RELACIONES CAUSALES EXPLICATIVAS EN LA EDUCACION CIENTÍFICA Y SU CONTRIBUCIÓN AL PENSAMIENTO CRÍTICO
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22600/1518-8795.ienci2022v27n3p239Palavras-chave:
Causalidad, Mecanismos causales, Educación Científica, Pensamiento críticoResumo
El termino causalidad se utiliza en diferentes disciplinas de las ciencias desde la Física hasta la Biología; donde se hace uso rutinario de estos conceptos para inferir relaciones causales. Es evidente que las ciencias son el mejor lugar al que acudir para comprender la causalidad, pero en cada una ha sido abordado de manera diferente. Por lo tanto, pretendemos reflexionar en la siguiente pregunta: ¿Que implica utilizar este término (relaciones causales) en la educación científica? y ¿Cómo éstas contribuyen al pensamiento crítico? Para ello, se presentan enfoques epistemológicos sobre la causalidad desde la filosofía, la psicología y las ciencias naturales; posteriormente se describen sus implicaciones en la Educación científica y finalmente presentamos las nociones de relaciones causales y su contribución al pensamiento crítico.Referências
Ahn, W. K., Kalish, C. W., Medin, D. L., & Gelman, S. A. (1995). The role of covariation versus mechanism information in causal attribution. Cognition, 54(3), 299-352. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(94)00640-7
Apple, M. W. (1986). Ideología y currículo. Madrid, España: Akal.
Bechtel, W., & Abrahamsen, A. (2005). “Explanation: A Mechanistic Alternative”, Studies in History and Philosophy of the Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 36,421–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsc.2005.03.010
Berland, L. K., & Reiser, B. J. (2009). Making sense of argumentation and explanation. Science Education, 93, 26–55. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20286
Bhaskar, R. (2008). A Realist Theory of Science. New York and Oxon: Routledge
Bowler, P. J., & Morus, I. R. (2005). Panorama general de la ciencia moderna, Barcelona, España: Crítica
Brigandt, I. (2016). Why the difference between explanation and argument matters to science education. Science & Education, 25(3), 251-275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-016-9826-6
Bunge, M. (2004). How does it work? The search for explanatory mechanisms. Philosophy of the Social Sciences (34), 182–210.https://doi.org/10.1177/0048393103262550
Campaner, G. (2004). La argumentación en clases de Educación Ambiental. Trabajo de investigación tutelado para la obtención del Diploma de Estudios Avanzados. Universidad Autónoma de Madrid.
Craver, C. (2007). Explaining the Brain: Mechanisms and the Mosaic Unity of Neuroscience, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Craver, C., & Tabery,J. (2017): “Mechanisms in Science”, en The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, E. N. Zalta (Ed.), https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2017/entries/science-mechanisms/
Chen, Z., & Klahr, D. (1999). All other things being equal: Acquisition and transfer of the control of variables strategy. Child Development, 70(5), 1098 – 1120. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00081
Davidson, D. (1967). Causal Relations. En D. Davidson. Essays on Actions and Events. Oxford: Clarendon Press (pp. 149-162).
Della Rocca, M. (2008). Spinoza. New York and Oxon: Routledge
Descartes, R. (2003). Discurso del método (Vol. 39). Ediciones Colihue SRL.
Ennis, R. (1985). A logical basis for measuring critical thinking skills. Educational Leadership. 43(2), 44- 46. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ327936
Disessa, A. A. (2014). The construction of causal schemes: Learning mechanisms at the knowledge level. Cognitive science, 38(5), 795-850. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12131
Dijksterhuis, E. J. (1961). The Mechanization of the World Picture. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Dündar?Coecke, S., Tolmie, A., & Schlottmann, A. (2020). Children's reasoning about continuous causal processes: The role of verbal and non?verbal ability. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(2), 364-381. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12287
Ellis, B. (2001). Scientific Essentialism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fara, P. (2009). Breve historia de la ciencia. Barcelona, España: Ariel.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogía del oprimido, Buenos Aires, Argentina: Siglo XXI.
Freire, P. (1974). La educación como práctica de libertad. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Siglo XXI.
Gerring, J. (2008). Review Article: The Mechanismic Worldview: Thinking Inside the Box. British Journal of Political Science, 38, 161-179. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123408000082
Glennan, S (2002). “Rethinking Mechanistic Explanation”, Philosophy of Science, 69, S342–S353. https://doi.org/10.1086/341857
Goldvarg, E., & Johnson-Laird, P. N. (2001). Naive causality: a mental model theory of causal meaning and reasoning. Cognitive Science, 25, 565-610. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2504_3
Gopnik, A., Sobel, D. M., Schulz, L. E., & Glymour, C. (2001). Causal learning mechanisms in very young children: Two-, three-, and four-year-olds infer causal relations from patterns of variation and covariation. Developmental Psychology, 37(5), 620 – 629. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.37.5.620
Groff, R. (2017). Causal mechanisms and the philosophy of causation. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 47(3), 286-305. https://doi.org/10.1111/jtsb.12118
Hanisch, S., & Eirdosh, D. (2020). Causal mapping as a teaching tool for reflecting on causation in human evolution. Science & Education, 30(4), 993-1022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00157-z
Hume, D. (1975). Enquiries Concerning Human Understanding and Concerning the Principles of Morals; Reprinted from the 1777 Edition and with Introduction and Analytical Index by L. A. Selby-Bigge, (3th Ed.) Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Illari, P. M. (2011). Mechanistic evidence: disambiguating the Russo–Williamson thesis. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 25(2), 139-157. https://doi.org/10.1080/02698595.2011.574856
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2010). 10 ideas clave. Competencias en argumentación y uso de pruebas. Barcelona, España: Graó.
Kant, I. (1787/2008). Crítica de la razón pura. [Traducción Pedro Ribas]. Madrid, España: Taurus.
Kuhn, D. (1993). Connecting scientific and informal reasoning. The Development of Rationality and Critical Thinking, a special issue of the Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 39(1), 74 103. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23087301
Kim, J. (2007). Causation and Mental Causation. En B. McLaughlin & J. Cohen (Eds.) Contemporary debates in philosophy of mind (pp.227-2443). Singapur: Blackwell
Koslowski, B. (1996). Theory and evidence: The development of scientific reasoning. Cambridge, United States of America: MIT Press.
Koyre. A. (1980). Estudios galileanos. Madrid, España: Siglo XXI Editores.
Leslie, A., Friedman, O., & German, T. (2004). Core mechanisms in `theory of mind´. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(12), 528-533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2004.10.001
Lewis, D. (1973). Cozmteifac.tuals. Oxford, Basil Blackwell,.
Machamer, P., (2004), “Activities and Causation: The Metaphysics and Epistemology of Mechanisms”, International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 18, 27-39. https://doi.org/10.1080/02698590412331289242
Machamer, P., Darden, L., & Craver, C. F. (2000). Thinking about mechanisms. Philosophy of science, 67(1), 1-25. https://www.jstor.org/stable/188611
Mahoney, J. (2003). Tentative Answers to Questions about Causal Mechanisms. Presented at American Political Science Association annual meeting in Philadelphia, United States of America.
Miguel, M. L., dos Santos, L. J., & Mendes de Souza, L.A. (2022). Algumas percepções de estudantes do ensino médio sobre ciências, pseudociência e movimentos anticientíficos. Investigações em Ensino de Ciências, 27(1), 191-222. http://dx.doi.org/10.22600/1518-8795.ienci2022v27n1p191
Mumford, S., & Anjum, R. (2010). A Powerful Theory of Causation. In A. Marmodoro (Ed.), The Metaphysics of Powers: Their Grounding and their Manifestations. New York and Oxon: Routledge
Osborne, J. F., & Patterson, A. (2012). Authors’ response to ‘‘For whom is argument and explanation a necessary distinction? A response to Osborne and Patterson’’ by Berland and McNeill. Science Education, 96, 814–817. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21034
Oliveira, C. M. A., & Carvalho, A. M. P. (2005). Escrevendo em aulas de ciências. Ciência & Educação (Bauru), 11(3), 347-366. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-73132005000300002
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2006). The miniature guide to critical thinking concepts and tools. Foundation for critical thinking. http://www.criticalthinking.org/files/Concepts_ Tools.pdf.
Pearl, J., & Mackenzie, D. (2018). The book of why: The new science of cause and effect. New York, United States of America: Basic Books.
Pérez, D. (1999). La mente como eslabón causal. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Catálogos.
Piaget, J. (1967). El juicio y el razonamiento en el niño. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Guadalupe.
Premack, D. & Premack, J. (1995). Intention as psychological cause. En D. Sperber, D. Premack & A.J. Premack (Eds.) Causal Cognition: A Multidisciplinary Debate (pp. 185-200). New York: Oxford University Press.
Psillos, S. (2002). Causation & Explanation. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press.
Pulido, W. Q. (2002). Causalidad física: procesos causales y cantidades conservadas. Revista de filosofía, 58, 79-99.
Russ, R. S., Scherr, R. E., Hammer, D., & Mikeska, J. (2008). Recognizing mechanistic reasoning in student scientific inquiry: A framework for discourse analysis developed from philosophy of science. Science education, 92(3), 499-525. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20264
Russo, F., & Williamson, J. 2007. Interpreting causality in the health sciences. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 21, 157-170. https://doi.org/10.1080/02698590701498084
Sánchez, F. P. (2012). La búsqueda de las relaciones causales: el desafío del ejercicio diario de un epidemiólogo. Revista Médica de Risaralda, 18(2), 165-171. http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php
Sánchez Ron, J.M. (2006) El poder de la ciencia. Madrid, España: Crítica
Schlottamnn, A. (2001). Perception versus Knowledge of Cause and Effect in Children: When Seeing in Believing. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10(4), 111-115. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20182715
Solbes, J. (2002). Les empremtes de la ciència, Alzira: Germania
Solbes, J. (2013). Contribución de las cuestiones socio-científicas al desarrollo del pensamiento crítico (i): introducción. Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias, 10(1), 1-10. https://revistas.uca.es/index.php/eureka/article/view/2791
Solbes, J. (2019). Cuestiones socio-científicas y pensamiento crítico: Una propuesta contra. las pseudociencias, Tecne, Episteme y Didaxis, 46, 81- 99
Solbes, J., & Torres, N. (2012). Análisis de las competencias de pensamiento crítico desde el aborde de las cuestiones sociocientíficas: un estudio en el ámbito universitario. Didáctica de las ciencias experimentales y sociales, (26), 247-269. https://doi.org/10.7203/dces.26.1928
Solbes, J.., & Torres, N. Y. (2013). ¿ Cuáles son las concepciones de los docentes de ciencias en formación y en ejercicio sobre el pensamiento crítico?. Tecné, Episteme y Didaxis: TED, (33), 61-85. https://doi.org/10.17227/01213814.33ted61.85
Solbes J. S., Palomar, R., & Dominguez-Sales, M. C. (2018). To what extent do pseudosciences affect teachers? A look at the mindset of science teachers in training. Mètode Science Studies Journal, 8, 188-195. https://doi.org/10.7203/metode.8.9943
Suárez, M., & Villegas, C (2018): “Causalidad en la ciencia”, Enciclopedia de la Sociedad Española de Filosofía Analítica http://www.sefaweb.es/causalidad-en-la-ciencia/
Smolin, L. (2007). Las dudas de la física en el siglo XXI. Barcelona, España: Crítica.
Tolmie, A., & Dündar-Coecke, S. (2019). A short-term intervention improved children's insights into causal processes. The Psychology of Education Review, 43(2). https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10086857/
Torres, N. Y., & Solbes, J. (2016). Contribuciones de una intervención didáctica usando cuestiones sociocientíficas para desarrollar el pensamiento crítico. Enseñanza de las ciencias: revista de investigación y experiencias didácticas, 34(2), 43-65. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/ensciencias.1638
Torres, N. Y. (2014). Pensamiento crítico y cuestiones socio-científicas: Un estudio en escenarios de formación docente, (Tesis doctoral.). Universitat de València, España. https://roderic.uv.es/handle/10550/36116
Toulmin, S. (2007). El uso de la argumentación. Barcelona, España: Peninsula.
Vieira, M. R., Tenreiro-Vieira, C., & Martins, E. (2010). Pensamiento Crítico y literacia científica. Alambique, 65, 96-104.
Woodward, J. (2009) Agency and Interventionist Theories. In. H. Beebee, C. Hitchcock, & P. Menzies (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Causation (pp. 234-262). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Yager, R. E. (1993). Science and critical thinking. In Clarke, J.H. & Biddle, A.W. (Eds.), Teaching critical thinking: Reports from across the curriculum. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, United States of America: Prentice Hall
Zangori, L., Forbes, C. T., & Biggers, M. (2013). Fostering student sense making in elementary science learning environments: Elementary teachers’ use of science curriculum materials to promote explanation construction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50, 989–1017. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21104
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2022 ?Nidia Yaneth Torres Merchan?, Thiago Henrique Barnabé Corrêa, Jordi Antoni Solbes Matarredona
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
A IENCI é uma revista de acesso aberto (Open Access), sem que haja a necessidade de pagamentos de taxas, seja para submissão ou processamento dos artigos. A revista adota a definição da Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI), ou seja, os usuários possuem o direito de ler, baixar, copiar, distribuir, imprimir, buscar e fazer links diretos para os textos completos dos artigos nela publicados.
O autor responsável pela submissão representa todos os autores do trabalho e, ao enviar o artigo para a revista, está garantindo que tem a permissão de todos para fazê-lo. Da mesma forma, assegura que o artigo não viola direitos autorais e que não há plágio no trabalho. A revista não se responsabiliza pelas opiniões emitidas.
Todos os artigos são publicados com a licença Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial 4.0 Internacional. Os autores mantém os direitos autorais sobre suas produções, devendo ser contatados diretamente se houver interesse em uso comercial dos trabalhos.
