A natureza da ciência e a instrumentação para o ensino da física

Medeiros, Alexandre; Bezerra Filho, Severino

doi:10.1590/S1516-73132000000200003

Resumos

O propósito deste artigo é o de examinar as convicções filosóficas que dão suporte aos comportamentos de alguns professores de física ao lidarem com o ensino da Física no contexto de um laboratório. Entrevistas foram feitas com professores de "Instrumentação para o Ensino da Física", normalmente apresentadas nos currículos desses cursos, assim como com professores secundários que tivessem previamente feito tal curso. As questões foram formuladas de tal modo que os sujeitos pudessem ser envolvidos numa conversa sobre como ensinar alguns assuntos da física e até que ponto seria importante apelar para a experimentação. Os resultados desta pesquisa revelaram perspectivas diferentes sobre o tema entre os sujeitos, principalmente posições indutivistas e realistas ingênuas, as quais são comentadas neste artigo.

A natureza da ciência; indutivismo ingênuo; realismo ingênuo; crenças de professores de física

The purpose of this article is to examine the philosophical convictions which underline the behaviour of some teachers of physics when dealing with the teaching of physics in a laboratory context. Interviews were conducted with teachers of "Instrumentation for Physics Teaching", usually presented in physics courses syllabus, as well as with some secondary teachers of physics who had previously followed such a course. The questions were addressed in such a manner that the subjects could involved in a conversation about how to teach some contents of physics and to which degree it would be important to appeal to experimentation. The findings of this research revealed some different perspectives about the theme among the subjects, mainly naive inductivist and realistic contentions, which are commented in this article.

The nature of science; naive inductivism; naive realism; physics teachers' beliefs

ARTIGOS

A natureza da ciência e a instrumentação para o ensino da Física

Alexandre Medeiros^I; Severino Bezerra Filho^II

^IProfessor Adjunto, phD, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Educação nas Ciências, Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco (e-mail: med@hotlink.com.br)

^IIProfessor Adjunto Mestre, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco

RESUMO

O propósito deste artigo é o de examinar as convicções filosóficas que dão suporte aos comportamentos de alguns professores de física ao lidarem com o ensino da Física no contexto de um laboratório. Entrevistas foram feitas com professores de "Instrumentação para o Ensino da Física", normalmente apresentadas nos currículos desses cursos, assim como com professores secundários que tivessem previamente feito tal curso. As questões foram formuladas de tal modo que os sujeitos pudessem ser envolvidos numa conversa sobre como ensinar alguns assuntos da física e até que ponto seria importante apelar para a experimentação. Os resultados desta pesquisa revelaram perspectivas diferentes sobre o tema entre os sujeitos, principalmente posições indutivistas e realistas ingênuas, as quais são comentadas neste artigo.

Unitermos: A natureza da ciência, indutivismo ingênuo, realismo ingênuo, crenças de professores de física.

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this article is to examine the philosophical convictions which underline the behaviour of some teachers of physics when dealing with the teaching of physics in a laboratory context. Interviews were conducted with teachers of "Instrumentation for Physics Teaching", usually presented in physics courses syllabus, as well as with some secondary teachers of physics who had previously followed such a course. The questions were addressed in such a manner that the subjects could involved in a conversation about how to teach some contents of physics and to which degree it would be important to appeal to experimentation. The findings of this research revealed some different perspectives about the theme among the subjects, mainly naive inductivist and realistic contentions, which are commented in this article.

Keywords: The nature of science, naive inductivism, naive realism, physics teachers' beliefs.

Texto completo disponível apenas em PDF.

Full text available only in PDF format.

Referências bibliográficas

ALTERS, B.Whose nature of science? Journal of Research in Science Education, v. 34, n.1, 1997.

BEZERRA FILHO, S. A relação teoria-experimento na visão de professores de física do segundo grau e de professores de instrumentação para o ensino de física: um estudo de caso. Aracajú, 1997. Dissertação (Mestrado) - Universidade Federal de Sergipe.

BOYD, R., GASPER, P. ,TROUT, J. The Philosophy of Science. Cambridge, Massachussets, Mit Press:, 1991.

CANTOR, G. Criticism of the projectile theory of light. Physics Education, v. 16, 1981. CHALMERS, A. What is this Thing Called Science? Milton Keynes, Open University, 1986.

CHAPMAN, B. Special relativity and the Michelson-Morley experiment. Physics Education, v.14, 1979.

CLEMINSON, A. Establishing an epistemological base for science teaching in the light of contemporary notions of the nature of science and how children learn science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 27, n. 5, 1990.

FEYRABEND, P. Against method: outline of an anarchistic philosophy of science. London, New Left Books, 1975.

FLECK, L. Genesis and development of a scientific fact. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1981.

FORGE, J. A role for philosophy of science in the teaching of science. Journal of Philosophy of Education, v. 13, 1979.

GARRISON, J. Husserl, Galileo and the process of idealization. Synthese, v. 66, 1986.

HANSON, N. Patterns of discovery: an inquiry into the conceptual foundation of science. London, The Scientific Book Guild, 1962.

HODSON, D. Toward a philosophical more valid curriculum. Science Education, v. 72, n.1, 1988.

HUSSERL, E. La crise des sciences européennes et la phénomenologie transcendentale. Paris, Gallimard, 1976.

KUHN, T. The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1970.

LAKATOS, I. The methodology of research programs. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1989.

LAWSON, A. What should students learn about the nature of science and how should we teach it? Journal of College Science Teaching, May, 1999.

LEDERMAN, N, ZEIDLER, D. Science teachers' conceptions of the nature of science: do they really influence teaching behaviour? Science Education, v. 71, n. 5, 1987.

MATTHEWS, M. Experiment as the objectification of theory: galileo's revolution. In: INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON MISCONCEPTIONS IN SCIENCE EDUCATION, 2, 1987, Cornell. Proceedings....Cornell: J.D Novak, 1987.

MATTHEWS, M. History, philosophy and science teaching: an approachment. Studies in Science Education, v.18, 1990.

______. Science teaching: the role of history and philosophy of science. Londres, Routledge, 1994.

MEDEIROS, A. Teachers of physics understanding of the nature of science with particular reference to the development of ideas of force and motion. 1992. Tese (Doutorado) - University of Leeds.

______. An investigation into erors made in attempts to solve mathematical problems. 1992. Tese (Doutorado)- University of Leeds.

______. Aston e a descoberta dos isótopos. Química Nova na Escola. nov, 1999.

O'HEAR, A. An introduction to the philosophy of science. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1990.

POPPER, K. The Logic of scientific discovery. London, Harper & Row, 1968.

POWERS, J. Philosophy and the new physics. London, Meuthuen, 1985.

ROUSE, J. Husserlian phenomenology and scientific realism. Philosophy of Science, v. 54, 1987.

SCHATZMAN, E. Ciência e sociedade. Coimbra, Almedina, 1973.

SILVA, M. Realismo e anti-realismo na ciência: aspectos introdutórios de uma discussão sobre a natureza das teorias. Ciência & Educação, v. 5, n.1, 1999.

SOLOMON, J. Teaching about the nature of science in the british national curriculum. Science Education, v. 75 , n.1, 1991.

STRASSER, S. Phenomenology and the human sciences. Pittsburgh, Duquesne University Press, 1963.

WARREN, P. Physics for Life. London, John Murray, 1988.

WOOLGAR, S. Science: the very idea. London, Tavistock, 1988.

Referências bibliográficas

ALTERS, B.Whose nature of science? Journal of Research in Science Education, v. 34, n.1, 1997.
BEZERRA FILHO, S. A relação teoria-experimento na visão de professores de física do segundo grau e de professores de instrumentação para o ensino de física: um estudo de caso. Aracajú, 1997. Dissertação (Mestrado) - Universidade Federal de Sergipe.
BOYD, R., GASPER, P. ,TROUT, J. The Philosophy of Science. Cambridge, Massachussets, Mit Press:, 1991.
CANTOR, G. Criticism of the projectile theory of light. Physics Education, v. 16, 1981.
CHALMERS, A. What is this Thing Called Science? Milton Keynes, Open University, 1986.
CHAPMAN, B. Special relativity and the Michelson-Morley experiment. Physics Education, v.14, 1979.
CLEMINSON, A. Establishing an epistemological base for science teaching in the light of contemporary notions of the nature of science and how children learn science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 27, n. 5, 1990.
FEYRABEND, P. Against method: outline of an anarchistic philosophy of science London, New Left Books, 1975.
FLECK, L. Genesis and development of a scientific fact Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1981.
FORGE, J. A role for philosophy of science in the teaching of science. Journal of Philosophy of Education, v. 13, 1979.
GARRISON, J. Husserl, Galileo and the process of idealization. Synthese, v. 66, 1986.
HANSON, N. Patterns of discovery: an inquiry into the conceptual foundation of science London, The Scientific Book Guild, 1962.
HODSON, D. Toward a philosophical more valid curriculum. Science Education, v. 72, n.1, 1988.
HUSSERL, E. La crise des sciences européennes et la phénomenologie transcendentale Paris, Gallimard, 1976.
KUHN, T. The structure of scientific revolutions Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1970.
LAKATOS, I. The methodology of research programs. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1989.
LAWSON, A. What should students learn about the nature of science and how should we teach it? Journal of College Science Teaching, May, 1999.
LEDERMAN, N, ZEIDLER, D. Science teachers' conceptions of the nature of science: do they really influence teaching behaviour? Science Education, v. 71, n. 5, 1987.
MATTHEWS, M. Experiment as the objectification of theory: galileo's revolution. In: INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON MISCONCEPTIONS IN SCIENCE EDUCATION, 2, 1987, Cornell. Proceedings...Cornell: J.D Novak, 1987.
MATTHEWS, M. History, philosophy and science teaching: an approachment. Studies in Science Education, v.18, 1990.
______. Science teaching: the role of history and philosophy of science Londres, Routledge, 1994.
MEDEIROS, A. Teachers of physics understanding of the nature of science with particular reference to the development of ideas of force and motion. 1992. Tese (Doutorado) - University of Leeds.
______. An investigation into erors made in attempts to solve mathematical problems. 1992. Tese (Doutorado)- University of Leeds.
______. Aston e a descoberta dos isótopos. Química Nova na Escola nov, 1999.
O'HEAR, A. An introduction to the philosophy of science. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1990.
POPPER, K. The Logic of scientific discovery. London, Harper & Row, 1968.
POWERS, J. Philosophy and the new physics. London, Meuthuen, 1985.
ROUSE, J. Husserlian phenomenology and scientific realism. Philosophy of Science, v. 54, 1987.
SCHATZMAN, E. Ciência e sociedade Coimbra, Almedina, 1973.
SILVA, M. Realismo e anti-realismo na ciência: aspectos introdutórios de uma discussão sobre a natureza das teorias. Ciência & Educação, v. 5, n.1, 1999.
SOLOMON, J. Teaching about the nature of science in the british national curriculum. Science Education, v. 75 , n.1, 1991.
STRASSER, S. Phenomenology and the human sciences. Pittsburgh, Duquesne University Press, 1963.
WARREN, P. Physics for Life London, John Murray, 1988.
WOOLGAR, S. Science: the very idea London, Tavistock, 1988.

Datas de Publicação

Publicação nesta coleção
06 Fev 2012
Data do Fascículo
2000

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

[1] ALTERS, B.Whose nature of science? Journal of Research in Science Education, v. 34, n.1, 1997.

[2] BEZERRA FILHO, S. A relação teoria-experimento na visão de professores de física do segundo grau e de professores de instrumentação para o ensino de física: um estudo de caso. Aracajú, 1997. Dissertação (Mestrado) - Universidade Federal de Sergipe.

[3] BOYD, R., GASPER, P. ,TROUT, J. The Philosophy of Science. Cambridge, Massachussets, Mit Press:, 1991.

[4] CANTOR, G. Criticism of the projectile theory of light. Physics Education, v. 16, 1981.

[5] CHALMERS, A. What is this Thing Called Science? Milton Keynes, Open University, 1986.

[6] CHAPMAN, B. Special relativity and the Michelson-Morley experiment. Physics Education, v.14, 1979.

[7] CLEMINSON, A. Establishing an epistemological base for science teaching in the light of contemporary notions of the nature of science and how children learn science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 27, n. 5, 1990.

[8] FEYRABEND, P. Against method: outline of an anarchistic philosophy of science London, New Left Books, 1975.

[9] FLECK, L. Genesis and development of a scientific fact Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1981.

[10] FORGE, J. A role for philosophy of science in the teaching of science. Journal of Philosophy of Education, v. 13, 1979.

[11] GARRISON, J. Husserl, Galileo and the process of idealization. Synthese, v. 66, 1986.

[12] HANSON, N. Patterns of discovery: an inquiry into the conceptual foundation of science London, The Scientific Book Guild, 1962.

[13] HODSON, D. Toward a philosophical more valid curriculum. Science Education, v. 72, n.1, 1988.

[14] HUSSERL, E. La crise des sciences européennes et la phénomenologie transcendentale Paris, Gallimard, 1976.

[15] KUHN, T. The structure of scientific revolutions Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1970.

[16] LAKATOS, I. The methodology of research programs. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1989.

[17] LAWSON, A. What should students learn about the nature of science and how should we teach it? Journal of College Science Teaching, May, 1999.

[18] LEDERMAN, N, ZEIDLER, D. Science teachers' conceptions of the nature of science: do they really influence teaching behaviour? Science Education, v. 71, n. 5, 1987.

[19] MATTHEWS, M. Experiment as the objectification of theory: galileo's revolution. In: INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON MISCONCEPTIONS IN SCIENCE EDUCATION, 2, 1987, Cornell. Proceedings...Cornell: J.D Novak, 1987.

[20] MATTHEWS, M. History, philosophy and science teaching: an approachment. Studies in Science Education, v.18, 1990.

[21] ______. Science teaching: the role of history and philosophy of science Londres, Routledge, 1994.

[22] MEDEIROS, A. Teachers of physics understanding of the nature of science with particular reference to the development of ideas of force and motion. 1992. Tese (Doutorado) - University of Leeds.

[23] ______. An investigation into erors made in attempts to solve mathematical problems. 1992. Tese (Doutorado)- University of Leeds.

[24] ______. Aston e a descoberta dos isótopos. Química Nova na Escola nov, 1999.

[25] O'HEAR, A. An introduction to the philosophy of science. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1990.

[26] POPPER, K. The Logic of scientific discovery. London, Harper & Row, 1968.

[27] POWERS, J. Philosophy and the new physics. London, Meuthuen, 1985.

[28] ROUSE, J. Husserlian phenomenology and scientific realism. Philosophy of Science, v. 54, 1987.

[29] SCHATZMAN, E. Ciência e sociedade Coimbra, Almedina, 1973.

[30] SILVA, M. Realismo e anti-realismo na ciência: aspectos introdutórios de uma discussão sobre a natureza das teorias. Ciência & Educação, v. 5, n.1, 1999.

[31] SOLOMON, J. Teaching about the nature of science in the british national curriculum. Science Education, v. 75 , n.1, 1991.

[32] STRASSER, S. Phenomenology and the human sciences. Pittsburgh, Duquesne University Press, 1963.

[33] WARREN, P. Physics for Life London, John Murray, 1988.

[34] WOOLGAR, S. Science: the very idea London, Tavistock, 1988.