【正文】 scientific knowledge is straightforward Science models represent reality Science and technology are identical Science is a solitary pursuit McComas warns that “both students and those who teach science must focus on the nature of science itself rather than just its facts and principles, school science must give students an opportunity to experience science and its processes, free of the legends, misconceptions and idealizations inherent in the myths about the nature of the scientific enterprise” (p. 68). These two articles illustrate the major difference between articles promoting the teaching of the nature of science from cognitive science learning theory perspective from that of a constructivist learning theory perspective. That difference is the shifting of the emphasis on the teaching 第 15 頁 of the history of science in science classrooms to sequencing in instruction in science lessons and promotion of better teacher preparation programs in the universities. Conclusion and implications It seems clear from examining both the research and the teaching literature that constructivism has influenced research on the teaching and learning of the nature of science, as well as actual teaching of the nature of science ideas. In the area of research, a constructivist learning theory perspective has influenced researchers to shift from using quantitative research techniques to using qualitative research methods in investigating the nature of science in the science classrooms. In the area of promoting the teaching of the nature of science, a constructivist learning theory perspective has influenced science educators to shift from merely emphasizing the teaching of the history of science in science classrooms to sequencing in instruction in science lessons and promotion of better teacher preparation programs in the universities. Implications for classroom teaching could be formation of cooperative learning groups and letting student in these groups to talk freely about issues of nature of science among themselves and share these ideas with the whole class, so that they can explore more indepth their misconceptions. Another implication could be giving students in these groups homework where they will explore the life of a famous scientist and act his life in front of the class or present it as a slide show. 第 16 頁 譯 文 題目： 在 建構主義的影響 下以 課堂 為 主體 對 自然科學領域的研究 收到： 2021 年 3 月 19 日， 修改： 2021 年 9 月 21 日 摘要 本文 大體上是關于 建構主義對 自然 科學 的影響， 建構主義 對自。 and teachers39。 understandings of the nature of science are essential. In addition, they pointed out the troubles involved when researchers attempt to categorize students39。 conceptions of the nature of science as well as previous remendations for improving students39。 conceptions and the effectiveness of specially designed curriculum before and after administrating these tests. By the late 1980s, researchers in science education were beginning to be influenced by the constructivist learning theory, which developed out of Jean Piaget39。 and (h) the interrelationships among and the interdependence of the different branches of science. To illustrate studies investigating the effects of a curriculum on students39。 (d) the distinctions among hypotheses, laws, and theories。 conceptions of the nature of science. Using TOUS and a prehensive review of several nationwide surveys, Klopfer and Cooley (1961) concluded that high school students39。 and students39。 interest in students39。 conceptions (Brickhouse, 1990). Interestingly, Trent (1965) had made such remendations 30 years earlier. As a consequence of this more recent research, it appears that the most important variables that influence students39。s understanding of the nature of science is related to his/her students39。 conceptions indicated that students did not possess adequate understandings of NOS and led to the conclusion that science teachers must not be attempting to teach nature of science. A second line of research focusing around curriculum development and assessment was initiated by Cooley and Klopfer (1963). The results of this movement were ambiguous. That is, the same curriculum was effective for 第 5 頁 one teacher with a particular group of students, but not for another teacher with different group of students. The appropriate conclusion was that the individual science teacher must make a difference. Predictably, a subsequent line of research focused on the assessment of teachers39。 conceptions, classroom practice, and students39。 (b) development, use, and assessment of curricula designed to “improve” student conceptions of the nature of science。 mental faculties” (Hurd, 1960)。 畢業(yè)論文英文文獻翻譯 學生姓名 : 姜海然 系 別 : 應用化學系 專 業(yè) : 化學 年 級 : 2021 級專接本 學 號 : 202120607111 指導教師 : 王建芬 衡水學院教務處印制 第 1 頁 原 文 題目 ： The influence of constructivism on nature of Science as an area of research and as a classroom subject Mehmet KARAKAS Science Teaching Department Artvin Coruh University Artvin Eigitim Fakultesi Cayagizi Mahallesi Artvin, TURKEY 08000 Email: Received 19 Mar., 2021 Revised 21 Sept., 2021 Abstract This paper is an general article about the influence of constructivism on nature of science Constructivism has influenced research on the teaching and learning of nature of science, as well as actual teaching of the nature of science ideas. In the area of research, a constructivist learning theory perspective has influenced researchers to shift from using quantitative research techniques to using qualitative research methods in investigating the nature of science in the science classrooms. In the area of promoting the teaching of the nature of science, a constructivist learning theory perspective has influenced science educators to shift from m