Contextualising the Teaching and Learning of Ecology: Historical and Philosophical Considerations

  • Ageliki Lefkaditou
  • Konstantinos Korfiatis
  • Tasos Hovardas
Chapter

Abstract

Ecology has gradually gained salience during the last few decades and ecological issues, including land use changes, global warming, biodiversity loss, food shortage, and so forth, seem to be gaining public attention. Though philosophers of science had given little attention to ecology, there is a lot of interesting work being currently pursued in philosophy of ecology and environmental philosophy. As Colyvan and colleagues put it, “ecology is an important and fascinating branch of biology, with distinctive philosophical issues” (Colyvan et al. 2009, p. 21). Given its conceptual and methodological familiarity with the social sciences, ecology occupies a unique position among other disciplines (Cooper 2003).

Keywords

Science Education Scientific Practice Ecological Literacy Ecological Concept Philosophical Consideration 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Adùriz-Bravo, A., & Izquierdo-Aymerich, M. (2005). Utilizing the 3P-model to characterize the discipline of didactics of science. Science & Education 14, 29–41.Google Scholar
  2. Akpan, J. P., & Andre, T. (1999). The effect of a prior dissection simulation on middle school students’ dissection performance and under-standing of the anatomy and morphology of the frog. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8, 107121.Google Scholar
  3. Allee, W. C. (1931). Animal aggregations. A study in General Sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  4. Ayala, F. J. (2009). Darwin and the scientific method. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science (USA), 106, 10033–10039.Google Scholar
  5. Barker, S., & Norris C. (2000) Feeding relationships: An ecological approach to teaching of food chains in the primary school. British Ecological SocietyGoogle Scholar
  6. Barker, S., & Slingsby, D. (1998). From nature table to niche: curriculum progression in ecological concepts. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 479–486.Google Scholar
  7. Berkowitz, A. R., Ford, M. E., & Brewer C. A. (2005). A framework for integrating ecological literacy, civics literacy and environmental citizenship in environmental education. In: E. A. Johnson & M. J. Mappin (Eds.), Environmental Education and Advocacy: Changing Perspectives of Ecology and Education (pp. 227–266). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Boucher, D. H. (1998). Newtonian ecology and beyond. Science as Culture, 7, 493–517.Google Scholar
  9. Bowen, G. M., & Roth, W. M. (2007). The practice of field ecology: Insights for science education. Research in Science Education, 37, 171–187.Google Scholar
  10. Bowers, C. (2001). How language limits our understanding of environmental education. Environmental Education Research, 7, 141–151.Google Scholar
  11. Brandon, R. N. (1994). Theory and experiment in evolutionary biology. Synthese, 99, 5973.Google Scholar
  12. Bravo-Torija, B., & Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2012). Progression in complexity: Contextualizing sustainable marine resources management in a 10th grade classroom. Research in Science Education, 42, 5–23.Google Scholar
  13. Carson, S. R. (1996). Foxes and rabbits - and a spreadsheet. School Science Review, 78, 21–27.Google Scholar
  14. Chamizo, J. A. (2011). A new definition of models and modeling in chemistry’s education. Science & Education, online first DOI:  10.1007/s11191-011-9407-7.
  15. Chinn, C. A., & Brewer, W. F. (2001). Models of data: A theory of how people evaluate data. Cognition and Instruction, 19, 323–393.Google Scholar
  16. Colyvan, M., Linquist, S., Grey, W., Griffiths, P., Odenbaugh, J., & Possingham, H. P. (2009). Philosophical issues in ecology: Recent trends and future directions. Ecology and Society, 14, http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art22/.
  17. Cook, L. M. (1993). HUNT: a simulation of predator searching behaviour. Journal of Biological Education, 27, 287–290.Google Scholar
  18. Cooper, G. J. (2003). The Science of the Struggle for Existence: On the Foundations of Ecology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Cuddington, K. (2001). The “balance of nature” metaphor and equilibrium in population ecology. Biology and Philosophy, 16, 463–479.Google Scholar
  20. D’Avanzo, C. (2003). Application of research on learning to college teaching: ecological examples. Bioscience, 53, 1121–1128.Google Scholar
  21. De Lozano, S. R., & Cardenas M. (2002). Some learning problems concerning the use of symbolic language in physics. Science & Education, 11, 589–599.Google Scholar
  22. Demetriou, D., Korfiatis, K., & Constantinou, C. (2009). Comprehending trophic relations through food web construction. Journal of Biological Education, 43, 53–59.Google Scholar
  23. Duschl, R., & Grandy, R. (2008). Reconsidering the character and role of inquiry in school science: Framing the debates. In R. Duschl & R. Grandy (Eds.), Teaching Scientific Inquiry: Recommendations for Research and Implementation. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  24. Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. (2007). Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8, National Research Council. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  25. Eberbach, C., & Crowley, K. (2009). From everyday to scientific observation: How children learn to observe the biologist’s world. Review of Educational Research, 79, 39–68.Google Scholar
  26. Ergazaki, M., & Ampatzidis, G. (2012). Students’ reasoning about the future of disturbed or protected ecosystems and the idea of the ‘balance of nature’. Research in Science Education, 42, 511–530.Google Scholar
  27. Feinsinger, P., Margutti, L., & Oviedo, R. D. (1997). School yards and nature trails: Ecology education outside university. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 12, 115–11.Google Scholar
  28. Flores-Camacho, F., Gallegos-Cázares, L., Garritz A., & García-Franco, A. (2007). Incommensurability and multiple models: Representations of the structure of matter in undergraduate chemistry students. Science & Education, 16, 775–800.Google Scholar
  29. Ford, D. (2005). The challenges of observing geologically: Third graders’ descriptions of rock and mineral properties. Science Education, 89, 276–295.Google Scholar
  30. Giere, R. N. (2004). How models are used to represent reality. Philosophy of Science, 71, 742–752.Google Scholar
  31. Gilbert, J. K., & Treagust, D. (1993). Multiple Representations in Chemical Education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  32. Godfrey-Smith, P. (2006). The strategy of model-based science. Biology and Philosophy, 21, 725–740.Google Scholar
  33. Grant, P., & Grant, R. (2010). Ecological insights into the causes of an adaptive radiation from long-term field studies of Darwin’s finches. In I. Billick & M. Price (Eds.), The Ecology of Place: Contributions of Place-based Research to Ecological Understanding (pp. 109–133). Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  34. Green, D. W. (1997). Explaining and envisaging an ecological phenomenon. British Journal of Psychology, 88, 199–217.Google Scholar
  35. Green, D. W. (2001). Understanding microworlds. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54, 879–901.Google Scholar
  36. Grosslight, L., Unger, C., Jay, E., & Smith, C. L. (1991). Understanding models and their use in science: Conceptions of middle and high school students and experts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 799–822.Google Scholar
  37. Grotzer, T. A., & Basca, B. B. (2003). How does grasping the underlying causal structures of ecosystems impact students’ understanding? Journal of Biological Education, 38, 1–14.Google Scholar
  38. Haila, Y. (1982). Hypothetico-deductivism and the competition controversy in ecology. Annals Zoologica Fennici, 19, 255–263.Google Scholar
  39. Haila, Y., & Levins, R. (1992). Humanity and nature: Ecology, science and society. London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
  40. Haila, Y., & Taylor, P. (2001). The philosophical dullness of classical ecology, and a Levinsian Alternative. Biology & Philosophy, 16, 93–102.Google Scholar
  41. Hale, M. (1991). Ecology in the national curriculum. Journal of Biological Education, 25, 20–26.Google Scholar
  42. Hale, M., & Hardie, J. (1993). The role of ecology in education in schools in Britain. In: M. Hale (Ed), Ecology in Education (pp. 10–22). Cambridge, UK. University of Cambridge Press.Google Scholar
  43. Harrison, A., & Treagust, D. (2000). A typology of school science models. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 1011–1026.Google Scholar
  44. Hogan, K. (2000). Assessing students’ systems reasoning in ecology. Journal of Biological Education. 35, 22–28.Google Scholar
  45. Hovardas, T., & Korfiatis, K. (2011). Towards a critical re-appraisal of ecology education: Scheduling an educational intervention to revisit the ‘balance of nature’ metaphor. Science & Education, 20, 1039–1053.Google Scholar
  46. Justus, J. (2006). Loop analysis and qualitative modeling: Limitations and merits. Biology and Philosophy, 21, 647–666.Google Scholar
  47. Keller, D. R., & Golley, F. B. (Eds.) (2000). The Philosophy of Ecology: From Science to Synthesis. Athens: University of Georgia Press.Google Scholar
  48. Kingsland, S. E. (2002a). Designing nature reserves: adapting ecology to real-world problems. Endeavour, 26, 9–14.Google Scholar
  49. Kingsland, S. E. (2002b). Creating a science of nature reserve design: perspectives from history. Environmental Modeling and Assessment, 7, 61–69.Google Scholar
  50. Kingsland, S. (2005). The evolution of American ecology 1890–2000. Baltimore, USA: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Kingsland, S. (2010). The role of place in the history of ecology. In I. Billick & M. Price (Eds.), The Ecology of Place: Contributions of Place-based Research to Ecological Understanding (pp. 15–39). Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  52. Knapp, A. K., & D’Avanzo, C. (2010). Teaching with principles: Toward more effective pedagogy in ecology. Ecosphere, 1, Article 15., DOI: 10.1890/ES10-00013.1
  53. Koponen, I. T. (2007). Models and modelling in physics education: A critical re-analysis of philosophical underpinnings and suggestions for revisions. Science & Education, 16, 751–773.Google Scholar
  54. Korfiatis, K., Papatheodorou, E., Stamou, G. P., & Paraskevopoulous, S. (1999). An investigation of the effectiveness of computer simulation programs as tutorial tools for teaching population ecology at university. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 1269–1280.Google Scholar
  55. Korfiatis, K. J., Stamou, A. G., & Paraskevopoulos, S. (2004). Images of nature in Greek primary school textbooks. Science Education, 88, 72–89.Google Scholar
  56. Korfiatis, K. J., & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2012). The living world in the curriculum: ecology, an essential part of biology learning. Journal of Biological Education, 46, 125–127.Google Scholar
  57. Krebs, C. (2010). Case studies and ecological understanding. In I. Billick & M. Price (Eds.), The Ecology of Place: Contributions of Place-based Research to Ecological Understanding (pp. 283–302). Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  58. Lambert, J. M. (1967). The Teaching of Ecology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  59. Leach, J., Driver, R., Scott, P., & Wood-Robinson, C. (1995). Children’s ideas about ecology, 1: Theoretical background, design and methodology. International journal of Science education, 17, 721–732.Google Scholar
  60. Leach, J., Driver, R., Scott, P., & Wood-Robinson, C. (1996a). Children’s ideas about ecology, 2: Ideas found in children aged 5–16 about the cycling of matter. International journal of science education, 18, 19–34.Google Scholar
  61. Leach, J., Driver, R., Scott, P., & Wood-Robinson, C. (1996b). Children’s ideas about ecology, 3: Ideas found in children aged 5–16 about the interdependence of organisms. International Journal of Science Education, 18, 129–141.Google Scholar
  62. Lefkaditou, A. (2012). Is ecology a holistic science, after all? In G. P. Stamou (eds), Populations, biocommunities, ecosystems: A review of controversies in ecological thinking. Bentham Science Publishers.Google Scholar
  63. Lemoni, R., Lefkaditou, A., Stamou, A. G., Schizas, D. & Stamou G. P. (2011). Views of nature and the human-nature relations: An analysis of the visual syntax of pictures about the environment in greek primary school textbooks diachronic considerations. Research in Science Education, DOI  10.1007/s11165-011-9250-5.Google Scholar
  64. Levins, R. (1966). The strategy of model building in population biology. American Scientist, 54, 421–431.Google Scholar
  65. Levins, R. (1968). Evolution in changing environments. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Levins, R. (1970). Complex systems. In: C. H. Waddington (Ed.) Towards a theoretical biology, Vol 3 (pp 73–88). Chicago: Aldine Publishing.Google Scholar
  67. Levins, R. (1993). A response to Orzack and Sober: Formal analysis and the fluidity of science. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 68, 547–555.Google Scholar
  68. Levins, R. (2006). Strategies of abstraction. Biology and Philosophy, 21, 741–755.Google Scholar
  69. Looijen, R. C. (2000). Holism and reductionism in biology and ecology. Dordrecht, Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  70. Lotka, A. J. (1925). Elements of physical biology, Baltimore, USA: Williams and Wilkins.Google Scholar
  71. Lutterschmidt, W., & Schaefer, J. (1997). A computer simulation for demonstrating and modelling predator–prey oscillations. Journal of Biological Education, 31, 221–227.Google Scholar
  72. MacArthur, R. H., & Wilson, E. O. (1967). The theory of island biogeography. Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
  73. Magnetorn, O., & Hellden, G. (2007). Reading new environments: Students’ ability to generalise their understanding between different ecosystems. International Journal of Science Education, 29, 67–100.Google Scholar
  74. Mappin, M. J., & Johnson, E. A. (2005). Changing perspectives in ecology and education in environmental education. In E. Johnson & M. Mappin (Eds.), Environmental education and advocacy: Changing perspectives of ecology and education (pp. 1–27). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  75. Marone, L., & Galetto, L. (2011). The dual role of hypotheses in ecological research and its association with the hypothetico-deductive method. Ecologia Austral, 21, 201–216.Google Scholar
  76. Matthews, M. R. (2005). Idealization and Galileo’s pendulum discoveries: Historical, philosophical and pedagogical considerations. In M. R. Matthews, C. F. Gauld, & A. Stinner (Eds.), The pendulum: Scientific, historical, philosophical & educational perspectives (pp. 209–235). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  77. McComas, W. F. (2002a). The ideal environmental science curriculum: History, rationales, misconceptions and standards. American Biology Teacher, 64, 665–672.Google Scholar
  78. McComas, W. F. (2002b). The nature of science in science education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  79. McComas, W. F. (2003). The nature of the ideal environmental science curriculum: advocates, textbooks and conclusions (part II). American Biology Teacher, 65, 171–178.Google Scholar
  80. McIntosh, R. (1987). Pluralism in ecology. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 18, 321–341.Google Scholar
  81. Mikkelson, G. M. (1999). Methods and metaphors in community ecology: the problem of defining stability. Perspectives on Science, 5, 481–498.Google Scholar
  82. Nadeau, R., & Desautel, J. (1984). The Kuhnian development in epistemology and the teaching of science. Toronto, Canada: Guidance Center of the University of Toronto.Google Scholar
  83. National Research Council (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  84. Odenbaugh, J. (2003). Complex systems, trade-offs and mathematical modeling: A response to Sober and Orzack. Philosophy of Science, 70, 1496–1507.Google Scholar
  85. Odenbaugh, J. (2005). Idealized, inaccurate but successful: A pragmatic approach to evaluating models in theoretical ecology. Biology and Philosophy, 20, 231–255.Google Scholar
  86. Odenbaugh, J. (2006). The strategy of ‘The strategy of model building in population biology’. Biology and Philosophy, 21, 607–621.Google Scholar
  87. Odenbaugh, J. (2007). Seeing the forest and the trees: Realism about communities and ecosystems. Philosophy of Science, 74, 628–641.Google Scholar
  88. Oh, S. P., & Oh, S. J. (2011). What teachers of science need to know about models: An overview. International Journal of Science Education, 33, 1109–1130.Google Scholar
  89. Oksanen, M., & Pietarinen, J. (2004). Philosophy and biodiversity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  90. Orzack, S. H., & Sober, E. (1993). A critical assessment of Levins’ “The strategy of model building (1966)”. Quarterly Review of Biology, 68, 534–546.Google Scholar
  91. Palladino, P. (1991). Defining ecology: Ecological theories, mathematical models, and applied biology in the 1960s and 1970s. Journal for the History of Biology, 24, 223–243.Google Scholar
  92. Passmore, C., Stewart, J., & Cartier, J. (2009). Model-based inquiry and school science: Creating connections. School Science and Mathematics, 109, 394–402.Google Scholar
  93. Peters, R. H. (1991). A Critique for ecology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  94. Portides, D. P. (2007). The relation between idealization and approximation in scientific model construction. Science & Education, 16, 699–724.Google Scholar
  95. Price, M., & Billick, I. (2010). The imprint of place on ecology and ecologists. In I. Billick & M. Price (Eds.), The Ecology of Place: Contributions of Place-based Research to Ecological Understanding (pp. 11–14). Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  96. Prins, G. T., Bulte, A. M. W., Van Driel, J. H., & Pilot, A. (2009). Students involvement in authentic modelling practices as contexts in chemistry education. Research in Science Education, 39, 681–700.Google Scholar
  97. Redish, E. F. (1994). Implications of cognitive studies for teaching physics. American Journal of Physics, 62, 796–803.Google Scholar
  98. Rudolph, J. L. (2005). Inquiry, instrumentalism, and the public understanding of science. Science Education, 89, 803–821.Google Scholar
  99. Ryoo, K., & Linn, M. (2012). Can dynamic visualizations improve middle school students’ understanding of energy in photosynthesis? Journal Of Research in Science Teaching, 49, 218–243.Google Scholar
  100. Sander, E., Jelemenská, P., & Kattmann, U. (2006). Towards a better understanding of ecology. Journal of Biological Education, 40, 119–123.Google Scholar
  101. Sarkar, S. (2005). Biodiversity and Environmental Philosophy: An Introduction to the Issues. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  102. Scheiner, S. M., & Willig, M. R. (2011). A general theory of ecology. In: S. M. Scheiner & M. R. Willig (Eds), The Theory of Ecology (pp. 3–18). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  103. Schwarz, C., & White, B. (2005). Metamodeling knowledge: Developing students’ understanding of scientific modeling. Cognition and Instruction, 23, 165–205.Google Scholar
  104. Schwarz, C., Reiser, B., Davis, E., Kenyon, L., Acher, A., Fortus, D., Shwartz, Y., Hug, B., & Krajcik, J. (2009). Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 632–654.Google Scholar
  105. Serra, H., & Godoy, W. A. C. (2011). Using ecological modeling to enhance instruction in population dynamics and to stimulate scientific thinking. Creative Education, 2, 83–90.Google Scholar
  106. Shrader-Frechette, K. S., & McCoy, E. D. (1994). What ecology can do for environmental management. Journal of Environmental Management, 41, 293–307.Google Scholar
  107. Silva, C. C. (2007). The role of models and analogies in the electromagnetic theory: A Historical case study. Science & Education, 16, 835–848.Google Scholar
  108. Simberloff, D. (1981). The sick science of ecology: symptoms, diagnosis and prescription. Eidema, 1, 49–54.Google Scholar
  109. Slingsby, D., & Barker, S. (2005). The role of learned societies, government agencies, NGOs, advocacy groups, media, schools, and environmental educators in shaping public understanding of ecology. In: E. A. Johnson & M. J. Mappin (Eds.), Environmental Education and Advocacy: Changing Perspectives of Ecology and Education (pp. 72–87). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  110. Stamp, N., Armstrong, M., & Biger, J. (2006). Ecological misconceptions, survey III: The challenge of identifying sophisticated understanding. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, 87, 168–175.Google Scholar
  111. Stephens, P. A., Buskirk, S. W., & Martínez del Rio, C. (2006). Inference in ecology and evolution. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 22, 192–197.Google Scholar
  112. Sterelny, K. (2006). Local ecological communities. Philosophy of Science, 73, 215–231.Google Scholar
  113. Strong, D. (1983). Natural variability and the manifold mechanisms of ecological communities. American Naturalist, 122, 636–660.Google Scholar
  114. Svoboda, J. & Passmore, C. (2011). The strategies of modeling in biology education. Science & Education, online first DOI  10.1007/s11191-011-9425-5.
  115. Taylor, P. (1989). Revising models and generating theory. Oikos, 54, 121–126.Google Scholar
  116. Taylor, P. (2000). Socio-ecological webs and sites of sociality: Levins’ strategy of model-building Revisited. Biology & Philosophy, 15, 197–210.Google Scholar
  117. Taylor, P. (2005). Unruly Complexity: Ecology, Interpretation, Engagement. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  118. Tomkins, S. P., & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2001). Looking for ideas: observation, interpretation and hypothesis-making by 12-year-old pupils undertaking science investigations. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 791–813.Google Scholar
  119. Tunnicliffe, S. D., & Ueckert, C. (2007). Teaching biology — the great dilemma, Journal of Biological Education, 41, 51–52.Google Scholar
  120. Tunnicliffe, S. D., & Ueckert, C. (2011): Early biology: the critical years for learning. Journal of Biological Education, 45, 173–175Google Scholar
  121. Van Driel, I., & Verloop, N. (1999). Teachers’ knowledge of models and modelling science. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 1141–1153.Google Scholar
  122. Vepsalainen, K., & Spence, J. (2000). Generalization in ecology and evolutionary biology. Biology and Philosophy, 15, 211–238.Google Scholar
  123. Volterra, V. (1926). Fluctuations in the abundance of a species considered mathematically. Nature, 118, 558–560.Google Scholar
  124. Webb, P., & Boltt, G. (1990). Food chain to food web: a natural progression? Journal of Biological Education, 24, 187–190.Google Scholar
  125. Weisberg, M. (2006a). Forty years of ‘The Strategy’: Levins on model building and idealization. Biology and Philosophy, 21, 623–645.Google Scholar
  126. Weisberg, M. (2006b). Richard Levins’ philosophy of science [editor’s introduction]. Biology and Philosophy, 21, 603–605.Google Scholar
  127. Weisberg, M., & Reisman, K. (2008). The robust Volterra principle. Philosophy of Science, 75, 106–131.Google Scholar
  128. White, B. Y. (1993). ThinkerTools: Causal models, conceptual change, and science education. Cognition and instruction, 10, 1–100.Google Scholar
  129. White, P. (2008). Beliefs about interactions between factors in the natural environment: A causal network study. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 559–572.Google Scholar
  130. Wilson, B. (2009). From laws to models and mechanisms: Ecology in the twentieth century, http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/4509.
  131. Wimsatt, W. C. (1981). Robustness, reliability and overdetermination’. In M. Brewer & B. Collins (Ed.), Scientific Inquiry and the Social Sciences (pp. 124–163). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  132. Wimsatt, W. C. (1987). False models as means to truer theories. In M. Nitecki & A. Hoffman (Eds.), Neutral Models in Biology (pp. 23–55). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  133. Wimsatt, W. C. (2001). Richard Levins as philosophical revolutionary. Biology & Philosophy, 16, 103–108.Google Scholar
  134. Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2008). Beyond the scientific method: Model-based inquiry as a new paradigm of preference for school science investigations. Science Education, 92, 941–947.Google Scholar
  135. Winther, R. G. (2006). ‘On the dangers of making scientific models ontologically independent’: Taking Richard Levins’ warnings seriously, Biology & Philosophy, 21(5), 703–724.Google Scholar
  136. Worster, D. (1994). Nature’s economy: A history of ecological ideas (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  137. Wynne, C., Stewart, J., & Passmore, C. (2001). High school students’ use of meiosis when solving genetics problems. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 501–515.Google Scholar
  138. Yodzis, P. (2000). Diffuse effects in food webs. Ecology, 81, 261–266.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ageliki Lefkaditou
    • 1
  • Konstantinos Korfiatis
    • 2
  • Tasos Hovardas
    • 3
  1. 1.School of Philosophy, Religion and History of ScienceUniversity of LeedsLeedsUK
  2. 2.Department of EducationUniversity of CyprusNikosiaCyprus
  3. 3.Department of Primary EducationUniversity of ThessalyVolosGreece

Personalised recommendations