Reply to “hearts and minds in the science classroom: The education of a confirmed evolutionist revisited”

Jackson, David; Doster, Elizabeth C.; Meadows, Lee

doi:10.1002/(sici)1098-2736(199701)34:1<93::aid-tea8>3.3.co;2-h

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Different in flavor, but similar in overall intent, were those studies which specifically focussed on biological evolution, where a primary teaching concern was to teach the nature of scientific theories as being something different from either dogma or mere guesses (see Scharmann, 1990;Jensen & Finley, 1995; and a consensus document from the National Academy of Sciences, 1998). Jackson et al (1995Jackson et al ( , 1997; see the commentary by Alters, 1997) study the science-religion interface in detail, specifically with reference to biological evolution. Their contribution to the pedagogy of the course was described earlier; we also followed their study methods of deep, semistructured interviews with students.…”

Section: Background: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Changes in student views of religion and science in a college astronomy course

et al. 2002

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A cautious introduction of the dialogue between science and religion into a college astronomy course provoked diverse reactions from the 340 students in the course. We studied student responses to this curricular intervention with data from the entire class and from a set of interviews of a focus group of 19 students. Approximately half of the students in the class engaged with the issue of science and religion to some extent. There were extraordinarily few negative reactions to this minor intervention. The intellectual paths taken by students who did engage the issue were very diverse; they negotiated their ways across some complex intellectual borders in their own different ways. Some of these pathways led to internal conflict in some students, but this conflict is not necessarily an obstacle to further understanding. Several students developed some rather deep understandings of the interface between science and religion. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Sci Ed 86:526–547, 2002; Published online in Wiley Interscience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI 10.1002/sce.10029

show abstract