Children's Teleological Intuitions: What Kind of Explanations Do 7-8 Year Olds Give for the Features of Organisms, Artifacts and Natural Objects?

Research in Science Education

Volumn 42, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 651-671

  Kampourakis, Kostas ^a   Pavlidi, Vasiliki ^a   Papadopoulou, Maria ^a   Palaiokrassa, Eirini ^a  

^a Geitonas School   (Greece)

Author keywords

Artifacts; Elementary students; Evolution education; Natural objects; Organisms; Teleology

Indexed keywords

EID: 84863112135     PISSN: 0157244X     EISSN: 15731898     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11165-011-9219-4     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Ariew, A. (2003). Ernst Mayr's 'Ultimate/Proximate' distinction reconsidered and reconstructed. Biology and Philosophy, 18, 553-565.
2. Ariew, A. (2007). Teleology. In D. Hull & M. Ruse (Eds.), Cambridge companion to the philosophy of biology (pp. 160-181). Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
3. Avise, J. C. (2010). Inside the human genome: A case for non-intelligent design. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4. Bloom, P., & Weisberg, D. S. (2007). Childhood origins of adult resistance to science. Science, 316, 996-997.
5. Branch, G., & Scott, E. C. (2009). The latest face of Creationism. Scientific American, 300(1), 92-99.
6. Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual change in childhood. Cambridge: MIT Press.
7. Carey, S. (2000). Science education as conceptual change. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 21, 13-19.
8. Curry, A. (2009). Creationist beliefs persist in Europe. Science, 323, 1159.
9. DiYanni, C., & Kelemen, D. (2005). Time to get a new mountain? The role of function in children's conceptions of natural kinds. Cognition, 97, 325-335.
10. Elder, C. L. (2007). On the place of artifacts in ontology. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence (Eds.), Creations of the mind: Theories of artifacts and their representation (pp. 33-51). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11. Evans, E. M. (2008). Conceptual change and evolutionary biology: A developmental analysis. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 263-294). New York: Routledge.
12. Graebsch, A., & Schiermeier, Q. (2006). Anti-evolutionists raise their profile in Europe. Nature, 444, 406-407.
13. Greif, M., Kemler-Nelson, D., Keil, F. C., & Guiterrez, F. (2006). What do children want to know about animals and artifacts?: Domain-specific requests for information. Psychological Science, 17(6), 455-459.
14. Hubbard, R. S., & Power, B. M. (2003). The art of classroom inquiry. A handbook for teachers-researchers. Portsmouth: Heinmann.
15. Kampourakis, K., & Zogza, V. (2008). Students' intuitive explanations of the causes of homologies and adaptations. Science & Education, 17(1), 27-47.
16. Kampourakis, K., & Zogza, V. (2009). Preliminary evolutionary explanations: a basic framework for conceptual change and explanatory coherence in evolution. Science & Education, 18(10), 1313-1340.
17. Keil, F. C. (1989). Concepts, kinds and cognitive development. Cambridge: MIT Press.
18. Keil, F. C. (1992). The origins of an autonomous biology. In M. R. Gunnar & M. Maratsos (Eds.), Modularity and constraints in language and cognition. Minnesota Symposium on Child Psychology (Vol. 25) (pp. 103-138). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
19. Keil, F. C. (1994). The birth and nurturance concepts by domains: The origins of concepts of living things. In L. A. Hirschfeld & S. Gelman (Eds.), Mapping the mind: Domain specificity in cognition and culture (pp. 234-254). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20. Keil, F. C. (1995). The growth of causal understanding of natural kinds. In D. Sperber, D. Premack, & A. J. Premack (Eds.), Causal cognition: A multi-disciplinary debate (pp. 234-262). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
21. Kelemen, D. (1999a). Function, goals and intention: children's teleological reasoning about objects. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3(12), 461-468.
22. Kelemen, D. (1999b). The scope of teleological thinking in preschool children. Cognition, 70, 241-272.
23. Kelemen, D. (1999c). Why are rocks pointy?: children's preference for teleological explanations of the natural world. Developmental Psychology, 35, 1440-1452.
24. Lennox, J. G. (1992). Teleology. In E. F. Keller & E. A. Lloyd (Eds.), Keywords in evolutionary biology (pp. 324-333). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
25. Lewens, T. (2004). Organisms and artifacts: Design in nature and elsewhere. Cambridge: MIT Press.
26. Mayr, E. (1961). Cause and effect in biology. Science, 134, 1501-1506.
27. Meijer, P. C., Korthagen, F. A. J., & Vasalos, A. (2009). Supporting presence in teacher education: the connection between the personal and professional aspects of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(2), 297-308.
28. Miller, J. D., Scott, E. C., & Okamoto, S. (2006). Public acceptance of evolution. Science, 313(5788), 765-766.
29. Numbers, R. (2009). That Creationism is a uniquely American phenomenon. In R. Numbers (Ed.), Galileo goes to jail, and other myths about science and religion (pp. 215-223). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
30. 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, 211-227.
31. Smith, M. U. (2010). Current status of research in teaching and learning evolution: II. pedagogical issues. Science & Education, 19(6-8), 539-571.
32. Sommers, T., & Rosenberg, A. (2003). Darwin's nihilistic idea: evolution and the meaninglessness of life. Biology and Philosophy, 18, 653-668.
33. Southerland, S. A., Abrams, E., Cummins, C. L., & Anselmo, J. (2001). Understanding. students' explanations of biological phenomena: conceptual frameworks or p-prims? Science Education, 85, 328-348.
34. Walsh, D. (2008). Teleology. In M. Ruse (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Biology (pp. 113-137). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
35. Williams, G. C. (2001/1996). Plan and purpose in nature: The limits of Darwinian evolution. London: Phoenix.