THE NATURE OF REPRESENTATION BASED ON BAS VAN FRAASSEN’S FRAMEWORK AND THE ATTRIBUTION OF MEANING TO SCHOOL CHEMICAL KNOWLEDGE
A Natureza da representação a partir do referencial de Bas van Fraassen e a atribuição de sentido ao conhecimento químico escolar
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-21172022240154Keywords:
Representações, Modelos, EpistemologiaAbstract
Initially, aspects of the problem of the nature of representation in teaching are presented, highlighting the disconnection between the meanings attributed by teachers and students to representative models of school scientific knowledge, based on examples originating from the teaching of Chemistry. Then, aspects of Bas van Fraassen's pragmatist conception are rescued and discussed. By comparing those examples with categories of thought from this framework, it was possible to show that the challenges that arise in learning chemistry related to representations are not solved by introducing more complex theories and, therefore, “closer to reality”, but constitute inherent challenges. to the representation relationship itself. In particular, it was possible to point out essential constitutive aspects of the representation: its relational character, its intentional character when attributing predicates, its virtuous interruption and the asymmetry in its relationship with the represented. We conclude that a reflection on these aspects can contribute to deepening the understanding of the nature of chemical representations, from the perspective of an approach that aims to prioritize the construction of meaning to chemical knowledge.
Downloads
References
Atkins, P., Jones, L., & Laverman, L. (2012). Princípios de Química-: Questionando aVida Moderna e o Meio Ambiente. Bookman Editora.
Bucat, B., & Mocerino, M. (2009). Learning at the sub-micro level: Structural representations. In: Multiple representations in chemical education(pp. 11-29). Springer, Dordrecht.
Chittleborough, G. (2014). The development of theoretical frameworks for understanding the learning of chemistry. In: Learning with understanding in the chemistry classroom (pp. 25-40). Springer, Dordrecht.
Cofré, H., Núñez, P., Santibáñez, D., Pavez, J. M., Valencia, M., & Vergara, C. (2019). A critical review of students’ and teachers’ understandings of nature of science. Science & Education, 28, 205-248.
Giere, R. N. (2004). How models are used to represent reality. Philosophy of science, 71(5), 742-752.
Gilbert, J. K., & Justi, R. (2016). Modelling-based teaching in science education(Vol. 9). Basel, Switzerland: Springer international publishing.
Gilbert, J. K. (2009). Multiple representations in chemical education (Vol. 4, pp. 1-8). D.F. Treagust (Ed.). Dordrecht: Springer.
Hoffmann, R., & Laszlo, P. (1991). Representation in chemistry. Angewandte Chemie International Edition in English, 30(1), 1-16.
Johnstone, A. H. (1991). Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what they seem. Journal of computer assisted learning, 7(2), 75-83.
Justi, R. (2006). La enseñanza de ciencias basada en la elaboración de modelos. Enseñanza de las ciencias: revista de investigación y experiencias didácticas, 173-184.
Knuuttila, T., & Boon, M. (2011). How do models give us knowledge? The case of Carnot’s ideal heat engine. European journal for philosophy of science, 1(3), 309-334.
Kozma, R., Chin, E., Russell, J., & Marx, N. (2000). The roles of representations and tools in the chemistry laboratory and their implications for chemistry learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(2), 105-143.
Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. In: Handbook of research on science education(pp. 831-879). Routledge.
Machado, J., & Rodrigues, M. G. (2022). É possível reabilitar o empirismo no Ensino de Ciências? Virtude pragmática sob a ótica antirrealista de Bas van Fraassen. Ciência & Educação (Bauru), 28.
Martins, A. F. P. (2015). Natureza da Ciência no ensino de ciências: uma proposta baseada em “temas” e “questões”. Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física, 32(3), 703-737.
McCOMAS, W. F. (2008). Seeking historical examples to illustrate key aspects of the nature of science. Science & Education, 17, 249-263.
Passmore, C., Gouvea, J. S., & Giere, R. (2014). Models in science and in learning science: Focusing scientific practice on sense-making. In: International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching(pp. 1171-1202). Springer, Dordrecht.
Stull, A. T., Hegarty, M., Dixon, B., & Stieff, M. (2012). Representational translation with concrete models in organic chemistry. Cognition and Instruction, 30(4), 404-434.
Taber, K. S. (2009). Learning at the symbolic level. In: Multiple representations in chemical education(pp. 75-105). Springer, Dordrecht.
Taber, K. S. (2012). The natures of scientific thinking: Creativity as the handmaiden to logic in the development of public and personal knowledge. In: Advances in nature of science research (pp. 51-74). Springer, Dordrecht.
Tümay, H. (2016). Reconsidering learning difficulties and misconceptions in chemistry: emergence in chemistry and its implications for chemical education. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(2), 229-245.
Van Fraassen, B. C. (2007). A imagem científica UNESP.
Van Fraassen, B. C. (2008). Scientific Representation: Paradoxes of Perspective. Oxford University Press.
Vollhardt, P., & Schore, N. E. (2013). Química Orgânica: Estrutura e Função. Bookman Editora.
