Peer Review in Science Education: An Introduction

This is an introduction to a special issue of Research in Science Education that focuses on peer review in science education. We introduce each of the articles in the special issue and highlight some of the issues that are addressed and the methods employed in the articles that follow. We regard peer review as central to issues of research in science education and publication of this special issue as just in time.     

Science, Worldviews and Education: An Introduction

This special issue of Science & Education deals with the theme of ‘Science, Worldviews and Education’. The theme is of particular importance at the present time as many national and provincial education authorities are requiring that students learn about the Nature of Science (NOS) as well as learning science content knowledge and process skills. NOS topics are being written into national and provincial curricula. Such NOS matters give rise to questions about science and worldviews: What is a worldview? Does science have a worldview? Are there specific ontological, epistemological and ethical prerequisites for the conduct of science? Does science lack a worldview but nevertheless have implications for worldviews? How can scientific worldviews be reconciled with seemingly discordant religious and cultural worldviews? In addition to this major curricular impetus for refining understanding of science and worldviews, there are also pressing cultural and social forces that give prominence to questions about science, worldviews and education. There is something of an avalanche of popular literature on the subject that teachers and students are variously engaged by. Additionally the modernisation and science-based industrialisation of huge non-Western populations whose traditional religions and beliefs are different from those that have been associated with orthodox science, make very pressing the questions of whether, and how, science is committed to particular worldviews. Hugh Gauch Jr. provides a long and extensive lead essay in the volume, and 12 philosophers, educators, scientists and theologians having read his paper, then engage with the theme. Hopefully the special issue will contribute to a more informed understanding of the relationship between science, worldviews and education, and provide assistance to teachers who are routinely engaged with the subject.     

The Nature of Science and Science Education: A Bibliography

Research on the nature of science and science education enjoys a longhistory, with its origins in Ernst Mach's work in the late nineteenthcentury and John Dewey's at the beginning of the twentieth century.As early as 1909 the Central Association for Science and MathematicsTeachers published an article – A Consideration of the Principles thatShould Determine the Courses in Biology in Secondary Schools – inSchool Science and Mathematics that reflected foundational concernsabout science and how school curricula should be informed by them. Sincethen a large body of literature has developed related to the teaching andlearning about nature of science – see, for example, the Lederman (1992)and Meichtry (1993) reviews cited below. As well there has been intensephilosophical, historical and philosophical debate about the nature of scienceitself, culminating in the much-publicised Science Wars of recent time. Thereferences listed here primarily focus on the empirical research related to thenature of science as an educational goal; along with a few influential philosophicalworks by such authors as Kuhn, Popper, Laudan, Lakatos, and others. Whilenot exhaustive, the list should prove useful to educators, and scholars in otherfields, interested in the nature of science and how its understanding can berealised as a goal of science instruction. The authors welcome correspondenceregarding omissions from the list, and on-going additions that can be made to it.     

国外科学本质教育研究及启示

促进学生对科学本质的理解已成为科学教育的根本目标之一.一般认为,科学本质涉及"科学知识的本质"与"科学探究的本质".科学本质观决定了科学本质教育的内容与学习范畴.科学本质教育的教学策略是多样的,主要有科学对话模式和HPS教学模式.通过正确处理科学本质与科学探究的关系、科学本质与科学史的关系、设计融入科学本质的课程教学,能有效促进学生对科学本质的理解.     

Mario Bunge, Systematic Philosophy and Science Education: An Introduction

Mario Bunge was born in Argentina in 1919 and is now in his mid-90s. He studied atomic physics and quantum mechanics with Guido Beck (1903?C1988), an Austrian refugee and student of Heisenberg. Additionally he studied modern philosophy in an environment that was a philosophical backwater becoming the first South American philosopher of science to be trained in science. His publications in physics, philosophy, psychology, sociology and the foundations of biology, are staggering in number, and include a massive 8-volume Treatise on Philosophy. The unifying thread of his scholarship is the constant and vigorous advancement of the Enlightenment Project, and criticism of cultural and academic movements that deny or devalue the core planks of the project: namely its naturalism, the search for truth, the universality of science, the value of rationality, and respect for individuals. At a time when specialisation is widely decried, and its deleterious effects on science, philosophy of science, educational research and science teaching are recognised, and at a time when ??grand narratives?? are thought both undesirable and impossible??it is salutary to appraise the fruits of one person??s pursuit of the ??Big?? scientific and philosophical picture or grand narrative. In doing so this special issue brings together philosophers, physicists, biologists, sociologists, logicians, cognitive scientists, economists and mathematicians to examine facets of Mario Bunge??s systematic philosophy and to appraise its contribution to important issues in current philosophy and, by implication, education.     

The Nature of Scientific Practice and Science Education

There is, broadly speaking, an agreement within the international science education community that comprehension of the nature of science (NOS) should be a key element in the scientific literacy of citizens. During the last few decades, several didactic approaches have emerged concerning what and how to teach NOS. Also, one of the basic objectives of science education is for students to become familiar with the skills typical of scientific practice; however, there is little reference to their need to also acquire meta-knowledge about scientific practice (i.e., an understanding of the nature of scientific practice). Among other reasons, this may be due to NOS being essentially identified in most of the predominant proposals with the nature of scientific knowledge. But why not plan the teaching of science to be in tune with real scientific practice for students to learn about the nature of scientific practice at the same time as they are learning science? The answer to this question has given rise to a proposal grounded in ten essential pedagogical principles for the teaching and learning of science in secondary school. These are the principle of formulating questions, the principle of creativity and imagination, the principle of experimentation, the principle of procedural diversity, the principle of errors as opportunity, the principle of modeling, the principle of cooperation and teamwork, the principle of argumentation and discussion, the principle of communication, and the principle of evaluation. The purpose of this article is to present the justification and fundaments of these principles.     

The Role of Insight in Science Education: An Introduction to the Cognitional Theory of Bernard Lonergan

This paper describes the transcendental method of Bernard Lonergan and itsrelevance to science education in general, and to physics education in particular.Lonergan formulated a cognitional theory, based upon the self-assembling dynamicinvariant structure of human knowing, that unfolds the complex relation amongknowing, objective knowledge, and intending subjects (knowers). His heuristicmethod integrates some of the tools necessary to facilitate the learning and teachingprocess because it provides a key that can link the intending subject (student), theintended object (knowledge), and the mediating subject (the teacher). His differentiatedstructure of knowledge can be employed to investigate pedagogical questions andmodels that address how students can be encouraged to engage actively in their ownauthentic learning process.     

体现科学本质的科学教学

理解科学本质是科学素养的内涵之一,是实现提高科学素养的科学教育目标的关键因素。现代科学本质观对科学知识、科学探究和科学事业进行了新的诠释。根据现代科学本质观,发展科学本质观下的科学教学理念,构建科学教育的三维目标,形成融入科学本质的科学教学策略,提升学生的科学本质观。     

Reconceptualizing the Nature of Science for Science Education

Two fundamental questions about science are relevant for science educators: (a) What is the nature of science? and (b) what aspects of nature of science should be taught and learned? They are fundamental because they pertain to how science gets to be framed as a school subject and determines what aspects of it are worthy of inclusion in school science. This conceptual article re-examines extant notions of nature of science and proposes an expanded version of the Family Resemblance Approach (FRA), originally developed by Irzik and Nola (International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 999–1021, 2014) in which they view science as a cognitive-epistemic and as an institutional-social system. The conceptual basis of the expanded FRA is described and justified in this article based on a detailed account published elsewhere (Erduran and Dagher in Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education: scientific knowledge, practices and other family categories. Springer, Dordrecht, 2014a). The expanded FRA provides a useful framework for organizing science curriculum and instruction and gives rise to generative visual tools that support the implementation of a richer understanding of and about science. The practical implications for this approach have been incorporated into analysis of curriculum policy documents, curriculum implementation resources, textbook analysis and teacher education settings.     

Science Education and the Nature of Nature: Bruno Latour's Ontological Politics

This article explores recent developments in the field of science and technology, and the work of Bruno Latour in particular, to problematize the nature of Nature in science education. Although science and technology studies, and the scholarship on science education alike, have become increasingly attentive to the antidemocratic habits of science as a way of knowing, less attention has been directed toward science's ontological commitments, and the politics that follow from a theory of Nature that is uniform, homogenous, and unchanging. Latour suggests that the Nature toward which scientific knowledge is directed serves as a transcendent authority with the potential to circumvent the democratic deliberations of a supposedly subjective social world. Rather than treating Nature as a social construct, Latour explores the methodological and political implications of a reality composed of plural worlds and multiple modes of being, and this article suggests that these theoretical tools offer exciting new possibilities in the field of educational case study research.     

挪威幼儿园的自然科学教育

挪威幼儿园的自然科学教育重在组织儿童进行大量户外活动,教育儿童热爱大自然.与大自然的接触为儿童提供了富有挑战性的学习环境和丰富的学习机会,并有助于儿童在自然科学和其他领域的学习.但是教师在充分利用和开发儿童的学习潜力方面尚有待改进.     

The Inclusion of the Nature of Science in Nine Recent International Science Education Standards Documents

Understanding the nature of science (NOS) has long been a desired outcome of science education, despite ongoing disagreements about the content, structure, and focus of NOS expectations. Addressing the concern that teachers likely focus only on student learning expectations appearing in standards documents, this study examines the current state of NOS in science education standards documents from nine diverse countries to determine the overt NOS learning expectations that appeared, NOS statements provided near those learning expectations, but not identified as learning outcomes (such as chart column headers or footnotes), and NOS statements found in ancillary text (e.g., introductory material or appendices). Findings indicate that NOS ideas rarely occur as expectations for student learning and are far more commonly found in ancillary material. Moreover, consensus was not apparent in the overt learning outcomes for students. Given the well-documented poor state of NOS instruction and the consistent lack of NOS appearing in published curriculum materials, the NOS standards appearing in nearly all documents analyzed are unlikely to provide sufficient conceptual or pedagogical support for NOS to be accurately interpreted or translated into meaningful experiences for students.     

试论科学的本质及其在科学教育中的价值

科学的本质阐明了科学的基本特征，认识科学的本质对于我们在科学教育中树立正确的自然现、科学观，理解科学教育的内涵和科学探究的本质，进而确立科学教育的指年思想、目的、内容以及教育教学方式等具有重要的意义。本文阐述了科学的本质，并对科学的本质在科学教育中的价值进行了论述。     

理科教师的科学本质观对科学教育的影响

人们对科学本质的认识经历了由科学的“真理观”向科学的“建构观”的转变。不同的科学本质观将直接影响着教师对科学教育目标的不同理解,对科学知识的不同选择,对教学主题的不同设计、教学话语的不同使用,对学生学习的不同评价。教师不同的科学本质观及其教学行为影响着学生的科学本质观的形成,影响着学生对科学内容的理解以及看待问题的思维方式。     

北京教育学院科学教育专业与科学课程建设

北京教育学院科学教育团队在科学课程的建设过程中形成了集《科学》课程开发、教材编写、数学研究和教师培训于一体的“四位一体的开发模式”,并在教育、科研和教师培训方面取得了丰硕的成果。