In
nternational R
Research in Education
E
ISSN 2327-5499
2
2014, Vol. 2, No. 1
Peerceptions of Prospeective Science
S
Teacheers abo
out
a Tecchnolog
gy Concepts aand
Sccience and
Scientiific-Tecchnolog
gical Literacy
L
y
Faatma Taşkın Ekici (Corrresponding Author)
Deppt. of Primaary Science Teacher Ed
ducation, Paamukkale U
University
PAU Egitiim Fak. Kinnikli Kampu
usu no.132, Denizli, Tuurkey
Tel: 90-258-296
9
-1106. E-m
mail: fekici@
@pau.edu.tr
M
Mustafa Aydoğdu
Dept. of Primary Sciennce Teacherr Education,, Gazi Univversity
Gazi Universitesi,
U
, Gazi Eğitim
m Fak., Ank
kara, Turkeyy
Tel: 90
0-312-202-88196. E-mail: musayd@
@gazi.edu.ttr
Receiveed: June 17,, 2013
doi:10.55296/ire.v2ii1.4965
Accepted:
A
Seeptember 24
4, 2013
Published:
P
JJanuary 22, 2014
URL: http://dx.do
oi.org/10.52
296/ire.v2i1 .4965
Abstract
m of this stuudy is to deetermine pree-service sccience teach
hers’ percepptions aboutt science
The aim
and techhnology concepts and to express the thoughtts about theeir scientificc and techn
nological
literacyy. The relattional surveey method was used about
a
the perceptions
p
of the Jun
nior and
Senior degree stuudents of sccience teaccher education program
m at scienc
nce and technology
conceptt. The data were colleected througgh on semii structured
d interview form inclu
uding 10
items ddeveloped byy researcheers. The reseearch includ
des 116 pree-service sciience teach
hers. The
data obbtained from participants were analysed qualitatively
q
y with usin
ing HyperR
Research
softwarre by open coding
c
technique. The conception
ns were interrpreted in teerms of dettermined
categories and connceptual co
onstructions . According
g to the fin
ndings, the perception
ns of the
pre-servvice sciencee teachers on
o science and techno
ology concepts are gennerally positive and
the perrceptions haave consistency to thee literature. In additio
on, pre-servvice teachers show
positivee behaviour to become literate in sscience and technology
y.
169
http://ire.macrrothink.org
In
nternational R
Research in Education
E
ISSN 2327-5499
2
2014, Vol. 2, No. 1
Keywords: Preservves teacher,, science annd technolog
gy concept, literacy
1. Introoduction
Recent science eduucation refo
orm efforts have ackno
owledged itts importannce by emph
hasizing
nce, technollogy, scienttific and
the need for studeents to deveelop a rich uunderstandiing of scien
n understan
nding is neccessary to integrate
i
technology literacyy concepts reasoning tthat such an
knowledge of the natural
n
worlld (Americaan Associatiion for the Advanceme
A
ent of Science, 1993;
Nationaal Researchh Council, 1995). In ttoday’s socciety, sciencce plays ann importantt role in
everydaay life wheere develop
pments aree occurring at a rapid
d pace. Addvances in science
continuue to have a major imp
pact on sociiety and thee life of peo
ople. It is; ttherefore, fo
ocus has
been diirected to the
t overwh
helming im
mportance of
o science education
e
iin schools and the
advancees in science should plaay a fundam
mental in gro
owing scien
ntifically lite
terate studen
nts.
The prim
mary goal for
f the curreent science education reform
r
initiaative is to pprepare and develop
a socieety that is scientificallly literate (AAAS, 1989,
1
1993
3; NRC, 19996) who will be
responssible for perrsonal decisions that aff
ffect the locaal and globaal communiity (Bell, Leederman,
& Abd--El-Khalickk, 2000; Smiith & Scharrmann, 1999
9). Not all educators
e
aggree to the meaning
m
of the tterm scientiific literacy
y, and withoout a clear definition, science refform outco
omes are
vague, aand often diifficult to asscertain (DeeBoer, 2000
0) (Cited by
y Butler, 20009).
The Naational Sciennce Education Standardds (NSES) holds
h
that scientific liteeracy implies that a
person can identiffy scientificc issues unnderlying national
n
and
d local deccisions and express
positionns that are scientificall
s
ly and technnologically informed (NSES,
(
19996). In the National
N
Sciencee Education Standards (1996,
(
p.222), the conteent standards define scieentific literaacy.
“Scientific literacy means
m
that a person can
c
ask, find, or deteermine ansswers to
questions derived
d
from
m curiosity about everyyday experiiences. It m
means that a person
has the ability to descrribe, explainn, and pred
dict natural phenomena
p
a. Scientific literacy
entails beinng able to read with uunderstandiing articles about scieence in the popular
ppress and to engage in social cconversation about the validity oof the concclusions.
l
imp
plies that a person can
c
identify
fy scientific issues underlying
Scientific literacy
national and
a
local decisions
d
aand express positionss that are scientifica
ally and
technologiccally inform
med. A literaate citizen should be able
a
to evalluate the qu
uality of
scientific innformation on the basiis of its sou
urce and thee methods uused to gen
nerate it.
Scientific liiteracy also
o implies thee capacity to
t pose and
d evaluate aarguments based
b
on
evidence annd to apply conclusionns from such
h argumentss appropriaately” (NSE
ES, 1996,
pp. 22).
Definitiions relatedd to scientiffic literacy started to appear in literature sinnce 1950s and this
conceptt attracted the
t attention
n of many sscientists sin
nce then. Many
M
definittions have been
b
put
forwardd for scienttific literacy
y since Pauul deHard Hurd used the term iin 1958 (A
American
Associaation for thee Advancem
ment of Scieence [AAAS
S], 1989; By
ybee, 1997;; Gräber et al.,
a 2001;
Holbroook & Rannnikmae, 199
97; Hurd, 11958; Laug
gksch, 2000
0; National Science Ed
ducation
Standarrds [NSES],, 1996; Organisation foor Economic Cooperatiion and Devvelopment [OECD],
2003; 22007). As a result, owin
ng to the facct that scien
ntists studieed with diffeerent dimen
nsions of
170
http://ire.macrrothink.org
In
nternational R
Research in Education
E
ISSN 2327-5499
2
2014, Vol. 2, No. 1
scientiffic literacy in the literrature, theyy put forwaard several different ddescriptionss of the
scientiffic literacy from
f
each other.
1.1 Liteerature Reviiew
Norris aand Philipss (2003) con
ntend that tthe term scientific literracy has beeen used to include
various componennts from thee following : “Knowled
dge of the substantive
s
content off science
and thee ability to distinguish from non-sscience; Un
nderstanding
g science an
and its appliications;
Knowleedge of whhat is consid
dered as sccience; Indeependence in
i learning science; Ability
A
to
think scientificallyy; Ability to
t use scieentific know
wledge in problem soolving; Kno
owledge
needed for intelliggent particiipation in science-bassed issues; Understandding the nature of
science, including its relation
nship with culture; Ap
ppreciation of and com
mfort with science,
includinng its wondder and cu
uriosity; Knnowledge off the risks and benefi
fits of scien
nce; and
Ability to think criitically abou
ut science annd to deal with
w scientiffic expertisee”.
Scientiffic literacy has been representedd differently by scien
nce educatoors and researchers
accordinng to their individual perspective
p
s and so rem
mained an elusive conncept (Bybee, 1997;
Hurd, 11998). Scienntific literaccy has beenn associated
d with scien
ntific contennt knowledg
ge, ways
of thinkking, and understandin
u
ngs of scienntific facts,, concepts and
a processses (Rascoee, Chun,
Kemp, Jackson, Lii, Oliver, & Tippins, 1 999) or as part of an individual’s
i
s intellectuaal ability
or accom
mplishmentts in buildin
ng socially iinformed, competent
c
and
a responsiible citizensship in a
democrratic societyy (Bybee,19
997). An unnderstanding of the meeaning of sscientific litteracy is
fundam
mental for im
mproving th
he quality oof science teaching
t
and learning and for dev
veloping
scientiffically literaate citizens.
Nowadaays, peoplee have turned to onlinne resources to get neews and infformation, to
t shop,
make trravel reservvations, soccialize withh friends who
w live bo
oth far andd near, wattch their
favoritee television shows and
d movies, an
and play gam
mes with people
p
who live far fro
om their
commuunities and whom
w
they may have nnever met in
n person. Th
his assertionn acknowledges the
fact thaat an undersstanding of science andd technolog
gy through school scieence is essential for
studentss in order too understand
d and cope with the demands of th
he modern w
world. Acco
ording to
Goodruum et al. (22001), schoo
ol curriculuum often seeparates sciience from technology
y and so
studentss find science not interesting annd not relaated to theiir lives. Laayton, Jenk
kins and
Donnelly (1994) argue
a
that sccience and technology
y are relevant to scienttific literacy
y and as
such, shhould be seecluded. Jen
nkins (19922) further no
otes that science teachhing do not need to
concenttrate on scieentific featu
ures, laws aand principlles but to be
b taught wiithin the co
ontext of
technology.
Sciencee and technoology issues; thereforee, need to in
nvolve teach
hing sciencce concepts through
technology so thatt science iss developedd through interesting
i
contexts (O
Osborne & Collins,
2000; S
Shamos, 19995). Also Sccience, Techhnology and
d Society isssues shouldd be includeed in the
school science currriculum so that learneers can dev
velop scientific and tecchnological literacy
(Bybee,, 1997). Thhese points suggest to integration of technology to educcational sysstem for
developping scientifically and
d technolo gically liteerate citizen
ns. Sciencee, technolo
ogy and
society issues shouuld involvee science annd technology concern
ns so that ciitizens can develop
scientiffic and technological liiteracy to liive as good
d and respon
nsible citizeens and for them to
171
http://ire.macrrothink.org
In
nternational R
Research in Education
E
ISSN 2327-5499
2
2014, Vol. 2, No. 1
cope wiith contempporary scien
ntific and tecchnologicall advancemeent.
Sciencee and technnology con
nfront indivviduals at personal,
p
co
ommunity, national an
nd even
global llevels. Hennce, it is important for policy-mak
kers to ask about the ddegree to which
w
all
individuuals in sociiety are preepared to inn relevant content
c
areas and havve understan
nding of
them (O
OECD, 20066).
The Innternational Society for
f
Technoology in Education
E
has develooped the National
N
Educatiional Technnology Stand
dards for Sttudents (NE
ETS) (ISTE,, 2007), whhich outliness critical
skills thhat studentss should deevelop to bee prepared for the futture. These standards describe
“What sstudents shoould know and
a be ablee to do to leaarn effectively and livee productiveely in an
increasiingly digital world,” (p
p. 1) which iincludes skiills and disp
positions suuch as: (a) crreativity
and innnovation, (bb) communication and collaboration, (c) reseearch and innformation fluency,
(d) critiical thinkinng, problem
m solving, aand decision
n making; (e) digital ccitizenship,, and (f)
technology operatiions and con
ncepts (ISTE
E, 2007).
According to the National Sccience Eduucation Stan
ndards (199
96), “the gooal of scien
nce is to
understand the nattural world
d, and the ggoal of tech
hnology is to make m
modification
ns in the
world too meet hum
man needs” (p.
( 24). Nevvertheless, the
t close rellationship bbetween scieence and
technology is acknnowledged as:
a A singlee problem often
o
has bo
oth scientificc and techn
nological
aspects. The needd to answeer questionss in the naatural world drives thhe developm
ment of
technological prodducts; moreeover, technnological needs
n
can drive
d
scienttific researcch. And
technological prooducts, from
m pencils to compu
uters, provide tools that prom
mote the
understanding of natural
n
phen
nomena (p. 224)
Technollogical liteeracy has been definned in varrious ways. In 2000,, the Interrnational
Technollogy Educaation Associiation (ITEA
A) stated th
hat technolo
ogical literaccy is “the ability
a
to
use, maanage, asseess, and understand teechnology” (p. 9). Thiis definitionn was put forth in
Standarrds for Techhnological Literacy
L
to cchallenge educators, sp
pecifically tthose in thee field of
technology educaation, to redirect
r
theeir curricu
ulum to fo
ocus on sstudents beecoming
technologically liteerate.
When the studennts understaand the reelationship between science andd technolog
gy, they
compreehend how to
t affect eacch other andd how thesee develop in
n social conntext and ho
ow to be
used forr improvingg peoples’ liiving condittions.
2. Reseearch Desiggn
This stuudy examinnes Turkish pre-servicee elementary
y science teeachers’ perrceptions reelated to
science, technologyy and scientific and tecchnologicall literacy concepts. Thee research has
h taken
place inn Gazi Univversity, in 2007-2008
2
A
Academic years.
y
The research
r
par
articipants were
w
116
volunteeer students chosen am
mong all sennior classess of the university menntioned abo
ove. The
researchh data weree gathered with
w the doccument conttaining 10 ittems. Whatt do you und
derstand
by sciennce? Is the science
s
necessary for teechnology?? What do you understaand by techn
nology?
Patton (1990) andd Thomas and Nelson (1996) also
o corroboraate that usinng the focu
us group
meetinggs and intervviews can help
h researcchers to gath
her informattion on seveeral people’’s views,
172
http://ire.macrrothink.org
In
nternational R
Research in Education
E
ISSN 2327-5499
2
2014, Vol. 2, No. 1
perceptions and opinions
o
in one sessioon and for the particiipants to pprovide cheecks and
balancees on each other’s
o
view
ws, which caan curb exttreme viewss. Thus, quaalitative meethods is
necessaary for genneralizing plausible aalternative explanations, describbing the program,
p
constructing a narrrative history, presennting data collection
c
procedures,
p
, and summ
marizing
a to help allow the rresearcher to
t have morre continuouus reflection on the
(Campbbell, 1974) and
researchh in progresss, more inteeraction witth the particcipants in th
he research, and more room
r
for
ongoingg alteration as the reseaarch proceedds (Bouma,, 2000).
Data off the researrch have beeen gathereed by Scien
nce and Tecchnology V
View Questtionnaire
which includes 10
1 open-en
nded questtions suppo
orted by some
s
interrviews. Wh
hen the
questionnnaire has been consttructed, it has been used
u
the litterature andd student teachers’
t
pre-inteerview quesstions. It haas been inclluded 116 primary
p
scieence teacheers in this research.
r
The datta gathered from participant studennt teachers has
h grouped
d by open cooding and analyzed
a
by the H
HyperReseaarch 2.0 Quaalitative Daata Analysiss Software.
3. Resu
ults and Disscussion
Before consideringg the pre-service teacheers’ responsses to questtion, a brieff attempt is made to
contextuualize eachh question. The qualittative respo
onses weree categorizeed and app
propriate
labels w
were attribuuted by the authors acccording to key
k phrases mentionedd by the pree-service
teacherss. Quotationns attributed
d informallyy are those of
o the studeents. All respponses in th
he tables
are exppressed andd quantified
d as percenntages and frequency. These finddings are prresented
below aas they relatte to the guiiding questiions.
3.1 Thee Meaning of Science
The queestion of “W
What is the science?”
s
hhas been a question
q
whiich scientistts couldn’t be
b made
a comm
mon decisionn in definitiion and couuldn’t be pro
ovided a co
onsensus to response fo
or years.
Questioons that faill to reach a common ddecision on the definition of the sccience depeend on a
continuuously develloping and advancing ffact of it an
nd it has uncclear bounddaries in term
ms of its
issues aand methodds, it is sop
phisticated. Indeed, it is very diffficult to sttate a defin
nition as
everyonne can acceppt because of
o its uncleaar boundariees, sophisticcated processs.
Table 1. The Questtion of “Wh
hat do you uunderstand by
b science?”
Science iis:
%
f
Productioon of Knowledge. Everythin
ng discoveredd or product.
%11
13
A system
matic structure.
%26
30
Explaininng and sense of
o the life.
%15
17
Positive rresponses of the
t philosophy
y.
%1
1
Based to Theories and wide-ranging
g set of inform
mation.
%31
35
Examines the universee and events in
n the universee.
%16
18
Empty.
%1
2
All of thhe interview
wed studentt teachers sttated that sccience could
d be evidencced by obseervations
and expperiments, it
i is a theorretical systeem and it iss needed to retrace speecific procedures to
173
http://ire.macrrothink.org
In
nternational R
Research in Education
E
ISSN 2327-5499
2
2014, Vol. 2, No. 1
attain sccience. Som
me statemen
nts of the stuudent teacheers as below
w:
− Science is production of know
wledge and information
i
n. Besides of this, it is using of
the inforrmation acccurately.
− Science is a compreehensive an d advanced
d field to atttain new infformation, to
t obtain
new prodducts and to
o present thhem to techn
nology.
Bloom (1989), haas asked th
he question of “What is science??” to 80 pr
primary prospective
teacherss in order to determinee their view
ws about thee concept of
o science annd has grou
uped the
responsses under thhe specific categories. Responsess given from
m prospecttive studentts in the
Bloom’’s study weere; “sciencce: is mechhanism of the
t earth an
nd universee, is discov
very, are
derstand thee explanatioon, is to und
derstand
researchhes, is to reesearch the explanationns, is to und
the evennts in daily life, is to diiscover andd to reveal, is
i method, is proceduree, is experim
ment and
observaation. Blooom divided
d these ressponses intto four categories. FFirst catego
ory was
mechannism of thee earth which includedd concepts of universe and its m
mechanism,, second
categoryy was inclluded concepts whichh stated sciience as method
m
and procedure and he
associatted these cooncepts with
h research m
methods and
d experiencees. The third
rd category contains
how theey explaineed somethin
ng that we encountered in daily life
l and it ccontains thee proofs
which reinforces to the exp
planations. The last category summed
s
upp the conccepts of
advanceements in teechnology and
a medicinne under thee title of reseearch for neew developm
ments.
Abell annd Smith (11994), donee a study sam
me with thee Bloom’s study,
s
they hhave also asked the
questionn of “Whatt is Science?” to learn the prospecctive sciencce teachers’ opinions ab
bout the
science. In this ressearch, %25
5 of the proospective teeachers stateed that scieence is a meethod or
a
associated with thhe other categories, wh
hile they staate the scieence is a
proceduure. They also
methodd. %13,5 of the particip
pants did a definition containing
c
both
b
two caategories. The other
responsses were thee reals, veriifies, repliees, products, doctrines. Abell and Smith sum
mmed up
these cooncepts undder the title of Amountt of Inform
mation. These researcheers have con
nstituted
five caategories frrom the responses off the particcipants. Ed
ducation caategory from
m these
categories has not taken placee in Bloom
m’s categoriees. In the sttudy of Abeell and Smiith, they
have doone such classify the cause
c
of %220 of the paarticipants defined
d
thee science as science
educatioon.
In the study done by
b Murcia and
a Schibecci (1999), %63
% of 73 prrospective tteachers deffined the
science as mechannism of thee earth, %221 of them as method, %17 of th
them as acccount of
informaation, %1 off them as reesearch for nnew develop
pment. %13
3 of them w
was irresponsive this
questionn.
Table 2. The Questtion of “Wh
hat do you m
mean that sccience is pro
oduced in sccience?”
Science iis produced inn science abou
ut:
%
f
Disciplinnes of Science
%9
11
Natural E
Events
%24
29
Making C
Concrete of Teechnology and
d Knowledge
%40
48
Social Evvents
%27
35
174
http://ire.macrrothink.org
In
nternational R
Research in Education
E
ISSN 2327-5499
2
2014, Vol. 2, No. 1
%9 of tthe respondded participaants has staated that theey are discip
plines of sciience (e.g. Physics,
Biologyy, etc.) to thhe question
n of “What do you meean that scieence is prooduced in sccience?”
The stuudent teacheers stated th
hat the scienntific produ
ucts are discciplines thatt have been derived
from sccientific reseearches dep
pended on thheir research
h focuses.
%24 off them statedd as natural events. Theese student teachers staated that sciientific prod
ducts are
t earth deepends on a cause, natural
n
evennts and kno
owledge
all the events occcurred on the
a
observaations, info
ormation helps to reecognize ou
urselves,
discloseed by experiments and
environnment and nature.
n
− “Prodduct of science is produ
duced in scieence” mean
ns that everyy event occu
urred on
the eaarth is also an apple ffalling down
n a tree is not
n coincideent, and rellies on a
causee.
− It hellps to solvee some probblems in ou
ur life and to
t understaand that is complex
structture. It can be a mediaator in solvving the pro
oblems suchh as in med
dicine. It
can be
b effective in
i present too us a moree comfortable and livabble life such
h as cars
and thhe other ad
dvantages saame with tha
at.
These ffindings coonsist with the studies from the literature. Martin
M
(19997), stated that the
productts of sciencee are materials, phenom
menon, con
ncepts, theories, ideas aand attitudees which
have sccientific coontent exhiibited as rresults of scientific
s
study and divided intto three
categories.
(1) Matterials (Mattters): Comp
puters, mobiile phones, jet planes
(2) Theory and Ideeas: Phenom
menon, conccepts, theoriies, laws
(3) Attittudes
In this study, opinnions of th
he participaants have been
b
divideed into grou
oups such “Science
“
Discipliines”, “Nattural Eventts”, “Makinng Concrette of Techn
nology andd Knowledg
ge” and
“Social Events”. When
W
these groups
g
are aarranged un
nder the threee main titlees, they can
n overlap
with thee classifyinng of Martin
n. For exam
mple, makin
ng concrete of technoloogy and kno
owledge
can be thought unnder the maaterials and theories an
nd ideas titles, becausee, some staatements
w
faciliitate to life and concep
ptualization and concreete of eventts which
such as materials which
had diff
fficulty in unnderstandin
ng have beenn investigatted in samee group. Maartin’s classification
has no sscience discciplines titlee, however, this title caan be though
ht under thee theories and ideas
title of M
Martin.
When aasked to thee student teeachers the question off “How is the
t productt of science used in
society??” and 94 of them responded to thhe question and
a responsses have groouped as below.
175
http://ire.macrrothink.org
In
nternational R
Research in Education
E
ISSN 2327-5499
2
2014, Vol. 2, No. 1
Table 3. The Questtion of “How
w is being uused the pro
oduct of scieence in sociiety?”
How is thhe product of science used in
i society?
%
f
Facilitatee to daily life
%4
47
43
Medicinee for Health
%1
18
17
Defense in Military
%4
4
4
Education
%6
6
6
Communnication
%3
3
3
Industry
%7
7
7
Multiple Fields
%9
9
8
Use to Sciencce Disciplines
Specific U
%6
6
6
Many oof the prospective teach
hers stated tthat productts of science are used tto facilitate to daily
life andd expressedd their opin
nions in terrms of meeeting the basic
b
needss and makin
ng their
lifestylee more com
mfortable in
n the nature
re. The som
me other prospective tteachers staated that
many pproduct of sccience havee been used by peopless as indispen
nsable toolss even if theey aren’t
aware oof that. Som
me statementts of prospeective sciencce teachers were the foollowings:
− It is on
o the top leevel of our daily life. For
F examplee, lenses shhades off to glasses;
the ellectric circu
uits illuminaate our life; food inform
mation can ssave our liffe.
− In meedicine, peo
oples use seeveral techn
nological prroducts to aacquire comf
mfortable
life sttandards (e..g., mobile pphones). Th
hese produccts raise theeir life stand
dards, at
the saame time, th
hey damagee their heallth. For thiss reason, m edicine hass to be a
step front
f
of the technologiccal advancees and it hass to make prrecautions.
“
is tecchnology?”
” to the prosspective sci ence teacheers, %22
When aasked the quuestion of “What
of the ppre-service teachers
t
thaat answeredd the questio
on stated ass applicationn of sciencee. These
m of the scie
ience in daiily life”,
particippants’ statem
ments are su
uch as “tecchnology is using form
“appliccation of sciience to faciilitate dailyy life” etc.
Table 4. The Questtion of “Wh
hat is Technoology?”
Technoloogy is
%
f
Applicatiion of Sciencee
%2
22
22
Scientificc Developmennt
%1
10
10
%2
26
26
Process
%3
3
3
Product
%3
39
39
Inventioon
Some pparticipant statements reelated to thee question are
a as below
w.
− Makinng science more
m
usefull, applying to
t daily life..
− It is a discipline that buildss bridge bettween sciencce and appllication. It includes
176
http://ire.macrrothink.org
In
nternational R
Research in Education
E
ISSN 2327-5499
2
2014, Vol. 2, No. 1
not only
o
knowing the equippment, but also how to
o be used aand where they are
utilizeed.
The stattements of the
t student teachers whho stated that technolog
gy is inventtions are as below.
− Devicces and equ
uipment whiich are deviised by scieentific advanncements co
onstitute
the teechnology.
− They are equipm
ment whichh is producced and devised to beecome avaiilable of
science in daily life.
l
The staatements of the studentt teachers w
who stated that
t
technology is pro duct of the science
are as bbelow.
− Technnology dep
pending onn scientific developments is prroducts wh
hich are
consttituted for peoples’ needds and whicch usually have
h
facilitaative effect on
o life.
− They are differen
nt productss which willl facilitate to
t life of inndividuals or
o which
m
for a different
d
purp
rpose.
are made
The queestion of “IIs the sciencce essentiall for techno
ology?” wass asked to tthe participaants, the
majorityy of them (%88 of reespondents) stated positive respon
nses while %4 of them
m stated
negative responsess. 4 studen
nt teachers maintained
d that techn
nology can exist even
n if it is
withoutt science. 8 participaants have maintained
d that the technologyy and the science
completted each othher.
Table 5. The Questtion of “Is th
he science eessential forr technology
y?”
Is the science essentiall for the techn
nology?
%
f
Yes
%8
88
88
No
%4
4
4
The samee level
%8
8
8
When iit has beenn asked to participantss the questtion of “W
What is the mean of scientific
literacyy?” the respoonses of thee respondennts grouped as the table below (Tabble 6)
Table 6. The Questtion of “Wh
hat is the meean of scien
ntific literacy?”
What is sscientific literaacy
%
f
Scientist
%3
3
3
To Underrstand the Science and Usin
ng Them in Daaily Life
%2
21
21
Knowingg Scientific Addvancements
%2
20
20
The Criteerion of Scienntific Literacy
%1
13
13
To Follow
w Journals, Newspapers and Other Publi cations
%4
40
40
Commonn Language Used by Scientiists
%3
3
3
177
http://ire.macrrothink.org
In
nternational R
Research in Education
E
ISSN 2327-5499
2
2014, Vol. 2, No. 1
The moost explicit and most frequently
f
uused statem
ments are “to
o understannd the scien
nce” and
“to be iinformed” and
a “to use in life” in tthe statemen
nts of the prrospective tteachers wh
ho stated
that thee scientific literacy is understandiing of scien
nce and commenting iin daily life
fe. Some
statemeents of them
m are as belo
ow.
− To exxhibit the personal
p
ideeas about the
t sciencee or to offeer solutionss for the
deficiiencies exhiibited in thee process off advancemeent of the sccience or to transfer
causee-effect and to use peopples’ purposses on the sccience.
− To bee able to lea
arn knowleddge based sccience and to
t form in oour life.
− To realize and to
o understannd scientificc phenomeno
on in our en
environmentts and to
ware of them
m while usinng.
be aw
Some sstatements of
o the Prosp
pective Teaachers who stated that scientific liiteracy is to
o follow
the publications suuch as journals and new
wspapers is as
a below
− Intereest, read and write everrything whiich has scien
ntific qualiffication.
− Readd and writee publicatioons and books related
d to sciencee. Be interrested in
scientific topics.
− To folllow revealeed scientificc knowledgee from dailyy publicationns.
These ffindings is consistent
c
with
w the literrature (abov
ve, in the Taable 6). It haasn’t been provided
p
a conseensus aboutt the definiition of thee scientific literacy an
nd we can see some different
d
definitioons from different
d
sciientists andd researcherrs. Therefore, it has nnot been ev
valuated
particippants’ responnses as true or false.
The conncept of sciientific literracy has be en defined first by Hu
urd. As stateed by Hurd
d (1958),
scientiffic literacy is,
i to help to
t grow cappable and responsible peoples in society, to develop
logical thinking skkills about societal,
s
pollitical and economic
e
issues and prroblems wh
hich they
can com
me across reelated to sciience and too understan
nd the sciencce conceptss. This defin
nition of
Hurd is consistent with the staatements in the categorry of “to und
derstand thee science an
nd use in
daily liffe”.
It has aalso been assked the question of “W
What is the meaning of
o technologgical literaccy?” The
responsses groupedd under the titles as tab
able below (Table 7). 100
1 prospecctive teacheers have
respondded the quesstion.
Table 7. The Questtion of “Wh
hat is the meeaning of teechnological literacy?”
What is tthe meaning of
o technologicaal literacy?
%
f
To be infformed from teechnological advancements
a
s and to can use the productts
%64
4
64
To produuce new produucts
%3
3
To apply technology too the life
%11
11
To can usse the technology
%10
10
To read journal, newsppaper or book related to techhnology
%12
2
12
178
http://ire.macrrothink.org
In
nternational R
Research in Education
E
ISSN 2327-5499
2
2014, Vol. 2, No. 1
The m
most of thee responsess were groouped undeer the titlee of “To bbe informeed from
technological advaancements and
a to be aable to use the produccts”. The staatements reelated to
technological literacy have been
b
coded in five cattegories. Bu
ut some staatements haave been
repeatedd under the other codin
ng. The stattements of “using
“
techn
nological prroducts” hav
ve taken
place inn the same category
c
wiith the folloowing “tech
hnological advancemen
a
nts”. Howev
ver, “the
using teechnology in
i daily life” has also bbeen represented as a separately
s
ccategory beccause of
intervieews with participants
p
. While a group of participantts found itt adequate to use
technological prodducts for tecchnology litteracy, a group of them
m didn’t finnd enough. Because
of this, two separatte coding haas been donne for these responses.
Some sttatements of
o the respon
ndents are aas below.
− Technnological litteracy is too be informeed by technological addvancementss, to use
technnological prroducts and not to be fa
ar from them
m.
− To foollow severa
al media reelated to them and to be informeed by technological
advanncements.
From thhe statemennts, technollogy literacyy is defined
d as to use, to direct, to evaluatee and to
understand the techhnology as a summary.. A technolo
ogical literate person w
will understaand what
w it is createed, how it iss formed th
he society an
nd its impoortance giveen to use
is technnology, how
in socieety with sevveral given ways (e.g.. with readiing several sources annd with inteerest and
wonderr) over time.
After thhe these quuestions (rellated to deffinition of scientific
s
an
nd technoloogy literacy
y), it has
been assked to partiicipants the question off “How liteerate of science and tecchnology aree you?”.
They sttated that thheir literacy
y was gradeed as good,, middle and bad (not enough) with
w their
statemeents as tablee below (Taable 8). Bessides of thiss grading, some
s
of thee participantts stated
that theey were literrate of scien
nce but not of technolo
ogy, while th
he others sttated that th
hey were
literate of technoloogy but not of
o science.
Table 8. The Questtion of “How
w much youu are scientifically and technologiically literatte?”
How mucch you are sciientifically and
d technologicaally literate?
%
f
Good
%12
2
12
Middle
%58
58
Bad
%19
19
I have Sccientific literaccy
%3
3
I have Teechnology literacy
%8
8
Some sstatements of 58 participants o f the total responden
nts stated tthat they accepted
a
themsellves in midddle degree for
f scientificc and technology literaacy as below
w.
179
http://ire.macrrothink.org
In
nternational R
Research in Education
E
ISSN 2327-5499
2
2014, Vol. 2, No. 1
Althouggh I’m not a science and
a technoloogy literatee completelyy, I enjoy reeading the writings
which ccomment onn physical, chemical aand biologiccal events in
n my enviroonment. But I don’t
give reiin myself. For
F this reason, I can saay it is in miiddle level.
− I have some speccific knowleedge and ba
ackground on
o the somee part of thee science
and technology
t
for
f I have bbeen seeing and repeatting for yeaars. But a litterate of
them would nevver considerr him (her) self adequ
uate. For thhis reason, I’m not
quite adequate. In
I middle leevel...
It has bbeen asked them the criteria
c
of tthe scientiffic and tech
hnological lliteracy and
d the 94
prospecctive sciencce teachers responded this questiion. The reesponses grrouped as th
he table
below ((Table 9.)
Table 9. The Questtion of “Wh
hat are the ccriteria of sccience and technology lliteracy?”
What aree the criteria of science and technology litteracy?
%
To be innformed the advancements
a
in the scienttific and tech
hnological fiellds and to usse and to
interpret them
%40
%
37
Reading of sources (joournals, newsp
papers, books or articles) reelated to sciencce and technoology
%33
%
31
The Leveel of Educatioon
%17
%
16
Using off Technology consciously
c
%7
%
7
To participate to fairs or
o exhibitions related to sciience and tech
hnology
%3
%
3
Some oof the statem
ments of thee prospectivve science teeachers who
ose responsses coded ass “To be
informeed the advaancements in the scieentific and technological fields aand to usee and to
interpreet them” aree as below.
− Criteria of the scientific aand technollogical literracy, in myy opinion, is to be
inform
med about advancemeents in the field
f
of scieence and tecchnology an
nd to be
able to
t be utilizeed from them
m
− The peoples’
p
ap
pplying tecchnology to
o daily lifee and usinng the prod
ducts of
technnology can be
b useful ass criteria.
According to thesse findings, it can be thought that there aree some critteria for litterate of
science and technoology and th
he prospecttive teachers are awaree of them. W
With these findings,
f
we can propound that
t
the literrate of sciennce and tech
hnology is recognized
r
by reading journal,
newspaaper or boook, to reseaarch interessting topicss, the level of educatition and to behave
conscioously while using produ
ucts.
In real,, with giveen technolo
ogy educatiion to indiv
viduals, it is providedd to be litterate of
technology of perssons. The In
nternationaal Technolog
gy Educatio
on Associattion (ITEA)) and its
Technollogy for All American
ns Project deeveloped “T
The Standarrds for Techhnological Literacy:
L
Contentt For the Sttudy of Tecchnology” aand in thesee standards designatedd the person
n who is
literate of technoloogy needs to do and to know th
he technology. These aare summaarized as
below:
180
http://ire.macrrothink.org
In
nternational R
Research in Education
E
ISSN 2327-5499
2
2014, Vol. 2, No. 1
A persoon that undderstands, with
w
increaasing sophistication, what
w
technoology is, ho
ow it is
created,, how it shaapes society
y, and in turrn is shaped
d by society
y is technoloogically liteerate. He
or she can hear a story abo
out technoloogy on teleevision or read
r
it in tthe newspaaper and
evaluatee its inform
mation intellligently, puut that inforrmation in context, annd form an opinion
based oon it. A techhnologically
y literate perrson is com
mfortable wiith and objeective aboutt the use
of technnology - neiither scared
d of it nor innfatuated wiith it.
Technollogical literracy is imp
portant for all studentts in order for them tto understaand why
technology and itss use is succh an imporrtant force in our econ
nomy. Anyyone can beenefit by
being ffamiliar wiith it. Everyone from
m corporatee executivees to teachhers to farm
mers to
homem
makers will be able to perform thheir jobs better if they are technnologically literate.
Technollogical literracy benefiits students who will choose tech
hnological careers; e.g
g. future
engineeers, aspiringg architects, and studeents from many
m
other fields. Theey can havee a head
start onn their futuree with an ed
ducation in ttechnology (ITEA, 200
00).
Finally,, the questioon of “Whaat are the tecchnologies do you use in daily liffe?” has beeen asked
and it hhas also beeen called up
pon to sort from the most
m
indispeensable of tthem to thee others.
This quuestion has been
b
respon
nded by all participantts and they sorted them
m as the com
mputers,
mobile phones, MP3
MP Players,, Flash Meemory, TVs, Clocks, Ca
ameras, Phhotocopy Machines,
M
ansportationn Vehicles.
Electriccal Appliancces and Tra
− Mobiile phone, computer, cameras, washing
w
ma
achine, TV,
V, briefly electrical
appliances used at home
− Mobiile phone, computer, caar, tram, TV
V, music set, natural gaas system, electrical
energgy
− Compputer, phonee, televisionn, radio... teechnologica
al devices thhe most useed by me
and thhe washing
g machine, fr
fridge, dishw
washer are other
o
exampples of it.
4. Concclusion
In summ
mary, the pre-service
p
science teacchers exam
mined severaal aspects oof concepts of both
science and technnology and meaning of scientifiic and tech
hnological literacy; teechnical,
nding of
societall, cultural and ethicaal. They prrovide pracctical appliication andd understan
scientiffic and technnological kn
nowledge inn science an
nd technolog
gy learning with focus on their
relevance in daily life in practical conteexts as an explanation
e
of the sem
mantic, cultu
ural and
social ddimensions of
o science and
a technoloogy as a hum
man endeav
vor.
Howeveer; the pre-service teaachers havee different definition of the term
ms of scien
nce and
technology. Docuuments dissplayed thhat althoug
gh particip
pants had some traaditional
understandings aboout science except for a few particcipants, they
y hold moree contemporary and
current views abouut scientific literacy.
Individuuals displayyed their sccientific liteeracy in diffferent ways, such as ffrequently using
u
of
technicaal terms or applying sccientific conncepts and processes.
p
And
A pre-serrvice teacheers often
have diifferent liteeracy in diffferent dom
mains, such as while th
hey have m
more undersstanding
conceptts and wordds related to
o daily life,, they have less undersstanding off technical concepts
c
181
http://ire.macrrothink.org
In
nternational R
Research in Education
E
ISSN 2327-5499
2
2014, Vol. 2, No. 1
and worrds of sciennce and tech
hnology.
Referen
nces
AAAS (Americann Associatio
on for the A
Advancemeent of Scien
nces). (19889). Sciencee for all
hnology.
Americaans: A Projject 2061 reeport on liteeracy goalss in science, mathematiics and tech
Washinngton DC: Author.
A
AAAS (American Associatio
on for the A
Advancement of Scien
nces). (19933). Benchmarks for
science literacy. New
N York: Oxford
O
Univversity Presss.
Abell, S. K., & Smith,
S
D. C. (1994). What is science?
s
Preservice ellementary teachers’
t
concepttions of thee nature off science. IInternationa
al Journal of Sciencee Education
n, 16(4),
475-4877. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/095000699401604
407
Bell, R
R. L., Lederrman, N. G.,
G & Abd-E
El-Khalick, F. (2000). Developinng and actin
ng upon
one’s coonception of
o the naturee of sciencee: A follow--up study. Journal
J
of R
Research in Science
Teachinng,
37,
563-581.
5
http://dxx.doi.org/100.1002/1098
8-2736(2000008)37:6<5
563::AID-TEA4>3.0.C
CO;2-N
Bloom, J. W. (19989). Preseervice elem
mentary teacchers’ concceptions off science: Science,
o Science Educationn, 11(4), 401-415.
4
theoriess and evoolution. International Journal of
http://dxx.doi.org/100.1080/0950
00698901100405
Bouma,, G. D. (20000). The research proceess. Oxford, New York
k: Oxford Unniversity Prress.
Butler, W. (2008).. Does Thee Nature Off Science Influence
I
College
C
Studdents’ Learrning Of
Biologiical Evolutiion?. Electrronic Thesees, Treatisess and Disseertations, PPaper 2415 (Florida
State U
University, College
C
of Education, P
PhD Dissertaation)
Bybee, R. W. (19997). Achieviing scientifi
fic literacy: From purposes to praactices. Porttsmouth,
NH: Heeinemann.
Cajas, F. (2001). The scien
nce/technoloogy interacction: Implications foor science literacy.
Journall of Researcch in Sciencce Teaching,, 38(7), 715
5-729. http:///dx.doi.org//10.1002/tea.1028
Campbeell, D. T. (1974).
(
Qualitative knnowing in action
a
research. Papeer presented
d at the
annual meeting of the America
an Psycholoogical Association. New
w Orleans, USA
DeBoerr, G. E. (20000). Scien
ntific literaccy: Anotherr look at itss historical and contem
mporary
meanings and its relationship
r
p to sciencee education
n reform. Jo
ournal of R
Research in Science
Teachinng,
37,
582-601.
5
http://dxx.doi.org/100.1002/1098
8-2736(2000008)37:6<5
582::AID-TEA5>3.0.C
CO;2-L
Goodruum, D., Hacckling, M., & Rennie,, L. (2001).. The statuss and qualiity of teach
hing and
learningg of sciencce in Austrralian schoools: A ressearch repo
ort. Canberrra: Departm
ment of
Educatiion, Traininng and Youth
h Affairs.
182
http://ire.macrrothink.org
In
nternational R
Research in Education
E
ISSN 2327-5499
2
2014, Vol. 2, No. 1
Gräber, W., Erdmaann, T., & Schlieker, V. (2001). ParCIS: Partnership
P
between Chemical
C
Industryy
andd
Sch
hools.
Retrieved
Noveember
2008,
from
http://w
www.ipn.unii-kiel.de/_ch
hik_sympossium/sites/p
pdf/graeber.p
pdf
Holbroook, J., & Raannikmae, M.
M (2007). Nature of science
s
educcation for eenhancing scientific
literacyy. Internaational Journal
Jo
of
Sciencce Education, 29((11), 134
47-1362.
http://dxx.doi.org/100.1080/0950
006906010007549
Hurd, P
P. D. (1998)). Scientific literacy: N
New minds for
f a changing world. Science Ed
ducation,
82,
27-30.
http://dxx.doi.org/100.1002/(SIC
CI)1098-2377X(199806))82:3<407::AID-SCE66>3.0.CO;2--G
Hurd, P
P. D. (19558). Sciencce literacy: Its meaniing for Am
merican schhools. Educational
Leadersship, 16(1), 13-16.
ISTE (Internationaal Society for Technoology in Education).
E
(1998). Naational educational
technollogy standarrds for studeents. Eugenne, OR: Auth
hor.
ITEA ((Internationnal Technollogy Educaation Assocciation, Technology ffor All Am
mericans
Project)). (2000). Standards
S
for
fo technoloogical litera
acy: Conten
nt for the sttudy of tech
hnology.
Reston,, VA: Authoor.
ITEA ((Internationnal Technollogy Educaation Assocciation, Technology ffor All Am
mericans
Project)). (1996). Technology
T
for all Am
mericans: A rationale and
a structuure for the study of
technollogy. Restonn, VA: Author.
Krupczak, Jr. J., & Ollis, D.
D F. (20055, April). Improving
I
the technoological liteeracy of
undergrraduates: Iddentifying the researcch issues. Workshop sponsored by The National
N
Sciencee Foundationn. National Academy oof Engineering, Washin
ngton, DC.
Laugksch R. C. (22000). Scien
ntific Literaacy: A concceptual overview. Scieence Educattion, 84,
71-94. hhttp://dx.dooi.org/10.100
02/(SICI)10098-237X(2
200001)84:1
1<71::AID--SCE6>3.0.CO;2-C
Layton,, D., Jenkinns, E., & Do
onnelly, J. (11994). Scien
nce and tecchnological literacy: Meanings
M
and raationales. Leeds,
L
UK:: Universitty of Leed
ds, Center for Studiees in Scien
nce and
Mathem
matics Educcation, in asssociation w
with UNESC
CO.
Martin, B. (1997)). Science, technologgy and non
nviolent acttion: the ccase for a utopian
dimensiion in the social analy
ysis of scieence and teechnology. Social
S
Studdies of Science, 27,
439-4633. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/030633129702700
03003
Massacchusetts Deepartment of Educatiion. (2001). Science and technnology/engineering
curriculum
f
framework.
Retrrieved
July
10,
2007,
from
http://w
www.doe.maass.edu/fram
meworks/sciitech/2001/sstandards/sttrand4.htmll
Millar, R. (2006). Twenty firsst century sccience: Insiights from the
t design aand implem
mentation
of a scieentific literaacy approacch in schooll science. In
nternationall Journal off Science Ed
ducation,
28(13), 1499-1521. http://dx.d
doi.org/10.11080/095006
6906007183
344
183
http://ire.macrrothink.org
In
nternational R
Research in Education
E
ISSN 2327-5499
2
2014, Vol. 2, No. 1
Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (19
998). Beyonnd 2000. Sccience educcation for tthe future. London:
L
Nuffieldd Foundatioon.
Miller, J. (2006). Civic
C
scientific literacyy in Europe and the Un
nited States.. Paper pressented at
the Annnual Meetingg of the Worrld Associa tion for Pub
blic Opinio Research, M
Montreal, Canada.
C
Miller, J. D. (19899). Scientifiic literacy. P
Paper preseented at the American A
Association
n for the
Advanccement of Sccience annu
ual meeting, San Franciisco, CA.
NAE & NRC (National Acadeemy of Enggineering & National Research Couuncil). (200
06). Tech
Tally: A
Approaches to assessin
ng technologgical literaccy. Washing
gton, DC: N
National Academies
Press.
NAE & NRC (Naational Acaademy of E
Engineering & Nationaal Researchh Council). (2002).
Techniccally speaking: Why alll Americanss need to kn
now more about
a
technoology. Washington,
DC: Naational Acaddemy Press.
Nationaal Science Education
E
Standards.
S
((1996). National Acad
demy of Sciiences. Wasshington
DC: Naational Acaddemy Press.
Norris, S. P., & Phhillips, L. M.
M (2003). How literaacy in its fu
undamental sense is ceentral to
S
Edu
ucation, 87,, 224-240. http://dx.doi
h
i.org/10.10002/sce.1006
66
scientiffic literacy. Science
NRC ((National Research Council). (1996). National
N
sccience eduucation sta
andards.
Washinngton, DC: National
N
Accademy Presss.
NSTA. (1992). Thhe use of co
omputers inn science education. Retrieved
R
Juune 24, 200
03, from
www.nsta.orrg/handbook
k/computer. asp Nation
nal researcch council (NRC). National
N
http://w
academ
my of sciencees Washington, d.c. 19 95
Osborne, J., & Colllins, S. (200
00). Pupils’ and parentts’ views of the school sscience currriculum.
Londonn: King's Coollege London.
Patton, M. Q. (19990). Qualittative evaluuation and research methods.
m
Neewbury Parrk: Sage
Publicaations.
Rascoe,, B., Chun, S., Kemp, A., Jacksonn, D. F., Li, H., Oliver, J. S., … R
Radcliffe, L.. (1999).
Scientiffic literacy:: Interpretaations of crross-section
n of our so
ociety. Papeer presented
d at the
Annual meeting off the Nation
nal Associattion for Ressearch in Sccience Teacching, Bosto
on, MA.
Retrived
Junee
21,
2003,
from
http://w
www.educ.sffu.ca/narstsiite/conferennce/rascoeettal/rascoeetal.html
Shamoss, M. H. (1995).
(
Thee myth off scientific literacy. New
N
Brunsw
wick, NJ: Rutgers
Universsity Press.
Smith, M. U., & Scharmann,
S
L. C. (19999). Defining
g versus describing thee nature of science:
A pragm
matic analyysis for classsroom teacchers and sccience educcators. Scieence Educattion, 83,
493-5099.
http://dxx.doi.org/100.1002/(SIC
CI)1098-2377X(199907))83:4<493::AID-SCE66>3.0.CO;2--U
184
http://ire.macrrothink.org
In
nternational R
Research in Education
E
ISSN 2327-5499
2
2014, Vol. 2, No. 1
Thomass, J. R., & Nelson,
N
J. K.
K (1996). Reesearch metthods in phyysical activiity. Champaaign, IL:
Human Kinetics.
Copyriight Disclaiimer
Copyrigght reservedd by the auth
hors.
This arrticle is ann open-acceess article ddistributed under the terms andd conditionss of the
Creative Commonss Attribution
n license (hhttp://creativ
vecommonss.org/licensees/by/3.0/).
185
http://ire.macrrothink.org