道尔顿对化学原子论的追求对未来的教师有多大价值?埃塞俄比亚kotebe教育大学一例

Abayneh Lemma Gurmu, Woldie Belachew
{"title":"道尔顿对化学原子论的追求对未来的教师有多大价值?埃塞俄比亚kotebe教育大学一例","authors":"Abayneh Lemma Gurmu, Woldie Belachew","doi":"10.26740/jcer.v6n2.p138-151","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Atom possesses controversial ontological accounts even in a single discipline such as chemistry. Its essence as a reality and inclusion in science education has been subjected to numerous philosophical and scientific debates. The educational literature also shows that the ancient corpuscular notion is dominantly portrayed within the curriculum and instruction of many educational settings. The fundamental problem is that the chemists, educators, philosophers, and historians of chemistry themselves haven’t had a substantial agreement on any of the philosophical and scientific accounts due to their longstanding philosophical divide between the different positions of positivism and realism. Neither has the historical perspective of philosophy and science been reasonably acknowledged in science/chemistry education. We aimed in this interpretative case study to figure out how much Dalton’s pursuit of the chemical atomism is worth to 22 purposely selected and interviewed prospective teachers. The resulting transcripts were analyzed using HPS, the seven milestones of its case study. As a result, one major and two minor themes were found none of which match any of the themes of the milestones. Moreover, the entire narrative lacks some essential perspectives and contexts of HPS in general and Dalton’s experimentations in particular. Misjudgment of his indivisibility notion, for example, is a drawback associated with this limitation. Thus, more inquiries are needed to be conducted in the long run into the curriculum and classroom practice while departmental discussions on such issues are suggested in the short run.","PeriodicalId":444789,"journal":{"name":"JCER (Journal of Chemistry Education Research)","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"HOW WORTHY IS DALTON’S PURSUIT OF CHEMICAL ATOMISM FOR THE PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS? A CASE OF KOTEBE UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION, ETHIOPIA\",\"authors\":\"Abayneh Lemma Gurmu, Woldie Belachew\",\"doi\":\"10.26740/jcer.v6n2.p138-151\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Atom possesses controversial ontological accounts even in a single discipline such as chemistry. Its essence as a reality and inclusion in science education has been subjected to numerous philosophical and scientific debates. The educational literature also shows that the ancient corpuscular notion is dominantly portrayed within the curriculum and instruction of many educational settings. The fundamental problem is that the chemists, educators, philosophers, and historians of chemistry themselves haven’t had a substantial agreement on any of the philosophical and scientific accounts due to their longstanding philosophical divide between the different positions of positivism and realism. Neither has the historical perspective of philosophy and science been reasonably acknowledged in science/chemistry education. We aimed in this interpretative case study to figure out how much Dalton’s pursuit of the chemical atomism is worth to 22 purposely selected and interviewed prospective teachers. The resulting transcripts were analyzed using HPS, the seven milestones of its case study. As a result, one major and two minor themes were found none of which match any of the themes of the milestones. Moreover, the entire narrative lacks some essential perspectives and contexts of HPS in general and Dalton’s experimentations in particular. Misjudgment of his indivisibility notion, for example, is a drawback associated with this limitation. Thus, more inquiries are needed to be conducted in the long run into the curriculum and classroom practice while departmental discussions on such issues are suggested in the short run.\",\"PeriodicalId\":444789,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JCER (Journal of Chemistry Education Research)\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JCER (Journal of Chemistry Education Research)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26740/jcer.v6n2.p138-151\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JCER (Journal of Chemistry Education Research)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26740/jcer.v6n2.p138-151","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

即使在化学这样的单一学科中,原子的本体论也存在争议。它作为一种现实和科学教育的包容性的本质已经受到了许多哲学和科学的争论。教育文献还表明,古代的微粒概念在许多教育机构的课程和教学中占主导地位。最根本的问题是,化学家、教育家、哲学家和化学历史学家本身,由于实证主义和现实主义的不同立场之间存在长期的哲学分歧,他们对任何哲学和科学解释都没有实质性的共识。在科学/化学教育中,哲学和科学的历史观也没有得到合理的承认。在这个解释性的案例研究中,我们的目的是要弄清楚道尔顿对化学原子论的追求对22位有意挑选和采访的未来教师有多大价值。结果转录本使用HPS进行分析,HPS是其案例研究的七个里程碑。结果,发现了一个主要主题和两个次要主题,其中没有一个与里程碑的任何主题相匹配。此外,整个叙述缺乏HPS的一些基本视角和背景,特别是道尔顿的实验。例如,对他的不可分割概念的错误判断,就是与这种限制相关的一个缺点。因此,从长远来看,需要对课程和课堂实践进行更多的调查,而短期内则建议对这些问题进行部门讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
HOW WORTHY IS DALTON’S PURSUIT OF CHEMICAL ATOMISM FOR THE PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS? A CASE OF KOTEBE UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION, ETHIOPIA
Atom possesses controversial ontological accounts even in a single discipline such as chemistry. Its essence as a reality and inclusion in science education has been subjected to numerous philosophical and scientific debates. The educational literature also shows that the ancient corpuscular notion is dominantly portrayed within the curriculum and instruction of many educational settings. The fundamental problem is that the chemists, educators, philosophers, and historians of chemistry themselves haven’t had a substantial agreement on any of the philosophical and scientific accounts due to their longstanding philosophical divide between the different positions of positivism and realism. Neither has the historical perspective of philosophy and science been reasonably acknowledged in science/chemistry education. We aimed in this interpretative case study to figure out how much Dalton’s pursuit of the chemical atomism is worth to 22 purposely selected and interviewed prospective teachers. The resulting transcripts were analyzed using HPS, the seven milestones of its case study. As a result, one major and two minor themes were found none of which match any of the themes of the milestones. Moreover, the entire narrative lacks some essential perspectives and contexts of HPS in general and Dalton’s experimentations in particular. Misjudgment of his indivisibility notion, for example, is a drawback associated with this limitation. Thus, more inquiries are needed to be conducted in the long run into the curriculum and classroom practice while departmental discussions on such issues are suggested in the short run.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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