(2016) Knowledge, belief, and science education: A contribution from the epistemology of testimony (original) (raw)
Related papers
Belief, Knowledge, and Science Education
Educational Psychology Review, 2001
Epistemological questions about the nature of knowledge and belief underlie many of the controversial issues fundamental to research and practice in science teaching and learning. In an effort to bring some clarity to questions of knowledge and belief embedded within science education research and teaching, we first describe the distinctions drawn between knowledge and belief in both philosophy and educational psychology, each of which have shaped the various definitions employed within science education. This discussion is followed by an examination of the distinctions drawn between knowledge and belief employed by three groups of science educators: the traditional distinctions of the foundationalists that are co-opted by researchers focusing on teacher thinking/cognition, the nonfoundational epistemology of the fallibilists and the evolution educators working from this framework, and the radical constructivists who react to and attempt to move past the limitations of these other positions. In this analysis, we explicate the different ways in which knowledge and belief are understood and operationalized in a broad spectrum of research, we describe the theoretical and philosophical assumptions underlying these approaches, and we explore the important areas of contention (both theoretical and empirical) surrounding each of these distinctions.
Knowing, Believing, and Understanding: What Goals for Science Education?
Science & Education, 2000
What is a teacher to do when confronted with a student who says "I understand that theory (e.g., evolution), but I don't believe it"? The purpose of this article is to provide a rationale for answering this question. First we describe the various ways in which the terms know/knowledge and believe/belief are used and summarize the distinctions commonly used to differentiate between these terms. Second, we propose that the primary goal of science education should be student knowledge and understanding, which we will argue typically (but not always) involves belief and typically (but not always) guides action. In those instances where a student evidences a meaningful understanding but still disbelieves, we further propose that the appropriate goal is for students to believe that the theory in question affords the best current scientific account of the relevant phenomena based on the available empirical evidence. Third, we evaluate instructional procedures for addressing the issues of knowledge, belief, and understanding recommended by recent authors before providing our own suggestions to teachers that we hope will be both more philosophically sound and more effective in the classroom.
Knowledge statements and belief statements: how do their differences matter for Science Education
2014
In this paper, I examine first the way knowledge-statements and belief-statements are questioned in ordinary language. The former are questioned by “how do you know?” questions, while the latter are questioned by “why do you believe?” questions. The answers to these questions are different. In the former case, one replies by providing the reasons that justify their being in position to know, whereas in the latter case, one replies by adducing the evidence for their statement. Then, I explore the epistemological repercussions of the difference in ordinary usage between the verbs ‘to know’ and ‘to believe’ and, drawing on these, I discuss the implication for science teaching.
Current science education research and policy highlight the need to conceptualize scientific disciplines not only based on a view of “science-as-knowledge” but also on a perspective of “science-as-practice,” placing an emphasis on practices such as explanation, argumentation, modeling, and communication. However, classroom discourse is not structured in a way that would normally provide to students the opportunity to engage in such “dialogic knowledge-building processes” (Duschl, 2008a) or epistemic discourse. This study argues that such a change in classroom discourse can be achieved through a focus on argumentation as an instructional approach, which aims to engage students in the epistemic practices of science. This study focuses on a qualitative case study of an experienced teacher’s attempts to use argumentation over a school year as a way to identify elements of epistemic discourse that science teachers could be making part of their everyday science teaching. The analysis of classroom talk focused on (a) the teacher’s discursive actions or epistemic operations, and (b) the ways in which these discursive actions presented or engaged students in the construction, justification, and evaluation of knowledge claims. The analysis revealed that the use of justificatory talk was consistent across the six lessons observed but the same consistency was not identified in attempts to engage students in evaluative practices. This discrepancy would suggest that evaluative practices were not as embedded in the teacher’s classroom talk as the justification or construction of knowledge claims. Implications discussed include the need to reconsider pre-service and in-service teacher training and professional development so that science teachers do not only develop their skills of teaching science based on argument, but also of talking science based on argument.
On the Epistemic Value of Students' Conceptions in Science Education
Science & Education, 2021
In this article, I present an analysis of the epistemic value of the students' conceptions, as employed in the current constructivist research. I focus on the conceptions about natural kinds. Since natural kind terms are a crucial part of the discourse of the natural sciences, my conclusions are particularly relevant in science education. To perform my analysis, I use a thought experiment, adapted from Hilary Putnam's famous Twin-Earth examples. I conclude that, to avoid some strong ontoepistemic implications, an externalist view of the learner's thought must be adopted. In my approach, students' conceptions are re-interpreted in terms of Hilary Putnam's stereotypes, conventional representations of a natural kind that guarantee a semantic competence in a specific linguistic environment. As a conclusion, I argue that the role of students' conceptions is not epistemic but pragmatic. They should not be understood as a partial or provisional representation of how a natural kind really is but as linguistic tools that permit the learner to engage in classroom discourse. Finally, I present a preliminary application of my ideas to the study of the usage of tautologies in science education.
From Epistemological Constrains towards Epistemological Resources in the Science Classroom
Nordic Studies in Science Education, 2012
This paper relates to the research of personal epistemology. Two different models are presented which originate from the areas of research on the developmental levels of epistemological beliefs and the epistemological resources. In addition the concept of pupils' 'epistemic views' is defined for the purpose in this particular study. The empirical aim of this study was to discover how pupils assessed their own knowledge, their physics teacher's knowledge and also that of scientists. The context of the study was 12 hours of science lessons, during which eighteen 7 th-grade pupils were taught the modelling idea connected to the topic 'structure of matter'. The core data in this qualitative case study was based on post-interviews. The pupils' views could be classified into all developmental levels of epistemological views. Some of the pupils even possessed beliefs suitable to all levels; this sample challenges the developmental nature of the beliefs. The pupils' epistemic views were compatible with the epistemological resources model, but also new resources were discovered. It seems that in the science classroom the pupils' views should be regarded as epistemological resources instead of treating them as epistemological constrains.
STUDENTS' SCIENTIFIC EPISTEMOLOGY: SOURCE OF KNOWLEDGE
The goals of science education are to help students to learn how to recognize and solve problems, comprehend new phenomena, set goals and regulate their own learning, develop an understanding of the nature of science by doing science and learn to reason scientifically. Education is a pursuit of knowledge where one is encountering new information. In any of these encounters we are influenced by the beliefs we hold about knowledge and knowing, that is by our personal epistemology and epistemological beliefs. This study investigates the shifts in the scientific epistemology in a high-school biology classroom. Various sources of data, questionnaires and interviews are used to analyze and identify the dimensions of scientific epistemology. The science curriculum is being taught using the THINK cycle and it centered on engaging the student with the teacher taking the role of the facilitator of both small-group and whole-class discussion. From the various sources of data, it is intended to track the students' epistemological beliefs based on one component of scientific epistemology: source of knowledge. The analysis indicated that the students showed a shift in terms of this component of scientific epistemology.