This study highlights the importance of integrating the history of technology into science education to improve primary student teachers’ (undergraduate students of the Department of Pedagogy and Primary Education of the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens) understanding of key concepts in science and technology, such as mechanical advantage, criteria for distinguishing types of levers, their applications in everyday life, and the conceptualization of force vectors. Additionally, the research aimed to enhance primary student teachers’ understanding of the Nature of Science (NOS) and the Nature of Technology (NOT), emphasizing that science and technology are distinct yet interrelated and identifying what constitutes technology. To ensure credibility, peer debriefing and thoroughly documented research conditions were employed. Statistical analyses, including Chi-square and Fisher’s exact test, were used to evaluate the significance of the results, addressing each research question in detail. The findings revealed a significant improvement in primary student teachers’ comprehension following the intervention compared to the control group, underscoring the effectiveness of the instructional approach. The study also suggests further exploration of simple machines and the incorporation of more extensive mathematical components in future research.
References
[1]
Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving Science Teachers’ Conceptions of Nature of Science: A Critical Review of the Literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 665-701. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690050044044
[2]
Akerson, V. L., & Volrich, M. L. (2006). Teaching Nature of Science Explicitly in a First-Grade Internship Setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 377-394. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20132
[3]
Akerson, V. L., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Influence of a Reflective Explicit Activity-Based Approach on Elementary Teachers’ Conceptions of Nature of Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 295-317. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1098-2736(200004)37:4<295::aid-tea2>3.0.co;2-2
[4]
Allchin, D. (2011). Evaluating Knowledge of the Nature of (Whole) Science. Science Education, 95, 518-542. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20432
[5]
Allchin, D. (2014). From Science Studies to Scientific Literacy: A View from the Classroom. Science & Education, 23, 1911-1932. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-013-9672-8
[6]
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (1989a). Chapter 1: The Nature of Science. Science for all Americans. Oxford University Press. http://www.project2061.org/publications/sfaa/online/chap1.htm
[7]
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (1989b). Chapter 3: The Nature of Technology. Science for all Americans. Oxford University Press. http://www.project2061.org/publications/sfaa/online/chap3.htm
[8]
Cardwell, D. S. L. (2001). Wheels, Clocks, and Rockets: A History of Technology. W.W. Norton & Company.
Clough, M. P. (2006). Learners’ Responses to the Demands of Conceptual Change: Considerations for Effective Nature of Science Instruction. Science & Education, 15, 463-494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-005-4846-7
[11]
Clough, M. P. (2011). The Story behind the Science: Bringing Science and Scientists to Life in Post-Secondary Science Education. Science & Education, 20, 701-717. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-010-9310-7
[12]
Clough, M. P. (2013). Teaching about the Nature of Technology. In M. P. Clough, J. K. Olson, & D. S. Niederhauser (Eds.), The Nature of Technology: Implications for Learning and Teaching (pp. 373-390). Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-269-3_19
[13]
Clough, M. P. (2018). Teaching and Learning about the Nature of Science. Science & Education, 27, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-018-9964-0
[14]
Clough, M. P. (2020). Using Stories behind the Science to Improve Understanding of Nature of Science, Science Content, and Attitudes toward Science. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), Science: Philosophy, History and Education (pp. 513-525). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57239-6_28
[15]
Clough, M. P., Olson, J. K., & Niederhauser, D. S. (2013). The Nature of Technology: Implications for Learning and Teaching. Sense Publishers. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-94-6209-269-3
[16]
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research Methods in Education (8th ed.). Routledge.
[17]
Compton, V. J., & Compton, A. D. (2013). Teaching the Nature of Technology: Determining and Supporting Student Learning of the Philosophy of Technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23, 229-256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-011-9176-2
[18]
Constantinou, C., Hadjilouca, R., & Papadouris, N. (2010). Students’ Epistemological Awareness Concerning the Distinction between Science and Technology. International Journal of Science Education, 32, 143-172. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903229296
[19]
Cunningham, C. M., Lachapelle, C., & Lindgren-Streicher, A. (2005). Assessing Elementary School Students’ Conceptions of Engineering and Technology. In ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition (pp. 811-820). ASEE. https://peer.asee.org/14836
[20]
Dagher, Z. R., & Erduran, S. (2016). Reconceptualizing the Nature of Science for Science Education: Why Does It Matter? Science & Education, 25, 147-164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-015-9800-8
[21]
De Vries, M. J. (2016a). Learners’ Philosophies about Technologies. In M. J. De Vries (Ed.), Teaching about Technology: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Technology for Non-philosophers (2nd ed., pp. 85-89). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32945-1_7
[22]
De Vries, M. J. (2016b). Philosophy of Technology: What and Why? In M. J. De Vries (Ed.), Teaching about Technology: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Technology for Non-philosophers (2nd ed., pp. 1-10). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32945-1_1
[23]
De Vries, M. J. (2016c). Teaching about Technology: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Technology for Non-Philosophers (2nd ed.). Springer International Publishing.
[24]
DiGironimo, N. (2011). What Is Technology? Investigating Student Conceptions about the Nature of Technology. International Journal of Science Education, 33, 1337-1352. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.495400
[25]
Driver, R., Squires, A., Rushworth, P., & Wood-Robinson, V. (1994). Making Sense of SECONDARY science: Research into Children’s Ideas. Routledge.
English, L. D., Hudson, P., & Dawes, L. (2013). Engineering-based Problem Solving in the Middle School: Design and Construction with Simple Machines. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 3, Article 5. https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1081
[28]
Erdogan, C., & Stilman, M. (2014). Incorporating Kinodynamic Constraints in Automated Design of Simple Machines. In 2014 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (pp. 2931-2936). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/iros.2014.6942966
[29]
Erdogan, C., & Stilman, M. (2016). Autonomous Realization of Simple Machines. In M. A. Hsieh, O. Khatib, & V. Kumar (Eds.), Experimental Robotics: The 14th International Symposium on Experimental Robotics (pp.471-486). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23778-7_31
[30]
European Commission (2014). The Future of Europe Is Science a Report of the President’s Science and Technology Advisory Council (STAC). Publications Office.
[31]
Flores, A. (2008). The Mean as the Balance Point: Thought Experiments with Measuring Sticks. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 39, 741-748. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207390701871655
[32]
Galluzzi, P. (1987). Leonardo da Vinci: From the “Elementi Macchinali” to the Man-Machine. History and Technology, 4, 235-265. https://doi.org/10.1080/07341518708581700
[33]
Galluzzi, P. (2001). Renaissance Engineers: From Brunelleschi to Leonardo da Vinci. Giunti.
[34]
García-Carmona, A. (2021). Improving Pre-Service Elementary Teachers’ Understanding of the Nature of Science through an Analysis of the Historical Case of Rosalind Franklin and the Structure of DNA. Research in Science Education, 51, 347-373. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9798-4
[35]
Gardner, P. L. (1993). Textbook Representations of Science-Technology Relationships. Research in Science Education, 23, 85-94. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02357048
[36]
Gardner, P. L. (1999). The Representation of Science-Technology Relationships in Canadian Physics Textbooks. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 329-347. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006999290732
[37]
Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. W. (2012). Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Applications (10th ed.). Pearson.
[38]
Hadjilouca, R., Constantinou, C. P., & Papadouris, N. (2011). The Rationale for a Teaching Innovation about the Interrelationship between Science and Technology. Science & Education, 20, 981-1005. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-010-9332-1
[39]
Hadzigeorgiou, Y. (2006). Humanizing the Teaching of Physics through Storytelling: The Case of Current Electricity. Physics Education, 41, 42-46. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9120/41/1/003
[40]
Hadzigeorgiou, Y. (2018). Teaching the Nature of Science through Storytelling: Some Empirical Evidence from a Grade 9 Classroom. SFU Educational Review, 10, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.21810/sfuer.v10i2.318
[41]
Howitt, D., & Cramer, D. (2017). Understanding Statistics in Psychology with SPSS (7th ed.). Pearson.
[42]
Hsu, M.-C., Purzer, S., & Cardella, M. E. (2011). Elementary Teachers’ Views about Teaching Design, Engineering, and Technology. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 1, 31-39. https://doi.org/10.5703/1288284314639
[43]
Kampourakis, K. (2016). The “General Aspects” Conceptualization as a Pragmatic and Effective Means to Introducing Students to Nature of Science: The General Aspects Conceptualization of NOS. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53, 667-682. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21305
[44]
Kazempour, M., & Sadler, T. D. (2015). Pre-Service Teachers’ Science Beliefs, Attitudes, and Self-Efficacy: A Multi-Case Study. Teaching Education, 26, 247-271. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2014.996743
[45]
Kemp, M. (2011). Leonardo. Oxford University Press.
[46]
Kipnis, N. (1996). The Historical-Investigative? Approach to Teaching Science. Science & Education, 5, 277-292. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00414317
[47]
Klassen, S. (2006a). A Theoretical Framework for Contextual Science Teaching. Interchange, 37, 31-62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-006-8399-8
[48]
Klassen, S. (2006b). A Theoretical Framework for Contextual Science Teaching. Interchange, 37, 31-62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-006-8399-8
[49]
Knight, M., & Cunningham, C. (2004). Draw an Engineer: Development of a Tool to Investigate Students’ Ideas about Engineers and Engineering. In 2004 Annual Conference Proceedings (pp. 9.482.1-9.482.11). ASEE Conferences. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--12831
[50]
Kokkotas, P., Rizaki, A., & Malamitsa, K. (2010). Storytelling as a Strategy for Understanding Concepts of Electricity and Electromagnetism. Interchange, 41, 379-405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-010-9137-9
[51]
Kruse, J. W. (2013a). Implications of the Nature of Technology for Teaching and Teacher Education. In M. P. Clough, J. K. Olson, & D. S. Niederhauser (Eds.), The Nature of Technology (pp. 345-369). Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-269-3_18
[52]
Kruse, J. W. (2013b). Promoting Middle School Students’ Understanding of the Nature of Technology. In M. P. Clough, J. K. Olson, & D. S. Niederhauser (Eds.), The Nature of Technology: Implications for Learning and Teaching (pp. 391-410). Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-269-3_20
[53]
Kubli, F. (1999). Historical Aspects in Physics Teaching: Using Galileo’s Work in a New Swiss Project. Science Education, 8, 137-150. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1008613706212
[54]
Landrus, M. (2010). Leonardo da Vinci’s Giant Crossbow. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-540-68918-8
[55]
Lawson, D. F., Stevenson, K. T., Peterson, M. N., Carrier, S. J., L. Strnad, R., & Seekamp, E. (2019). Children Can Foster Climate Change Concern among Their Parents. Nature Climate Change, 9, 458-462. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0463-3
[56]
Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of Science: Past, Present, and Future. In S. K. Abell, & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education (pp. 831-879). Routledge.
[57]
Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2014). Research on Teaching and Learning of Nature of Science. In S. K. Abell, & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education, Volume II (pp. 600-620). Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9780203097267
[58]
Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2019). Teaching and Learning Nature of Scientific Knowledge: Is It Déjà Vu All over Again? Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1, Article No. 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0002-0
[59]
Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (1998). Reasoning about Structure and Function: Children’s Conceptions of Gears. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 3-25. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1098-2736(199801)35:1<3::aid-tea2>3.0.co;2-x
[60]
Leuchter, M., & Naber, B. (2019). Studying Children’s Knowledge Base of One-Sided Levers as Force Amplifiers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56, 91-112. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21470
[61]
Marulcu, I., & Barnett, M. (2016). Impact of an Engineering Design-Based Curriculum Compared to an Inquiry-Based Curriculum on Fifth Graders’ Content Learning of Simple Machines. Research in Science & Technological Education, 34, 85-104. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2015.1077327
[62]
McComas, W. F. (2008). Seeking Historical Examples to Illustrate Key Aspects of the Nature of Science. Science & Education, 17, 249-263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-007-9081-y
[63]
McComas, W. F. (2011). The History of Science and the Future of Science Education. In P. V. Kokkotas, K. S. Malamitsa, & A. A. Rizaki (Eds.), Adapting Historical Knowledge Production to the Classroom (pp. 37-53). Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-349-5_3
[64]
McComas, W. F. (2014). Nature of Science in the Science Curriculum and in Teacher Education Programs in the United States. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching (pp. 1993-2023). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7654-8_61
[65]
McComas, W. F., Clough, M. P., & Almazroa, H. (1998). The Role and Character of the Nature of Science in Science Education. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The Nature of Science in Science Education: Rationales and Strategies (pp. 3-39). Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47215-5_1
[66]
McComas, W. F., Clough, M. P., & Nouri, N. (2020). Nature of Science and Classroom Practice: A Review of the Literature with Implications for Effective NOS Instruction. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), Nature of Science in Science Instruction (pp. 67-111). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57239-6_4
[67]
Metz, D., Klassen, S., McMillan, B., Clough, M., & Olson, J. (2007). Building a Foundation for the Use of Historical Narratives. Science & Education, 16, 313-334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-006-9024-z
[68]
Moon, F. C. (2007). The Machines of Leonardo da Vinci and Franz Reuleaux: Kinematics of Machines from the Renaissance to the 20th Century. Springer.
[69]
National Research Council (1996). National Science Education Standards: Observe, Interact, Change, Learn. National Academy Press.
[70]
Neumann, I., Michel, H., & Papadouris, N. (2020). Blending Nature of Science with Science Content Learning. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), Nature of Science in Science Instruction (pp.327-342). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57239-6_18
[71]
NGSS Lead States (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, by States. National Academies Press.
[72]
Niaz, M. (2009). Critical Appraisal of Physical Science as a Human Enterprise: Dynamics of Scientific Progress. Springer.
[73]
Nicholl, C. (2005). Leonardo da Vinci: Flights of the Mind. Penguin.
[74]
Norbury, J. W. (2006). Working with Simple Machines. Physics Education, 41, 546-550. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9120/41/6/010
[75]
Norris, S. P., Guilbert, S. M., Smith, M. L., Hakimelahi, S., & Phillips, L. M. (2005). A Theoretical Framework for Narrative Explanation in Science. Science Education, 89, 535-563. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20063
[76]
Oleson, A., & Hora, M. T. (2014). Teaching the Way They Were Taught? Revisiting the Sources of Teaching Knowledge and the Role of Prior Experience in Shaping Faculty Teaching Practices. Higher Education, 68, 29-45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-013-9678-9
[77]
Osborne, J., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science Education in Europe: Critical Reflections (p. 32). The Nuffield Foundation.
[78]
Osborne, J., Collins, S., Ratcliffe, M., Millar, R., & Duschl, R. (2003). What “Ideas-About-Science” Should Be Taught in School Science? A Delphi Study of the Expert Community. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 692-720. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10105
[79]
Pacey, A. (2001). Meaning in Technology (MIT Press Paperback ed). MIT.
[80]
Pleasants, J., Clough, M. P., Olson, J. K., & Miller, G. (2019). Fundamental Issues Regarding the Nature of Technology: Implications for STEM Education. Science & Education, 28, 561-597. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00056-y
[81]
Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2006). The Content Validity Index: Are You Sure You Know What’s Being Reported? Critique and Recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 29, 489-497. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20147
[82]
Rau, G., & Antink-Meyer, A. (2020). Distinguishing Science, Engineering, and Technology. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), Nature of Science in Science Instruction (pp.159-176). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57239-6_8
[83]
Rivet, A. E., & Krajcik, J. S. (2004). Achieving Standards in Urban Systemic Reform: An Example of a Sixth Grade Project-Based Science Curriculum. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 669-692. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20021
[84]
Rohaan, E. J., Taconis, R., & Jochems, W. M. G. (2008). Reviewing the Relations between Teachers’ Knowledge and Pupils’ Attitude in the Field of Primary Technology Education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 20, 15-26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-008-9055-7
[85]
Rosheim, M. E. (2006). Leonardo’s Lost Robots. Springer.
[86]
Ryan, A. G., & Aikenhead, G. S. (1992). Students’ Preconceptions about the Epistemology of Science. Science Education, 76, 559-580. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730760602
[87]
Schiffer, M., & Bowden, L. (1984). The Role of Mathematics in Science. American Mathematical Society. https://doi.org/10.5948/upo9780883859452
[88]
Schizas, D., Psillos, D., & Asimopoulos, S. (2024). Advancing Scientific Literacy: Integrating Nature of Science and Nature of Scientific Inquiry in Teaching Griffith’s and Avery-Macleod-McCarty Experiments. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 20, e2421. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/15522
[89]
Sexton, S. S. (2023). Nature of Science and Nature of Technology. In B. Akpan, B. Cavas, & T. Kennedy (Eds.), Contemporary Trends and Issues in Science Education (pp. 13-23). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24259-5_2
[90]
Stefanidou, C., & Skordoulis, C. (2017). Primary Student Teachers’ Understanding of Basic Ideas of Nature of Science: Laws, Theories and Models. Journal of Studies in Education, 7, 127-153. https://doi.org/10.5296/jse.v7i1.10599
[91]
Stefanidou, C., Psoma, V., & Skordoulis, C. (2020). Ptolemy’s Experiments on Refraction in Science Class. Physics Education, 55, Article ID: 035027. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6552/ab7c80
[92]
Stinner, A., McMillan, B. A., Metz, D., Jilek, J. M., & Klassen, S. (2003). The Renewal of Case Studies in Science Education. Science and Education, 12, 617-643. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1025648616350
[93]
Taddei, M., & Zanon, E. (2005). Leonardo’s Machines: Secrets and Inventions in the Da Vinci Codices. Giunti.
[94]
Takenouchi, K., & Makizono, M. (2014). Design Exercise Making Use of Classic Engineering Documents. In K. Kikuchi, T. Kanada, T. Otaka, & D. Matsuura (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Design Engineering and Science, ICDES 2014, August 31-September 3, 2014, Parkhotel Congress Center Pilsen, Czech Republic: Conference Subject: New Role of Design Engineering and Science (Vol. 2, pp. 22-25). Japan Society for Design Engineering.
[95]
Taylor, J. A. (2001). Using a Practical Context to Encourage Conceptual Change: An Instructional Sequence in Bicycle Science. School Science and Mathematics, 101, 117-124. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2001.tb18014.x
[96]
Usher, A. P. (1988). A History of Mechanical Inventions (Revised Edition). Dover.
[97]
Van Deventer, J., Wittmann, M. C., Hsu, L., Henderson, C., & McCullough, L. (2007). Comparing Student Use of Mathematical and Physical Vector Representations. In AIP Conference Proceedings (pp. 208-211). AIP. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2820935
[98]
Vollebergh, W. A. M., Iedema, J., & Raaijmakers, Q. A. W. (2001). Intergenerational Transmission and the Formation of Cultural Orientations in Adolescence and Young Adulthood. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 1185-1198. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.01185.x
[99]
Waight, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2012). Nature of Technology: Implications for Design, Development, and Enactment of Technological Tools in School Science Classrooms. International Journal of Science Education, 34, 2875-2905. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.698763
[100]
Yaşar, Ş., Baker, D., Robinson-Kurpius, S., Krause, S., & Roberts, C. (2006). Development of a Survey to Assess K-12 Teachers’ Perceptions of Engineers and Familiarity with Teaching Design, Engineering, and Technology. Journal of Engineering Education, 95, 205-216. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2006.tb00893.x
