Edinburgh Research Explorer

Mapping the nature of science in the Italian physics curriculum

From missing links to opportunities for reform

Citation for published version:

Caramaschi, M, Cullinane, A, Levrini, O & Erduran, S 2021, 'Mapping the nature of science in the Italian
physics curriculum: From missing links to opportunities for reform', International Journal of Science
Education, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 115-135. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.2017061

Digital Object Identifier (DOI):

10.1080/09500693.2021.2017061

Link:
Link to publication record in Edinburgh Research Explorer

Document Version:
Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record

Published In:
International Journal of Science Education

General rights
Copyright for the publications made accessible via the Edinburgh Research Explorer is retained by the author(s)
and / or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing these publications that users recognise and
abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.

Take down policy

The University of Edinburgh has made every reasonable effort to ensure that Edinburgh Research Explorer
content complies with UK legislation. If you believe that the public display of this file breaches copyright please
contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and
investigate your claim.

Download date: 20. déc.. 2024

 International Journal of Science Education

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsed20

Mapping the nature of science in the Italian

physics curriculum: from missing links to
opportunities for reform

Martina Caramaschi, Alison Cullinane, Olivia Levrini & Sibel Erduran

To cite this article: Martina Caramaschi, Alison Cullinane, Olivia Levrini & Sibel Erduran
(2022) Mapping the nature of science in the Italian physics curriculum: from missing links
to opportunities for reform, International Journal of Science Education, 44:1, 115-135, DOI:
10.1080/09500693.2021.2017061

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.2017061

© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa Published online: 31 Dec 2021.

UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group

Submit your article to this journal Article views: 1859

View related articles View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 2 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tsed20
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION
2022, VOL. 44, NO. 1, 115–135
https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.2017061

Mapping the nature of science in the Italian physics

curriculum: from missing links to opportunities for reform
a b a b
Martina Caramaschi , Alison Cullinane , Olivia Levrini and Sibel Erduran
a
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy; bDepartment of Education,
University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The article describes the analysis of the Italian physics curriculum Received 5 December 2020
documents in terms of the coverage of nature of science (NOS). Accepted 7 December 2021
NOS is not explicitly presented as part of the Italian high-school
KEYWORDS
physics curriculum. The article focuses on analysing the implicit Nature of science;
aspects of the curriculum documents. The Family Resemblance curriculum; Italian science
Approach (FRA) to NOS was used as an analytical lens. FRA was education
chosen because of the broad range of categories that it provides
to trace curriculum content. Curriculum documents were analysed
using the FRA categories as well as an Epistemic Network
Analysis (ENA) which has shown important limitations in the
FRA categories ‘Political Power Structures, Scientific Ethos,
Professional Activities’. These aspects of NOS belong to the social-
institutional aspects of the FRA framework. There were also some
inconsistencies between the general section and the specific
sections of the curriculum. The study elaborates on how FRA and
ENA can be used to analyse NOS content in a science curriculum.
The epistemic networks provide concrete illustrations of where
curriculum revision can best be carried out to promote
underrepresented aspects of NOS. Implications for future research
and recommendations for curriculum reform internationally are
suggested.

Introduction
The concept of the curriculum is very old and its meaning has changed over the years in
how we theorise and understand it. Curriculum knowledge is knowledge of what should
be taught to a particular group of pupils to guarantee an equal and comparable education
to students attending different schools in a country. Curriculum includes benchmarks,
learning goals, but also knowledge of the variation in instructional material available
and knowledge of the reasons why you would or would not use particular material in
certain circumstances (Ball et al., 2008; Shulman, 1986). Modern concepts of educational
curriculums tend to combine two purposes. One purpose is on the process of individual
cognitive development and the other on the process of socialisation and how one adjusts

CONTACT Sibel Erduran [email protected]

© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any
medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.
116 M. CARAMASCHI ET AL.

or attributes to society and social environments. NOS-rich curricula that guide teaching
and assessment by encouraging teachers to include this content in the classroom will play
an important part in developing the individual and socialisation processes (McComas &
Nouri, 2016). The Italian physics curriculum document that will be analysed in this paper
is the official document that schools have to consider to guarantee uniformity in the con-
tents and in the learning outcomes over the country. As we will explain later, the docu-
ment is written to allow freedom for the teachers to make their pedagogical choices.
The analysis of the curriculum was guided by a particular framework of NOS called
the expanded Family Resemblance Approach (FRA) (Irzik & Nola, 2014). The FRA fra-
mework refers to NOS as a cognitive-epistemic and social-institutional system (Erduran
& Dagher, 2014a). Although the framework is broad, it focuses on, among other factors,
the cognitive development and social aspects of science. It is primed for investigating
modern curriculum and it provides a useful organisational framework for analysing
science curriculum and instruction and gives rise to a richer understanding of and
about science. The curriculum is incredibly important for the enactment of science
content knowledge, and it is one of the defining features of teacher knowledge bases
(Shulman, 1986). Since the curriculum document has no explicit NOS section, the
implicit NOS elements were analysed for NOS opportunities. The article provides
details for teachers and curriculum developers on how NOS can be made explicit and
investigates how the connections between the categories in the content can be made
for teaching NOS. The aim is to aid understanding of the curriculum to show how the
categories in the FRA framework are connected by using an Epistemic Network Analysis
(ENA) and help visualise the type and frequency of connections between categories in the
curriculum (Shaffer et al., 2016).

Nature of science and physics education

The term ‘Nature of Science’ (NOS) has been defined in numerous ways over the years
and often is used by science educators to discuss matters such as what is science, how it
functions, the epistemological and ontological foundations of science, how scientists act
as a social group and how society influences and reacts to scientific activities (Clough &
Olson, 2008). Lederman (1992) refers to the NOS as the values and assumptions funda-
mental to science and its knowledge development, which include independence of
thought, creativity, tentativeness, empirically based, subjectivity, testability and cultural
and social embeddedness. McComas (2003) refers to the definition and scope of NOS
as the ‘rules of the game’ (p. 25) which have led to the knowledge production and the
evaluation of truth claims in the natural world. Similar to Clough and Olson (2008),
his definition states that NOS includes learning about how science functions, viewing
scientists at work and reviewing their interactions in a community. The nature of
science (NOS) has become a major field of research in science education over the last
several decades, and this is proven by the prolific body of publications in this area
(Rubba & Anderson, 1978; Lederman, 1992; Driver et al., 1996; Alters, 1997; Abd-El-
Khalick et al., 1998; McComas et al., 1998; Erduran & Kaya, 2019; Galili, 2019;
Hodson, 1988). As early as the 1960s, attention was paid to the NOS as it was seen to
be a key component of scientific literacy. Attention supporting an understanding of
science from philosophical and historical perspectives has been spotlighted worldwide,
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION 117

where it is now an explicit goal in science curricula (Olson, 2018). Although it is the goal
to teach the nature of science, the question is still being asked; whose version is to be
taught? And useful pedagogical frameworks of NOS from history and philosophy of
science in science education are currently sparse.
For the last 30 years, the science education community has largely focused on a per-
spective commonly referred to as the ‘consensus view’ (Lederman et al., 2002). As such,
the view holds a special place in the history of NOS research, as the framework was used
in bodies of NOS related work at all educational levels and appreciated, mainly, for its
inner consistency and coherence. It presents itself as a set of tenets deemed appropriate
for science K-12 instruction and includes ideas such as (1) Tentativeness of Scientific
Knowledge, (2) Observations and Inferences, (3) Subjectivity and Objectivity in
Science, (4) Creativity and Rationality, (5) Social and Cultural Embeddedness in
Science, (6) Scientific Theories and Laws and (7) Scientific Methods. As more ideas
and frameworks emerge, criticisms have been made of the approach. Those in favour
of this NOS view have responded to its critics by stating that the tenets were never
intended to be taught as declarative statements, but are summative statements for
much deeper ideas, and the problem lies with the pedagogy and teacher professional
development, rather with the model itself (Lederman & Lederman, 2014). Nevertheless,
critics insist that the tenets oversimplify NOS to the extent that they significantly misre-
present NOS ( Hodson & Wong, 2017). Yacoubian (2012) and Hodson and Wong (2017)
detail how the consensus view presents a narrow focus and does not provide direction for
applying NOS ideas to various ends, distorts the elementary core of NOS and does not
offer a developmental trajectory for teaching NOS content. Other critics have produced
frameworks they feel are more authentic representations of NOS that are inclusive and
diverse and provided more guidance for science educational needs on how to apply
NOS ideas in various ways, some of which will be discussed in this paper.
Physics as a subject is well primed to include the history and philosophy of science
which are concepts that fall under the umbrella of NOS. The subject naturally evokes phi-
losophical questions, that students can be guided to address to reflect on the historical
changes in knowledge systems, and in the development of the epistemic ways that
have progressively been used to test, share, value and accept pieces of knowledge as
‘true’ (Stadermann & Goedhart, 2020; Levrini et al., 2014). Physics content progression
in history has often represented for Physics Education Research an interesting source of
knowledge to investigate possible corresponding parallels between the evolving idea in
learning and the historical development of physics as a discipline (Matthews, 1994).
Despite these epistemological and philosophical foundations of physics, their relevance
is usually not emphasised in science curricula and ultimately not in the secondary
physics classrooms (Stadermann & Goedhart, 2020). This lack of emphasis is largely
the responsibility of curricular documents. Looking at curricula, they are little more
than a collection of concepts. Curricular documents are often used as foundations for
textbook designers, which research has shown often miss opportunities to present his-
torical and contemporary vignettes from curriculum content (McDonald & Abd-El-
Khalick, 2017). This has a cause and effect for classroom practice as teachers heavily
rely on textbooks to design and deliver their lesson content. Therefore, policymakers
need to take better considerations and make it an important goal for curricular docu-
ments to emphasise NOS.
118 M. CARAMASCHI ET AL.

Research has shown that providing perspectives of NOS from physics does indeed allow
for debate and intrigue, thus making it much more appealing to the students (Lederman,
2006; Lederman & Lederman, 2014). Science education literature from the last 30 years has
recognised the importance of history and philosophy of science (Hodson, 1988; Monk &
Osborne, 1997; Niaz, 1998; Levrini & Fantini, 2013), and so the decision to include the
history of physics in science curricula should not be a dilemma, but yet often they fall
short of explicit instruction and cognitive learning goals for teachers (Olson, 2018; Yeh
et al., 2019). One of the early counties to include it in its curriculum policy documents
was the USA with the publication of Science for all Americans (AAAS, 1989) and the
Science Education Content Standards (NRC, 1996). Addressing the nature and history
of science thus became an important science education content standard that was expected
to support content standards in the physical, earth and life sciences, alongside a focus on
inquiry and technological design (Erduran & Dagher, 2014b). Recently other countries
have seen the explicit inclusion of NOS in its curricular documents (i.e. New Zealand,
Ireland). The Italian science curricula do not have explicit sections designated to the
NOS. The article describes how the analysis of the Italian physics curriculum (MIUR,
2010a) was undertaken to illustrate where NOS could be explicitly taught. As NOS is
not explicitly taught as part of the Italian physics curriculum, the focus lays on analysing
the implicit aspects to investigate how NOS is positioned. The Family Resemblance
Approach (FRA) framework (Erduran & Dagher, 2014a) guided the analysis of the docu-
ments. This model was chosen as it is an emerging area of NOS literature that is showing to
have an impact on how nature of science is now being researched (Erduran & Kaya, 2019;
MacDonald, 2017; McDonald & Abd-El-Khalick, 2017; Yeh et al., 2019).

Family Resemblance Approach to nature of science

To investigate how NOS is present in the Italian Physics curriculum, we adopted the FRA
vision of NOS. The family resemblance concept originated in Wittgenstein’s work and it
was applied to the characterisation of NOS by Irzik and Nola (2014) as well as Erduran
and Dagher (2014a). The framework was theorised by Irzik and Nola (2011) and recon-
ceptualised for science education by Erduran and Dagher (2014a).
The approach takes a specific stance with respect to the delicate methodological problem
of defining science, accounting both for the diversity of the scientific disciplines and their
reciprocal resemblances that create the ‘science family’. The approach assumes that ‘there is
no fixed set of necessary and sufficient conditions which determine the meaning of
[science]’ (Irzik & Nola, 2011, p. 594). Yet, just like in a family, each member (out of
the metaphor, each discipline) resembles some family members with respect to some
aspects and other members with respect to other aspects. The core of the FRA approach
applied to NOS is the individuation of the clusters of the aspects that can be used to
compare the disciplines and, as a whole, to characterise the Nature of Science.
This framework is presented in Table 1 and was used for the analysis along with the
FRA wheel (Erduran & Dagher, 2014a, p. 28). It represents the Nature of Science as a
system with cognitive-epistemic and social-institutional aspects. This holistic represen-
tation of NOS is composed of 11 categories, across the 2 aspects which constantly interact
with each other in numerous ways (Irzik & Nola, 2014). Science as a cognitive-epistemic
system encompasses processes of inquiry, aims and values, methods and methodological
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION 119

Table 1. FRA categories Erduran and Dagher (2014a).

Cognitive-epistemic Aims and values The scientific enterprise is underpinned by adherence to a set of
aspects values that guide scientific practices. These aims and values are
often implicit and they may include accuracy, objectivity,
consistency, scepticism, rationality, simplicity, empirical adequacy,
prediction, testability, novelty, fruitfulness, commitment to logic,
viability, and explanatory power.
Scientific Practices The scientific enterprise encompasses a wide range of cognitive,
epistemic, and discursive practices. Scientific practices such as
observation, classification, and experimentation utilise a variety of
methods to gather observational, historical, or experimental data.
Cognitive practices, such as explaining, modelling, and predicting,
are closely linked to discursive practices involving argumentation
and reasoning.
Methods and Scientists engage in disciplined inquiry by utilising a variety of
methodological rules observational, investigative, and analytical methods to generate
reliable evidence and construct theories, laws, and models in a
given science discipline, which are guided by particular
methodological rules. Scientific methods are revisionary in nature,
with different methods producing different forms of evidence,
leading to clearer understandings and more coherent
explanations of scientific phenomena.
Scientific knowledge Theories, laws, and models (TLM) are interrelated products of the
scientific enterprise that generate and/or validate scientific
knowledge and provide logical and consistent explanations to
develop scientific understanding. Scientific knowledge is holistic
and relational, and TLM are conceptualised as a coherent network,
not as discrete and disconnected fragments of knowledge.
Social-Institutional Professional activities Scientists engage in a number of professional activities to enable
aspects them to communicate their research, including conference
attendance and presentation, writing manuscripts for peer-
reviewed journals, reviewing papers, developing grant proposals,
and securing funding.
Scientific ethos Scientists are expected to abide by a set of norms both within their
own work and during their interactions with colleagues and
scientists from other institutions. These norms may include
organised scepticism, universalism, communalism and
disinterestedness, freedom and openness, intellectual honesty,
respect for research subjects, and respect for the environment.
Social certification and By presenting their work at conferences and writing manuscripts for
dissemination peer-reviewed journals, scientists’ work is reviewed and critically
evaluated by their peers. This form of social quality control aids in
the validation of new scientific knowledge by the broader
scientific community.
Social values of science The scientific enterprise embodies various social values including
social utility, respecting the environment, freedom, decentralising
power, honesty, addressing human needs, and equality of
intellectual authority.
Social organisations and Science is socially organised in various institutions including
interactions universities and research centres. The nature of social interactions
among members of a research team working on different projects
is governed by an organisational hierarchy. In a wider
organisational context, the institute of science has been linked to
industry and the defence force.
Political power structures The scientific enterprise operates within a political environment that
imposes its own values and interests. Science is not universal, and
the outcomes of science are not always beneficial for individuals,
groups, communities, or cultures.
Financial systems The scientific enterprise is mediated by economic factors. Scientists
require funding in order to carry out their work, and state- and
national-level governing bodies provide significant levels of
funding to universities and research centres. As such, these
organisations have an influence on the types of scientific research
funded, and ultimately conducted.
120 M. CARAMASCHI ET AL.

rules, and scientific knowledge, while science as a social-institutional system encom-

passes professional activities, scientific ethos, social certification and dissemination of
scientific knowledge, and social values. Figure 1 presents the FRA wheel designed by
Erduran and Dagher (2014a, p. 28).
Since its inception, the FRA model has been used in science education to develop strat-
egies inteacher education (Cullinane, 2018; Erduran et al., 2021; Erduran & Kaya, 2018,
2019) and as a tool for conceptualising research and innovation policies in education
(Laherto et al., 2018) and document analysis of curricula and textbooks (Kaya &
Erduran, 2016; McDonald, 2017; Park, Seungran Yang, et al., 2020; Park, Wu, et al.,
2020; Yeh et al., 2019). The framework has recently been used in geography education
to categorise the implicit structure of the discipline in order to develop the nature of
geography for teacher educators (Puttick & Cullinane, 2021). The affordance of the FRA
framework for investigating students’ views of nature of science at university level has
been investigated (Akgun & Kaya, 2020) and FRA has been suggested as a useful frame-
work to develop university students’ identities as scientists (Mohan & Kelly, 2020).
Within the European IDENTITIES project (www.identities.eu) the framework is used to
elaborate on the concept of ‘discipline’, within the broader problem to define interdiscipli-
narity (Alvargonzález, 2011). As the Latin root ‘discere’ (to learn) reminds, a ‘discipline’ is a
re-organisation of knowledge with the scope of teaching it. Disciplines ground their roots
into the educational necessity to re-organise knowledge in such a way that students, whilst
building their knowledge, can also develop epistemic skills, such as problem solving, mod-
elling, representing, arguing, explaining, testing, sharing and so on. The IDENTITIES
project is using the FRA framework to compare the epistemic core of the different S-T-
E-M disciplines and reflect on their identities in terms of confront between their values/
aims, practices, methods and ways to organise knowledge (Branchetti & Levrini, 2021).

Figure 1. FRA wheel: science as a cognitive-epistemic and social-institutional system (Erduran &
Dagher, 2014a, p. 28).
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION 121

We have chosen to use FRA as an analytical framework because it is fairly broad and
inclusive of different aspects of NOS. Our aim was to investigate the extent to which the
Italian curriculum documents refer to different aspects of NOS so other characterisations
of NOS that focus on a particular set of statements (e.g. Lederman et al., 2002) would not
have been fit for this purpose. Furthermore, the FRA inherently highlights the intercon-
nectedness of ideas about NOS and we wanted to explore how the different FRA cat-
egories were related to each other in the curriculum standards. In their publication,
A clear description of each FRA frameworkcategory of the wheel (Figure 1) is expanded
on and adapted in Table 1. This revised version also aided in the analytical process of the
curriculum documents reported in this study, as it was consulted often when there was
any debate or discrepancy in the classification process.

Secondary schooling and science curricula in Italy

In order to be able to draw some international comparisons, a brief overview of the
organisational structure of the Secondary schooling in Italy is reported. In Italy,
there are three types of high schools, that are Liceo, Istituto Tecnico and Istituto Profes-
sionale. Liceo provides cultural and methodological instruments to have a deep under-
standing of reality and develops logic, creative, rational and critical approaches to
situations. There exist six different types of Liceo, depending on the discipline focus.
One of those is scientific lyceum high school (Liceo Scientifico), in which several
hours are dedicated to teaching scientific disciplines like Mathematics, Physics,
Biology, and Chemistry, along with basic cultural disciplines such as Italian, Latin, Phil-
osophy, Art and History. The other two types of high schools – Istituto Tecnico and
Istituto Professionale – offer technical and vocational training (MIUR, 2018), but it is
reductive to describe them in a nutshell. However, in all the high school types in
Italy, students study physics, for at least one year. The motivation of the study pre-
sented here is to analyse the curriculum of one specific high school type: the Liceo
Scientifico. The reason: this type of school physics is studied for the entire five-year
period. And, this school dedicates more time to studying physics than any other type
of schools in Italy. The scientific lyceum high school offers three possible curricula of
study; Traditional (Tradizionale), Applied Sciences-Option (Opzione Scienze Applicate)
and Sports-Section (Sezione ad Indirizzo Sportivo). For all three, the physics discipline’s
section of curricula adopted are the same with some minor adaptations. Each year,
thousands of students enrol in these type of schools. In 2019/2020 the total number
of application forms for all the secondary schools was 542,654 (MIUR, 2019, p. 3).
The these, 94.7% of th students chose high school, the rest chose education and pro-
fessional training (5.3%). Between the three types of high school, most students
chose the Liceo (54.6%), and more specifically, 25% of students choose the Liceo Scien-
tifico, of which 15.2% the Traditional one, 8.2% the Applied Sciences-Option and 1.6%
the Sports-Section (MIUR, 2019, p. 10). The Liceo Scientifico curricula impact so many
teachers and students’ learning experience. The Italian curriculum is not unique and
like many curricula globally, it too does not have a specific component for NOS. The
curriculum document will be described in the next section, to demonstrate the impor-
tance of analysing this specific curriculum. Our methods will be useful for other
countries as an example of how to analyse curricula with no specific NOS component.
122 M. CARAMASCHI ET AL.

On the 15th of March 2010, the legislative decree that describes the organisation and
didactics of the Liceo high school in Italy has been issued. In annex F of the decree, a table
explains the study plan the teachers and students must follow during the five years of the
Liceo Scientifico school (MIUR, 2010b). The table also indicates the hours of lessons per
year for each discipline; the document states that physics requires a minimum of
66 hours per year during the first and second year (grades 9–10) , then 99 hours per
year during the last three years (grades 11–12–13) of schooling (MIUR, 2010b). The
ethos of the study plan outlines how its aim is to favour the acquisition of knowledge
and methods of mathematics, physics, and natural sciences. The same year, another
decree, the Italian National indications was issued (MIUR, 2010a). It consists of rec-
ommendations, aimed to orient schools and teachers and provide a common framework
for all the schools of the country. They have been explicitly outlined to be non-normative
and non-prescriptive. At the back, there is the idea that teachers have to be autonomous
whereby they are taking into account variable factors, such as the students, the environ-
ment, and of course their own vision for teaching approaches. In the annex F of this
decree, there are the indications specific for Liceo Scientifico school. In the analysis,
we focused the attention on the physics discipline’s section, which we refer to now
going forward as ‘the document’. It is important at this stage to draw the distinction
between the parts of the curriculum document. It is organised into two main sections;
the first one titled ‘General lines and comptences’, includes the scope and competences
that are expected to be developed throughout the five-year path. The second part is
entitled ‘Specific learning objectives’, articulates the physics content knowledge and
themes (e.g. kinematics, optics) along with a description of learning objectives. In the
article we will call them, respectively, ‘Section G’ and ‘Section S’. Another important
note is that the Section S is articulated in three sub-sections, referring to the different
grades: first biennium (grades 9–10), second biennium (grades 11–12), fifth year
(grade 13). We will call them respectively ‘S9–10’, ‘S11–12’ and ‘S13’. These two
decrees (MIUR, 2010a, 2010b) updated the previous curriculum (MIUR, 2005), that
was in effect from November 2005 until 2010.

Methodology
The empirical study was guided by the following primary research question: How can
FRA and ENA be used for analysing NOS content in science curricula? Using the FRA
as an analytical framework, the curriculum was investigated to determine what area of
the curriculum contained aspects of the NOS from the perspective of the FRA frame-
work. Content analysis describes a range of analytic approaches, from impressionistic,
intuitive, interpretive analyses to systematic, strict textual analysis (Hsieh & Shannon,
2005; Rosengren, 1981). We applied a strict and systematic set of procedures for the rig-
orous analysis, examination and verification of the contents of written data (Cohen et al.,
2007). The precise type of content analysis methods chosen by a researcher is often deter-
mined by the theoretical and substantive interests of the researcher and the problem
being studied (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005; Weber, 1990). In the case of our study, we
implemented a strict text analysis. The coding was conducted independently by two
researchers; any disagreement or potential misrepresentation of the data was resolved
through discussion and one such example is as follows. We were careful in our analysis
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION 123

not to reflect any of our own biases as educators and make inferences about the curricu-
lum content if it was not explicitly written in the document. We tried not to infer what we
ourselves as educators would include when teaching the learning objective or topic. For
example, the document referred to nuclear energy. We agreed as educators that if teach-
ing this topic we would include features that would align with the social values of the
science category and discuss features around how nuclear power has implications for
the environment, it’s a social utility and how it addresses human needs. However, the
learning objective did not mention or include these wider societal issues and so this
rigid approach became part of the strategies used in the analysis. As we show above,
the nature of qualitative data often makes it difficult to separate personal experience
during the interpretation of the data in the analysis phase. There are ways to maintain
objectivity and avoid bias and increase reliability with qualitative data analysis and we
outline the concrete steps used during the analysis in the following section entitled
‘Analysis Criteria and Reliability’.
The analytical methodology used a theory-driven approach to determine the analysis
criteria and it is shown with some illustrated examples of the classification process. The
intention was to analyse the text and find the presence of the categories in the curriculum.
Table 2 illustrates how the text was put into sections. The first column indicates the
section that the text was obtained from within the document; sub-section 3.6. The text
is in the next column. A column was used for each of the following FRA categories in
the cognitive-epistemic system. The last column represents all the categories from the
social and institutional system. The findings from the analysis of the text showed that
in most cases the text was classified into only one category from the FRA framework.
However, there were cases where the text related to different parts of the framework.
Table 2 shows such an example, the text contained a number of instances related to mul-
tiple parts of the FRA framework, each part was underlined and a letter denoting its pres-
ence was marked and recorded in the column indicative of the category. For example,
‘experimental dimension’ was underlined, as experimental aspects are an investigative
method in physics, and relates to ideas presented in the methods and methodological
rules category. Then, ‘activities’ is discussed in relation to the scientific practices category,
as science activities such as observation or experimentation are practices. The text

Table 2. Example theory-driven analysis of the Italian curriculum document with the FRA framework.
Social and
institutional
Cognitive-epistemic system system
Aims Methods and
Specific learning objectives and Scientific methodological Scientific
Fifth year values practices rules knowledge
S13.6 The experimental dimension •A •B
(B) can be further deepened Social
with activities (A) to be organisation
carried out not only in the and interactions
school’s didactic laboratory,
but also in universities and
research institute
laboratories (C)
124 M. CARAMASCHI ET AL.

discussing ‘universities and research institutes laboratories’, was classified within the
Social organisation and interactions, because this particular category in the FRA frame-
work describes science as socially organised into research centres and universities.

Analysis criteria and reliability

Further to the issues of content analysis, procedures for analysis were outlined in order to
classify the curriculum document content. The authors needed to develop analysis cri-
teria to ensure that the results were valid and reliable. The authors initially analysed
the document individually, in order to obtain a baseline for the categorisation. The
authors went through every instance of disagreement and reconciled the judgments fol-
lowing discussions which set key guidelines or criteria for classification:

(1) As the framework is fluid and interwoven (Erduran & Dagher, 2014a), some items
were present in more than one category, and so it was decided through discussion
that the same piece of text could be classified in multiple categories. For example,
the curriculum discusses the ‘predictive nature of physical laws’ in subsection
S11–12.1. Prediction is discussed in both the aims and values category and the prac-
tices category. Therefore, ‘prediction’ was counted in both categories.
(2) When a statement was deemed to relate to one category only, then it was only
recorded once regardless if the text had multiple references to that category. For
example, in subsection S11–12.5, the statement made multiple references to
different theories, laws and principles in physics (kinetic theory, gas laws and prin-
ciples of thermodynamics). These concepts relate to the knowledge category, but all
these instances were only counted once in the tally.
(3) Some instances were reconciled through discussion when it was noticed that infer-
ences were made about the text from how the authors would potentially teach the
content. Therefore, to ensure that our study implemented strict text analyses
(Hsieh & Shannon, 2005), we removed any instances where there were not explicit
references to the aspects in the text. For example, section G.6 refers to ‘the society in
which the student lives’. We agreed as educators, we would include features of social
organisations and interactions and financial systems, as well as social values of
science. However, as this was inferred from reading the text and it did not explicitly
mention social organisations, interactions and financial systems, and so were
removed.
(4) Finally, there were some instances that were misclassified in the individual process.
There was a triangulation process implemented with the authors themselves, consul-
tation with the publication (Erduran & Dagher, 2014a) as well as published studies
that used similar approaches (Cheung, 2020; Yeh et al., 2019) and the concepts out-
lined in Table 1. Unless there was a shared presence, in these documents and the
authors’ observations, then the instances were not recorded.

After each round of analysis and refinement of the analysis criteria, percentage agree-
ment was calculated by using inspiration from Miles and Huberman (1994). One (1) was
recorded when there was a match, and zero (0) was recorded when there was no match or
a disagreement. All these matching instances were counted and divided by the total
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION 125

number recorded. According to their methods, Miles and Huberman (1994) suggest any-
thing over 80% agreement is a good indicator of reasonable reliability.

Epistemic network analysis

Epistemic Network Analysis (ENA) is described as an innovative approach to displaying
the connections between data in a graphic image. There is limited research in science
education using ENA along with FRA for document analysis (e.g., Cheung, 2020).
ENA was initially developed to model cognitive networks based on the assumption
that the structure of connections among cognitive elements is more important than
the mere presence of those elements alone (Shaffer et al., 2016). The ENA can be
applied to all contexts to manage complex networks of relationships among small,
fixed elements. For example, this method of analysis and representation has been used
to visualise how people connected NOS ideas (Peters-Burton et al., 2019). The aim of
the analysis is to discover not only which NOS categories are present in the physics cur-
riculum, but also which categories are interconnected and how that is what holistic struc-
ture emerges. The ENA presented here shows the relationships found between NOS
categories in the Physics curriculum. We produced the ENA analysis, using the Online
ENA Tool (www.app.epistemicnetwork.org), free available to allow everyone to
develop his/her own epistemic network analysis. A helpful tutorial (Shaffer et al.,
2016) has been created to explain the theory behind ENA and to detail the process by
which the ENA tool creates a network model. The results of our analysis that are also
reported in Table 2 were used to perform the ENA analysis.
The network analysis works in the following way. Every time more than one category
in a statement has been found, a link between these categories is made by the software. If
only one category is found in a statement, no links are created (Peters-Burton et al., 2019;
Shaffer et al., 2016). To analyse the agreement between the authors’ results, two ENA ana-
lysises on the separate authors’ results were produced and then compared; to analyse the
final connections found between the FRA categories, the sum of their analysis was used
rather than individual analysis. For example, looking at the case in Table 2, the analysis
led the authors to recognise three categories in the statement S13.6. So, in this case, the
ENA analysis will show the connections between those categories. ENA analysis allows
immediate understanding of which categories are more connected and which are not.
That is because the most frequent connections are represented as thicker lines. The cat-
egories, that are the basic elements of the network, are represented as black dots, flanked
by the corresponding name. Once the strongest connections have been found, they can
be tested against the document statements to check their significance.

Results and findings

Once the initial individual analysis was completed, the authors compared results. One
author classed 58 instances and the other classed 35 instances. This first round of analysis
found that there was a combined count of 64 instances of NOS in the curriculum and
these evaluations resulted in a percentage agreement of only 46.9%. These included
both instances of agreement (30) and disagreement (34). A reconciliation procedure
took place that allowed us to develop the analysis criteria outline above, which resulted
126 M. CARAMASCHI ET AL.

in 52 instances (see Table 3). In terms of individual analysis, one author reconciled their
count from 58 instances to 49 instances. The other author reconciled their count from 35
instances to 47 instances. Following the reconciliation process, there were 44 overlapping
instances of agreement and 8 instances of disagreement, leaving the overall percentage
agreement to be 84.6%. Table 3 shows where agreement was met. There were several
times when 100% agreement was reached for certain categories such as aims and
values, professional activities, scientific ethos, social certification, social organisations
and interactions, and political power structures categories. Each author found there to
be three instances of the aims and values category, and the authors agreed on all three.
Similarly, the authors agreed that there were no instances of the social-institutional
activities category in the document and so there was complete agreement there as
well. Of the 11 categories in the FRA framework, the authors agreed on the presence
or absence of NOS instances across 6 of the different categories. Although there wasn’t
complete agreement across the other five categories, there were still high levels of agree-
ment. In total, our analysis shows that of the 52 instances of NOS classified, and within
those, only 6 (11.5%) of those instances related to aspects within the social institutional
system aspect, and no social-institutional category was found in the curriculum docu-
ment relating to the first two-year period. (See Figure 4(a) in the ENA section for evi-
dence of this claim.) These results such as this would indicate the lack of
representation of these features in the curriculum.
The results show that the curriculum has several instances related to the knowledge
category (22), followed by practices (12), then methods and methodological rules (9),
and then aims and values (3). The analysis of the document found that there were
limited instances from the social-institutional aspect (6), which includes features of
social certification and dissemination (1), social values of science (2), social organisations
and interactions (2) and financial systems (1). The analysis showed there were no
instances of professional activities, scientific ethos, and political power structures.
Other studies, too, have reported this particular imbalance in the science curricula of
Ireland (Erduran & Dagher, 2014b), in Turkey (Kaya et al., 2019) and Taiwan (Yeh
et al., 2019). The table shows the limited scope of the curriculum in terms of NOS rep-
resentation and opportunities. As expected, the knowledge category had many instances,
followed by the methods and practices categories. Unfortunately, the curriculum pre-
sented a narrow scope of science as a social institutional system aspect, with only six
recorded instances, in total.

Table 3. Results of the percentage agreement between authors for the FRA categories; aims and
values (A&V), scientific practices (P), methods and methodological rule (M&MR), scientific
knowledge (K) in the cognitive-epistemic system, and professional activities (PA), scientific ethos
(ScE), social certification and dissemination (SCD), social values of science (SVSc), social
organisations and interactions (SOI), political power structures (PPS) financial systems (FS) in the
social-institutional aspect.
Cognitive-epistemic Social institutional Tot
FRA categories A&V P M&MR K Act Eth Cert Value Org Pol Fin
Matching count 3 10 8 19 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 44
Different count 0 2 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 8
Total count 3 12 9 22 0 0 1 2 2 0 1 52
Percentage agreement 84.6%
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION 127

Findings from epistemic network analysis

The finding of our ENA concern the total connections found by the authors in the whole
document and the different parts of the document. The total connections found by the
two authors are depicted by the image in Figure 2. The central black dot represents
the categories (Political Power Structures, Scientific Ethos, Professional Activities)
which are not linked to the others. The most frequent connections are seen between
scientific practices and scientific knowledge, scientific practices and method and meth-
odological rules, and scientific knowledge and method and methodological rules. Less
tangible connections exist between aim and values and scientific knowledge. The less fre-
quent connections are seen between categories belonging to two different systems (cog-
nitive-epistemic system and social-institutional system) or between the individual
categories of the social-institutional system.
Figure 3a and Figure 3b present the connections found in the curriculum document.
Each image provides the results of the analysis to illustrate the connections found in the
document’s section G (general) (Figure 3a); the connections found in document part S

Figure 2. Overview of all connections across FRA categories.

128 M. CARAMASCHI ET AL.

(specific) (Figure 3b). Looking at the curriculum in more detail, analysis was carried out
of the stages of study in the five years of high school. Figure 4(a–c) presents the connec-
tions found in the different document sections Section S9–10, which relate to year 1–2 of
high school, Section S11–12, which relate to years 3–4 of high school, and Section S13
which relate to the fifth and final year of study in high school.
In both these analyses, there is a notable lack of connections with the NOS categories
related to the social-institutional aspects. Similar to other studies that used this type of
analysis to look at curriculums and assessments (see the work of Cheung, 2020), we
also found that the NOS categories in relation to the social-institutional system are
often not emphasised in the curriculum content. The connections between the ‘social
organizations and interactions’, ‘political power structures’, and ‘financial systems’ are
key features of the FRA framework and they are retained to be vital to students’ under-
standing of how scientific enterprises work within social and cultural milieu (Erduran &
Dagher, 2014a). Nevertheless, the results from this study, as well as studies by Cheung
(2020), Yeh et al. (2019), Erduran and Dagher (2014b) and Park, Wu, et al. (2020), high-
light an insufficient presence, articulation and interconnections among these categories.
The second aspect emerges from the comparison of the figures related to the general
section G of the curriculum document (see Figure 3a) and to the specific section S of the
curriculum document (see Figure 3b). The graph related to the general section G is
characterised by a rich range of connections. The connections between the cognitive-
epistemic categories of NOS (A&V, K, Pr, Methods) appear strong. Among these, the
strongest appears between ‘practices’ and ‘method and methodological rules’. A qualitat-
ive analysis of these connections highlights that they are explicit and significant because
they emerge from sentences like the following one: ‘experiencing and explaining the
meaning of the various aspects of the experimental method i.e. the reasoned inquiry of
natural phenomena, the choice of significant variables, the collection and critical analysis
of data’ (G.5). In the general section G, another important type of connection exists
between ‘aims and values’ and ‘knowledge’. This connection emerges explicitly in

Figure 3. Representations about the connections found in the curriculum document. Each image pro-
vides the results of the analysis to illustrate the connections found in the document section G (general)
(Figure 3a); the connections found in document part S (specific) (Figure 3b).
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION 129

statements like ‘the understanding of the fundamental concepts of physics, the laws and
theories, helps the students in becoming aware of the cognitive value of the discipline’
(G.1). In statements like ‘model construction and validation’ (G.5), the connection is
more implicit since its recognition implies reason on the fact that the model to be
valid must satisfy certain values that make it scientific. The figure related to the
specific section S (Figure 3b) appears very different from the previous one and much
focused on the knowledge node. Here, the strongest connections are between ‘knowledge’
and ‘practices’. An example of the link is in the following statement: ‘through the study of
geometric optics, the student will be able to interpret the phenomena of light reflection
and refraction and the functioning of the main optical instruments’ (S). In this sentence,
the link emerges by taking ‘geometric optics’ as knowledge, and ‘interpreting

Figure 4. Representations of the connections found in the specific section of the curriculum docu-
ment. Each image provides the results of the analysis to illustrate the connections found in the
specific section regarding the first two years S9–10 (ISCED levels 9–10) (Figure 4a); in the second
two years of physics course S11–12 (levels 11–12) (Figure 4b); in the last year S13 (level 13) (Figure 4c).
130 M. CARAMASCHI ET AL.

phenomena’ as practices. The distinction between the general and the specific sections
resonates with the different roles that the two sections are supposed to play: whilst the
former aims to frame teaching within cultural, epistemic and pedagogical scopes, the
latter section aims to point out the specific science content that has to be dealt with in
class to pursue specific learning objectives.
However, the difference between the two sections deserved further investigation.
Thus, we decided to unpack the specific section of the curriculum and search for the
NOS structure within the three subsections of the specific part of the document: the
sub-section related to the first biennium S9–10 (the first two years or grades 9–10)
(Figure 4a), the sub-section related the second biennium S11–12 (grades 11–12)
(Figure 4b), the sub-section related to the fifth year S13 (grade 13) (Figure 4c). By split-
ting them up, it emphasises problematic elements within the document. The sub-
section related to the first biennium of high school (Figure 4a) presents only three
elements connected, all belonging to the cognitive and epistemic system: practices,
knowledge and methods. Here the links only exist between the cognitive and epistemic
categories. This image shows clearly that the focus on knowledge makes the structure of
connections between NOS elements collapse and disappear. The distance between the
NOS structure of Section G (Figure 3a) and the NOS structure of the subsection of the
first biennium (Figure 4a) can induce to think that a ‘developmental approach’ is
implicitly implemented in the curriculum. According to this approach, we would
expect to see, in the following grades, a progressive enrichment of the NOS structures.
Unfortunately, the image related to the second biennium and the fifth year (Figure 4b,
c) do not seem to support this hypothesis. Their NOS structure remains less articulated
than the NOS structure of the general part. Furthermore, a qualitative analysis of the
connections shows that a larger ratio of connections in the specific part refers to
neither explicit nor particularly strong links. All these elements led us to see several
issues in the curriculum that are worth to be stressed both for teachers and for
policymakers.

Conclusion and discussion

The multiple studies that are emerging which use FRA as an analytical tool (e.g. Cheung,
2020; Erduran et al., 2021; Kaya & Erduran, 2016; McDonald, 2017; Yeh et al., 2019) indi-
cate that it is not only a relevant framework for analysis due to both its domain specific
and domain general characteristics (e.g. physics versus biology as domains), but it also
provides a holistic view of how science is presented in the curriculum. Rather than a
generic characterisation of ‘science’ in relation to NOS, the FRA framework facilitates cap-
turing domain-specific features of different aspects (Erduran & Dagher, 2014a). A holistic
understanding of NOS is crucial not only for its value for enabling reflection on how
science operates in the real world, but also because of its interconnectedness that
enables students to understand why and how science works (Yeh et al., 2019). The par-
ticular context of the Italian curriculum points to some of the limitations in terms of
how different aspects of NOS are covered in the curriculum. The issue of inclusion of par-
ticular NOS content as well as establishment of the interconnections between ideas is rel-
evant not only to the particular Italian context here but more broadly to the design of
curriculum standards more widely across the world.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION 131

The general and the specific section of the Italian curriculum (Figure 3a,b) have different
NOS structures and these differences cannot be explained simply in terms of the different
roles of the two sections. It instead sheds light on a feature of the curriculum that the tea-
chers often perceive: a sort of detachment between the aims/values claimed in the general
section and the contents’ description reported in the specific part of the curriculum docu-
ment. Even though connections between NOS elements are recognisable in the general part
of the curriculum document, they do not always appear significantly related to knowledge
when the contents are described. This difference between the two sections leaves room for
teachers to decide to deal with NOS according to their style, tastes, and epistemological
stances. However, the collapse of the NOS structure and the lack of any development
approach seem to support the hypothesis that the curriculum does not simply leave
room for teachers, but that it has inner weaknesses and possible inconsistencies.
However, these observations raise empirical questions regarding curriculum design and
implementation. The study has implications for further research with regards to how tea-
chers themselves might interpret the curriculum standards, as well as applications of the
methodology to other curriculum, globally. It would be beneficial to conduct a comparative
study between curriculum standards and teachers’ interpretations of those standards to see
the extent to which teachers might be mediating interconnections between curriculum
standards in teaching practice. In other words, although our study is significant in terms
of illustrating disconnection between ideas, it could be that teachers themselves link up
ideas in their teaching practice (Shulman, 1986). Future studies could interview teachers
to investigate how they interpret the statements for teaching purposes and do a comparison
to illustrate the diversity or uniformity of teaching approaches.
The methodological approaches used in the paper enable us as researchers to trace the
lack of any evidence of a developmental path for helping teachers teach NOS in physics
lessons. The data from the analysis of the curriculum backs up claims of how the FRA
framework is not compartmentalised but flows into one another. The ENA analysis
shows if and how these connections are present in curricular documents. It is the
hope that these network connections will help in curriculum development and teacher
education programmes, where they might want to develop NOS instruction and strat-
egies using curriculum documents. Furthermore, the epistemic networks illustrated in
the paper provide concrete illustrations of where curriculum revision can best be
placed to promote underrepresented aspects of NOS. Due to its broad nature, the FRA
has affordance for pointing to all the components of the cognitive-epistemic and
social-institutional systems interact with one another, enhancing or influencing scientific
activity. The ENA analysis extends the potential of FRA to illustrate the precise connec-
tions that need to be made for the curriculum to be coherent (Cheung, 2020).
Although the study was conducted with Italian curricula, it has implications for cur-
riculum analysis in other parts of the world and for broader goals. In particular, it
pointed out a strategy to recognise whether curricula give back a faithful and articulated
idea of what makes a body of knowledge a discipline. The collapse of the NOS structure
that our analysis pointed out in the Italian curriculum, when one moves from the General
to the Specific part, shows that knowledge gets lost in its inner disciplinary structure.
FRA, together with ENA, shows that both the epistemic dimensions and their connec-
tions disappear, by leaving only a list of notions. In this society of uncertainty where
knowledge is fragmented in data and pieces of information, it would be very important
132 M. CARAMASCHI ET AL.

that also the official documents play an important role promoting teaching as a way to
equip the young with epistemic skills, that are needed to make sense of the complexity
of our world. Being able to recognise the multiple dimensions of knowledge
with sensible and robust connections and arguments are indeed more and more funda-
mental competences in our society. The results we have obtained here are an example of
where and how official documents can fail and should act.
Foremost, the methodological approaches of using FRA as an analytical framework as
well as the ENA approach are noteworthy. The FRA categories can potentially orient cur-
riculum research in other parts of the world as they are fairly generic and comprehensive
and can be adapted to other national contexts. This aspect has already been confirmed
through other studies that have adapted both approaches in different ways to analysis
of curriculum and assessment documents, for example in Hong Kong (Cheung, 2020).
Furthermore, science educators from different parts of the world can potentially
benefit from examining details of other countries’ curricula to help them orient their
own curricula and to learn from different content and approaches. Although numerous
curriculum standards documents have included NOS for as early as the 1980s (e.g.
AAAS, 1989) there is still much space within curricula to clarify and enrich the
content about NOS. The research reported in the paper thus contributes not only to
the study of NOS from an FRA perspective (e.g. Akbayrak & Kaya, 2020; Akgun &
Kaya, 2020; Erduran & Dagher, 2014b; Erduran & Kaya, 2018; Mohan & Kelly, 2020;
Park, Seungran Yang, et al., 2020; Petersen et al., 2020) in the context of curriculum
analysis but also it has practical implications for curriculum policy reform.

Acknowledgement
The paper is the result of a collaborative study that started with the Erasmus + traineeship of
Martina Caramaschi at the University of Oxford under the supervision of Sibel Erduran and
Alison Cullinane, with Olivia Levrini as the main supervisor at the University of Bologna.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

ORCID
Martina Caramaschi http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1950-7824
Alison Cullinane http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5316-0962
Olivia Levrini http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4267-3989
Sibel Erduran http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5226-0136

References
AAAS. (1989). Science for all Americans. American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (1998). The nature of science and instructional
practice: Making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82(4), 417–436.
Akbayrak, M., & Kaya, E. (2020). Fifth-grade students’ understanding of social-institutional
aspects of science. International Journal of Science Education, 42(11), 1834–1861. http://dx.
doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1790054
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION 133

Akgun, S., & Kaya, E. (2020). How do university students perceive the nature of science? Science &
Education, 29(2), 299–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00105-x
Alters, B. J. (1997). Whose nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 39–55.
Alvargonzález, S. (2011). Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, transdisciplinarity, and the
sciences. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 25(4), 387–403. https://doi.org/10.
1080/02698595.2011.623366
Ball, D., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it
special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389–407. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022487108324554
Branchetti, L., & Levrini, O. (2021). Disciplines and interdisciplinarity in STEM education to foster
scientific authenticity and develop epistemic skills. Invited symposium presented at capital
NARST. https://identitiesproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/NARST2021_Branchetti_
compressed.pdf
Cheung, K. (2020). Exploring the inclusion of nature of science in biology curriculum and high-
stakes assessments in Hong Kong. Science & Education, 29(3), 491–512. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11191-020-00113-x
Clough, M. P., & Olson, J. K.. (2008). Teaching and assessing the nature of science: An introduc-
tion. Science & Education, 17(2–3), 143–145. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11191-007-9083-9
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). New York:
Routledge.
Cullinane, A. (2018). Incorporating nature of science into initial science teacher education
[Unpublished PhD dissertation]. University of Limerick, Ireland.
Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Open
University Press.
Erduran, S., & Dagher, Z. R (2014a). Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education:
Scientific knowledge, practices and other family categories. Springer.
Erduran, S., & Dagher, Z. R. (2014b). Regaining focus in Irish junior cycle science: Potential new
directions for curriculum and assessment on nature of science. Irish Educational Studies, 33(4),
335–350. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2014.984386
Erduran, S., & Kaya, E. (2018). Drawing Nature of Science in Pre-service Science Teacher
Education: Epistemic Insight Through Visual Representations. Research in Science Education,
48(6), 1133–1149. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9773-0
Erduran, S., & Kaya, E. (2019). Transforming teacher education through the epistemic core of chem-
istry: Empirical evidence and practical strategies. Springer.
Erduran, S., Kaya, E., Cilekrenkli, A., Akgun, S., & Aksoz, B.. (2021). Perceptions of nature of
science emerging in group discussions: A comparative account of pre-service teachers from
Turkey and England. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 19(7),
1375–1396. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10763-020-10110-9
Galili, I. (2019). Towards a refined depiction of nature of science. Science & Education, 28(3–5),
503–537. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00042-4
Hodson, D. (1988). Toward a philosophically more valid science curriculum. Science Education, 72
(1), 19–40. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730720103
Hodson, D., & Wong, S. L. (2017). Going beyond the consensus view: Broadening and enriching
the scope of NOS-oriented curricula. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology
Education, 17(1), 3–17.
Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative
Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2011). A family resemblance approach to the nature of science for science
education. Science & Education, 20(7-8), 591–607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-010-9293-4
Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2014). New directions for nature of science research. In M. Matthews (Ed.),
International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (pp. 999–1021).
Springer.
Kaya, E., & Erduran, S. (2016). From FRA to RFN, or how the family resemblance approach can be
transformed for science curriculum analysis on nature of science. Science & Education, 25(9-10),
1115–1133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-016-9861-3
134 M. CARAMASCHI ET AL.

Kaya, E., Erduran, S., Aksoz, B., & Akgun, S. (2019). Reconceptualised family resemblance
approach to nature of science in pre-service science teacher education. International Journal
of Science Education, 41(1), 21–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1529447
Laherto, A., Kampschulte, L., de Vocht, M., Blonder, R., Akaygun, S., & Apotheker, J. (2018).
Contextualizing the EU’s “responsible research and innovation” policy in science education:
A conceptual comparison with the nature of science concept and practical examples.
EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(6). http://dx.doi.
org/10.29333/ejmste/89513
Lederman, N., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R., & Schwartz, R. (2002). Views of nature of science ques-
tionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of
science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497–521. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.
10034
Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A review of
the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 331–359.
Lederman, N. G. (2006). Syntax of nature of science within inquiry and science instruction. In L. B.
Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science: Implications for teaching,
learning, and teacher education (pp. 301–317). Kluwer Academic.
Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2014). Research on teaching and learning of nature of science.
In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. II, pp.
600–620). Routledge.
Levrini, O., Bertozzi, E., Gagliardi, M., Grimellini-Tomasini, N., Pecori, B., Tasquier, G., & Galili, I.
(2014). Meeting the discipline-culture framework of physics knowledge: A teaching experience
in Italian secondary school. Science & Education, 23(9), 1701–1731. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11191-014-9692-z
Levrini, O., & Fantini, P. (2013). Encountering productive forms of complexity in learning Modern
physics. Science & Education, 22(8), 1895–1910. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-013-9587-4
Matthews, M. (1994). Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. Routledge.
McComas, W. F. (2003). A textbook case of the nature of science: Laws and theories in the science
of biology. International Journal Science Math Education, 1, 141–155.
McComas, W. F., Clogh, M. P., & Almarzroa, H. (1998). The role and character of the nature of
science in Science Education. Science and Education, 7(6), 511–523.
McComas, W. F., & Nouri, N. (2016). The nature of science and the next generation science stan-
dards: Analysis and critique. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 27(5), 555–576. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10972-016-9474-3
McDonald, C. V. (2017). Exploring representations of nature of science in Australian junior sec-
ondary school science textbooks: A case study of genetics. In C. V. McDonald & F. Abd-El-
Khalick (Eds.), Representations of nature of science in school science textbooks: A global perspec-
tive (pp. 98–117). Routledge.
McDonald, C. V., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2017). Representations of nature of science in school
science textbooks. In C. V. McDonald & F. Abd-El-Khalick (Eds.), Representations of nature
of science in school science textbooks: A global perspective (pp. 1–19). Routledge.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods (2nd
ed.). Sage.
MIUR, Italy. (2005). Decreto legislativo 17 ottobre 2005. Retrieved July 9, 2020, from https://
archivio.pubblica.istruzione.it/comitato_musica_new/normativa/allegati/dl226_05.pdf
MIUR, Italy. (2010a). Regulations containing national indications concerning the specific learning
objectives of the activities and courses included in the high school curricula. Gazzetta Ufficiale
– DECRETO 7 ottobre 2010, n. 211. Retrieved July 9, 2020, from https://www.
gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2010/12/14/010G0232/sg
MIUR, Italy. (2010b). Study plan for scientific high school. Annex F, Piano degli Studi del Liceo
Scientifico, opzione Scienze Applicate. Retrieved July 9, 2020, from https://www.
gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2010/06/15/010G0111/sg
MIUR, Italy. (2018). Le iscrizioni al primo anno dei percorsi di istruzione e formazione [available].
https://www.miur.gov.it/web/guest/scuola-secondaria-di-secondo-grado
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION 135

MIUR: Ufficio Gestione Patrimonio Informativo e Statistica. (2019). Le iscrizioni al primo anno dei
percorsi di istruzione e formazione. Retrieved June 23, 2020.
Mohan, A., & Kelly, G. J. (2020). Nature of science and nature of scientists. Science & Education, 29
(5), 1097–1116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00158-y
Monk, M., & Osborne, J. (1997). Placing the history and philosophy of science on the curriculum:
A model for the development of pedagogy. Science Education, 81(4), 405–424. https://doi.org/
10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199707)81:4<405::AID-SCE3>3.0.CO;2-G
Niaz, M. (1998). From cathode rays to alpha particles to quantum of action: A rational reconstruction
of structure of the atom and its implications for chemistry textbooks. Science Education, 82(5),
527–552. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199809)82:5<527::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-B
NRC (National Research Council). (1996). National science education standards. National
Academies.
Olson, J. K. (2018). The inclusion of the nature of science in nine recent international science edu-
cation standards documents. Science & Education, 27(7–8), 637–660. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11191-018-9993-8
Park, W., Seungran Yang, S., & Song, J. (2020). Eliciting students’ understanding of nature of
science with text-based tasks: Insights from new Korean high school textbooks. International
Journal of Science Education, 42(3), 426–450. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1714094
Park, W., Wu, J. Y., & Erduran, S. (2020). The nature of STEM disciplines in the science education
standards documents from the USA, Korea and Taiwan: Focusing on disciplinary aims, values
and practices. Science & Education, 29(4), 899–927. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00139-1
Peters-Burton, E. E., Parrish, J. C., & Mulvey, B. K. (2019). Extending the utility of the views of
nature of science assessment through epistemic network analysis. Science & Education, 28(9-
10), 1027–1053. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00081-x
Petersen, I., Herzog, S., Bath, C., & Fleißner, A.. (2020). Contextualisation of factual knowledge in
genetics: A pre- and post- survey of undergraduates’ understanding of the Nature of Science.
Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 16(2). http://dx.doi.org/10.
29333/ijese/7816
Puttick, S., & Cullinane, A. (2021). Towards the nature of geography for geography education: An
exploratory account, learning from work on the nature of science. Journal of Geography in
Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2021.1903844
Rosengren, K. E. (1981). Advances in Scandinavia content analysis: An introduction. In K. E.
Rosengren (Ed.), Advances in content analysis (pp. 9–19). Sage.
Rubba, P., & Andersen, H. (1978). Development of an instrument to assess secondary school stu-
dents’ understanding of the nature of scientific knowledge. Science Education, 62(4), 449–458.
Shaffer, D. W., Collier, W., & Ruis, A. R. (2016). A tutorial on epistemic network analysis:
Analyzing the structure of connections in cognitive, social, and interaction data. Journal of
Learning Analytics, 3(3), 9–45. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2016.33.3
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational
Researcher, 15(2), 4–14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004
Stadermann, H. K. E., & Goedhart, M. J. (2020). Secondary school students’ views of nature of
science in quantum physics. International Journal of Science Education, 42(6), 997–1016.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1745926
Weber, R. P. (1990). Basic content analysis. Sage.
Yacoubian, H. (2012). Towards a philosophically and a pedagogically reasonable nature of science
curriculum [Doctoral dissertation]. http://era.library.ualberta.ca/public/view/item/
uuid:9b2d52c1-607a-420b-8447-54c82ae14a72
Yeh, Y., Erduran, S., & Hsu, Y. S. (2019). Investigating coherence on nature of science in the
science curriculum documents: Taiwan as a case study. Science & Education, 28(3-5), 291–
310. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00053-1