Abstract
Recently, there has been an increasing emphasis in discussions on science education on the potential and advantages of stories and narratives in teaching situations. From this, one might conclude that simply starting to use stories in science classrooms is a good thing, per se. Yet, as I will argue in my paper, things do not appear to be that easy. From my understanding, it is necessary to select the stories to be told in teaching situations with care – and also to reject those stories which are not to be told. With respect to such a selection, different criteria can be employed, depending on the aims of the instructional unit. In doing so, my criteria for selection will be based on an education which does not focus solely on the communication of scientific knowledge but which emphasizes relevant topics from the nature of science for structuring the teaching. With this intention, one can identify constructions of narratives that are misleading with respect to the nature of science and which may lead to an inappropriate understanding of science and scientific practice.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bloor D. (1991) Knowledge and social imagery. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL
Cardwell D.S.L. (1989) James Joule: A biography. Manchester University Press, Manchester, UK
Frercks J. (2007) Immaterial Devices. Centaurus 49: 81–113
Hannover, B. & Kessels, U. (2004). Self-to-prototype matching as a strategy for making academic choices. Why German high school students do not like math and science. Learning and Instruction, 14, 51-67. Retrieved September 9, 2008 from http://www.ewi-psy.fu-berlin.de/einrichtungen/arbeitsbereiche/ewi-psy/media/forschung/HannoverKesselsLearningInstruction2004.pdf
Heering P. (2000) Getting shocks: Teaching electrostatics with historical experiments at secondary school level. Science & Education 9: 363–373
Heering P. (2006) Public experiments and their analysis with the replication method. Science & Education 16: 637–645
Hentschel K. (2003) Das Mauberer in weißen Kittel. Phsik in Unserer Zeit 34: 225–231
Hoffmann J.R. (1996) André-Marie Ampère. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
Holton G. (1978) Subelectrons, presuppositions, and the Millikan-Ehrenhaft dispute. Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 9: 161–224
Klassen, S. & Teichmann, J. (2008). Conference programme of the Second International Conference on Story in Science Teaching. Authors: Munich, Germany.
McComas W.F. (1998) The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies. Kluwer, Dordrecht, NL
McComas W.F., Clough M.P., Almazroa H. (1998) The role and character of the nature of science in science education. In: McComas W.F. (eds) The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies. Kluwer, Dordrecht, NL, pp 3–40
Mpemba E.B., Osborne D.G. (1969) Cool?. Physics Education 4: 172–175
Nollet J.A. (1753) Essai sur l’électricité des corps (3rd ed). Guerin, Paris
Nye, M.J. (1981). N-rays: An episode in the history and psychology of science. Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences, 11, 125-156.
Thompson, M. (n.d.). Why hot water freezes before cold. Available at http://www.lancs.ac.uk/ug/thompsom/
Watson W. (1746) Experiences et observations, pour servir a l’explication de la nature et de proprietés de l’électricité. S. Jorry, Paris
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Heering, P. False Friends: What Makes a Story Inadequate for Science Teaching?. Interchange 41, 323–333 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-010-9133-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-010-9133-0