Browse > Article

Korean University Students' Philosophical Stances of Understanding Atomic Structure in terms of the Lakatosian View  

Seung, Eul-Sun (Guil High Schoo)
Bryan, Lynn A. (Purdue University)
Nam, Jeong-Hee (Pusan National University)
Publication Information
Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education / v.25, no.6, 2005 , pp. 678-688 More about this Journal
Abstract
The main objective of this study was to investigate Korean university students' understanding of the structure of the atom based on a Lakatosian view. In this study, we examined twenty-three Korean university students' understandings of atomic structure using an open-ended questionnaire. The participants were all junior students majoring in chemistry education in Korea. The characteristics of students' understanding were categorized into three philosophical stances based on the classification criteria. Assertions were constructed concerning students' written descriptions of the development of scientific knowledge with respect to atomic structure: (a) characteristics of positivist response; (b) characteristics of transitional response; (c) characteristics of Lakatosian response; and (d) tendencies in students' responses.
Keywords
Lakatosian view; Atomic structure;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Burbules, N.C., & Linn, M.C. (1991). Science education and philosophy of science: Congruence of contradiction? International Journal of Science Education, 13, 227-241   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Coxhead, P., & Whitfiel, R.C. (1975). Science understanding measure: Test manual. Birmingham: University of Aston
3 Driver, R. & Easley, J. (1978). Pupils and paradigms: a review of literature related to concept development in adolescent science students. Studies in Science Education, 10, 37-60   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Eichinger, D.C., Abell, S.K. & Dagher, Z.R.( 1997). Developing a Graduate Level Science Education Course on the Nature of Science. Science & Education, 6, 417-429   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Kitchener, R.F. (1987). Genetic epistemology, equilibration and the rationality of scientific change, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 18, 339-366   DOI
6 von Glasersfeld, E. (1989). Cognition, construction of knowledge, and teaching, Synthese, 80, 121-140   DOI
7 Hodson, D. (1993). Philosophic stance of secondary school science teachers, curriculum experiences, and children's understanding of science: some preliminary findings. Interchange, 24, 41-52   DOI
8 Lederman, N.G. & O'Malley, M. (1990). Students perceptions of tentativeness in science: development, use, and sources of change. Science Education, 74, 225-239   DOI
9 Kuhn, T.S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolution. (3rd ed). Chicago: University of Chicago Press
10 Duschl, R.A., & Gitomer, D.H. (1991). Epistemological perspectives on conceptual change: Implications for educational practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 839-858   DOI
11 Shulman, L.S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching, Educational researcher, 15, 4-14
12 Casti, J. L. (1989). Paradigms lost: Images of man in the mirror of science. New York, NY: Morrow
13 Gilbert, J.K., & Swift, D.J. (1985). Toward a Lakatosian analysis of the Piagetian and alternative conceptions research programs. Science Education, 69, 681-696   DOI
14 Justi, R., & Gilbert, J. (2000). History and philosophy of science through models: some challenges in the case of 'the atom'. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 993-1009   DOI
15 Niaz, M. (1998). A Lakatosian conceptual change teaching strategy based on student ability to build models with varying degrees of conceptual understanding of chemical equilibrium. Science & Education, 7, 107-127   DOI   ScienceOn
16 McComas, W.F., Clough, M.P. & Almazroa, H. (1998). The role and character of the nature of sCIence in science education. In McComas, W.F.(Eds.), The Nature of Science in Science Education: Rationales and Strategies(pp.3-36). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers
17 Lakatos, I. (1970). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 91-195). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
18 Rowell, J.A., & Cawthron, E.R. (1982). Images of science: An empirical study. European Journal of Science Education, 4, 79-94   DOI   ScienceOn
19 Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving science teachers' conceptions of the nature of science: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 665-701   DOI
20 National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academic Press
21 Lederman, N. G., & Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (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   DOI   ScienceOn
22 Solomon, J., Duveen, J., Scott, L., & McCarthy, S. (1992). Teaching about the nature of science through history: Action research in the classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 409-421   DOI
23 Achinstein, P. (1991). Particles and waves: Historical essays in the philosophy of science. New York: Oxford University Press
24 Posner, G., Strike, K., Hewson, P., & Gertzog, W. (1982). Accommodation of a Scientific Conception: Toward a Theory of Conceptual change. Science Education, 66, 211-227   DOI
25 Matkins, J.J., Bell, R., Irving, K. & McNall, R.(2002). Impacts of Contextual and Explicit Instruction on Preservice Elementary Teachers' Understandings of the Nature of Science, Paper presented at the Annual International Conference of the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science. Charlotte, NC, January 10-13, 2002
26 Niaz, M. (1993). Competing Research Programs in Science Education: A Lakatosian Interpretation. Interchange, 24, 181-190   DOI
27 Niaz, M. (1995). Progressive transitions from algorithmic to conceptual understanding in student ability to solve chemistry problems: A Lakatosian interpretation. Science Education, 79(1), 19-36   DOI   ScienceOn
28 Blanco, R. & Niaz, M. (1998). Baroque Tower on a Gothic Base: A Lakatosian Reconstruction of Students' and Teachers' Understanding of Structure of the Atom. Science and Education, 7, 327-360   DOI   ScienceOn
29 Niaz, M., Aguilera, D., Maza, A., & Liendo, G. (2002). Argumnts, contradictions, resistances, and conceptual change in students' understanding of atomic structure. Science Education, 86(4), 505-525   DOI   ScienceOn
30 Kang, S., Scharmann, L.C., & Noh, T. (2004). Examining students' views on the nature of science: Results from Korean 6th, 8th, and 10th graders. Science Education, 89, 314-334   DOI   ScienceOn
31 Lederman, N.G. (1992). Students and teachers' conceptions of the nature of science: a review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 331-359   DOI
32 Niaz, M. (1994). Enhancing thinking skills: Domain specific/domain general strategies-A dilemma for science education, Instructional Science, 22, 413-422   DOI