Science Studies as an educational discipline: experience of reconstruction

Introduction. The paper presents a reconsideration of the foundations of the discipline of Science Studies, taking into account post-non-classical ideas about science. This approach positions Science Studies not only as a scientific field but also as an educational discipline aimed at novice researchers. Aim. The present research aimed to assess the current state of science as a scientific and educational discipline in the Russian and Euro-American scientific traditions. It also aimed to present the project of teaching the discipline of Science Studies as a rigorous science, encompassing both its fundamental and applied aspects, and utilising quantitative and qualitative research methods. Methodology and research methods. The synthesis of universal evolutionism approaches (including deterministic chaos concepts) and the methods of quantitative and qualitative content analysis were employed. Results. A quantitative analysis of the state of science in Russia was conducted. The analysis revealed an increase in the interest of Russian researchers in scientific issues. However, it also highlighted a lack of clear understanding of its disciplinary parameters. Scientific novelty and practical significance. It is proved that Science Studies can be a significant incentive for the growth of scientific knowledge in Russia. The work has led to an understanding of the role of epistemological (cognitive) and social mechanisms in the development of science.

1. Boricheskij I. Science as an exact science. Sociologiya nauki i tekhnologij = Sociology of Science and Technology. 2013;4(3):11–17. (In Russ.) Accessed March 12, 2024. http://sst.nw.ru/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/naukovedenie-kak-tochnaya-nauka.pdf

2. Dobrov G.M. Nauka o nauke: Vvedenie v obshchee naukovedenie = Science of Science: Introduction to General Science. 2nd ed. Kiev: Publishing House Naukova Dumka; 1970. 320 р. (In Russ.) Accessed March 12, 2024. https://rusneb.ru/catalog/000200_000018_RU_NLR_DIGIT_30505/

3. Gindilis N.L. The formation and development of science in ХХ century. Sociologiya nauki i tekhnologij = Sociology of Science and Technology. 2015;6(1):98–104. (In Russ.) Accessed March 12, 2024. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/stanovlenie-i-razvitie-naukovedeniya-v-hh-veke

4. Gindilis N.L. Stanovlenie naukovedenija v SSSR (seredina 60-h godov XX veka) = The formation of science in the USSR (mid-60s of the twentieth century). In: Rakitov A.I., ed. Naukovedcheskie issledovaniya = Science of Science Research. Moscow: RAN INION; 2011:217–272. (In Russ.) Accessed March 12, 2024. https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=17087270

5. Gindilis N.L. Naukovedenie 70-h gg. XX veka. V knige: Naukovedcheskie issledovanija = The science of the 70s of the twentieth century. In: Rakitov A.I., ed. Naukovedcheskie issledovaniya = Science of Science Research. Moscow: RAN INION; 2012:161–215. (In Russ.) Accessed March 12, 2024. https://elibrary.ru/pkaser

6. Gindilis N.L. Iz istorii sovetskogo naukovedenija: 80-e gody = From the history of Soviet science: the 80s. In: Rakitov A.I., ed. Naukovedcheskie issledovaniya = Science of Science Research. Moscow: RAN INION; 2013:171–214. (In Russ.) Accessed March 12, 2024. https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=20958871

7. Gindilis N.L. Iz istorii otechestvennogo naukovedenija: 90-e gody = From the history of Russian science: the 90s. In: Rakitov A.I., ed. Naukovedcheskie issledovaniya = Science of Science Research. Moscow: RAN INION; 2015:153–182. (In Russ.) Accessed March 12, 2024. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/iz-istorii-otechestvennogo-naukovedeniya-90-e-gody

8. Aleksandrov I.Yu. Science and power: a scientific project and the problem of substantiating the cumulative concept of scientific progress. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo gosudarstvennogo instituta kulturi = Saint Petersburg State University of Culture Bulletin. 2011;3(8):109–122. (In Russ.) Accessed March 12, 2024. https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=16920783

9. Granovskij Yu.V. The difficult fate of science in Russia. In: Rakitov A.I., ed. Naukovedcheskie issledovaniya = Science Studies Research. Moscow: RAN INION; 2010:110–124. (In Russ.) Accessed March 12, 2024. https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=16858202

10. Shherbin V. The main form of scientific self-knowledge. Nauka i innovacii = Science and Innovation. 2013;131:12–15. (In Russ.) Accessed March 12, 2024. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/glavnaya-forma-nauchnogo-samopoznaniya.

11. Dadalko V.A., Dadalko S.V. Scientometry in the context of science and modern education. Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie = Knowledge. Understanding. Skill. 2020;1:148–161. (In Russ.) doi:10.17805/zpu.2020.1.13

12. Danilenko V.P. Vvedenie v naukovedenie = Introduction to Science. Saratov: Publishing House Aj Pi Er Media; 2018. 316 p. (In Russ.) Accessed March 12, 2024. https://www.iprbookshop.ru/73601.html/

13. Price D. Networks of scientific papers. Science. 1965;149:510–515. doi:10.1126/science.149.3683.510

14. Zeng A., Shen Z., Zhou J., Wu J., Fan Y., Wang Y., Stanley H.E. The science of science: from the perspective of complex systems. Physics Reports. 2017;714-715:1–74. doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2017.10.001

15. Gates A.J., Barabasi A.-L. Reproducible science of science at scale: pySciSci. Quantitative Science Studies. 2023;4 (3):1–17. doi:10.1162/qss_a_00260

16. Lin Z., Yin Y., Liu L., Wang D. SciSci net: a large-scale open data lake for the science of science research. Scientific Data. 2023;10(1):1–23. doi:10.1038/s41597-023-02198-9

17. Chaudhury S. Science of science. Tech Scape: The Science, Technology and Education Journal of IIT Jodhpur. 2023;3(3). Accessed March 12, 2024. https://iitj.ac.in/techscape/vol03/issue03/directors-column/science_of_science/

18. Wang D., Barabási A.-L. The Science of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2021. 308 p. doi:10.1017/9781108610834

19. Fortunato S., Bergstrom C.T., Börner K., Evans J.A., Helbing D., Milojevic S., et al. Science of science. Science. 2018;359(6379):1–7. doi:10.1126/science.aao0185

20. Yian Y., Wang Y., Evans J.A., Wang D. Quantifying the dynamics of failure across science, startups and security. Nature. 2019;575(778):190–194. doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1725-y

21. Chu J.S.G., Evans J. Slowed canonical progress in large fields of science. In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA. 2021;118(41):e2021636118. doi:10.1073/pnas.2021636118

22. Feng S., Foster J.G., Evans J.A. Weaving the fabric of science: dynamic network models of science’s unfolding structure. Social Networks. 2015;43:73–85. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2015.02.006

23. Lingfei W., Wang D., Evans J.A. Large teams develop and small teams disrupt science and technology. Nature. 2019;566(7744):378–382. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2015.02.006

24. Foster J.G., Rzhetsky A., Evans J.A. Tradition and innovation in scientists’ research strategies. American Sociological Review. 2015;80(5):875–908. doi:10.1177/0003122415601618

25. Cardona G., Herrera A. Gender distribution in publishing in five leading optometry journals. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics. 2024;44(3):634–640. doi:10.1111/opo.13283

26. Kang D., Evans J. Against method: exploding the boundary between qualitative and quantitative studies of science. Quantitative Science Studies. 2020;1(3):930–944. doi:10.1162/qss_a_00056

27. Perig A.V. Didactic student-friendly approaches to more effective teaching of the fundamentals of scientific research in a digital era of scientometrics. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education. 2018;14(12). doi:10.29333/ejmste/97188

28. Witteveen J., Green S. Teaching philosophy of science that matters. European Journal for Philosophy of Science. 2023;13(25):1–10. doi:10.1007/s13194-023-00529-6

29. Waldrop M.M. Why we are teaching science wrong, and how to make it right. Nature. 2015;523:272–274. doi:10.1038/523272a

30. Yarkova E.N. Istoriya i filosofiya nauki = History and Philosophy of Science. Tyumen: Tyumen State University; 2012. 364 р. (In Russ.) Accessed March 12, 2024. https://znanium.ru/catalog/document?id=360984

31. Stepin V.S. Teoreticheskoe znanie = Theoretical Knowledge. Moscow: Publishing House Progress-Tradicija; 2003. 744 p. (In Russ.) Accessed March 12, 2024. https://viewer.rsl.ru/ru/rsl01002352851

32. Kitchin R. Big Data. New epistemologies and paradigm shift. Big Data & Society. 2014;1–12. doi:10.1177/2053951714528481

33. Karimov A.R., Kazakova V.A. The theory of intellectual virtues and modern education. Vestnik Nizhegorodskogo universiteta im. N.I. Lobachevskogo = Bulletin of Lobachevsky University of Nizhny Novgorod. 2014;5:155–162. (In Russ.) Accessed March 12, 2024. https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=22296259

34. Baehr J. Educating for intellectual virtues: from theory to practice. Journal of Philosophy of Education. 2013;47(2):248–262. doi:10.1111/1467-9752.12023

35. McClelland D.C. The Achieving Society. N.Y.: Martino Fine Books; 2010. 530 p. Accessed March 12, 2024. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1496181

36. Gilmanov S.A., Mironov A.V., Mishchenko V.A. Scientific-methodological knowledge and its development in the educational process. Obrazovanie I nauka=The Education and science journal. 2024;26(1):12–53. (In Russ.) doi:10.17853/1994-5639-2024-1-12-53