A conceptual overview of the role of beauty and aesthetics in science and science education

Studies in Science Education

Volumn 43, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 38-61

  Girod, Mark ^a  

^a WESTERN OREGON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85012531582     PISSN: 03057267     EISSN: 19408412     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03057260708560226     Document Type: Note

References (88)

1. BAD ASH, L. (1987). Ernest Rutherford and theoretical physics. In R. Kargon and P. Achinstein (Eds.), Kelvin's Baltimore lectures and modern theoretical physics: historical and philosophical perspectives, (pp. 349-373). Cambridge: MIT Press.
2. BEARDSLEY, M.C. (1967). The history of aesthetics. In P. Edwards (Ed.), The encyclopedia of philosophy. Volume 1 (pp. 18-35). New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
3. BURKE, E. (1990). A philosophical enquiry into the origin of our ideas of the sublime and beautiful. New York: Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1757)
4. CAVANAUGH, S. (2005, April). Sublime science: Dewey, the sublime, andscience education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Quebec.
5. CHAMBERLAIN, A. (1987). At the Exploratorium: teaching art and science. Educational Perspectives, 24(2), 11-16.
6. CHANDRASEKHAR, S. (1987). Truth and beauty: aesthetics and motivations in science. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
7. COLE, K.C. (1998). The universe and the teacup: the mathematics of truth and beauty. New York: Harcourt Brace.
8. COLE, K.C. (1999). First you build a cloud and other reflections on physics as a way of life. San Diego: Harcourt Brace.
9. COLE, M. (1996). Cultural psychology: a once and future discipline. Cambridge: MA: Harvard.
10. CRAIG, R. & KRAVETZ, R. (1993). Science or aesthetics: a journey through chemistry class. Clearing House, 66(6), 363-365.
11. CRANE, V., NICHOLSON, H., CHEN, M. & BITGOOD, S. (Eds.) (1994). Informal science learning: what the research says about television, science museums, and community-based projects. Dedham, MA: Research Communications.
12. DAWKINS, R. (1994). The blind watchmaker. New York: W.W. Norton.
13. DAWKINS, R. (1998). Unweaving the rainbow: science, delusion, and the appetite for wonder. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
14. DEWEY, J. (1986). How we think: a restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. In J.A. Boydston (Ed.), John Dewey: The later works, 1925-1953 (Vol. 8, pp.105-352). Carbondale: Southern University Press. (Original work published 1933.)
15. DEWEY, J. (1934/1980). Art as experience. New York: Berkley.
16. DIRAC, P.A.M. (1963). The evolution of the physicist's picture of nature. Scientific American, 208(5), 45-53.
17. DIRAC, P.A.M. (1980). Why we believe in the Einstein theory. In B. Gruber and R.S. Millman (Eds.), Symmetries in science (pp.1-11). New York: Plenum Press.
18. FALK, J.H. (Ed.) (2001). Free-choice science education: how we learn science outside of school. New York: Teachers College Press.
19. FALK, J.H., MARTIN, W.W. & BALLING, J.D. (1978). The novel field-trip phenomenon: adjustment to novel settings interferes with task learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 15, 127-134.
20. FESMIRE, S.A. (1995). Educating the moral artist: dramatic rehearsal in moral education. In J. Garrison (Ed.), The new scholarship on Dewey (pp.45-60). Boston: Kluwer.
21. FISCHER, E.R (1995). Aristoteles, Einstein & Co. Munich: Piper Verlag.
22. FISCHER, E.P. (1999). Beauty and the beast: The aesthetic moment in science. Translated by E. Oehlkers, New York: Plenum Publishing Corporation.
23. FLANNERY, M. (1991). Science and aesthetics: a partnership for science education. Science Education, 75, 577-593.
24. FLANNERY, M. (1993). Teaching about the aesthetics of biology: a case study on rhythm. Interchange, 24(1-2), 5-18.
25. FLANNERY, M. (1998). How to see it. American Biology Teacher, 60, 619-623.
26. FLANNERY, M. (2003). Looking at things differently. American Biology Teacher, 65, 298-303.
27. GARRISON, J. (Ed.) (1995). The new scholarship on Dewey. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
28. GARRISON, J. (1997). Dewey and Eros: wisdom and desire in the art of teaching. New York: Teachers College Press.
29. GIROD, M. (2001a). Nobody likes soap in their eyes: portraying a more inviting science by teaching for aesthetic understanding. CESI (Council for Elementary Science International) Science, 34(2), 20-24.
30. GIROD, M. (2001b). Teaching fourth grade science for aesthetic understanding. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.
31. GIROD, M. & WONG, D. (2002). An aesthetic (Deweyan) perspective on science learning: case studies of three fourth graders. Elementary School Journal, 102, 199-224.
32. GIROD, M., RAU, C. & SCHEPIGE, A. (2003). Appreciating the beauty of science ideas: teaching for aesthetic understanding. Science Education, 87, 574-587.
33. GIROD, M., PARDALES, M. & CAVANAUGH, S. & WONG, D. (2003). Leveling the playing field: teaching and learning science for aesthetic understanding. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Chicago, IL, April 2003.
34. GOODEN, K. (2005). Biome is where the art is. Science and Children, 43(1), 28-32.
35. GREENE, M. (1981). Aesthetic literacy in general education. In J.F. Soltis (Ed.), 'Philosophy and education: Eightieth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (pp.115- 141). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
36. GREENE, M. (1995). Releasing the imagination: essays on education, the arts, and social change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
37. HEISENBERG, E. (1984). Inner exile. Translated by S. Cappellari, and C. Morris. Boston: Birkhauser.
38. HEISENBERG, W. (1971). Physics and beyond: encounters and conversations. New York: Harper and Row.
39. HOFFMAN, R. (1987). Plainly speaking. American Scientist, 75, 418-420.
40. HOFFMAN, R. (1988a). Molecular beauty. American Scientist, 76, 389-391.
41. HOFFMAN, R. (1988b). Molecular beauty II: Frogs about to be kissed. American Scientist, 76, 604-605.
42. HOFFMAN, R. (1989). Molecular beauty III: as rich as need be. American Scientist, 77, 177-178.
43. HOLTON, G. (1973). Thematic origins of scientific thought. Kepler to Einstein. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
44. HUNSINGER, P. (1973, April). Science without aesthetics. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the International Communication Association., Montreal.
45. HUTCHESON, F. (1973). An inquiry concerning beauty, order, harmony, design. In P. Kivy (Ed.), International archives of the history of ideas, series minor 9, p. 34 (I, lx). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. (Original work published in 1725.)
46. HUXLEY, A. (1991). Literature and science. New York: Oxbow Press.
47. JACKSON, P. (1995). If we took Dewey's aesthetics seriously, how would the arts be taught? In J. Garrison (Ed.), The new scholarship on Dewey (pp.25-34). Boston: Kluwer.
48. JACKSON, P. (1998). John Dewey and the lessons of art. New Haven: Yale University Press.
49. JOHNSON, M. (1990). The body in the mind: the bodily basis of memory, imagination, and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
50. JOHNSTON, J.S. (2002). John Dewey and the role of scientific method in aesthetic experience. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 21, 1-15.
51. JUNG, C., GERHARD, A., & READ, H. (Eds.) (1968). Civilization in transition: Collected works of C.G. Jung, Volume 10. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
52. KOERTGE, N. (Ed.) (1998). A house built on sand: exposing postmodernist myths about science. New York: Oxford.
53. LATOUR, B. (1999). Pandora's hope: essays on the reality of science studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard.
54. LEDERMAN, N., ABD-EL-KHALICK, F., BELL, R. & SCHWARTZ, R. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire (VNOS): toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners' conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 497-521.
55. LEMKE, J.L. (2001). Articulating communities: sociocultural perspectives on science education. Journal of Research in Science Education, 38, 296-316.
56. LEMLEY, B. (1999). Do you see what they see? Discover, 20(12), 80-87.
57. MCALLISTER, J.W. (1996). Beauty and revolution in science. New York, Cornell University Press.
58. ODIN, S. (1986). Blossom scents take up the ringing: Synaesthesia in Japanese and Western aesthetics. Soundings, 69(3), 256-281.
59. OPPENHEIMER, F. (1979). Aesthetics and the 'right answer.' Humanist, 39(2), 18-21.
60. ORTONY, A. (Ed.). (1979). Metaphors and thought. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
61. OSBORNE, H. (1964). Notes on the aesthetics of chess and the concept of intellectual beauty. British Journal of Aesthetics, 4, 160-163.
62. NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCE (1995). National science education standards. Retrieved: August 13, 2004 from http://books.nap.edu/html/nses/html/action.html
63. NESPOR, J. (2000). School field trips and the curriculum of public spaces. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32, 25-43.
64. PRAWAT, R. (1993). The value of ideas: problems versus possibilities in learning. Educational Researcher, 22, 5-16.
65. PRAWAT, R. (1999). Dewey, Peirce, and the learning paradox. American Educational Research Journal, 36(1), 47-76.
66. PUGH, K.J. (2002). Teaching for idea-based, transformative experiences in science: an investigation of the effectiveness of two instructional elements. Teachers College Record, 104, 1101-1137.
67. PUGH, K.J. (2004). Newton's laws beyond the classroom walls. Science and Education, 88, 182-96.
68. PUGH, K.J. BERGIN, D.A. (2005). The effect of schooling on students' out-of-school experience. Educational Researcher 34(9), 15-23.
69. PUGH, K.J. & GIROD, M. (in press). Science, art and experience: Constructing a science pedagogy from Dewey's aesthetics. Journal of Science Teacher Education.
70. RAMEY-GASSERT, L. (1997). Learning science beyond the classroom. Elementary School Journal, 97, 433-450.
71. RESNICK, M., BERG, R., & EISENBERG, M. (2000). Beyond black boxes: bringing transparency and aesthetics back to scientific investigation. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(1), 7-30.
72. ROMMEL-ESHAM, K. (2005). Do you see what I see? Science and Children, 43(1), 40-43.
73. ROOT-BERNSTEIN, R. (1989). Discovering. Inventing and solving problems at the frontiers of science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
74. ROOT-BERNSTEIN, R. (1997). The sciences and arts share a common creative aesthetic. In A.I. Tauber (Ed.), The elusive synthesis: Aesthetics and science (pp.49-82). Norwell, MA: Kluwer.
75. SANTAYANA, G. (1955). The sense of beauty: being the outline of aesthetic theory. New York: Dover Publications. (Original work published 1896.)
76. SHUSTERMAN, R. (1992). Pragmatist aesthetics: living beauty, rethinking art. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
77. SMITH, J. & GIROD, M. (2003). The power of 'psychologizing the subjects': Big ideas, teachers, and teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, 295-307.
78. SNOW, C.P. (Ed.). (1959). The two cultures and the scientific revolution. New York: Cambridge University Press.
79. STELLFLUE, P., ALLEN, M. & GERBER, T. (2005). Art and science grow together. Science and Children, 43(1), 33-35.
80. SULLIVAN, A.M. (2000). Notes from a marine biologist's daughter: On the art and science of attention. Voices inside schools. Harvard Educational Review, 70(2), 211-227.
81. TAUBER, A.I. (Ed.) (1997). The elusive synthesis: aesthetics and science. Norwell, MA: Kluwer.
82. WEINBERG, S. (1987). Towards the final laws of physics. In Feynman R.P. and Weinberg, S. (Eds.), Elementary particles and the laws of physics: The 1986 Dirac memorial lectures (pp.61-110). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
83. WONG, E.D. (1993). Understanding the generative capacity of analogies as a tool for explanation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 1259-1272.
84. WONG, E.D. (2007). Beyond control and rationality: Dewey, aesthetics, motivation, and educative experiences. Teachers College Record, 109(1), 192-220.
85. WONG, E.D., PUGH, K. J., & THE DEWEY IDEAS GROUP AT MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY (2001). Learning science: a Deweyan perspective. Journal of Research on Science Teaching, 38, 317-336.
86. ZEMBYLAS, M. (1998, April). Epistemological and affective dimensions of elementary science teachers' work. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. San Diego, CA.
87. ZEMBYLAS, M. (2002). Constructing genealogies of teachers' emotions in science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 79-103.
88. ZEMBYLAS, M. (2005). Three perspectives on linking the cognitive and the emotional in science learning: Conceptual change, socio-constructivism, and poststructuralism. Studies in Science Education, 41, 91-115.