Conclusion: Understanding the Elusive Nature of Objectivity

Abstract

An evaluation of research in science education reported in this book shows the problematic nature of understanding some of the universal values associated with objectivity such as certainty, value neutral observations, facts, infallibility, scientific method, and truth of scientific theories and laws. Similarly, aspects of Merton's "ethos of science" such as open-mindedness, universalist, disinterested, and communal have also been invoked to understand progress in science. Studies evaluated, however, have pointed out that some of these values are not necessarily essential for understanding objectivity. Philosophy of science itself has explored new territory in this context and Giere (2006a, p. 95) considers that it is presentist hubris to think that we can have an objectively correct or true theories. Daston and Galison (2007) have constructed the evolving nature of scientific judgment (objectivity) through the following phases: truth-to-nature, mechanical objectivity, structural objectivity, and finally trained judgment. Each of these regimes did not supplant the other but they can coexist and supplement each other at the same time. Although objectivity is not synonymous with truth or certainty, it has eclipsed other epistemic virtues and to be objective is often used as a synonym for scientific in both science and science education.Table 7.1 provides an overview of the classification of all the articles evaluated in this book. Following are some of the salient features of the results obtained: (a) S&E was the only journal in which two articles were classified in Level V, which approximates to the evolving nature of objectivity; (b) In all the chapters most of the articles were classified in Levels II and III; (c) Classification of the articles in Level III (62% for JRST, and 44% for S&E) means that the authors recognized the problematic nature of objectivity and hence the need for alternatives; and (d) Very few articles were classified in Level I (none for HPST and ESE), which approximates to the traditional concept of objectivity as found in most science textbooks. These results provide a detailed account (over a period of almost 25 years) of how the science education research community conceptualizes the difficulties involved in accepting objectivity as an unquestioned epistemic virtue of the 179