This study explored how four elementary teachers assessed the developmental appropriateness and importance of nine nature of science (NOS) aspects after participating in a yearlong professional development program. A multiple-embedded case study design was employed. The primary data sources included (a) Views of Nature of Science Elementary School Version 2 (VNOS-D2) questionnaire (Lederman & Khishfe, 2002), (b) Ideas about Science for Early Elementary (K-4) Students questionnaire (Sweeney, 2010), and (c) follow-up semi-structured interviews. Data were analyzed using Yin’s (1994, 2003) analytic tactics of pattern matching, explanation building, and cross-case synthesis. The cross-case analysis revealed that our participants used the following criteria separately or in some combination when they were asked to rate NOS aspects in terms of developmental appropriateness and importance: (a) teachers’ NOS learning experience, (b) NOS teaching experience, (c) knowledge of their students, (d) knowledge of curriculum, (e) knowledge of school context, and (f) perceptions about the utility value of a NOS aspect or a myth about a NOS aspect. We found that even though our participants did not rank all NOS aspects equally, they considered all nine NOS aspects developmentally appropriate and important enough to be introduced at the elementary level. 

Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2001). Embedding nature of science instruction in preservice elementary science courses: Abandoning scientism, but... Journal of Science Teacher Education, 12(3), 215-233.

Abd-El-Khalick, F. S. & Akerson, V. L. (2004). Learning about nature of science as conceptual change: Factors that mediate the development of preservice elementary teachers’ views of nature of science. Science Education, 88, 785-810.

Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Akerson, V. (2009). The influence of metacognitive training on preservice elementary teachers’ conceptions of nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 31(16), 2161-2184.

Abd-El-Khalick, F. S., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 665-701.

Akerson, V. L., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2003). Teaching elements of nature of science: A yearlong case study of a fourth grade teacher. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(10), 1025-1049.

Akerson, V. L., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Influence of a reflective explicit activity-based approach on elementary teachers’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(4), 295-317.

Akerson, V. L., Buck, G. A., Donnelly, L. A., Nargund-Joshi, V., & Weiland, I. S. (2011). The importance of teaching and learning nature of science in the early childhood years. The Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(5), 537-549.

Akerson, V. L., Buzzelli, C. A., & Eastwood, J. L. (2012). Bridging the gap between preservice early childhood teachers’ cultural values, perceptions of values held by scientists, and the relationships of these values to conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(2), 133-157.

Akerson, V. L., Cullen, T. A., & Hanson, D. L. (2009a). Fostering a community of practice through a professional development program to improve elementary teachers’ views of nature of science and teaching practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(10), 1090-1113.

Akerson, V. L., Cullen, T. A., & Hanson, D. L. (2010). Experienced teachers’ strategies for assessing nature of science conceptions in the elementary classroom. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(6), 723-745.

Akerson, V., & Donnelly, L. A. (2010). Teaching nature of science to K‐2 students: What understandings can they attain? International Journal of Science Education, 32(1), 97-124.

Akerson, V. L., Hanson, D. L., & Cullen, T. A. (2007). The influence of guided inquiry and explicit instruction on K–6 teachers’ views of nature of science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(5), 751-772.

Akerson, V. L. & Hanuscin, D. L. (2007). Teaching nature of science through inquiry: Results of a 3-year professional development program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 653-680.

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.

Akerson, V. L., Townsend, J. S., Donnelly, L. A., Hanson, D. L., Tira, P., & White, O. (2009b). Scientific modeling for inquiring teachers network (SMIT’N): The influence on elementary teachers’ views of nature of science, inquiry, and modeling. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20(1), 21-40.

Alonzo, A. C., & Gotwals, A. W. (2012). Learning progressions in science: Current challenges and future directions. Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (2009). Benchmarks online. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science. Retrieved from http://www.project2061.org/publications/bsl/online/index.php?home=true

American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (2013). Benchmarks for science literacy: A tool for curriculum reform. Retrieved from http://www.project2061.org/publications/bsl/

Deniz, H., & Akerson, V. L. (2013). Examining the impact of a professional development program on elementary teachers’ views of nature of science and nature of scientific inquiry, and science teaching efficacy beliefs. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 17(3).

Deniz & Adibelli (2014). Exploring how second grade elementary teachers translate their nature of science views into classroom practice after a graduate level nature of science course. Research in Science Education. Advance online publication. doi:10.1007/s11165-014-9447-5

Bell, B., & Gilbert, J. (1996). Teacher development: A model from science education. London: Falmer Press.

Bell, R. L., Matkins, J. J., & Gansneder, B. M. (2011). Impacts of contextual and explicit instruction on preservice elementary teachers’ understandings of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(4), 414-436.

Celik, S., & Bayrakceken, S. (2012). The influence of an activity-based explicit approach on the Turkish prospective science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(4), 75-95.

Choi, J. (2004). ‘The nature of science’: An activity for the first day of class. Retrieved from http://www.scienceteacherprogram.org/genscience/Choi04.html

Cullen, T. A., Akerson, V. L., & Hanson, D. L. (2010). Using action research to engage K-6 teachers in nature of science inquiry as professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(8), 971-992.

Dass, P. M. (2005). Understanding the nature of scientific enterprise (NOSE) through a discourse with its history: The influence of an undergraduate ‘history of science’ course. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 3(1), 87-115.

DeBoer, G. E. (2000). Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(6), 582-601.

Donnelly, L. A., & Argyle, S. (2011). Teachers’ willingness to adopt nature of science activities following a physical science professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22(6), 475-490.

Driver, R., Leach, J., Miller, & Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Bristol, PA: Open University Press.

Duschl, R., Maeng, S., & Sezen, A. (2011). Learning progressions and teaching sequences: A review and analysis. Studies in Science Education, 47(2), 123-182.

Esker, S. A., & Forawi, S. (2007). Explicit teaching of the nature of science: conceptions and misconceptions of early childhood and elementary students. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Educational Research Association. Clearwater, FA.

Feyerabend, P. K. (1975). Against method: Outline of an anarchistic theory of knowledge. London: New Left Books.

Grossman, P.L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.

Hanuscin, D. L., Akerson, V. L., & Phillipson‐Mower, T. (2006). Integrating nature of science instruction into a physical science content course for preservice elementary teachers: NOS views of teaching assistants. Science Education, 90(5), 912-935.

Jenkins, S., & Page, R. (2003). What do you do with a tail like this? Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Koenig, K., Schen, M., & Bao, L. (2012). Explicitly targeting pre-service teacher scientific reasoning abilities and understanding of nature of science through an introductory science course. Science Educator, 21(2), 1-9.

Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions about the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 331-359.

Lederman, N. G. (1999). Teachers’ understanding of the nature of science and classroom practice: Factors that facilitate or impede the relationship. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 916-929.

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. 831-880). New York: Routledge.

Lederman, N. G., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (1998). Avoiding de-natured science: Activities that promote understandings of the nature of science. In W. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies. (pp. 83-126). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Lederman, J. S., & Khishfe, R. (2002). Views of nature of science, form D2. Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL (unpublished paper).

Lederman, N. G. & Zeidler, D. L. (1987). Science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: Do they really influence teaching behavior? Science Education, 71, 721-734.

Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge: The Construct and its Implications for Science Education. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Mansour, N. (2009). Science teachers’ beliefs and practices: Issues, implications and research agenda. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 4(1), 25-48.

Matkins, J. J., & Bell, R. L. (2007). Awakening the scientist inside: Global climate change and the nature of science in an elementary science methods course. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(2), 137-163.

Matkins, J. J., Bell, R., Irving, K., & McNall, R. (2002). Impacts of contextual and explicit instruction on preservice elementary teachers’ understandings of the nature of science. Paper presented at the annual International Conference of the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science, Charlotte, NC. Retrieved from the ERIC database. (ED465615)

McComas, W. F. (1998). The principal elements of the nature of science: Dispelling the myths of science. In W. F. McComas (Ed.) Nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 53-70). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer (Springer) Academic Publishers.

McComas, W. F., Almazroa, H., & Clough, M. P. (1998). The nature of science in science education: An introduction. Science & Education, 7(6), 511-532.

McComas, W. F., Clough, M. P., & Almazroa, H. (1998). The role and character of the nature of science in science education. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 3-39). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

McDonald, C. V. (2010). The influence of explicit nature of science and argumentation instruction on preservice primary teachers’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(9), 1137-1164.

Meyling, H. (1997). How to change students’ conceptions of the epistemology of science. Science & Education, 6, 397-416.

Morrison, J. A., Raab, F., & Ingram, D. (2009). Factors influencing elementary and secondary teachers’ views on the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(4), 384-403.

National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council (NRC). (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Nespor, J. K. (1985). The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching: Final report of the teacher beliefs study. Research and Development Center for Teacher Education, University of Texas, Austin, TX. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED270446).

Nespor, J. (1987). The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19(4), 317-328.

NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Quigley, C., Pongsanon, K., & Akerson, V. L. (2010). If we teach them, they can learn: Young students’ views of nature of science aspects to early elementary students during an informal science education program. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(7), 887-907.

Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307-332.

Posnanski, T. J. (2010). Developing understanding of the nature of science within a professional development program for inservice elementary teachers: Project Nature of Elementary Science Teaching. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(5), 589-621.

Salter, I., & Atkins, L. (2013). Student-generated scientific inquiry for elementary education undergraduates: Course development, outcomes and implications. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(1), 157-177.

Shim, M. K., Young, B. J., & Paolucci, J. (2010). Elementary teachers’ views on the nature of scientific knowledge: A comparison of inservice and preservice teachers approach. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 14, 1-18.

Sweeney, S. J. (2010). Factors affecting early elementary (K-4) teachers’ introduction of the nature of science: A national survey. (Unpublished PhD). University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR.

Windschitl, M., & Sahl, K. (2002). Tracing teachers’ use of technology in a laptop computer school: The interplay of teacher beliefs, social dynamics, and institutional culture. American educational research journal, 39(1), 165-205.

Yin, R. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing.

Yin, R.K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). London: Sage Publications.

Young, E. (1992). Seven blind mice. New York: Penguin Putnam Books for Young Readers.