Keywords education reform science education science sociology science knowledge
Science cannot be divorced from society. Science education is not only to let students acquire knowledge, but more importantly, to acquire scientific methods, enhance scientific spirit and understand the social value of scientific knowledge. S.M.Nashon and others believe that the history of science, philosophy of science and sociology of science are necessary for the cultivation of science teachers and science teaching. Through the historical, social and political background, students can understand how knowledge developed, how it was established and how it was applied to solve public problems. Through this deeper understanding, students can experience the idea of establishing the essence of knowledge more widely and realistically. [1] Sociology of science should occupy a place in science education. However, at present, there is little concern about the relationship between sociology of science and science education in China, and it does not seem to be a hot issue in the field of science education abroad. Even the sociology of science itself, its development process is not smooth sailing.
We raise this question here because we believe that science education cannot ignore sociology of science, which has many functions in science education. At the same time, I hope to draw attention to this problem, and the content of sociology of science can also participate in the training and training of science teachers.
First of all, sociology of science is very important to everyone.
Regarding the position and role of the history of science in science education, Blache published an article in the journal Science of 1974, proposing that "the history of science should be positioned at the X level?" problem Therefore, D.Allchin, imitating Blache's practice, published "Should sociology of science be positioned at the X level?" in Science Education in 2004. Newspapers. In this paper, Aqin pointed out bluntly that sociology of science should be positioned at the "E" level: it is very important to everyone. After detailed explanation in many aspects, Archin proposed that teachers should clearly distinguish between standardized elements and descriptive elements in the nature of science, which was fully satisfied in science teaching. Contemporary understanding of the essential characteristics of science shows that scientific knowledge can make mistakes, and students should understand why and how scientists make mistakes. Science teachers need to adopt a new concept of the nature of science, which must include standardization and descriptive. How do scientists work? When do they work? Why do they sometimes split? What are the possible outcomes? How do we know them? How do scientists correct their mistakes? These problems are likely to be imitated in students' learning activities. 2. Every science course should include some social cases, which are based on the mistakes in science and how scientists later realized and overcame them. Aqin cited the case of C. Aikman, winner of the Nobel Prize in Medicine in 1929. How did he prove that beriberi was caused by the lack of a food factor, and thus put forward the concept of malnutrition, and thus found vitamin B 1. In this process, he constantly experienced a tortuous process from mistakes to success. Qin pointed out: "I don't think teaching science wrongly is just like teaching medicine without disease or teaching law without criminal activities." The result is divorced from reality. Scientific work is not idealized. In science, gender imbalance may lead to mistakes, deception, cultural values, theoretical bias and uneven data display. The same is true of students studying at school. We all need to learn from past mistakes. Scylla that disturbs scientific sociologists is naturally terrible. It must be suppressed and the cultural expectation of science will be lowered. If you don't understand this properly, you will misunderstand the ultimate goal of science. On the other hand, the relativistic Charybdis vortex that makes defenders of rational beliefs uneasy is equally unacceptable. In order to plan and deploy between the Scylla Reef of idealistic scientism and the Carides Vortex of doubtful relativism, and to avoid being caught between Scylla and Charybdis, we must adopt a dual view of scientific essence. 3 1 should sociology of science be positioned at the x level? Absolutely not, but it should not be located in the philosophy of science. The essence of science must include normative and descriptive elements, which should be clearly related and carefully distinguished. By combining the wrong reasons, we try to establish reliable knowledge and the principles of philosophy of science, and we use sociology of science to understand the real practice of science. [2] Collins (H.M.Collins) discussed in detail how scientists and science teachers apply sociology of science in his paper, and pointed out sharply and ironically: As we know, a contradictory proposition is that a myth is not a success in teaching science itself, and it is best not to think but simply to accept knowledge and develop skills, which has been greatly appreciated, just like. Fortunately, science teachers have learned to pretend to accept knowledge as self-discovery, which is a superb deception, and I don't think it will be abandoned too soon. [3]
The study of scientific knowledge should be linked with students' daily life and social practice. Scientific development has to go through wrong hardships, so students also need to go through wrong setbacks in science education in order to understand science. Simply instilling knowledge and giving reasons can't be fully accepted and truly understood by students. Science education should make students face real science and real practice. In the history of curriculum thought, Dewey had already put forward the socialization and living of subject knowledge, which laid a solid foundation for the establishment of the concept of "school discipline". In the Concept Reconstruction Movement, William F.Pinar believes that the teacher and his students in the classroom organically combine "subject knowledge" with subjectivity and sociality through "complex dialogue" and seek the subject meaning (self-realization) and social value (social democratization) of "subject knowledge" through interdisciplinary inquiry and critical thinking, which is education. This is "curriculum development after concept reconstruction". [4] Obviously, sociology of science is inseparable from science curriculum and science education.
Second, science is influenced by society.
Sometimes, in people's eyes, the research that scientists are engaged in seems to be far away from the hubbub, and scientists also seem to be free from human fireworks. For example, for some people of Galileo Galilee's contemporaries, what he and his successors are engaged in are meaningless pastimes, because they watch the ball roll down the inclined plane without paying attention to some really valuable problems, such as improving shipbuilding methods, which may develop trade and enhance the strength of the navy. Almost at the same time, Jan Swammerdam, a Dutch microscopist, became the object of ridicule by some far-sighted critics. They think it is really hard to understand that he always focuses on his "tiny animals", that is, microorganisms, because it is obviously a waste of energy on meaningless things. When charles ii learned about the basic research of atmospheric pressure, he might laugh at the absurdity of "weighing air". In his view, compared with the "major issues" that natural philosophers should pay attention to, this is just children's games and boring pastimes [5]. But the fact is that the interest center of science is determined not only by the internal development force of science, but also by social forces. Although the above research seems to have little to do with society, in fact, these initial problems are all due to military and economic needs. External ballistics, for example, discusses the motion law of guns and shells after they leave the barrel, that is, the motion trajectory and the relationship between the speed of guns and shells and air resistance. Of course, the study of free fall is essential, and the social significance of Galileo's inclined plane movement experiment is highlighted. Galileo discussed the trajectory of ballistic trajectory in his masterpiece Dialogue between Two New Sciences. He also made it clear that this research was supported by the prestigious Florence Arsenal. [6]
In today's era of great science, the evaluation of scientific achievements cannot be completely determined by the same scientific body, but the public's recognition of a scientific discovery can change scientists' contempt for this invention. The scientific evaluation of the discovery value of penicillin is an excellent case. 1928, Sir A.Fleming of England discovered penicillin and its inhibitory effect on some bacteria in his experiment. From the point of view of biology or microbiology, this discovery is only a biological antagonism, and it has no great innovative significance. So the scientific evaluation of this invention was not too high at first. Later, with the development of purification and industrialized penicillin production technology, penicillin played a great role in saving the lives of a large number of wounded and sick people in the Second World War, which made the public highly evaluate the discovery of penicillin, and some even thought that penicillin, not the atomic bomb, won the war. Social recognition in turn affected the attitude of the scientific community towards the discovery of penicillin, so that in 1945, Fleming was finally awarded the highest prize in natural science: the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine. In addition, the phenomenon of sleeping beauty also exists in science, which shows that members of the same scientific body are more studied in the conventional scientific paradigm. Therefore, this phenomenon deserves the attention and research of sociology of science. [7]
In addition to its own laws, scientific development will also be restricted by society. Scientific isomorphism is neither an ivory tower nor a paradise. Science education cannot be a closed education, but should pay attention to various social problems. Abroad, SSI (Social Science Problem) movement, which has arisen in science education in recent years, has become an important trend of thought in science education. [8] Using the problems that students face in real life, through the collection and dialogue of evidence, it is helpful to understand the social and humanistic level of science, the value of science and the limitations of science, learn how to think with scientific knowledge, and become future citizens with rational judgment and critical thinking ability. This educational trend of thought has a lot to do with this social characteristic of science.
Third, true knowledge transcends national boundaries.
Scientists' scientific research activities have long been regarded as "selfless", which is also an important part of the code of conduct for scientists proposed by R.K.Merton. What is the essence of "selfless" science? Cao Nanyan explained that knowledge is the cooperative product of group life from the beginning, and individual knowledge is the product of group's * * * common destiny, * * * common activities and overcoming * * * common difficulties. * * * The activities of the same company need to comply with some norms. "De-profiting" is a code of conduct for scientists and scientific activities, and it is also a rule of the game. In other words, the pursuit of "benefits" through "science" needs to follow certain rules. One of the rules is that the scientific knowledge generated cannot be required to directly serve the producers' own "interests", because interests often lead to blindness and prejudice. On the contrary, scientific identification needs to be based on "empirical evidence" and "logical consistency" at the institutional level, so as to eliminate the prejudice and mistakes caused by personal interests on scientific knowledge products and make scientific knowledge gradually transform from unreliable personal knowledge to more reliable public knowledge. [9] Such knowledge transcends national boundaries and cultural differences and is not restricted by localism or anything else. As Merton pointed out, culture may lead to different interpretations and different levels of interest in research results. However, if it is credible knowledge, it is applicable in different cultures and different societies. Knowledge with local characteristics in one culture may not be applicable in another culture, but this does not affect the effectiveness of thinking methods. [10] This is also a famous saying of the famous scientist L. Pasteur: "Scientists have their motherland, but science has no borders".
In the long process of scientific development, there are many stupid compulsory interventions that violate this law. For example, after 1933, Nazi Germany imposed such a political standard in universities and scientific research institutions according to the creed of racial purity, that is, it must be born in an "Aryan" family and openly identify with Nazi goals. In fact, all those who fail to meet this standard are excluded from universities and scientific research institutions. Because of this exclusion, a large number of outstanding scientists were expelled. The direct consequence of this ethnic cleansing is the weakening of German science. Merton reluctantly pointed out, "In some cases, scientists need to accept the decision of political leaders who know nothing about science on scientific career." But at the same time, it emphasizes the principle of scientific universalism: "Nuremberg's decree cannot invalidate Hubble's ammonia production method", and Chou Ying cannot deny the law of universal gravitation. Chauvinists can delete the names of foreign scientists from history textbooks, but the formulas established by these scientists are essential for science and technology. No matter what the final achievements of echt-deutsch or pure Americans are, every new scientific progress is supplemented by the previous efforts of some foreigners. " [ 1 1]
In science education, "the diversity of science" and "people of all cultures have contributed to science" have become one of the basic elements of science. As Joseph Needham said, "the DPRK was born in the sea" and "there is only one kind of science in the world, and that is global science. Therefore, the expansion of the team of scientists will produce better and better science, but it is not American science, western science or male supremacy science, let alone feminist science, nor will it produce a multicultural gender or ethnic science group on the ruins of ancient white science in Europe. " [ 12]
Fourth, science is a social activity.
In the late 20th century, "big science" rose, and science became a socialized cause. For example, the Manhattan Project, which started in 1942, involved nearly150,000 scientific and technological personnel, cost 2 billion US dollars and lasted for 3 years, and produced the first atomic bomb. The Apollo moon landing program, which started in 196 1, was jointly developed by 200 companies and 120 universities, costing 30 billion dollars, and finally achieved the grand goal of the first human landing on the moon in 1969. 1985 was first proposed by American scientists, and was officially launched in 1990. The human genetic project, which was jointly participated by scientists from the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Japan and China, cost $3 billion, and lasted for 15 years, aiming at accurately sequencing the human genome composed of more than 3 billion base pairs, discovering all human genes and carrying out it. The plan was completed two years ahead of schedule in 2003. This kind of project has a complex connection with society in many aspects, which is also the research of scientific heroes in the era of small science. The start-up of these projects depends more on the consideration of their social value. B barber once thought that science should be regarded as a social activity and a series of behaviors of human society. From this perspective, science is not just a piece of scattered and proven knowledge, but a series of logical methods to obtain this knowledge. From this perspective, science is first and foremost a special kind of thought and behavior. In different historical periods, people have different ways and degrees to realize this kind of thought and behavior. In addition, each different type of social organization plays a different role in science and brings its own unique problems. [13] Merton also believes that major scientific discoveries are the product of social cooperation and therefore belong to society. Scientifically name these discoveries after scientists, such as Copernicus system and Boyle's law. It's just a memorable and memorable way. 1. Newton's famous saying-"If I see farther, it is because I stand on the shoulders of giants" not only shows that he benefits from public heritage, but also acknowledges that scientific achievements are cooperative and selective in nature. [ 14]
Just because science is a social activity, with the increasing institutionalization of science, its relationship with other social systems has become closer. Various technologies based on science and the local spread of a scientific concept have produced great social forces, promoted our history and greatly influenced the relations established among all ethnic groups in the world. On the contrary, all kinds of crises and problems in today's society cannot be blamed only on science, and all members of society must bear certain responsibilities for social and political problems. Eric Ashby BaronAshby, a British scientist, is right: "Stopping the war is an urgent practical problem, which needs to be solved by political means (if it can be completely solved), not by the electronic version of Don Quixote." [ 15]
The era of small scientific elitism has passed, and the era of big science needs the cooperation between science and people in the body. Effective cooperative learning in science education can cultivate people with cooperative consciousness, habits and abilities. Learning can be seen as a change of personal identity, that is, from a legal marginal participant to a core member of the same body. Science education needs to cultivate people's concern for society and a high sense of social responsibility.
Verb (abbreviation of verb) Science is a cultural process.
We live in an era of increasing dependence on science because of material welfare, but if we only know science in this way, it is an extremely utilitarian and materialistic attitude. "Science is a goddess, not a milking cow!" [16] Science itself is a kind of culture and a part of human culture. In the process of scientific development, when scientists make their great discoveries, they are inevitably influenced by the culture and concepts of the times. In his famous speech on understanding science, J.B. Conant described the role of highly generalized and systematic concepts in science. He called these ideas "conceptual schemes". Conant believes that without proper conceptual schema, scientific research is either blind or ineffective. The measurement of atmospheric pressure is a good example. Aristotle and Galileo failed to draw a correct conclusion from experimental phenomena because they held the concept that "nature hates vacuum". In Aristotle's natural philosophy, vacuum, that is, space without any substance, is inconceivable. When the use of water pumps has become very common, the reason why water can be pumped up is because according to Aristotle's concept, there is no vacuum in nature, and the gap left by the piston's upward twitching must be filled with water immediately. But this explanation can't stand the question. Can water be improved indefinitely? Facts show that water can only be pumped to a height of about 33 feet, and it can't be higher. Galileo did not deny Aristotle's idea, so he guessed that the repulsive force to vacuum was not infinite but limited and measurable, but the solution to this problem was left to Torricelli (E.Torricelli), Pascal (B.Pascal) and Boyle (R.Boyle). They hold another view that air has weight and is an elastic medium. Therefore, they designed a more suitable conceptual schema for the same experimental phenomenon, thus solving the problem of water pump and getting the scientific concept of atmospheric pressure. A.L. lavoisier's scientific explanation of the chemical nature of combustion has laid one of the most important foundations for modern chemistry, because he abandoned the ancient phlogiston theory to explain the combustion process and adopted the conceptual schema of redox. Conant believes that the history of science, especially the history of modern science, can be written according to the greater development of conceptual schema and the greater weakening of experience in science. [17] The formation and inheritance of this conceptual schema is not only related to the development of science itself, but also closely related to the social and cultural background at that time. "Science is influenced by culture and social values" is an important progress in contemporary understanding of the nature of science. [ 18]
Regarding the relationship between scientific culture and humanistic culture, Si Nuo raised the question of "two cultures". Sokka provoked a "scientific war" at the end of the 20th century, the essence of which was a debate about the nature of science or scientific knowledge. Science is a cultural process, and scientific culture and humanistic culture should have a dialogue and integration, not confrontation, and be separated by a deep gap. In science education, it is urgent to coordinate the harmony between man and nature and society and promote the development of man and the progress of society. This can't be cut to fit shoes, and it is a perfect circle. This is not an overnight promotion. But on the basis of learning from each other, the two cultures complement each other perfectly. [ 19]
Since 1970s, some scientific sociologists have turned their research into scientific content, which has led to the emergence of sociology of scientific knowledge. These studies emphasize the cultural basis of scientific knowledge and a series of other issues, which are not discussed in this paper.
References:
What happened to Nathan S.M., Nelson W.S., Feng Baobao S. STS?
Pre-service Physics Teachers and Quantum history of mechanics
[J]。 Science and art. Education, 2008, 17(4):387-40 1.
[2] all chin D. Should sociology of science be rated as X? [J]。 science
Education, 2004,88 (6): 934-946.
[3] Collins. H.M. The use of sociology of science for scientists and educators [J]. Science and art. Education, 2007, 16(3~5):2 17-230.
[4] Zhang Hua. On knowledge in teaching [J]. Global Education Outlook in 2008 (1 1): 7- 14.
Robert king merton. Sociology of science [M]. Translated by Lu Xudong. Beijing: Commercial Press, 2003: 80-8 1, 345.
[6] step on the hen to sell. Standing on the shoulders of giants [M]. Translated by Zhang Bu Tiandeng. Shenyang: Liaoning Education Press, 2004: 650-65 1.
[7] Liang Liming, Lin Xiaojin, Xue, Lagging Cognition: Sleeping Beauty Phenomenon in Science [J]. Dialectics of Nature Communication, 2009,31(1): 39-45.
[8] Zeidler D L, Saddler T D, Applebaum S, Callahan B E. Promoting reflective judgment through social science issues [J]. Journal of Science Teaching Research .2009,46 (1): 74-10/.
[9] Cao Nanyan. On the "disinterest" of science [J]. Philosophical Studies, 2003 (5): 63-69.
Yan Peng. True knowledge transcends national boundaries —— An interview with robert merton, a contemporary sociologist [J]. Sociological research, 1992 (3): 1-6.
Cai Zhong. Postmodern relativism and anti-scientific thoughts-science, revision and power [M]. Nanjing: Nanjing University Press, 2004: 356.
Bernard barber. Science and social order [M]. Translated by Gu Xin. Beijing: Life, Reading and Knowledge Joint Publishing Company, 199 1: 2-4.
[16] proctor n. What is worthless science? Purity and strength in modern knowledge [M]. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 199 1:63.
Conant J.B. On Understanding Science [M]. New Haven: Yale University
News, 1947:29-97.
[ 18]Lederman N . G .，Abd-El-Khalick F .，Bell R . L .，Schwartz R . S
Questionnaires on the Nature of Science: Towards Effectiveness and Significance
Evaluation of learners' view of scientific essence [J].
Journal of Science Teaching and Research, 2002,39 (6): 497-521.
[19] Li xingmin. Cultural implication of science [M]. Beijing: Higher Education Press, 2007: 33-45.