Pre-Service Secondary Science Teachers and the Contemporary Epistemological and Philosophical Conceptions of the Nature of Science: Scientific Knowledge Construction Through History
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this research, we aim to synthesize the complex issue of students’ and science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science (NOS). We identified the conceptions of ninety-five pre-service science teachers (PSTcs) enrolled in the Qualifying Master’s Program in Teaching Science at the secondary level in Quebec (Canada) about the NOS, particularly relative to the development of science through history and approaches to constructing scientific knowledge, especially regarding the relationship between observation, hypothesis, experiment, measure and theory. To this end, we constructed a multiple-choice questionnaire (MCQ) comprising 11 statements to characterize their conceptions. The qualitative data analysis underscores the intricate nature of scientific knowledge construction. The PSTcs identified are as follows: 1. Scientific theories today correspond to improving ancient theories; 2. Science progresses by accumulation; 3. Science advancement results from improving current theories thanks to experimentation; 4. The observation is a pure observation that is preconceived; 5. We must experiment with scientific equipment in a laboratory to disprove a theory; and 6. Experiments precede scientific theory. These conceptions are crucial not only for developing training programs that help pre-service science teachers (PSTs) to study the concepts of science prescribed in the curriculum within the history and epistemology of science, but also to underscore the urgency and importance of addressing these conceptions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.067 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".