On the epistemic value of students’ conceptions in Science Education

dc.contributor.authorSánchez Gómez, Pedro Juan
dc.date.accessioned2025-11-03T14:55:43Z
dc.date.available2025-11-03T14:55:43Z
dc.date.issued2021-06-01
dc.descriptionThis work has been supported by the Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades, through the research project PGC2018-099423-B-I00. The author is a member of the research group Methods of Scientific Representation (MSR), based at the Complutense University of Madrid.
dc.description.abstractIn this article, I present an analysis of the epistemic value of the students' conceptions, as employed in the current constructivist research. I focus on the conceptions about natural kinds. Since natural kind terms are a crucial part of the discourse of the natural sciences, my conclusions are particularly relevant in science education. To perform my analysis, I use a thought experiment, adapted from Hilary Putnam’s famous Twin-Earth examples. I conclude that, to avoid some strong ontoepistemic implications, an externalist view of the learner’s thought must be adopted. In my approach, students’ conceptions are re-interpreted in terms of Hilary Putnam’s stereotypes, conventional representations of a natural kind that guarantee a semantic competence in a specific linguistic environment. As a conclusion, I argue that the role of students’ conceptions is not epistemic but pragmatic. They should not be understood as a partial or provisional representation of how a natural kind really is but as linguistic tools that permit the learner to engage in classroom discourse. Finally, I present a preliminary application of my ideas to the study of the usage of tautologies in science education.
dc.description.departmentDepto. de Didáctica de las Ciencias Experimentales , Sociales y Matemáticas
dc.description.facultyFac. de Educación
dc.description.refereedTRUE
dc.description.sponsorshipMinisterio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades (España)
dc.description.statuspub
dc.identifier.citationSánchez Gómez, P. J. (2021). On the Epistemic Value of Students’ Conceptions in Science Education. Science and Education, 30(4), 827-847. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11191-021-00211-4
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/S11191-021-00211-4
dc.identifier.issn1573-1901
dc.identifier.issn0926-7220
dc.identifier.officialurlhttps://doi.org/10.1007/S11191-021-00211-4
dc.identifier.relatedurlhttps://produccioncientifica.ucm.es/documentos/60e6a0f94edb8e25f92cd37f
dc.identifier.relatedurlhttps://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85104764365
dc.identifier.relatedurlhttps://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000640432300001
dc.identifier.relatedurlhttps://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11191-021-00211-4
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/125639
dc.issue.number4
dc.journal.titleScience & Education
dc.language.isoeng
dc.page.final847
dc.page.initial827
dc.publisherSpringer Netherlands
dc.relation.projectIDinfo:eu-repo/grantAgreement/AEI/Plan Estatal de Investigación Científica y Técnica y de Innovación 2017-2020/PGC2018-099423-B-I00/ES/REPRESENTACIONES ESTOCASTICAS EN CIENCIAS NATURALES: FUNDAMENTOS CONCEPTUALES Y APLICACIONES/
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 Internationalen
dc.rights.accessRightsopen access
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
dc.subject.cdu37.02
dc.subject.cdu372.85
dc.subject.cdu37.015.3
dc.subject.cdu3
dc.subject.cdu1
dc.subject.cdu37.013
dc.subject.cdu371.3
dc.subject.keywordScience education
dc.subject.keywordHilary Putnam
dc.subject.keywordSemantic externalism
dc.subject.keywordStudents' conceptions
dc.subject.keywordEducational constructivism
dc.subject.keywordEducación científica
dc.subject.keywordExternismo semántico
dc.subject.keywordConceptos de los estudiantes
dc.subject.keywordConstructivismo educativo
dc.subject.ucmDidáctica
dc.subject.ucmEnseñanza de las Ciencias Sociales
dc.subject.ucmEnseñanza de las Ciencias experimentales
dc.subject.ucmPedagogía
dc.subject.ucmMétodos de enseñanza
dc.subject.unesco58 Pedagogía
dc.subject.unesco7205.05 Filosofía de las Ciencias Sociales
dc.subject.unesco5801 Teoría y Métodos Educativos
dc.titleOn the epistemic value of students’ conceptions in Science Education
dc.typejournal article
dc.type.hasVersionAM
dc.volume.number30
dcterms.referencesReferencias bibliográficas: • Abbott, S. (Ed.) (2016). Content knowledge (2020, December 13). In S. Abbott (Ed.), The glossary of education reform. Retrieved from http://edglossary.org/content-knowledge. Accessed March 2021 • Astolfi, J.-P., & Develay, M. (1989). La didactique des sciences. Paris: Seuil • Barradas Solas, F., & Sánchez Gómez, P. J. (2014). Orbitals in chemical education. An analysis through their graphical representations. Chemical Education Research and Practice, 15, 311–319 DOI: 10.1039/C4RP00023D • Bird, A. & Tobin, E. (2018). Natural Kinds. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/natural-kinds/. Accessed March 2021 • Bodner, G. M. (1986). Constructivism: A theory of Knowledge. Journal of Chemical Education, 63, 873–878 DOI: 10.1021/ed063p873 • Bodner, G. M., Kobluchar, M., & Geelan, D. (2001). The many forms of constructivism. Journal of Chemical Education, 78(8), 1107 DOI: 10.1021/ed078p1107.4 • Bosch, M., Chevallard, Y., García, F. J., & Monaghan, J. (Eds.). (2019). Working with the anthropological theory of the didactic in mathematics education: A comprehensive casebook. London: Routledge • Burge, T. (1979). Individualism and the mental. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 4, 73–121 DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-4975.1979.tb00374.x • Burge, T. (1986). Individualism and psychology. Philosophical Review, 45, 3–45 DOI: 10.2307/2185131 • Chevallard, Y. (1985). La transposition didactique. Du savoir savant au savoir enseigné. Grenoble: La Pensee Sauvage • Chevallard, Y. (2019). Introducing the anthropological theory of the didactic: An attempt at a principled approach. Hiroshima Journal of Mathematics Education, 12, 71–114 • Coll, R. K., & Treagust, D. F. (2001). Learners’ mental models of chemical bonding. Research in Science Education, 31(3), 357–382 DOI: 10.1023/A:1013159927352 • Dagher, Z., & Cossman, G. (1992). Verbal explanations given by science teachers: Their nature and implications. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 361–374 DOI: 10.1002/tea.3660290405 • Duit, R. (1991). Students’ conceptual framework consequences for learning science. In: S. Glynn, R. Yeany, B. Britton (Eds.), The Psychology of Learning Science (pp. 65–88). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum • Engström, A. (2014). RC is a theory of learning, not teaching. Constructivist Foundations, 9(3), 314–316. http://constructivist.info/9/3/314. Accessed March 2021 • Geeraerts, D. (2008). Prototypes, stereotypes, and semantic norms. In G. Kristiansen & R. Dirven (Eds.), Cognitive Sociolinguistics: Language Variation, Cultural Models, Social Systems (pp. 21–44). Berlin-New York. Mouton de Gruyter DOI: 10.1515/9783110199154.1.21 • Gettier, E. L. (1963). Is justified true belief knowledge? Analysis, 23(6), 121–123 DOI: 10.1093/analys/23.6.121 • Gibbs, R. W., & McCarrell, N. S. (1990). Why boys will be boys and girls will be girls: Understanding colloquial tautologies. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 19, 125–145 DOI: 10.1007/BF01068094 • Hatfiled, L. L. (2014). Radical constructivism in the classroom: Tensions and balances. Constructivist Foundations, 9(3), 433–435. http://constructivist.info/9/3/433. Accessed March 2021 • Jungwirth, E. (1986). Tautological explanations and definitions—an avoidable phenomenon. Journal of Biological Education, 24, 270–272 DOI: 10.1080/00219266.1986.9654838 • Kelly, G. A. (1955). The Psychology of Personal Constructs: A Theory of Personality. New York: W. Norton & Company, Inc • Kivinen, O., & Ristelä, P. (2003). From Constructivism to a Pragmatist Conception of Learning. Oxford Review of Education, 29(3), 363–375 DOI: 10.1080/03054980307442 • Matthews, M. R. (2000). Constructivism in science and mathematics education. In D. C. Phillips (Ed.), National Society for the Study of Education, 99th Yearbook (pp. 161–192). Chicago: University of Chicago Press • McGinn, C. (1977). Charity, interpretation, and belief. Journal of Philosophy, 74, 521–535 DOI: 10.2307/2025795 • Meibauer, J. (2008). Tautology as presumptive meaning. Pragmatics and Cognition, 16, 439–470 DOI: 10.1075/pc.16.3.02mei • Papaphotis, G., & Tsaparlis, G. (2008a). Conceptual versus algorithmic learning in high school chemistry: The case of basic quantum chemical concepts. Part 1. Statistical analysis of a quantitative study. Chemical Education Research and Practice, 9(4), 323–331 DOI: 10.1039/B818468M • Papaphotis, G., & Tsaparlis, G. (2008b). Conceptual versus algorithmic learning in high school chemistry: The case of basic quantum chemical concepts. Part 2. Students’ common errors, misconceptions and difficulties in understanding. Chemical Education Research and Practice, 9(4), 332–340 DOI: 10.1039/B818470B • Parent, T. (2013). Externalism and self-knowledge. The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Summer 2013 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2013/entries/self-knowledge-externalism/. Accessed March 2021 • Pessin, A., & Goldberg, S. (Eds.). (1996). The twin earth chronicles: Twenty years of reflection on Hilary Putnam’s "The Meaning of `Meaning’". Armonk: M.E. Sharpe • Potvin, P., & Cyr, G. (2017). Toward a durable prevalence of scientific conceptions: Tracking the effects of two interfering misconceptions about buoyancy from preschoolers to science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(9), 1121–1142 DOI: 10.1002/tea.21396 • Putnam, H. (1975). The Meaning of ‘Meaning’. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 7, 131–193. Repr. in Philosophical Papers Vol. 2: Mind, Language and Reality (1975), 215–271. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press • Rowlands, S. and Carson, R. (2001). The contradictions in the constructivist discourse. Philosophy of Mathematics Education Journal (P. Ernest, Ed.), 14. Available online at: http://socialsciences.exeter.ac.uk/education/research/centres/stem/publications/pmej/pome14/rowlands.htm (accessed Dec 2020) • Salmon, N. (1979). How not to derive essentialism from the theory of reference. Journal of Philosophy, 76, 703–725 DOI: 10.2307/2025854 • Salmon, N. (1982). Reference and essence. Oxford: Basil Blackwell • Sánchez Gómez, P. J. (2013). The semantics of chemical education: constructivism, externalism and the language of chemistry. Foundations of Chemistry, 15, 103–116 DOI: 10.1007/s10698-011-9130-0 • Sánchez Gómez, P. J. (2016). Students’ conceptions and radical constructivism. Science & Education, 25, 629–650 DOI: 10.1007/s11191-016-9829-3 • Sánchez Gómez, P. J., & Martin, F. (2003). Quantum vs. “classical” chemistry in university chemistry education: A case study of the role of chemistry in thinking the curriculum. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 4(2), 131–148 DOI: 10.1039/B2RP90042D • Seifert, V. A. (2019). Reduction and emergence in chemistry. Internet encyclopedia of philosophy. https://www.iep.utm.edu/red-chem/. Accessed March 2021 • Staver, J. R. (1998). Constructivism: Sound theory for explicating the practice of science and science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(5), 501–520 DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199805)35:5<501::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-T • Stefani, C., & Tsaparlis, G. (2009). Students’ levels of explanations, models, and misconceptions in basic quantum chemistry: A phenomenographic study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(5), 520–536 DOI: 10.1002/tea.20279 • Taber, K. S., & Watts, M. (2000). Learners’ explanations for chemical phenomena. Chemical Education: Research and Practice in Europe, 1(3), 329–353 • Taber, K. S. (2002). Conceptualizing quanta: illuminating the ground state of student understanding of atomic orbitals. Chemical Education Research and Practice, 3(2), 145–158 DOI: 10.1039/B2RP90012B • Taber, K. S. (2004). Learning quanta: barriers to stimulating transitions in student understanding of orbital ideas. Science Education, 89(1), 94–116 DOI: 10.1002/sce.20038 • Taber, K. S. and Coll, R. (2003). Bonding, in Gilbert J., Jong O., Justi R., Treagust D. and Driel J., (ed.), Chemical education: towards research-based practice, contemporary trends and issues in science education. Netherlands: Springer • Taylor, P. (1993). Collaborating to reconstruct teaching: The influence of researcher beliefs. In K. Tobin (Ed.), The practice of constructivism in science education (pp. 267–297). Washington, DC: AAAS Press • Tsaparlis, G. (1997). Atomic and molecular structure in chemical education: A critical analysis from various perspectives of science education. Journal of Chemical Education, 74(8), 922 DOI: 10.1021/ed074p922 • Tsaparlis, G., & Papaphotis, G. (2002). Quantum-chemical concepts: Are they suitable for secondary students? Chemical Education Research and Practice, 3(2), 129–144 DOI: 10.1039/B2RP90011D • Tsaparlis, G., & Papaphotis, G. (2009). High-school students’ conceptual difficulties and attempts at conceptual change: The case of basic quantum chemical concepts. International Journal of Science Education, 31(7), 895–930 DOI: 10.1080/09500690801891908 • von Glasersfeld, E. (1974). Piaget and the radical constructivist epistemology. In C. D. Smock & E. von Glasersfeld (Eds.), Epistemology and education (pp. 1–24). Athens: Follow Through Publications • von Glasersfeld, E. (1983). Learning as a constructive activity. In: J. C. Bergeron, N. Herscovics (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th annual meeting of the North American Group of psychology in mathematics education (Vol. 1, pp. 41-63). Montreal: PME-NA • von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). Radical Constructivism: A way of knowing and learning. Londres: Falmer Press • von Glasersfeld, E. (1996). Aspects of radical constructivism and its educational recommendations. In L. P. Steffe, P. Nesher, P. Cobb, G. A. Goldin, & B. Greer (Eds.), Theories of mathematical learning (pp. 307–314). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isAuthorOfPublicationa66ebe31-21cc-403a-9ca4-9b34ac0c87c4
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscoverya66ebe31-21cc-403a-9ca4-9b34ac0c87c4

Download

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
On_epistemic_Ver_Aceptada.pdf
Size:
447.39 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format

Collections