Keywords: teacher education, hypothesis, focus groups Keywords (user): laboratory work, language, inquiry

Tabel 1. A summary of the different customs of using the term 'hypothesis' in four cultural institutions relevant for science teacher education.

Cultural Institution

Customary use of 'hypothesis'

1. Scientific research 'Hypothesis' refers to a tentative explanation, from which predictions can be derived, and that connects to a more comprehensive theoretical framework.

Pure science courses

The term 'hypothesis' is not commonly used or discussed in laboratory tasks and inquiry oriented activities.

Science education courses for teachers

'Hypothesis' means a guess about an outcome, and is frequently used (but not discussed explicitly) in laboratory tasks and inquiry oriented activities.

4. School science 'Hypothesis' means a guess about an outcome, and is frequently used (but not discussed explicitly) in laboratory tasks and inquiry oriented activities.

In the current debate on curriculum development in science education, two notions stand out: 22 scientific literacy and inquiry. Scientific literacy has been discussed in depth by Roberts 23 (2007) who distinguishes between what he calls Visions I and II of curriculum aims in science 24 education. Simply put, Vision I involves an emphasis on science as a body of knowledge in its 25 2 own right, whereas Vision II puts an emphasis on science as a part of human culture and 26 society at large. In either case, for someone to be scientifically literate, an understanding of 27 scientific inquiry is fundamental. That is to say, an understanding of how scientific 28 knowledge about the world is generated through processes of scientific investigation. 29 However, despite many reform efforts teachers continue to be unclear about the meaning of 30 inquiry in science education [START_REF] Anderson | Inquiry as an Organizing Theme for Science Curricula[END_REF][START_REF] Deboer | A history of ideas in science education: Implications for practice[END_REF]. In part this may be due to the 31 fact that the term inquiry is used to refer both to a pedagogical strategy for teaching science, 32 and as a content for students to learn [START_REF] Bybee | Teaching science as inquiry[END_REF]. The educational goals associated with 33 inquiry as a content have been described by [START_REF] Lederman | Syntax of nature of science within inquiry and science instruction[END_REF] as learning to do inquiry and 34 learning about inquiry. It is learning about inquiry that is arguably the more important goal for 35 the advancement of scientific literacy. 36

Learning about the nature of scientific inquiry (NOI) includes many dimensions. One 37 important dimension can be for learners to understand the basics of hypothesis testing through 38 the use of controlled experiments. The method of controlled experiments is central in many 39 natural sciences, but it is not the equivalent of 'the scientific method' [START_REF] Beveridge | The art of scientific investigation[END_REF], and 40 many scholars agree that this notion seriously misrepresents science [START_REF] Rudolph | Portraying Epistemology: School Science in Historical Context[END_REF]41 Windschitl, 2004). In fact, learning about the method of the controlled experiment may be an 42 important step in understanding that this is one particular type of method used in science. In 43 the present study we focus on the use and role of hypotheses in science and science education 44 as an important sub-dimension of learning about scientific inquiry. 45 We have in a previous study described teachers ' [START_REF] Säljö | Lärande och kulturella redskap : om lärprocesser och det kollektiva minnet[END_REF]. They include both bureaucratic and material 76 dimensions as well as more informal systems of practice [START_REF] Rogoff | Apprenticeship in thinking: cognitive development in social context[END_REF]. Institutions are in 77 this way systems of established and embedded social rules that structure social interactions, 78 although the rules are not always explicit and compelling in a definite way [START_REF] Hodgson | What Are Institutions?[END_REF]. 79

The modifier 'cultural' refer to that these institutions also embody cultural values and 80 purposes [START_REF] Rogoff | Apprenticeship in thinking: cognitive development in social context[END_REF], and have been shaped by their particular historical and contingent 81 developmental path [START_REF] Wertsch | Mind as action[END_REF]. 82

The relationship between cultural institutions and individuals' actions within these can 83 be approached by analysing mediated action and habits. Mediated action refers to an agent 84 acting by means of, or mediated by, cultural artefacts [START_REF] Wertsch | Mind as action[END_REF], with the most 85 ubiquitous cultural artefact being language [START_REF] Säljö | Lärande och kulturella redskap : om lärprocesser och det kollektiva minnet[END_REF]. Mediational means both provide 86 affordances and constrains [START_REF] Wertsch | Mind as action[END_REF] for how we communicate, act and think. Our uses 87 of language, including particular distinctions and divisions, is to a large extent habitual 88 [START_REF] Wickman | Aesthetic experience in science education: Learning and meaning-851 making as situated talk and action[END_REF]. By habits we mean predispositions and tendencies for certain kinds of 89 actions in certain situations [START_REF] Dewey | Human nature and conduct: An introduction to social psychology[END_REF], and not strictly repetitive behaviour in a 90 biological sense [START_REF] Cohen | Reading Dewey: Reflection on the Study of Routine[END_REF]. Institutions are upheld by the habits of individuals, 91 simultaneously as institutions and the mediational means they provide, shape individuals 92 habits [START_REF] Dewey | Human nature and conduct: An introduction to social psychology[END_REF][START_REF] Hodgson | Institutions and Individuals: Interaction and Evolution[END_REF][START_REF] Maréchal | Not irrational but habitual: The importance of 'behavioural lock-in' in 807 energy consumption[END_REF]. We call these collectively shared 93 habits, that characterise cultural institutions, customs [START_REF] Dewey | Human nature and conduct: An introduction to social psychology[END_REF][START_REF] Cohen | Reading Dewey: Reflection on the Study of Routine[END_REF]. Being 94 socially transmitted, habits require the attention and will of the agent while learning them, but 95 once established they tend to function without explicit reflection. Nevertheless, habits can be 96 made the object of explicit deliberation, which is a first step in changing habits, and the 97 transformation of habits for coping with new situations can be conceptualised as learning 98 [START_REF] Rorty | Philosophy and the mirror of nature[END_REF][START_REF] Wickman | Aesthetic experience in science education: Learning and meaning-851 making as situated talk and action[END_REF]. 99 Four different cultural institutions have emerged as relevant in describing and analysing the 102 results presented here: scientific research, pure science courses, science education courses for 103 teachers and school science. These cultural institutions are interrelated but they can be briefly 104 described individually as follows. Scientific research refers to basic or applied research at a 105 university or the equivalent with the aim of increased or better knowledge of natural processes 106 and phenomena. Pure science courses refer to courses given by a science department at a 107 university, often led by an active researcher, and with no particular orientation towards 108 teacher education. This type of course tends to focus quite exclusively on introducing students 109 to a well-established body of scientific knowledge. Science education courses for teachers, on 110 the other hand, are given by the teacher education department or the equivalent, and are often 111 led by teachers with a lot of experience from teaching science in schools. This type of course 112 often has the dual purpose of teaching students science and simultaneously teaching them 113 how to teach science in schools (sometimes called 'parallel processes'), although the 114 emphasis between these two purposes may vary. School science is here science as a school 115 subject in secondary and upper secondary schools. 116 117

Language use and the meaning of words 118

A pragmatist perspective on language means that instead of seeing language as an outer 119 expression or representation of an inner mental state, as is usually the case in cognitive 120 perspectives, the meaning of words or any utterances are to be found in their use and 121 consequences (James 1907(James /1995;;[START_REF] Wickman | Aesthetic experience in science education: Learning and meaning-851 making as situated talk and action[END_REF][START_REF] Wickman | Learning as discourse change: A sociocultural 853 mechanism[END_REF]. This means 122 that words do not have an essential or universal meaning but must be understood as part of an 123 activity, context, or what Wittgenstein called a 'language-game' [START_REF] Wickman | Aesthetic experience in science education: Learning and meaning-851 making as situated talk and action[END_REF]. To 124 understand a word is at the same time to know how to play the language-game it is a part of. 125 6 Also, language can, to a large extent, be understood as functioning through habits and 126 customs. In language-games the use, and thus meaning, of words are usually not questioned 127 but are typically understood as part of a practice as a whole (Hardwick, 1971). The fact that 128 most utterances 'stand fast', i.e. are not question by the individuals participating in an activity, 129 is a necessary condition for communication [START_REF] Wickman | Learning as discourse change: A sociocultural 853 mechanism[END_REF]Wittgenstein, 1968). 130 This means that to learn a language-game is not simply to know the use of certain words but 131 also means the acquisition of habits of using these words as part of an activity (Wickman, 132 2004). In order to reflect upon the customs (i.e. shared habits) of the major cultural institution 133 relevant to science teacher education, it is therefore relevant to study and make explicit the 134 particular uses of language that are associated with them. 135

We define a pivot term as a single word or term that can be used to highlight how two 136 or more different cultural institutions and their associated language-games overlap or 137 intersect. It can metaphorically be described as a term on which one can balance two such 138 systems -a common point around which they can be said to revolve. A pivot term thus relates 139 to some central aspect of two or more activities, or language-games, with distinctively 140 different purposes, resulting in the word having radically different meanings and connotations 141 in these activities. If the customs of using a particular term differs significantly between two 142 cultural institutions it may be described as a pivot term. The same pivot term may thus 143 mediate quite different action in different activities. Pivot terms are special compared to other 144 words, only because they can be positioned to provide a point of leverage for analytically 145 separating two or more activities. This is not an essential or universal quality of a certain class 146 of words, but a description of a role or function that a term may play when comparing its 147 The Use of 'Hypothesis' in Scientific Research 152 The possible pivot term analyzed in this paper is 'hypothesis' and its use in the cultures that 153 meet in science teacher education. In the results section we present empirical data on its use in 154 the cultures that teacher students are directly involved in. However, to examine how these 155 uses are related to the aim of teaching teacher students about inquiry as it is carried out in 156 scientific research, a comparison needs to be made with its use in scientific research. 157 158 The word 'hypothesis' is commonly used in science to refer to a tentative explanation related 159 to some observed phenomena [START_REF] Chalmers | What is this thing called science?[END_REF]. A hypothesis is not a single prediction 160 [START_REF] Mccomas | The principal elements of the nature of science: dispelling the 809 myths[END_REF] but a suggestion about how the data is connected [START_REF] Wilson | An introduction to scientific research[END_REF]. Often, it 161 Nature in the year 2000 [START_REF] Hansson | Falsificationism Falsified[END_REF] These hypotheses all have in common that they in different ways state tentative explanations, 170 with reference to causal or functional relationships, of natural phenomena. Example one 171 proposes as "functional interaction", example two how a geological feature was "created" (i.e. 172 caused) and example three proposes "hole-doping" as a factor that might cause the 173 phenomenon of "super conductivity" under certain conditions. Furthermore, they all refer to 174 theoretical concepts (e.g. superconductivity, neurotransmitter, gravel deposit) that have 175 kind. Example three may superficially be mistaken for a prediction. If one only considers 177 grammatical form, this may be true, in a sense, but the key here is the second part, 'if it is 178 hole-doped'. This refers to a cause or explanation of the predicted superconductivity in this 179 particular case. For this explanation to make sense, the hypothesis must be connected to a 180 more comprehensive model relating the particulars of 60 C within the even more 181 comprehensive theory of solid state physics. This implies that a hypothesis cannot stand 182 alone, and that the theory or research objective to which it is related is needed to separate a 183 scientific hypothesis from a groundless guess about an outcome or arbitrary fortune-telling 184 [START_REF] Mccomas | The principal elements of the nature of science: dispelling the 809 myths[END_REF]. 185

It can be questioned whether hypotheses play an important role in all forms of scientific 186 research [START_REF] Hansson | Falsificationism Falsified[END_REF]. However, it is definitely widely used in the way described here in 187 science studies, which is the field of scholarship in which the nature of scientific inquiry 188 (NOI) is systematically studied and described. 189 190

Research Question 191

The objective of this article is to examine the uses of the potential pivot term 'hypothesis ' and 192 analyse the possible consequences of these for science teacher education. In particular the 193 research questions are: 194 In order to obtain information about the characteristic customs of teacher education in a 204 manner that was not too artificial, and simultaneously hear a large number of informants from 205 a range of backgrounds, focus group interviews were chosen as the method of data collection. 206

This approach was inspired by [START_REF] Volante | Teacher Candidates' Perceptions of Conceptual Orientations in 870 Their Preservice Program[END_REF], who used focus groups to explore 207 teacher students understanding of the conceptual orientations of their own teacher education 208 programmes and practicum experiences, and also Hurtado, Carera, Lin, Arellano, and 209 Espinosa (2009), who used focus groups to study university students experiences with the 210 culture of science. 211 212

Sample Selection 213

Six well-known universities were chosen to obtain a broad representation of teacher education 214 programmes in Sweden. The target group was teacher students who specialised in natural 215 science for secondary schools and who were approaching the end of their education. In all 216 seven focus group interviews were conducted with a total of 32 students and 3 to 6 217 participants in each group at the following universities: Gothenburg University, Malmö 218 University, Mälardalen University, Stockholm University, Umeå University and Uppsala 219 University 220

Focus Group Interviews 221

The focus group interviews were orchestrated to situate the conversations in a context similar 222 to the type of conversations that teacher educators may have with their students. This was 223 At the beginning of the interview, the researcher repeated the information that the students 233 had been given before the meeting and described the overall objective and how data was 234 going to be used. During the interviews, an interview guide was used (Appendix A) to help 235 call attention to and focus on relevant themes of discussion. 236 A focusing exercise is described by [START_REF] Bloor | Focus Groups in Social 740 Research[END_REF] as 237 'an attempt to concentrate the group's attention and interaction on a particular topic' (p.43). In 238 our case, this was done by asking the students to agree upon a ranking of seven statements 239 about the main purposes of laboratory work in their university education, as perceived by 240 them (Appendix B). The statements were inspired by Roberts's seven curriculum emphases in 241 science education [START_REF] Roberts | Developing the concept of curricular emphases in science education[END_REF]. During the exercise, the students were asked to explain 242 The objective of these preparations and tasks was to create conditions favourable for 252 engaging conversations, which we hoped would provide many natural opportunities to 253 elaborate on the meaning and use of inquiry related terms such as 'hypothesis'. It was not our 254 intention to elicit the students' views on the nature of the purpose of laboratory work or how 255 'pedagogical theories' might differ from 'natural scientific theories'. These themes were 256 instead used as heuristics to help create meaningful, content rich and focused conversations. 257

We feel that over all we succeeded with this and several students commented after the 258 interviews that they had found the event both inspiring and educative. 259 260

Analysis of Data 261

All focus group interviews were transcribed verbatim and then proofread to ensure a high 262 quality of the transcribed record. The transcripts were then coded in terms of the general 263 topics of the interviews as well as sections relating to the use of the term 'hypothesis'. This 264 provided an overview of the material. In the next step, the transcripts were re-coded in more 265 detail, with a focus on the use and mentioning of the term 'hypothesis' using the Transana 266 software for qualitative data analysis. All episodes containing references to hypotheses were 267 printed and sorted in subcategories in order to find the common themes described in this 268 article. The most representing transcripts have been chosen to be presented and commented 269 upon in the Result section. The transcripts are translations from verbatim Swedish transcripts 270 to English. Great care has been taken to stay as close as possible to original sense of the 271 wording, but the transcripts in Swedish also contain many grammatically odd formulations as 272 transcribed talk often does. 273 Although the word 'hypothesis' was used in different ways by the teacher students in this 282 study, the use completely dominated the interviews was to equate a hypothesis with a 283 proposition about 'what you believe will happen' when performing a laboratory task, i.e. a 284 guess about an outcome. This is in line with how teachers were found to use this word in a 285 previous study (Gyllenpalm et al., 2009), and also in line with how the use of this word in 286 school science has been described elsewhere [START_REF] Baxter | When a hypothesis is not an educated guess[END_REF]. Other uses such as 287 equating a hypothesis with a research question, an assumption that can be tested and as a 288 tentative explanation, were mentioned at a few rare occasions, but cannot be considered to be 289 representative of the prevailing custom. Below is an example of this seemingly natural and 290 spontaneous meaning given to the term by most students: 291 The last comment by Johan refers to a take-home laboratory task in which the students 310 were to perform an experiment to test how two different treatments (one environment 311 with sunlight and one without) affected the growth of a plant. This was part of a science 312 education course for teachers. As exemplified here, the use of a hypothesis as a guess 313 about an outcome dominated the focus group conversations. There were no indications 314 of the students having noted that this use conflates a hypothesis with a prediction. 315 316

Absence of Hypotheses in Pure science courses 317

The custom of having students formulate their own hypotheses as guesses about the outcome 318 of a laboratory task in school science is in stark contrast to the customs of the pure science 319 courses. In these courses, talk about hypotheses is rare and it is normally not an important 320 concept in laboratory tasks. 321 mentioned that began with some hypothesis? 323 10. Jan: We haven't had a lab like that. 324 11. Petra: We haven't had a lab like that, no. 325

(University E) 326
Whereas it can easily be seen in the complete interview transcripts that the two above 327 quotes explicitly refer to pure science courses, it is inferred from the context in the next 328 two quotes. As this distinction was found to be important only after analysing the 329 interviews, it was not addressed explicitly during the interviews. 330 12. Klara: Yeah, but it's just that you rarely get to, I mean there are no hypotheses in that 331 way; instead you often get to do lab tasks in which you know what will happen if you 332 mess up, sort of. There is a correct result in some way. And that … Yes … then there 333 isn't really a hypothesis and then you don't work with hypotheses in that way. 334

(University F) 335

These quotes illustrate that in the pure science courses, there is little use for or even 336 mentioning of hypotheses. Previous research has also shown that in pure science courses, 337 laboratory tasks are usually highly structured and recipe like [START_REF] Hult | Laborationen -myt och verklighet: en kunskapsöversikt över laborationer 781 inom teknisk och naturvetenskaplig utbildning[END_REF]. The absence of 338 hypotheses in laboratory tasks in pure science courses is also accompanied by what seems to 339 be a rather low emphasis on discussion about the nature of science and the nature of scientific 340 inquiry in general. In the quote below, Klara is referring to item number seven in the focusing 341 exercise when she concludes that they have not discussed the nature of scientific inquiry: 342 Because what we, in my group did, was that we were to look at, there are aquatic 360 woodlice of different colours, they are grey, brown, green, and then we had a 361 hypothesis that it depends on where they grow, where they live. Depending on if they 362 live off the green seaweed they become green, and if they live on the brown seaweed, 363 they become brown. It was the only time that we formulated a hypothesis, and so to 364 say tested if that was the case. But that is probably the only time I have done anything 365 like that. 366

(University B) 367

This example was recalled by Lalla as the interviewer continued to probe the role played by 368 the notion of a hypothesis in their education. We can see that Lalla is talking about a 369 hypothesis in the form of a tentative explanation; however, it should be noted that this did not 370 seem to be a more reflective or systematic use of this term, as will become clearer in the next 371 The science education courses for teachers seem to have two features that are particularly 387 relevant for the present discussion. The first is the so-called 'parallel process' already 388 mentioned. The second is that talk about hypotheses was often mixed with talk about theories 389 of learning. In the next quote, we see how a student reasoned about the purpose for using 390 hypotheses in schools as a pedagogical tool: 391 23. Interviewer: So have you talked a lot about hypotheses and what function they have? 392 24. Carola: Yes, and that is something we use during our practicum as well and that we 393 are to use later in the teacher profession in which when you do lab work with the 394 students, it is often the method you use. That the students should get to try but also 395 perhaps have some, yes, a conception, what will happen and then you find out and it is 396 What is it really? And you want to, yes, in a way you want to encourage the students 398 to learn more, and so on, and not serve everything on a plate. Or what do you guys 399 feel? 400

(University C, Group 1) 401

To Carola, a hypothesis seems to be associated with a pedagogical method. The 402 pedagogical function of the hypothesis in the teaching method she is describing is to 403 elicit the students' preconceptions, a notion usually connected to conceptual change 404 theories of learning [START_REF] Park | Modelling Analysis of Students' Processes of Generating Scientific 819 Explanatory Hypothesis[END_REF]). Here we note that "method" is also a potential pivot 405 term related to 'hypothesis'. In the context of science education this term is often 406 ambiguous as can bee seen in the definition of the inquiry emphasis conflation. Below is 407 a further illustration of referring to hypotheses as a pedagogical tool: 408 25. Miriam: The hypotheses were very important in the air lab. 409 26. Interviewer: Ok, in what way, what did it mean? 410 27. Miriam: Well, it was important in some way that we had a conception before we did 411 the actual eh experiment how… a conception about what could happen, and then we 412 were supposed to confirm or deny if it was true by performing the experiment. 413 28. Lisa: But Maria, surely it was a part of these lab tasks, wasn't it that students' 414 conceptions was that in this case, that it contains nothing, it is empty […]? 415 29. Miriam: Yes, that's right because precisely this about dropping your own hypothesis, 416 that it is like wrong, so it is pretty difficult to do because you prefer that your everyday 417 conceptions perhaps are the ones that are true, so to speak, it is difficult to drop it 418 because then you lose in a way a part of your sense of reality in some way. And then 419 it's important to understand the new context how it works, how the theory perhaps 420 really is. So this was actually a part of the thing with this really. 421 It seems as if it is only in this context of a pedagogical approach to teaching the products of 423 science that the notion of a hypothesis is common and has a clearly justified role for these 424 students. Miriam's last comment also demonstrates the personal nature of a hypothesis when 425 used as a pedagogical tool, when she refers to 'dropping your own hypothesis' (turn 29), a 426 point that will be discussed later. 427 428

Reproducing the Customs of School Science 429

Discussion about hypotheses does not seem to be very common in most pure science courses 430 at the university level, and in particular, not in connection with laboratory work. The 431 exception is science education courses for teachers, as noted, although in these, talk about 432 hypotheses also seems to be taken for granted and not reflected upon critically. In the 433 following quote by Albert, it is not completely clear if he is referring to a pure science course 434 or to both kinds of courses. Nevertheless, the quote illustrates his perceived gap between the 435 customs at the university and those in school; it also corroborates the earlier findings that the 436 hypothesis is a guess about an outcome in the school custom (Gyllenpalm et al., 2009) Johan's reasoning made Alexandra, who was in the same group, uncertain. She seemed to 498 have been certain that a hypothesis simply meant a guess about an outcome. This lead to a 499 meaning exchange between Johan and Alexandra in which Johan developed his argument 500 about the role of hypotheses in a similar way to that of Tomas above. What both Johan and 501 Tomas are observing is that there is a strange kind of reversed epistemology when it comes to 502 the prevailing use of a hypothesis as a guess about an outcome. What this means is that the 503 students are presented with a situation or experimental procedure (a scientific method) and 504 then asked about what they believe will happen. At the same time, everyone involved knows 505 that there is a single answer that is already known that is accepted as the correct one, i.e. there 506 is a didactical contract [START_REF] Brousseau | Theory of Didactical Situations in Mathematics[END_REF] Alexandra is given an eye-opener and brings to light the existing contrast between the 524 meaning of a hypothesis in school science compared to scientific research. Simultaneously, it 525 seems as if the school custom exerts a strong pressure on the students, and that they tend to 526 reproduce this custom as Staffan's statement in turn 42 indicates. 527 528

Hypothesis Fear 529

In the existing school custom in which a hypothesis usually means a guess about an outcome, 530 there is also a certain emphasis on the 'you' part of this statement, i.e. what you (the student) 531 personally believe. What this suggests is that 'you' are identified with 'your hypothesis' as if 532 'you are your hypothesis'. This is in line with the teachers' pedagogical use of the concept as 533 a tool for making students aware of their own preconceptions or misconceptions (Gyllenpalm 534 et al., 2009). Disregarding for a moment that this use of the notion gives a distorted image of 535 the nature of scientific inquiry, there is also reason to suspect that the identity between 'you 536 and your hypothesis' is the root of the hypothesis fear that both teachers and teacher students 537 have reported observing in school children (Gyllenpalm et al., 2010). Lina's statement from 538 turn 32 is continued, and it demonstrates this point, which is also corroborated by the rest of 539 the group. 540 thinking that it's a bit scary like when they don't really know if it really is correct… 543 49. Olle: Students I've had have seen it more like a competition that "I have to be right". 544

Because it has often happened then that they have written it down afterwards, if they 545 are very competitive. "Yes, I don't write it yet, but look to see what happens first and 546 then write it with a big exclamation mark, that yes, I made the correct guess, I was 547 right!" 548 50. Lina: Yes (laughter) 549 51. Albert: I also recognize this, that there is a kind of uncertainty, that they are afraid of 550 writing something incorrect. I have tried to explain to them that you can never lose 551 credit based on the hypothesis. 552

(University B) 553

A strong emphasis on teaching students the correct explanations [START_REF] Roberts | Developing the concept of curricular emphases in science education[END_REF] and the fact 554 that because of this, the main purpose of performing laboratory tasks is to reach the correct 555 conclusion [START_REF] Andrée | Den levda läroplanen. En studie av naturorienterande 735 undervisningspraktiker i grundskolan[END_REF] most likely contribute to this hypothesis fear. The hypothesis 556 becomes a tool for psychological manipulation and blackmailing and the stress caused is 557 likely to contribute to students developing a negative attitude towards science as a school 558 subject. Blackmailing occurs if students feel a need to play along with the 'guess the answer' 559 game, because they want to please the teacher or achieve a certain grade even though they are 560 uncomfortable. Simultaneously, there seems to be a reaction in some schools against the 561 prevailing custom of using a hypothesis as a guess about an outcome because of the conflict it 562 easily provokes. 563 52. Klara: We have never really discussed hypotheses either like in any context the way I 564 see it, because when I was doing my practicum, it's like a lot of teachers are totally 565 hypotheses, as the teachers see it. Because then they make up really strange things and 570 then they can even imagine that "we wrote it in our hypothesis so it must be true" so it 571 can get a bit weird like that. 572

(University D) 573
Like many others, Klara notes that the subject of hypotheses is not a theme that has been 574 discussed during laboratory work or at any other time. The counter reaction to the stress 575 caused by the reversed epistemology apparently expressed by some teachers is 576 understandable. However, the reaction is misdirected, since it is based on taking the existing 577 custom as a given and then simply rejecting it as wrong. This is like throwing out the baby 578 with the bathwater. The teachers are then 'completely against using hypotheses' perhaps 579

Summary of Results 584

The research objective of this article was to describe how teacher students use the potential 585 pivot term 'hypothesis' and how this use relates to a number of cultural institutions that can 586 be said to constitute science teacher education. We found that the students habitually used 587 'hypothesis' as equivalent to a guess about an outcome, in line with the customs of school 588 science (Gyllenpalm et al., 2009). Although some students began to question this during the 589 course of the interviews, there was also evidence of the tendency to remain loyal to the 590 described by the students, inspired us to distinguish between pure science courses and science 592 education courses for teachers. In the pure science courses, little or no emphasis is placed on 593 hypotheses or hypothesis testing as a part of laboratory tasks. Only in some rare cases when 594 students get to do more comprehensive inquiry projects did the concept of a hypothesis 595 appear, but this seems to be a one-time event for most students. This is a finding in line with 596 previous research on science teacher education in Sweden [START_REF] Lager-Nyqvist | Att göra det man kan: en longitudinell studie av hur sju 793 lärarstudenter utvecklar sin undervisning och formar sin lärarroll i naturvetenskap[END_REF]. Thus, it 597 seems as if the students are expected to invent or discover the logic and subtleties of 598 formulating hypotheses and hypothesis testing on their own during the course of completing 599 one single more comprehensive inquiry project. It is a big leap for most students to make, and 600 as research shows, they are unlikely to learn much more about the nature of scientific inquiry 601 just from participating in this type of project without explicitly reflecting upon it from a 602 philosophy of science perspective [START_REF] Lederman | Teachers' understanding of the nature of science and classroom 802 practice: Factors that facilitate or impede the relationship[END_REF][START_REF] Windschitl | Inquiry projects in science teacher education: What can investigative 855 experiences reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classroom practice[END_REF]. 603

In contrast to the pure science courses, talk about hypothesis seems frequent in science 604 education courses for teachers, and it is often associated with a pedagogical methodology and 605 theoretising about the nature of how individuals learn scientific concepts. Although 606 hypotheses were a common part of these courses, it was not a topic that had been discussed 607 often. In fact, there was nothing to suggest that it had been discussed in terms of scientific 608 research methodology. Finally, we also noted that the students confirmed our earlier finding 609 that school students may feel anxiety over formulating their own hypotheses as guesses about 610 an outcome; a phenomenon we have labelled 'hypothesis fear' (Gyllenpalm et al., 2010). Not 611 all themes were discussed in depth at each interview, although most themes were at least 612 touched on in all groups. Summarising the results, it is a surprisingly homogenous choir 613 formed by students from all over the country. 614 The uses of the term 'hypothesis' in the different contexts, or cultural institutions, 615 described and analysed here are summarised in Table 1 below. These cultural institutions can 616 be conceptualised a being connected in chain of partly overlapping cultures in the order given 617 by the numbers in Table 1. Our results illustrate, by focusing on the pivot term "hypothesis", 618 a specific way in which the continuity of this chain between the cultures of scientific research 619 on and school science is broken. This break problematic since an important objective of 620 school science is to introduce learners to the culture, practices and language-games of 621 scientific research [START_REF] Rogoff | Apprenticeship in thinking: cognitive development in social context[END_REF][START_REF] Wickman | Aesthetic experience in science education: Learning and meaning-851 making as situated talk and action[END_REF]. However, describing concrete and 622 specific aspects of this break, as we have tried to, also suggests ways of overcoming these 623 problems. Furthermore, three questions are raised by the results presented here. First, what is 624 the origin of these radically different uses of ´hypothesis´ in contexts where they might be 625 expected to coincide? Second, how are the different customs that differentiate these cultures 626 reproduced in respect to the use of ´hypothesis´? And, third, what are the consequences of this 627 state of affairs for teaching and curriculum development? Our answers to these questions are 628 speculative and draw on the educational research literature, as well as on our results and 629 theoretical framework. 630 [Insert Tabel 1 here] 631

Constructivism as a Possible Origin of the Inquiry Emphasis Conflation 632

There is reason to believe that failing to distinguish between a hypothesis and a 633 prediction in school science is connected with the influences of constructivist theories of 634 learning. Constructivist theories of learning can be traced to Piaget's theory of individual 635 development of cognitive schemata through a process of accommodation resulting from a loss 636 of mental equilibrium (Piaget, 1964(Piaget, /2003). Piaget's theory and the early elaborations of it to 637 suit the field of science education research tend to mix theories of how individuals learn on a 638 short time scale, and theories of how science as a collective enterprise advances over the 639 [START_REF] Carey | Sources of Conceptual Change[END_REF][START_REF] Driver | Pupils and Paradigms: A Review of Literature Related to 761 Concept Development in Adolescent Science Students[END_REF]Posner, Strike, Hewson, & 640 Gertzog, 1982). Park (2006, p. 488) recently summarised teaching based on constructivism as 641 being composed of four stages: 'recognition of prior idea, cognitive conflict, resolution of 642 conflict, and recognition of the modified idea.' Somewhere along the way, the notion of 643 hypothesis seems to have been hijacked as a tool for eliciting students' prior ideas and setting 644 the stage for a cognitive conflict to occur. In this process, the hypothesis was confused with a 645 prediction, and since the objective has not traditionally been to teach students about NOI, this 646 collapsed distinction did not appear to have any negative consequences. However, if an 647 understanding of NOI is important, this conflation becomes problematic. Furthermore, we 648 note that due to the existing, but tacit, didactical contract [START_REF] Brousseau | Theory of Didactical Situations in Mathematics[END_REF] that characterises 649 school science, this pedagogical use of the hypothesis seems to lead to the reported hypothesis 650 fear suffered by students. The didactical contract generally states that what is important to 651 learn are the correct explanations and producing the correct results in a laboratory task. As 652 these explanations and results are known, there is no incentive for students to take a guess that 653 turns out to be wrong because of the risk of appearing stupid. This risk and the prospect of 654 wasted intellectual effort combined with a desire to please the teacher can be hypothesised to 655 produce the anxiety reported amongst students. 656 It is possible that there are other origins of this conflation. One is that scientists 657 themselves, and college textbooks, may not always use these terms in a consequent manner 658 [START_REF] Lawson | Connecting science and mathematics: The 796 nature of scientific and statistical hypothesis testing[END_REF]. However, our results are in line with other critiques of constructivism that 659 address its epistemological and ontological basis [START_REF] Kruckenberg | A Deweyan Perspective on Science Education: Constructivism, 791 Experience, and Why We Learn Science[END_REF]Säljö, 2000), and the 660 pedagogical practices derived from it [START_REF] Caravita | Re-framing the problem of conceptual change[END_REF][START_REF] Furtak | The problem with answers: An exploration of guided scientific inquiry 767 teaching[END_REF]. Also, the 661 idea that students misconception always obstruct learning and that teachers therefore need to 662 focus primarily on conceptual change has recently been criticised (Hamza & Wickman, 663 2007). 664

Reproducing the Inquiry Emphasis Conflation 666

Pure science courses generally omit discussions about hypotheses and the nature of 667 scientific inquiry (NOI). Laboratory tasks in these types of courses are usually closed, fully 668 structured and used to motivate, exemplify and teach the established theories and explanations 669 of science [START_REF] Hult | Laborationen -myt och verklighet: en kunskapsöversikt över laborationer 781 inom teknisk och naturvetenskaplig utbildning[END_REF]. However, it is not merely what is said and done that is important in 670 education, but also what is not said, what Östman (1998) called 'companion meanings'. Thus, 671 the pure science courses indirectly teach that talk about hypotheses in relation to research 672 methodology and NOI is not important enough to merit systematic teaching and assessment. 673

The fact that there is a general silence about NOI in general and the use of hypotheses in 674 particular in pure science courses could be an effective buffer between the education cultures 675 and the culture of scientific research, thus breaking the continuity of the chain. The link 676 between scientific research and the rest of the educational system is broken by the silence 677 about these issues; consequently, the pure science courses contribute to maintaining the status 678 quo. 679

The science education courses for teachers seem to import the school customs right into 680 the university. Here laboratory work is used both to illustrate science topics and teaching 681 methods simultaneously (the so-called 'parallel processes'), thus contributing more directly to 682 reproducing the inquiry emphasis conflation. In these courses, talk of hypotheses is common, 683 but also taken for granted and not reflected upon explicitly. It is also used as a pedagogical 684 tool rather than as a concept for research methodology. The hypothesis is connected to 685 theories of learning and methods for teaching, but not to discussions about and learning about 686 NOI. Thus, methods of teaching are not separated from methods of scientific inquiry, and the 687 inquiry emphasis conflation is perpetuated. In both the pure science courses and the science 688 education courses for teachers, we note that what we find here is probably not intended by the 689 teachers leading these courses. It may be that they are aware of the distinctions we make here; 690 however, the point is that this is not what we find when talking to the teacher students. Hence, 691 if these issues have been raised, they have not had much impact. 692 [START_REF] Lortie | Schoolteacher: A sociological study[END_REF] has pointed out that teachers tend to teach the way they were taught, since 693 an average student has 'spent 13000 hours in direct contact with classroom teachers by the 694 time he [sic] graduates from high school' (p. 61), implying a powerful socialisation. As 695 described in the theoretical framework, cultural institutions are upheld by and simultaneously 696 shape individuals habits [START_REF] Dewey | Human nature and conduct: An introduction to social psychology[END_REF][START_REF] Cohen | Reading Dewey: Reflection on the Study of Routine[END_REF][START_REF] Hodgson | Institutions and Individuals: Interaction and Evolution[END_REF][START_REF] Maréchal | Not irrational but habitual: The importance of 'behavioural lock-in' in 807 energy consumption[END_REF]. Here 697 we have presented evidence demonstrating how the custom of using the term 'hypothesis' 698 indeed seems to be reproduced in school science with little or no influence from the customs 699 of scientific research passing through the filter of teacher education. 700 701

Implications for Teaching and Curriculum Development 702

Customs and other stable social structures are necessary for the growth and continuity 703 of cultural institutions. Understanding the characteristic customs of the cultural institutions 704 relevant for science education is a prerequisite for successful development and reform 705 projects [START_REF] Dewey | Human nature and conduct: An introduction to social psychology[END_REF][START_REF] Keys | Co-Constructing Inquiry-Based Science with Teachers: 788 Essential Research for Lasting Reform[END_REF][START_REF] Rowell | Shaping school science: Competing discourses in an 833 inquiry-based elementary program[END_REF]Windschitl, 706 Thompson, & Braaten, 2008b). Otherwise, projects may be hindered by participants acting 707 according to contradictory yet unexamined customs and habits related to key issues 708 [START_REF] Fredrichsen | Brokering at the Boundary: A 764 Prospective Science Teacher Engages Students in Inquiry[END_REF]Trumbull et al., 2005). Due to the status of 709

'hypothesis' as a potential pivot term, new curricular material that focus on hypothesis testing 710 as a dimension of learning about scientific inquiry may be interpreted within the school 711 custom of using hypotheses as a pedagogical tool. The concept of 'pivot term' may thus be 712 used to draw attention to this and other potential sources of confusion and miscommunication. 713

  The Uses of the Term Hypothesis and the Inquiry Emphasis Conflation in Science Teacher Education

  customary use in relation to the different purposes of different cultural institutions. Analysing 148 the use of potential pivot terms is thus a way to operationalise how specific words can play a 149 central role in mediating action. 150

  is a proposition about a correlation or causal mechanism. What follows are three examples of 162 hypotheses from recent scientific research. All examples are taken from articles published in 163

  relation to a more comprehensive theory and research programme of some 176

1 .

 1 How do science teacher students use the word 'hypothesis' and describe its function when 195 discussing examples of laboratory tasks in their own university education? 196 2. In what ways are the customary ways of using the word 'hypothesis' different in the 197 cultural institutions that constitute science teacher education in Sweden? 198 question is addressed by presenting and analysing transcripts from the focus 199 group interviews, while the second question is addressed analytically based on the findings

  students to bring concrete examples of laboratory work from their own 224 university education and discuss these in terms of educational purposes. The interviews lasted 225 on average 1.5 hours and were conducted by the first author, according to the following exercise: ranking the purposes of laboratory tasks 229 3. Students tell about their own examples of laboratory work 230 4. 'Pedagogical methods and theories' are compared with 'Natural scientific methods and 231 theories' 232

  their reasoning as they worked on the task and to refer back to concrete examples from their 243 own education. The exercise took approximately 30 minutes to complete. 244After the focusing exercise, each of the examples provided by each student was 245 discussed. These mainly consisted of laboratory reports or instructions. The students were 246 asked individually to elaborate on the context in which the example was situated in their 247 education, and to relate it to the list of purposes discussed during the focusing exercise. As a 248 the interview, two sheets of papers were distributed with two different topics or 249 themes (Appendix C) and the students were asked to discuss these in relation to the focusing 250 exercise and their own examples. 251

  we present data from the focus group interviews to highlight the significant themes that 276 emerged from the analysis of the use the pivot term 'hypothesis'. All of the names of the 277 students are pseudonyms, and the names of the universities are anonymous, but consistently 278 denoted by letters. 279280The Dominant Use of "Hypothesis" in Teacher Education 281

  : Well, now I don't think that there were any of these examples that you 322

  she says, this constitutes an unusual or unique example, in that it was the only 372 time they were supposed to formulate their own hypothesis and design corresponding 373 investigations to test it. 374 375 Science education courses for teachers 376 The absence of emphasis on and discussion of hypotheses in laboratory tasks in pure science 377 courses is contrasted by science education courses for teachers. Below, Jonas explicitly states 378 that he only recalls talk of hypotheses in this type of course. In the following examples, it can 379 be deduced from the larger context of the interview conversations that the students are 380 referring to the same kind of courses. 381 21. Interviewer: So in your laboratory tasks, this stuff about reasoning around a 382 hypothesis doesn't seem to have been a big thing. 383 22. Jonas: I guess it's really only existed during the didactics [science education courses 384 for teachers] lab tasks. 385 (University A) 386

  for the students, for them to discover what is, what science consists of. 397

  : But, eh, at least the students I have had have had a really difficult time to 541 formulate, they have been very uncertain when they try to formulate hypotheses, 542

  . So I feel very ambivalent and we have never had any 566 discussion about this. 567 53. Melanie: Are they against it? 568 54. Klara: It can get very, in some classes, it can get very confusing when they write 569

  without realizing that what they call a hypothesis may be something quite different from what 580 it normally means in scientific research. 581 582 Discussion 583

  science. The use and function of hypotheses at university courses, as 591

  get to formulate your own research question? 886 -Plan and conduct investigations on your own to answer your own research question? 887 -Is there a difference between a laboratory task and an experiment? 888 -Did you plan and conduct a controlled experiment on your own? 889 -What is a controlled experiment? 890 -Did you formulate your own hypotheses and predictions? 891 -Is there a difference between the concepts of hypothesis and prediction? 892 -Has any teacher discussed these concepts in your educationlaboratory tasks or inquiry projects in my education has often been to: 8971. Learn about the science behind technical and natural phenomenon in our everyday life. 898 2. Learn about the nature of science: what is characteristic of science. 899 3. Learn scientific subject matter as a preparation for taking more advanced courses 900 4. Motivate or exemplify scientific theories and models of explanation. 901 5. Learn about the historical development of science as a part of our culture. 902 6. Learn about the role of science in society, technology and decision-making. 903 7. Learn to handle processes and methods used in scientific research.

  selective traditions in relation to

	learn to relate to and act within
	F o r
	P
	e
	e r
	R
	e
	v i e
	w
	O n l
	y
	4

Page 13 of 38 URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/tsed Email: editor_ijse@hotmail.co.uk International Journal of Science Education

  Students using the word 'hypothesis' as a guess about an outcome were also asked if they had 297 noted the fact that this equates a hypothesis with a prediction. This was clearly not something 298 the students had considered, as exemplified in the following quote: 299 You know it's not directly, it's not like we have formulated our own hypothesis 304 to be able to see if there is any difference, it's more like we have… I guess our, our 305 hypothesis was to be formulated, what do you think is going to happen with the one 306 that's in darkness and the one that is in light, and what does it depend on? So I guess 307

	300	4. Interviewer: It sounds somewhat like a prediction as well.
	301	5. Johan: Yes, well, yes perhaps you could better say that's what it is. It is nothing…
	302	6. Interviewer: Is this something that you have distinguished between or talked about?
	303 308	F 7. Several: No o r P e e r 8. Johan: that's what we have written.
	309	(University C, Group 2)	R
			e
			v i e
			w
	292 293	1. Sara: Hypothesis? Hypothesis is what you believe is going to happen in the experiment. O n l y
	294	2. Klara: Yes.
	295	3. Sara: That's what you're supposed to come up with before if it is a hypothesis…
	296	(University D)
			13

  And in that case, if number seven has to do with that, I definitely think that we 349 don't get into that when we do laboratory tasks and experiments at all.Although hypotheses are rare in pure science courses, there were examples discussed during 353 the interviews that can be said to involve hypothesis testing more explicitly. Again, it is not 354 always clear if the distinction between pure science courses and science education courses for 355 teachers can be applied in all of these examples. In any case, they constituted rare and more 356 comprehensive tasks in which the students were given more freedom and responsibility to 357 conduct their own inquiry projects. 358 20. Lalla: The only lab task, or whatever you should call it, it was this scientific article. 359

	347	17. Klara: And it's really important that we know.
	348	(five turns further down)
	18. Klara: 350
	351	19. Camilla: No
	352	(University D)
		F o r
		P
		e
		e r
		R
		e
		v i e
		w
		O n l
		y
	343	13. Interviewer: The scientific method, what would that be?
	344	14. Mattias: It's what they say…
	345	15. Klara: It's what they always talk about, but no one wants to define.
	346	16. Sara: Nobody wants to explain it, no.

Page 20 of 38 URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/tsed Email: editor_ijse@hotmail.co.uk International Journal of Science Education

  Perhaps not scientifically like, but I can follow Albert's track that it is like that I 455 interpret the word sort of. That is also how I have asked students to formulate 456 hypotheses before you have done laboratory tasks. And then like, well, what is a 457 hypothesis? And then I've probably explained it sort of with the words that it's like 458 Mattias raises a doubt as the interviewer asks if they all agree with the just stated definition of 481 a hypothesis as a guess about an outcome. A few lines further down, Tomas develops this 482 thread of reasoning by stating that it is a paradox to be given a method in the form of a recipe 483 to follow in a laboratory task and then being asked to guess what will happen. A similar 484 argument was provided by Johan in another interview in which he questioned the use of the 485 notion of a hypothesis and linked this to thoughts about studying causality. 486 35. Johan: If you look at, if you think about, eh, I don't know if it says, I think it says that 487 we are to write a hypothesis, and when you think about it, it's not really a hypothesis 488 in the same sense that it is when you write or do something more scientific, but it's 489 more that we do an assessment, what we believe is going to happen. It's not directly… 490 36. Interviewer: What would be more scientific? 491 37. Johan: I feel like you perhaps should, more like draw up a, a theory for what you 492 believe could, eh, effect. I believe this is going to happen because, and that because of 493 want to do this experiment. But here we have been assigned to do this 494 experiment and guess what we think is going to happen. So it is a bit more like 495

	446 447 448 469 470 471 496	[courses], that now you are going to do this laboratory task and you are going to find out about this and this, and what do you think will happen? (University B) On some occasions, the conversations led to the students questioning the role of a hypotheses in scientific research compared to the more familiar school science and their own teacher education. this, we guessing…
	449 472 497	Albert describes the recurring habit of 'always beginning with writing a hypothesis' as a 33. Mattias: Yes, but if you now think that in real research where they really come up with (University C, Group 2)
	450 473	guess about an outcome, and he contrasts this with the courses he has taken at the university new things, do they really have hypotheses there in the same way we have them now?
	451 474	of which he 'can't recall' anything similar. Later in the same interview, Lina refers back to That they sit down and think for an hour first, hmm…what's going to happen?
	452 453 475 476	F o r Albert's statement: 31. Interviewer: So hypothesis as "what you think will happen", do you think that it is a F o r ( a few lines further down) 34. Tomas: […] I mean we never start with that, with the idea, instead we start with the F o r
	454 477 478 479 480 459	P e e r R e good definition of what a hypothesis is? P e e r R complete experiment. And that can never science, I mean research could never start with an experiment and then try to find out why you have this experiment, it seems a bit twisted. (University D) P e e r R 32. Lina: what you believe is going to happen, what colour you think it will be or what you e e
	437 438 460 461 462	. 30. Albert: I can refer back to my practicum school once again speaking about hypothesis. v i e w believe, like that. (University B) v i e v i e Lina's statement shows a certain questioning of the meaning of a hypothesis that can be w w
	439 440 441 463 464 465	In part, I agree about what has been said because when I hear the word hypothesis, I think about my [practicum] school when they write lab reports and regardless if you talk about year seven or year nine, they always get to start by writing their own O n l y connected to the interviewer encouraging the students to think about hypotheses in a scientific context. However, what she describes is how she normally has used the word during her practicum. These examples provide a snapshot of how the existing customs in school science O n l O n l y y
	442 466	hypothesis. How they think, what they believe… They read through the actual lab task continues to be reproduced.
	443 467	and find out about what we are going to do a lab about. And the lab question is, what
	444 468	result they are to find out. Then they always get to write down what they believe is Questioning the Use of a Hypothesis as a Guess about an Outcome
	445	going to happen. And hypothesis in that sense, I can't recall from the university
		20 21

Page 22 of 38 URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/tsed Email: editor_ijse@hotmail.co.uk International Journal of Science Education

  . Later in the same interview we note that, although 507 the familiar custom is challenged, they continue to show a kind of loyalty to the customs of 508

	518	44. Interviewer: Is this something that you have discussed with your teachers or earlier in
	519	connection to laboratory tasks?
	520	45. Several: No.
	521	46. Staffan: In any case, very little, but not that I can remember.
	522	47. Alexandra: No.
	523	(University C, Group 2)
		F o r
		P
		e
		e r
		R
		e
	509 510	school science. 38. Alexandra: Ok, but it doesn't feel like you very often in that case, that you formulate v i e w
	511 512 513	any hypothesis when you work, I mean like we have done. 39. Johan: No, not with them. 40. Staffan: And that the students, no that's true, in school so… O n l y
	514	41. Alexandra: But you still call it a hypothesis.
	515	42. Staffan: Yes, well, I guess it is this form so that it's like and in that way, you prepare
	516	yourself for the way it will be like perhaps in high school.
	517	43. Johan: Yes.
		22

In conclusion, this study both corroborates our earlier finding that there is a custom in 714 science education to conflate methods of teaching with methods of scientific inquiry 715 (Gyllenpalm et al., 2009(Gyllenpalm et al., , 2010)), and, furthermore, describes how this conflations is related to 716 the different uses of the pivot term "hypothesis" in different cultural institutions relevant for 717 teacher education. The consequences of this conflation may be the reported hypothesis fear as 718 well as an increased difficulty in reaching the intended goals of scientific literacy because 719 NOI as a learning goal becomes difficult to distinguish and emphasise. Teacher educators 720 need to be aware of how the existing customs relate to the goal of learning about scientific 721 inquiry associated with scientific literacy. In pure science courses, we suggest that more effort 722 be devoted to teaching about NOI and, in particular, the logic of hypothesis testing. In science 723 education courses for teachers, work needs to be done to distinguish explicitly between 724 theories of how individuals learn and descriptions of how knowledge production occurs in 725 science at large. We also suggest that the personalized form of address should be abandoned 726 when asking students for predictions and a hypothesis. Rather, there should be a critical 727 examination of all possible explanations (hypotheses) and how they relate to the empirical 728 evidence (predictions and actual outcomes). 729