教授科学的本质可提高非 STEM 专业学生的科学素养。

David W Donley
{"title":"教授科学的本质可提高非 STEM 专业学生的科学素养。","authors":"David W Donley","doi":"10.59390/HRWL6927","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Traditionally, science courses focus on knowledge and practices within specific disciplines. There has long been a call, however, to increase the focus on the nature and process of science as a way to improve scientific literacy and increase the transfer of knowledge. Despite this, there are few systematic studies that seek to understand the impact of this approach. Revising a STEM course in a liberal arts curriculum to primarily focus on the nature and process of science rather than on the content of a specific discipline increased student scores on the Test of Scientific Literacy Skills and improved perceptions of STEM. In the revised course, students self-reported higher levels of confidence in their ability to learn scientific information and their ability to contribute to scientific progress compared to traditional methods. These data and other literature suggest that the traditional knowledge-focused approach to science education is insufficient to facilitate scientific literacy and address equity gaps in STEM. Proposed is a model where scientific literacy and feelings of inclusion in STEM are the product of direct engagement in the process of science and careful evaluation of the nature of science. Long-term, a holistic approach that includes an authentic discussion of the enterprise of sciences is needed to prepare students to engage in future problems that are best solved by cross-disciplinary collaboration.</p>","PeriodicalId":74004,"journal":{"name":"Journal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11396173/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Teaching the Nature of Science Improves Scientific Literacy Among Students Not Majoring in STEM.\",\"authors\":\"David W Donley\",\"doi\":\"10.59390/HRWL6927\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Traditionally, science courses focus on knowledge and practices within specific disciplines. There has long been a call, however, to increase the focus on the nature and process of science as a way to improve scientific literacy and increase the transfer of knowledge. Despite this, there are few systematic studies that seek to understand the impact of this approach. Revising a STEM course in a liberal arts curriculum to primarily focus on the nature and process of science rather than on the content of a specific discipline increased student scores on the Test of Scientific Literacy Skills and improved perceptions of STEM. In the revised course, students self-reported higher levels of confidence in their ability to learn scientific information and their ability to contribute to scientific progress compared to traditional methods. These data and other literature suggest that the traditional knowledge-focused approach to science education is insufficient to facilitate scientific literacy and address equity gaps in STEM. Proposed is a model where scientific literacy and feelings of inclusion in STEM are the product of direct engagement in the process of science and careful evaluation of the nature of science. Long-term, a holistic approach that includes an authentic discussion of the enterprise of sciences is needed to prepare students to engage in future problems that are best solved by cross-disciplinary collaboration.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74004,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11396173/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.59390/HRWL6927\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.59390/HRWL6927","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

传统上,科学课程侧重于特定学科的知识和实践。然而,长期以来,人们一直呼吁加强对科学本质和过程的关注,以此来提高科学素养和增加知识的传授。尽管如此,很少有系统的研究试图了解这种方法的影响。对文科课程中的一门科学、技术和工程学课程进行修订,使其主要侧重于科学的本质和过程,而不是特定学科的内容,从而提高了学生在科学素养技能测试中的得分,并改善了对科学、技术和工程学的看法。与传统方法相比,在修订后的课程中,学生们自我报告说,他们对自己学习科学信息的能力和为科学进步做出贡献的能力有了更高的信心。这些数据和其他文献表明,传统的以知识为重点的科学教育方法不足以促进科学素养的提高和解决科学、技术和工程学领域的公平差距。建议采用的模式是,科学素养和对 STEM 的融入感是直接参与科学过程和仔细评估科学本质的产物。从长远来看,我们需要一种全面的方法,包括对科学事业进行真实的讨论,使学生做好准备,参与解决未来的问题,而这些问题最好通过跨学科合作来解决。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Teaching the Nature of Science Improves Scientific Literacy Among Students Not Majoring in STEM.

Traditionally, science courses focus on knowledge and practices within specific disciplines. There has long been a call, however, to increase the focus on the nature and process of science as a way to improve scientific literacy and increase the transfer of knowledge. Despite this, there are few systematic studies that seek to understand the impact of this approach. Revising a STEM course in a liberal arts curriculum to primarily focus on the nature and process of science rather than on the content of a specific discipline increased student scores on the Test of Scientific Literacy Skills and improved perceptions of STEM. In the revised course, students self-reported higher levels of confidence in their ability to learn scientific information and their ability to contribute to scientific progress compared to traditional methods. These data and other literature suggest that the traditional knowledge-focused approach to science education is insufficient to facilitate scientific literacy and address equity gaps in STEM. Proposed is a model where scientific literacy and feelings of inclusion in STEM are the product of direct engagement in the process of science and careful evaluation of the nature of science. Long-term, a holistic approach that includes an authentic discussion of the enterprise of sciences is needed to prepare students to engage in future problems that are best solved by cross-disciplinary collaboration.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Interactive Notebooks Improve Students' Understanding of Developmental Neurobiology, Attitudes Toward Research, and Experimental Design Competency in a Lecture-Based Neuroscience Course. Introducing BRAINOER: The Behavioral Research and Interdisciplinary Neuroscience Open Educational Repository. Low-Cost Classroom and Laboratory Exercises for Investigating Both Wave and Event-Related Electroencephalogram Potentials. Memphis NeuroSTART Program: Promoting Student Success and Increasing the Diversity of Applicants to Neuroscience Graduate Programs. Neurodiversity in the Minds of Students: From Perception to Campus Programming.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1