Abstract
The argument presented in this paper is that efforts designed to engender systemic advancements in science education for fostering the scientific literacy of learners are directly related to the ontological perspectives held by members of the discipline. In elaborating this argument, illustrative disciplinary perspectives representing three complementary aspects of science education are addressed. These three perspectives represent the disciplinary knowledge and associated dynamics of: (a) science students, (b) science teachers, and (c) science education researchers. In addressing the ontological perspectives of each, the paper emphasizes how interdisciplinary perspectives can accelerate progress in science education.
This research was supported by the National Science Foundation, USA REC 0228353.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Sowa, J.: Knowledge representation: Logical, philosophical, computational foundations. Brooks, NY (2000)
Davis, R., Schrobe, H.: Szolovita What is knowledge representation? AI Magazine 14(1), 17–33 (1993)
Kuhn, T.: The structure of scientific revolution. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1996)
Vitale, M.R., Romance, N.R., Crawley, F.: Trends in science education research published in the Journal of Research in Science Teaching: A longitudinal policy perspective. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia, PA (2010)
Luger, G.F.: Artificial intelligence: Structures and strategies for complex problem solving. Addison-Wesley, NY
Vitale, M.R., Romance, N.R.: Concept mapping as a means for binding knowledge to effective content area instruction: An interdisciplinary perspective. In: Canas, A.J., Novak, J.D. (eds.) Concept Maps: Theory, Methodology, and Technology, pp. 112–119. San Jose, Costa Rica (2006)
Romance, N.R., Vitale, M.R.: Implementing an in-depth expanded science model in elementary schools: Multi-year findings, research issues, and policy implications. International Journal of Science Education 23, 373–404 (2001)
Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., Cocking, R.R.: How people learn. NAP, Washington (2000)
Anderson, J.R.: Automaticity and the ACT theory. American Journal of Psychology 105(2), 165–180 (1992)
Anderson, J.R.: Problem solving and learning. American Psychologist 48(1), 35–44 (1993)
Anderson, J.R.: ACT: A simple theory of complex cognition. American Psychologist 51(4), 335–365 (1996)
Cepeda, N.J., Coburn, N., Rohrer, D., Wixted, J.T., Mozer, M.C., Pashler, H.: Optimizing distributed practice: Theoretical analysis and practical applications. Experimental Psychology 56, 236–246 (2009)
Sidman, M.: Equivalence relations and the reinforcement contingency. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 74, 127–146 (2000)
Vitale, M.R., Romance, N.R.: A knowledge-based framework for unifying content-area reading comprehension and reading comprehension strategies. In: McNamara, D. (ed.) Reading Comprehension Strategies: Theory, Interventions, and Technologies, pp. 75–103. Erlbaum, NY (2007)
Romance, N.R., Vitale, M.R.: How should children’s alternative conceptions be considered in teaching and learning science concepts: Research-based perspectives. National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Diego, CA (1998)
Duncan, R.G., Hmelo-Silver, C.E.: Learning progressions: Aligning curriculum, instructionh, and assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 46, 606–609 (2009)
Schmidt, W.H., et al.: A splintered vision: An investigation of U.S. science and mathematics education, vol. III. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1997)
Novak, J., Gowin, D.B.: Learning how to learn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1984)
Mintzes, J.J., Wandersee, J.H., Novak, J.D.: Teaching science for understanding: A human constructivist view. Academic Press, NY (1998)
Hofmeister, A.M., Engelmann, S., Carnine, D.: Developing and validating science education videodisks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 26(8), 665–667 (1989)
Muthukrishna, N., Carnine, D., Grossen, B., et al.: Children?s alternative frameworks: Should they be directly addressed in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 30(3), 233–248 (1993)
Vitale, M.R., Romance, N.R.: Using videodisk technology in an elementary science methods course to remediate science knowledge deficiencies and facilitate science teaching attitudes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 29(9), 915–928 (1992)
Vosniadou, S.: Learning environments for representational growth and cognitive science. In: Vosniadou, S., DeCorte, E., Glaser, R., Mandl, H. (eds.) International Perspectives on the Design of Technology-Supported Learning Environments, Mahwah, pp. 13–24. Erlbaum, NJ (1996)
Dufresne, R.J., Gerance, W.J., et al.: Constraining novices to perform expert like problem analyses: Effects of schema acquisition. The Journal of Learning Sciences 2(3), 307–331 (1992)
Chi, M., Feltovich, L., Glaser, R.: Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science 5, 121–152 (1981)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Romance, N.R., Vitale, M.R. (2011). Broadening the Ontological Perspectives in Science Learning: Implications for Research and Practice in Science Teaching. In: Andrews, S., Polovina, S., Hill, R., Akhgar, B. (eds) Conceptual Structures for Discovering Knowledge. ICCS 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 6828. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22688-5_38
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22688-5_38
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-22687-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-22688-5
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)