MARI

JOFRE

Are Your Reasons

Eco n

mic o

Pol it
l ica
P ers o

A Case Study Exploring College Students' Pre-Existing Beliefs about Science

na

S cie n

ific t

Stephanie Marie Mari

based upon a paper co-authored with

Booklet designed by

1 Theory and Thesis

Dr. Ana Jofre

The premise of science education is philosophically realist; that a scientific fact or method is included in the curriculum implies "this is the way the world really is/works" (1). But in practice, students' views on reality are shaped by "two modes of thinking - empirical and non-empirical" (2) and can be constructed from many sources including pre-existing economic, political, and personal beliefs. These pre-existing beliefs can pose a "cognitive conflict," as what a student already knows competes with the knowledge they are expected to reproduce in exchange for points in the "classroom game" (3).

Table of Contents
PAGE 1-2 3 4-5 6-7 8 Theory and Thesis Description of Sample Question 1 Results Question 2 Results Conclusions

This booklet was created to share findings from a case study with roundtable participants at the Fourth International Conference on Science in Society, November 15-17, 2012, Berkeley, CA.

2 Theory and Thesis

3 Description of Sample

To personally make sense of scientific reality in their own lives, not just learn to recite the correct response, students must "go through the steps of reasoning by themselves and thereby make fully explicit to themselves the reasons for the correct answer" (4). In order to better understand their reasoning, science educators should "attend to student epistemological framing" (5) - that is, take steps to understand the ideas and experiences that students bring to the classroom. This can help teachers identify and begin addressing students' "erroneous 'commonsense' or 'everyday' understandings" (6) about the natural world that may cause them to disregard scientific conclusions.

We analyzed survey assignments from 234 students in a physics-oriented Liberal Studies course on:
O

MO

RE

SOP

- physics relevant to social issues - various philosophies of science - what a scientific theory entails - distinguishing science from pseudoscience

JR

H 74

115 students (49%) were in their first year of college.

47 were enrolled in majors like liberal arts or business.
OTHER

Only 39 students (16%) were women.

26

SR 19

75 students were formally

UN

DECIDED

ET

112 (47%) of students were in a STEM major.

4 Question 1 Results

5 Question 1 Results

Students were asked:

Which statement best describes your personal views? 30 % N = 206 Science is the only way we can know anything.
Anything else requires faith or inference that cannot be proved. Without science, we would be left in the Stone Age.

(Larger words were more frequently used by students.)

Themes used to describe science

60

63 % Science is the best way of obtaining information about the physical universe.
"Hundreds of things people originally thought were unexplainable are now firmly explained via science. Science "has been a beacon of rationality in a dark and confused world.

13

nature certain disprove solve method objective unbiased evidence facts understanding data observe quantifies math experiment detailed discovery how theories ideas accurate possibility test technology predict why replicability human capacity evolved rationality

meaning power sure productive real tool progress trial and error imagination vital universal irrefutable thought provoking confirmation enlightenment process mostly theories (not facts) describe make decisions logic careful reliable laws useful engineering correct

proof evolves

15

validate helpful explore right uncertain wonder applied practical structure versatile defines consistent research trustworthy calculations verify cures generates questions made by god measure marvel truth socially defined

7% There are many physical phenomena that science will never be able to explain.
"We will never know everything and it's probably better in some ways that we don't know them.

Perceived weaknesses of science

-it can't explain Creation

Some things were just never meant to have rhyme or reason.

-it is limited by the capacity of our brains -some knowledge is too complex -measurement is limited by technology
-it can't explain events not observed by humans -some things are not meant to be explained

6 Question 2 Results

7 Question 2 Results

Do you think we should apply the precautionary principle to global warming? N=120

Reasoning used to OPPOSE taking action

43%

25%

21%

11%

NO 44%

YES 56%
Are your reasons political, personal, economic, or scientific?
Overall reasoning used by students

"How can you justify something over a half a degree and ice?" "A step away from fossil fuels would do horrors to economies across the globe... causing job losses, hunger, poverty, and a lack of energy resources." "If someone wishes to reduce their effect then they should. However, widespread enforcement or laws don't seem to me to be a good idea." "Al Gore does not apply it. He has 2 houses, drives a Ford Explorer and his houses are powered by an electric company that burns coal."

Reasoning used to SUPPORT taking action

47%

36%

17%

4% 18%

40%

38%

(Some students used more than one type of reasoning.)

"Fossil fuels are a limited resource. Finding other methods of energy will be beneficial in the long run, whether global warming is an issue or not." "We cannot ignore the fact that global temperature increase directly correlates with the amount of CO2 in the air." "I would like my kids to enjoy nature as I have." No students in support of applying the precautionary principle used political reasoning.

8 Conclusions

Nearly all students believed science was the best - if not only - way to know about about the natural world. The themes used to describe science indicate students view it as a method to find proof and as a body of knowledge that evolves over time, so that today's science facts may be subject to future falsification. The weaknesses perceived by students suggest some may be unclear on science's purpose: it is not intended to explain/predict metaphysical or supernatural phenomena. Compared to those in support of taking action on global warming, a greater proportion of students opposed used scientific reasoning. However, they often disregarded the conclusions reached by climate experts. While many were opposed to government mandates to reduce global warming, they often supported the same activities when framed as a personal choice to "go green."

References
(1) McCarthy, C. & Sears, E. (2000). "Science Education: Constructing a True View of the Real World?" In Philosophy of Education 2000, p374. (2) Koul, R. (2003). "The Relevance of Public Image of Science in Science Education Policy and Practice." Science & Education 12 (1), p118. (3) Hutchison, P. & Hammer, D. (2010). "Attending to Student Epistemological Framing in a Science Classroom." Science Education 94 (3), p508. (4) Nola, R. (1997). "Constructivism in Science and Science Education: A Philosophical Critique." Science & Education 6 (1), p59. (5) Hutchison and Hammer 2010, p507. (6) Jenkins, E. W. (2000). "Constructivism in School Science education: Powerful Model or the Most Dangerous Intellectual Tendency?" Science & Education 9 (6), p605.
(See full paper for complete list of works cited.)

Sociologist/Designer Fremont, CA

Stephanie Marie Mari

Dr. Ana Jofre

Asst. Professor of Physics & Optical Science University of North Carolina at Charlotte

Are your reasons political, personal, economic, or scientific?

This study uses data from classroom assignments to examine college students' attitudes toward science, emphasizing the scientific and non-scientific reasoning used to form opinions about taking action on climate change.
To read the complete paper, scan the QR Code or email StephanieMarieMari@gmail.com