Guest editorial: The impact of the knowledge explosion on science education

The knowledge explosion in science education: Balancing practical and theoretical knowledge

“…Our example of the accumulation of theoretical scientific knowledge in river ecology and its incorporation into textbooks matches the pattern described by Harding and Vining (1997) for genetics, evolution, and molecular biology. We totally agree with Harding and Vining that the knowledge explosion in science-at least in the restricted sense of theory alone-should not be perceived as a problem for educators, and that providing a framework of theoretical knowledge upon which to build later is an important process.…”

“…Drawbacks to the RCC are not discussed in detail in these textbooks. Further, as noted by Harding and Vining (1997) for the fields of genetics, evolution, and molecular biology, new concepts have been proposed attempting to blend the RCC with other factors such as the presence of dams (e.g., serial discontinuity hypothesis: Ward & Stanford, 1983) and the importance of floodplains (e.g., flood pulse concept: Junk, Bayley, & Sparks, 1989). This explosion of concepts to describe river ecosystem function has swiftly entered the textbook literature with little critical exploration ("don't let facts get in the way of a good story") and may have some unpleasant future side effects.…”

The knowledge explosion in science education: Balancing practical and theoretical knowledge

“…Our example of the accumulation of theoretical scientific knowledge in river ecology and its incorporation into textbooks matches the pattern described by Harding and Vining (1997) for genetics, evolution, and molecular biology. We totally agree with Harding and Vining that the knowledge explosion in science-at least in the restricted sense of theory alone-should not be perceived as a problem for educators, and that providing a framework of theoretical knowledge upon which to build later is an important process.…”

“…Drawbacks to the RCC are not discussed in detail in these textbooks. Further, as noted by Harding and Vining (1997) for the fields of genetics, evolution, and molecular biology, new concepts have been proposed attempting to blend the RCC with other factors such as the presence of dams (e.g., serial discontinuity hypothesis: Ward & Stanford, 1983) and the importance of floodplains (e.g., flood pulse concept: Junk, Bayley, & Sparks, 1989). This explosion of concepts to describe river ecosystem function has swiftly entered the textbook literature with little critical exploration ("don't let facts get in the way of a good story") and may have some unpleasant future side effects.…”

Portraying Science Accurately in Classrooms: Emphasizing Open-Mindedness Rather Than Relativism

“…If we do not keep in mind that science is a slow process in which knowledge evolves, we may take the truth too seriously and think that theories are either permanent or tentative when they are really neither. Almost all of the knowledge we teach in classrooms is well established and accepted by scientists as true (Harding & Vining, 1997). It is dangerous to link the abstract idea that scientific knowledge is tentative too closely with specific, well-established concepts; it gives the false impression of relativism because it suggests that knowledge remains as tentative over time as it was in the beginning.…”

Chapter X: The Changing Perspectives of Constructivism: Science Wars and Children's Creativity

“…The beautiful line spectra of incandescent atoms, for example, were recognized for nearly a century before succeeding waves of quantum theory explained them in slightly different ways. In evolutionary biology, as Patricia Harding and Leo Vining point out, 7 facts provided by the fossil evidence did not go away, although they were enhanced by data from genetics, radioactivity, and molecular biology, to support ever more sophisticated but continually reconstructed theories. Andrew Boulton and Debra Panizzon make similar points about river ecology theory; 8 but then they argue that it was the processes of science and the warrants that are made for scientific claims which should be studied rather than the phenomena (facts) themselves.…”

The knowledge explosion in science education: Balancing practical and theoretical knowledge

“…Our example of the accumulation of theoretical scientific knowledge in river ecology and its incorporation into textbooks matches the pattern described by Harding and Vining (1997) for genetics, evolution, and molecular biology. We totally agree with Harding and Vining that the knowledge explosion in science-at least in the restricted sense of theory alone-should not be perceived as a problem for educators, and that providing a framework of theoretical knowledge upon which to build later is an important process.…”

“…Drawbacks to the RCC are not discussed in detail in these textbooks. Further, as noted by Harding and Vining (1997) for the fields of genetics, evolution, and molecular biology, new concepts have been proposed attempting to blend the RCC with other factors such as the presence of dams (e.g., serial discontinuity hypothesis: Ward & Stanford, 1983) and the importance of floodplains (e.g., flood pulse concept: Junk, Bayley, & Sparks, 1989). This explosion of concepts to describe river ecosystem function has swiftly entered the textbook literature with little critical exploration ("don't let facts get in the way of a good story") and may have some unpleasant future side effects.…”

Portraying Science Accurately in Classrooms: Emphasizing Open-Mindedness Rather Than Relativism

“…If we do not keep in mind that science is a slow process in which knowledge evolves, we may take the truth too seriously and think that theories are either permanent or tentative when they are really neither. Almost all of the knowledge we teach in classrooms is well established and accepted by scientists as true (Harding & Vining, 1997). It is dangerous to link the abstract idea that scientific knowledge is tentative too closely with specific, well-established concepts; it gives the false impression of relativism because it suggests that knowledge remains as tentative over time as it was in the beginning.…”

Chapter X: The Changing Perspectives of Constructivism: Science Wars and Children's Creativity

“…The beautiful line spectra of incandescent atoms, for example, were recognized for nearly a century before succeeding waves of quantum theory explained them in slightly different ways. In evolutionary biology, as Patricia Harding and Leo Vining point out, 7 facts provided by the fossil evidence did not go away, although they were enhanced by data from genetics, radioactivity, and molecular biology, to support ever more sophisticated but continually reconstructed theories. Andrew Boulton and Debra Panizzon make similar points about river ecology theory; 8 but then they argue that it was the processes of science and the warrants that are made for scientific claims which should be studied rather than the phenomena (facts) themselves.…”

The knowledge explosion in science education: Balancing practical and theoretical knowledge

“…Our example of the accumulation of theoretical scientific knowledge in river ecology and its incorporation into textbooks matches the pattern described by Harding and Vining (1997) for genetics, evolution, and molecular biology. We totally agree with Harding and Vining that the knowledge explosion in science-at least in the restricted sense of theory alone-should not be perceived as a problem for educators, and that providing a framework of theoretical knowledge upon which to build later is an important process.…”

“…Drawbacks to the RCC are not discussed in detail in these textbooks. Further, as noted by Harding and Vining (1997) for the fields of genetics, evolution, and molecular biology, new concepts have been proposed attempting to blend the RCC with other factors such as the presence of dams (e.g., serial discontinuity hypothesis: Ward & Stanford, 1983) and the importance of floodplains (e.g., flood pulse concept: Junk, Bayley, & Sparks, 1989). This explosion of concepts to describe river ecosystem function has swiftly entered the textbook literature with little critical exploration ("don't let facts get in the way of a good story") and may have some unpleasant future side effects.…”

Portraying Science Accurately in Classrooms: Emphasizing Open-Mindedness Rather Than Relativism

“…If we do not keep in mind that science is a slow process in which knowledge evolves, we may take the truth too seriously and think that theories are either permanent or tentative when they are really neither. Almost all of the knowledge we teach in classrooms is well established and accepted by scientists as true (Harding & Vining, 1997). It is dangerous to link the abstract idea that scientific knowledge is tentative too closely with specific, well-established concepts; it gives the false impression of relativism because it suggests that knowledge remains as tentative over time as it was in the beginning.…”

Chapter X: The Changing Perspectives of Constructivism: Science Wars and Children's Creativity

“…The beautiful line spectra of incandescent atoms, for example, were recognized for nearly a century before succeeding waves of quantum theory explained them in slightly different ways. In evolutionary biology, as Patricia Harding and Leo Vining point out, 7 facts provided by the fossil evidence did not go away, although they were enhanced by data from genetics, radioactivity, and molecular biology, to support ever more sophisticated but continually reconstructed theories. Andrew Boulton and Debra Panizzon make similar points about river ecology theory; 8 but then they argue that it was the processes of science and the warrants that are made for scientific claims which should be studied rather than the phenomena (facts) themselves.…”