Do We Have a Trust Problem? Exploring Undergraduate Student Views on the Tentativeness and Trustworthiness of Science

IF 2.1 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
William W. Cobern, Betty AJ Adams, Brandy A-S. Pleasants, Andrew Bentley, Robert Kagumba
{"title":"Do We Have a Trust Problem? Exploring Undergraduate Student Views on the Tentativeness and Trustworthiness of Science","authors":"William W. Cobern,&nbsp;Betty AJ Adams,&nbsp;Brandy A-S. Pleasants,&nbsp;Andrew Bentley,&nbsp;Robert Kagumba","doi":"10.1007/s11191-021-00292-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Science includes the fundamental attributes of durability and uncertainty; hence, we teach about the “tentative yet durable” nature of science. Public discourse can be different, where one hears both confidence about “settled science” and doubts about “just theories.” The latter observation gives rise to the possibility that emphasis on learning the tentative nature of science offers some people the actionable option of declining to accept canonical science. Our paper reports the findings from initial and replication exploratory studies involving about 500 preservice, elementary/middle school teacher education students at a large Midwestern public university. Using a survey method that included opportunities for student comments, the study tested hypotheses about confidence in the veracity, durability, tentativeness, and trustworthiness of science. We found that most students embrace noncontroversial science as correct, and that almost all embraced the tentative nature of science regardless of what they thought about controversial topics. However, when asked about the trustworthiness of science, many students were not willing to say that they trust scientific knowledge. Even students strongly supportive of science, including controversial science, responded similarly. And why did they say that science is not trustworthy? The explanation echoed by many students was that scientific knowledge is tentative. Our paper concludes with implications for instruction and research. Our findings suggest that it would be prudent for science educators to increase instructional focus on the relationship between data and evidence that leads to the durability of scientific knowledge. Future research needs to thoroughly investigate the public interpretation of what we teach about the nature and characteristics of science, and for the implications it might have on how scientific knowledge is or is not incorporated in the development and implementation of public policy.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":56374,"journal":{"name":"Science & Education","volume":"31 5","pages":"1209 - 1238"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11191-021-00292-1.pdf","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science & Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11191-021-00292-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Science includes the fundamental attributes of durability and uncertainty; hence, we teach about the “tentative yet durable” nature of science. Public discourse can be different, where one hears both confidence about “settled science” and doubts about “just theories.” The latter observation gives rise to the possibility that emphasis on learning the tentative nature of science offers some people the actionable option of declining to accept canonical science. Our paper reports the findings from initial and replication exploratory studies involving about 500 preservice, elementary/middle school teacher education students at a large Midwestern public university. Using a survey method that included opportunities for student comments, the study tested hypotheses about confidence in the veracity, durability, tentativeness, and trustworthiness of science. We found that most students embrace noncontroversial science as correct, and that almost all embraced the tentative nature of science regardless of what they thought about controversial topics. However, when asked about the trustworthiness of science, many students were not willing to say that they trust scientific knowledge. Even students strongly supportive of science, including controversial science, responded similarly. And why did they say that science is not trustworthy? The explanation echoed by many students was that scientific knowledge is tentative. Our paper concludes with implications for instruction and research. Our findings suggest that it would be prudent for science educators to increase instructional focus on the relationship between data and evidence that leads to the durability of scientific knowledge. Future research needs to thoroughly investigate the public interpretation of what we teach about the nature and characteristics of science, and for the implications it might have on how scientific knowledge is or is not incorporated in the development and implementation of public policy.

我们是否存在信任问题?探讨大学生对科学的试探性和可信度的看法
科学包括持久性和不确定性的基本属性;因此,我们讲授科学的“试探性而持久”的本质。公共话语可能会有所不同,人们既听到对“既定科学”的信心,也听到对“公正理论”的怀疑。后一种观察产生了这样一种可能性,即强调学习科学的试探性本质,给一些人提供了拒绝接受规范科学的可行选择。我们的论文报告了对中西部一所大型公立大学约500名职前、小学/中学教师教育学生进行的初步和重复性探索性研究的结果。该研究采用了一种调查方法,其中包括让学生发表评论的机会,测试了对科学的真实性、持久性、试探性和可信度的信心的假设。我们发现,大多数学生认为无争议的科学是正确的,而且几乎所有学生都接受了科学的试探性,而不管他们对有争议的话题有什么看法。然而,当被问及科学的可信度时,许多学生不愿意说他们相信科学知识。即使是强烈支持科学的学生,包括有争议的科学,也做出了类似的反应。为什么他们说科学不可信?许多学生赞同的解释是科学知识是尝试性的。本文的结论是对教学和研究的启示。我们的研究结果表明,对于科学教育者来说,增加对导致科学知识持久性的数据和证据之间关系的教学关注是谨慎的。未来的研究需要彻底调查公众对我们所教授的科学的性质和特征的解释,以及它可能对科学知识如何被纳入或不纳入公共政策的制定和实施产生的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Science & Education
Science & Education Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1117
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Science & Education publishes research informed by the history, philosophy and sociology of science and mathematics that seeks to promote better teaching, learning, and curricula in science and mathematics. More particularly Science & Education promotes: The utilization of historical, philosophical and sociological scholarship to clarify and deal with the many intellectual issues facing contemporary science and mathematics education.  Collaboration between the communities of scientists, mathematicians, historians, philosophers, cognitive psychologists, sociologists, science and mathematics educators, and school and college teachers. An understanding of the philosophical, cultural, economic, religious, psychological and ethical dimensions of modern science and the interplay of these factors in the history of science.  The inclusion of appropriate history and philosophy of science and mathematics courses in science and mathematics teacher-education programmes.  The dissemination of accounts of lessons, units of work, and programmes in science and mathematics, at all levels, that have successfully utilized history and philosophy.  Discussion of the philosophy and purposes of science and mathematics education, and their place in, and contribution to, the intellectual and ethical development of individuals and cultures.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信