In this article, I present an analysis of the epistemic value of the students' conceptions, as employed in the current constructivist research. I focus on the conceptions about natural kinds. Since natural kind terms are a crucial part of the discourse of the natural sciences, my conclusions are particularly relevant in science education. To perform my analysis, I use a thought experiment, adapted from Hilary Putnam’s famous Twin-Earth examples. I conclude that, to avoid some strong ontoepistemic implications, an externalist view of the learner’s thought must be adopted. In my approach, students’ conceptions are re-interpreted in terms of Hilary Putnam’s stereotypes, conventional representations of a natural kind that guarantee a semantic competence in a specific linguistic environment. As a conclusion, I argue that the role of students’ conceptions is not epistemic but pragmatic. They should not be understood as a partial or provisional representation of how a natural kind really is but as linguistic tools that permit the learner to engage in classroom discourse. Finally, I present a preliminary application of my ideas to the study of the usage of tautologies in science education.

在本文中，我将对当前建构主义研究中所采用的学生观念的认知价值进行分析。我专注于关于自然物种的概念。由于自然种类术语是自然科学论述中的关键部分，因此我的结论在科学教育中尤为重要。为了进行分析，我使用了一个思想实验，该实验改编自希拉里·普特南（Hilary Putnam）著名的双地球实例。我得出结论，为避免强烈的本体论含义，必须采用对学习者思想的外在观点。在我的方法中，根据希拉里·普特南（Hilary Putnam）的刻板印象重新解释了学生的观念，希拉里·普特南（Hilary Putnam）的刻板印象是自然类型的常规表示形式，可以保证在特定语言环境中的语义能力。作为结论，我认为，学生观念的作用不是认知的，而是务实的。它们不应被理解为自然种类的真实性的部分或临时代表，而应被视为允许学习者从事课堂话语的语言工具。最后，我将自己的思想初步应用到科学教育中重言式用法的研究中。