Abstract
This manuscript presents a model of conceptual change from a social constructivism perspective by examining the fallacious argumentation and discourse patterns revealed by students as they form scientific and social judgments. A central premise is advanced that likens how individuals react when anomalous data is presented in conflict with their own scientific beliefs to how they react when the social, moral, and ethical beliefs held by others are in conflict with their own convictions. A framework is provided that will allow science educators to examine “samples of thought” related to “social thinking.” A special case of fallacious reasoning—the effects of core beliefs on argumentation—seems to suggest the need for a view of science that moves beyond traditional (positivistic and postpositivistic) notions of “scientific” thinking and allows for the social construction of knowledge. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Sci Ed 81:483-496, 1997.
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.
