تحلیل کتاب‌های درسی علوم دوره ابتدایی بر اساس بازنمایی مولفه‌های ماهیت علم با کاربست معادلات آنتروپی شانون
محورهای موضوعی : پژوهش در برنامه ریزی درسیزهرا رجبی 1 , اصغر سلطانی 2 , مهرانگیز علی نژاد 3
1 - کارشناس ارشد برنامه‌ریزی درسی، گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه شهید باهنر کرمان، کرمان، ایران.
2 - دانشیار گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه شهید باهنر کرمان، کرمان، ایران.
3 - استادیار گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه شهید باهنر کرمان، کرمان، ایران.
کلید واژه: آنتروپی شانون, علوم تجربی, ماهیت علم, کتاب درسی, تحلیل محتوا, دوره ابتدایی,
چکیده مقاله :
هدف پژوهش حاضر تحلیل کتاب‌های درسی علوم دوره ابتدایی بر اساس بازنمایی مولفه های ماهیت علم بود. روش پژوهش توصیفی از نوع تحلیل محتوا بود. جامعه آماری پژوهش شامل کتاب های درسی علوم تجربی پایه‌های ششگانه دوره ابتدایی در سال 1400، روش نمونه‌‌گیری تصادفی ساده و حجم جامعه با نمونه برابر بود. ابزار گرد آوری داده ها چک لیست تحلیل محتوای استاندارد (برگرفته از Phillips et al., 2015) بود. واحد تحلیل شامل جملات و پاراگراف ها، سوالات، شکل ها، جداول، نظرات حاشیه ای یا تعاریف و مراحل مختلف فعالیت آزمایشگاهی یا عملی بود. پایایی ابزار از طریق محاسبه شاخص هولستی 82/0 برآورد شد. تحلیل داده ها با استفاده از شیوه جبرانی پردازش داده‌های فراوانی، یعنی آنتروپی شانون انجام گرفت. نتایج نشان داد که بیشترین توجه کتاب های درسی علوم دوره ابتدایی مربوط به مولفه علم به عنوان شیوه پژوهش و کمترین میزان توجه کتاب های درسی علوم دوره ابتدایی مربوط به مولفه علم به عنوان تعامل میان علوم، فناوری و جامعه بود . نتایج همچنین نشان داد که نسبت متوازنی در توزیع مولفه ها در کتاب های درسی علوم رعایت نشده است. نتیجه کلی پژوهش حاکی از آن بود که چگونگی توزیع مولفه‌های ماهیت علم در کتاب‌های درسی علوم دوره ابتدایی بر اساس یافته‌های این پژوهش نیازمند بازنگری است.
The aim of this study was to analysis of elementary science textbooks based on the representation of nature of science. The research method was descriptive and content analysis. The statistical population of the research included the experimental science textbooks of the sixth grades of the academic year of 2021, simple random sampling was used and the size of the population was equal to the sample. The data collection tool was a content analysis checklist (adapted from Phillips et al., 2015). The unit of analysis consisted of complete sentences and paragraphs, questions, figures, tables, margins or definitions, and each stage of a laboratory or practical activity. The reliability of the instrument was estimated to be 0.82 through calculating the Holsti index. Data analysis was done using compensatory data processing method, that is, Shannon entropy. The results showed that the highest level of attention of elementary science textbooks is related to the science as a way of investigating and the least attention was paid to the science textbooks of elementary school related to the component of science as the interaction of science, technology, and society. The results also showed that the balanced ratio in the distribution of components was not observed in science textbooks. The general result of the research indicated that the distribution of the components of the nature of science in elementary science textbooks needs to be revised based on the results of current research.
Abd-El-Khalick, F. (1998). The influence of history of science courses on students’ conceptions of the nature of science. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Oregon State University, Oregon.
Abd‐El‐Khalick, F., Myers, J. Y., Summers, R., Brunner, J., Waight, N., Wahbeh, N., ... & Belarmino, J. (2017). A longitudinal analysis of the extent and manner of representations of nature of science in US high school biology and physics textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(1), 82-120.
Akgun, S., & Kaya, E. (2020). How do university students perceive the nature of science? Science & Education, 29(2), 1-32.
Andersson-Bakken, E., Jegstad, K. M., & Bakken, J. (2020). Textbook tasks in the Norwegian school subject natural sciences: what views of science do they mediate? International Journal of Science Education, 42(8), 1320-1338.
Asgarikhah, N. (2017). Examining the 6th elementary science textbook from the perspective of the nature of science. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Shahid Rajaie. [In Persian]
Cheung, K. K. C. (2020). Exploring the inclusion of nature of science in biology curriculum and high-stakes assessments in Hong Kong. Science & Education, 29(3), 491-512.
Chiappetta, E. L., & Koballa, T. R., Jr. (2002). Science instruction in the middle and secondary schools (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Chua, J. X., Tan, A. L., & Ramnarain, U. (2019). Representation of NOS aspects across chapters in Singapore Grade 9 and 10 Biology textbooks: insights for improving NOS representation. Research in Science & Technological Education, 37(3), 259-278.
Glasson, G. E., & Bentley, M. L. (2000). Epistemological undercurrents in scientists' reporting of research to teachers. Science Education, 84(4), 469-485.
Hansson, L., Leden, L., & Thulin, S. (2020). Book talks as an approach to nature of science teaching in early childhood education. International Journal of Science Education, 42(12), 2095-2111.
Hodson, D., &Wong, S. L. (2014). From the horse’s mouth: why scientists’ views are crucial to nature of science understanding. International Journal of Science Education, 36(16), 2639–2665.
Karimi, M.-H., Mazidi, M., & Mehrmohammadi, M. (2007). Examining of the Grade 1 high school science textbook from the perspective of philosophy of science. Journal of social and human sciences of Shiraz University, 26(3), 111-136. [In Persian]
Khishfe, R., & Lederman, N. G. (2007). Relationship between instructional context and views of nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 29(8), 939–961.
Li, X., Tan, Z., Shen, J., Hu, W., Chen, Y., & Wang, J. (2020). Analysis of five junior high school physics textbooks used in China for representations of nature of science. Research in Science Education, 50(3), 833-844.
Liaghat, S., Niknam, Z., & Bagheri, S. (2013). "The nature of science" and experimental science education: Analysis of the content of the third-grade experimental science textbook. Quarterly Journal of Curriculum Studies, 29, 89-116. [In Persian]
McComas, W. F., Clough, M. P., & Almazroa, H. (1998). The role and character of the nature of science in science education. Science & Education, 7(6), 511–532.
Mola, S., Fathi-Azar, E., & Adib, Y. (2016). The experiences of high school science teachers from the nature of science: A phenomological study. Research in Curriculum Planning, 13(24), 38-53. [In Persian]
Park, W., Yang, S., & Song, J. (2020). Eliciting students’ understanding of nature of science with text-based tasks: Insights from new Korean high school textbooks. International Journal of Science Education, 42(3), 426-450.
Phillips, M. C., Vowell, J. E, Lee, Y. H, Plankis, B. J. (2015). How do elementary science textbooks present the nature of science? The Educational Forum, 79(2), 148-162.
Ramnarain, U. D., & Chanetsa, T. (2016). An analysis of South African Grade 9 natural sciences textbooks for their representation of nature of science, International Journal of Science Education, 38(6), 922-933.
Soltani, A., Sharif, M., & Roknizadeh, R. (2010). The study of faculty members views about aspects of nature of science in the science curriculum. Quarterly Journal of Research and Planning in Higher Education, 16(2), 1-17. [In Persian]
Summers, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2019). Examining the representations of NOS in educational resources. Science & Education, 28(3), 269-289.
Yeh, Y.-F., Erduran, S., & Hsu, Y.-S. (2019). Investigating coherence about nature of science in science curriculum documents. Science & Education, 28(3), 291-310.
Zaheri, M., Abdolmaleki, S., & Farjadmand, L. (2018). Understanding of Student Teachers of Science Education from the Nature of Science: A Case Study of Tehran Teacher Training Centers. Research in Curriculum Planning, 15(31), 79-94. [In Persian]
_||_