File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)

Article: Understandings of Nature of Science and Multiple Perspective Evaluation of Science News by Non-science Majors

TitleUnderstandings of Nature of Science and Multiple Perspective Evaluation of Science News by Non-science Majors
Authors
Issue Date2014
PublisherSpringer. The Journal's web site is located at http://springerlink.metapress.com/openurl.asp?genre=journal&issn=0926-7220
Citation
Science & Education (In press), 2014 How to Cite?
AbstractUnderstandings of nature of science (NOS) are a core component of scientific literacy, and a scientifically literate populace is expected to be able to critically evaluate science in the media. While evidence has remained inconclusive on whether better NOS understandings will lead to critical evaluation of science in the media, this study aimed at examining the correlation therein. Thirty-eight non-science majors, enrolled in a science course for non-specialists held in a local community college, evaluated three health news articles by rating the extent to which they agreed with the reported claims and providing as many justifications as possible. The majority of the participants were able to evaluate and justify their viewpoint from multiple perspectives. Students’ evaluation was compared with their NOS conceptions, including the social and cultural embedded NOS, the tentative NOS, the peer review process and the community of practice. Results indicated that participants’ understanding of the tentative NOS was significantly correlated with multiple perspective evaluation of science news reports of socioscientific nature (r = 0.434, p < 0.05). This moderate correlation suggested the association between understanding of the tentative NOS and multiple perspective evaluation of science in the media of socioscientific nature. However, the null result for other target NOS aspects in this study suggested a lack of evidence to assume that understanding the social dimensions of science would have significant influence on the evaluation of science in the media. Future research on identifying the reasons for why and why not NOS understandings are applied in the evaluation will move this field forward.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/209348

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLeung, JSCen_US
dc.contributor.authorWong, ASLen_US
dc.contributor.authorYung, BHWen_US
dc.date.accessioned2015-04-17T05:08:52Z-
dc.date.available2015-04-17T05:08:52Z-
dc.date.issued2014en_US
dc.identifier.citationScience & Education (In press), 2014en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/209348-
dc.description.abstractUnderstandings of nature of science (NOS) are a core component of scientific literacy, and a scientifically literate populace is expected to be able to critically evaluate science in the media. While evidence has remained inconclusive on whether better NOS understandings will lead to critical evaluation of science in the media, this study aimed at examining the correlation therein. Thirty-eight non-science majors, enrolled in a science course for non-specialists held in a local community college, evaluated three health news articles by rating the extent to which they agreed with the reported claims and providing as many justifications as possible. The majority of the participants were able to evaluate and justify their viewpoint from multiple perspectives. Students’ evaluation was compared with their NOS conceptions, including the social and cultural embedded NOS, the tentative NOS, the peer review process and the community of practice. Results indicated that participants’ understanding of the tentative NOS was significantly correlated with multiple perspective evaluation of science news reports of socioscientific nature (r = 0.434, p < 0.05). This moderate correlation suggested the association between understanding of the tentative NOS and multiple perspective evaluation of science in the media of socioscientific nature. However, the null result for other target NOS aspects in this study suggested a lack of evidence to assume that understanding the social dimensions of science would have significant influence on the evaluation of science in the media. Future research on identifying the reasons for why and why not NOS understandings are applied in the evaluation will move this field forward.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherSpringer. The Journal's web site is located at http://springerlink.metapress.com/openurl.asp?genre=journal&issn=0926-7220en_US
dc.relation.ispartofScience & Educationen_US
dc.rightsThe final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/[insert DOI]en_US
dc.titleUnderstandings of Nature of Science and Multiple Perspective Evaluation of Science News by Non-science Majorsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailLeung, JSC: leungscj@hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.emailWong, ASL: aslwong@hkucc.hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.emailYung, BHW: hwyung@hkucc.hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityLeung, JSC=rp01760en_US
dc.identifier.authorityWong, ASL=rp00972en_US
dc.identifier.authorityYung, BHW=rp00985en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s11191-014-9736-4en_US
dc.identifier.hkuros242913en_US

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats