Diversity of Students' Views about Evidence, Theory, and the Interface between Science and Religion in an Astronomy Course

Nancy W. Brickhouse, Zoubeida R. Dagher, William J. Letts, H. L. Shipman

Journal of Research in Science Teaching · 2000 · 140 citations · 33 references

Concepts

TL;DR

For decades, science education policy has urged teaching the nature of science, yet research on how students develop these understandings within specific courses remains scarce. This study investigates how students’ grasp of the nature of astronomy evolves during a single semester college course. Using work from 340 students and three‑time interviews of selected participants, the authors present class data and a detailed case study of five students’ conceptual development. Results show that instruction prompts students to demand evidence, integrate scientific and religious perspectives, and differentiate scientific from nonscientific theories. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc., J Res Sci Teach 37: 340–362.

Abstract

Arguments for teaching about the nature of science have been made for several decades. The most recent science education policy documents continue to assert the need for students to understand the nature of science. However, little research actually explores how students develop these understandings in the context of a specific course. We examine the growth in students' understanding about the nature of astronomy in a one-semester college course. In addition to student work collected for 340 students in the course, we also interviewed focus students three times during the course. In this article we briefly describe class data and discuss in detail how five students developed their ideas throughout the course. In particular, we show the ways in which students respond to instruction with respect to the extent to which they (a) demand and examine evidence used for justifying claims, (b) integrate scientific and religious views, and (c) distinguish between scientific and nonscientific theories. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 37: 340–362, 2000.

References

33