教什么是科学的“真实”

IF 2.1 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Sarah L. Ferguson
{"title":"教什么是科学的“真实”","authors":"Sarah L. Ferguson","doi":"10.1007/s11191-021-00308-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Discourse about public perception of science is often positioned as a dichotomy between trust in scientific evidence and scientists as experts, versus critiques of the limitations of scientific knowledge and a mistrust in scientists as biased professionals and political agents. However, this dichotomy becomes something of a false argument, as our tendency to look for the “right” answer in these arguments often gets in the way of finding a balancing point in which both of these positions could be held in productive tension. The purpose of the present article is to lay out the argument that society can both trust in scientific evidence and question scientific bias in the same space, holding these two seemingly opposite positions in productive tension, and that we should teach students to do the same. Critical realism is presented as an ontology and epistemology to frame science education, and focus on the development of critical scientific literacy by teaching students what is real and what is arbitrary about science. Recommendations for science education are outlined, grounded in critical realism and connected to current education research and principles of the nature of science.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":56374,"journal":{"name":"Science & Education","volume":"31 6","pages":"1651 - 1669"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11191-021-00308-w.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Teaching What Is “Real” About Science\",\"authors\":\"Sarah L. Ferguson\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11191-021-00308-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Discourse about public perception of science is often positioned as a dichotomy between trust in scientific evidence and scientists as experts, versus critiques of the limitations of scientific knowledge and a mistrust in scientists as biased professionals and political agents. However, this dichotomy becomes something of a false argument, as our tendency to look for the “right” answer in these arguments often gets in the way of finding a balancing point in which both of these positions could be held in productive tension. The purpose of the present article is to lay out the argument that society can both trust in scientific evidence and question scientific bias in the same space, holding these two seemingly opposite positions in productive tension, and that we should teach students to do the same. Critical realism is presented as an ontology and epistemology to frame science education, and focus on the development of critical scientific literacy by teaching students what is real and what is arbitrary about science. Recommendations for science education are outlined, grounded in critical realism and connected to current education research and principles of the nature of science.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56374,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Science & Education\",\"volume\":\"31 6\",\"pages\":\"1651 - 1669\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11191-021-00308-w.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Science & Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11191-021-00308-w\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science & Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11191-021-00308-w","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: 1

摘要

关于公众对科学的看法的讨论通常被定位为对科学证据和科学家作为专家的信任与对科学知识局限性的批评和对科学家作为有偏见的专业人员和政治代理人的不信任之间的二分法。然而,这种二分法变成了一种错误的论点,因为我们倾向于在这些论点中寻找“正确”的答案,往往会阻碍我们找到一个平衡点,在这个平衡点上,这两个立场都可以在富有成效的紧张中保持一致。本文的目的是提出这样的论点,即社会可以信任科学证据,也可以在同一空间质疑科学偏见,在生产紧张中持有这两个看似相反的立场,我们应该教学生也这样做。批判实在论以本体论和认识论的形式提出科学教育的框架,并通过教导学生科学的真实和武断来关注批判性科学素养的发展。对科学教育的建议进行了概述,以批判现实主义为基础,并与当前的教育研究和科学本质的原则相联系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Teaching What Is “Real” About Science

Discourse about public perception of science is often positioned as a dichotomy between trust in scientific evidence and scientists as experts, versus critiques of the limitations of scientific knowledge and a mistrust in scientists as biased professionals and political agents. However, this dichotomy becomes something of a false argument, as our tendency to look for the “right” answer in these arguments often gets in the way of finding a balancing point in which both of these positions could be held in productive tension. The purpose of the present article is to lay out the argument that society can both trust in scientific evidence and question scientific bias in the same space, holding these two seemingly opposite positions in productive tension, and that we should teach students to do the same. Critical realism is presented as an ontology and epistemology to frame science education, and focus on the development of critical scientific literacy by teaching students what is real and what is arbitrary about science. Recommendations for science education are outlined, grounded in critical realism and connected to current education research and principles of the nature of science.

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
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