After 2000, a new group research group appears in the Greek academic scene called ―History, Philosophy and Didactics of Science and Technology‖ – HPDST. HPDST originates from two complementary groups, the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology group of the National Hellenic Research Foundation and the group for the Didactics of Science of the Department of Education of the University of Athens. The merge was brought through the acknowledgment that there is a strong need for science to be re-established in society and engage its stakeholders. This goal is to be accomplished through state of the art research using an interdisciplinary approach. Since 2000, HPDST has developed into one of the most promising research teams in South-eastern Europe.
The epistemological issue arising is whether these two Disciplines i.e. History of Science and Didactics of Science can complement each other. The main question one may ask is: Whether Teaching of the History of Science in the science classroom is legitimate.
The first attempt to fuse these two research traditions mentioned above following developments in Greek Science Education was made by Andreas Kassetas, a secondary school physicist.
The second attempt was made through the organization of a series of Conferences in Thessaloniki (2001), Athens (2003), Athens (2005) and Patras (2007). These biennial conferences have been complemented by a series of other initiatives such as the formalization of the ―Hellenic Society of History, Philosophy and Didactics of Science‖ following the Meeting organized in Athens in September 2007.
In the autumn of 1980, during the 2nd National Conference of the Hellenic Physical Society, Andreas Kassetas made the first reference for the need to incorporate elements from the history of physics in physics teaching in Greece. Which were the theoretical milestones of this proposal? According to A. Kassetas‘ own writings his theoretical sources included: The antipositivism of T. S. Kuhn‘s Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Arthur Koesler‘s Sleepwalkers, Yannis Karas‘ History of Greek Science, John Bernal‘s Science in History, Rene´ Taton‘s Histoire General des Sciences and above all the Harvard Project Physics Course.
A few years later, the Hellenic Physical Society appointed A. Kassetas and his team (his teacher in Athens University S. Mourikis and his friend and colleague N. Dapontes) to write a Physics textbook for the 10th and 11th grade students (1st and 2nd grade of the Greek Lyceum). The textbook was written following the general line of the Harvard Project with certain variations and differences though, which reflect the originality of the authors‘ contribution in Physics Teaching. The textbook was endorsed by the Ministry of Education and was printed and distributed to ―polykladika‖ Lycea. In the Greek educational system of those days there were two types of Lyceum: the ―polykladikon‖ and the general. In the ―polykladikon‖ Lyceum a
3 Science & Education 15, Nos 7-8, 2006, Special Issue: Textbooks in the Scientific Periphery
student could follow specialized and more intense Physics courses while the General Lyceum was oriented more on general education.
There were fourteen ―Polykladika‖ Lycea in Greece with nearly 10,000 students. Kassetas‘ textbook has been taught for 12 years (1984–1996) while the revised edition of the book was taught for another 4 years (1996–2000) in all the Lycea of the country.
Unfortunately, there was no official state committee to evaluate the outcome of this attempt. We have in our hands only one evaluation report from 6 Lycea in the Athens region based on a questionnaire distributed among the physics teachers of the corresponding schools. The structure of the questionnaire is fragmentary, reflects only the personal opinion of the teachers and there are no any quantitative data to support solid conclusions. However, the general feeling is that the majority of Greek Physics teachers were not adequately prepared to teach the historical material contained in the book, since they did not have any formal education in the history of science, or even any training in the logic of the Harvard Project before the official introduction of the book. Their usual tactic was to omit the historical information or the paragraphs dealing with epistemological matters.
Kassetas estimates that only about 30–40% of teachers felt comfortable with the book and embraced it wholeheartedly in its first phase. The growing opposition to the book led to its revision in 1996 when a lot of the historical material was left out and finally to its replacement in 2000 by another textbook (Skordoulis & Halkia 2005).
It is interesting to note though that the main argument against Kassetas‘ book was based on a naive empiricism advocating ―the introduction of experiment‖ as the solution to any problem that Greek physics teaching faced.
In this context, it is not surprising that the introduction of a History of Science and Technology course, on a compulsory basis, in the Greek Lyceum in 1999, supported by a textbook written by staff of the Department of History and Philosophy of Science (Gavroglou et al.), faced harsh opposition from both teachers and students and it was made elective the following year.
Following these events, it became a common belief among scholars in the Departments of Education of the Universities of Thessaloniki and Athens that only a process of systematic teacher education and training on both undergraduate and postgraduate level in History, Epistemology and Didactics of Science linked with research work on the conditions that shape the educational environment from the 19th century onwards and in constant dialogue with the international community holding similar views can create a fertile ground for the success of HPST in Greece (Skordoulis 2009).
A vast literature already exists trying to answer this legitimate question. Summarizing, teaching history of science assists in Abolishing the ―Two Cultures‖ Dichotomy, to show the students that science is part of human culture and that science is a human activity, to improve the image of scientists in Society, to change students‘ attitude towards science and also attract highly qualified students to science courses.
All the above may sound highly utilitarian. But does the teaching of the history of science in the science classroom bring an improvement in students understanding of the scientific concepts? Do students that have been taught history of science have a better understanding of basic scientific concepts than those who have not? Do they perform better in science courses?
This is hard to answer emphatically. What has been proved by research in the relevant field is that Teaching History of Science improves critical thinking and problem solving skills and students acquire a better understanding of the Nature of Science (NOS). The objections of colleagues criticizing the teaching of history of science in the science classroom are based on the ideas developed by Thomas Kuhn in his ―Essential Tension‖ (1977).
Kuhn‘s main argument is that Teaching History of Science in the Science Classroom undermines the dedication of students to Normal Science, to the dominant ‗Paradigm‘, and that history of science in the science textbooks is a pseudo-history i.e. a pseudo-history of science that has undergone a Didactical Transposition. The notion of ‗Didactic transposition‘ was firstly introduced by the French sociologist Verret (1975) and was used extensively in the field of Mathematics Education by Chevallard (1985). According to this classical approach, scientific knowledge is transformed to school science after specific educational system (institutional) actors have functioned upon it. Some years later, Martinand (1986) showed that it is not only the formal (institutional) educational system but also the social practices that play a crucial role in the didactic transposition of a scientific concept. More recently, Clement (1998) has added the value system as a determining factor in the didactic transposition.
It is a fact that after having gone through its phases of infancy i.e. admiration of the ancient science, history of science in Greece runs now a mature period where current research trends are integrated with those of the international community of Historians of Science and also of science educators. The HPDST group has developed partnerships with European research groups and built a network of historians of science and technology in South-Eastern Europe. To support these goals, the group publishes a bilingual journal (Kritiki: Critical Science and Education), an international journal (Almagest, International Journal for The History of Scientific Ideas) and the Newsletter for The History of Science in
Proceedings of the 4th International Conference of the ESHS, Barcelona 2010 39
Southeastern Europe. The role of this group in SE Europe has been further strengthened by support from the European Union for its future development (program Hephaestus, REGPOT 1-2008).
References
BLAY M., NICOLAÏDIS E., (2001), L’Europe des sciences : constitution d’un espace scientifique, ed. Seuil, Paris CHEVALLARD, Y., (1985), La transposition didactique, du savoir savant au savoir enseigné, La pensée sauvage,
Grenoble, p39
CLEMENT, P., (1998), La biologie et sa didactique. Dix ans de recherches, Aster (INRP, Paris), 27, pp.57-96 KUHN T. S. (1977), ‘Concepts of Cause in the Development of Physics’ in his The Essential Tension, University of
Chicago Press, pp. 21-30
MARTINAND, J.L., (1986), Connaître et transformer la matière, Peter Lang, Berne.
NICOLAIDIS, E. (2010), L’ Histoire Des Sciences En Grèce: La Naissance D’ une Communauté Scientifique, Archives Internationales D’Histoire Des Sciences, 60, 5-11
SKORDOULIS C. D. & HALKIA L. (2005), “Introduction: Notes on the History, Philosophy and Science Teaching in Greece”, Science & Education Vol.14, No. 7-8, 601-605
SKORDOULIS C.D. (2009), “Hellenic Studies in History, Philosophy of Science and Science Teaching: New Perspectives”, Science & Education, vol. 18, 1193-1197.
VERRET, M., (1975), Le temps des études, Librairie Honoré Champion, Paris.