Constructivism, relativism, and chemical education.
Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California, Los Angeles 90095, USA.
Journal Article: Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences (impact factor: 2.67). 06/2003; 988:359-69.
Abstract
Whereas most scientists are highly critical of constructivism and relativism in the context of scientific knowledge acquisition, the dominant school of chemical education researchers appears to support a variety of such positions. By reference to the views of Herron, Spencer, and Bodner, I claim that these authors are philosophically confused, and that they are presenting a damaging and anti-scientific message to other unsuspecting educators. Part of the problem, as I argue, is a failure to distinguish between pedagogical constructivism regarding students' understanding of science, and constructivism about the way that scientific knowledge is acquired by expert scientists.
Source: PubMed
Comments on this publication
ResearchGate members can add comments. Sign up now and post your comment!
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.
Science & Research Jobs
Keywords
anti-scientific message
chemical education researchers
constructivism
distinguish
dominant school
pedagogical constructivism
scientific knowledge acquisition
Spencer
students' understanding
unsuspecting educators

