In search of new lights: getting the most from competing perspectives

Abstract

Some 18 months ago, Wolff-Michael Roth approached me with the idea to have a special issue on conceptual change theory and sociocultural theories that might be complementary or alternative. He was writing an article that adopted a bottom-up approach to the learning of science, that is, an approach that addressed questions such as ‘‘What competencies allow students and interviewers alike to talk about conceptions?’’ ‘‘Under what conditions can researchers extract conceptions from interview materials?’’ and ‘‘What are the implications of the fact that interviewers and students talk about conceptions that researchers denote as ‘misconceptions’?’’ I readily agreed because I regarded the pervasive acceptance of conceptual change theory as an ideology that obscured some of the most important issues in science education. Providing a forum in which the status quo was analyzed alongside of sociocultural alternatives was appealing to me. For my professional life as a science educator, which began more than 40 years ago, I have experienced the steady rise of conceptual change theory as a theoretical framework for science education. I never fully embraced this framework even though I was primarily interested in teaching and learning of science, and learning to teach science. I carefully studied its tenets, considered how they might be applied, but never really saw any advantage in adopting its premises, largely because conceptual change theory did not address praxis or knowledgeability. Hence, neither teaching nor learning was adequately addressed in ways that shed light on the issues that my research sought to address. I have continuously searched for appropriate theoretical frameworks for my research in science education, being mindful of Max Van Manen’s (1990) advice that those seeking to shine fresh light on an issue first must find the light. In so doing I have been mindful that as theories illuminate landscapes in particular ways, they simultaneously obscure or fail to discern other potentially salient issues.