Contributions to the Understanding of the Nature of Science in Science Education: a Study Based on the Latourian Conception of the Fabrication of Scientific Objectivity
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.28976/1984-2686rbpec2022u817840Keywords:
Science Objectivity, Nature of Science, Science Studies, Bruno LatourAbstract
In this theoretical article, we draft from the well-known observation that teaching about science is also teaching about the nature of science. Seeking to contribute to this line of research and education, we analyzed the construction of scientific objectivity, from the perspective of Bruno Latour, in three different moments: laboratory research, argumentative positioning of scientific articles, and wider circulation of knowledge in scientific and sociocultural circles. We discuss implications for understanding the nature of science, and finally we point out some research questions and consequences for teaching.
References
Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2012). Nature of Science in Science Education: Toward a Coherent Framework for Synergistic Research and Development. In B. J. Fraser, K. G. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second International Handbook of Science Education (pp. 1041–1060). Springer.
Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving science teacher’s conceptions of nature of science: a critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 665–701.
Ackerson, V., & Donnelly, L. A. (2008). Relationships among learner characteristics and preservice teachers’ views of the nature of science. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 20(1), 45–58.
Allain, L. R., Ramos, P. L., Schetino, L. P. L., Oliveira, J. B., & Fraile, O. O. (2020). Sistemas de Conhecimentos Científicos e Tradicionais de formandos em Ciências da Natureza na Educação do Campo: diálogos a partir da Teoria Ator-Rede. Revista Insignare Scientia, 3(4), 61–80. https://doi.org/10.36661/2595-4520.2020v3i4.11810
Allchin, D. (1999). Values in Science: an Educational Perspective. Science & Education 8(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008600230536
Ministério da Educação (MEC) (2018). Base nacional comum curricular. http://basenacionalcomum.mec.gov.br/images/BNCC_EI_EF_110518_versaofinal_site.pdf
Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Understandings of the Nature of Science and Decision Making on Science and Technology Based Issues. Science Education, 87, 352–377. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10063
Blok, A., & Jensen, T. E. (2011). Bruno Latour. Hybrid thoughts in a hybrid world. Routledge.
Brown, H. (1983). La nueva filosofía de la ciencia. Tecnos.
Carey, S., & Smith, C. (1993). On understanding the nature of scientific knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 28(3), 235–251. https://www.harvardlds.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Carey-Smith.-1993.-On-understanding-the-nature-of-scientific-knowledge.pdf
Central Association for Science and Mathematics Teachers (1907). A consideration of the principles that should determine the courses in biology in secondary schools. School Science and Mathematics, 9(3), 241–247. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1909.tb03028.x
Chalmers, A. F. (2017). O que é ciência afinal? (Obra original publicada em 1983). Brasiliense.
Cobern, W. W., & Loving, C. C. (2001). Defining “Science” in a Multicultural World: Implications for Science Education. Science Education, 85, 50–67.
Coutinho, F. A., Goulart, M. I. M., Munford, D., & Ribeiro, N. A. (2014). Seguindo uma lupa em uma aula de ciências para a educação infantil. Investigações Em Ensino de Ciências, 19(2), 381–402.
Coutinho, F. A., Santos, V. M. D. F., Amaral, A. C. R., Santos, M. I., Silva, F. A. R., & Silva, A. D. J. (2016). Quando os educandos transformam uma sequência didática em um ator-rede: movimentos de translação entre ciência, tecnologia, sociedade e ambiente na educação de jovens e adultos. Experiências Em Ensino de Ciências, 11(3), 178–193. https://fisica.ufmt.br/eenciojs/index.php/eenci/article/view/591
Coutinho, F. A., & Silva, F. A. R. (2014). Análise de texto de um livro didático de biologia orientada pela teoria ator-rede: um estudo sobre o tema evolução biológica. Investigações Em Ensino de Ciências, 19(3), 531–539.
Coutinho, F. A., & Silva, F. A. R. (2016). Sequências didáticas: propostas, discussões e reflexões teórico-metodológicas. FAE/UFMG.
Crasnow, S. (2008). Feminist philosophy of science: ‘standpoint’ and knowledge. Science & Education, (17), 1089–1110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-006-9069-z
Daston, L., & Galison, P. (2007). Objectivity. MIT Press.
Douglas, H. E. (2009). Science, Policy, and the Value-Free Ideal. University of Pittsburgh Press.
Davson-Galle, P. (2002). Science, Values and Objectivity. Science & Education, (11), 191–202. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014412500803
Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Open University Press.
Faria, S. E., & Coutinho, A. F. (2015). Educação Científica em ação: a cartografia das controvérsias como prática de cidadania técnico-científica. Caderno de Pesquisa, 22(3), 133–147. https://doi.org/10.18764/2178-2229.v22.n3.p.133-147
Feyerabend, P. K. (1975). Against Method. Verso.
Figueiredo, A. F. A., Nobre, J. C. L., Allain, L. R., & Paes, S. R. (2020). O Encontro de Saberes como expansão epistêmica: percursos na Universidade Federal dos Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri. Revista Mundaú, 9, 50–67.
Freeman, S., & Herron, J. C. (2009). Análise evolutiva. Artmed.
Freitas, A. P. S., & Coutinho, F. A. (2018). Performando um espaço de reflexão sobre sistemas de conhecimento a partir de um debate: experiência em uma turma de licenciatura em educação do campo. Cadernos CIMEAC, 8(1), 283–302. https://doi.org/10.18554/cimeac.v8i1.2832
Hanson, N. R. (1958). Patterns of Discovery. Cambridge University Press.
Harding, S. (2015). Objectivity and Diversity: Another Logic of Scientific Research. University of Chicago Press.
Kuhn, T. S. (1978). A estrutura das revoluções científica (Obra original publicada em 1962). Perspectiva.
Lacey, H. (2020). Objectivity and Science Education. Science & Education, 29(1), 199–201. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00082-w
Ladyman, J. (2002). Understanding philosophy of science. Routledge.
Latour, B. (2000). Ciência em ação. Como seguir cientistas e engenheiros sociedade afora. Editora da UNESP.
Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1997). Vida de laboratório. A produção dos fatos científicos. Relume Dumará.
Latour, B. (2001). A esperança de Pandora: ensaios sobre a realidade dos estudos científicos. EDUSC.
Lederman, N. G. (2010). Nature of Science: past, present, and future. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on Science education. Routledge.
Lewis, B. F., & Aikenhead, G. S. (2001). Introduction: Shifting Perspectives from Universalism to Cross-Culturalism. Science Education, 85, 3–5.
Lima, N. W., Ostermann, F., & Cavalcanti, C. J. H. (2018). A não-modernidade de Bruno Latour e suas implicações para a Educação em Ciências. Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física, 35(2), 367–388.
Lima, N. W., Vazata, P. A. V., Ostermann, F., Cavalcanti, C. J. de H., & Moraes, A. G. (2019). Educação em Ciências nos Tempos de Pós-Verdade: Reflexões Metafísicas a partir dos Estudos das Ciências de Bruno Latour. Revista Brasileira De Pesquisa Em Educação Em Ciências, 19, 155–189. https://doi.org/10.28976/1984-2686rbpec2019u155189
Matthews, M. R. (2018). New Perspectives in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching: An Introduction. In M. R. Matthews, M. R. (Ed.), History, Philosophy, and Science Teaching. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62616-1
Melo, M. F. A. Q. (2007). Seguindo as pipas com a metodologia da TAR. Revista do Departamento de Psicologia, 19(1), 169–186. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-80232007000100013
Niaz, M. (2018). Evolving Nature of Objectivity in the History of Science and its Implications for Science Education. Springer.
Pierce, C. (2015). Learning about a fish from ANT: acotr network theory and science education in the postgenomic era. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 10, 83–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-013-9498-3
Psillos, S. (2007). Philosophy of Science A–Z. Edinburgh University Press.
Reis, A. L., & Silva, F. A. R. (2021). Seguindo um chargista em tempos de pandemia e recrutando aliados para a educação científica. Olhar de Professor, (24), 1–12.
Reiss, J., & Sprenger, J. (2017). “Scientific Objectivity”. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/scientific-objectivity
Rezzadori, C. B. D. B., & Oliveria, M. A. (2011). A Rede Sociotécnica de um Laboratório de Química do Ensino Médio. Experiências Em Ensino de Ciências, 6(3), 16–37.
Shapin, S. (1988). Following scientists around. Social Studies of Science, 18(3), 533–550.
Smith, M. U., & Scharmann, L. C. (1999). Defining versus Describing the Nature of Science: A Pragmatic Analysis for Classroom Teachers and Science Educators. Science Education, 83, 493–509. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199907)83:4%3C493::AID-SCE6%3E3.0.CO;2-U
Stefanidou, C., & Skordoulis, C. (2014). Subjectivity and Objectivity in Science: An Educational Approach. Advances in Historical Studies, (3), 183–193.
Suppe, F. (1989). The semantic conception theories and scientific realism. University of Illinois Press.
Zanatta, R. P. P, & Filho, N. C. S. (2020). O Ensino de Ciências e a leitura da modernidade e da pós-modernidade por Bruno Latour: reflexões acerca do surgimento de pós-verdades e concepções alternativas no Ensino de Física Moderna e Contemporânea no Ensino Fundamental II. Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física, 37(3), 1469–1495. https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-7941.2020v37n3p1469
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Francisco Ângelo Coutinho, Samuel Itxai Silva Lobo, Ana Paula Silva Freitas, Bárbara Mariane Martinez Viana, Irlan von Linsingen
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The authors are responsible for the veracity of the information provided and for the content of the papers.
The authors who publish in this journal fully agree with the following terms:
- The authors attest that the work is unpublished, that is, it has not been published in another journal, event notices or equivalent.
- The authors attest that they did not submit the paper to another journal simultaneously.
- The authors retain the copyright and grant to RPBEC the right of first publication, with the work licensed simultaneously under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows the sharing of the work with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- The authors attest that they own the copyright or the written permission from copyright owners of figures, tables, large texts, etc. that are included in the paper.
- Authors are authorized to take additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (for example, to publish in institutional repository or as a book chapter), with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) after the publication in order to increase the impact and citation of published work.
In case of identification of plagiarism, inappropriate republishing and simultaneous submissions, the authors authorize the Editorial Board to make public what happened, informing the editors of the journals involved, any plagiarized authors and their institutions of origin.
