LITERATURE REVIEW
2.5 A BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE LITERATURE
Nature of science describes the character of science and how science functions.
Since scientific knowledge is constantly being questioned, re-evaluated and tested different views about how this knowledge is developed have emerged. Changes in conceptions of nature of science have mirrored major shifts in focus and emphasis in the history, philosophy and sociology of science. There is no single accepted
philosophical view of nature of science but the 'new' philosophy of science offers a view that is more consistent with current scientific practice.Itrejects formal logic as the main tool of scientific analyses rather science history and the science community are looked to for such analyses. Furthermore it invokes sociological, psychological, or cultural elements in attempting to describe the scientific endeavour. Rather than merely examining actual scientific practice, it attempts to situate scientific issues, claims and practices within their larger social and cultural contexts. Historical accounts of science acknowledges science as a human activity and provides a lens as to the ways in which ideas have been tested and developed in the past and the ways in which this has
informed developments in science. These accounts have revealed that nature of science is dynamic, complex and multifaceted. As a result different conceptions of nature of science have emerged and will continue to emerge as affirmed by historians,
sociologists, philosophers, and other members within the scientific community.
Nevertheless consensus does exist within the scientific community as to certain aspects of nature of science that are essential for science education.
From the inception of science education adequate understandings of nature of science have appeared, either implicitly or explicitly, in different science education ideas and goals. Ithas been linked to scientific method, scientific process and inquiry and more recently to scientific literacy. Despite continued interests in nature of science in science curricula, textbooks still seem rigidly bound in communicating the body and terminology of knowledge in science rather than the way that science knowledge comes to exist. As a result empiricism still has a strong influence on the conception and teaching of science. Contemporary science education is faced with many challenges some of which include multicultural science, environmentalism, constructivism, feminism, non-Western sciences, scientific literacy and declining enrolment in science-based disciplines. The scientific community believes that these challenges can be met by understanding nature of science. Accordingly helping learners develop adequate understandings of nature of science have recently been re- emphasized in major reform efforts in science education. The South African outcomes- based science curricula have mirrored such efforts via C2005.
An analysis of the South African science curriculum revealed that C2005 subscribes to contemporary views of learning like constructivism. Itacknowledges that learners develop many conceptions about the scientific world throughout their life experiences and these conceptions have consequences in the course of the development of science teaching. Subsequently C2005 supports learning experiences that challenge learners' ideas, encouraging them to reflect on these in the light of accepted scientific
knowledge and interpretations. A framework of analysis based on three strands: the nature of science knowledge, the nature of scientific inquiry and the relationship between science and society revealed that the new South African science curriculum reflect contemporary views within the scientific community. A requirement of C2005
and the scientific community are that learners develop the following conceptions about nature of science:
The nature ofscience knowledge: Scientific knowledge, including facts, theories, and laws is created tentatively, arduously, and with great ingenuity by groups of scientists. Itis not an objective, literal description of reality, but instead is an uncertain way of imagining or representing certain aspects of reality. Scientific knowledge has basis in empirical evidence nevertheless it is inferential, creative and culturally embedded. Empirical evidence is collected and interpreted based on current scientific perspectives (theory-laden observations and interpretations) as well as personal subjectivity due to scientists' values, knowledge, and prior experiences. Human creativity and imagination is used in the invention of explanations and theoretical models. A model is an imagined mechanism or process that is created by scientists to help them to think about the unknown in terms of the familiar. Scientific knowledge changes as new evidence is brought to evaluate existing theories and laws or when old evidence is reinterpreted. Although change and continuity are persistent features of science, the main body of scientific knowledge is stable, well established, reliable, and grows by being corrected slowly. Scientific understandings is not the only way of making sense of the world since many different cultures have contributed and continue to contribute to our understanding of the physical and biological world.
The nature ofscientific inquiry: Despite popular belief there is no single scientific method or approach nevertheless, all scientific approaches value precision, rigour, evidence, logic, and good arguments. Science is the continual and cyclical process of asking questions and seeking answers therefore formulating hypotheses and designing and carrying out investigations to test the hypotheses characterize scientific inquiry. Hypotheses are widely used for choosing what data to pay attention to and
what additional data to seek, and for guiding the interpretation of the data. However results of similar scientific investigations seldom turn out exactly the same due to differences in methods, or circumstances in which the investigation is carried out, or because of uncertainties in observations or unexpected differences in the things being investigated. Whilst scientists value dispassionate observation and analysis their work is also determined by imagination, and even chance. As a result scientists' explanations about what happens in the world come partly from what they observe and partly from what they think. Consequently it is possible for scientists to legitimately come to different interpretations of the same data and therefore disagree.
The relationship between science and society: Historical analysis has revealed that scientific knowledge is a product of social, religious, political, economic, and environmental circumstances. Furthermore, different people from different cultures have contributed to the advancement of science. Although the scientific enterprise is guided by discipline-centred values it is also embedded in personal, social, cultural values. Consequently science is not value neutral and scientists are no less biased than others are about their perceived interests. Scientists work in groups to seek out possible sources of bias however there is no guarantee against bias. Given that science is a social enterprise new knowledge claims are generally shared and, to be accepted by the scientific community, must survive a process of regulation and evaluation within the scientific community i.e. undergo critical peer review. Despite collaboration and cooperation within the scientific community there is also fierce competition.
The traditional South African curriculum focused on the development of science concepts but nature of science was a 'hoped for' goal. However, C2005 explicitly addresses this shortcoming by including nature of science as one of its three outcomes.
Accordingly nature of science is a new focus for South African teachers and research
in this field is in its infancy. Itis argued that a multiple method approach using both quantitative and qualitative data is required to understand both teachers and learners views about nature of science and to improve teaching and learning in the science classroom. There is agreement that through research, teachers take ownership of the curriculum, are effective agents of transformation and, are more reflective of their practices (Department of Education, 2002b; Keeves, 1998; Wickman, 1994).
2.6 WHY THIS STUDY CONTRIBUTES TO NATURE OF SCIENCE