Teaching Science andepistemicpractices: teachers’ roleandstudents’ engagement
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22600/1518-8795.ienci2016v21n2p52Keywords:
Science education, epistemicpractices, teachers’ role, engagementAbstract
In this paper, we explore ideas about science education. Our considerations begin to describe and analyze some aspects of science and schools, and advocate importance of science education occurs through the development of epistemic practices for addressing concepts, laws, models and scientific theories. Therefore, weemphasizetheimportanceofteacherpromptdiscursiveinteractionsthatcanproduceengagementamongstudents. In order to sustain our point of view, we analyze teaching situations occurred in Elementary School science classes. Our results show teacher and students participating in discussions, proposing ideas, communicating understanding, evaluating proposals and legitimizing knowledge; in that case, we found evidences of students’engagement. This allows us to affirm that rich discursive interactions on topics of science can also develop opportunities for the emergence of epistemic practices among students and teacher.In thispaper, we explore ideasaboutscienceeducation. Ourconsiderationsbegintodescribeandanalyze some aspectsofscienceandschools, andadvocateimportanceofscienceeducationoccursthroughthedevelopmentofepistemicpractices for addressingconcepts, laws, modelsandscientifictheories. Therefore, weemphasizetheimportanceofteacherpromptdiscursiveinteractionsthatcanproduceengagementamongstudents. In ordertosustainour point ofview, weanalyzeteachingsituationsoccurred in ElementarySchoolscience classes. Ourresults show teacherandstudentsparticipatingin discussions, proposingideas, communicatingunderstanding, evaluatingproposalsandlegitimizingknowledge; in that case, wefoundevidencesofstudents’engagement. Thisallowsustoaffirmthatrichdiscursiveinteractionsontopicsofsciencecanalsodevelopopportunities for theemergenceofepistemicpracticesamongstudentsandteacher.References
Berland, L.K., & Hammer, D. (2012). Framing for Scientific Argumentation, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(1), 68–94.
Brasil (1996). Lei No. 9394/96, Lei de Diretrizes e Bases da Educação Nacional.
Bybee, R. W., & DeBoer, G. E. (1994). Research on Goals for the Science Curriculum, In Gabel, D. L. (ed.), Handbook of Research in Science Teaching and Learning. (pp. 357-387). New York, NY: McMillan.
Carvalho, A. M. P. (2006). Las prácticas experimentales en el proceso de enculturación científica. In Quintanilla, M., & Adúriz-Bravo, A. (Orgs.), Enseñar ciencias en el nuevo milenio: retos y propuestas. v.1 (pp. 73-90). Santiago, Chile: Ediciones Universidad Católica do Chile.
Carvalho, A. M. P. (2013) Ensino de Ciências e a proposição de sequências de ensino investigativas. In Carvalho, A. M. P. (Org.). Ensino de Ciências por Investigação: condições para implementação em sala de aula. (pp. 1-20). São Paulo, SP: Cengage Learning.
Carvalho, A. M. P. (2011). Ensino e aprendizagem de Ciências: referenciais teóricos e dados empíricos das sequências de ensino investigativas (SEI). In Longhini, M. D. (Org.), O Uno e o Diverso na Educação (pp. 253-266). Uberlândia, MG: EDUFU.
Chervel, A. (1990). História das disciplinas escolares: reflexões sobre um campo de pesquisa. Teoria & Educação, (2),177-229.
De Chiaro, S. & Leitão, S. (2005). O papel do professor na construção discursiva da argumentação em sala de aula. Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 18(3), 350-357.
Duschl, R. A. (2008). Science education in three-part harmony: balancing conceptual, epistemic and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 268-291.
Eagleton, T. (2005). A ideia de cultura. São Paulo, SP: Editora UNESP.
Eliot, T.S. (1988). Notas para uma definição de cultura. São Paulo, SP: Editora Perspectiva.
Engle, R. & Conant, F. (2002). Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 20(4), 399-483.
Fourez, G. (2003). Crise no Ensino de Ciências? Investigações em Ensino de Ciências, 8(2),109-123.
Fourez, G. (1994). Alphabétisation Scientifique et Technique – Essai sur les finalités de l’enseignement des sciences. Bruxelas, Bélgica: DeBoeck-Wesmael.
Freire, P. (1967). Educação como prática da liberdade. Rio de Janeiro, RJ: Paz e Terra.
Hurd, P. D. (1998). Scientific Literacy: New Minds for a Changing World. Science Education, 82(3), 407-416.
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., Bugallo Rodríguez, A., & Duschl, R. A. (2000). “Doing the Lesson” or “Doing Science”: Argument in High School Genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757-792.
Julia, D. (2001). A cultura escolar como objeto histórico. Revista Brasileira de História da Educação, (1), 9-44.
Kelly, G.J. (2008). Inquiry, activity and epistemic practice. In Duschl, R.A., & Grandy, R. E. (eds.) Teaching Scientific Inquiry: recommendations for research and implementation. (pp. 288-291). Rotterdam, Holand: Taipei Sense Publishers.
Kelly, G.J. & Licona, P. (in press). Epistemic practices and science education, In Matthews, M. (Ed.), HPS&ST anthology.
Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kuhn, T.S. (1996). Estrutura das revoluções científicas. São Paulo, SP: Perspectiva.
Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1997). A Vida de Laborato?rio – A produc?a?o dos fatos cienti?ficos. Rio de Janeiro, RJ: Relume-Dalmara?.
Lidar, M., Lundqvist, E., & Östman, L. (2005). Teaching and learning in the Science classroom: The interplay between teachers’ epistemological moves and students’ practical epistemology. Science Education, 90(1),148-163.
Longino, H. E. (1990). Science as social knowledge: Values and objectivity in science inquiry. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Longino, H. E. (2002). The fate of knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Osborne, J. (2016). Defining a knowledge base for reasoning in Science: the role of procedural and epistemic knowledge. In Duschl, R. A., & Bismarck, A.S. (eds.) Reconceptualizing STEM Education: the central role of practice. New York, NY: Routledge.
Passmore, J. (1980). The philosophy of teaching. London, UK: Duckworth.
Sasseron, L. H. & Carvalho, A. M. P. (2011). Alfabetização Científica: uma revisão bibliográfica. Investigac?o?es em Ensino de Cie?ncias , 16(1), 59-77.
Silva, A.C.T. (2008). Estratégias enunciativas em salas de aula de química: contrastando professores de estilos diferentes. (Tese de doutorado, Faculdade de Educação, UFMG), Minas Gerais, BR.
Vinão Frago, A. (1995). Historia de la educación y historia cultural - Posibilidades, problemas, cuestiones, Revista Brasileira de Educação, (0), 63-82.
White, L. A. & Dillingham, B. (2009). O conceito de cultura. Rio de Janeiro, RJ: Contraponto.
Young, M. (2007). Para que servem as escolas? Educação e Sociedade, 28(101), 1287-1302.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
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.
