Thomas Kuhn's Impact on Science Education: What Lessons Can Be Learned?

Science Education

Volumn 88, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 90-118

  Matthews, Michael R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 2142697126     PISSN: 00368326     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sce.10111     Document Type: Review

References (143)

1. Abimbola, I. O. (1983). The relevance of the "new" philosophy of science for the science curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 83(3), 181-193.
2. Bachelard, G. (1934/1984). The new scientific spirit, Boston: Beacon Books.
3. Bachelard, G. (1940/1968). The philosophy of No, New York: Orion Press.
4. Bacon, F. (1620/1960). In F. H. Anderson (Ed.), The new organon and related writings. New York.
5. Baltas, A., Gavroglu, K., & Kindi, V. (1997). A discussion with Thomas S. Kuhn: A physicist who became a historian for philosophical purposes. Neusis, 6, 145-200.
6. Barnes, B. (1977). Interests and the growth of knowledge. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
7. Barnes, B. (1982). T. S. Kuhn and social science, London: Macmillan.
8. Benson, G. D. (1989). Epistemology and science curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 21(4), 329-344.
9. Bettencourt, A. (1993). The construction of knowledge: A radical constructivist view. In K. Tobin (Ed.), The practice of constructivism in science education (pp. 39-50). Washington, DC: AAAS Press.
10. Bird, A. (2000). Thomas Kuhn. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
11. Brante, T., Fuller, S., & Lynch, W. (Eds). (1993). Controversial science: From content to contention. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
12. Bruner, J. S., & Postman, L. (1949). On the perception of incongruity: A paradigm. Journal of Personality, 18, 206-223.
13. Brush, S. G. (2000). Thomas Kuhn as a historian of science. Science and Education, 9(1/2), 39-58.
14. Caneva, K. L. (2000). Possible Kuhns in the history of science: Amomalies of incommensurable paradigms. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science, 31(1), 87-124.
15. Carey, S. (1988). Conceptual differences between children and adults. Mind and Language, 3(3), 167-181.
16. Carey, S. (1992). The origin and evolution of everyday concepts. In R. N. Giere (Ed.), Cognitive models of science (pp. 89-128). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
17. Carnap, R. (1969). The logical structure of the world and pseudoproblems in philosophy. Berkeley: University of California Press.
18. Cawthron, E. R. & Rowell, J. A. (1978). Epistemology and science education. Studies in Science Education, 5, 31-59.
19. Collingwood, R. G. (1940). An essay on metaphysics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
20. Collingwood, R. G. (1945). The idea of nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21. Conant, J., & Haugeland, J. (2000). The road since structure: Thomas S. Kuhn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
22. Connelly, F. M. (1969). Philosophy of science and the science curriculum. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6, 108-113.
23. Crosson, F. J. (Ed.) (1967). Science and contemporary society. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
24. Davis, N. T. B., McCarty, J., Shaw, K. L., & Sidani-Tabbaa, A. (1993). Transitions from objectivism to constructivism in science education. International Journal of Science Educationi, 15, 627-636.
25. Driver, R., & Easley, J. (1978). Pupils and paradigms: A review of literature related to concept development in adolescent science students. Studies in Science Education, 5, 61-84.
26. Duschl, R. A. (1985). Science education and philosophy of science twenty-five years of mutually exclusive development. School Science and Mathematics, 87(7), 541-555.
27. Elkana, Y. (1970). Science, philosophy of science, and science teaching. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 2, 15-35.
28. Feyerabend, P. K. (1962). Explanation, reduction and empiricism. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 3, 28-97.
29. Feyerabend, P. K. (1970). Consolations for the specialist. In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge, (pp. 197-230). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
30. Feyerabend, P. K. (1975). Against method. London: New Left Books.
31. Feyerabend, P. K., & Maxwell, G. (Eds.). (1966). Mind, matter, and method: Essays in philosophy of science and science in honor of Herbert Feigl. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
32. Fleck, L. (1935/1979). In T. J. Trenn & R. K. Merton (Eds.), Genesis and development of a scientific fact. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
33. Friedman, M. (2002). Kant, Kuhn and the rationality of science. Philosophy of Science, 69(2), 171-190.
34. Galileo, G. (1633/1953). Dialogue concerning the two chief world systems (S. Drake, Trans.). Berkeley: University of California Press. (Second revised edition, 1967.)
35. Gauld, C. F. (1991). History of science, individual development and science teaching. Research in Science Education, 21, 133-140.
36. Glasersfeld, E. von (1989). Cognition, construction of knowledge and teaching. Synthese, 80(1), 121-140.
37. Gopnik, A. (1988). Conceptual and semantic development as theory change. Mind and Language, 3, 197-217.
38. Gopnik, A. (1996). The scientist as child, philosophy of Science, 63(4), 485-514.
39. Grosz, E. (1993). Bodies and knowledges: Feminism and the crisis of reason. In L. Alcoff & E. Potter (Eds.), Feminist epistemologies (pp. 187-215). London: Routledge.
40. Cuba, E. G., & Linclon, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
41. Guthrie, W. K. C. (Trans.). (1956). Plato: Protagoras and Meno. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, UK: Penguin Books.
42. Gutting, G. (Ed.). (1980). Paradigms and revolutions: Applications and appraisals of Thomas Kuhn's philosophy of science. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
43. Hacking, I. (Ed.). (1981). Scientific revolutions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
44. Hacking, I. (1992). "Style" for historians and philosophers. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 23(1), 1-20.
45. Hanson, N. R. (1958). Patterns of discovery. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
46. Hawkins, D. (1994). Constructivism: Some history. In P. Fensham, R. Gunstone, & R. White (Eds.), The content of science: A constructivist approach to its teaching and learning (pp. 9-13). London: Palmer Press.
47. Herron, M. D. (1969). Nature of science: Panacea or Pandora's Box? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6, 105-107.
48. Hewson, P. W. (1981). A conceptual change approach to learning science. European Journal of Science Education. 3(4), 383-396.
49. Hodson, D. (1988). Toward a philosophically more valid science curriculum. Science Education, 72, 19-40.
50. Hoodbhoy, P. (1991). Islam and science: Religious orthodoxy and the battle for rationality. London: Zed Books.
51. Horwich, P. (Ed.). (1993). World changes: Thomas Kuhn and the nature of science. Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books.
52. Hoyningen-Huene, P. (1993). Reconstructing scientific revolutions: Thomas S. Kuhn's philosophy of science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
53. Hoyningen-Huene, P., & Sankey, H. (Eds.) (2001). Incommensurability and related matters. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
54. Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1988). The child is a theoretician, not an inductivist. Mind and Language, 3(3)
55. Kitcher, P. (1982). Abusing science: The case against creationism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
56. Kitcher, P. (1988). The child as parent of the scientist. Mind and Language, 3(3), 217-228.
57. Kragh, H. (1998). Social constructivism, the gospel of science and the teaching of physics. Science and Education, 7(3), 231-243.
58. Kuhn, T. S. (1959). The Essential Tension: Tradition and Innovation in Scientific Research. The Third University of Utah Research Conference on the Identification of Scientific Talent, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. Reprinted in his The Essential Tension, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 225-239.
59. Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions (1st edn.). Chicago: Chicago University Press.
60. Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd edn.). Chicago: Chicago University Press.
61. Kuhn, T. S. (1977). The essential tension. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
62. Kuhn, T. S. (1986/2000). Possible worlds in the history of science and 'Speaker's reply. In J. Conant & J. Haugeland (Eds.), The road since structure: Thomas Kuhn (pp. 58-89). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
63. Kuhn, T. S. (1991). The road since Structure. In A. Fine, M. Forbes, & L. Wessels (Eds.), PSA 1990, (Vol. 2, pp. 3-13). East Lansing MI: Philosophy of Science Association. Also in J. Conant & J. Haugeland (Eds.), The Road Since Structure: Thomas S. Kuhn (pp. 90-104). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
64. Kuhn, T. S. (1991). The road since Structure. In A. Fine, M. Forbes, & L. Wessels (Eds.), PSA 1990, (Vol. 2, pp. 3-13). East Lansing MI: Philosophy of Science Association. Also in J. Conant & J. Haugeland (Eds.), The Road Since Structure: Thomas S. Kuhn (pp. 90-104). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
65. Kuhn, T. S. (1991/2000). The trouble with historical philosophy of science, The Robert and Maurine Rothschild Lecture, Department of History of Science, Harvard University. In J. Conant & J. Haugeland (Eds.), The road since structure: Thomas S. Kuhn (pp. 105-120). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
66. Kuhn, T. S. (1993). Afterwords. In P. Horwich (Ed.), World changes: Thomas Kuhn and the nature of science (pp. 311-341). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
67. Kuhn, T. S. (2000). On learning physics. Science and Education, 9(1/2), 11-19.
68. Lakatos, I. (1970). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 91-196). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
69. Lakatos, I. (1971). History of science and its Rational reconstructions. In R. C. Buck & R. S. Cohen (Eds.), Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science (Vol. 8, pp. 91-135). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Reidel.
70. Lakatos, I., & Musgrave, A. (Eds.). (1970). Criticism and the growth of knowledge. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
71. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts. London: Sage.
72. Levine, A. T. (2000). Which way is up? Thomas S. Kuhn's analogy to conceptual development in childhood. Science and Education, 9(1/2), 107-122.
73. Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
74. Locke, J. (1690/1924). An essay concerning human understanding (abridged and edited by A. S. Pringle-Pattison). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
75. Lorsbach, A., & Tobin, K. (1992). Constructivism as a referent for science teaching. NARST Newsletter, 30, 5-7.
76. Loving, C. C., & Cobern, W. A. (2000). Invoking Thomas Kuhn: What citation analysis reveals for science education, Science and Education, 9(1/2), 187-206.
77. Martin, M. (1972). Concepts of science education. New York: Scott, Foresman. (Reprint, University Press of America, 1985.)
78. Matthews, M. R. (1992a). Constructivism and the empiricist legacy. In M. K. Pearsall (Ed.), Scope, sequence and coordination of secondary school science: Relevant research (pp. 183-196). Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association.
79. Matthews, M. R. (1992b). Old wine in new bottles: A problem with constructivist epistemology. In H. Alexander (Ed.), Philosophy of education 1992, Proceedings of the forty-eighth annual meeting of the Philosophy of Education Society (pp. 303-311). Urbana, IL: Philosophy of Education Society.
80. Matthews, M. R. (1994). Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. New York: Routledge.
81. Matthews, M. R. (1997). James T. Robinson's account of philosophy of science and science teaching: Some lessons for today from the 1960s. Science Education, 81(3), 295-315.
82. Matthews, M. R. (Ed.). (1998). Constructivism and science education: A philosophical examination. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
83. Matthews, M. R. (2000a). Constructivism in science and mathematics education. In D. C. Phillips (Ed.), National Society for the Study of Education 99th Yearbook (pp. 161-192). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.
84. Matthews, M. R. (2000b). Time for science education: How teaching the history and philosophy of pendulum motion can contribute to science literacy. New York: Kluwer.
85. McMullin, E. (1970). The history and philosophy of science: A taxonomy. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 5, 12-67.
86. McMullin, E. (1975). History and philosophy of science: A marriage of convenience? Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 32, 515-531.
87. McMullin, E. (1993). Rationality and paradigm change in science. In P. Horwich (Ed.), World changes: Thomas Kuhn and the nature of science (pp. 55-78). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
88. Musgrave, A. (1980). Kuhn's second thoughts. In G. Gutting (Ed.), Paradigms and revolutions (pp. 39-53). Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press. (Originally published in 1971.)
89. Nanda, M. (1997). The science question in postcolonial feminism. In P. R. Gross, N. Levitt, & M. W. Lewis (Eds.), The flight from science and reason (pp. 420-436). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
90. Nanda, M. (1998). The epistemic charity of the social constructivist critics of science and why the Third World should refuse the offer. In N. Koertge (Ed.), A house built on sand: Exposing postmodernist myths about science (pp. 286-311). New York: Oxford University Press.
91. Nersessian, N. J. (1989). Conceptual change in science and in science education, Synthese, 80(1), 163-184. Also in M. R. Matthews (Ed.), History, philosophy and science teaching: Selected readings. Toronto: OISE Press.
92. Nersessian, N. J. (1989). Conceptual change in science and in science education, Synthese, 80(1), 163-184. Also in M. R. Matthews (Ed.), History, philosophy and science teaching: Selected readings. Toronto: OISE Press.
93. Nersessian, N. J. (2003). Kuhn, conceptual change and cognitive science. In T. Nickles (Ed.), Thomas Kuhn. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
94. Nickles, T. (Ed.) (2003). Thomas Kuhn. New York: Cambridge University Press.
95. Nola, R., & Sankey, H. (2000). A selective survey of theories of scientific method. In R. Nola & H. Sankey (Eds.), After Popper, Kuhn and Feyerabend (pp. 1-65). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
96. Novak, J. D. (1998). The pursuit of a dream: Education can be improved. In J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee, & J. D. Novak (Eds.), Teaching science for understanding: A human constructivist view (pp. 3-28). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
97. Nussbaum, J. (1983). Classroom conceptual change: The lesson to be learned from the history of science. In H. Helm & J. D. Novak (Eds.), Misconceptions in science and mathematics (pp. 272-281). Department of Education, Cornell University.
98. Oakeshott, M. (1962). Rationalism in politics. In M. Oakeshott (Ed.), Rationalism in politics. London: Methuen.
99. Pépin, Y. (1998). Practical knowledge and school Knowledge: A constructivist representation of education, In M. Larochelle, N. Bednarz, & J. Garrision (Eds.), Constructivism and education (pp. 173-192). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
100. Phillips, D. C. (Ed.). (2000). Constructivism in education. Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.
101. Piaget, J. (1970). Genetic epistemology. New York: Columbia University Press.
102. Piaget, J., & Garcia, R. (1989). Psychogenesis and the history of science. New York: Columbia University Press.
103. Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal knowledge. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
104. Popper, K. R. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchinson.
105. Popper, K. R. (1970). Normal science and its dangers. In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge (pp. 51-58). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
106. Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211-227.
107. Quine, W. V. O. (1951). Two dogmas of empiricism. Philosophical Review, 60, 20-43, Reprinted in 1953 in his From a logical point of view (pp. 20-46). New York: Harper & Row.
108. Quine, W. V. O. (1951). Two dogmas of empiricism. Philosophical Review, 60, 20-43, Reprinted in 1953 in his From a logical point of view (pp. 20-46). New York: Harper & Row.
109. Radcliffe-Richards, J. (1997). Why feminist epistemology isn't. In P. R. Gross, N. Levitt, & M. W. Lewis (Eds.), The flight from science and reason (pp. 385-412). New York: New York Academy of Sciences.
110. Robinson, J. T. (1968). The nature of science and science teaching. Belmont CA: Wadsworth.
111. Robinson, J. T. (1969). Philosophy of science: Implications for teacher education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6(1), 99-104.
112. Roth, M.-W., & Roychoudhury, A. (1994). Physics students' epistemologies and views about knowing and learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(1), 5-30.
113. Salmon, W. (1990). Rationality and objectivity in science, or Tom Bayes meets Tom Kuhn. In C. Wade Savage (Ed.), Scientific theories: Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science (Vol. XIV, pp. 175-204). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
114. Scheffler, I. (1966). Science and subjectivity (1st edn.), Indianapolis: Hackett. (2nd ed. 1982).
115. Schwab, J. J. (1960). The teaching of science as enquiry. In J. J. Schwab & P. Brandwein (Eds.), The teaching of science (pp. 1-103). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
116. Scott, E. C. (1997). Creationism, ideology and science'. In P. R. Gross, N. Levitt, & M. W. Lewis (Eds.), The flight from science and reason (pp. 505-525). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
117. Shapere, D. (1971). The paradigm concept. Science 172, 706-709. Reprinted in his Reason and the search for knowledge (1984, pp. 49-57). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Reidel.
118. Shapere, D. (1971). The paradigm concept. Science 172, 706-709. Reprinted in his Reason and the search for knowledge (1984, pp. 49-57). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Reidel.
119. Shapere, D. (1984). Reason and the search for knowledge. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Reidel.
120. Shimony, A. (1976). Comments on two epistemological theses of Thomas Kuhn. In R. S. Cohen et al. (Eds.), Essays in memory of Imre Lakatos (pp. 569-588). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Reidel.
121. Shimony, A. (1991). Some comments on rationality in science and in ethics. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), History, philosophy and science teaching: Selected readings (pp. 95-101). Toronto, Canada: OISE Press.
122. Siegel, H. (1979). On the distortion of the history of science in science education. Science Education, 63, 111-118.
123. Siegel, H. (1982). On the parallel between piagetian cognitive development and the history of science. Philosophy of Social Science, 12, 375-386.
124. Siegel, H. (1985). Relativism, rationality and science education. Journal of College Science Teaching, 15(2), 102-106.
125. Slezak, P. (1994a). Sociology of science and science education: Part I. Science and Education, 3(3), 265-294.
126. Slezak, P. (1994b). Sociology of science and science education: Part II. Science and Education, 3(4), 329-356.
127. Southerland, S. A., Sinatra, G. M., & Matthews, M. R. (2001). Belief, knowledge, and science education. Review of Educational Psychology, 13(4), 325-351.
128. Staver, J. (1998). Constructivism: Sound theory for explicating the practice of science and science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(5), 501-520.
129. Stegmüller, W. (1976). The structure and dynamics of theories. New York: Springer.
130. Stove, D. C. (1982). Popper and after: Four modern irrationalists. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
131. Strike, K. A., & Posner, G. J. (1992). A revisionist theory of conceptual change. In R. Duschl & R. Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of science, cognitive psychology, and educational theory and practice (pp. 147-176). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
132. Suchting, W. A. (1997). Reflections on Peter Slezak and the "sociology of scientific knowledge". Science and Education, 6(1/2), 151-195.
133. Suppe, F. (Ed.). (1977). The structure of scientific theories. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
134. Taylor, P. C. S. (1993). Collaborating to reconstruct teaching: The influence of researcher beliefs', In K. Tobin (Ed.), The practice of constructivism in science education (pp. 267-297). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
135. Thagard, P. (1992), Conceptual revolutions. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.
136. Tobin, K. (Ed.). (1993). The practice of constructivism in science and mathematics education. Washington DC: AAAS Press.
137. Toulmin, S. E. (1953). The philosophy of science: An introduction. London: Hutchinson.
138. Toulmin, S. E. (1970). Does the distinction between normal and revolutionary science hold water? In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 39-47). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
139. Toulmin, S. E. (1972), Human understanding. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
140. Tucker, R. C. (Ed.). (1978). The Marx-Engels reader. New York: Norton.
141. Wartofsky, M. W. (1976). The relation between philosophy of science and history of science. In R. S. Cohen, P. K. Feyerabend, & M. W. Wartofsky (Eds.), Essays in memory of Imre Lakatos (pp. 717-738). Dordrecht: Reidel, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 39. Republished in 1979 in his Models. Dordrecht: Reidel.
142. Watkins, J. W. N. (1970). Against "Normal Science". In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 25-38). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
143. Wolpert, L. (1992). The unnatural nature of science. London: Faber & Faber.