Abstract
This chapter evaluates research reported in the International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching (HPST). HPST is the first handbook (www.springer.com 978-94-007-7653-1) devoted to the field of historical and philosophical research in science and mathematics education. The handbook has 76 chapters written by 125 authors from 30 countries, which makes it truly an international endeavor. More than 300 reviewers from the disciplines of history, philosophy, education, psychology, mathematics, and natural science contributed with their expertise to its elaboration. In order to understand the rationale of the handbook it is important to consider the following invitation that was sent to the prospective authors of the different chapters:This clearly shows the wide ranging and multiple objectives of the Handbook that can provide guidance for future research as well as curricular and pedagogical feedback to those working in the educational field. Based on the subject index of the handbook, I found 10 chapters that referred to “Feyerabend” or “epistemological anarchism.” However, 4 chapters made only a simple mention with no elaboration and thus were not included. Six chapters discussed some aspect of epistemological anarchism or Feyerabend. Following the guidelines based on Charmaz (2005), presented in Chap. 3, and in order to facilitate credibility, transferability, dependability and confirmability (cf. Denzin & Lincoln, 2005), of the results I adopted the following procedure: (a) All the 6 chapters from the International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching (HPST) were evaluated and classified in one of the five levels (I to V, see Chap. 3 for levels); and (b) After a period of approximately 3 months all the articles were evaluated again and there was an agreement of 95% between the first and the second evaluation. It is important to note that the authors of these chapters were not necessarily writing about epistemological anarchism, but rather referred to it in the context of their selected topic. Appendix 7 provides a complete reference to each of these 6 chapters that can provide readers with an overview of the topic of interest. Distribution of all the articles according to author’s area of research, context of the study and level (classification) is presented in Appendix 8.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bauer, H. H. (1994). Scientific literacy and the myth of the scientific method. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press
Brush, S. G. (1974). Should the history of science be rated X? Science, 183(4130), 1164–1172.
Brush, S. G. (1978). Why chemistry needs history — And how it can get some. Journal of College Science Teaching, 7, 288–291.
Brush, S. G. (1979). Comments on ‘On the distortion of the history of science in science education’. Science Education, 63(2), 277–278.
Charmaz, K. (2005). Grounded theory in the 21st century: Applications for advancing social justice studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 507–535). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Collins, H. M. (1985). Changing order: Replication and induction in scientific practice. London: Sage
Collins, H. M. (2000). On beyond 2000. Studies in Science Education, 35, 169–173.
Cooper, L. N. (1970). An introduction to the meaning and structure of physics (short edn). New York: Harper & Row.
Daston, L., & Galison, P. L. (2007). Objectivity. New York: Zone Books.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 1–32). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Feyerabend, P. K. (1962/1981). Explanation, reduction and empiricism. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 3, 28–97.
Feyerabend, P. K. (1974/1975b/1988). How to defend society against science. In E. D. Klemke, R. Hollinger, & A. D. Kline (Eds.), Introductory readings in the philosophy of science. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus.
Feyerabend, P. K. (1975a). Against method. Outline of an anarchist theory of knowledge. Londond: New Left Books.
Fuller, S. (1992). Social epistemology and the research agenda of science studies. In A. Pickering (Ed.), Science as practice and culture (pp. 390–428). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Giere, R. N. (2006a). Scientific perspectivism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Giere, R. N. (2016). Feyerabend’s perspectivism. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 57, 137–141.
Hacking, I. (1983). Representing and intervening. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Harvard Project Physics Course. (1975). Text (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Heering, P., & Höttecke, D. (2014). Historical-investigative approaches in science teaching. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching (Vol. II, pp. 1473–1502). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
Heilbron, J. L. (1981a). Rutherford-Bohr atom. American Journal of Physics, 49, 223–231.
Heilbron, J. L. (1981b). Historical studies in the theory of atomic structure. New York: Arno Press.
Hodson, D. (1998). Science fiction: The continuing misrepresentation of science in the school curriculum. Curriculum Studies, 6(2), 191–216.
Hodson, D. (2009). Teaching and learning about science: Language, theories, methods, history, traditions and values. Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Hodson, D. (2014). Nature of science in the science curriculum: Origin, development, implications and shifting emphases. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching (Vol. II, pp. 911–970). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
Hoffmann, R. (2014). The tensions of scientific storytelling: Science depends on compelling narratives. American Scientist, 102, 250–253.
Holton, G. (1978a). Subelectrons, presuppositions, and the Millikan-Ehrenhaft dispute. Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences, 9, 161–224.
Holton, G. (1978b). On the educational philosophy of the Project Physics Course. In G. Holton (Ed.), The scientific imagination (pp. 294–298). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Holton, G. (1993). Science and anti-science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Jenkins, E. (2007). School science: A questionable construct? Journal of Curriculum Studies, 39(3), 265–282.
Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
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.
Machamer, P. K., Pera, M., & Baltas, A. (Eds.). (2000). Scientific controversies: Philosophical and historical perspectives. New York: Oxford University Press.
Mackenzie, J., Good, R. G., & Brown, J. R. (2014). Postmodernism and science education: An appraisal. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching (Vol. II, pp. 1057–1086). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
Matthews, M. R. (Ed.). (2014a). International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (3 volumes). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
Matthews, M. R. (2014b). Introduction: The history, purpose and content of the Springer. In International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (Vol. I, pp. 1–15). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
McCarthy, C. L. (2014). Cultural studies in science education: Philosophical considerations. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (Vol. III, pp. 1927–1964). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
Niaz, M. (2005). An appraisal of the controversial nature of the oil-drop experiment: Is closure possible? British Journal of the Philosophy of Science, 56, 681–702.
Niaz, M. (2009). Critical appraisal of physical science as a human enterprise: Dynamics of scientific progress. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
Niaz, M. (2011a). How to facilitate teachers’ understanding of hypotheses and predictions? Interchange, 42(1), 51–58.
Niaz, M. (2011b). Innovating science teacher education: A history and philosophy of science perspective. New York: Routledge.
Niaz, M. (2015). That the Millikan oil-drop experiment was simple and straightforward. In R. L. Numbers & K. Kampourakis (Eds.), Newton’s apple and other myths about science (pp. 157–163). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Niaz, M. (2016). Chemistry education and contributions from history and philosophy of science. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
Niaz, M. (2018). Evolving nature of objectivity in the history of science and its implications for science education. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Popper, K. (1970). Normal science and its dangers. In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 51–58). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Preston, J. (1997). Feyerabend: Philososphy, science and society. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Preston, J., Munévar, G., & Lamb, D. (Eds.). (2000). The worst enemy of science? Essays in memory of Paul Feyerabend. New York: Oxford University Press.
Rudolph, J. L. (2000). Reconsidering the ‘nature of science’ as a curriculum component. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(3), 403–419.
Scheffler, I. (1967). Science and subjectivity. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.
Schulz, R. M. (2014). Philosophy of education and science education: A vital but underdeveloped relationship. In M.R. Matthews (Ed.), International Handbook. of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching (Vol. II, pp. 1259–1316). Dordrecht: Springer
Schwab, J. J. (1974). The concept of the structure of a discipline. In E. W. Eisner & E. Valance (Eds.), Conflicting conceptions of curriculum (pp. 162–175). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing Corp.
Siegel, H. (1979). On the distortion of the history of science in science education. Science Education, 63, 111–118.
Siegel, H. (1991). The rationality of science, critical thinking, and science education. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), History, philosophy and science teaching: Selected readings (pp. 45–62). Toronto, Canada: OISE Press.
Taber, K. S. (2014). Methodological issues in science education research: A perspective from the philosophy of science. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (Vol. III, pp. 1839–1893). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
Wilson, D. (1983). Rutherford: Simple genius. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Niaz, M. (2020). Understanding Epistemological Anarchism (Feyerabend) in Research Reported in Reference Work. In: Feyerabend’s Epistemological Anarchism. Contemporary Trends and Issues in Science Education, vol 50. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36859-3_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36859-3_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-36858-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-36859-3
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)