Learning about the Nature of Scientific Knowledge: The Imitating-Science Project

Kolstø, Stein Dankert; Mestad, Idar

doi:10.1007/1-4020-3673-6_20

Cited by 14 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…To talk science and write science: to discuss the design of their pathways to solve experimental problems (e.g., Jiménez-Aleixandre & Reigosa, 2006;Kelly et al, 1998); to formulate hypotheses and design experiments to test them (Ergazaki & Zogza, 2005;Kolstø & Mestad, 2005); to agree upon group reports (e.g., Patronis et al, 1999); to produce research papers (see Kelly et al, this book).…”

Section: Active Producers Of Justified Knowledge Claims: the Role Of mentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Authentic activities are these that constitute problems, not just rhetorical questions, for instance an unexpected obstacle encountered in a process of genetic engineering (Ergazaki & Zogza, 2005); that are relevant, or perceived as relevant for the lives of the students, as the controversial issue of wolfs in Norway (Mork, 2005) or cloning (Sadler & Zeidler, 2005); that require to be solved using inquiry procedures (Kolstø & Mestad, 2005;Kuhn & Reiser, 2007). Brown et al (1993) discuss what should authentic and inauthentic mean in school science classrooms, pointing out that, to suggest, as Brown et al (1989) do, enculturation of students in the cultures of science (mathematics, etc.)…”

Section: Inquiry and Argumentation Instruction As Cognitive Apprenticmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To generate products or answers, in the form of proposals, claims, solutions, experimental designs, or artifacts, for questions and problems (e.g., Baker, 2002;Ergazaki & Zogza, 2005;Jiménez-Aleixandre & Pereiro, 2002;Kelly et al, 1998;Kolstø & Mestad, 2005).…”

Section: Active Producers Of Justified Knowledge Claims: the Role Of mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Designing Argumentation Learning Environments

Jiménez‐Aleixandre

2007

Science &Amp; Technology Education Library

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How can we support pupils' engagement in argumentation? Should argumentation be explicitly taught or rather embedded in the learning tasks? Which design principles are related to the goal of promoting argumentation in the science classroom? Are they the same as design principles for constructivist learning environments? How can research explore these features of learning environments supporting argumentation?The above excerpt comes from a 4th-grade classroom (9-10-year-olds), during the process of jointly planning a field trip by teacher and pupils, including decisions about topics to be studied and methods to study them. The teacher uses an analogy between ecology and classroom studies that is the reverse of another analogy found in educational papers (see for instance Doyle, 1977) that propose viewing the classroom as a complex system of relationships and interactions similar to the relationships in ecosystems. Here the presence of the researcher, Ramón López, in the classroom is used to exemplify both the need for an approach to the pond as a whole and of doing it in the field. Implicit in the teacher analogy between the classroom and the pond is the goal of promoting pupils' reflection about their own learning processes and about the ways of constructing knowledge concerning the pond.The use of this analogy can be seen as connected to the third, fourth and fifth questions formulated in the first paragraph, the last concerning research about argumentation learning environments, a research tightly interwoven with the design principles aimed at promoting argumentation, the subject of the third and fourth questions. These design principles intend, among other goals, that pupils reflect about their own learning. The relationships among designing environments to promote argumentation and investigating them can be connected to the impact on some science educators, like myself, initiating S. Erduran and M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (eds.), Argumentation in Science Education.91

show abstract

Section: Active Producers Of Justified Knowledge Claims: the Role Of mentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Inquiry and Argumentation Instruction As Cognitive Apprenticmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Designing Argumentation Learning Environments

Jiménez‐Aleixandre

2007

Science &Amp; Technology Education Library

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In these characteristics, learning is seen as a continuous process which improves with time, and at the same time, learning occurs over time. Kolstø and Mestad (2005) designed a study to provide more appropriate experiences regarding scientific research and they showed that improvement in knowledge about scientific processes and characteristics of scientific knowledge decreased the use of words such as "proof" and "facts" that were signs of a quick learning process and a final point in learning. Evidence collection is a continuous process and its end-point cannot be called "proof" and "facts" due to the tentative nature of scientific knowledge (Lederman, 2007).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Epistemological Predictors of Prospective Biology Teachers’ Nature of Science Understandings

Köseoğlu

Köksal

2015

EURASIA J MATH SCI T

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to investigate epistemological predictors of nature of science understandings of 281 prospective biology teachers surveyed using the Epistemological Beliefs Scale Regarding Science and the Nature of Science Scale. The findings on multiple linear regression showed that understandings about definition of science and objectivity in science were negatively predicted by beliefs in inborn learning ability (ILA) and requirement for time in learning (RTL), while understandings about tentativeness was positively predicted by the same belief factors. Also, understandings of characteristics of scientific knowledge were positively predicted by beliefs in ILA and RTL, and hierarchy between laws and theories were negatively predicted by beliefs in ILA, RTL and development of learning ability with opportunity and support.

show abstract

“…The possible influence of the teaching strategy used became evident in a study exploring learning about social aspects of science (Kolstø & Mestad, 2005). Students in two science classes were given the research question "Why do people walk around in circles in fog and snowy weather?".…”

Section: Scientific Inquiry and Critical Discussion In The Science CLmentioning

confidence: 99%