Abstract
The subjectivity and objectivity of science are strongly associated to the nature of science, which is part of science education curricula worldwide. The issue under research is how an epistemological issue, like objectivity and subjectivity in science, could be introduced in science classes, so as to reflect the most realistic image of science. Following this line in the present study, concepts were related to what students and teachers should know, science education research and policy documents were explored, and current views within the philosophy of science were briefly summarized. We propose a distinction between the partially subjective scientific process and the rather objective end result of scientific inquiry as a schema promoting better understanding in science education. Intersubjectivity and critical transformation are then proposed as concepts which can enhance this schema. The history of science provides a suitable framework for teaching these ideas in science classes.
Highlights
Nature of Science (NoS) constitutes an integral part of the scientific literacy that science education aims to impart to both students and teachers
Some of them are inclined to attribute subjectivity to scientific endeavour, while the others are inclined to support the objectivity of science in the sense of impartiality or general agreement, the distinction between the subjective character of the scientific process and the rather objective character of scientific knowledge is not clearly suggested. This begs a number of questions: is there a single answer appropriate and compatible with science education as to what objectivity means when referring to science? Terms such as truth, impartiality or lack of bias are some of the alternatives to objectivity, but are they informative enough in relation to the objectivity or subjectivity of scientific knowledge? We argue that science educators should come to a consensus on the topic, in the sense of distinguishing the subjective character of scientific research from the rather objective character of scientific knowledge
We have argued that science education should become aware of the ongoing philosophical discussion if it is to prevent students’ and teachers’ views of science and scientific practice being biased and incomplete
Summary
Nature of Science (NoS) constitutes an integral part of the scientific literacy that science education aims to impart to both students and teachers. A large part of the community of science educators does not necessarily distinguish the subjective character of the research activity from the rather objective character of the resulting scientific knowledge, preferring to generalize about the personal and social factors that can influence science. Millar and Driver in their study “Beyond Processes” present a critical review of the assumptions which underpin what is referred to as “process of science” In this research they support learning approaches which view “knowledge as personally and socially constructed, rather than objective and revealed; theories as provisional, not absolute” (Millar & Driver, 1987: 57) as good alternatives to the traditional and old-fashioned picture of science. Philosophy of science provides the ground in order all factors that affect and are affected by science to be studied, discussed and elaborated
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
