Abstract
There is an extensive research programme in science education which reports on student thinking, knowledge, understanding and learning in science subjects. Research reports in journals commonly present knowledge claims about these important foci, and often in such reports these core notions (thinking, understanding, knowing, learning) are treated as relatively unproblematic - as though they can be ‘taken for granted’ within the discourse of science education, and as if the process of uncovering thinking, understanding, knowing and learning is relatively straightforward given available research techniques. Yet such foci - another’s thinking, knowing, understanding and learning - are not observables, but rather have to be inferred from phenomena that can be observed in research. Indeed, these foci are arguably at the level of theoretical constructs that act as components of explanatory schemes for making sense of people’s behaviours (such as how they respond to research probes). It is argued that researchers need to be more aware of the difficulties in accessing the mental lives of others, and to be more explicit in their reports about the modelling processes involved in developing accounts of the thinking, understanding, knowing and learning of research participants.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Abimbola, I. O. (1988). The problem of terminology in the study of student conceptions in science. Science Education, 72(2), 175–184.
Ahtee, M., & Varjola, I. (1998). Students’ understanding of chemical reaction. International Journal of Science Education, 20(3), 305–316.
Andersson, B. (1986). The experiential gestalt of causation: A common core to pupils’ preconceptions in science. European Journal of Science Education, 8(2), 155–171.
Bailey, R. (2006). Science, normal science and science education – Thomas Kuhn and Education. Learning for Democracy, 2(2), 7–20.
Banerjee, A. C. (1991). Misconceptions of students and teachers in chemical equilibrium. International Journal of Science Education, 13(4), 487–494.
Barker, V., & Millar, R. (1999). Students’ reasoning about chemical reactions: What changes occur during a context-based post-16 chemistry course? International Journal of Science Education, 21(6), 645–665.
Bivall, P., Ainsworth, S., & Tibell, L. A. E. (2011). Do haptic representations help complex molecular learning? Science Education, 95(4), 700–719. doi:10.1002/sce.20439.
Black, P. J., & Lucas, A. M. (Eds.). (1993b). Children’s informal ideas in science. London: Routledge.
Bodner, G. M. (1986). Constructivism: A theory of knowledge. Journal of Chemical Education, 63(10), 873–878.
British Educational Research Association. (2000). Good practice in educational research writing. Southwell, UK: British Educational Research Association.
Chevallard, Y. (2007). Readjusting didactics to a changing epistemology. European Educational Research Journal, 6(2), 131–134.
Coll, R. K., Lay, M. C., & Taylor, N. (2008). Scientists and scientific thinking: Understanding scientific thinking through an investigation of scientists views about superstitions and religious beliefs. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 4(3), 197–214.
diSessa, A. A. (1993). Towards an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10(2&3), 105–225.
Fensham, P. J. (2004). Defining an identity: The evolution of science education as a field of research. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Gilbert, J. K. (1995). Studies and fields: Directions of research in science education. Studies in Science Education, 25, 173–197. doi:10.1080/03057269508560053.
Gilbert, J. K., Osborne, R. J., & Fensham, P. J. (1982). Children’s science and its consequences for teaching. Science Education, 66(4), 623–633.
Gilbert, J. K., & Watts, D. M. (1983). Concepts, misconceptions and alternative conceptions: Changing perspectives in science education. Studies in Science Education, 10(1), 61–98.
Gilbert, J. K., & Zylbersztajn, A. (1985). A conceptual framework for science education: The case study of force and movement. European Journal of Science Education, 7(2), 107–120.
Glasersfeld, E. v. (1988). The reluctance to change a way of thinking. Irish Journal of Psychology, 9(1), 83–90. Retrieved from http://www.univie.ac.at/constructivism/EvG/papers/110.pdf
Glasersfeld, E. v. (1989). Cognition, construction of knowledge, and teaching. Synthese, 80(1), 121–140.
Jaakkola, T., Nurmi, S., & Veermans, K. (2011). A comparison of students’ conceptual understanding of electric circuits in simulation only and simulation-laboratory contexts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(1), 71–93. doi:10.1002/tea.20386.
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (2003b). Models, causation, and explanation. In A. J. Sanford (Ed.), The nature and limits of human understanding (pp. 26–46). London: T&T Clark Ltd.
Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago.
Kuhn, T. S. (1974/1977). Second thoughts on paradigms. In T. S. Kuhn (Ed.), The essential tension: Selected studies in scientific tradition and change (pp. 293–319). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions (3rd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago.
Lakatos, I. (1970). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrove (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 91–196). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2006). Scientific thinking and science literacy. In W. Damon, R. M. Lerner, K. A. Renninger, & I. E. Sigel (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (Child psychology in practice 6th ed., Vol. 4, pp. 153–196). New York: Wiley.
Matthews, M. R. (1992). Old wine in new bottles: A problem with constructivist epistemology. Philosophy of Education Yearbook 1992. Retrieved from available at http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/eps/PES-Yearbook/92_docs/Matthews.HTM
Matthews, M. R. (2002). Constructivism and science education: A further appraisal. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 11(2), 121–134.
McCloskey, M. (1983). Intuitive physics. Scientific American, 248(4), 114–122.
Peterson, R., Treagust, D. F., & Garnett, P. (1986). Identification of secondary students’ misconceptions of covalent bonding and structure concepts using a diagnostic instrument. Research in Science Education, 16, 40–48.
Polanyi, M. (1962). Personal knowledge: Towards a post-critical philosophy (Corrected version ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Popper, K. R. (1934/1959). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchinson.
Popper, K. R. (1970). Normal science and its dangers. In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrove (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 51–58). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Pring, R. (2000). Philosophy of educational research. London: Continuum.
Ratinen, I. J. (2011). Primary student-teachers’ conceptual understanding of the greenhouse effect: A mixed method study. International Journal of Science Education, 1–27. doi:10.1080/09500693.2011.587845.
Sjøberg, S. (2010). Constructivism and learning. In E. Baker, B. McGaw, & P. Peterson (Eds.), International encyclopaedia of education (3rd ed., pp. 485–490). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
Taber, K. S. (2006a). Beyond constructivism: The progressive research programme into learning science. Studies in Science Education, 42, 125–184.
Taber, K. S. (2006c). Constructivism’s new clothes: The trivial, the contingent, and a progressive research programme into the learning of science. Foundations of Chemistry, 8(2), 189–219.
Taber, K. S. (2007). Classroom-based research and evidence-based practice: A guide for teachers. London: Sage.
Taber, K. S. (2008b). Towards a curricular model of the nature of science. Science Education, 17(2–3), 179–218. doi:10.1007/s11191-006-9056-4.
Taber, K. S. (2009b). Progressing science education: Constructing the scientific research programme into the contingent nature of learning science. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Taber, K. S. (2013a). Classroom-based research and evidence-based practice: An introduction (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
Taber, K. S. (Forthcoming). Methodological issues in science education research: A perspective from the philosophy of science. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history and philosophy for science and mathematics education. Springer.
Toulmin, S. (1972). Human understanding: The collective use and evolution of concepts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Watson, J. B. (1924/1998). Behaviorism. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Watson, J. B. (1967). What is behaviourism? In J. A. Dyal (Ed.), Readings in psychology: Understanding human behavior (2nd ed., pp. 7–9). New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
White, R. T. (1998). Research, theories of learning, principles of teaching and classroom practice: Examples and issues. Studies in Science Education, 31, 55–70. doi:10.1080/03057269808560112.
Yenilmez, A., & Tekkaya, C. (2006). Enhancing students’ understanding of photosynthesis and respiration in plant through conceptual change approach. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(1), 81–87. doi:10.1007/s10956-006-0358-8.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Taber, K.S. (2013). The Centrality of Models for Knowledge Claims in Science Education. In: Modelling Learners and Learning in Science Education. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7648-7_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7648-7_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-7647-0
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-7648-7
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)