Scholarlink

<p>In this study, we examined aspects of the Nature of Science (NOS) within the science section of the upper secondary level in the Brazilian Common Core Curriculum. Employing the reconceptualised family resemblance approach to the NOS (RFN) analytical framework, a content analysis was conducted to identify the NOS aspects. Epistemic Network Analysis (ENA) was also applied to indicate the connection strength between categories. The findings revealed that the analysed benchmarks highly represent the cognitive–epistemic (66 codes) and social–institutional systems (50 codes). However, ENA results show that the benchmarks have a stronger connection among the cognitive–epistemic system categories with centrality in the <i>scientific practices and cognitive practice</i> categories. <i>The content subject</i>, a non-RFN category, was found to be frequent, establishing strong connections with the <i>social values of science</i> in the network. A more satisfactory representativeness and connectedness of the social–institutional elements are desired. This study contributes to the applicability of RFN as an analytical framework in an unexplored context. The limitations of the study were also discussed.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Analysing the Nature of Science in the Brazilian Common Core Curriculum

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年3月28日

查看全文
  • Sara Souza Pimenta,
  • Beyza Okan,
  • Edit Katalin Molnár

摘要

In this study, we examined aspects of the Nature of Science (NOS) within the science section of the upper secondary level in the Brazilian Common Core Curriculum. Employing the reconceptualised family resemblance approach to the NOS (RFN) analytical framework, a content analysis was conducted to identify the NOS aspects. Epistemic Network Analysis (ENA) was also applied to indicate the connection strength between categories. The findings revealed that the analysed benchmarks highly represent the cognitive–epistemic (66 codes) and social–institutional systems (50 codes). However, ENA results show that the benchmarks have a stronger connection among the cognitive–epistemic system categories with centrality in the scientific practices and cognitive practice categories. The content subject, a non-RFN category, was found to be frequent, establishing strong connections with the social values of science in the network. A more satisfactory representativeness and connectedness of the social–institutional elements are desired. This study contributes to the applicability of RFN as an analytical framework in an unexplored context. The limitations of the study were also discussed.