شبكة المعلومات العربية التربوية

Over the past few decades, research has been conducted on the nature of science (NOS) which is considered a critical component for achieving scientific literacy. While most of the studies focused on exploring students’ and teachers’ views of NOS, limited studies were conducted to identify university science professors’ conceptions of NOS. Previous studies conducted with scientists reported that they hold mixed conceptions of NOS, and the survey instruments used were mainly based on VNOS (Views of the Nature of Science) questionnaires which reflect a “consensus view” towards conceptualizing NOS. However, this view was criticized for providing students with a simplistic image of science. For this reason, the current study adopts a recent theoretical framework which is the family resemblance approach (FRA). FRA is a comprehensive framework that presents NOS in terms of cognitive-epistemic and social-institutional systems including eleven categories that embody classes of ideas about science that are either left out or partially addressed by previous NOS models. To our best knowledge, only one study was conducted with Taiwanese scientists to explore their NOS views using the FRA as a theoretical framework. However, this study extends the emerging literature on the FRA by exploring the NOS conceptions of university science professors in the Lebanese context. Participants involved are 35 university science professors who teach science-technology- and- engineering-related subjects. The study adopts a mixed-methods approach. A modified version of the reconceptualized family resemblance approach (RFN) questionnaire as well as semi-structured interviews were used as the data-gathering instruments. The findings revealed that the university science professors hold mixed NOS conceptions which are consistent with the FRA approach to NOS. While the categories of the cognitive-epistemic system were the most highlighted in the professors’ responses, categories of the social-institutional system were less addressed. Interestingly, a new emerging theme related to epistemic affect was mentioned by two professors in the interviews. Implications for theory, methodology, practice, and policy as well as recommendations for further research are discussed in light of these findings. (Author’s abstract)