CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 425Science Education and PedagogyEducational Strategies and EpistemologiesEvolution and Science Education

‘An experiment is when you try it and see if it works’: a study of grade 7 students’ understanding of the construction of scientific knowledge

Carey, Susan, Evans, Risa, Honda, Maya, Jay, Eileen, Unger, Christopher·1989·International Journal of Science Education
DOI 10.1080/0950069890110504
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The research reported here focuses on grade 7 (12‐year‐old) students’ epistomological views prior to and after exposure to a teaching unit especially developed to introduce the constructivist view of science. A clinical interview was used to assess students’ understanding about the nature of scientific knowledge and inquiry. Students’ initial epistemological stance is that scientific knowledge is a passively acquired, faithful copy of the world, and that scientific inquiry is limited solely to observing rather than constructing explanations about nature. We found that it is possible to move students beyond this initial view.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/0950069890110504

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Carey et al. (1989) found that a majority of seventh graders believed that scientific knowledge is a faithful copy of nature and that scientific inquiry is a Baconian process of observing facts rather than a process of constructing theories to account for empirical observations.

    “Carey et al. (1989) found that a majority of seventh graders believed that scientific knowledge is a faithful copy of nature and that scientific inquiry is a Baconian process of observing facts rather than a process of constructing theories to account for empirical observations.”

    From The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: A theoretical framework and implications for science instruction. (1993) · cites this paper as Carey et al. (1989)

  • Children (and even some adults) do not make the same sharp distinction between theories and evidence that scientists do.

    “In addition, it appears that children (and even some adults) do not make the same sharp distinction between theories and evidence that scientists do (Carey, Evans, Honda, Jay, & Unger, 1989; D. Kuhn, 1989; D. Kuhn, Amsel, & O'Loughlin, 1988).”

    From The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: A theoretical framework and implications for science instruction. (1993) · cites this paper as Carey, Evans, Honda, Jay, & Unger, 1989

  • Carey et al. (1989) developed a 3-week instructional unit blending an enculturation approach with some explicit instruction on the scientific method; as a result, students showed a marked increase in their understanding of the nature and purposes of scientific inquiry.

    “In the domain of science, Carey et al. (1989) developed a 3-week instructional unit blending an enculturation approach with some explicit instruction on the scientific method.As a result of this short intervention, students showed a marked increase in their understanding of the nature and purposes of scientific inquiry.”

    From The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: A theoretical framework and implications for science instruction. (1993) · cites this paper as Carey et al. (1989)

  • There is some empirical support for the notion that enculturation methods can foster the development of epistemological commitments.

    “There is some empirical support for the notion that enculturation methods can foster the development of epistemological commitments.”

    From The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: A theoretical framework and implications for science instruction. (1993) · cites this paper as Carey et al. (1989)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 12 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Carey, S., Evans, R., Honda, M., Jay, E., & Unger, C.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
ORCID
Carey, Susan
Venue
International Journal of Science Education
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
1989-11
Volume
11
Issue
5
Pages
514-529
ISSN
  • 0950-0693 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-5289
DOI
10.1080/0950069890110504
OpenAlex
W2107324590
Cited by
425
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 18
FWCI
20.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Science Education (publishedVersion)
  • University of New Hampshire Scholars Repository (University of New Hampshire at Manchester) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Evolution and Science Education
Keywords
epistemological beliefs, nature of scientific knowledge, scientific inquiry, constructivism, constructivist teaching, seventh grade students, secondary school science, student understanding of science, clinical interview

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review