Standards for the Education of Science Teachers: The Context of Science

The program prepares candidates to relate science to the daily lives and interests of students and to a larger framework of human endeavor and understanding. The context of science refers to:

• Relationships among systems of human endeavor including science and technology.
• Relationships among scientific, technological, personal, social and cultural values.
• Relevance and importance of science to the personal lives of students.

4.1 Examples of Indicators
 

4.2 Rationale and Discussion

Nearly fifty years ago Ralph Tyler (1949) emphasized the importance of paying attention to students' interests when building educational programs. In so doing, he took a stance opposing the traditional goals and curriculum resources that experts had used to build science programs. The tradition of science education in the United States can be described as one of elitism, with the goal of preparation for college dominating all others. Tyler (1949) observed "It seems quite clear that the Committee of Ten thought it was answering the question: What should be the elementary instruction for students who are later to carry on much more advanced work in the field?" (p. 26). He argued that subject matter specialists, instead, should seek to answer an alternative question: "What can your subject contribute to the education of young people who are not going to be specialists in your field; what can your subject contribute to the layman, the garden variety of citizen?" (Tyler, 1949, p. 26).

We have come a long way since Tyler wrote Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction to explicate a framework for examining curriculum and instruction. Consider, for example, the "Call to Action" of the National Science Education Standards, in which Richard Klausner, Chairperson of the National Committee on Science Education Standards and Assessment, and Bruce Alberts, President of the National Academy of Sciences, assert: "This nation has established as a goal that all students should achieve scientific literacy" (1996, p. ix). The foundation for their belief is that school science, taught under the guidance of the National Science Education Standards (NRC, 1996), can provide important skills to all students--skills that will keep America competitive in the global marketplace and help students, as citizens, lead satisfying, productive lives in a highly technological democratic society.

Science teacher education is a critical component of the ongoing effort to develop a nation with scientifically literate citizens. An important basic function of science teacher education is to prepare teachers to relate science and technology meaningfully to the local community, to the daily lives of students, and to broader societal issues. As we view the horizon of the twenty-first century, science teacher educators must consider both Tyler's wisdom and Klausner's and Albert's calls to action. Teachers must no longer treat K-12 education solely as preparation for the university.

A metaphor that embodies the importance of teaching science in context is worth considering. To begin, list the possible adjectives that might describe the common house cat. The list could include terms such as curious, independent, smart, ornery, playful, mean, and quiet--the same adjectives teachers might use to describe children. Now consider how to get a cat out from under a sofa. One way is to reach under the sofa, find an appendage, and pull the cat out. Generally a cat thus removed becomes highly irritated and uncooperative.

A second approach is to drag a length of string across the floor in front of the sofa. The average cat emerges quickly, full of interest, curiosity, anticipation, and even enthusiasm. The point of the metaphor is that we are more likely to achieve positive results if we present science to our students in the same way we present the string to the cat. The string represents the social context of the science curriculum, which relates to the daily lives and interests of students.

This is not a metaphor without grounding in theory and research. If knowledge is a conceptual model that individuals use to make sense of the world (Sternberg, 1985), constructivist epistemology holds that world is the experiential construct of individuals and groups where learners actively build rather than passively receive their models (Staver, 1994). Piaget's theory (e.g., Bybee & Sund, 1982) reminds us that developmental considerations stand paramount in the teaching of science, with young children needing--not just preferring--concrete learning experiences. Even high school and college students vary extensively in their capacity to think abstractly (e.g. Staver & Pascarella, 1984), and therefore can benefit from concrete learning experiences.

Curriculum developers in science education have long advocated concrete learning experiences, and the National Science Foundation has long supported the development of appropriate exemplary curricula. Presently, several science curricula are available which emphasize science in students' daily lives and broader community and societal issues. Chemistry in the Community (American Chemical Society, 1988) and Biology: A Community Context (Leonard & Penick, 1998) are two examples. They engage student interests through community contexts while introducing them to substantive chemistry and biology. Biology: A Human Approach (BSCS, 1997) places emphasis on connections between students' lives and biological concepts, and on student designed investigations. On a broader level, the science-technology-society movement (Harms & Yager, 1981; Yager, 1996) illustrates an emerging momentum of teaching and learning science in context. With respect to curriculum reform and public understanding of science, several recent publications (Bybee, 1993; Bybee & McInerney, 1995; Lewenstein, 1992) point out the importance of connecting science with students, the public, and society.

4.3 Recommendations of the National Science Teachers Association

The context of science is closely related to its perceived value and relevance, yet universities commonly isolate the content of science courses from meaningful contexts. This may reflect the view that knowledge is meaningful unto itself, but a more practical reason for abstraction may be that many scientists learned their subject without applied contexts, pursuing research without concern for the applications of their work. They may not be aware of broader applications of work in their field, or its relationship to the needs and values of others. Whatever the reasons, over a decade of reviews of science teacher education programs by NSTA shows that many courses deal poorly with applications, related social issues and values (Gilbert, personal communication).

NSTA recommends that science preparation programs pay more attention to the learning of science in social and technological contexts. Seminars or capstone experiences in which students study the nature of science and its social context in depth might be valuable. Options also include field trips, internships, and arranged visits to industries, businesses and institutions that engage in scientific or technological research in their field, courses from applied fields such as agriculture, nursing, or engineering, and joint study opportunities with teacher candidates in technology education or social studies.

Applications of science are different from issues and values. Issues and values may be most effective if they are presented and discussed in the context of the science preparation to which they most relate. Studying values and issues related to the detection and prevention of AIDS is more likely to be effective as part of a course on epidemiology than similar study as an exercise in a science methods course. Teaching value-analysis and decision-making skills may initially prove problematic where science instructors are themselves unfamiliar with these skills. Professional development of university faculty, both in science and education, will most likely be needed if these skills are to become a significant part of teacher preparation.

The best science teacher preparation programs ensure that their graduates can relate science to applications in the community and in the lives of the students they teach. They provide opportunities for students to understand how the science they study is applied to meet human needs in medicine, business and industry. They provide for study and discussions of issues and values along with content preparation and simultaneously engage students in structured decision-making and values-analysis. The curriculum, overall, is concerned with the integration of issues into the curriculum and projects required to address them. Candidates for teaching demonstrate the ability to use common sources of information (newspapers, magazines, televised reports) to relate their science instruction to contemporary issues and events. They comfortably conduct discussions relating to values and issues and implement science-related inquiries that relate the content of their science to the needs and interests of their students.

4.4 References

American Chemical Society (1988). Chemistry in the Community. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.

BSCS (1997). Biology: A human approach. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.

Bybee, R. W. (1993). Reforming science education: Social perspectives & personal reflections. New York: Teachers College Press.

Bybee, R. W., & McInerney, J. D. (1995). Redesigning the science curriculum: A report on the implications of standards and benchmarks for science education. Colorado Springs, CO: BSCS.

Bybee, R. W., and Sund, R. B. (1982). Piaget for educators (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill Publishing Company.

Harms, N. C., & Yager, R. E. (1981). What research says to the science teacher - volume 3. Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association.

Leonard, W. H., & Penick, J. E. (1998). Biology: A community context. Cincinnati, OH: South-Western Educational Publishing.

Lewenstein, B.V. (Ed.) (1992). When science meets the public. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.

National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Staver, J. R. (1994). Constructing concepts of constructivism with elementary teachers. In L. Schafer (Ed.). 1994 AETS Yearbook: Behind the methods class door. (pp. 109-117). Columbus, OH: ERIC.

Staver, J. R., & Pascarella, E. T. (1984). The effects of method and format on the responses of subjects to a Piagetian reasoning problem. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21(3), 305-314.

Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Human intelligence: The model is the message. Science, 230(4730), 1111-1118.

Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.