Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Evolving Nature of Objectivity in the History of Science and its Implications for Science Education pp 79–123Cite as

Understanding Objectivity in Research Reported in the Journal of Research in Science Teaching (Wiley-Blackwell)

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 492 Accesses

Part of the book series: Contemporary Trends and Issues in Science Education ((CTISE,volume 46))

Abstract

Based on a website search with the keyword “objectivity,” 110 articles in the 24-year period (1992–2015) referred to some form of objectivity and were classified according to the following criteria: Levels I–V (same as presented in Chap. 3). Results obtained showed the following distribution of the 110 articles evaluated: Level I = 4, Level II = 33, Level III = 68, Level IV = 5, and Level V = none. Only 5% (5 out of 110) of the articles were considered to have an understanding of objectivity that approximated to its historical evolution. None of the articles referred to the work of Daston and Galison on objectivity or mentioned “trained judgment.” Traditional standards of educational research are based on positivist philosophy. One article reported that based on Guba and Lincoln’s notion of trustworthiness traditional standards of internal and external validity, reliability, and objectivity can be replaced by notions of credibility, transferability, dependability, and triangulation of data sources (Level III). In order to facilitate objectivity and researcher independence it is generally recommended in educational research that the researchers must maintain a distance between themselves and the subjects of their investigation. This prescription is, however, problematic as one article reported that in order to establish a mutually acceptable dialogue with the teacher in the classroom it is important to audit the process rather than the product (Level III).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science, AAAS. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy: project 2061. Washington: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bencze, L., & Hodson, D. (1999). Changing practice by changing practice: Toward a more authentic science and science curriculum development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 521–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beth, E. W., & Piaget, J. (1966). Mathematical epistemology and psychology. Dordrecht: Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, R. N., Gaspar, P. & Trout, J. D. (1990). The philosophy of science. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T. (1988a). Can we be scientific in applied social science? In E. S. Overman (Ed.), Methodology and epistemology for social science (pp. 315–333). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (first published in 1984).

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T. (1988b). The experimenting society. In E. S. Overman (Ed.), Methodology and epistemology for social science (pp. 290–314). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, H. M. (1982). Tacit knowledge and scientific networks. In B. Barnes & D. Edge (Ed.), Science in context. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, L. N. (1992). Physics: structure and meaning. Hanover: University Press of New England.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crabtree, B. F., & Miller, W. L. (1999). Doing qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daston, L., & Galison, P. L. (1992). The image of objectivity. Representations, 40(special issue: seeing science), 81–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daston, L., & Galison, P. (2007). Objectivity. New York: Zone Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desmond, A., & Moore, J. (1991). Darwin. London: Michael Joseph.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobzhansky, T. (1973). Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution. The American Biology Teacher, 35, 125–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duschl, R. A., & Grandy, R. (2013). Two views about explicitly teaching nature of science. Science & Education, 22(9), 2109–2139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox-Keller, E. (1992). Secrets of life, secrets of death: essays on language, gender and science. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, S. (1988). Social epistemology. Bloomington, IN: Indiana State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freire, P. (1971). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. (1999). An introduction to discourse analysis. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giere, R. N. (2006a). Perspectival pluralism. In S. H. Kellert, H. E. Longino & C. K. Waters (Eds.), Scientific pluralism (pp. 26–41). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gipps, C. (1999). Socio-cultural aspects of assessment. In A. Iran-Nejad & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Review of research in education 24, (355–392). Washington: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giroux, H. (1992). Border crossings: cultural workers and the politics of education. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gooday, G., Lynch, J. M., Wilson, K. G., & Barsky, C. K. (2008). Does science education need the history of science? Isis, 99, 322–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gould, S. J. (1977). Ever since Darwin. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, S. J. (1981). The mismeasure of man. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1972). Knowledge and human interests. (trans: Shapiro, J.J.). London: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacking, I. (1983). Representing and intervening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, D. J. (1991). Simians, cyborgs, and women: the reinvention of nature. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. (1987). The science question in feminism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. (1998). Is science multi-cultural? Postcolonialisms, feminisms, and epistemologies. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, P. A., & Vining, L. C. (1997). The impact of the knowledge explosion on science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 969–975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D. (1993). In search of a rationale for multicultural science education. Science Education, 77, 685–711.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holton, G. (1969). Einstein and the ‘crucial’ experiment. American Journal of Physics, 37, 968–982.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holton, G. (1978a). Subelectrons, presuppositions, and the Millikan-Ehrenhaft dispute. Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences, 9, 161–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holton, G. (1978b). The scientific imagination: case studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holton, G. (1996). Science education and the sense of self. In P. R. Gross, N. Levitt & M. W. Lewis (Eds.), The flight from science and reason (pp. 551–560). New York: New York Academy of Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hubbard, R. (1988). Some thoughts about the masculinity of natural science. In M. M. Gergen (Ed.), Feminist thought and the structure of knowledge (pp. 1–15). New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, E. F. (1985). Reflections on gender and science. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitchener, R.F. (1986). Piaget’s theory of knowledge: Genetic epistemology and scientific reason. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klahr, D., Fay, A. L., & Dunbar, K. (1993). Heuristics for scientific experimentation: a developmental study. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 111–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klassen, S. (2011). The photoelectric effect: reconstructing the story for the physics student. Science & Education, 20(7–8), 719–731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laats, A., & Siegel, H. (2016). Teaching evolution in a creation nation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lacey, H. (2004). Is there a significant distinction between cognitive and social values? In P. Machamer & G. Wolters (Eds.), Science, values and objectivity (pp. 24–51). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ladyman, J. (2002). Understanding philosophy of science. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (2000). Paradigmatic controversies, contradidtions, emerging confluences. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research 2nd ed. (pp. 163–188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Longino, H. E. (1990). Science as social knowledge: values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Machamer, P., & Wolters, G. (2004). Introduction: science, values and objectivity. In P. Machamer & G. Wolters (Eds.), Science, values and objectivity (pp. 1–13). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr, E. (1982). The growth of biological thought: Diversity, evolution and inheritance. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medawar, P. B. (1967). The art of the soluble. London: Methuen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R.K. (1942). Science and technology in a democratic order. Journal of Legal and Political Sociology, 1. Reprinted as ‘Science and Democratic Social Structure’, in his Social theory and social structure. New York: Free Press (1957).

    Google Scholar 

  • Myrdal, G. (1944/1962). An American dilemma: the negro problem and modern democracy. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council, NRC (1992). National science education standards: A sampler. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council, NRC. (1996). National science education standards. Washington: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niaz, M. (1991). Role of the epistemic subject in Piaget’s genetic epistemology and its importance for science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 569–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niaz, M. (1997). Can we integrate qualitative and quantitative research in science education? Science & Education, 6, 291–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niaz, M. (1998). From cathode rays to alpha particles to quantum of action: a rational reconstruction of structure of the atom and its implications for chemistry textbooks. Science Education, 82, 527–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niaz, M. (2009). Critical appraisal of physical science as a human enterprise: dynamics of scientific progress. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niaz, M. (2011). Innovating science teacher education: a history and philosophy of science perspective. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niaz, M. (2012). From ‘Science in the Making’ to understanding the nature of science: an overview for science educators. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niaz, M. (2014). Science textbooks: the role of history and philosophy of science. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (pp. 1411–1441). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niaz, M. (2016). Chemistry education and contributions from history and philosophy of science. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Niaz, M., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Benarroch, A., Cardellini, L., Laburú, C. E., Marín, N., Montes, L. A., Nola, R., Orlik, Y., Scharmann, L. C., Tsai, C.-C., & Tsaparlis, G. (2003). Constructivism: defense or a continual critical appraisal --- a response to Gil-Pérez, et al. Science & Education, 12, 787–797.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niaz, M., Aguilera, D., Maza, A., & Liendo, G. (2002). Arguments, contradictions, resistances and conceptual change in students’ understanding of atomic structure. Science Education, 86, 505–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niaz, M., & Robinson, W. R. (1993). Teaching algorithmic problem solving or conceptual understanding: role of developmental level, mental capacity, and cognitive style. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 2, 407–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nurrenbern, S. C., & Pickering, M. (1987). Concept learning versus problem solving: is there a difference? Journal of Chemical Education, 64, 508–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogbu, J. (1978). Minority education and caste: the American system in cross-cultural perspective. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pascual-Leone, J., Goodman, D., Ammon, P., & Subelman, I. (1978). Piagetian theory and neo-Piagetian analysis as psychological guides in education. In J. M. Gallagher & J. A. Easley (Eds.), Knowledge and development 2, (243–289). New York: Plenum.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J. (1971). Biology and knowledge: an essay on the relations between organic regulations and cognitive processes. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J. (1977). Equilibration of cognitive structures. New York: Viking.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W.-M. (1995). Authentic school science. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rutherford, E. (1911). The scattering of alpha and beta particles by matter and the structure of the atom. Philosophical Magazine, 21, 669–688.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rutherford, F. J., & Ahlgren, A. (1990). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sewell, Jr., W. H. (1992). A theory of structure: duality, agency, and transformation. American Journal of Sociology, 98(1), 1–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheperd, L. (1993). Lifting the veil: the feminine side of science Boston: Shambhala Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C. (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsaparlis, G. (2014). Linking the macro with the micro levels of chemistry: demonstrations and experiments that can contribute to active/meaningful/conceptual learning. In I. Devetek & S. A. Glažar (Eds.), Learning with understanding in the chemistry classroom (pp. 41–61). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wertheim, M. (1995). Pythagoras’ trousers. New York: W.W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeany, R. H. (1991). Dissemination and implementation of research findings: impacting practice. NARST News, 33(4), 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziman, J. (1994). The rationale of STS education is in the approach in science education. In J. Solomon & G. Aikenhead (Eds.), STS education: international perspectives on reform (pp. 21–31). New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Epistemology of Science Group, Department of Chemistry, Universidad de Oriente, Cumaná, Sucre, Venezuela

    Prof. Mansoor Niaz

Authors
  1. Prof. Mansoor Niaz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mansoor Niaz .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Niaz, M. (2018). Understanding Objectivity in Research Reported in the Journal of Research in Science Teaching (Wiley-Blackwell). In: Evolving Nature of Objectivity in the History of Science and its Implications for Science Education. Contemporary Trends and Issues in Science Education, vol 46. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67726-2_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67726-2_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-67725-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-67726-2

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation