Advertisement

What Scientific Heroes Are (Not) Doing

  • Michiel van Eijck
  • Wolff-Michael Roth
Chapter
Part of the Cultural Studies of Science Education book series (CSSE, volume 7)

Abstract

Graphs and graphing are quintessential images in and of science and scientific knowledge. However, as our research has shown, they constitute both an ideology—nature as understandable in terms of variables—and a representation of scientists as logical inquirers. However, when highly successful scientists are asked to interpret graphs in introductory textbooks of their own field, they often fail to provide the standard correct answers students in first-year university courses are expected to provide. That is, the science graphs and graphing practices that textbooks use to depict science processes and products do and require very different forms of knowledge than the ones that make good (successful) scientists. On the other hand, when they talk about graphs from their own or related work, the same scientists who fail to provide standard answers on textbook graphs exhibit the very knowledge and skills that lead to their successful research careers. Graphs in textbooks and the skills they require, therefore, contribute to the epic image of science rather than to science as practiced.

Keywords

Natural Object Gypsy Moth Original Graph Language Game Sprint Speed 
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. Bakhtine, M. [Volochinov, V. N.]. (1977). Le marxisme et la philosophie du langage: essai d’application de la méthode sociologique en linguistique. Paris: Les Éditions de Minuit.Google Scholar
  2. Barwise, J. (1988). On the circumstantial relation between meaning and content. In U. Eco, M. Santambrogio, & P. Violi (Eds.), Meaning and mental representations (pp. 23–39). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bourdieu, P. (1980). Le sens pratique [Logic of practice]. Paris: Les Éditions de Minuit.Google Scholar
  4. Bowen, G. M., Roth, W.-M., & McGinn, M. K. (1999). Interpretations of graphs by university biology students and practicing scientists: Towards a social practice view of scientific re-presentation practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 1020–1043.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. de Saussure, F. (1916/1995). Cours de linguistique générale [Course on general linguistics]. Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
  6. Derrida, J. (1972). Marges de la philosophie [Marges of philosophy]. Paris: Les Éditions de Minuit.Google Scholar
  7. Derrida, J. (1981). Dissemination. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  8. Derrida, J. (1996). Le monolinguisme de l’autre ou la prothèse d’origine [Monolingualism of the other or the prosthesis of origin]. Paris: Galilée.Google Scholar
  9. Eco, U. (1976). A theory of semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Eco, U. (1984a). Semiotics and the philosophy of language. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Eco, U. (1984b). The name of the rose. Boston: G. K. Hall.Google Scholar
  12. Heidegger, M. (1977). Sein und Zeit [Being and time]. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
  13. Lacan, J. (1966). Écrits [Ecrits]. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
  14. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Latour, B. (1992). Aramis ou l’amour des techniques [Aramis or the love of technology]. Paris: Éditions la Découverte.Google Scholar
  16. Latour, B. (1993). La clef de Berlin et autres leçons d’un amateur de sciences [The key to Berlin and other lessons of a science lover]. Paris: Éditions la Découverte.Google Scholar
  17. Lavoie, J. (1998, October 17). Moth imperils B.C. economy. Times Colonist, A1, A2.Google Scholar
  18. Livingston, E. (1995). An anthropology of reading. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Lynch, M. (1991). Method: Measurement–ordinary and scientific measurement as ethnomethodological phenomena. In G. Button (Ed.), Ethnomethodology and the human sciences (pp. 77–108). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Preziosi, D. (1986). The multimodality of communicative events. In J. Deely, B. Williams, & F. E. Kruse (Eds.), Frontiers in semiotics (pp. 44–50). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Rorty, R. (1979). Philosophy and the mirror of nature. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Roth, W.-M. (2001). “Authentic science”: Enculturation into the conceptual blind spots of a discipline. British Educational Research Journal, 27, 5–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Roth, W.-M. (2003a). Scientific literacy as an emergent feature of human practice. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35, 9–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Roth, W.-M. (2003b). Toward an anthropology of graphing: Semiotic and activity theoretic perspectives. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Roth, W.-M. (2003c). Scientific literacy as an emergent feature of human practice. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35, 9–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Roth, W.-M. (2009c). Radical uncertainty in scientific discovery work. Science, Technology & Human Values, 34, 313–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Roth, W.-M. (2010a). An anthropology of reading science texts in online media. Semiotica, 182, 409–442.Google Scholar
  28. Roth, W.-M. (2010b). Vygotsky’s dynamic conception of the thinking-speaking relationship: A case study of science lectures. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 5, 49–60.Google Scholar
  29. Roth, W.-M. (2010c). Activism: A category for theorizing learning. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 10, 278–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Roth, W.-M., & Bowen, G. M. (1999a). Complexities of graphical representations during lectures: A phenomenological approach. Learning and Instruction, 9, 235–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Roth, W.-M., & Bowen, G. M. (1999b). Digitizing lizards or the topology of vision in ecological fieldwork. Social Studies of Science, 29, 719–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Roth, W.-M., & Bowen, G. M. (2003). When are graphs ten thousand words worth? An expert/expert study. Cognition and Instruction, 21, 429–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sharrock, W., & Button, G. (1991). The social actor: Social action in real time. In G. Button (Ed.), Ethnomethodology and the human sciences (pp. 137–175). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wittgenstein, L. (1953/1996). Philosophische Untersuchungen/Philosophical investigations (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  35. Wittgenstein, L. (2000). Wittgenstein source: Bergen text edition. htpp://www.wittgensteinsource.org. Accessed 22 Sept 2010.
  36. Roth, W.-M. (1996). The co-evolution of situated language and physics knowing. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 5, 171–191Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michiel van Eijck
    • 1
  • Wolff-Michael Roth
    • 2
  1. 1.Eindhoven School of EducationEindhoven University of TechnologyEindhovenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Griffith Institute for Educational ResearchGriffith UniversityGriffithAustralia

Personalised recommendations