Note- It covers topics related to Unit I of M.Ed. Semester 4th Science education. It is with special reference to syllabus of BHU. Hopefully students of other Universities those have similar topics to be studied under another paper may found it useful to an extent. In case of this topic, it’s my humble request to the viewers that try search this topic from other sources as well.

1. By,
Garima Tandon
B.Sc., B.Ed., M.Ed.
Banaras Hindu University
Educational Goals- Educational goals are decided on the basis of level of programme
whether it is 2°, U.G. level or P.G. level. Consideration in this syllabus is- 2° level.
Goals of Science Pedagogy-
To develop critical thinking (looking for positive as well as negative aspect)
Goals of Science vs. Goals of Science Education-
Goals of Science-
 Scientific literacy as a whole concept reflects the goals of science.
 The goals of science is: to understand natural phenomena (To investigate). The
phenomena can be explained / represented in the form of theory. A theory is scientific
explanation. It is tentative (Process involved: Observation, Analysis, Experimentation
etc.). Therefore ultimate goal of science is development of theory.
Goals of Science Education / Science teaching-learning- (To know, To understand, To
apply)
a) Cognitive
 To develop scientific attitude / temperament
 To develop critical thinking
 To develop knowledge of facts, concepts, principles, rules related to science
 To make them able to do experimentation & handle tools
 Science process skills
 Make hypothesis
 Experimentation
 Handling tool
 Drawing Inference
 Communication skills
 To develop the ability-
 To make educated guess
 To set & carry out experiments
 To know Inference
 To communicate result
 To develop an understanding about product of science & how to apply it.
b) Affective-
 To develop an awareness
 To develop rational thinking
 To develop empirical thinking (observation based)

2.  To develop open-mindedness
 To develop unprejudiced & unbiased judgement capacity
 Make flexible self-correction ability because science as process is itself self-corrective
based on accumulation of a new perspective & evidences to look into it.
c) Psychomotor
Epistemological beliefs of Science / Nature of Science / what is Science-
 Students’ age is less when they are school going, therefore this concept was removed
 A psychological study- As student see the knowledge similarly they acquire it.
Psychologist found that it is not beyond reach but it should be presented in simple form
in the classroom.
e.g. - footprints of birds of different size: some large size footprints & some
smaller then finally last only larger one.
Observation→Hypothesis→Result→Inference
Conclusion- Observation & Inference both are important
 Objectivity in Science-
Is Science highly objective?- No, it will destruct creativity
Knowledge can’t be said to be truth that is verified by hypothesis testing but is
said to be Valid
Objectivity is of high level in observation in Science but inference can be
different therefore there is subjectivity in drawing inference
Observation can’t be in mechanistic way
All observations are theory laden in nature i.e. guided by a theory
Elements describe Nature of Science / Science Epistemological Belief-
MaComa (1995) in his book made a list of elements that elaborate nature of science /
Science Epistemological Belief on the basis of 30-40 years of previous studies:
i. Student must know that laws & theories are 2 distinct point of scientific
knowledge
ii. Science involves creativity
iii. Scientific knowledge is creative in nature (that means change is possible at all
level)
iv. Science involves both observation & inference. Objectivity can be attained
strictly during observation. The element of subjectivity can enter into drawing
inference
v. All the observations are theory laden in nature
 Students should know that what are the different aspect in acquiring science knowledge,
because it affect their way of knowing.
 Nature of Science was established as Goal of science education by American
Association for Science while describing Scientific literacy. A proper Scientific Attitude
can be developed by the knowledge of it.
 2 important things:

3. a. Knowledge in Science (Facts, Concepts, Principles
b. Knowledge about Science (What is observation, inference & experiment, what is
its nature that is an implicit knowledge can’t be taught directly)
 BSCS, Chem. Studies, PSCS, Nutfield study clarified that if aim of science education is
to transact science by lecturing then even after making such curriculum that kind of
epistemological belief cannot be developed
 There is lots of confusion among students regarding law & theory
 They know Science is tentative but only in terms of technological advancement.
Epistemological bases of Science Education
Types of Knowledge-
A. Propositional & Procedural-
1. Propositional Knowledge- Also called as descriptive or declarative knowledge.
Example- A puppy is young one of dog, seeds are used to produce plants. Such
statements can be proved true or false. It in turn may be of 4 types:
a. Logical- In this type of knowledge, we examine relationships between
statements and draw conclusions based on the law of logic. Example- Metals
are good conductor of electricity. Mercury is a metal. Hence, mercury is a
good conductor of electricity.
b. Systemic- This kind of knowledge results from learning a system of words or
symbols and examining how they relate to one another. For example- W=
F*S is systemic knowledge because we understand something specific when
we use the term W, F, & S.
c. Semantic- Knowledge that arises due to the knowledge of meaning of words
processed by a person is called as semantic knowledge.
d. Empirical- Empirical knowledge comes from our senses, observation,
generation of hypotheses, testing and confirmation (or refutation) of
hypotheses result in empirical knowledge. John Locke when referring to
empirical knowledge says, ‘all ideas come from sensation or reflection’. Such
knowledge can be tested both logically and through experimentation. It is
used to describe and predict phenomena. It is communicated by qualitative
and quantitative descriptions, empirical hypotheses, empirical definitions,
generalizations and scientific laws. For example- Newton’s Laws of Motion,
Dalton’s Atomic Theory etc.
2. Procedural Knowledge- It is also called as imperative knowledge i.e.
knowledge required to perform a task. For example- in order to perform an
experiment, we need to have procedural knowledge. If a person may explain the
accurate procedure of conducting an experiment but he/she may not actually
perform it then he/she lack procedural knowledge. Procedural knowledge, thus, is

4. a collection of skills. Task likes dissection, handling instrument and performing
experiments in science involve procedural knowledge.
B. Apriori & Aposteriori
1. Apriori Knowledge-Knowledge or fact exist before experience, on the basis of
reasoning
2. Aposteriori Knowledge- Knowledge gained after experience or empirical perception
Sources of Knowledge-
According to Pierce, there are 4 main sources of knowledge as described below:
1. Scientific knowledge-
 Most valid in contemporary world
 An objective way to determine belief, so that conclusion would be same for
everybody
 If the method is properly followed, they should arrive at the same conclusion
and hence same belief
 Belief is determined by external permanency & by something upon which our
thinking has no effect
 Not restricted to the method of science exclusively to inquiry about subject
matter
 Presents distinction of a right & wrong way
2. Intuition / A priori Method-
 Method of agreeableness to reason for fixation of belief
 A different new method of settling opinions must be adopted, that shall not
only produce an impulse to believe but shall also decide what proposition it is
which is to be believed
 We select those propositions which agree with reason or rationality and
ignoring or giving lesser weight to empirical facts
 Systems of this sort have not usually rested upon any observed facts, at least
not in any great degree
 More intellectual & respectable from the point of view of reason than either of
the other method
 Distinguished for its comfortable conclusion.
3. Authority (Religious)-
 A way to resolve doubt
 We believe what we are told to believe by those in power.
 Main & best method to govern masses
 It leads to peace but in the cost of individual freedom
 Incomplete method, because everything can’t be regulated

5. 4. Tenacity-
 We picked up a belief which happens to please us and keep it ignoring
everything which might question it and recognizing only those things, which
support our belief
 We literally cling to our own beliefs steadfastly, resisting anything or anyone
that might contradict those beliefs
 Man who pursue this method, are distinguished for their decision or character.
They do not waste time in trying to make up their minds what they want but
fastening like lightening upon whatever alternatives come first, they hold to it
to the end, whatever happens, without an instant’s irresolution
 Blind and unjustified method
 Unable to hold its ground in practice
 Social impulse is against it
Empiricism & Rationalism-
Empiricism- Knowledge gained by senses is valid knowledge
Rationalism- Knowledge gained by rationalization is valid knowledge
Criteria for Validation of Scientific Knowledge-
S.No. Source of Knowledge Validation
1. Science Empirical Testing
2. Authority
3. Intuition Rationality
4. Tenacity
Note- I missed few points in validation column because I am not very sure regarding
that. Kindly write about criteria for validation of source of knowledge for authority &
tenacity, if u find it anywhere.
What is Science?
Science
Observation Explain
Empirical Part
Inference
Logical Part

6. Science as:
a. Unit of Knowledge
b. Process of Investigation
c. A style of thinking
Characteristics of Scientific mind- Development of:
1. Objectivity-
 Observe the things without any prejudice or presumption
 Draw inference free from social, economic & political pressure
 Consider all thoughts to be temporary (e.g. enhance in the number of elements
in the periodic table of Mendeleev)
2. Freedom from fear & prejudices
3. Critical Thinking-
 Go deep
 Try to know about each aspect of topic & answer of how
4. Logical Thinking-
 Students should be motivated to think, is it correct? If Yes / No, why it is so
 Try to find out what as the reason of previous mistakes
 Find out cause & effect relationship
 Inferences on the basis of evidences
 Making hypothesis on the basis of hypothesis
 Teacher can develop this by using following method:
Collect data/evidences→Test hypothesis→Draw Inferences
5. Liberal Behaviour / Receptivity in free brain-
 Listen others thought →Rethink about your own thought→If judicious
justifiable, change your thoughts
 Desire for new thoughts
 Flexible attitude
6. Respect for evidences-
 Each inference should be based on valid evidence
 Ready to change previous inference on the basis of valid evidence.
7. Honest observation and reporting-
 Focus on process rather than product.
8. Doubtability-
 Criticize
 Question social evils & superstitions and dissolve them on the basis of
arguments & logic
9. Diligence / Persistency-

7.  Accept failure
 Learn from mistakes
 Try continuously
 Sustained effort (Each scientific discovery is the sustained effort of scientists)
Sociological Bases of Science Education
Citizenship is the ultimate goal of education so that students should understand the norms and
standards of society.
Education should be democratic because it aims to develop democratic citizens or individual
for democratic society those can take part in discussion related to Socio-Scientific Issues
(SSI).
More the society depends on SSI, more it will be scientific.
We can’t take part in political discussion if we do not have basic understanding of political
concept (scientific concept).
Science is part of our culture. It is not only western in origin but is in all culture / universal
culture. It is not western achievement but is human achievement.
Scientific Literacy for Democratic Citizenship
Involvement of science in making future citizens of Science dominated Society those have
scientific knowledge, attitude & democratic citizenship.
 General Education-
 Awareness of environment
 Relationship b/w man & environment
 Knowledge & understanding of Science / Scientific literacy helps individual to
become are active citizen in the society
 Socio-scientific Issues-
Society
Democratic
Participati
on
Decision
Making
Well
Informed
Society + Science & Technology
Socio-Scientific Issues

8.  If we are saying that a social structure is democratic it means they are participating in
problem solving & decision making.
 Decision must be informed that means you should know about the thing regarding which
you are making decision. Without it a decision will be baseless.
 Society must be dominated by Science & technology
 If society is science & technology oriented then issues will be socio-scientific issues (issues
that concern with science)
 Each issue leads to participation & decision making
 More informed the citizen, more informed decision they will take
 Acc. to P.T. Nehru, Scientific Temperament is essential for India
 Citizenship Education
 Socio-scientific issues
Historical Development of Scientific Knowledge
The history of science is characterized by revolutions in scientific outlook. Scientists have a
worldview or "paradigm". A paradigm is a universally recognizable scientific achievement
that, for a time, provides model problems and solutions to a community of practitioners.
In science and philosophy, a paradigm (/ˈpærədaɪm/) is a distinct set of concepts or thought
patterns, including theories, research methods, postulates, and standards for what constitutes
legitimate contributions to a field.
The Oxford English Dictionary defines a paradigm as "a pattern or model, an exemplar; a
typical instance of something, an example". The historian of science Thomas Kuhn gave it its
contemporary meaning when he adopted the word to refer to the set of concepts and practices
that define a scientific discipline at any particular period of time. In his book, The Structure of
Scientific Revolutions (first published in 1962), Kuhn defines a scientific paradigm as:
"universally recognized scientific achievements that, for a time, provide model problems and
solutions for a community of practitioners, i.e.,
 what is to be observed and scrutinized
 the kind of questions that are supposed to be asked and probed for answers in relation
to this subject
 how these questions are to be structured
 what predictions made by the primary theory within the discipline
 how the results of scientific investigations should be interpreted
 how an experiment is to be conducted, and what equipment is available to conduct the
experiment.

9. Paradigms have two aspects. Firstly, within normal science, the term refers to the set of
exemplary experiments that are likely to be copied or emulated. Secondly, underpinning this
set of exemplars are shared preconceptions, made prior to – and conditioning – the collection
of evidence. These preconceptions embody both hidden assumptions and elements that he
describes as quasi-metaphysical; the interpretations of the paradigm may vary among
individual scientists.
Kuhn suggests that certain scientific works, such as Newton's Principia or John Dalton's New
System of Chemical Philosophy (1808), provide an open-ended resource: a framework of
concepts, results, and procedures within which subsequent work is structured. Normal science
proceeds within such a framework or paradigm. A paradigm does not impose a rigid or
mechanical approach, but can be taken more or less creatively and flexibly.
Thomas Kuhn argued that science does not evolve gradually towards truth.
Science has a paradigm which remains constant before going through a paradigm shift when
current theories can’t explain some phenomenon, and someone proposes a new theory.
A scientific revolution occurs when: (i) the new paradigm better explains the observations, and
offers a model that is closer to the objective, external reality; and (ii) the new paradigm is
incommensurate with the old.
For example, Lamarckian evolution was replaced with Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural
selection.
A paradigm shift, a concept identified by the American physicist and philosopher Thomas
Kuhn, is a fundamental change in the basic concepts and experimental practices of a scientific
discipline. Even though Kuhn restricted the use of the term to the natural sciences, the concept
of a paradigm shift has also been used in numerous non-scientific contexts to describe a
profound change in a fundamental model or perception of events.
Paradigm shifts tend to appear in response to the accumulation of critical anomalies as well as
the proposal of a new theory with the power to encompass both older relevant data and explain
relevant anomalies.
Kuhn presented his notion of a paradigm shift in his influential book The Structure of Scientific
Revolutions (1962).
Kuhn contrasts paradigm shifts, which characterize a scientific revolution, to the activity of
normal science, which he describes as scientific work done within a prevailing framework or
paradigm. Paradigm shifts arise when the dominant paradigm under which normal science
operates is rendered incompatible with new phenomena, facilitating the adoption of a new
theory or paradigm.
As one commentator summarizes:
Kuhn acknowledges having used the term "paradigm" in two different meanings. In the first
one, "paradigm" designates what the members of a certain scientific community have in
common, that is to say, the whole of techniques, patents and values shared by the members of
the community. In the second sense, the paradigm is a single element of a whole, say for
instance Newton’s Principia, which, acting as a common model or an example... stands for the
explicit rules and thus defines a coherent tradition of investigation. Thus the question is for

10. Kuhn to investigate by means of the paradigm what makes possible the constitution of what he
calls "normal science". That is to say, the science which can decide if a certain problem will be
considered scientific or not. Normal science does not mean at all a science guided by a coherent
system of rules, on the contrary, the rules can be derived from the paradigms, but the paradigms
can guide the investigation also in the absence of rules. This is precisely the second meaning
of the term "paradigm", which Kuhn considered the most new and profound, though it is in
truth the oldest.
Some examples of contemporary paradigm shifts include:
 In medicine, the transition from "clinical judgment" to evidence-based medicine
 In social psychology, the transition from p-hacking to replication
 In software engineering, the transition from the Rational Paradigm to the Empirical
Paradigm
 In artificial intelligence, the transition from classical AI to data-driven AI
Kuhn's idea was, itself, revolutionary in its time. It caused a major change in the way that
academics talk about science; and, so, it may be that it caused (or was part of) a "paradigm
shift" in the history and sociology of science. However, Kuhn would not recognize such a
paradigm shift. Being in the social sciences, people can still use earlier ideas to discuss the
history of science.
Kuhn's Phases of Science-
Knowledge which does not evolve according to the four main phases, according to Kuhn, may
not be considered scientific.
Phase 1: Pre-science
The pre-paradigmatic state refers to a period before a scientific consensus has been reached.
Disorganized and diverse activity.
Constant debate over fundamentals.
As many theories as there are theorists.
No commonly accepted observational basis. The conflicting theories are constituted with their
own set of theory-dependent observations.
Phase 2: Normal Science
(most common – science is usually stable)
A paradigm is established which lays the foundations for legitimate work within the discipline.
Scientific work then consists in articulation of the paradigm, in solving puzzles that it throws
up.
A paradigm is a conventional basis for research; it sets a precedent.
Puzzles that resist solutions are seen as anomalies.
Anomalies are tolerated and do not cause the rejection of the theory, as scientists are confident
these anomalies can be explained over time.
Scientists spend much of their time in the Model Drift step, battling anomalies that have
appeared. They may or may not know this or acknowledge it.

11. It is necessary for normal science to be uncritical. If all scientists were critical of a theory and
spent time trying to falsify it, no detailed work would ever get done.
Phase 3: Crisis
This is where the paradigm shift occurs.
Anomalies become serious, and a crisis develops if the anomalies undermine the basic
assumptions of the paradigm and attempts to remove them consistently fail.
Under these circumstances the rules for the application of the paradigm become relaxed. Ideas
that challenge the existing paradigm are developed.
In crisis there will be ‘extraordinary science’ where there will be several competing theories.
If the anomalies can be resolved, the crisis is over and normal science resumes. If not, there is
a scientific revolution which involves a change of paradigm.
Phase 4: Revolution
Eventually a new paradigm will be established, but not as a result of any logically compelling
justification.
The reasons for the choice of a paradigm are largely psychological and sociological.
The new paradigm better explains the observations, and offers a model that is closer to the
objective, external reality
Different paradigms are held to be incommensurable — the new paradigm cannot be proven or
disproven by the rules of the old paradigm, and vice versa.
There is no natural measure or scale for ranking different paradigms.
Conclusion-
The enormous impact of Thomas Kuhn's work can be measured in the changes it brought about
in the vocabulary of the philosophy of science: besides "paradigm shift", Kuhn raised the word
"paradigm" itself from a term used in certain forms of linguistics to its current broader meaning.
The frequent use of the phrase "paradigm shift" has made scientists more aware of and in many
cases more receptive to paradigm changes, so that Kuhn’s analysis of the evolution of scientific
views has by itself influenced that evolution.