. The Qualitative Report, 23(11), 2622–2633.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boran, G. H. (2014). The effect of argumentation based science instruction on views of nature of science and epistemological beliefs. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Pamukkale University, Institute of Educational Sciences.

  • Borgerding, L., & Deniz, H. (2019). Nature of science views and epistemological views of college biology students. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 19, 290–303. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42330-019-00049-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borgerding, L. A., Deniz, H., & Shevock, E. A. (2017). Evolution acceptance and epistemological views of college biology students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching., 54(4), 493–519. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.213740

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buehl, M. M., Alexander, P. A., & Murphy, P. K. (2002). Beliefs about schooled knowledge: Domain specific or domain general? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27, 415–449. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.2001.1103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Çetinkaya-Aydın, G., & Çakıroğlu, J. (2017). Learner characteristics and understanding nature of science. Science & Education, 26(7–9), 919–951. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-017-9939-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chai, C. S., Deng, F., Wong, B., & Qian, Y. (2010). South China education majors’ epistemological beliefs and their conceptions of the nature of science. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 19(1), 111–125. https://doi.org/10.3860/taper.v19i1.1512

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, K. W., & Elliott, R. G. (2000). Exploratory study of epistemological beliefs of Hong Kong teacher education students: Resolving conceptual and empirical issues. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 28(3), 225. https://doi.org/10.1080/713650691

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chappell, S. G. (2017). Plato. In S. Bernecker & K. Michaelian (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of philosophy of memory (pp. 385–395). Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, J. A., & Pajares, F. (2010). Implicit theories of ability of Grade 6 science students: Relation to epistemological beliefs and academic motivation and achievement in science. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(1), 75–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2009.10.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, M. M., Chan, K. W., Tang, S. Y., & Cheng, A. Y. (2009). Preservice teacher education students’ epistemological beliefs and their conceptions of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(2), 319–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.09.018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, M., Lankford, D. M., & Wescott, D. J. (2011). Exploring the relationships among epistemological beliefs, nature of science, and conceptual change in the learning of evolutionary theory. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 4(2), 313–322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12052-011-0324-7

    Google Scholar 

  • Choung, H., Newman, T. P., & Stenhouse, N. (2020). The role of epistemic beliefs in predicting citizen interest and engagement with science and technology. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 10(3), 248–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2020.1774094

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clough, M. P. (2008). Teaching the nature of science to secondary and post-secondary students: Questions rather than tenets. California Journal of Science Education, 8(2), 31–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Çolak, H. (2009). Exploring the development of nature of science views and personal epistemologies of upper elementary and middle school students (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Indiana University, Department of Curriculum and Instruction.

  • Conley, A. M., Pintrich, P. R., Vekiri, I., & Harrison, D. (2004). Changes in epistemological beliefs in elementary science students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(2), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.01.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conole, G., Dyke, M., Oliver, M., & Seale, J. (2004). Mapping pedagogy and tools for effective learning design. Computers and Education, 43(1–2), 17–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2003.12.018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cullinane, A., & Erduran, S. (2023). Nature of science in preservice science teacher education–Case studies of Irish pre-service science teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 34(2), 201–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2022.2042978

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeBacker, T. K., Crowson, H. M., Beesley, A. D., Thoma, S. J., & Hestevold, N. L. (2008). The challenge of measuring epistemic beliefs: An analysis of three self-report instruments. The Journal of Experimental Education, 76(3), 281–312. https://doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.76.3.281-314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deng, F., Chen, D., Tsai, C., & Chai, C. S. (2011). Students’ views of the nature of science: A critical review of research. Science Education, 95(6), 961–999. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deniz, H. (2011). Searching for components of conceptual ecology that mediate development of epistemological beliefs in science. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(6), 743–749. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-010-9267-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deryakulu, D., & Bıkmaz, F. H. (2003). The validity and reliability study of the epistemological belief scale. Journal of Educational Research, 2(4), 243–257.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dinçol Özgür, S., & Temel, S. (2021). An examination of university students’ views of the nature of science based on their epistemological beliefs. Journal of Higher Education, 11(2), 438–444. https://doi.org/10.2399/yod.20.656321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolphin, G. R., & Tillotson, J. W. (2015). “Uncentering” teacher beliefs: The expressed epistemologies of secondary science teachers and how they relate to teacher practice. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 10(2), 21–38. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijese.2015.228a

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elby, A., & Hammer, D. (2001). On the substance of a sophisticated epistemology. Issues and Trends, 85, 554–567. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.1023

    Google Scholar 

  • Eroğlu, S. E., & Güven, K. (2006). Examination of university students’ epistemological beliefs in terms of some variables. The Journal of Selcuk University Social Sciences Institute, 16, 295–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gören, D., & Kaya, E. (2023). Students’ understanding of the nature of science and their metacognitive awareness. Boğaziçi University Journal of Education., 40–2(2), 315–336. https://doi.org/10.52597/buje.1123164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J. A., Azevedo, R., & Torney-Purta, J. (2008). Modeling epistemic and ontological cognition: Philosophical perspectives and methodological directions. Educational Psychologist, 43(3), 142–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520802178458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J. A., Sandoval, W. A., & Bråten, I. (2016). An introduction to epistemic cognition. In I. Bråten, J. Greene, & W. Sandoval (Eds.), Handbook of epistemic cognition (pp. 13–28). Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J. A., Torney-Purta, J., & Azevedo, R. (2010). Empirical evidence regarding relations among a model of epistemic and ontological cognition, academic performance, and educational level. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 234–255. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017998

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Ectj, 29(2), 75–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02766777

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hacıömeroğlu, G. (2011). Examining elementary preservice teachers’ epistemological beliefs as predictors of beliefs about mathematical problem solving. Buca Faculty of Education Journal, 30, 206–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofer, B. K. (1997). The development of personal epistemology: Dimensions, disciplinary differences, and instructional practices (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). University of Michigan.

  • Hofer, B. K. (2000). Dimensionality and disciplinary differences in personal epistemology. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(4), 378–405. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofer, B. K. (2001). Personal epistemology research: Implications for learning and teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology Review, 4(13), 353–383. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011965830686

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofer, B. K. (2004). Introduction: Paradigmatic approaches to personal epistemology. Educational Psychologist, 39(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3901_1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofer, B. K. (2006). Domain specificity of personal epistemology: Resolved questions, persistent issues, new models. International Journal of Educational Research, 45, 85–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2006.08.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67, 88–140. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543067001088

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Işıksal, M., Kurt, G., Doğan, O., & Çakıroğlu, E. (2007). Epistemological conceptions of pre-service elementary mathematics teachers: Effects of university and grade level. Elementary Education Online, 6(2), 313–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, K., & Willoughby, S. (2018). Changing epistemological beliefs with nature of science implementations. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 14(1), 010110. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.14.010110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1988). The computer and the mind: An introduction to cognitive science. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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, 53(5), 667–682. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khishfe, R., & 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, 39(7), 551–578. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, S. Y., & Hamdan Alghamdi, A. K. (2021). Saudi Arabian secondary school students’ views of the nature of science and epistemological beliefs: Gendered differences. Research in Science & Technological Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2021.1961721

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitchener, R. (2002). Folk epistemology: An introduction. New Ideas in Psychology, 20, 89–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-118X(02)00003-X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kızkapan, O., Nacaroğlu, O., & Kırmızıgül, A. S. (2023). Pre-service science teachers’ epistemic beliefs, nature of science views, and beliefs in pseudoscience. Science & Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-023-00450-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koseoglu, P., & Köksal, M. S. (2015). Epistemological predictors of prospective biology teachers’ nature of science understandings. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(4), 751–763. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1383a

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Küçükaydın, M., Esen, S., Çite, H., & Geçer, S. (2023). Critical thinking, epistemological beliefs, and the sciencepseudoscience distinction among teachers. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 7(3), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202319566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lecourt ,D.(2006). Philosophy of science. (Trans. I. Ergüden). Dost Kitabevi. (Publication year of the original work 2001)

  • Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 331–359. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660290404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 831–879). Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G., Antink, A., & Bartos, S. (2014). Nature of science, scientific inquiry, and socio-scientific issues arising from genetics: A pathway to developing a scientifically literate citizenry. Science & Education, 23(2), 285–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9503-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, L. (2016). Psychological perspectives on measuring epistemic cognition. In I. Bråten, J. Greene, & W. Sandoval (Eds.), Handbook of epistemic cognition (pp. 375–392). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, M. R. (2012). Changing the focus: From nature of science (NOS) to features of science (FOS). In Advances in nature of science research (pp. 3–26). Springer, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • McComas, W. F. (2002). Science and its myths. In M. Shermer (Ed.), The skeptics encyclopedia of pseudoscience (pp. 430–442). ABC CLIO Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McComas, W. F. (2014). Nature of science. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The language of science education: An expanded glossary of key terms and concepts in science teaching and learning (pp. 67–68). Sense Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • McComas, W. F., & Olson, J. K. (2000). Internatıonal science education standards documents. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education rationales and strategies (pp. 41–52). Kluwer (Springer) Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Sage Publications.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Muis, K. R., Bendixen, L. D., & Haerle, F. C. (2006). Domain-generality and domain-specificity in personal epistemology research: Philosophical and empirical reflections in the development of a theoretical framework. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 3–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9003-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muis, K. R., Trevors, G., Chevrier, M., Greene, J. A., Sandoval, W., & Bråten, I. (2016). Epistemic climate for epistemic change. In J. A. Greene, W. A. Sandoval & I. Bråten (Eds.), Handbook of epistemic cognition (pp. 331–359). Routledge.

  • Munfaridah, N., Adiguna, S., & Purwaningsih, E. (2023). An exploration of teachers’ epistemological belief: A case from in-service and pre-service physics teachers in Bengkulu. KnE Social Sciences, 8(10), 362–372. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v8i10.13462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murat, A., & Erten, H. (2018). An evaluation of science teachers’ epistemological beliefs in terms of several variables. Turkish Journal of Educational Studies, 5(2), 38–63. https://doi.org/10.33907/turkjes.399224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC). (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18290

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ocak, İ. (2018). The relationship between teacher candidates’ views of the nature of science and their problem solving skills. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 419–432. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11329a

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oksal, A., Şenşekerci, E., & Bilgin, A. (2006). Development of the central epistemological beliefs scale: The validity and reliability study. Journal of Uludag University Faculty of Education, 19(2), 371–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Özgelen, S. (2012). Exploring the relationships among epistemological beliefs, metacognitive awareness and nature of science. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 7, 409–431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Özkal, K., Tekkaya, C., Sungur, S., Cakiroglu, J., & Cakiroglu, E. (2010). Elementary students’ scientific epistemological beliefs in relation to socio-economic status and gender. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(7), 873–885. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-009-9169-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Öztürk, N., Akyol, G., & Tuncay Yüksel, B. (2022). How do preservice science teachers’ personal epistemological beliefs differ for different levels of nature of science views? Kırşehir Education Faculty Journal, 23(1), 1042–1090.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, B., & Marra, R. M. (2008). Individual domain-specific epistemologies: Implications for educational practice. In Knowing, knowledge and beliefs: Epistemological studies across diverse cultures (pp. 325–350). Springer Netherlands

  • Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2014). The miniature guide to critical thinking concepts and tools (7th ed.). Foundation for Critical Thinking Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulsen, M. B., & Wells, C. T. (1998). Domain differences in the epistemological beliefs of college students. Research in Higher Education, 39(4), 365–384. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018785219220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peffer, M. E., & Ramezani, N. (2019). Assessing epistemological beliefs of experts and novices via practices in authentic science inquiry. International Journal of STEM Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0157-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, W.G. (1968). Patterns of development in thought and values of students in a liberal arts college a validation of a scheme. Harvard Univ., Cambridge, Mass. Bureau of Study Counsel. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED024315

  • Perry, W. G. (1981). Cognitive and ethical growth: The making of meaning. In A. Chickering (Ed.), The modern American college (pp. 76–116). Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pomeroy, D. (1993). Implications of teachers’ beliefs about the nature of science: Comparison of the beliefs of scientists, secondary science teachers, and elementary teachers. Science Education, 77(3), 261–278. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730770302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryder, J., & Leach, J. (2006). Teaching about the epistemology of science in upper secondary schools: An analysis of teachers’ classroom talk. Science & Education, 17(23), 289–315. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-006-9007-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schommer, M. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 498–504. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.3.498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schommer, M. (1993). Epistemological development and academic performance among secondary students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(3), 406–411. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.85.3.406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schommer-Aikins, M., & Duell, O. K. (2013). Domain specific and general epistemological beliefs: Their effects on mathematics. Revista De Investigación Educativa, 31(2), 330–330. https://doi.org/10.6018/rie.31.2.170911

    Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G., Bendixen, L. D., & Dunkle, M. E. (2002). Development and validation of the Epistemic Belief Inventory (EBI). In B. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 261–277). Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, R. S., & Lederman, N. G. (2002). ‘“It’s the nature of the beast”’: The influence of knowledge and intentions on learning and teaching nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(3), 205–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information, 22(2), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-2004-22201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinatra, G. M., Kienhues, D., & Hofer, B. K. (2014). Addressing challenges to public understanding of science: Epistemic cognition, motivated reasoning, and conceptual change. Educational Psychologist, 49(2), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.916216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M., & Siegel, H. (2004). Knowing, believing, and understanding: What goals for science education? Science & Education, 13, 553–582. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCED.0000042848.14208.bf

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Southerland, S. A., Johnston, A., & Sowell, S. (2006). Describing teachers’ conceptual ecologies for the nature of science. Science Education, 90(5), 874–906. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ståhl, T., Sormunen, E., & Mäkinen, M. (2021). Epistemic beliefs and internet reliance–is algorithmic authority part of the picture? Information and Learning Sciences, 122(11/12), 726–748. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-01-2021-0004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taşkın, Ç. (2012). Epistemological beliefs: As predictors of preservice teachers’ learning approaches. Mustafa Kemal University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 9(19), 273–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, C. C. (2000). Relationships between student scientific epistemological beliefs and perceptions of constructivist learning environments. Educational Research, 42(2), 193–205. https://doi.org/10.1080/001318800363836

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuncay-Yüksel, B., Yılmaz-Tüzün, Ö., & Zeidler, D. L. (2023). Epistemological beliefs and values as predictors of preservice science teachers’ environmental moral reasoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21889

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Üçer-Erdemir, A., & Dinçol Özgür, S. (2023). A descriptive content analysis of theses on the nature of science in Turkey. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 22(86), 683–713. https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.1224389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Üztemur, S., Sevigen, E., Arıkan, B., & Çelik, V. G. (2021). A content analysis of epistemological beliefs in education in the Turkey context (2002–2020). Journal of Interdisciplinary Education: Theory and Practice, 3(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.47157/jietp.846148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, H. H., Hong, Z. R., She, H. C., Smith, T. J., Fielding, J., & Lin, H. S. (2022). The role of structured inquiry, open inquiry, and epistemological beliefs in developing secondary students’ scientific and mathematical literacies. International Journal of STEM Education, 9(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-022-00329-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willoughby, S. D., & Johnson, K. (2017). Epistemic beliefs of non-STEM majors regarding the nature of science: Where they are and what we can do. American Journal of Physics, 85(6), 461–468. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.4979654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yıldırım, A. (1999). Qualitative research method. Education & Science, 23(112), 7–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeineddin, A., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2010). Scientific reasoning and epistemological commitments: Coordination of theory and evidence among college science students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(9), 1064–1093. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20368

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The study was carried out with the highest integrity, transparency, and regard for the participants’ well-being. All participants provided informed consent, and their anonymity and privacy were rigorously protected. To ensure the integrity and reliability of the findings, the research design, methodology, and reporting adhere to ethical principles. The authors are committed to supporting responsible and ethical research techniques, as well as to contribute to knowledge growth with honesty and accountability. Also, as authors of the research, we declare that there is no conflict of interest for this research.

Funding

The authors have not disclosed any funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Science Education, Faculty of Education, Nevsehir Hacı Bektaş Veli University, Nevşehir, Turkey

    Davut Sarıtaş

  2. Department of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Education, Nevsehir Hacı Bektaş Veli University, Nevşehir, Turkey

    Oktay Kızkapan

Authors
  1. Davut Sarıtaş
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Oktay Kızkapan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Davut Sarıtaş.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have not disclosed any competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sarıtaş, D., Kızkapan, O. The Link Between Science Teacher Candidates’ Understandings of the Nature of Science and Their Epistemic Beliefs. Tech Know Learn 29, 1597–1625 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-024-09730-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-024-09730-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy