Comparing and Discussing Positions on Scientific Literacy in Teacher Education and Lower Secondary School Curricula

Gerd Johansen, Hilde Afdal

Abstract


One of the purposes of science teacher education is to provide prospective teachers with a solid foundation from which to educate scientifically literate pupils. It is reasonable to assume that curriculum documents provide opportunities as well as imposing restraints on the interpreted, enacted, and experienced curriculum. Hence, we analyse Norwegian national curricula documents for science teacher education and lower secondary education to explore how they communicate in terms of positions on scientific literacy: we explore how knowledge, knowledge processes, and values related to knowledge are configured in the documents. Our analysis is a theoretically driven content analysis inspired by discourse analysis, through which we explore the configuration of the concepts and arguments in use in the curricula. Although both curricula emphasize a similar body of knowledge, the teacher education curriculum lacks the more elaborate approaches to communication and the nature of science (NOS) that are found in the school science curriculum. Moreover, both are concerned with science as enculturation but otherwise provide different arguments for learning science. Prospective teachers might thus be ill-equipped to address vital epistemic aspects of school science.

https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.17.2.7


Keywords


Curriculum analysis; Science (teacher) education; Science curriculum; Scientific literacy; Curriculum structures

Full Text:

PDF

References


Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2011). Nature of science in science education: Toward a coherent framework for synergistic research and development. In B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (Vol. 2, pp. 1041-1060). Dordrecht: Springer.

Aikenhead, G., Orpwood, G., & Fensham, P. (2011). Scientific literacy for a knowledge society. In C. Linder, L. Östman, D. A. Roberts, P.-O. Wickman, G. Erickson, & A. MacKinnon (Eds.), Exploring the landscape of scientific literacy (pp. 28-44). Oxon: Routledge.

Appleton, K., & Kindt, I. (2002). Beginning elementary teachers' development as teachers of science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 43-61.https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1015181809961

Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control, and identity: Theory, research, critique. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishing.

Bianchini, J. A. (2012). Teaching while still learning to teach: Beginning science teachers' views, experiences, and classroom practices. In B. J. Fraser, K. G. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (Vol. 1, pp. 389–399). Dordrecht: Springer.

Bloom, B. S. e. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Handbook I: Cognitive domain (Vol. 19). London: Longman.

Braaten, M., & Windschitl, M. (2011). Working toward a stronger conceptualization of scientific explanation for science education. Science Education, 95(4), 639–669 https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20449

Cochran-Smith, M., & Villegas, A. M. (2015). Framing teacher preparation research: An overview of the field, part 1. Journal of Teacher Education, 66(1), 7–20 https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487114549072

Collins, H., French, S., Millar, R., Osborne, J., Vinen, W. F., & Wright, P. (2000). Forum: Beyond 2000. Studies in Science Education, 35(1), 167–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260008560160

Corrigan, D. (2014). Curriculum and values. In R. Gunstone (Ed.), Encyclopedia of science education (pp. 1–4). Dortrecht: Springer.

Crawford, B. A. (2007). Learning to teach science as inquiry in the rough and tumble of practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(4), 613–642. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20157

Crawford, B. A. (2014). From inquiry to scientific practices in the science classroom. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education. Oxon: Routledge.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Constructing 21st-century teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 300–314. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487105285962

Davis, E. A., Petish, D., & Smithey, J. (2006). Challenges new science teachers face. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 607–651. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543076004607

Deng, F., Chen, D.-T., Tsai, C.-C., & Chai, C. S. (2011). Students' views of the nature of science: A critical review of research. Science Education, 95(6), 961–999. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20460

Dressel, P. L., & Marcus, D. (1982). On teaching and learning in college. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Duschl, R. (2008). Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 268–291. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732x07309371

Duschl, R. A., & Grandy, R. E. (2008). Teaching scientific inquiry: Recommendations for research and implementation. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

European Parliament Council of the European Union. (2006). Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on key competences for lifelong learning. Retrieved from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/;jsessionid=x4lFTnsMyRsnsnjBgqnwlsN5jDgF1NkhrHKhvQ409tGyYsTkxk1N!632333948?uri=CELEX:32006H0962

Eurydice Education Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency. (2011). Science education in Europe: National policies, practices and research. Retrieved from http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice/documents/thematic_reports/133en.pdf

Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse. Textual analysis for social research. Oxon: Routledge.

Feinstein, N. W. (2011). Salvaging science literacy. Science Education, 95(1), 168–185. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20414

Fensham, P. (2013). The science curriculum: The decline of expertise and the rise of bureaucratise. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 45(2), 152–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2012.737862

Goodlad, J. I. (1979). Curriculum inquiry: The study of curriculum practice. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Halliday, M. A. K. (2004). The language of science. London: Continuum.

Harlen, W. e. (2010). Principles and big ideas of science education. Retrieved from https://www.ase.org.uk/documents/principles-and-big-ideas-of-science-education/

Herman, B. C., Clough, M. P., & Olson, J. K. (2013). Teachers’ nature of science implementation practices 2–5 years after having completed an intensive science education program. Science Education, 97(2), 271–309. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21048

Hodson, D. (1993). Re-thinking old ways: Toward a more critical approach to practical work in school science Studies in Science Education, 22, 85-142. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057269308560022

Hodson, D. (2003). Time for action: Science education for an alternative future. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 645-670. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690305021

Hodson, D. (2011). Looking to the future. Building a curriculum for social activism. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

Hofstein, A., & Kind, P. M. (2011). Learning in and from science laboratories. In B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (Vol. 1, pp. 189–207). Dordrecht: Springer.

Hopmann, S. (2007). Restrained teaching: The common core of Didaktik. European Educational Research Journal, 6(2), 109–124. https://doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2007.6.2.109

Jenkins, E. (2003). School science: Too much, too little, or a problem with science itself? Canadian Journal of Math, Science & Technology Education, 3(2), 269-274. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926150309556564

Jenkins, E. (2013). The ‘nature of science’ in the school curriculum: the great survivor. Journal of curriculum studies, 45(2), 132-151. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2012.741264

Jones, M. G., & Leagon, M. (2014). Science teacher attitudes and beliefs: Reforming practice. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research in science education (Vol. II). New York: Routledge.

Knain, E. (2015). Scientific literacy for participation: A systemic functional approach to analysis of school science discourses. Rotterdam: Sense.

Kolstø, S. D. (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientific issues. Science Education, 85(3), 291–309. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.1011

Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/107621758100400412

Kunnskapsdepartementet [Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research]. (2009). Nasjonalt kvalifikasjonsrammeverk for høyere utdanning. Oslo. Retrieved from http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/kd/tema/hoyere_utdanning/nasjonalt-kvalifikasjonsrammeverk.html?id=564809

Kunnskapsdepartementet [Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research]. (2011). Nasjonale retningslinjer for grunnskolelærerutdanningen. Oslo. Retrieved from http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/kd/documents/legislation/legal-guidelines/2010/national-guidelines-for-differentiated-t.html?id=640249

Kunnskapsdepartementet [Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research]. (2015). Tett på realfag. Nasjonal strategi for realfag i barnehagen og grunnoplæringen (2015-2019) [Focus on science and mathematics. National strategy for kindergarten and school]. Oslo. Retrieved from https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/869faa81d1d740d297776740e67e3e65/kd_realfagsstrategi.pdf

Lattuca, L. R., & Stark, J. S. (2009). Shaping the college curriculum: Academic plans in context. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2012). Nature of scientific knowledge and scientific inquiry: Building instructional capacity through professional development. In B. J. Fraser, K. G. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (Vol. 1, pp. 335–359). Dordrecht: Springer.

Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2014). Research on teaching and learning of nature of science. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. 2, pp. 600–620). New York: Routledge.

Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

Liu, X. (2013). Expanding notions of scientific literacy: A reconceptualization of aims of science education in the knowledge society. In N. Mansour & R. Wegerif (Eds.), Science education for diversity (pp. 23–39). Dordrecht: Springer.

Longino, H. E. (1990). Science as social kowledge: Values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Loughran, J. J. (2014). Developing understandings of practice: Science teacher learning. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education. (Vol. 2, pp. 811–829). Oxon: Routledge.

Melville, W. (2008). Mandated curriculum change and a science department: A superficial language convergence? Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(5), 1185–1199, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2007.03.004

Mogensen, F., & Schnack, K. (2010). The action competence approach and the ‘new’discourses of education for sustainable development, competence and quality criteria. Environmental Education Research, 16(1), 59-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620903504032

Muller, J. (2009). Forms of knowledge and curriculum coherence. Journal of Education and work, 22(3), 205-226. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080902957905

National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting themes, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Norris, S., & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87(2), 224-240. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10066

Norris, S., & Phillips, L. M. (2008). Reading as inquiry. In R. A. Duschl & R. E. Grandy (Eds.), Teaching Scientific Inquiry (pp. 233–261). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

Olson, J. K., Tippett, C. D., Milford, T. M., Ohana, C., & Clough, M. P. (2015). Science teacher preparation in a North American context. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 26(1), 7–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-014-9417-9

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2012a). Education Today 2013. In. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/edu_today-2013-en

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2012b). PISA 2015 Item Submission Guidelines: Scientific Literacy. Vol. 2014. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/Submission-Guidelines-Science.pdf

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2016). PISA 2015 Results (Volume II). http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264267510-en

Osborne, J. (2014). Teaching scientific practices: Meeting the challenge of change. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(2), 177–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-014-9384-1

Paavola, S., Lipponen, L., & Hakkarainen, K. (2004). Models of innovative knowledge communities and three metaphors of learning. Review of Educational Research, 74(4), 557–576. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074004557

Phenix, P. (1986). Realms of meaning: A philosophy of the curriculum for general education. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Roberts, D. A. (1988). What counts as science education? In P. Fensham (Ed.), Developments and dilemmas in science education (pp. 27–54). London: Falmer Press.

Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research in science education (pp. 729–780). Oxon: Routledge.

Roberts, D. A., & Bybee, R. W. (2014). Scientific literacy, science literacy, and science education. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 545–558). Oxon: Routledge.

Roth, W.-M., & Barton, A. C. (2004). Rethinking scientific literacy. New York, NY: Routledge.

Russ, R. S. (2014). Epistemology of science vs. epistemology for science. Science Education, 98(3), 388–396. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21106

Russell, T., & Martin, A. K. (2014). Learning to teach science. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. II, pp. 871–888). Oxon: Routledge.

Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2009). Scientific literacy, PISA, and socioscientific discourse: Assessment for progressive aims of science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(8), 909–921. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20327

Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 25(2), 4–13. https://doi.org/10.2307/1176193

Sikorski, T. R., & Hammer, D. (2017). Looking for coherence in science curriculum. Science Education, 00, 1–15. doi:10.1002/sce.21299

Sivesind, K. (2012). Kunnskapsløftet: Implementering av nye læreplaner i reformen. Synteserapport fra evalueringen av Kunnskapsløftet [Knowledge promotion: Implementation of the new curricula. A report synthesising the evaluation of knowledge promotion]. Retrieved from https://www.udir.no/tall-og-forskning/finn-forskning/rapporter/kunnskapsloftet-implementering-av-nye-lareplaner-i-reformen/

Smith, D. V., & Gunstone, R. F. (2009). Science curriculum in the market liberal society of the twenty-first century: ‘Re-visioning’ the idea of science for all. Research in Science Education, 39(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9069-2

Sund, L., & Öhman, J. (2014). On the need to repoliticise environmental and sustainability education: Rethinking the postpolitical consensus. Environmental Education Research, 20(5), 639–659. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2013.833585

Thomson, N., & Tippins, D. J. (2013). Envisioning science teacher preparation for twenty-first-century classrooms for diversity: Some tensions. In N. Mansour & R. Wegerif (Eds.), Science Education for Diversity (pp. 231–249). Dordrecht: Springer.

Tytler, R., Prain, V., & Hubber, P. (2013). Constructing representations to learn in science. Rotterdam: Sense.

Utdanningsdirektoratet [Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training]. (2013). Læreplan i naturfag [Curriculum for school science]. Retrieved from http://www.udir.no/kl06/NAT1-03/.

Veel, R. (2000). Learning how to mean - scientifically speaking: Apprenticeship into scientific discourse in the secondary school. In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Genre and institutions - social processes in the workplace and school (pp. 161–195). London: Continuum.

Voogt, J., & Roblin, N. P. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st century competences: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(3), 299–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2012.668938

Wallace, C. S. (2012). Authoritarian science curriculum standards as barriers to teaching and learning: An interpretation of personal experience. Science Education, 96(2), 291–310. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20470

Young, M. (2013). Overcoming the crisis in curriculum theory: a knowledge-based approach. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 45(2), 101–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2013.764505

Zeidler, D. L., Herman, B. C., Clough, M. P., Olson, J. K., Kahn, S., & Newton, M. (2016). Humanitas emptor: Reconsidering recent trends and policy in science teacher education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 27(5), 465–476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-016-9481-4


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


e-ISSN: 1694-2116

p-ISSN: 1694-2493