Constructing Scientific Knowledge in the Classroom Rosalind Driver Hilary Asoko John Leach Eduardo Mortimer Philip Scott Educational Researcher, Vol. 23, No. 7. (Oct., 1994), pp. 5-12. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0013-189X%28199410%2923%3A7%3C5%3ACSKITC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-C Educational Researcher is currently published by American Educational Research Association. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/aera.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. http://www.jstor.org Fri Dec 7 17:32:34 2007

Constructing Scientific Knowledge in the Classroom The view that knowledge cannot be transmitted but must be con- structed by the mental activity of learners underpins contempo- rary perspectives on science education. This article, which presents a theoretical perspective on teachingand learning science in the social setting of classrooms, is informed by a view of scien- tific knowledge as socially constructed and by a perspective on the learning of science as knowledge construction involving both in- dividual and social processes. First, we present an overview of the nature of scientific knowledge. We then describe two major tradi- tions in explaining the process of learning science: personal and social constructivism. Finally, we illustrate how both personal and social perspectives on learning, as well as perspectives on the nature of the scientific knowledge to be learned, are necessary in interpreting science learning in formal settings. Educational Researcher, Vol.23, No. 7,pp. 5-12 Tknowerdto he core commitment of a constructivist position, that knowle ge is not transmitted directly from one another, but is actively built up by the learner, is shared by a wide range of different research tra- ditions relating to science education. One tradition focuses on personal construction of meanings and the many infor- mal theories that individuals develop about natural phe- nomena (Carey, 1985 Carmichael et al., 1990 Pfundt & Duit, 1985)as resulting from learners' personal interactions with physical events in their daily lives (Piaget, 1970). ~ e a r n l n ~ i n classroom settings, from this perspective, is seen to require well-designed practical activities that chal- lenge learners' prior conceptions encouraging learners to reorganize their personal theories. A different tradition portrays the knowledge-construction process as coming about through learners being encultured into scientific dis- courses (e.g.,Edwards & Mercer, 1987 Lemke, 1990). Yet others see-it as involving apprenticeship into scientific practices (Rogoff & Lave, 1984). Our own work has focused on the study of ways in which school students' informal knowledge is drawn upon and interacts with the scientific " ways of knowing introduced in the classroom (e.g., John- ston & Driver, 1990 Scott, 1993 Scott, Asoko, Driver, & Emberton, 1994).Clearly thereis a rangeo f amountso f processes by which knowledge construction takes place. some clarification of these distinct perspectives and how they may interrelate appears to be needed. A further issue that requires clarification among science educators is the relationship being proposed between con- structivist views of learning and implications for peda- gogy. Indeed, Millar (1989) has argued that particular views of learning do not necessarily entail specific peda- gogical practices. Furthermore, the attempts that have been made to articulate "constructivist" approaches to peda- gogy in science (Driver & Oldham, 1986 Fensham, Gun- stone, & White, 1994 Osborne & Freyberg, 1985)have been criticized on the grounds that such pedagogical practices are founded on an empiricist view of the nature of science itself (Matthews, 1992 Osborne, 1993),an argument that is examined later in the article. In this article we shall present our view of the interplay among the various factors of personal experience, lan- guage, and socialization in the process of learning science in classrooms, and discuss the problematic relationships between scientific knowledge, the learning of science, and pedagogy. The Nature of Scientific Knowledge Any account of teaching and learning science needs to con- sider the nature of the knowledge to be taught. Although recent writings in the field of science studies emphasize that scientific practices cannot be characterized in a sim- plistic unitary way, that is, there is no single "nature of sci- ence" (Millar, Driver, Leach, & Scott, 19931,there are some core commitments associated with scientific practices and knowledge claims that have implications for science edu- cation. We argue that it is important in science education to appreciatethat scientific knowledge is both symbolic in na- ture and also socially negotiated. The objects of science are not the phenomena of nature but constructs that are ad- vanced by the scientific community to interpret nature. Hanson (1958) gives an eloquent illustration of the differ- ence between the concepts of science and the phenomena of the world in his account of Galileo's intellectual strug- gles to explain free-fall motion. For several years Galileo ROSALINDRIVER D is Professor of Science Education in the School of Education at the University of Leeds, United Kingdom, where HILARYSOKO, A JOHN LEACH, and PHILIP SCOTT are lec- turers in science education. All four share an interest in teaching 2,vd Jc#,v,vi,vgsciz,vcz, u~?,b p ,~iic~~J~,vbz$io c r v ~ 5 , ?~,bzdczd- opment of conceptual understanding, and are members of the Children's Learning in Science Research Group. EDUARDO MORTIMER is an Assistant Professor in the Faculty of Educa- tion of the Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil, and is also interested in the development of conceptual understanding in science. OCTOBER 1994 5