Advancing students’ NOS understanding: the power of history of science-based instruction within the reconceptualised family resemblance approach


İnci Akçay K., SUNGUR S., YILMAZ TÜZÜN Ö.

International Journal of Science Education, 2025 (SSCI, Scopus) identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Basım Tarihi: 2025
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1080/09500693.2025.2604796
  • Dergi Adı: International Journal of Science Education
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Scopus, Education Abstracts, Educational research abstracts (ERA), ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Psycinfo
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: History of science, Nature of science, Reconceptualized Family Resemblance Approach (RFN)
  • Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

This study examined the effect of history of science (HOS)–based instruction on sixth-grade students' understanding of the nature of science (NOS) through the Reconceptualized Family Resemblance (RFN). RFN conceptualizes NOS across five categories: aims and values, scientific practices, methods and methodological rules, scientific knowledge, and the social–institutional system of science. A mixed-methods Embedded Experimental Model was employed. The sample consisted of 101 students from a public middle school in Türkiye, drawn from four intact classes randomly assigned to experimental and control groups. Quantitative data were collected using the RFN Student Questionnaire administered as pre- and post-tests, while qualitative data were obtained through semi-structured interviews with eight purposively selected students who demonstrated moderate science achievement and balanced gender representation. Pre-test MANOVA results indicated no statistically significant differences between the groups. Post-test MANOVA results showed that students receiving HOS-based instruction achieved significantly higher NOS understanding in the categories of aims and values, scientific knowledge, and the social–institutional system. Although differences in scientific practices and methodological rules were not statistically significant, the experimental group displayed higher mean scores in these dimensions. Qualitative findings supported the quantitative results.