Categorization of the Tentativeness of Scientific Knowledge: A Document Analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22600/1518-8795.ienci/2025v30n3p258Keywords:
Tentativeness of Scientific Knowledge, Reliable Scientific Knowledge, Enduring Scientific Knowledge, Never Absolute Scientific Knowledge, Certain Scientific KnowledgeAbstract
Tentativeness of Scientific Knowledge (TdCC) is considered a category of Nature of Science (NOS), which attempts to capture the changing nature of scientific knowledge (K.K), conceived from different perspectives as Reliable, Durable, Never Absolute, and Questionable. For this reason, the purpose of this article is to identify and describe the subcategories that allow us to understand TdCC from the literature. Therefore, this research answers the following questions: What are the subcategories that allow us to understand TdCC? And what are the characteristics of the subcategories that allow us to understand TdCC? To this end, a documentary investigation was carried out, which sought to obtain, analyze, and compare information on the subject of study, the search for information was carried out through the analysis of the article "Conceptualization of the Nature of Science: The Development of Two Approaches," which enabled the extraction and analysis of twenty-five (25) articles, allowing for the recognition of the four (4) subcategories mentioned for TdCC. Based on this analysis, a conceptual and methodological contribution was generated in the HPS area, in the NOS line and in the TdCC category, because both students and teachers will develop an informed view of the tentative nature of scientific knowledge, promote reflections on the methods of doing science, improve understanding of the NOS construct as a critical component of scientific literacy, stimulate scientific interest, and show science as a human activity.References
Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2012). Examining the Sources for our Understandings about Science: Enduring Conflations and Critical Problems in Research on Nature of Science in Science Education, International Journal of Science Education, 34(3), 353-374. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.629013
Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Akerson, V. (2004). Learning as conceptual change: Factors that mediate the development of pre-service elementary teachers’ views of nature of science. Science Education, 88, 785–810. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10143
Abd-El-khalick, F., & Lederman, N. (2000). Improving science teachers’ conceptions of nature of science: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 665-701. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690050044044
Acevedo, J., Vázquez, Á., Martín, M., Oliva, J., Acevedo, P., Paixão, F., & Manassero M. (2005). Naturaleza de la ciencia y educación científica para la participación ciudadana. Una revisión crítica. Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias, 2(2), 121-140. http://dx.doi.org/10.25267/Rev_Eureka_ensen_divulg_cienc.2005.v2.i2.01
Adúriz-Bravo, A. (2005). Una introducción a la naturaleza de la ciencia, la epistemología en la enseñanza de las ciencias naturales. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Fondo de cultura económica. http://repositoriokoha.uner.edu.ar/fceco/digitalizacion/indices/005503.pdf
Adúriz-Bravo, A., Alzate Quintero, G. C., Pujalte, A. P., & Alzate, Óscar E. T. (2023). Concepções de ensino sobre a natureza da ciência: obstáculos epistemológicos que aparecem entre os professores de ciências. Revista Internacional de Pesquisa em Didática das Ciências e Matemática, 4, e023004. https://periodicoscientificos.itp.ifsp.edu.br/index.php/revin/article/view/872
Aikenhead, G., & Ryan, A. (1992). The development of a new instrument: “Views on Science-Technology-Society” (VOSTS). Science Education, 76(5), 477–491. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730760503
Akerson, V., Cullen, T., & Hanson, D. (2010). Experienced teachers’ strategies for assessing Nature of Science conceptions in the elementary classroom. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21, 723–745. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-010-9208-x
Allchin, D. (2011). Evaluating knowledge of the nature of (whole) science. Science Education, 95(3), 518-542. (224 citas). https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20432
Allchin, D. (2017). Beyond the Consensus View: Whole Science, Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 17(1), 18-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2016.1271921
Amador-Rodríguez, R., & Adúriz-Bravo, A. (2017). Concepciones emergentes de la naturaleza de la ciencia (NOS) para la didáctica de las ciencias. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, (Núm. Extra.), 3499–3504. https://raco.cat/index.php/Ensenanza/article/view/337111/427980
Amaya-Martínez, F. A., Ayala-Villamil, L.-A., & García-Martínez, Álvaro. (2024). Propuesta metodológica para la enseñanza de la tentatividad del conocimiento científico en estudiantes de educación media. Tecné, Episteme y Didaxis: TED, (55), 734–737. https://revistas.upn.edu.co/index.php/TED/article/view/21064
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1990). Science for all Americans. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. https://url-shortener.me/6SBC
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. Oxford University Press.
Ayala-Villamil, L-A. (2019). Unidad didáctica para la enseñanza explícita de un aspecto de la naturaleza de la ciencia. Latin American Journal of Science Education, 6(1), 12002. http://www.lajse.org/may19/2019_12002.pdf
Ayala-Villamil, L-A. (2020). Conceptualización de naturaleza de la ciencia: el desarrollo de dos enfoques: Conceptualization of nature of science: the development of two approaches. Noria Investigación Educativa, 2(6), 105-128. https://doi.org/10.14483/25905791.16653
Ayala-Villamil, L-A., & García-Martínez, A. (2021). VNOS: A historical review of an instrument on the nature of science. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 17(2), e2238. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/9340
Bartos, S., & Lederman, N. (2014). Teachers’ knowledge structures for Nature of Science and Scientific Inquiry: Conceptions and classroom practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(9), 1150–1184. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21168
Cofré, H., Vergara, C., Lederman, N. G., Lederman, J. S., Santibáñez, D., Jiménez, J., & Yancovic, M. (2014). Improving Chilean In-service Elementary Teachers’ Understanding of Nature of Science Using Self-contained NOS and Content-Embedded Mini-Courses. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(7), 759-783. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-014-9399-7
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (Sixth ed.). Taylor & Francis Group. https://url-shortener.me/6SB2
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones (NRC) (1996). Estándares nacionales de educación científica, Washington, DC, Nacional Academy Press.
Dagher, Z. R., & Erduran, S. (2016). Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education. Science & Education, 25(1), 147-164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-015-9800-8
Dagher, Z. R., & Erduran, S. (2017). Abandoning Patchwork Approaches to Nature of Science in Science Education. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 17(1), 46–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2016.1271923
Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science by Rosalind Driver John Learch Robin Millar and. Open University Press. https://url-shortener.me/6SBE
Erduran, S., & Dagher, Z. (2014). Reconceptualizing education science for science the Nature of Scientific knowledge, practices and other family categories. Indian Journal of Cancer, 43. Springer. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019- 509X.138304
García-Martínez, A., & Pinilla, J. (2007). Colegios públicos de excelencia para Bogotá. Orientaciones curriculares para el campo de Ciencia y Tecnología. Grupo de Investigación en educación en Ciencias Experimentales-GREECE, Ed: Alcaldía Mayor de Bogotá DC, Secretaria de Educación Bogotá-Colombia. https://repositoriosed.educacionbogota.edu.co/bitstream/handle/001/885/Campo%20pens%20cien%20y%20tecn.pdf
Gómez, L. (2010). Un espacio para la investigación documental. Revista Vanguardia psicológica clínica teórica y práctica, 1(2), 226-233. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=4815129
Hodson, D., & Wong, S. (2014). From the horse’s mouth: Why scientists’ views are crucial to nature of science understanding. International Journal of Science Education, 36(16), 2639–2665. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.927936
Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2011). A Family Resemblance Approach to the Nature of Science for science education. Science & Education, 20(7–8), 591–607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-010-9293-4
Irzik, G., & Nola, R. (2014). New directions for Nature of Science research. In M. Matthews (Ed.), International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching (pp. 999–1021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7654-8_30
Izquierdo-Aymerich, M., & Adúriz-Bravo, A. (2003). Epistemological foundations of school science. Science & Education, 12, 27-43. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022698205904
Izquierdo-Aymerich, M., García-Martínez, Á., Quintanilla, M., & Adúriz-Bravo, A. (2016). Historia, Filosofía y Didáctica de las Ciencias: Aportes para la formación del profesorado de ciencias. Bogotá, Colombia: Editorial Universidad Distrital. https://doi.org/10.14483/9789588972282
Kampourakis, K. (2016). The “General Aspects” conceptualization as a pragmatic and effective means to introducing students to nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(5), 667–682. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21305
Lederman, N., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R., & Schwartz, R. (2002). Views of Nature of Science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of Nature of Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497–521. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10034
Lederman, N. (2007). Nature of Science: Past, present, and future. In S. Abell, & N. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education (pp. 831– 880). https://scispace.com/pdf/handbook-of-research-on-science-education-4ne3ar0sel.pdf
Lederman, N., Bartos, S., & Lederman, J. (2014). The development, use, and interpretation of Nature of Science assessments. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching (971–997). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7654-8_29
Lewthwaite, B., Murray, J., & Hechter, R. (2012). Revising teacher candidates’ views of science and self: ¿Can accounts from the history of science help? International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 7(3), 379–407. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ990525.pdf
Matthews, M. (1994). Historia, filosofía y enseñanza de las ciencias: La aproximación actual. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 12(2), 255–277. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/ensciencias.4447
Matthews, M. (2012). Changing the focus: From nature of science (NOS) to features of science (FOS). In Advances in nature of science research (pp. 3-26). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2457-0_1
Matthews, M. (2015). Science teaching: The contribution of history and philosophy of science (20th Anniversary Revised and Expanded Edition). Taylor & Francis. https://ipa-pasca.unpak.ac.id/pdf/bahan_ajar/2024/Science%20Teaching.pdf
McComas, W., & Olson, J. (1998). The Nature of Science in international science education. In W. McComas (Ed.), The Nature of Science in Science Education: Rationales and Strategies (pp. 41–52). Kluwer Academic Publisher. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47215-5
McComas W. (2008) Seeking historical examples to illustrate key aspects of the nature of science. Science & Education, 17(2-3), 249-263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-007-9081-y
Meinardi, E., Adúriz-Bravo, A., Morales, L., & Bonan, L. (2002). El modelo de Ciencia Escolar. Una propuesta de la didáctica de las ciencias naturales para articular la normativa educacional y la realidad del aula. Revista de Enseñanza de la Física, 15(1), 13-22. https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/revistaEF/article/view/15875/15681
Ministry of Education and Higher Education (MoEHE). (1998). General outline for science curriculum (in Arabic). Ramallah: Curriculum Development Center.
Osborne, J., Collins, S., Ratcliffe, M., Millar, R., & Duschl, R. (2003). What “ideas-about-science” should be taught in school science? A delphi study of the expert community. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(7), 692–720. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10105
Roberts, D.A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S.K. Abell y N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 729–780). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203097267
Ryan, A., & Aikenhead, G. (1992). Students’ preconceptions about the epistemology of science. Science Education, 76, 559–580. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730760602
Tancara, C. (1993). La investigación documental. Temas sociales, (17), 91-106. http://www.scielo.org.bo/pdf/rts/n17/n17a08.pdf
Vázquez-Alonso, Á., & Manassero-Mas, M. (2017a). An alternative conceptualization of the Nature of Science for science and technology education. Conexão Ci, 12(2), 18–24. https://revistas.uniformg.edu.br/conexaociencia/article/view/804/911
Vázquez-Alonso, Á., & Manassero-Mas, M. (2017b). Una conceptualización de la Naturaleza de la Ciencia y la Tecnología para reducir la brecha entre investigación y enseñanza de las ciencias. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, (Num. Extra.), 3851–3858. https://raco.cat/index.php/Ensenanza/article/view/337518
Wong, S., & Hodson, D. (2009). From the horse’s mouth: What scientists say about scientific investigation and scientific knowledge. Science Education, 93(1), 109–130. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20290
Wong, S., & Hodson, D. (2010). More from the horse’s mouth: What scientists say about science as a social practice. International Journal of Science Education, 32(11), 1431 – 1463. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903104465
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Fabio Andrés Amaya-Martínez, Luis-Alfonso Ayala-Villamil, Álvaro García-Martínez
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
IENCI is an Open Access journal, which does not have to pay any charges either for the submission or processing of articles. The journal has adopted the definition of the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI), which states that the users have the right to read, write down, copy, distribute, print, conduct searches and make direct links with the complete texts of the published articles.
The author responsible for the submission represents all the authors of the work and when the article is sent to the journal, guarantees that he has the permission of his/her co-authors to do so. In the same way, he/she provides an assurance that the article does not infringe authors´ rights and that there are no signs of plagiarism in the work. The journal is not responsible for any opinions that are expressed.
All the articles are published with a Creative Commons License Attribution Non-commercial 4.0 International. The authors hold the copyright of their works and must be contacted directly if there is any commercial interest in the use of their works.
