Educational Psychology Review

, Volume 13, Issue 4, pp 325–351 | Cite as

Belief, Knowledge, and Science Education

  • Sherry A. Southerland
  • Gale M. Sinatra
  • Michael R. Matthews


Epistemological questions about the nature of knowledge and belief underlie many of the controversial issues fundamental to research and practice in science teaching and learning. In an effort to bring some clarity to questions of knowledge and belief embedded within science education research and teaching, we first describe the distinctions drawn between knowledge and belief in both philosophy and educational psychology, each of which have shaped the various definitions employed within science education. This discussion is followed by an examination of the distinctions drawn between knowledge and belief employed by three groups of science educators: the traditional distinctions of the foundationalists that are co-opted by researchers focusing on teacher thinking/cognition, the nonfoundational epistemology of the fallibilists and the evolution educators working from this framework, and the radical constructivists who react to and attempt to move past the limitations of these other positions. In this analysis, we explicate the different ways in which knowledge and belief are understood and operationalized in a broad spectrum of research, we describe the theoretical and philosophical assumptions underlying these approaches, and we explore the important areas of contention (both theoretical and empirical) surrounding each of these distinctions.

belief knowledge epistemology 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alexander, P. A., and Dochy, F. J. R. C. (1995). Conceptions of knowledge and beliefs: A comparison across varying cultural and educational communities. Am. Educ. Res. J. 32: 413–442.Google Scholar
  2. Alexander, P. A., Schallert, D,. L., and Hare, V. C. (1991). Coming to terms: How researchers in learning and literacy talk about knowledge. Rev. Educ. Res. 61: 315–343.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, R. C., Reynolds, R. E., Schallert, D. L., and Goetz, E. T. (1977). Frameworks for comprehending discourse. Am. Educ. Res. J. 14: 367–382.Google Scholar
  4. Armstrong, D.M. (1973). Belief,Truth andKnowledge, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  5. Ayer, A. J. (1956). The Problem of Knowledge, Penguin, Harmondsworth.Google Scholar
  6. Baltas, A. (1988). On the structure of physics as a science. In Batens, D., and van Bendegens, J. P. (eds.), Theory and Experiment, Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 207–225.Google Scholar
  7. Bishop, B. A., and Anderson, C.W. (1990). Student conceptions of natural selection and its role in evolution. J. Res. Sci. Teaching 27: 415–427.Google Scholar
  8. Chambliss, M. J. (1994). Why do readers fail to change their beliefs after reading persuasive text? In Garner, R., and Alexander, P. (eds.), Beliefs About Text, Text Comprehension, and Instruction With Text, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 75–89.Google Scholar
  9. Cobern, W. W. (1993). Contextual constructivism: The impact of culture on the learning and teaching of science. In Tobin, K. (ed.), The Practice of Constructivism in Science Education, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 51–70.Google Scholar
  10. obern, W.W. (1994). Belief, understanding, and the teaching of evolution. J. Res. Sci. Teaching 31(5): 583–590.Google Scholar
  11. Cobern, W. W. (2000). The nature of science and the role of knowledge and belief. Sci. Educ. 9(3): 219–246.Google Scholar
  12. Cornford, F. M. (1935). Plato's theory of knowledge, Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  13. Cronin-Jones, L. L. (1991). Science teacher beliefs and their influence on curriculum implementation: Two case studies. J. Res. Sci. Teaching 28(3): 235–250.Google Scholar
  14. Demastes-Southerland, S., Good, R., and Peeble P. (1995). Students' conceptual ecologies and the process of conceptual change in evolution. Sci. Educ. 79(6): 637–666.Google Scholar
  15. Demastes-Southerland, S., Good, R., and Peebles, P. (1996). Patterns of conceptual change in evolution. J. Res. Sci. Teaching 33(4): 407–431.Google Scholar
  16. Demastes, S., Settlage, J., and Good, R. (1995). Students' conceptions of natural selection and its role in evolution: Cases of replication and comparison. J. Res. Sci. Teaching 32(5): 535–550.Google Scholar
  17. Dole, J. A., and Sinatra, G. M. (1994). Social psychology research on beliefs and attitudes: Implications for research on learning from text. In Garner R., and Alexander, P. (eds.), Beliefs About Text, Text Comprehension, and Instruction With Text, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 245–264.Google Scholar
  18. Dole, J. A., and Sinatra, G. M. (1998). Reconceptualizing change in the cognitive construction of knowledge. Educ. Psychologist 33(2/3): 109–128.Google Scholar
  19. Garner, R., and Alexander, P.A. (1991). Skill, will, and thrill: Factors in adults' text comprehension. atPaper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL, April 1991.Google Scholar
  20. Gess-Newsome, J. (1999). Knowledge and beliefs about subject matter and its impact on instruction. In Gess-Newsome, J., and Lederman, N. G. (eds.), Examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge: The Construct and its Implications for Science Education,,Kluwer, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  21. Gilbert, J., Osborne, R., and Fensham, P. (1982). Children's science and its consequences for teaching. Sci. Educ. 66(4): 623–633.Google Scholar
  22. Guthrie, W. K. C. (trans.) (1956). Protagoras and Meno, Penguin, Harmondsworth.Google Scholar
  23. Guzzetti, B. J., Synder, T. E., Glass, G. V., and Gamas, W. S. (1993). Promoting conceptual change in science:Acomparative meta-analysis of instructional interventions from reading education and science education. Reading Res. Q. 28: 117–155.Google Scholar
  24. Harding, P., and Hare, W. (2000). Portraying science accurately in classrooms: Emphasizing open-mindedness rather than relativism. J. Res. Sci. Teaching 37(3):225–235.Google Scholar
  25. Harding, S. G. (1994). After the neutrality ideal: Science, politics, and “strong objectivity.” In Jacob, M. C. (ed.), The Politics of Western Science, Humanities Press, New Jersey, pp. 81–101.Google Scholar
  26. Hirst, P. H. (1979). Human movement, knowledge and education.J. Philosophy Educ. 13: 101–108.Google Scholar
  27. Hofer, B. K., and Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Rev. Educ. Res. 67(1): 88–140.Google Scholar
  28. Irzik, G. (1995). Popper's epistemology and world three. In Kucuradi, I., and Cohen, R.S. (eds.), The Concept of Knowledge: The Ankara Seminar, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp. 83–95.Google Scholar
  29. Kagan, D. M. (1990). Ways of evaluating teacher cognition: Inferences concerning the Goldilocks principle. Rev. Educ. Res. 60(3): 419–469.Google Scholar
  30. Kardash, C. M., and Scholes, R. J. (1996). Effects of preexisting beliefs, epistemological beliefs, and need for cognition on interpretation of controversial issues. J. Educ. Psychol. 88(2): 260–271.Google Scholar
  31. Lawson, A. E., and Worsnop, W. A. (1992). Learning about evolution and rejecting a belief in special creation: Effects of reflective reasoning skill, prior knowledge, prior belief, and religious commitment. J. Res. Sci. Teaching 29(2): 143–166.Google Scholar
  32. Mahner, M., and Bunge, M. (1996). Is religious education compatible with science education? Sci. Educ. 5(2): 101–123.Google Scholar
  33. Meadows, L., Doster, E., and Jackson, D. F. (2000). Managing the conflict between evolution and religion. The American Biology Teacher 62(2): 102–107.Google Scholar
  34. Murphy, K., and Alexander, P.A. (in press). Persuasion as a dynamic, multidimensional process: A viewfinder for individual and intraindividual differences. Cognition Instr. Google Scholar
  35. Musgrave, A. (1974). The objectivism of Popper's epistemology. In Schilpp, P. A. (ed.), The Philosophy of Karl Popper, Open Court, La Salle, IL, pp. 560–596.Google Scholar
  36. Matthews, M. R. (1994). Science Teaching: The Role of History and Philosophy of Science, Routledge, New York.Google Scholar
  37. National Research Council (1996). National Science Education Standards, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  38. National Academy of Sciences (1998). Teaching About Evolution and the Nature of Science, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  39. Phillips, D. C., and Burbules, N. C. (2000). Postpositivism and Educational Research, Rowman & Littlefield, New York.Google Scholar
  40. Pintrich, P. R. (1999). Motivational beliefs as resources for and constraints on conceptual change. In Schnotz, W., Vosniadou, S., and Carretero, M. (eds.), New Perspectives on Conceptual Change, Pergamon, New York, pp. 33–50.Google Scholar
  41. Pintrich, P. R., Marx, R. W., and Boyle, R. A. (1993). Beyond cold conceptual change: The role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Rev. Educ. Res. 63: 167–199.Google Scholar
  42. Plokin, H. (1994). Darwin Machine and the Nature of Knowledge, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  43. Poole, M. (1995). Beliefs and Values in Science Education, Open University Press, Buckingham.Google Scholar
  44. Popper, K. R. (1934/1959). The Logic of Scientific Discovery, Hutchinson, London.Google Scholar
  45. Popper, K. R. (1972). Objective Knowledge, Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  46. Posner, G., Strike, K., Hewson, P., and Gertzog, W. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education 66(2): 211–227.Google Scholar
  47. Reynolds, R. E., Sinatra, G. M., and Jetton, T. L. (1996). Views of knowledge acquisition and representation: A continuum from experience-centered to mind-centered. Educ. Psychologist 31(2): 93–104.Google Scholar
  48. Roth, W. (1993). Metaphors and Conversational Analysis as Tools in Reflection on Teaching Practice: Two Perspectives on Teacher-Student Interactions in Open-Inquiry Science. Sci. Educ. 77(4): 351–373.Google Scholar
  49. Russell, B. (1963). Mysticism and Logic, George Allen & Unwin, London.Google Scholar
  50. Rutledge, M. L., and Warden, M. A. (2000). Evolutionary theory, the nature of science, and high school biology teachers: Critical Relationships. Am. Biol. Teacher 62(1): 23–31.Google Scholar
  51. Scheffler, I. (1965). Conditions of Knowledge, Scott, Foresman & Co, New York.Google Scholar
  52. Schnotz, W., Vosniadou, S., and Carretero M. (1999). New Perspectives on Conceptual Change, Pergamon, New York.Google Scholar
  53. Schommer, M. (1994). An emerging conceptualization of epistemological beliefs and their role in learning. In Garner, R., and Alexander, P. (eds.), Beliefs AboutText,Text Comprehension, and Instruction With Text, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 25–40.Google Scholar
  54. Settlage, J. (1994). Conceptions of natural selection: A snapshot of the sense-making process. J. Res. Sci. Teaching 31(5): 449–458.Google Scholar
  55. Siegel, H. (1998). Knowledge, truth, and education. In Carr, D. (ed.), Education, Knowledge and Truth: Beyond the Postmodern Impasse, Routledge, London, pp. 19–36.Google Scholar
  56. Smith, M. U. (1994). Counterpoint: Belief, understanding, and the teaching of evolution. J. Res. Sci. Teaching 31(5): 591–597.Google Scholar
  57. Smith, M. U., and Scharmann, L. C. (1999). Defining versus describing the nature of science: A pragmatic analysis for classroom teachers and science educators. J. Res. Sci. Teaching 83: 493–509.Google Scholar
  58. Smith, M.U., Siegel, H., and McInerney, J.D. (1995).Foundational issues in evolution education. Sci. Educ. 4: 23–46.Google Scholar
  59. Southerland, S. A. (2000). Epistemic universalism and the shortcomings of curricular multicultural science education. Sci. Educ. 9(3): 289–307.Google Scholar
  60. Taylor, P. (1993). Collaborating to reconstruct teaching: The influence of researcher belief. In Tobin, K. (ed.), The Practice of Constructivism in Science Education, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 267–297.Google Scholar
  61. Toulmin, S. E. (1972). Human Understanding, Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  62. Vosniadou, S., and Brewer, W. (1994). Mental models of the day/night cycle. Cogn. Sci. 18: 123–183.Google Scholar
  63. Wandersee, J., Mintzes, J., and Novak, J. (1994). Research on alternative conceptions in science. In Gables, D. (ed.), Handbook on Research in Science Teaching, Macmillan, New York.Google Scholar
  64. Woodbury, S. (submitted). Teacher change in the context of mathematics educational reform: A conceptual change model Curriculum Inquiry.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sherry A. Southerland
    • 1
  • Gale M. Sinatra
    • 2
  • Michael R. Matthews
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Teaching and LearningUniversity of UtahSalt Lake City
  2. 2.Department of Educational PsychologyUniversity of NevadaLas Vegas
  3. 3.School of Education StudiesUniversity of New South WalesAustralia

Personalised recommendations