What do students need to face the future?

Dr Gary Simpson Woodleigh School Baxter, Victoria, Australia

Introduction

In science education we often argue about whether we should be teaching content or skills. This argument usually develops into a consideration of which skills students need or what content they should have. I am sure that most groups of teachers have very similar discussions in their departmental meetings, or over coffee, when trying to agree to what the curriculum should look like, so that they can allocate their limited and valuable time as effectively as possible. I intend to take this opportunity to explain my perspective on this argument. Hopefully it will be possible to generalise my views to the broader curricula offerings of other departments.

As a science educator, I take the position that I need to develop scientific literacy in my students. I believe that with scientific knowledge expanding and evolving, it is more important that the students are able to apply a sceptical, inquiring mind, to understand and participate in debates about the use of science in their society. I recognise that not all of my students will work as scientists, but I also recognise that their lives (unimaginable as their futures are) will be heavily influenced by science and the technologies that evolve with our ever-increasing knowledge of the physical and natural world. My students must be able to take an informed role in transforming their society.

So, in this paper I start with a consideration of what I mean by scientific literacy, then I consider how I attempt to achieve this literacy in my students. I then finish with a consideration of what I think my students need now and in the future.

What do I mean by scientific literacy?

So what do scientifically literate students look like? First, they will understand that there is a connection between their life and experiences and the study of science. They will be able to read the newspaper, blog or wiki, listen to the radio or podcast, view a documentary or news article in an audio-visual format and apply their knowledge of the scientific process, and a good dose of healthy scientific scepticism, to the information presented and begin to clarify their own view. They will know that scientific knowledge is evolutionary, non-foundational, culturally and socially determined and arises from theory-dependent inquiry. This fuels scepticism when considering new knowledge claims. They will also remember facts from school and be able to apply them to new situations. They are also aware that, as our knowledge changes, sometimes we must let go old ideas and replace them with new ones. Most of all, they are confident when using the language of science; they can understand what is being said and can analyse the knowledge claim for themselves.

How do I achieve this?

How does one achieve such a state in the students that one teaches? I start by exploring key ideas in science – the content. These ideas themselves do not change a great deal: the structure and function of living things; the manner in which living things interact with each other and their physical world; the structure and function of matter and energy and the manner in which matter and energy interact with each other and the natural world; and the structure, function and evolution of our universe. The details of these big ideas, however, continue to evolve as science continues to explore and develop richer, more sophisticated, more ‘truthful’ explanations for the world we experience.

Humans have always, and will always, ask questions about these big ideas. All cultures have a tradition of science that attempts to answer these questions. By exploring the history of these big ideas, including the beliefs of other cultures, the sociology of knowledge making and the impact of science and the technology that often develops beside the ideas in the lived world of people, I am able to engage my students in explorations of these ideas with our tradition of science as the point of reference. Also, one must work with science. Since the days of Galileo, it has become a hands-on enterprise, with beliefs being rigorously tested by experiment. Students must have the opportunity to develop tests for themselves, putting their own beliefs under examination in a rigorous manner. In this way, they also get to learn how to use a broad range of equipment and to begin to develop the skills necessary to use them: microscopes, telescopes, Bunsen burners, scalpels, cupboards of glassware and electronic and mechanical equipment.

Conclusion

So why teach science? I believe that science is a branch of knowledge created by human beings to explain their reality. That is, we use science to explain the questions that bother all of us. Why is the sky blue? Why does the sun rise each day and the moon (in one shape or other – in fact, why the shapes) most nights? Why is there a high and a low tide? Why do certain animals and plants appear in the environment at different times? Is there a supreme omniscient and omnipresent being? Did he, she or it create everything? Does he, she or it control our daily lives? Our western tradition of science, the youngest of the extant science traditions, has distanced itself from spiritual questions (unlike any other tradition of science) and is based on a reductionist philosophy and methodical application of observational techniques (thanks in large part to Rene Descartes and Galileo Galilei). It is this that we teach to young people who have already developed their own theories to answer those, and many other, questions listed above.

So why do we teach this to young people?

First, because we want them to be able to take part in an increasingly scientific and technological world (technology being a close cousin of science, in constant interaction with it) in a meaningful manner. That is, even if they do not work in science-based jobs, we want them to be able to take part in decision-making about science. For example, the desire of some biochemists to grow embryos for the sole purpose of harvesting stem cells.

Second, because we want them to be able to have meaningful careers as scientists or in a related field where scientific knowledge and skill can be applied. We recognise that not all of our students will wish to work in science, but many will and a year 7 to 10 course should prepare them for specialised Victorian Certificate of Education (VCE) subjects and university entrance.

Third, because, like all human beings, they seek to explain their reality. All of our students will have explanations for a variety of phenomena that they have created, in total ignorance of any scientific tradition or through poorly understood knowledge of certain phenomena. It is our duty to uncover those misconceptions and assist the student to re-conceive them in line with the western tradition of science.
Fourth, because we have an obligation to develop logical, clear thinking members of our community who are able to act on the basis of knowledge and understanding to transform their society.

What should a secondary school science program look like? I believe that in years 7 and 8 the program should teach the process of science through contextual settings. That is, we teach how to use the various pieces of equipment, the safe use of that equipment, the application of a scientific method (which one I hear the relativists cry!) using the historical development of ideas, the famous individuals and incidents of science, and the content itself. This program would have aspects of all the four disciplines of science, that is, biology, chemistry, earth studies and physics. Whenever possible, we should encourage students to act in line with their beliefs. For example, this could be establishing a classroom routine for the disposal of chemical waste, following practical investigations in response to considerations of sustainable waste management at the school. At year 9, the program should continue to look at how science is practiced and should include representation of the four disciplines, but there would be an increase in the amount of theoretical context. At year 10, most schools offer a selective program. This attempts to achieve a number of things, such as:

• looking in depth at a particular phenomena
• develop opportunities for future employment in the society of our students’ future
• preparing the students for VCE level study.

Many VCE teachers, me being one, do not require theoretical content of their students, but rather they want students who are engaged and interested in learning science and capable of applying the scientific method and scepticism to investigate phenomena. After this, the opportunity for selective offerings that are highly targeted may provide an opportunity for students to develop a deeper appreciation of the process of science that they can then take to any VCE subject, or to life in general, as an informed member of society. I would suggest the following semester length units, and this is by no means an exhaustive list:

• the science of flight
• biochemistry
• marine biology
• formulation science (cosmetics, pharmaceuticals and other industrial/home chemicals)
• history and philosophy of science
• the question of whether there is life on other planets
• robotics (in conjunction with the technology faculty)
• science of photography (in conjunction with the creative art faculty).

I believe that a move from breadth in year 7 to greater depth by year 10 meets the needs of my students now, so that they will have the knowledge and skills to make the informed choices for their future.