Connecting Inquiry and Values in Science Education
Conducting scientific inquiry is expected to help students make informed decisions; however, how exactly it can help is rarely explained in science education standards. According to classroom studies, inquiry that students conduct in science classes seems to have little effect on their decision-making. Predetermined values play a large role in students’ decision-making, but students do not explore these values or evaluate whether they are appropriate to the particular issue they are deciding, and they often ignore relevant scientific information. We explore how to connect inquiry and values, and how this connection can contribute to informed decision-making based on John Dewey’s philosophy. Dewey argues that scientific inquiry should include value judgments and that conducting inquiry can improve the ability to make good value judgments. Value judgment is essential to informed, rational decision-making, and Dewey’s ideas can explain how conducting inquiry can contribute to make an informed decision through value judgment. According to Dewey, each value judgment during inquiry is a practical judgment guiding action, and students can improve their value judgments by evaluating their actions during scientific inquiry. Thus, we suggest that students need an opportunity to explore values through scientific inquiry and that practicing value judgment will help informed decision-makings.
This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under grant no. 1338735. Our thanks to Magda Grohman, Nick Gans, Marco Tacca, the members of the Values in Science Research Lab, and the audience at the Philosophy of Science Association.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1989). Science for all Americans. Washington DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science http://www.project2061.org/publications/sfaa/online/sfaatoc.htm.Google Scholar
- American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Anderson, E. (2014). Dewey’s moral philosophy. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2014 Edition). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2014/entries/dewey-moral/
- Christenson, N., Rundgren, S-N. C., & Zeidler, D. L. (2014). The relationship of discipline background to upper secondary students’ argumentation on socioscientific issues. Research in Science Education, 44, 581–601.Google Scholar
- Coulo, A. C. (2014). Philosophical dimensions of social and ethical issues in school science education: values in science classrooms. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (pp. 1087–1117). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
- Council of Ministers of Education Canada (CMEC) Pan Canadian Science Project. (1997). Common framework of science learning outcomes: K-12. http://www.cmec.ca/science/framework/index.htm.
- Dewey, J. (1916a/2004). The logic of judgments of practice. In Essays in Experimental Logic (pp. 214–281). Mineola: Dover Publications. (Unabridged reprinting of work originally published 1916, Chicago: University of Chicago Press; a revised version of an essay published in multiple parts in 1915 in The Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods.)Google Scholar
- Dewey, J. (1916b) Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education. New York: The Macmillan Company. Converted to electronic version (2001) at http://web.archive.org/web/20080705064404/http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/DewDemo.html
- Dewey, J. (1938/1991). Logic: The theory of inquiry. In J. A. Boydston (Ed.), The later works of John Dewey. Southern Illinois UP, 1991. (Originally published New York: Henry Holt and Company, Inc., 1938.)Google Scholar
- Dewey, J. (1948b). Reconstruction in philosophy. Kindle version. Retrieved from Amazon.com.
- Forge, J. (2008). The responsible scientist. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
- Hempel, C. G. (1965). Science and human values. In Aspects of scientific explanation and other essays in the philosophy of science (pp. 81–96). New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
- Kuhn, T. S. (1977). Objectivity, value judgment, and theory choice. In The essential tension: selected studies in scientific tradition and change (pp. 320–339). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Longino, H. E. (1990). Science as social knowledge: values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Longino, H. E. (2002). The fate of knowledge. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Matthews, M. R. (1994). Science teaching: the role of history and philosophy of science. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- McComas, W. F., & Olson, J. K. (1998). The nature of science in international science education standards documents. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education (pp. 41–52). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
- McMullin, E. (1983). Values in science. In P. D. Asquith & T. Nickles (Eds.), PSA: Proceedings of the biennial meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982 (pp. 3–28). East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association.Google Scholar
- National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
- National Research Council (NRC). (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
- National Research Council (NRC). (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
- NGSS Lead States (2013). Next generation science standards: for states, by states. http://www.nextgenscience.org/
- Queensland School Curriculum Council (QSCC) (2001). Studies of society and environment. http://www.qscc.qld.edu.au/kla.sose.publicatons.html.
- Rooney, P. (1992). On values in science: is the epistemic/non-epistemic distinction useful? In PSA: Proceedings of the biennial meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association. Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 13–22.Google Scholar
- Rutherford, F. J., & Ahlgren, A. (1990). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Wilkins, C. (2017). Socializing science education empowering students through the use of discourse and argumentation of socioscientific issues. Learning to Teach, 5(1). Retrieved from http://utdr.utoledo.edu/learningtoteach/vol5/iss1/7
- Zeidler, D. L. (2001). Participating in program development: standard F. In D. Siebert & W. McIntosh (Eds.), College pathways to the science education standards (pp. 18–22). Arlington: National Science Teachers Press.Google Scholar