A topic in teaching science
An authentic science education asks learners to both learn about some specific scientific ideas and also to learn something of the nature of science – the practices of scientists and the processes by which new scientific knowledge is constructed and developed. There are a number of nature of science (sometimes abbreviated to 'NOS') themes that might be thought important to teach young people about.
Read more about teaching the nature of science
One of these themes is science as a rhetorical activity.
Science as rhetoric
"…success in science [involves] persuading the scientific community, or that part of it working in
the same field at least, that particular scientific results and ideas are important and progress the
field forward. This then depends upon argument: making a case that data can be best interpreted in
a certain way, and persuading those who may currently think quite differently about certain natural
phenomena" (Taber, 2017: 34)
Scientific reports as arguments
"The scientific paper is in effect a rhetorical structure for best presenting a particular interpretation of certain data such that it seems to offer evidence for a particular model, theory, principle, or other such construct …In presenting this argument, the author(s) will select and sequence material
to make a case, and will necessarily exclude much information (possibly including some collected
data) that is considered less relevant to the knowledge claims being made" (Taber, 2017: 34)
Sir Peter Medawar went as far as to ask whether the scientific paper was by its nature a fraud as it might be understood to present a descriptive account of research undertaken, whereas in practice it was a carefully constructed argument based on deliberately selected and sequenced information that could only offer a partial account of the research.
Photograph of Immunologist (and science essayist) Peter Medawar, Winner of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1960, from his biography at the Nobel prize organisation's website.
Scientists are human, and are inevitably sometimes influenced by assumptions, perspectives, biases, experiences, intuitions they bring to their work – so can never be sure they are offering a totally neutral evaluation giving fair consideration to all interpretations.
Read about the human nature of science
Given that it may be better if individual scientists 'fight their corners' and leave the community to judge their claims (as in a court of law the prosecuting and defence attorneys are expected to do their best, with the rules of evidence and honesty, to argue for their side's case).
"Even when scientists are scrupulously honest in their attempts to be objective, other scientists approaching the same evidence base from different perspectives might have made different judgements about what was relevant and should be included, and how the presented data should best be interpreted as scientific evidence…The scientific literature should therefore not be seen as a series of factual and objective accounts of nature, but rather as a cumulative collection of knowledge claims, each based on some limited data, interpreted through particular frameworks of understanding, and evaluated as of merit by referees chosen as suitable experts by journal editors." (Taber, 2017: 34-5)
Read about the peer review process
Teaching should reflect the rhetorical nature of science
"Teaching science involves helping learners to appreciate the value of the unfamiliar constructs used
in science. Just as scientists orchestrate evidence and present carefully structured arguments to
persuade their colleagues of claims made in scientific papers, so similar rhetorical moves are made
by science teachers in reconstructing scientific concepts with their students…Science teachers can reflect the nature of science in their teaching by giving learners insight into those rhetorical processes." (Taber, 2017: 35)
Work cited:
- Taber, K. S. (2017). Reflecting the nature of science in science education. In K. S. Taber & B. Akpan (Eds.), Science Education: An International Course Companion (pp. 23-37). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. [Download the author’s manuscript version of the chapter.]
