No abstract

No abstract

This paper explores the different types and characteristics of preschool children's explanations of plant growth and rain formation. The children's explanations were categorized as naturalistic, non-naturalistic, or synthetic, i.e., explanations containing both naturalistic and nonnaturalistic parts. In regards to plant growth the children tended to rely on synthetic or on naturalistic explanations, which involved direct and indirect agents (such as water, a person, fertilizers, roots) enabling the plant to grow. Non-naturalistic explanations of plant growth, or the nonnaturalistic parts of synthetic explanations, were mainly animistic (anthropomorphic). In the case of rain formation the children most frequently used non-naturalistic explanations, which were mainly teleological or metaphysical. The naturalistic explanations recorded on rain formation, as well as the naturalistic parts of synthetic explanations tended to have a non-agentive character, i.e., children considered rainwater as preexisting in containers such as the clouds. Overall, the explanations recorded about plant growth tended to be more complex than the ones for rain formation. It is suggested that science activities designed for preschool children should take into account the types and characteristics of their explanations in order to select which phenomena are appropriate for this age group, and aim at fostering the children's ability at formulating naturalistic explanations.

The image prevailing among the public of scientific research and researchers constitutes a contradictory and complex combination of traditional stereotypes. We explore central facets of the image of scientific research and researchers as reflected in Greek adolescent students' drawings. Drawings were produced by 171 students participating in a drawing competition launched in the context of the "Researchers' Night 2007" implemented by three research institutions in Greece. Analysis of students' drawings involved dimensions related to the image of scientific researchers and of scientific research. Outcomes indicate that the students hold fairly outdated views of scientific researchers and their activity, involving stereotypic views of scientists and science, as well as gender stereotypes. Therefore there is an urgent need to promote a more relevant image of scientific researchers and their activity to young people and especially students.

This paper aims to reveal the social representations about the nature and the evolution of Space-Science & Astronomy, Genetics & Biotechnology, Natural Sciences and Engineering & Informatics, through analyzing active (i.e., original and creative) metaphors found in 2303 technoscientific articles published in four Greek daily newspapers and two popular scientific magazines. The analysis showed that all metaphors concerning the nature of the four disciplinary fields can be clustered into four superordinate categories that juxtapose these fields to: (1) a construct; (2) a supernatural process; (3) an activity extending the frontiers of knowledge; (4) a dipole of promise and/or scare. The most frequently employed category is that representing technoscience as an activity extending the frontiers of knowledge. Furthermore, the evolution of the four disciplines is mainly represented as a violent process. Each discipline though, seems to be characterized by combinations of different categories of metaphors. Therefore each discipline evokes different social representations.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract