Research ArticleOpen AccessGoogle Scholar indexed
Epistemological Contributions of Toulmin’s Argumentative Model in Scientific Education
Federal Institute Goiano (IF Goiano), Rio Verde, Brazil
Postgraduate Program in Professional Technology Education, Federal Institute Goiano (ProfEPT/IFGoiano), Urutaí, Brazil
Postgraduate Program in Education for Science of the University of the State of São Paulo (PPGEpC/FC/Unesp), Bauru, Brazil
Postgraduate Program in Organizational Management of the Federal University of Catalão (PPGGO/UFCat), Catalão, Brazil
- 1 Federal Institute Goiano (IF Goiano), Rio Verde, Brazil
- 2 Postgraduate Program in Professional Technology Education, Federal Institute Goiano (ProfEPT/IFGoiano), Urutaí, Brazil
- 3 Postgraduate Program in Education for Science of the University of the State of São Paulo (PPGEpC/FC/Unesp), Bauru, Brazil
- 4 Postgraduate Program in Organizational Management of the Federal University of Catalão (PPGGO/UFCat), Catalão, Brazil
Copy link · social · email
Abstract
On the basis of a theoretical study, the objective of this article is to analyze questions around the scientific rationality, with an indication of the potentialities of Toulmin ’ s model of argument that can subsidize the confrontation of the problem of scientific education practices landmarked of an absolute and neutral science. The use of this argumentative model is legitimated, mainly, with the possibility of refutation as a way of demonstrating that the theoretical knowledge is provisional conjectures. Thus, it is emphasized that any conception of science linked to the activity of isolated individuals in search of truth is not resonant even with social reality itself.
KeywordsEpistemological DebateScientific RationalityToulmin’s Argumentative ModelRefutationScientific Education
- Aguiar Júnior, O. (2016). O papel do construtivismo na pesquisa em ensino de ciências. Investigacoes em ensino de ciências, 3, 107-120.
- Bacon, F. (1973). Novumorganum ou verdadeiras indicacoes acerca da interpretacao da natureza. Portal periódicos CAPES. Domínio Público.: Créditos da digitalizacao: Membros do grupo de discussao Acrópolis (Filosofia). http://br.egroups.com/group/acropolis/
- Cawthron, E. R., & Rowell, J. A. (1978). Epistemology and Science Education. Epistemology and Science Education, 5, 31-59. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267808559856
- Cleminson, A. (1990). Establishing an Epistemological Base for Science Teaching in the Light of Contemporary Notions of the Nature of Science and of How Children Learn Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 429-445. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660270504
- Dagnino, R. (2008). Neutralidade da ciência e determinismo tecnológico: Um debate sobre a tecnociência. Campinas: Unicamp.
- de Araújo, M. S. T., & dos S. Abib, M. L. V. (2003). Atividades experimentais no ensino de física: Diferentes enfoques, diferentes finalidades. Revista Brasileira de Ensino de Física, 25, 176-194. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1806-11172003000200007
- Fernandes-Sobrinho, M. F., Goncalves, E. A., & Fernandes, P. S. R. (2017). Percurso e diversidade epistemológica da pesquisa em educacao: Tensionamentos e possibilidades. Cadernos de Pesquisa, 23, 81-91. https://doi.org/10.18764/2178-2229.v.23n.especial/p81-91
- Hodson, D. (1985). Philosophy of Science, Science and Science Education. Studies in Science Education, 12, 25-57. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057268508559922
- Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2008). Designing Argumentation in Learning Environments. In S. Erduran, & M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from Classroom-Based Research (pp. 91-115). Dordrecht: Springer.
- Kuhn, T. S. (1996). A estrutura das revolucoes científicas (4th ed.). Sao Paulo: Perspectiva.
- Lakatos, I. (1979). O falseamento e a metodologia dos programas de pesquisa científica. In I. Lakatos, & A. Musgrave (Eds.), A crítica e o desenvolvimento do conhecimento (pp. 109-243). Sao Paulo: Cultrix.
- Mendonca, P. C., & Justi, R. (2013). Ensino-aprendizagem de ciências e argumentacao: Discussoes e questoes atuais. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Educacao em Ciências, 13, 187-216.