| Abstract: | At the start of their first semester, 35 college freshmen were given an interview probing (a) their differentiation of scientists' ideas from evidence, and hypotheses from theories; (b) their understanding of the inherent uncertainty of scientific knowledge; and (c) their reasoning about scientific controversies. The most common responses were in terms of an epistemology in which scientists' ideas and evidence are differentiated, and theories are understood as tested hypotheses (Level 2 in our system based on Carey, Evans, Honda, Jay, & Unger, 1989), although students varied in how consistently they differentiated theories and evidence across all questions. Responses in which theories are understood as broader explanatory frameworks guiding hypothesis testing (Level 3) were virtually nonexistent, but some students gave responses that showed awareness of processes of interpreting and reinterpreting patterns of results (Level 2.5). Responses across the three parts of the interview were significantly related. Consistently differentiating scientists' ideas from evidence was strongly related to appreciating the inherent uncertainty of scientific knowledge and with having a deeper understanding of the reasons for scientific controversies and how to resolve them. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 43: 747–785, 2006 |
