History of Science in Physics Teaching

Science & Education (2021) 30:609–638
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00191-x
ARTICLE
History of Science in Physics Teaching

Possibilities for Contextualized Teaching?
Wagner Tadeu Jardim 1 & Andreia Guerra

2
& Hermann Schiffer
2
Accepted: 23 December 2020 / Published online: 22 January 2021

# The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. part of Springer Nature 2021
Abstract
Science educators are increasingly using a historical approach to pedagogy as a way to
enable students to understand the process of the construction of science in a more
contextualized manner. Considering the meaning of context in a broader sense, this
article has two objectives. First, it aims to explore how physics lessons using a Cultural
History of Science approach allowed the development of activities that encouraged
students to have discussions about science where their own socio-cultural context was
considered, referring to Brazilian scientific production. Second, the article to investigate
which understandings about scientific practices could be developed by students from in-
class discussions inspired by the Cultural History of Science approach focusing on a
historical and students’ own social contexts. The historical episode selected to be
introduced in their physics lessons was the development of the Leiden jar in Europe, in
the eighteenth century, focusing on the quotidian practices and habits that enabled the
construction and use of this artifact. The lessons developed from the Cultural History
approach seemed to allow the students to understand that science was developed by many
different social actors, in sites that exceed the laboratory and by actions performed in
various dimensions. The findings suggest that this approach in science teaching can be a
strategy to historically contextualize the development of science while allowing students
to reflect about the scientific production in their social context.
Keywords Cultural history of science . Scientific practices . Science education . Electricity .

Leiden jar . Voltaic pile
* Wagner Tadeu Jardim

[email protected]
Andreia Guerra
[email protected]
Hermann Schiffer
[email protected]
Extended author information available on the last page of the article
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

610 W. T. Jardim et al.
1 Introduction
Many researchers argue that one of the goals of science education is to teach about science
(Allchin 2011; Martins 2015; Maurines and Beaufils 2013; Moura and Guerra 2016; Dagher
and Erduran, 2016), suggesting that it could promote understandings about the relationships
between science and society in science lessons and avoid presenting science as “a one-way
street” as materialized in discourses of authority. When pursuing strategies toward this goal,
studies point out that an approach based on History, Philosophy, and Sociology of Science
(hereafter HPSS) can teach science content while enabling students to understand the process
of construction of scientific knowledge in a contextualized way (Jardim and Guerra 2017a;
Allchin, Andersen and Nielsen 2014; Forato, Pietrocola and Martins 2012).
Although the HPSS approach to science teaching has many supporters, it is important to
question what is meant by contextualization. Context is a polysemic word. In the field of HPSS
and science teaching, it could be understood in a historical sense, meaning that a contextual-
ized historical narrative is one that shows science as a socio-cultural achievement (Milne 2011;
Allchin, Andersen and Nielsen 2014; Erduran, Dagher and McDonald 2019). However,
inspired by scholars such as Barton (1998), the meaning of context in a broader sense should
be considered. In a way, science education should aim to situate science in the social, political,
and historical spheres in each educational context, taking into account the relationships that
different groups of students have with (scientific) knowledge (Barton 1998).
Therefore, the potential of the HPSS approach to “overcome the ‘sea of meaninglessness’”
(Matthews 1992) would be better fulfilled if the stories told to students about science valued
their educational contexts in a way that turned these lessons into an opportunity for the
students to recognize and reflect upon the socio-cultural context in which they are living
and science’s impact on it (Moura, Jager and Guerra 2020). From these considerations, a study
was conducted to create subsidies for science lessons inspired by a contextualized historical
approach that considers students’ socio-cultural context.
In the last decades, interactions between historians of science and scholars from science
studies and humanities changed the History of Science (hereafter HS) in many ways (Pestre
1995; Nyhart 2016). Their studies focus not exclusively on scientists and others who supported
science nor in how scientists derived their theories (Nyhart 2016). As a result of these changes
in historians’ practices, different historiographical approaches emerged, such as the Cultural
History of Science (hereafter CHS). From the CHS approach, science is a cultural achieve-
ment. Culture is understood here as a net that guides the actions and beliefs of people in a
community and at the same time is constructed by these same people. In this way, culture is
not only a social structure, but it is related to values, meanings, and symbols associated with a
society (Geertz 1973 p.5). These values, meanings, and symbols are constituent elements of
science (Pimentel 2010).
Cultural historians of science develop their studies focusing on the dynamic of everyday
scientific practices (Pimentel 2010), and in microhistory. From the study of scientific practices
and habits, historians encouraged discussions about the relationship between science and
society, in particular, the role of social and institutional context in the building of scientific
knowledge. It is worth noting that scientific practices should not be considered exclusively to
come from the laboratory. They encompass activities such as reading, writing, debating, and
questioning, as well as activities associated with financial support, research, research groups,
conference organization, and editing and performing scientific communication that are also
crucial to comprehending the scientific enterprise. Scientific practices are historical, local,

History of Science in Physics Teaching 611
temporal, and contingent enterprises, encompassing cultural performances and activities

(Pimentel 2007, 2010; Daston and Galison, 2007; Kelly and Licona 2018).
Consequently, to the CHS approach to understanding the material culture of experiments and
instruments developed in science becomes crucial in order to comprehend the development of
science, which brings us to analyze the procedures and the materials employed in the scientific
enterprise (Pimentel 2010). This evokes many different aspects to be considered in historical
studies, such as the instruments used and the experiments performed in the development of
science, how they are constructed and reconstructed, the materials used to construct and recon-
struct them, the roles written or not written in their manipulation, and the scientists and other social
actors who developed or participated in these performances (Pimentel 2010). Therefore, the
construction, validation, and diffusion of scientific knowledge are local and temporal matters,
and the questions studied in science and the manners developed to answer these questions change
throughout history. As a result, the historians of science aim at understanding “what has sustained
science socially, culturally, and materially; and who has benefitted and who has suffered in its
formation” (NYHART 2016, p. 7).
Since there is not only one historiographical approach, it is crucial to define which one to adopt in
science lessons. This research group performed its work in Brazil, a multicultural society in which
there are many different public schools contexts. Some students live and study in neighborhoods
where the majority of the population did not finish K-12, and going to university is a far dream for
many, while others study in public schools where the majority of students go to university. Previous
studies developed by this research group (Jardim and Guerra 2018; Camel, Moura and Guerra 2019)
indicate that since the CHS promotes the study of scientific practices and habits in a microhistory
approach, it inspires debates about the relationship between science and society from the lived
experience of those who contributed directly and indirectly to the development of science.
Therefore, the CHS approach has the potential to elucidate how scientific knowledge is
constructed in each context and which paths someone should follow to become scientists and to
be recognized in the scientific community. Other studies suggest (Jager 2018) that the use of
CHS in science lessons could encourage students to evoke and discuss questions related to the
scientific production that are not planned by the teacher. Since it is the goal here to develop
science lessons in a contextualized historical way where students’ socio-cultural context is
considered, the CHS approach was adopted in this study.
The study was developed in physics lessons in a public Brazilian vocational high school in
which a member of this research group teaches. This school belongs to the Brazilian Federal
network, which offers integrated technical education (ITE).1 In Brazil, those schools are among
the best Brazilian public schools. Students who complete K-12 education in this school and sit
national exams to enter Brazilian universities are usually successful. Also, in the group of
students who participated in this study, there were many boys and girls that desired to be
scientists or physicians.
Nonetheless, during the year in which this study was being developed, the Brazilian
government was changing some policies related to Brazilian scientific agencies that are
responsible for most science funding.2 The government was also changing policies regarding
1
In addition to standard high school, students attend courses that provide them with technical training. Instead of
the standard duration of 3 years for high school in Brazil, for the conclusion of high school (integrated to the
technician), the student takes 4 years.
2
As seen in: https://www.nature.com/news/brazilian-scientists-reeling-as-federal-funds-slashed-by-nearly-half-1.
21766 and in https://www.nature.com/news/scientists-plead-with-brazilian-government-to-restore-funding-1.
22757

public universities, where the majority of Brazilian science is produced and where students,
who participated in this study, wanted to attend. These changes were creating obstacles to
Brazilian scientists and graduate students to develop their research. As a response, Brazil’s
science community promoted different protests against these policies, and some Brazilian
scientists left the country looking for better work conditions.
In the beginning of the school year, some of the students who participated in this study
seemed worried with the changing scientific policies in Brazil in special with the end of a
government program, created nearly a decade before, called Science without Frontiers. This
program supported scholarships for students on all levels to study in foreign universities of
excellence. Some students desired to follow a scientific carrier and were planning to study
abroad. Others participated in a Brazilian program aimed to encourage students to pursue
STEM carriers (Brazilian Program of Scientific Initiation from High School –PIBIC–EM) that
was also experiencing budget cuts at the time. This scenario guided this study to analyze
possibilities of bringing the discussion about science from a broader historical approach to
science classrooms, to encourage these students to reflect on the situation of Brazilian science,
considering their professional expectations.
Based on this scenario, this study was developed in a class of the 12th year of K-12 in
which electricity was the theme of the mandatory curriculum. One of the researchers who
developed this study had the opportunity to replicate a Leiden jar according to the replication
method developed at the Europa-Universität Flensburg.3 This inspired us to select the devel-
opment and the use of the Leiden jar as the historical episode upon which the lessons
performed in this study were planned.
Moreover, some studies about replication of historical experiments indicate that it could be
an angle from which to study science’s material culture, from insights about the experimental
practices of scientists of the past, opening up ways to connect this practice to the culture in
which it was embedded (Heering 2000, 2007). In this way, these results are not far from the
CHS approach in a way that both consider the historical context and the material culture
important issues to be analyzed in the history of science studies.
However, the CHS approach led us to discuss scientific practices employed in the devel-
opment of Leiden jar more broadly than those related to the replication of the artifact.
Therefore, the boundaries of the historical episode of the development of the Leiden jar, in
Europe, in the eighteenth century was augmented, focusing on its replication and use, and also
on the diffusion of scientific knowledge in the eighteenth century. Some examples of planned
discussions were about the new experiments, artifacts, and discussions resulted from the use of
the Leiden jar, the Republic of Letters, printed publications, private lessons, the role of
scientific academies in sharing and validating scientific knowledge, the structures of scientific
academies, and the lectures given in scientific academies.
From these considerations, this article has two objectives. First, it aims to explore how
physics lessons using a CHS approach allowed the development of activities that encouraged
students to have discussions about science considering students’ own socio-cultural context,
referring to Brazilian scientific production. Second, to investigate which understandings about
scientific practices could be developed by students from in-class discussions inspired by the
CHS approach that focused both on a historical context and on the student’s social context.
3
The professor-researcher spent the previous semester at the Europa-Universität Flensburg (Germany)
researching along with the institution’s group on History of Science and historical experiments with emphasis
on the replication method (Heering 2007).

To achieve these objectives, this article is presented in five parts. Following this introduc-
tion, the research context, the methodology, and the methodological procedures that conducted
data analysis will be presented. The third section is devoted to presenting the context of the
classroom in which the research was developed, describing the lessons developed during the
course from information collected in the field diary and audio recorder. In the fourth section,
the data analysis is discussed and, finally a conclusion with final considerations.
2 Methodology
In this section, three dimensions of this study’s methodology will be presented. First, the
schools’ context and how this study was presented and proposed to the students will be
described. Next, information about the researchers and the teacher and how they worked
together in and out of class will be presented. Finally, the methodology chosen for data
analysis will be described.
The research was developed for 2 months in a class of 21 students (15 boys and 6 girls) of
the third year of a public vocational federal Brazilian school, in which most of the teachers
have master or doctoral degrees. In general, the schools’ teachers participate in a research
group and develop different activities related to teaching. In these vocational schools, the
students take the subjects of the national basic curriculum concomitant with the subjects of
technical training. The students are not from the upper economic classes, and there is a quota
system that allocates 50% of vacancies for persons of color and indigenous people. These
federal schools are among the best schools in Brazil. However, they are a minor part of the
Brazilian school system.
The teacher responsible for the lessons has academic expertise in the subjects of History of
Science and science teaching, and two researchers were responsible for implementing the
survey (hereafter researcher 1, researcher 2) reported in this paper. One month before the
beginning of data collection, researcher 1 started attending all physics lessons from the chosen
class. After each physics lesson, researchers 1 and 2 met to discuss the field diary’s notes and
the data collected.
Beside this personal meeting, the study’s data were constantly shared and commented on
weekly within this research group. This group consists of science teachers (including the one
responsible for the lessons) and science education researchers who work in different realities in
Brazil. The research group has the purpose of studying History of Science and Science
Education to inspire research developed by its members. Besides that, whether in development
of the survey or in data analysis, all stages of empirical research were discussed during the
meetings, and new directions for the research were debated.
In the beginning the school year, the design for this study was debated with the
students. It was presented how the sequence of lessons would be performed, how long it
would take (2 months), and the pedagogical objectives from choosing the CHS approach.
Also presented which scientific content would be taught and which matters related to how
scientific knowledge is constructed were planned to be discussed during the following 2
months.
It was made clear to the students that they could reject the proposal and even stop during the
process. None of the students rejected the proposition. This acceptance could be justified by
the fact that the teachers at this school have the habit of using different teaching methodolo-
gies. Despite this, the students had never studied physics in a historical approach.

The school’s principal was also consulted and agreed with this study. Additionally, this
study was applied in a government ethics virtual platform (Plataforma Brasil), where the study
was evaluated by a committee, and it was accepted. This platform required every student (or
their parents) to sign a written form accepting to participate in the survey.
Following Erickson (2012) and Moraes and Galiazzi (2006), a qualitative approach was
used in data analysis. Data was gathered from the transcriptions of the audio recording of the
lessons, from the researcher’s field diary, and from a text (summary of the lessons) written by
students. All data was analyzed from a qualitative perspective to find patterns and interpret
what understandings about scientific practices were developed by the students from in-class
discussions inspired by the CHS approach that focused both on a historical context and on the
student’s own social context.
At the end of the lessons, a detailed reading of data was done with the research group. As a
result, it was determined that the scientific practices’ discussions could be grouped into three
main topics: the diffusion of scientific knowledge, the experimental character of scientific
production, and science funding. As part of data analysis, three themes were created with these
names. It is worth noting that only the first two topics were previously considered when
planning the lessons. The last one came as a result of weekly meetings within the research
group, when it was realized that many students brought up matters about scientific funding,
and this inspired the teacher to bring more to the lessons about this theme. Therefore, the topic
of scientific funding also became a theme for data analysis.
For data analysis, each theme was further divided into sub-themes, as described in the
“Findings” section, each representing specific in-class discussions inspired by the lessons.
Then a stage, called unitarization as proposed by Moraes and Galiazzi (2006), was performed.
From the themes selected, data was cut down as much as possible to search for extracts or
excerpts that can, in themselves, bring relevant information to the analysis process (Moraes
and Galiazzi 2006). It is worth noting that each theme represents a concept intended to be
identified, encompassing units that contain close meanings.
The meanings attributed to data, originated from students’ oral or written manifesta-
tions, were interwoven with the school’s and student’s context. So, in data analysis, there
was a constant triangulation among the data obtained from the production of the students,
their background, and the situation that Brazil was going through, and the researcher’s
field diary.
Therefore, this qualitative methodology represents an interpretative approach in a herme-
neutic character, predicting the author’s data impregnation process. Therefore, there is a non-
transparent sense in the text, which manifests from possible interpretations that vary due to the
background built by the theoretical assumptions of those who read them (Erickson 2012). In
other words, the researchers identified meanings that guided the construction of the answers of
the research questions and to compose a more complete picture of the environment where data
were generated, one researcher acted within the classroom and was not dissociated from the
context in which the data collection took place.
Finally, in the next sessions, this study’s results will be presented in two parts. In the first
part, based on the field diary’s entries and the analysis of the audio recording, the physics
lessons will be described overall to understand how the historical approach was developed and
how the historical discussions inspired in-class debates about science where students’ socio-
cultural context is considered. Then, the results of the unitarization and categorization pro-
cesses will be further discussed, and some extracts from students’ talks and written texts, and
their non-transparent sense will be presented, and an interpretation of them will be indicated.

3 An Overview of the Lessons
In this section, the lessons and the activities promoted in class will be briefly
described. Inspired by discussions with the research group, both researchers 1 and 2
developed historical studies based on the CHS approach about the development of the
Leiden jar from primary and secondary sources. Some references used in this study
will be mentioned in the following overview that was written from researcher 1’s field
diary notes and audio recorder. This following section is divided into eight parts
representing each lessons of the course. It is worth noting that before these lessons
started, the teacher had taught some contents of the mandatory curriculum during the
previous month, such as electric charges and process of electric charging.
3.1 Lesson 1—Introduction
To introduce the discussions about the development of the Leiden jar from a CHS
approach, the teacher created an opportunity to introduce the students to an electro-
static machine, an important instrument of the material culture of that historical
context. Then, in the school’s physics laboratory, the teacher demonstrated the func-
tioning of two electrostatic machines (a Van de Graaff generator and a Wimshurst
machine) and encouraged the students to manipulate them. The students were asked
how the machines functioned, and then the functionality was explained using the
contents of mandatory curriculum taught before.
Since the material culture of science was one of the aspects to be explicitly
discussed during the lessons, the teacher showed students, in pictures, different
historical machines of eighteenth century. Then the teacher differentiated them from
those manipulated in the school laboratory and pointed out some functional adapta-
tions, such as the replacement of components (the glass disk was replaced with a rigid
plastic disk in the Wimshurst didactical machine) for didactic purposes.
It was also explained the extensive use of those machines in Europe in that time.4
The teacher pointed out that in the mid-1740s, there were several new studies on
electricity, many derived from theoretical studies and by new phenomenon observed
from the use of artifacts as electrostatic machines (Heilbron 1979). In that context, the
experiments were frequently taken as a representation of natural phenomena or even
as entertainment, but they also evoked discussions about the new or known concepts
and theories (Home 1985; Bertucci 2007). The teacher also pointed out that the role
of the experiment changed throughout history and indicated that this would be
discussed when studying Coulomb’s law. To conclude, some social actors involved
in the development of science in Europe in the eighteenth century were presented,
such as the instrument-makers, who participated intensively in the construction,
improvement, and use of different artifacts (Roberts 1999; Bensaude-Vincent and
Blondel 2008).
4
The scientific knowledge that much attracted the general public involved anatomy and electricity (Roberts
1999; Bertucci 2007). Demonstration of electricity experiments in the eighteenth century used different artifacts,
such as an electrostatic machine and an electric condenser (Bertucci 2006; Bertucci 2008).

3.2 Lesson 2—Republic of Letters and Scientific Academies
Following previous discussions, the teacher planned to explore scientific practices related to
the diffusion of scientific knowledge developed in Europe in the eighteenth century
(Holenstein, Steinke and Stuber 2013). The lesson started with the teacher presenting the
Republic of Letters as a virtual network that had many characteristics and impacts in scientific
production and diffusion in the eighteenth century. It helped in easing trades through borders,
intensifying exchanges of materials and knowledge, while reducing the impact of restrictions
such as language, religion, and politics (Biskup 2013). To a certain extent, it reinforced a
desired impersonality character in aggregating participants that were distant from major cities.
But the utopian ideal of equality cannot be taken literally (Brockliss 2013). Despite the efforts
of many participants in placing members of this network in equal positions, the Republic of
Letters was presented as letter exchanging network that had a hierarchical structure based on
patronage, influence, and status (Daston 1991; Brockliss 2013; Burke 2011; Biskup 2013;
Fleßenkämper 2013).
Despite preached ideals presented by the Republic of Letters, this community remained
restricted when it came to its members, mostly middle- and high-class white men. Addition-
ally, its members were differentiated between “masters and disciples, professors and appren-
tices, patrons and clients”, similar to its society—old regime’s hierarchical society—even if
this network meant to oppose hierarchical orders and rivalry between nations (Burke 2011, p.
278).
To materialize this discussion, the teacher read in class a letter written by botanist Peter
Collinson (1694–1768) to Carl Linnaeus (1707–1778). In this letter (dated from 1748),
Collinson (2002) claimed that the former was, through his actions, breaking the principle of
reciprocity of the virtual network. This episode happened when Collinson, who had some
recognition at the time but was not at the top of the Republic of Letters hierarchy, had sent
Linnaeus seeds that would be used in experiments, but he never received the books Linnaeus
had promised him (Brockliss 2013). The students seemed interested in the Linnaeus episode
and they asked the teacher many questions about the structure of the Republic of the Letters.
While reading some extracts from this letter in class, it was highlighted that Collinson
exchanged letters with scholars, such as Benjamin Franklin around 1740. In these letters,
Collinson updated the American natural philosopher about studies developed in Europe while
sending him materials that would be used in experiments involving electrical phenomena.
Collinson came to be a great help for Franklin at that time (Moura 2019).
This episode was also chosen to allow the teacher to discuss details about the relations
between members of the Republic of Letters and to avoid developing simplistic ideas that
there was a clear distinction and hierarchical order between those who collected specimen
and materials, and those natural philosophers that received that. There was no clear
hierarchical structure between the members of this network, since even between natural
philosophers, there were factors that differentiated them, like in which institution they
worked, the resources that they had access to, acquired status, and patronage
(Fleßenkämper 2013).
In addition to presenting Franklin’s proposals for the nature of electricity, the teacher
addressed how he stablished a network of contacts by traveling to Europe and keeping contact
with natural philosophers from many European cities. A map with the density of letters
exchanged between Franklin and others was presented to students (Fig. 1). Franklin commu-
nicated more with natural philosophers from Great Britain but also from many other European

cities. Figure 1 also allowed the teacher to highlight the few women that Franklin had contact
with matter that would be brought up later by the students.
Students were impressed by how European countries like France and England were the
centers of the scientific network’s exchanges of scientific knowledge. Some of them were
surprised that the USA was not the center of scientific production in that context allowing the
teacher to discuss that the importance of a country or institution in science changes throughout
history.
oThen the teacher explain that the Republic of Letters was composed mainly of European
men with formal affiliation in scientific societies or universities, a university education or a
good classical education, and a significant social status (Almási 2009, Brockliss 2013). At the
beginning of the eighteenth century, the exchange of letters constituted an important form of
communication among those who dedicated themselves to the construction of scientific
knowledge (Daston 1991; Goodman 1996). This network of communication was intensified,
especially from the end of the seventeenth century, with the creation of state postal services
(Brockliss 2013). The teacher also showed pictures of specimens studied in this period and
pointed out that sending of specimens and other materials to prominent natural philosophers in
this cultural context was a common practice for those who wished to gain admission and
prestige in the virtual network (Brockliss 2013; Holenstein, Steinke and Stuber 2013).
The teacher also discussed the role of scientific academies and scientific societies for the
development of science in the eighteenth century. The academies’ members presented, in the
periodic meetings, the results of empirical and theoretical research. Another way to dissem-
inate research results is in the academies’ printed publications, such as the annual Histoire et
Mémoires of the Academy of Paris (McClellan III 2003). In this way, sending letters to
members of a renowned academy, with the description of a research’s result, was an oppor-
tunity for non-members of these academies to obtain recognition from the reading of their
work at one of these meetings. Another practice promoted by academies and societies was to
allocate funds to awards studies in selected areas, which also ended up boosting production in
certain areas, and opening space for non-members to get publish their work (Daston 1991;
Brockliss 2013).
Fig. 1 Benjamin Franklin’s Correspondence Network, 1757–1763 (Rydell and Winterer, 2012)

The teacher concluded that being a member of an important academy or scientific society
enabled the natural philosopher to participate more effectively in the Republic of Letters
(Goodman 1996; Holenstein, Steinke and Stuber 2013). The teacher finished the discussion
presenting the Académie des Sciences of Paris and the Royal Society and discussing their funding,
the followed rules needed to be a member, and the practices developed in both academies.
3.3 Lesson 3—Charles Dufay and Arthur Ávila
To continue the previous discussions about the scientific academies, the teacher presented some
aspects of the biography of French physician Charles Dufay (1698–1739). Considering the CHS
approach, the teacher focused on aspects of Dufay’s biography that could improve discussions
about scientific practices employed in the development of the Leiden Jar, such as his academic
training, his family’s network of connections, and when and how he became a member of the
Académie des Sciences of Paris. It was also pointed out that Dufay produced papers on different
subjects, electricity being the area in which he acted the most (Heilbron 1979). The teacher
presented the Dufay’s law and the crucial role of this law in that context. Recalling the previous
discussions about Linnaeus, the students were directed to the fact that the non-peripheral
participation in the Paris Academy was important both to make Dufay’s work known and to
provide him with quick and extensive access to work considered relevant to the time.
The teacher also highlighted the prominence of printed publications in that context, such as
Dufay’s four memoirs published in Histoire de L’Académie Royale des Sciences. Students also
focused on the emergence of a new profession: the publisher (McClellan III 2003), who along
with the members of the academies, were important social agents that composed the diffusion
of scientific knowledge in that context (Holenstein, Steinke and Stuber 2013).
Three studies inspired the construction of the third lesson’s last activity. In the first one,
developed by Gurgel, Pietrocola and Watanabe (2016), the authors argue that contact with
Brazil’s scientific production seems to help them in recognizing that science is part of their
country’s activities. Sarukkai (2014) points out that exclusively referencing European scientists in
science teaching can propagate an image of science as an exclusively European achievement. In
the third one, Gandolfi (2018) indicated that science lessons seem to be the principal source for
students to obtain knowledge about science. Gandolfi (2018) also suggests that discussions in
science lessons influence students’ worldviews about who is responsible for “doing science.”
Inspired by these studies and by the students’ wishes to follow scientific careers, the last
activity aimed to bring discussions to class about central and peripheral places in scientific
knowledge production both from historical and contemporary perspectives. The trajectory of
Artur Avila, a Brazilian mathematician who was awarded the Fields Medal in 2014, was presented
to students as an example of a Brazilian scientist who received an important scientific prize and to
highlight some of the scientific practices around his professional trajectory. This example was
chosen since Arthur studied and had developed part of his research in the same city of the
students, and they recognized institutions where he worked and studied.
Therefore, for this activity, students were asked to do a quick internet search on their
smartphones, to get information about Artur Avila.5 They easily found information about him
and summarized this information to the teacher, who wrote it down on the board. The students
5
Artur Avila is the only Latin American to win the Fields Medal as of 2014. The Fields Medal and the Nobel
prize were chosen as themes due to their visibility. In addition, The Fields Medal was highlighted because no
Brazilian has been awarded a Nobel as of this writing.

highlighted the schools where Avila had his elementary education (Brazilian schools consid-
ered among the best); the prizes that he won in the Mathematics Olympics, both as a student,
and when he was working as a mathematician; his dual citizenship in Brazil/France, how he
had acquired dual nationality (working in a Brazilian institution for part of the year and in
another part of the year in an institution in France); and the Brazilian universities where he
graduated.
To raise more questions, the teacher asked the students to use their smartphones again to
search for other Fields Medal winners. Other cases of dual nationality were highlighted by the
students, such as Richard Borcherds (South Africa/UK) winner in 1998 and Ngô Bao Châu
(Vietnam/France) in 2010. Students found mathematicians who received the Fields Medal and
were born in peripheral countries in science such as Brazil. However, they pointed out that the
winners had obtained their graduate degree at important scientific institutions on the world
stage, as had happened to Terence Tao (Australia), winner of the Fields Medal in 2006 who
had a doctoral degree from Princeton (USA), and Maryam Mirzakhani, winner of the award
for mathematics in 2014, who obtained a doctorate from Harvard (USA). Students also pointed
out that Maryam was the only woman to receive the Fields Medal as of that time. During these
discussions, the students recalled the case of Dufay and the importance of his network to
disseminate Dufay’s law.
In the students’ talks in the lessons, the students emphasized that although nationality is not
absolutely determinant for a researcher’s career, the sites where a researcher studies and the
network they establish during their career are important for his or her scientific production.
3.4 Lesson 4—Sites of Scientific Production
Maintaining the historical approach, in the fourth lesson, the teacher discussed sites where
scientific knowledge was disseminated in the eighteenth century such as itinerant lectures,
private classes, and classes in universities (Roberts 1999; Hochadel 2003, 2007). The teacher
also summarized some discussions led in the previous lessons highlighting scientific practices
surrounding the Republic of Letters, scientific academies, and printed publications. During
these discussions, the students were asked how they imagine knowledge is circulated among
scientists today. In general, students responded that the difficulties faced during the Republic
of Letters and printed publications ended with the advent of the internet since anyone can post
content online and everyone can have free access to any content. Their main view was that
nowadays, communication is much more accessible than in the eighteenth century.
An activity was developed to help the students to question the changes in the diffusion of
scientific knowledge throughout history and the access to this knowledge, by analyzing
contemporary scientific publications. Students were asked to download, via smartphone,
articles selected by the teacher. Inspired by previous studies that indicated a lack of diversity
in answers from students about scientists and their works (Gandolfi 2018), the teacher chose 5
articles of varied subjects and authorships from Brazilian researchers from the institution
where the students studied. This selection was made by the research group and had the
intention of selecting both free and paid scientific articles. Students were not previously
informed about possible financial costs for applicable cases. When the indicated articles were
searched, the students soon demonstrated that they could not download some files, as they
would have to pay large fees.
From these observations, the teacher presented examples of publishers of scientific journals,
emphasizing the review process and different publishing conditions. Three processes of

publication were explained: those in which authors and readers do not pay directly for the
article’s submission and reading, those in which the author pays for the publication and the
readers have free access to the article, and those in which the author has no costs to publish
their work, but readers pay for access.
This activity mobilized most of the students. During the teacher’s presentation, students
asked questions about publishing costs and questioned who would benefit from the process of
editing scientific articles. At that time, the teacher pointed out that despite the costs and
possible profits from this publishing system, most of the authors, evaluators, and often the
editors are not paid for their activities. However, participating in these activities and publishing
in renowned journals (often paid directly by authors and/or readers) are key scientific practices
for a researcher to have their work recognized.
As soon as the teacher commented that in some journals the cost of publishing an article
could reach as much as $3200 as in Physical Review and Letters (if authors choose to have
their article published open access)6 or even $5200 as in the case of Nature Communications,7
some students declared that it was absurd that an author, in addition to researching, should pay
to publicize the results. Then the teacher emphasized the role of being in a scientific institution
and the benefits provided by it, explaining that, in Brazil, the financial support agency
CAPES8 subscribes to some scientific periodicals and gives free access to graduate students,
researchers, and professors who work in Brazilian Universities.
The students also discussed the language in which the articles they found were published.
The teacher emphasized that English is an essential language for scientific communication
nowadays. This highlight inspired a discussion about the teaching of English in Brazilian
schools and the fact that in Brazil, middle-class students have extra support from studying
English in specialized courses that some students in this class did not have.
Regarding financial barriers to access scientific knowledge and the profits acquired by
some companies, the teacher explained the recent backlash among research institutions and the
overall scientific community about these same issues with the system of scientific publication.
There is a movement of academics, mainly Europeans, that aims to boycott certain companies
by not participating in their publishing processes. Discussions on this subject seemed to spark
interest in the students. According to some of them, they had never imagined actions as
organized protests affecting science so directly.
There are clear differences between the structure of communication and access to knowl-
edge in the eighteenth century and today. The students recognized how easy it was to “surf”
the internet between websites of news and of scientific journals and the ease to input excerpts
of texts into some websites that translate from English to Portuguese. Still, they were troubled
by the fact that the access to scientific papers and journals is not totally free. Not only their
price being high but because some of those students did not have free access to the internet.
More than that, even with available tools, some found hard to understand translated websites
(automatically or by excerpts), since the result is not perfectly translated to Portuguese. As a
result, in class discussions came to make the students realize that the internet can facilitate
many operations, like search and translate, but they still do not change a non-egalitarian social
reality.
6
https://journals.aps.org/authorsopen-access-physical-review-physical-review-letters
7
https://www.nature.com/ncomms/about/article-processing-charges
8
Foundation of the Ministry of Education (MEC) is responsible for the expansion and consolidation of post-
graduate studies—master’s and doctoral degrees—all over Brazil.

3.5 Lesson 5—Replication of Leiden Jar
The lesson that began this observation occurred in the school’s physics laboratory where the
students could handle Leiden jars and perform experiments involving electric circuits such as
Nollet’s experiment. In Nollet’s experiment, an electrical circuit is formed by people holding
hands and a Leiden jar. Before carrying out the experiment itself, the teacher presented two
Leiden jars9 that had been reconstructed according to the method of replication at Europa-
Universität Flensburg,10 and also three didactic versions. The researcher 1 narrated the process
of building the two Leiden jars replicas emphasizing the materials used, their manipulation,
precautions, and difficulties encountered by him in this process.
Later, the teacher used historical images to discuss the development of the Leiden jar in the
eighteenth century, pointing out that the artifact was built in a socio-cultural context where the
Netherlands was a key player in the communication between England and other European
countries. The teacher presented Petrus Van Musschenbroek (1692–1761) and Ewald Jürgen
von Kleist (1700–1748), explaining that they studied at Leiden University where experimental
culture was concentrated. The teacher highlighted the role of private lessons and itinerant
lectures in that context and then discussed that the culture of instrument-makers and of
experimentation was present in the foundations of and in the work developed by Van
Musschenbroek and Kleist (Roberts 1999; Brockliss 2003; Jardim and Guerra 2017b).
It was also pointed out that in the mid-1740s, there were several studies on electricity, many
derived from observations made such as electric attraction and repulsion, conduction, and
insulation, and the students were reminded that it was in this context that Dufay worked. It was
also in this context where Kleist and Musschenbroek were engaged in the study of electricity.
Finding a way to store the electric fluid was something pursued by many researchers, and these
two were acquainted with past work, including Dufay’s rule. From the discussions developed
in the previous lesson, it was highlighted that Kleist and Musschenbroek were able to evidence
successfully electrical effects coming from a Leiden jar independently, such as the one
manipulated by the students in the laboratory (Heilbron 1979).
It was also highlighted Musschenbroek’s detailed description of the Leiden jar and that it
quickly reached scholars like Nollet that had prominence in the Science Academy of Paris.
Nollet immediately replicated the experiment drawing the academy’s attention to the Leiden
jar. On the other hand, Kleist kept corresponding with members of the Academy of Science of
Berlin like Johannes Nathaniel Lieberkühn and other experts on electricity (Silva and Heering
2018). The teacher reminded the discussion about the constructions of the replicas manipulated
by the students to point out that at first it was hard to duplicate the same effects as described by
Kleist (Heilbron 1979). Therefore, the sites of knowledge diffusion and apparatuses’ replica-
tion contributed to spreading information about the Leiden jar’s effects, interpretations, and
how to master its material and structural replication.
The teacher also explained to the students that the conception of a condenser in modern
times is still far from the eighteenth century’s interpretations of the Leiden jar. Many natural
philosophers searched for an interpretation of that new phenomena. At first, the interpretation
of this device indicated that it was possible to store electricity in a container (Heilbron 1979;
9
These Leiden jars were the reconstruction of those that were the most popular in Europe in the eighteenth
century. Different from the ones constructed by Musschenbroek and Kleist, these jars had a metallic coating.
10
Researcher 1 stayed one semester at Europa-Universität Flensburg (Germany) researching along with the
institution’s group on History of Science and historical experiments with emphasis on this replication method
(Heering, 2007). However, there was no condition in the school to replica the Leiden jar with the students.

Silva and Heering 2018). After the construction of new Leiden jars, other interpretations of its
functioning appeared. To exemplify, the teacher presented the Franklin’s interpretation (Moura
2019). From the consideration that there was a single electrical fluid, Franklin argued that the
Leiden jar could accumulate an excess of that fluid in its interior (positive electricity) while
developing a lack of it in its outer parts (negative electricity).
The teacher even presented the Leiden jar as a capacitor and explained the structures of a
parallel plate capacitor. In presenting the induction and charging process of a capacitor, the
teacher employed the concepts of induction and polarization of charges and highlighted the
role of each of the metal plates of the Leiden jar as well as, primarily, the insulator (the glass)
in order to prevent the flow of the charge through the bottle. To reinforce the physical concepts
discussed previously and their relationship to the structure of a Leiden jar, the teacher made
again the jars available to the students so that they could handle them.
To finish the discussion, the teacher pointed out that the Leiden jar was popularized in
demonstrations of electrical phenomena focused on entertainment and on research. The teacher
also cited experiments developed from the Leiden jar such as the electric circuit composed by
people holding hands and touching a Leiden jar (Silva and Heering 2018). The teacher invited
the students to reproduce this experiment from one Leiden jar replica, arousing much of the
students’ attention. This reproduction enabled the teacher to discuss the concepts of closed and
open electric circuits.
The discussions during the laboratory lessons provoked thoughts from students not only
about physical concepts but also about the process of replicating an experiment, which led to
reflections about the material culture of that context. Students asked the teacher about how
experiments were reproduced in the itinerant lectures and if that kind of approach attracted
more people to scientific endeavors. During these discussions, students affirmed that they had
an idea of science being more closed, confined to laboratories and performed only among
scientists.
3.6 Lesson 6—Writing a Summary
In order to have feedback from the students and to collect data, a group activity was planned.
The students were asked to gather in groups of 3 or 4 to produce a text summarizing the
aspects about science that they considered most relevant in the discussions performed in all
lessons up to that moment. They had approximately an hour and a half to discuss in groups and
to construct the text. They could consult the notes taken during classes.
3.7 Lesson 7—The Construction and Diffusion of the Voltaic Pile
Inspired by the reading of students’ texts, the teacher summarized the previous historical
discussions emphasizing the popularization of the Leiden jar and the broader use of this
artifact. From this discussion, the instructor introduced the biography of Italian physician Luigi
Galvani (1737–1798), focusing on his academic training, the importance of Galvani’s partic-
ipation in private lessons in Bologna to complement his academic foundations, the sites where
he obtained practical experience in physiology, and the matters he studied around the 1770s
(Heilbron 1991; Bresadola 1998).
Later, the teacher used historical images of Galvani’s experiments, highlighting the tech-
niques he described in his publication De viribus electricitatis in motu musculari (Galvani
1791). The teacher also pointed out that the various experiments conducted by the physician

were assisted by his nephew Camillo Galvani, who worked in the botanical garden of the
University of Bologna, and his wife Lucia Galeazzi Galvani (1743–1788), who often assisted
her husband’s experiments and proofread his texts (Piccolino and Bresadola 2013). The
students asked about Lucia and if her name is cited by Galvani in his papers. To answer the
students, the teacher presented some details of her biography, contextualizing it in the Italian
scenario that focused on the “learned ladies,” women in a similar social position to Lucia, who
were similarly trained and who worked in relatives’ laboratories (Frize 2013; Pal 2012). The
teacher emphasized that most “learned ladies” ended up occupying a peripheral position in
scientific production, supporting husbands and relatives; however, the teacher cited the
example of Laura Bassi (1711–1778), who obtained her doctorate degree at the University
of Bologna and had some success (Piccolino and Bresadola 2013; Findlen 1999).
The teacher concluded this part of the course discussing that the experimental analyses
developed by Galvani were constantly used by him to support the thesis of the existence of an
animal fluid, different from ordinary electricity (Galvani 1791 and 1792). The teacher also
discussed the environment where Galvani worked and published (Hankins 1985; Heilbron
1979). As a result, students asked the teacher about animal electricity, and the teacher
explained that the replication of the Galvani experiments was carried out by people from a
variety of educational backgrounds, who began to dispute the explanation for the phenomena
observed, leading to a great number of publications on the subject in a short period of time
(Kipnis 1987; Bernardi 2000). Two groups of explanations for the experiments with frogs
were presented: the one constructed by those who considered the frog itself as an object of
study and the group of physicists who viewed frogs only as instruments with the function of
measuring and detecting electrical effects (Kipnis 1987, Bernardi 2000).
Over this matter, Alessandro Volta’s work (1745–1827) as a natural philosopher who
understood the frog as a measuring instrument was presented. The teacher highlighted that
Volta and the Italian Bassiano Carminati (1750–1830) developed a research program that
involved comparisons between the frog and the Leiden Jar, identifying a new interpretation for
Galvani’s experiments, since they indicated that the electric action was generated from the
contact of metals (Bernardi 2000; Kragh 2000). Then, the experiments and instruments
developed and used by Volta to defend that ordinary electricity could be produced by contact
between two metals were presented to students (Cavazza 2002; Bernardi 2000; and Chang
2015). In this lesson, the teacher summarized the discussions highlighting that the develop-
ment of instruments and experiences were common scientific practices of the period that were
employed by many different social actors.
Volta traveled around Europe because of his aristocrat tradition. Volta exchanged with
scholars like Beccaria, Nollet, and Priestley constructing an extensive communication network
(Pancaldi 2005). The teacher also pointed out that Volta does not represent a good example of
that time, since in “matters of quality and quantity of letters, few Italian scientists can be
compared to other foreigner scholars that were Volta’s contacts” (Pancaldi 2005 p. 46).
Thus, while presenting Volta’s studies, it was highlighted how certain aspects of his life
(especially when young) and social context contributed to his professional trajectory. During
this discussion, the teacher drew students’ attention to their current situation in Brazil and the
end of the government program Science Without Borders. Some students spoke against the
ending of this program and told the teacher they intended on studying abroad during their
academic lives, but that now this sounded unlikely to happen.
Later, the publication of Volta’s paper describing the Voltaic pile to the Royal Society was
explained, focusing on the reading of the first part of the letter sent by Volta that was originally

written in French and sent to the English Royal Transactions of Royal Society, on March 20,
1800 (Volta, 1800). This first part of the letter was read in the Royal Society, and some of their
associates had early access to what was described there. Among these associates were Anthony
Carlisle (1768–1840), a surgeon at Westminster Hospital who, accompanied by William
Nicholson (1753–1815), quickly reproduced the pile and developed experiments that ended
up showing the decomposition of water from electrical effects.
Through these demonstrations, until then unpublished, Thomas Garnett (1766–1802),
professor of chemistry, became aware of this new phenomenon and presented the experiment
of electrolysis of water to the Royal Institution on May 28,1800. This presentation drew the
attention of a popular newspaper, the Morning Chronicles that offered a brief description of the
pile (87 words were used to describe the construction of the pile). As the structure of this
artifact was very simple to reproduce, it was widely replicated and disseminated among the
most diverse profiles of stakeholders, months before the official publication of the Royal
Society on September 1800 (Chang 2015). This was an opportunity for the teacher to discuss
the replication of the Voltaic pile and its wide use among natural philosophers and laypeople,
who appropriated the apparatus without necessarily discussing the cause of the electric effect
(Chang 2015).
Continuing the discussion of the Voltaic pile, the teacher concluded explaining the diffu-
sion of the apparatus pointing out that there were still doubts about the causes of the effects
produced by it, which were not answered until the first decades of the nineteenth century. The
teacher explained the doubts to the students and highlighted that accessible publications about
the Voltaic pile and some phenomenon obtained using it, such as water decomposition,
contributed to the wide diffusion of the Voltaic pile (Pancaldi 2005, Kipnis 2003).
The teacher finished the discussion about the Voltaic pile highlighting Napoleon’s interest
in science, the reward received by Volta from Napoleon, and that Napoleon’s proximity to
science led him to assign political functions and finances to various natural philosophers
(Pancaldi 2005).
3.8 Lesson 8—Discussing Brazilian Science
Considering the previous discussions about financial support of scientific research, as in the
case of Napoleon and the socio-cultural context of the students themselves, in reference to
scientific production, the teacher developed one last activity to provoke discussions about the
financial support of science in Brazil. To develop the activity, the teacher asked the students to
bring to class some news from a newspaper or news channel (on paper or online) that dealt
with funding of science. The students also produced a summary about the chosen article.
Many reports related to Brazil’s deep cuts to science funding in recent years were presented
by the students. By showing some reports about the lack of resources for science in recent
years in Brazil, some comparisons between real values of investment in science and technol-
ogy in Brazil (as a function of gross domestic product) and in OECD countries were
highlighted, and the implications for Brazilian science due to the funding cuts that the country
has been suffering in recent years were discussed. The reading of these reports motivated
discussions about a constitutional amendment that had just been adopted in Brazil, which froze
government expenses in several areas, implying funding cuts in science and technology. At
that moment, some students resumed the discussion about Napoleon and drew a parallel
between the contemporary panorama and the influence of Napoleon in the historical context
studied. Then they emphasized that if Napoleon, or a government, or a private company

decides to increase funding to a certain area, more researchers would probably have an interest
in establishing themselves academically in that area.
On the topic of public and private research funding, students highlighted possible interests
of those who employ resources for this purpose. In that sense, a highly discussed example was
that of pharmaceutical research designed to support or counteract the possible benefits brought
about by the use of pharmaceutical products or other treatments. Students pointed out that such
surveys could be commissioned or performed mainly to support the interests of companies and
investors. Some examples of personal situations were shared as in cases of relatives who had
faced some health issue and underwent treatments or remedies about which there was
controversy about their effectiveness, either by different doctors or by scientific research that
pointed to contradictory conclusions.
Regarding research funding in Brazil, the teacher mentioned the case of a Brazilian
researcher who was the first person in Latin America to win a prize in the UK for the best
doctoral thesis of 2018 and that, when talking about this prize in the Brazilian press,
highlighted the situation of funding in scientific research in developed countries, in compar-
ison to the conditions found in Brazil.11 The discussions were concluded with students
pointing out that their survey showed that some Brazilian researchers are increasingly leaving
the country to work in countries with more funding devoted to sciences.
4 Findings
In this section, the data collected from the students’ talks in the lessons and from the summary
written in groups in Lesson 6 will both be partially presented and discussed. Three themes
were constructed in data analysis, as described in methodology section: diffusion of scientific
knowledge, experimental character of science production, and science funding. Clearly, these
themes converse with each other, thus some activities done during lessons and data collected
were related to more than one.
To further scrutinize this analysis, each theme is further divided into sub-themes, each
representing specific in-class discussions inspired by the activities in the lesson. A table was
built for each theme, containing their respective sub-themes, where excerpts from student’s
writings or recording of their speeches are associated to each sub-theme (and numbered for
later reference). Then these excerpts are interpreted considering the present theoretical and
methodological approach aiming to answer both research questions.
Therefore, the results of this analysis will be presented as evidence of (1) which under-
standings about scientific practices the students developed during the activities and (2) if these
understandings were developed considering students’ socio-cultural context. It is worth noting
that the same excerpt could be presented in more than one sub-theme.
In order to identify the excerpts from student’s writings or speeches, the following codes
were used: student X (number), when the speech is from an individual student during a lesson;
excerpt from summary X (number of the group), extract of the abstract produced by students in
groups during Lesson 6.
11
https://g1.globo.com/df/distrito-federal/noticia/pesquisadora-de-brasilia-ganha-premio-de-melhor-tese-de-
biologia-do-reino-unido.ghtm

4.1 1st Theme—Diffusion of Scientific Knowledge
In this session, excerpts will be presented to indicate in different moments of the lessons the
teacher inspired the study of scientific practices related to and encouraged discussions about
how scientific knowledge was diffused during the development of the Leiden jar and also in
contemporary science.
In 7 of 8 summaries, students made explicit references to the modus operandi of the
Republic of Letters. As seen in Table 1, some students mentioned the exchange of letters (in
excerpts 1 and 7) and the communication of findings and exchange of materials between
scientists (3). There were also excerpts highlighting other scientific practices. In 3 of 8
summaries, students argued about publishing practices such as in books or articles, and in 5
of 8 summaries, experiments and practical lessons developed in universities and amphitheaters
or in itinerant lectures and private lessons were highlighted as practices of dissemination of
scientific knowledge in the eighteenth century. The scientific academies and central places in
scientific knowledge production appeared in 4 out of 8 written summaries like some examples
shown in the table.
In other examples, passages can be found in which students illustrate scientific prac-
tices in recent times (6, scientific production is disseminated mainly from scientific virtual
journals […] and 10, one great modern potential is the existence of the Internet […]),
highlighting positive aspects of modernity (10 and 11) but also many similarities between
today’s scientific practices and the ones performed in the eighteen century (6, Access to
scientific knowledge is still a privilege […], and 11, Many scientific journals and articles
are not free […] are still an unattainable dream for millions, especially in emerging
countries like ours).
Data presented above indicates that students understood the structure of the Republic of
Letters playing “a key role in sharing among scientific fields” (1st extract) and also recognized
many different practices of communication among natural philosophers in the eighteenth
century, highlighting the dynamics in the diffusion of scientific knowledge in that period.
More than that, examples used by students indicate that the lessons in which the teacher
evoked discussions about students’ context and Brazilian scientific production were central in
their recognition of scientific practices now and before and in understanding that these
practices change throughout history.
Table 1 contains excerpts concerning actors involved (or hidden) in the production of
scientific knowledge. It is highlighted the prominence that some researchers acquired in the
Republic of Letters’ network (1, 3) and in other sites of knowledge production, as universities
(5) and academies (13 and 15). In many excerpts, students show their concern with how much
access certain actors or social groups have to scientific knowledge and to its production. For
example, many passages were found in excerpts criticizing the privileges that some had and
still have in society and within the scientific community (5, […] and showed to the elites.
These were exclusive sites; 6, Access to scientific knowledge is still a privilege; 7, 9, and 10,
full excerpts; 11, an unattainable dream for millions, especially in emerging countries like
ours).
In other excerpts, students criticized the lack of participation of women in the Republic of
Letters (3, The men who belonged to the Republic of Letters) and presented the example of
Laura Bassi (2, written by three girls and one boy). It is worth noting that in the activity in
which the Fields Medal was discussed, some students, including the boy in the group
mentioned above (student 3), pointed out that only one woman had received the award.

Table 1 1st theme: diffusion of scientific knowledge
Sub-theme Excerpts from student audio and text
The means of communication among scientists (1) The Republic of Letters played a key role in sharing
among scientific fields, since in letters that anyone
who could have access, people would have their
work better publicized, so they’d have greater status
within the community (excerpt from summary 8)
(2) Although it represents a transformative process, the
Republic of Letters had less participation of the more
peripheral layers of society, being more restricted to
the elites. Science was dominated by men at the time,
and very few women stood out in the scientific
setting. An example of a woman in science was
Laura Bassi, PhD in Philosophy. (excerpt from
summary 2)
(3) Scientific knowledge was shared from Republic of
Letters in which the scientists, especially from
England and France, communicated their findings
and received materials from others scientists. The
men who belonged to the Republic of Letters had a
great status in that epoch in relation to scientific
production. (excerpt from summary 7)
(4) The publication of books was a hard assignment (in
the 18th century) since the editors were only
interested in publishing books that they could profit
from, such as books on botany. (excerpt from
summary 2)
(5) In the 18th century, the main places of dissemination
of scientific knowledge were Universities and
amphitheaters. In these sites, experiments and
practical lessons were developed and showed to the
elites. These were exclusive sites (excerpt from
summary 4)
(6) Nowadays, scientific production is disseminated
mainly from scientific virtual journals that frequently
charge to a paper be published or read, making the
dissemination of knowledge difficult. Then, there are
challenges to democratic scientific development.
Access to scientific knowledge is still a privilege.
(excerpt from summary 2)
Knowledge circulation has social, identity, and (7) ...but the Republic of Letters was not for everyone, I
financial restrictions mean, they (people in general) could send as many
letters as they want, but to be answered I think it was
like if today you sent a letter to a great scientist or a
famous artist, if you are “nobody”, who would reply
to you? (student 12)
(8) [...] for those scientific articles (18th century) that
were published in private journals, they would need
to be on society’s agenda, welcomed by the
population, and there was also the profit motive
(9) However, we can conclude that the circulation of
knowledge had its restrictions, since not everyone
had the opportunity to be in [the Republic of Letters].
Many people had to resort to the itinerant lectures and
private lessons that were aimed at a more lay public

Table 1 (continued)
Sub-theme Excerpts from student audio and text
(10) Nowadays, this ‘filter’ [access to knowledge]

sometimes was granted according to the purchasing
power of someone, whether or not a person could pay
for access to scientific articles, whose copyright
belongs to the major publishers. However, one great
modern potential is the existence of the Internet,
which allows the global mobilization of people, such
as those against the “monopoly of knowledge”. We
can mention the boycott of scientists, mainly about
Elseviex [Elsevier] in Germany. (excerpt from
summary 3)
(11) Many scientific journals and articles are not free,
and universities, though much more democratic than
in the eighteenth century, are still an unattainable
dream for millions, especially in emerging countries
like ours. (student 6)
(12) The dissemination of scientific knowledge
nowadays seems to be as difficult as in the past.
Today, in the majority of the cases, for someone to
have access to the scientific papers it is necessary that
she/he pay fees. (excerpt from summary 2)
Institutions were/are important centers for production, (13) The Paris Academy of Sciences was considered one
dissemination, and validation of scientific knowl- of the greatest centers of scientific production of the
edge time. A scientist who could become a member there
would undoubtedly have greater credibility, status
and visibility for their studies. (student 15)
(14) [...] many times, even without knowing the
person’s work, from just knowing where the person
comes from [institution] we already have a first
image that serves as a seal of quality which
contributes to its dissemination and credibility…
(unspecified student)
(15) [...] even if [Dufay’s] work is good, it could take
more time for people to know about him if he wasn’t
at the academy. (student 4)
Data analysis indicates that from the discussions led in class by the teacher, students
reflected about the lack of recognition that some hidden actors (or actresses) suffered in
science and upon some necessary conditions to participate in the scientific endeavor. From
the many examples illustrated above, students seemed troubled with the restrictions faced by
those who wished to participate in the Republic of Letters, and with the restrictions, they
experienced when trying to download articles on the internet. Another important remark is that
student 3 participated in a debate group at the school about minority issues (gender, race, and
sexual orientation) suggesting that the consideration about women’s participation in science
brought by group 2 was not far from the socio-cultural context of these students.
From Table 1’s analysis, it can be affirmed that the lessons were successful in considering
students’ socio-cultural context, in which Brazilian science was experiencing budget cuts and
Brazilian scientists were protesting against these budget cuts, while some of these scientists
were leaving Brazil. It is also worth noting that some of these students, who participated in the
Brazilian program (PIBIC-EM) to stimulate students to follow a STEM career, were therefore
experiencing cuts in their scholarships, and some of them would not be able to attend the

school otherwise. This seemed to demonstrate in a real way that there are great obstacles to
doing science in Brazil. From this theme’s analysis, it can be concluded that the CHS approach
inspired students to connect discussions about different historical cases with their socio-
cultural context.
4.2 2nd Theme—Experimental Character of Science Production
Specially in Lessons 4, 5, and 7, the researchers and the teacher developed activities with the
propose to inspire discussions about the material culture (Pimentel 2010) and the experimental
character of science production (Heering 2000, 2007) focusing in the development of the
Leiden jar.
In some activities, students manipulated electrical artifacts and performed experiments,
while discussing their historical impact from the study of different scientific practices and
social actors employed in their development. Table 2 was built to present excerpts from
students’ speeches and summaries associated to the five sub-themes created for the analysis
of how the experimental character of science production was discussed during the lessons.
Similar to the results in the first theme (in 5 and 9 of Table 1), Table 2 illustrates excerpts
where the emphasis given by students to the practice of private lessons (in excerpt 1) and to the
itinerant lectures (6), and also to the work of actors like chemists and biologists (10) and
instrument-makers (7 and 11) can be seen. And again, excerpts mentioning the participation of
non-scholars in these sites and practices can be found, at the same time highlighting the social
class privilege and the desire for status in these situations (4 and 5, also in 5, 6, 7, 9, and 11 in
Table 1).
In 6 from 8 summaries, there are excerpts mentioning the large dissemination of the
artifacts discussed in the lessons and the use of these artifacts to develop new experiments
and scientific knowledge (as in 3, there was the popularization of different experiments about
the theme; 6, 7, in 9, The bottle was used as form of entertainment for some, as in itinerant
lectures, and also as medical treatment; and in 10, It is nice to notice that there were a lot of
people working with the Voltaic pile). During the lessons and in 7 abstracts (from total of 8),
the students pointed out the use of the Leiden jars in the historical context studied, mentioning
the new experiments developed from its use and its extensive use at the time, as used in
itinerant lectures. The students also pointed out some medicinal use of electricity, indicating
differences between recent conceptions (in 2, Nowadays, electricity has a different conception
in medicine; and in 8, A contemporary practice is the use of electricity as a medical resource)
and historical ones (2, 3, in 8, stimulated muscle contractions […] This occurred thankfully to
the Leiden jar; and 9).
These results suggest that the lessons inspired by the CHS approach created opportu-
nities for the students to recognize different social actors participating in the development
of science. Additionally, the students seemed to recognize that science education in the
eighteenth century did not occur only in the universities of that time, which drew attention
to the importance of different sites of teaching that allowed new possibilities to share
knowledge. Therefore, even while discussing its experimental character, students seemed
to understand science in the eighteenth century as not an exclusively laboratory practice
(Pimentel, 2010).
The apparatus and experiments and all the scientific practices related to them pointed out by
students illustrate how the lessons inspired discussions on how the development of the Leiden
jar were connected to the socio-cultural context in which they were constructed. This suggests

Table 2 2nd theme: science’s experimental character
Sub-theme Student’s excerpts from audio and text
There are many different scientific practices, actors, and (1) The diversity of how to teach in that context had
sites, besides the “lab coat scientist,” the laboratory consequences to the development of new ways to
and practices directly related to it share and validate scientific knowledge, such as
private lessons, itinerant lectures, and amphitheaters.
(student 4)
(2) Scholars began to observe that small shocks were
capable of causing spasms, popularizing the idea
that they could be used to treat muscular atrophy and
pain. The Leiden jar was essential for the
dissemination of these treatments. Nowadays,
electricity has a different conception in medicine, but
it is still being used to aid to make the heart beat
again after it has stopped (excerpt from summary 8)
(3) They (natural philosophers in the 18th century)
believed that electric stimulus could cure illness, and
they constructed theories about electric stimulus and
muscular movements. In this way, there was the
popularization of different experiments about the
theme (excerpt from summary number 6)
(4) These experiments were done in places like the
amphitheaters. They attracted even those who were
not scholars on the subject: showing interest in these
experiments was common, as a way to obtain social
status and to show knowledge (student 7)
(5) However, not everything was positive, often the
places and access to the experimental lectures varied
with social class and participating in them was
considered “status”. (student 3)
(6) The Leiden university acquired many instruments to
develop scientific experiments. These experiments
were also used in entertainment, in teaching at the
itinerant lessons. We could cite the “flying boy” and
the “electric kiss”. (excerpt from summary number
2)
Science has a material culture (7) There were scholars who did experiments and
created instruments related to the manipulation of
electricity and other subjects – these were the
instrument-makers. The Leiden jar allowed them to
construct a lot of experiments. One of those was the
circuit (…) (excerpt from summary number 6)
(8) A contemporary practice is the use of electricity as a
medical resource, that began with the assumption
that electricity stimulated muscle contractions
making some lost movements return (or almost).
This occurred thankfully to the Leiden jar that
allowed the storage of electricity and it was used to
create a closed circuit. (excerpt from summary 3)
(9) The popularity of this instrument [Leiden jar]
happened mainly by the great curiosity about how
electricity worked and what it could be used for. The
bottle was used as form of entertainment for some,
as in itinerant lectures, and also as medical
treatment. (Not reported from who it was taken)
(10) It is nice to notice that there were a lot of people
working with the Voltaic pile, chemists and
biologists. I think this would not happen easily

Table 2 (continued)
nowadays, but a lot of knowledge looking into the

same thing should help to bring a lot of ideas to
study explanations around it (student 8)
(11) In this context, the instruments-makers were cru-
cial to the development of science. We could cite the
famous Leiden jar, the first artifact to store electric-
ity. (excerpt from summary 4)
that students understood that the replications of the Leiden jar and Voltaic pile were important
for the development of science since it allowed people from different part of Europe and with
different backgrounds to manipulate them and to produce new experiments and scientific
knowledge. These findings indicate that the practice of replication with a pedagogical purpose
of historical instruments and experiments had positive results, when oriented by the discussion
of scientific practices.
4.3 3rd Theme—Science Funding
When planning the lessons, the teacher considered students’ desire to become scientists and
the changing scientific policies in Brazil to bring to focus science funding as the theme of the
last activity of the course. The analysis of field diary indicates that this activity generated a lot
of discussions in the classroom, and Table 3 was created with examples of students’ oral
production concerning this theme. The written texts (summaries), science funding was not
mentioned since these texts were written in the final activity. This can be seen as an indicator
of the importance of explicit discussions about scientific practices when discussing science
(Clough 2006).
As Table 3 shows, attention was given by the students to the financial character of science,
both in defining research programs (in 1, a direction that could benefit or damage certain
fields; and 5) and as in a condition for researching and publishing (2, 3, 4, and 6). Additionally,
student’s examples contemplated both eighteenth century and contemporary science (4 and 6),
and they highlighted that funding represents a restriction (all excepts above) in science
production as was discussed on previous lessons (Theme 1; 2nd sub-theme: Knowledge
circulation has social, identity and financial restrictions).
In excepts 5 and 6, students evoked issues related to differences in public and private
funding. In number 5, the difference in the vested interests in research developed by the
government and by “a business person” is highlighted, criticizing the later. While in number 6,
students worries about the situation in science funding in Brazil were interpreted, both because
of Brazilian science’s situation but also for their career choices (What we said here [in class] is
cool even to make us think about what we are gonna do).
As previously described, during the lessons the teacher presented discussions about con-
temporary science, some related to funding in scientific research. Data presented above further
indicates that students seemed to associate these discussions with historical ones when
bringing to class issues related to the current reality of Brazilian science that were not expected
by the teacher. This might have been inspired by the cut in public funding for scientific

Table 3 3rd theme: science funding
Science funding defines research programs and has (1) It is a public money cut, of investment, as in Napoleon’s
a direct impact on science’s material culture case, not that it had had a cut, but a direction that could
benefit or damage certain fields (student 17)
(2) Publishing books, in the beginning, was a complex task,
since publishers were only interested in profitable
subjects, such as botany, in order to profit from the
popularity of the topic. So, probably more people were
interested in these subjects, both to read and to study.
(3) For scientific articles or books to be published by
private publishers, it was necessary [...] that there be a
profitable return or to be published from large personal
investments. (excerpt from summary 1)
Government policies impact science production (4) This discourages many people from pursuing such
and scientific career’s development careers (in scientific research). Many choose to be a
teacher even if they do not want to teach. People end up
having to leave the country, when they are able to, for
better opportunities, just like Franklin, who made a
network of contacts in Europe even though he was from
the US. (student 7)
(5) The Government, in fact... well... you can demand a
vaccine from the government if you need it.
Theoretically the purpose of the government is to serve
you. When these things are in the hands of a
businessperson, you cannot demand anything from
them. The businessperson is there to follow their own
interests. On the government’s case, it may want to serve
its own population or may just want to sell it to another
country that does not have that knowledge. (student 4)
(6) I think that in Brazil there are fields that are very
limited, for example, biology… I’ve read on the internet
that a lot of people do not advise to study it because
generally you are only able to become a teacher
afterwards. What we said here [in class] is cool even to
make us think about what we are gonna do. When you
think about pursuing the scientific career in Brazil, you
should first consider the scenario in that field. You
cannot only follow your interests; many areas are not
profitable or offer no opportunities. In other countries
that provide much more investment, in Europe mainly,
or even in Argentina, where you have more investment,
you have a greater protection while here we have cuts on
scholarships. This encourages people from these other
countries to follow their dreams, they have less
difficulties, these things matter a lot. (student 2)
research and the changes in scientific policies in Brazil, both much debated in the national
press and by street protests against these changes.
Students also seemed to recognize that academics in different places and contexts carry out
their research with specific limitations indicating that they have questioned some of their initial
ideas, like the one that the internet brought free access to scientific knowledge. More than that,
this indicates that the study of scientific practices allowed them to identify matters to be
considered in their professional decisions.

It is worth noting in their speeches and written texts, students again recognized (as
presented in the 2nd theme) that the changes in scientific policies in Brazil are an obstacle
for the future development of science in Brazil, leading some scientists to leave the country.
Therefore, the discussions led during the lessons seemed to be an opportunity for the students
to comprehend the importance for Brazilian citizens to engage in discussions about national
scientific policies as a way that enhances their chances for success in their professional future
since some desired to become scientists in Brazil.
And finally, the CHS approach allowed the teacher to plan activities that took into
consideration the desire of students to be scientists, as well as their background, in
activities developed in physics classes. This indicates the potential of developing activities
that consider student’s socio-cultural context in reference to Brazilian scientific
production.
5 Final Comments
This study is part of a larger project that aims to develop science lessons with a historical
approach to encourage contextualized activities in a historical sense but also considering
students’ social-cultural context. In this survey, students presented a desire to follow scientific
careers while recognizing that they were living in a time in Brazil when certain scientific
policies were being applied that were considered obstacles to progress by the scientific
community.
Inspired by the CHS, quotidian practices and habits performed during the development of
the Leiden jar were discussed with students. This survey’s findings indicate that the students
developed understandings about how scientific practices changed throughout history and these
practices involved different people (from different social groups, professions, genres), from
different places, doing different things since some stayed in invisible conditions, as women in
the eighteenth century, according to the CHS approach (Nyhart 2016). The students seemed to
comprehend that scientific practices encompass not only activities considered exclusively
laboratory-based such as reading, writing, debating, questioning, and also activities associated
with financial support, research groups, and scientific communication in accord to the CHS
approach (Pimentel 2010).
These findings also indicate that the CHS approach allowed the teacher to develop lessons
based on a narrative that focuses on scientific practices even when a biography of a scientist
was presented, suggesting that selecting a specific historiographical approach should be
considered in science teaching, as pointed in Gandolfi (2018). Besides, these findings support
studies (Allchin 2014; Sarukkai 2014) indicating that the CHS approach impacts understand-
ing of the scientific enterprise as a dynamic and negotiating community.
The results also indicate that the students comprehended that to be recognized as a
contributor to the scientific endeavor, it is essential that the person participates in a proper
scientific network of their time in order to share scientific knowledge, to be updated with new
contributions and to be recognized by their peers. In their outputs, students highlighted that the
schools and sites where scientists were trained, the people they met, and the access of
information they had during their training and career are crucial to their scientific
performances.
It is worth noting that these findings support Gurgel, Pietrocola and Watanabe’s (2016)
results which indicate that the contact with Brazil’s scientific production helps students to

recognize that Brazil produces science. Moreover, the CHS approach allowed the teacher to
develop activities to encourage discussions about scientific production that were not planned
or predicted but that were related to students’ socio-cultural context, such as the conditions
faced by someone who decides to follow a scientific carrier in Brazil.
The historical episode was chosen, as described in the “Introduction” section, because of
the mandatory curriculum and the experience of researcher 1 in the replication of historical
experiments for pedagogical purposes. This agrees with the literature (Heering 2000, 2007;
Heering and Höttecke 2014) that indicates the replication of historical experiments as a way of
bringing to science teaching discussions about science, such as the materiality involved, the
difficulties in building an apparatus and collecting experimental data, and bringing students
closer to the steps of concept construction scientist involved (Heering and Höttecke 2014).
In this way, the replication of historical experiments for pedagogical purposes could be a strategy
to study science’s material culture, opening ways to connect experimental practices which the
culture in which they were embedded. However, this group was unable to replicate the Leiden jar
according to the replication method, with the students in the school where the research was
performed. So, two Leiden jar replicas were presented, with the narration of the process to construct
them, and from the CHS approach, the teacher emphasized the dynamics of the places of production
and validation of knowledge, its dissemination, communication between scientists, and financing,
among others seeking to contribute with what has been produced in the area.
From the discussions of scientific practices employed in the diffusion of scientific knowledge in
the eighteenth century and in the replica and manipulation of the Leiden jar, the students seemed to
understand how this artifact brought new considerations about electricity, such as the electrical
circuit, and new experiments, such as the ones developed by Galvani, that encourage the construc-
tion of new apparatus such as Voltaic pile. The results also suggest that the students comprehended
how Leiden jar was constructed and reconstructed in different sites and how rules were written for
their manipulation (such as Dufay’s rule) indicating that the conception of science as an independent
enterprise was questioned, indicating that even without conditions to replicate devices, the discus-
sions of the construction process followed by the study of scientific practices around the dissemi-
nation and consolidation of this artifact is a possible way to discuss science’s material culture.
As previously indicated in this paper, the CHS approach can be used as a strategy in science
teaching to historically contextualize the development of science (Milne 2011; Allchin,
Andersen and Nielsen 2014; Martins 2015; Erduran, Dagher and McDonald 2019). More
than that, this study’s results suggest that the CHS inspired the teacher to present a historical
narrative the focused on scientific practices and habits, which allowed the creation of activities
that encouraged discussions related to the students. As a result, the students reflected on the
situation of Brazilian science, considering their career expectations. Therefore, valuing the
contexts of students can shift the focus away from students as science fact learners to critical
negotiators since their career ambitions and social and political context inspired the teacher to
define the content to be taught and themes about science to be discussed (Barton, 1998).
It is also worth noting that this study is limited since it was developed with a specific reality
in mind. The results discussed here could bring support to science education suggesting that
the CHS approach in science teaching could be a way to teach science in a broader way,
contributing to science education for all (Barton 1998).
Acknowledgments We would like to thank Professor Dr. Peter Heering for the collaboration in several stages
of the work developed and the University of Flensburg for receiving us in their laboratories of History of Science.
We also thank CAPES and CNPQ for all financial support for the development of the research. We would also

like to thank our research group, NIEHCC (https://niehcc.wordpress.com/), for all the support during the entire
process.
Code Availability Not applicable.
Funding This study was financially supported by CAPES and CNPQ.
Data Availability Not applicable.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
References
Allchin, D. (2011). Evaluating knowledge of the nature of (whole) science. Science Education, 95(3), 518–542.
Allchin, D., Andersen, H., & Nielsen, K. (2014). Complementary approaches to teaching nature of science:
Integrating student inquiry, historical cases, and contemporary cases in classroom practice. Science
Education, 98(3), 461–486.
Almási, G. (2009). The uses of humanism: Johannes Sambucus (1531–1584), Andreas Dudith (1533–1589), and
the republic of letters in east Central Europe. Leiden: Ed. Brill.
Barton, A. C. (1998). Reframing “science for all” through the politics of poverty. Educational Policy, 12(5), 525–
541.
Bensaude-Vincent, B., & Blondel, C. (2008), eds. Science and spectacle in the European Enlightenment. (1-24)
London: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.
Bernardi, W. (2000) The controversy on animal electricity in eighteenth-century Italy: Galvani, Volta and others.
In Nuova Voltianas, Bevilacqua and Fregonese, 101–114 eds. Milan: Hoepli.
Bertucci, P. (2006) Back from wonderland: Jean Antoine Nollet's Italian tour (1749).in Alexander (Ed.).
Curiosity and Wonder from the Renaissance to the Enlightenment. (pp.192-211). London: Ashgate
Publishing Ltd.
Bertucci, P. (2007). Therapeutic attractions: Early applications of electricity to the art of healing (pp. 271–283).
Brain, Mind and Medicine: Essays in Eighteenth-Century Neuroscience.
Bertucci, P. (2008) Domestic spectacles: Electrical instruments between business and conversation. Bensaude-
Vincent, B.; Blondel, C. (Eds.). Science and Spectacle in the European Enlightenment (pp. 75-87).
Aldershot: Ashgate.
Biskup, T. (2013). Transnational careers in the Service of Empire: German natural historians in eighteenth-
century London. In: Scholars in Action (2 vols). Brill, pp. 43-69.
Bresadola, M. (1998). Medicine and science in the life of Luigi Galvani (1737–1798). Brain Research Bulletin,
46(5), 367–380.
Brockliss, L. (2003). Science, the universities, and other public spaces: Teaching science in Europe and the
Americas. The Cambridge History of Science, v. 4, (pp. 44-86) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brockliss, L. (2013). Starting-out, getting-on and becoming famous in the eighteenth-century Republic of Letters
background. In Holenstein, Steike, Stuber, scholars in action: The practice of knowledge and the figure of
the savant in the 18th century (pp. 71–100). Leiden: Ed. Brill.
Burke, P. (2011). A República das Letras Europeia, 1500-2000. Estudos Avançados, 25, 277–288.
Camel, T.O., Moura, C., & Guerra, A. (2019). Revolução química e historiografia: uma releitura a partir da
História Cultural da Ciência para o Ensino de Química. Educación Química, 30(1), 136.
Cavazza, M. (2002). The Institute of Science of Bologna and the Royal Society in the eighteenth century. Notes
and Records of the Royal Society, 56(1), 3–25.
Chang, H. (2015) The transmission of the Voltaic battery. Crossing Oceans. Coleçtion CLE, v. 75.
Clough, M. P. (2006). Learners’ responses to the demands of conceptual change: Considerations for effective
nature of science instruction. Science & Education, 15(5), 463–494.
Collinson, P. (2002). To Carl Linnaeus 1748. In Armstrong, A. W. Forget Not Me and My Garden. American
Philosophical Society, Philadelphia, pp. 144.

Dagher, Z. R., & Erduran, S. (2016). Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education. Science &
Education, 25(1–2), 147–164.
Daston, L. (1991). The ideal and reality of the Republic of Letters in the enlightenment. Science in Context, 4(2),
367–386.
Daston, L., & Galison, P. (2007). Objectivity. Brooklyn. NY: Zone Books.
Erduran, S., Dagher, Z. R., & McDonald, C. V. (2019). Contributions of the family resemblance approach to
nature of science in science education. Science & Education, 28, 311–328.
Erickson, F. (2012) Qualitative research methods for science education. In B. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. McRobbie
(eds) Second international handbook of science education. Springer International Handbooks of Education,
vol 24. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9041-7_93
Findlen, P. A. (1999). Forgotten Newtonian: Women and science in the Italian provinces. In Clark, W.; Golinski
J.; Schaffer S. The Science in Enlightenment. (pp. 313-349) Cambridge.
Fleßenkämper, I. (2013). From aristocratic support to academic office: Patronage and University in the Scottish
Enlightenment. In Scholars in Action (2 vols) (pp. 101-121). Ed. Brill.
Forato, T. C. M., Pietrocola, M., & Martins, R. A. (2012). History and nature of science in high school: Building
up parameters to guide educational materials and strategies. Science & Education, 21, 657–682.
Frize, M. (2013). Laura Bassi and science in 18th century. Europe. Heidelberg: Springer.
Galvani, L. (1791). De Viribus Electricitatis in Motu Musculari. Bologna, Italy: Typographia Instituti
Scientiarum (RM green, trans.). Commentary on the effect of electricity on muscular motion, p. 66-67.
Gandolfi, H. (2018) Different people in different places secondary school students’ knowledge about history of
science. Science&Education, 27, 259–297.
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.
Goodman, D. (1996). The republic of letters: A cultural history of the French enlightenment. Cornell University
Press.
Gurgel, I., Pietrocola, M., & Watanabe, G. (2016). The role of cultural identity as a learning factor in physics: A
discussion through the role of science in Brazil. Culture Studies of Science Education, 11, 349–370.
Hankins, T. L. (1985). Science and the enlightenment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Heering, P. (2000). Getting shocks: Teaching secondary school physics through history. Science Education, 9,
363–373.
Heering, P. (2007). Public experiments and their analysis with the replication method. Science & Education, 16,
637–645.
Heering, P., & Höttecke, D. (2014) Historical-investigative approaches in science teaching pp. 1473-1502. In
Matthews, M. (Ed.). International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching.
Dordrecht:Springer.
Heilbron, J. L. (1979). Electricity in the 17th and 18th centuries: A study of early modern physics. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Heilbron, J. L. (1991). The contributions of Bologna to galvanism. Historical Studies in the Physical and
Biological Sciences, 22(1), 57–85.
Hochadel, O. (2003). A shock to the public: Itinerant lecturers and instrument makers as practitioners of
electricity in the German Enlightenment (1740-1800). Nuova Voltiana: Studies on Volta and his Times, 5,
53–67.
Hochadel, O. (2007). The business of experimental physics: Instrument makers and itinerant lecturers in the
German enlightenment. Science & Education, 16(6), 525–537.
Holenstein, A., Steinke, H., and Stuber, M. (2013) Introduction. Practices of knowledge and the figure of the
scholar in the eighteenth century, in: Scholars in action: The practice of knowledge and the figure of the
savant in the 18th century, edited by: Holenstein, A., Steinke, H., and Stuber M., pp. 1–41 Leiden: Ed. Brill.
Home R.W. (1985) The notion of experimental physics in early eighteenth-century France. In: Pitt J.C. (eds)
Change and Progress in Modern Science. The University of Western Ontario Series in philosophy of
science (a series of books in philosophy of science, methodology, epistemology, logic, history of science,
and related fields), vol 27. Springer, Dordrecht.
Jager, I. (2018). Discussing gender with women deprived of liberty: a look from the cultural history of science to
the development of botany in the 18th and 19th centuries. Master dissertation, Centro Federal de Educação
Tecnológica Celso Suckow da Fonseca, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Jardim, W.T., & Guerra, A. (2017a). Experimentos históricos e o ensino de física: agregando reflexões a partir da
revisão bibliográfica e da história cultural da ciência. Investigações em Ensino de Ciências, 22(3), 244.
Jardim, W. T., & Guerra, A. (2017b). República das Letras, academias e sociedades científicas no século XVIII: a
garrafa de Leiden e a ciência no ensino. Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física, 34(3), 774–797.

Jardim, W. T., & Guerra, A. (2018). Práticas científicas e difusão do conhecimento sobre eletricidade no século
XVIII e início do XIX: possibilidades para uma abordagem histórica da pilha de volta na educação básica.
Revista Brasileira de Ensino de Física, 40(3), 3603.
Kelly, G. J., & Licona, P. (2018). Epistemic practices and science education. In M. Matthews (Ed.), History,
philosophy and science teaching: New perspectives (pp. 139–165). Chamonix: Springer.
Kipnis, N. (1987). Luigi Galvani and the debate on animal electricity, 1791–1800. Annals of Science, 44(2), 107–
142.
Kipnis, N. (2003). In Volta and the history of electricity. Universita degli studi di Pavia. Kirjassa F. Bevi-lacqua
ja EA Giannetto (Toim.) Hoepli. Milano.
Kragh, H. (2000). Confusion and controversy: Nineteenth-century theories of the voltaic pile. Kirjassa F.
Bevilacqua ja EA Giannetto (Toim.) Nuova Voltiana. Studies on Volta and his Times, 1, 133–157.
Martins, A. F. P. (2015). Natureza da Ciência no ensino de ciências: uma proposta baseada em “temas” e
“questões”. Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física, 32(3), 703–737.
Matthews, M. R. (1992). History, philosophy, and science teaching: The present rapprochement. Science
Education, 1(1), 11–47.
Maurines, L., & Beaufils, D. (2013). Teaching the nature of science in physics courses: The contribution of
classroom historical inquiries. Science Education, 22, 1443–1465.
McClellan III, J. (2003). Scientific institutions and the organization of science. The Cambridge History of
Science: Eighteenth-Century Science. 4, 87-106. Cambridge University Press.
Milne, C. (2011). The invention of science: Why history of science matters for the classroom. Rotterdam: Sense
Publishers.
Moraes, R., & Galiazzi, M. D. C. (2006). Análise textual discursiva: processo reconstrutivo de múltiplas faces.
Ciência & Educação (Bauru), 12(1), 117–128.
Moura, C. B., & Guerra, A. (2016). Cultural history of science: a possible path for discussing scientific practices
in science teaching?. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências, 16(3), 749–771.
Moura, B. A. (2019). A filosofia natural de Benjamin Franklin: traduções de cartas e ensaios sobre a
eletricidade e a luz. UFABC Ed: São Bernardo do Campo.
Moura, C. B., Jager, I. T., & Guerra, A. (2020). Teaching about sciences in/for the global south: lessons from a
case study in a Brazilian classroom. In: Hagop Yacoubian; Lena Hansson.(Org.). Nature of Science and
Social Justice (pp. 137–155). Chamonix: Springer.
Nyhart, L. K. (2016). Historiography of the history of science. In B. Lightman (Ed.), A companion to the history
of science (pp. 7–22). Oxford: Welley Blackwell.
Pal, C. (2012). Republic of women: Rethinking the Republic of Letters in the seventeenth century. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Pancaldi, G. (2005). Volta: Science and culture in the age of enlightenment. Princeton: Princeton University
Press.
Pestre, D. (1995). Pour une histoire sociale et culturelle des sciences. Nouvelles définitions, nouveaux objets,
nouvelles pratiques: nouvelles définition, nouveaux objets, nouvelle pratiques. Annales HSS, 3, 487–522.
Piccolino, M., & Bresadola, M. (2013). Shocking frogs: Galvani, Volta, and the electric origins of neuroscience.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pimentel, J. (2007) La Revolución Cientifica in História de Europa. Miguel Artola (org.), Europa (pp. 163-238).
Madrid: S.L.U. Espasa Libros.
Pimentel, J. (2010). ¿Qué es la historia cultural de la ciencia? https://doi.org/10.3989/arbor.2010.743n1206.
Roberts, L. (1999). Going Dutch: Situating science in the Dutch enlightenment. In. Clark (Ed.). The Sciences in
Enlightened Europe (pp. 350-388). Chicago: Ed. University of Chicago Press.
Rydell, C; Winterer, C. (2012) Benjamin Franklin’s correspondence network, 1757-1763, mapping the republic
of letters project, Stanford University. http://republicofletters.stanford.edu/casestudies/franklin.html last
accessed in 30/09/2020.
Sarukkai. (2014). Indian experiences with science: Considerations for history, philosophy, and science teaching.
In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching
(pp. 1691–1719). Dordrecht: Springer.
Silva, C. C., & Heering, P. (2018). Re-examining the early history of the Leyden jar: Stabilization and variation
in transforming a phenomenon into a fact. History of Science, 56(3), 314–342.
Volta, A. (1800). On the electricity excited by the mere contact of conducting substances of different kinds. In a
letter from Mr. Alexander Volta, FRS professor of natural philosophy in the University of Pavia, to the Rt.
Hon. Sir Joseph banks, Bart. KBPRS. Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London, 403-431.
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.

Affiliations
Wagner Tadeu Jardim 1 & Andreia Guerra 2 & Hermann Schiffer 2

1
Federal Institute of Education, Science and Technology of the Southeast of Minas Gerais, Juiz de Fora,
Brazil
2
Federal Center of Technology and Education of Rio de Janeiro, Celso Suckow da Fonseca (CEFET/RJ), Rio
de Janeiro, Brazil

Terms and Conditions
Springer Nature journal content, brought to you courtesy of Springer Nature Customer Service Center
GmbH (“Springer Nature”).
Springer Nature supports a reasonable amount of sharing of research papers by authors, subscribers
and authorised users (“Users”), for small-scale personal, non-commercial use provided that all
copyright, trade and service marks and other proprietary notices are maintained. By accessing,
sharing, receiving or otherwise using the Springer Nature journal content you agree to these terms of
use (“Terms”). For these purposes, Springer Nature considers academic use (by researchers and
students) to be non-commercial.
These Terms are supplementary and will apply in addition to any applicable website terms and
conditions, a relevant site licence or a personal subscription. These Terms will prevail over any
conflict or ambiguity with regards to the relevant terms, a site licence or a personal subscription (to
the extent of the conflict or ambiguity only). For Creative Commons-licensed articles, the terms of
the Creative Commons license used will apply.
We collect and use personal data to provide access to the Springer Nature journal content. We may
also use these personal data internally within ResearchGate and Springer Nature and as agreed share
it, in an anonymised way, for purposes of tracking, analysis and reporting. We will not otherwise
disclose your personal data outside the ResearchGate or the Springer Nature group of companies
unless we have your permission as detailed in the Privacy Policy.
While Users may use the Springer Nature journal content for small scale, personal non-commercial
use, it is important to note that Users may not:
1. use such content for the purpose of providing other users with access on a regular or large scale
basis or as a means to circumvent access control;
2. use such content where to do so would be considered a criminal or statutory offence in any
jurisdiction, or gives rise to civil liability, or is otherwise unlawful;
3. falsely or misleadingly imply or suggest endorsement, approval , sponsorship, or association
unless explicitly agreed to by Springer Nature in writing;
4. use bots or other automated methods to access the content or redirect messages
5. override any security feature or exclusionary protocol; or
6. share the content in order to create substitute for Springer Nature products or services or a
systematic database of Springer Nature journal content.
In line with the restriction against commercial use, Springer Nature does not permit the creation of a
product or service that creates revenue, royalties, rent or income from our content or its inclusion as
part of a paid for service or for other commercial gain. Springer Nature journal content cannot be
used for inter-library loans and librarians may not upload Springer Nature journal content on a large
scale into their, or any other, institutional repository.
These terms of use are reviewed regularly and may be amended at any time. Springer Nature is not
obligated to publish any information or content on this website and may remove it or features or
functionality at our sole discretion, at any time with or without notice. Springer Nature may revoke
this licence to you at any time and remove access to any copies of the Springer Nature journal content
which have been saved.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, Springer Nature makes no warranties, representations or
guarantees to Users, either express or implied with respect to the Springer nature journal content and
all parties disclaim and waive any implied warranties or warranties imposed by law, including
merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose.
Please note that these rights do not automatically extend to content, data or other material published
by Springer Nature that may be licensed from third parties.
If you would like to use or distribute our Springer Nature journal content to a wider audience or on a
regular basis or in any other manner not expressly permitted by these Terms, please contact Springer
Nature at
[email protected]

History of Science in Physics Teaching - Possibili

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

History of Science in Physics Teaching - Possibili

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

History of Science in Physics Teaching - Possibili

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Science & Education (2021) 30:609–638

Wagner Tadeu Jardim 1 & Andreia Guerra

Accepted: 23 December 2020 / Published online: 22 January 2021

Keywords Cultural history of science . Scientific practices . Science education . Electricity .

* Wagner Tadeu Jardim

Extended author information available on the last page of the article

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

temporal, and contingent enterprises, encompassing cultural performances and activities

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3 An Overview of the Lessons

3.1 Lesson 1—Introduction

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3.2 Lesson 2—Republic of Letters and Scientific Academies

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3.3 Lesson 3—Charles Dufay and Arthur Ávila

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3.4 Lesson 4—Sites of Scientific Production

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3.5 Lesson 5—Replication of Leiden Jar

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3.6 Lesson 6—Writing a Summary

3.7 Lesson 7—The Construction and Diffusion of the Voltaic Pile

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

3.8 Lesson 8—Discussing Brazilian Science

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

4.1 1st Theme—Diffusion of Scientific Knowledge

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Table 1 1st theme: diffusion of scientific knowledge

Sub-theme Excerpts from student audio and text

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sub-theme Excerpts from student audio and text

(10) Nowadays, this ‘filter’ [access to knowledge]

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

4.2 2nd Theme—Experimental Character of Science Production

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Table 2 2nd theme: science’s experimental character

Sub-theme Student’s excerpts from audio and text

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sub-theme Student’s excerpts from audio and text

nowadays, but a lot of knowledge looking into the

4.3 3rd Theme—Science Funding

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Table 3 3rd theme: science funding

Sub-theme Student’s excerpts from audio and text

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Code Availability Not applicable.

Funding This study was financially supported by CAPES and CNPQ.

Data Availability Not applicable.