Scientific eponym in educational Universe (original) (raw)

The Science of Education – Disciplinary Knowledge on Non-Knowledge/Ignorance?

Educational Research: Why ‘What Works’ Doesn't Work

Uncertainty is in. 1 As a future-oriented, specific form of non-knowledge, it nowadays counts as a central characteristic of the knowledge of the world and also determines the way of dealing with it practically. This is shown not only in quantum physics or in 'Schroedinger's cat', in medical-therapeutic diagnostics, in the subsumption of phenomena in classification systems, in language comprehension and recognition but also in stocks and foreign exchange rates, in insurance, in betting and gambling. Currently, 'uncertainty' is also taken up offensively by strategists from the advertising industry, for example, in the context of new information and communication technologies. Not far removed from advertising rhetoric, 'uncertainty' is proclaimed to be a prerequisite for modern management of enterprises. Uncertainty is said to be a fundamental characteristic of our modern society, which renews everything, 'including its own description'. Therefore, enterprises would have to adapt 'from knowledge management to the management of uncertainty'. Such management of uncertainty relies less on the traditional sciences 2 and more on external knowledge, art and literature as sources of current trends and the humanities-sociology, philosophy, anthropology, ethnology etc. Since the 1980s 'uncertainty' is no longer merely seen as a factor in the sciences, which has to be controlled and minimized. 3 Uncertainty is even understood as a dynamic sign of scientific and social development. 4 Since this time, the topic 'uncertainty'-traditionally embodied in philosophy, mathematics and probability theory-is taken up by a multitude of different social and scientific disciplines. In particular, cognition and behavioural sciences, sociology of knowledge, epistemology, and organization/management sciences not only promoted the increasing trend of this topic, but also developed new insights and perspectives, which allow us to speak of the emergence of a new paradigm: Not long ago, the dominant methods of coping with ignorance were to try eliminating it or absorbing it. The emerging frameworks now seem to have jettisoned the assumption that ignorance is ultimately reducible, and the new style is 'managerial' in the sense of attempting to understand, tolerate, and even utilize certain kinds of ignorance (Smithson, 1988, p. viii). In this context, the disciplinary order of traditional sciences-based on methodical and systematic severity and on regulative principles such as truth, certainty, accuracy and objectivity-is relativized by a new cartography of the scientific cosmos, in

THE REALITY OF THE EDUCATION IN SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE

There are different paths to reality, they are determined by the knower, being instrumental methodological study object, epistemological axis, among others. Reality presents several faces, what is observable and what is perceived sensory empirical data obtained correspond to the visible, the main thing is to discover the hidden side, which is behind the perceptible or data. Epistemology is the whole process of obtaining scientific knowledge, ranging from the pre knowledge to get to know the hidden side, one thing is what is seen and what is not, and one that is not seen, is really it is.

A comment on “the problem of terminology in the study of student conceptions in science”

Abimola (1988) raises a fundamental issue about the study of students' conceptions in science-the problem of terminology to label these conceptions. As he so rightly asserts, the importance of this issue is in the need for researchers (and readers) to understand the nature and implications of the terminology used in reporting research. This response to the paper is motivated by a desire to strengthen the arguments about the importance of terminology by raising two related issues which run counter to some other aspects of the paper: there are other significant factors, apart from views of science, which influence researchers' use of terminology to label conceptions; the value of seeking a single descriptor for conceptions is, at best, questionable. Consideration of the first of these two issues leads to arguments for the second.

The problem of terminology in the study of student conceptions in science

Science Education, 1988

This paper revisits the problem of terminology in the study of student conceptions in science. Progress on the resolution of the problem is reviewed first. Then, an analysis is performed on the knowledge of science subdividing it into components such as disciplinary, curricular, experiential, and personal knowledge. An attempt is then made to analyze how these four components of knowledge might interact in research settings to produce different contexts. Based on these analyses, it is suggested that the appropriateness of a particular term as a descriptor of science knowledge might be dependent on specific research contexts that science education researchers need to make more explicit. It seems misconceptions, alternative conceptions, and knowledge can coexist within each research context. How they might do this, and researchers' inferences about them, including underlying thought processes need to be documented. Remediation strategies would then vary with each type of conceptions and with each context.

Introducing the Semantic View of Scientific Theories in Science Education

Science & culture: Promise, challenge and demand: Book of proceedings, 2011

In the last forty years or so, research concerned with laying the theoretical foundations for didactics of science (i.e., science education as a discipline) with the use of frameworks from the philosophy of science has witnessed a growing " rapprochement " between science education and recent and current philosophical debates. Since the very beginning of research in the so-called nature of science (NOS), scholars have been exploring different ways to relate the teaching of traditional scientific content with meta-scientific perspectives on science. In this spirit, outlooks related to the so-called new philosophy of science have had relevant impact on NOS research and education. On the other hand, constructs such as " model " , " structure " , " representation " or " constraint " , which for the last thirty years have been the focus of many philosophical debates related to the semantic view of scientific theories have received much less attention until very recently. However, it has been pointed out that there is a shift in this situation; scholar highlight that the updating of the philosophical foundations for NOS research towards the direction of the semantic view, and of the construct of " scientific model " in particular, could very well meet the aims of scientific literacy for all. Such movement towards recent and current philosophy of science could enhance the learning of scientific and philosophical competences related to the nature of science. However, the relations between NOS research and meta-scientific viewsare not undisputed, especially with regard to the philosophy of science. While from a naturalised standpoint philosophy of science may be considered a science in its own right, dealing with empirical facts (the set of cultural practices and products that we label " science "), it has traditionally been regarded as a philosophical (and thus a priori) field, with no universally agreed-upon answers to philosophical questions about science. This dual nature of philosophy of science is inherited by NOS research and innovation, and has given rise to different ways of dealing with this tension between the " philosophical " and the " meta-scientific " approaches to the philosophy of science. We will outline four possible approaches to this tension, and argue in favour of a non-general philosophical approach. In this context we will explore the ways in which the theoretical construct of " model " coined by the semantic view may be adequately incorporated to NOS research and to the school science curriculum. In particular, we want to show how the notion of key nature-of-science ideas may be of use in this endeavour.

Teaching and learning nature of scientific knowledge: Is it Déjà vu all over again?

Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 2019

This review traces the history of research on the teaching and learning of nature of scientific knowledge (NOSK), and its implications for curriculum and instruction. Initially, the complex rubric of NOSK is clearly conceptualized, while recognizing that there is no singularly accepted definition. As part of this conceptualization NOSK is distinguished from the body of scientific knowledge and science practices/inquiry, the latter of which is often conflated with NOSK. The empirical research on NOSK related to teaching, learning, and assessment is briefly reviewed, followed by a discussion of the challenges that teachers face and a delineation of research foci that can help alleviate teachers’ challenges. Finally, a variety of important questions yet to be answered are delineated and explained.

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.