Sorry for the extended delay in response. I have been having trouble signing on, and we have just started the school year (CRAAAAZY). Anyway, I would start with the book Soul of Science by Pearcy and Thaxton. Some of the books they reference are also helpful. The Scientific Revolution by Steven Shapin is also very helpful. It has been a long journey for me even to understand some of the flow of history and philosophy, but I feel like I know enough to be in conversation but not to speak authoritatively. There are aspects to this conversation that are really deep and complicated, and they have been debated for a really long time e.g. Plato's realm of the forms, Aristotle's hylomorphic substances, etc. We are all pushing against the edge of mystery trying to make as much sense as possible of God's wondrous creation.
The most basic question I (and my 9th grade team) are trying to help our students understand and answer is, "Does an immaterial reality called a form exist?" Both Plato and Aristotle, along with most of church tradition, would say 'yes.' There are differences about where, and what, and how, but the basic name for this position is realism. If the answer is 'no' then that position is called nominalism, which means that when we see a frog we are not recognizing it as a frog because we are recognizing the immaterial reality that shapes the material of that creature into a frog, we are merely recognizing a pattern that we have 'named' (hence nominalism) a frog. The nominalists thought the idea of form was extraneous (think Occam's razor) so they discarded it.
However, form helps us with questions like, "how do non-living atoms/molecules make something that is alive?" "Given a creature is made up of so many parts, why can we consider all of these parts one thing? What is the cause of their oneness? The answer would be their formal cause.
I am not sure if this helps or only muddies the waters, but there it is. Again, sorry for the late response.