Science And Education Essay Topics

Being passionate about science, I wonder a lot about the way I was taught science throughout school (and at college) and the way the people I know are being taught science in educational institutes. I think there is something fundamentally wrong with any approach that seeks to impose a linguistic corset on the processes involved in the understanding of science. You don’t make people good at science by making them learn answers to questions and then evaluating how well they reproduce those answers in an exam, not more than you can produce Olympic medallists by teaching them the history of their discipline as in who won what in the past!

That approach only tends to work as long as what is being evaluated is the state of knowledge about what is known about the world. Science, however, happens to be much more than a mere compendium of facts that is supposed to be assimilated. It is a process, a set of tools, a systematic approach that enables one to discern relationships between different things and examine the nature of those relationships.

It is also about being fundamentally rebellious in a strange sort of way, it is an attempt to try and be a paradigm shifter in matters of human knowledge. It involves not being satisfied with the nature of explanations but to probe further, to see if there are chinks in the proverbial armour of our knowledge of observational reality, or if there are gaps that need patching up. Science may, as far as one is inclined to treat it as an enterprise, eventually turn out to be unending. There’s so much to learn, so much to ask, and so much to find out.

It is in light of this that I find the almost authoritarian “You shall accept what I tell thee, and don’t ask me questions!” attitude that is so much a feature of science educators (this would appear to be a feature of educators here in general, too) here a bit bizarre, for science class, in my opinion, is a place that should not only entail knowing what is known to be true, but why, and how we arrived at that state of knowledge.

I know that anecdotes do not count for much, but it was rather surprising that I ended up explaining causality, controls and experiment design to a 13-year old, despite the scientific method being treated in the curriculum at the age of 11, obviously not very well.

So, having got that preliminary rant out of the way, I think it is time to focus on the key question. How should science be taught? What skills should we be focussing on? While I will not claim to having the definitive answer, I will still put forth my opinions, in the hope that it will foster discussion that will eventually give rise to a new consensus.

Firstly, I think that the scientific method ought to be taught, as in the experimental discernment of causes and effects. The idea of variables and causes and effects are perhaps the easiest to convey, and can be demonstrated with things like food. It is possible to demonstrate that the cause of the lemony taste of lemonade is due to the presence of lemon extract in it. Show that if you take two glasses of ingredients other than the lemon , add lemon to one and not the other (this is the concept of a control and a test), the variation in taste will be down to the presence of lemon extract in the preparation.

Another example would be sweets prepared with and without sugar, or food with and without spice. The core idea here is simple, the introduction of the principle of determinism. Stochastic processes is something they’ll have to be introduced to later, and a plausible method of demonstrating stochasticity using everyday examples evades me at the moment.

It is not difficult to see how one may, with knowledge of the aforementioned basics, go on to be in a position to understand and test hypotheses, and also to properly design experiments to do so. Concepts such as scientific theories can be introduced later, and by the time one enters late middle school, with well-developed skills in mathematics, at around the age of 12-13, much more advanced concepts can be introduced, culminating with the establishment of solid scientific foundations for further study if one so desired.

The other issue I want to write about in this essay pertains to the way science is presented. As I already said, I was really put off at school by the way science was taught. It used to be people reading the textbook out loud, more or less, and this already compounded the problems posed by a badly devised curriculum. Those people would really do well to learn from someone like Walter Levin at MIT, with a high degree of experimentation involved. If you are teaching Newton’s laws of motion, for instance, it isn’t difficult to illustrate them at all! , something like a duster on a table would do for the first two and then you could perhaps make a little rocket to illustrate the third…

The lack of connection with what is being studied is a special problem with biology, in my opinion. There is just so much natural beauty out there, and there are excellent books such as National Geographic’s “Exploring the Human Body” which are eminently suited in the conveyance of said natural beauty.

There also could be great benefits to getting a microscope, just to highlight all the diversity there is, and to show students the tissues in plants and animals they read about in the curriculum, which they tend to do so without any sense of connection. It is also not difficult to take fruits to the classroom and illustrate the concepts of radial and bilateral symmetry, or to introduce the myriad of resources available on the web that bring the concepts they’re being taught to life (pun intended).

More could be conveyed about ideas such as mitosis and meiosis and photosynthesis and so on just through the judicious use of animations and videos. There is no substitute to a good time-lapse video of cells dividing if one were to be studying that, or bacteria growing.Finally, I would like to chime in for the introduction of practical science earlier in education, including at school level, I would like to substantiate the fact that children can do good science at a very young age by pointing to the peer-reviewed study that a group of 8-11 year olds in Blackawton Primary School in the UK was able to produce.The full paper is here http://rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/7/2/168

I hope that more educators will turn their attention to what is a very important area of education, and that it will bring forth ideas that can utilize the full breadth of analogy, technology and good old science to impart the tools required for scientific reasoning and the knowledge required to enable that reasoning to be solid in a way that is no longer coma-inducing.

Most importantly, I hope that those ideas are tested experimentally so that the science curriculum becomes an example of the principles it is supposed to teach. That is all from me this time round.

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

This entry was posted in Articles by Exploreable (Ankur Chakravarthy), Stuff In General.. Bookmark the permalink.

Science education is the field concerned with sharing science content and process with individuals not traditionally considered part of the scientific community. The learners may be children, college students, or adults within the general public; the field of science education includes work in science content, science process (the scientific method), some social science, and some teaching pedagogy. The standards for science education provide expectations for the development of understanding for students through the entire course of their K-12 education and beyond. The traditional subjects included in the standards are physical, life, earth, space, and human sciences.

Historical background[edit]

The first person credited with being employed as a Science teacher in a British public school was William Sharp who left the job at Rugby School in 1850 after establishing Science to the curriculum. Sharp is said to have established a model for Science to be taught throughout the British Public Schools.[1]

The next step came when the British Academy for the Advancement of Science (BAAS) published a report in 1867.[2] BAAS promoted teaching of "pure science" and training of the "scientific habit of mind." The progressive education movement of the time supported the ideology of mental training through the sciences. BAAS emphasized separately pre-professional training in secondary science education. In this way, future BAAS members could be prepared.

The initial development of science teaching was slowed by the lack of qualified teachers. One key development was the founding of the first London School Board in 1870, which discussed the school curriculum; another was the initiation of courses to supply the country with trained science teachers. In both cases the influence of Thomas Henry Huxley was critical (see especially Thomas Henry Huxley educational influence). John Tyndall was also influential in the teaching of physical science.[3]

In the US, science education was a scatter of subjects prior to its standardization in the 1890s.[4] The development of a science curriculum in the US emerged gradually after extended debate between two ideologies, citizen science and pre-professional training. As a result of a conference of 30 leading secondary and college educators in Florida, the National Education Association appointed a Committee of Ten in 1892 which had authority to organize future meetings and appoint subject matter committees of the major subjects taught in U.S. secondary schools. The committee was composed of ten educators (all men) and was chaired by Charles Eliot of Harvard University. The Committee of Ten met, and appointed nine conferences committees (Latin, Greek, English, Other Modern Languages, Mathematics, History, Civil Government and Political Economy, and three in science). The three conference committees appointed for science were: physics, astronomy, and chemistry (1); natural history (2); and geography (3). Each committee, appointed by the Committee of Ten, was composed of ten leading specialists from colleges and normal schools, and secondary schools. Each committee met in a different location in the U.S. The three science committees met for three days in the Chicago area. Committee reports were submitted to the Committee of Ten, which met for four days in New York, to create a comprehensive report.[5] In 1894, the NEA published the results of work of these conference committees.[5]

According to the Committee of Ten, the goal of high school was to prepare all students to do well in life, contributing to their well-being and the good of society. Another goal was to prepare some students to succeed in college.[6]

This committee supported the citizen science approach focused on mental training and withheld performance in science studies from consideration for college entrance.[7] The BAAS encouraged their longer standing model in the UK.[8] The US adopted a curriculum was characterized as follows:[5]

  • Elementary science should focus on simple natural phenomena (nature study) by means of experiments carried out "in-the-field."
  • Secondary science should focus on laboratory work and the committee's prepared lists of specific experiments
  • Teaching of facts and principles
  • College preparation

The format of shared mental training and pre-professional training consistently dominated the curriculum from its inception to now. However, the movement to incorporate a humanistic approach, such as science, technology, society and environment education is growing and being implemented more broadly in the late 20th century (Aikenhead, 1994). Reports by the American Academy for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), including Project 2061, and by the National Committee on Science Education Standards and Assessment detail goals for science education that link classroom science to practical applications and societal implications.

Fields of Science Education[edit]

See also: Branches of science

Physics Education[edit]

See also: Physics education

Physics First, a program endorsed by the American Association of Physics Teachers, is a curriculum in which 9th grade students take an introductory physics course. The purpose is to enrich students' understanding of physics, and allow for more detail to be taught in subsequent high school biology and chemistry classes. It also aims to increase the number of students who go on to take 12th grade physics or AP Physics, which are generally elective courses in American high schools.[22]

Physics education in high schools in the United States has suffered the last twenty years because many states now only require three sciences, which can be satisfied by earth/physical science, chemistry, and biology. The fact that many students do not take physics in high school makes it more difficult for those students to take scientific courses in college.

At the university/college level, using appropriate technology-related projects to spark non-physics majors’ interest in learning physics has been shown to be successful.[23] This is a potential opportunity to forge the connection between physics and social benefit.

Chemistry Education[edit]

See also: Chemistry education

Chemistry is the study of chemicals and the elements and their effects and attributes. Students in chemistry learn the periodic table. The branch of science education known as "chemistry must be taught in a relevant context in order to promote full understanding of current sustainability issues."[9] As this source states chemistry is a very important subject in school as it teaches students to understand issues in the world. As children are interested by the world around them chemistry teachers can attract interest in turn educating the students further.[10] The subject of chemistry is a very practical based subject meaning most of class time is spent working or completing experiments.

Pedagogy[edit]

While the public image of science education may be one of simply learning facts by rote, science education in recent history also generally concentrates on the teaching of science concepts and addressing misconceptions that learners may hold regarding science concepts or other content. Science education has been strongly influenced by constructivist thinking.[11]Constructivism in science education has been informed by an extensive research programme into student thinking and learning in science, and in particular exploring how teachers can facilitate conceptual change towards canonical scientific thinking. Constructivism emphasises the active role of the learner, and the significance of current knowledge and understanding in mediating learning, and the importance of teaching that provides an optimal level of guidance to learners.[12]

The guided-discovery approach to science education[edit]

Along with John Dewey, Jerome Bruner, and many others,Arthur Koestler[13] offers a critique of contemporary science education and proposes its replacement with the guided-discovery approach:

To derive pleasure from the art of discovery, as from the other arts, the consumer—in this case the student—must be made to re-live, to some extent, the creative process. In other words, he must be induced, with proper aid and guidance, to make some of the fundamental discoveries of science by himself, to experience in his own mind some of those flashes of insight which have lightened its path. . . . The traditional method of confronting the student not with the problem but with the finished solution, means depriving him of all excitement, [shutting] off the creative impulse, [reducing] the adventure of mankind to a dusty heap of theorems.

Specific hands-on illustrations of this approach are available.[14][15]

Research[edit]

The practice of science education has been increasingly informed by research into science teaching and learning. Research in science education relies on a wide variety of methodologies, borrowed from many branches of science and engineering such as computer science, cognitive science, cognitive psychology and anthropology. Science education research aims to define or characterize what constitutes learning in science and how it is brought about.

John D. Bransford, et al., summarized massive research into student thinking as having three key findings:

Preconceptions 
Prior ideas about how things work are remarkably tenacious and an educator must explicitly address a students' specific misconceptions if the student is to reconfigure his misconception in favour of another explanation. Therefore, it is essential that educators know how to learn about student preconceptions and make this a regular part of their planning.
Knowledge Organization
In order to become truly literate in an area of science, students must, "(a) have a deep foundation of factual knowledge, (b) understand facts and ideas in the context of a conceptual framework, and (c) organize knowledge in ways that facilitate retrieval and application."[2]
Metacognition 
Students will benefit from thinking about their thinking and their learning. They must be taught ways of evaluating their knowledge and what they don't know, evaluating their methods of thinking, and evaluating their conclusions.

Educational technologies are being refined to meet the specific needs of science teachers. One research study examining how cellphones are being used in post-secondary science teaching settings showed that mobile technologies can increase student engagement and motivation in the science classroom.[16]

According to a bibliography on constructivist-oriented research on teaching and learning science in 2005, about 64 percent of studies documented are carried out in the domain of physics, 21 percent in the domain of biology, and 15 percent in chemistry.[17] The major reason for this dominance of physics in the research on teaching and learning appears to be that understanding physics includes difficulties due to the particular nature of physics.[18] Research on students' conceptions has shown that most pre-instructional (everyday) ideas that students bring to physics instruction are in stark contrast to the physics concepts and principles to be achieved – from kindergarten to the tertiary level. Quite often students' ideas are incompatible with physics views.[19] This also holds true for students’ more general patterns of thinking and reasoning.[20]

Science education in different countries[edit]

Australia[edit]

Like in England and Wales science education is compulsory up until year 11 where students can choose to study one or more of the branches mentioned above. and if they wish to no longer study science they can choose none of the branches. The science subject is one course up until year 11, meaning students learn in all of the branches giving them a broad idea of what science is all about. The National Curriculum Board of Australia (2009) stated that "The science curriculum will be organised around three interrelated strands: science understanding; science inquiry skills; and science as a human endeavour."[21] These strands give teachers and educators the framework of how they should be instructing their students.

A major problem that has befallen science education in Australia over the last decade is a falling interest in science. As less year 10 students are choosing to study science for year 11 it is problematic as these are the few years where students form attitudes to pursue science careers.[22] This issue is not just happening in Australia it is happening in countries all over the world.

China[edit]

Educational quality in China suffers because a typical classroom contains 50 to 70 students. With over 200 million students, China has the largest educational system in the world. However, only 20% percent of students complete the rigorous ten-year program of formal schooling.[23]

As in many other countries, the science curriculum includes sequenced courses in physics, chemistry, and biology. Science education is given high priority and is driven by textbooks composed by committees of scientists and teachers. Science education in China places great emphasis on memorization, and gives far less attention to problem solving, application of principles to novel situations, interpretations, and predictions.[23]

United Kingdom[edit]

See also: Science education in England

In English and Welsh schools, science is a compulsory subject in the National Curriculum. All pupils from 5 to 16 years of age must study science. It is generally taught as a single subject science until sixth form, then splits into subject-specific A levels (physics, chemistry and biology). However, the government has since expressed its desire that those pupils who achieve well at the age of 14 should be offered the opportunity to study the three separate sciences from September 2008.[24] In Scotland the subjects split into chemistry, physics and biology at the age of 13–15 for National 4/5s in these subjects, and there is also a combined science standard grade qualification which students can sit, provided their school offers it.

In September 2006 a new science program of study known as 21st Century Science was introduced as a GCSE option in UK schools, designed to "give all 14 to 16 year old's a worthwhile and inspiring experience of science".[25] In November 2013, Ofsted's survey of science[26] in schools revealed that practical science teaching was not considered important enough.[27] At the majority of English schools, students have the opportunity to study a separate science program as part of their GCSEs, which results in them taking 6 papers at the end of Year 11; this usually fills one of their option 'blocks' and requires more science lessons than those who choose not to partake in separate science or are not invited. Other students who choose not to follow the compulsory additional science course, which results in them taking 4 papers resulting in 2 GCSEs, opposed to the 3 GCSEs given by taking separate science.

United States[edit]

In many U.S. states, K-12 educators must adhere to rigid standards or frameworks of what content is to be taught to which age groups. This often leads teachers to rush to "cover" the material, without truly "teaching" it. In addition, the process of science, including such elements as the scientific method and critical thinking, is often overlooked. This emphasis can produce students who pass standardized tests without having developed complex problem solving skills. Although at the college level American science education tends to be less regulated, it is actually more rigorous, with teachers and professors fitting more content into the same time period.[28]

In 1996, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences of the U.S. National Academies produced the National Science Education Standards, which is available online for free in multiple forms. Its focus on inquiry-based science, based on the theory of constructivism rather than on direct instruction of facts and methods, remains controversial.[28] Some research suggests that it is more effective as a model for teaching science.

"The Standards call for more than 'science as process,' in which students learn such skills as observing, inferring, and experimenting. Inquiry is central to science learning. When engaging in inquiry, students describe objects and events, ask questions, construct explanations, test those explanations against current scientific knowledge, and communicate their ideas to others. They identify their assumptions, use critical and logical thinking, and consider alternative explanations. In this way, students actively develop their understanding of science by combining scientific knowledge with reasoning and thinking skills."[29]

Concern about science education and science standards has often been driven by worries that American students lag behind their peers in international rankings.[30] One notable example was the wave of education reforms implemented after the Soviet Union launched its Sputniksatellite in 1957.[31] The first and most prominent of these reforms was led by the Physical Science Study Committee at MIT. In recent years, business leaders such as Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates have called for more emphasis on science education, saying the United States risks losing its economic edge.[32] To this end, Tapping America's Potential is an organization aimed at getting more students to graduate with science, technology, engineering and mathematics degrees.[33] Public opinion surveys, however, indicate most U.S. parents are complacent about science education and that their level of concern has actually declined in recent years.[34]

Prof Sreyashi Jhumki Basu [35] published extensively on the need for equity in Science Education in the United States.

Furthermore, in the recent National Curriculum Survey conducted by ACT, researchers uncovered a possible disconnect among science educators. "Both middle school/junior high school teachers and post secondary science instructors rate(d) process/inquiry skills as more important than advanced science content topics; high school teachers rate them in exactly the opposite order." Perhaps more communication among educators at the different grade levels in necessary to ensure common goals for students.[36]

2012 science education framework[edit]

According to a report from the National Academy of Sciences, the fields of science, technology, and education hold a paramount place in the modern world, but there are not enough workers in the United States entering the science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) professions. In 2012 the National Academy of Sciences Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards developed a guiding framework to standardize K-12 science education with the goal of organizing science education systematically across the K-12 years. Titled A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas, the publication promotes standardizing K-12 science education in the United States. It emphasizes science educators to focus on a "limited number of disciplinary core ideas and crosscutting concepts, be designed so that students continually build on and revise their knowledge and abilities over multiple years, and support the integration of such knowledge and abilities with the practices needed to engage in scientific inquiry and engineering design." [37]

The report says that in the 21st century Americans need science education in order to engage in and "systematically investigate issues related to their personal and community priorities," as well as to reason scientifically and know how to apply science knowledge. The committee that designed this new framework sees this imperative as a matter of educational equity to the diverse set of schoolchildren. Getting more diverse students into STEM education is a matter of social justice as seen by the committee.[38]

2013 Next Generation Science Standards[edit]

In 2013 a new standards for science education were released that update the national standards released in 1996. Developed by 26 state governments and national organizations of scientists and science teachers, the guidelines, called the Next Generation Science Standards, are intended to "combat widespread scientific ignorance, to standardize teaching among states, and to raise the number of high school graduates who choose scientific and technical majors in college...." Included are guidelines for teaching students about topics such as climate change and evolution. An emphasis is teaching the scientific process so that students have a better understanding of the methods of science and can critically evaluate scientific evidence. Organizations that contributed to developing the standards include the National Science Teachers Association, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the National Research Council, and Achieve, a nonprofit organization that was also involved in developing math and English standards.[39][40]

Informal science education[edit]

Informal science education is the science teaching and learning that occurs outside of the formal school curriculum in places such as museums, the media, and community-based programs. The National Science Teachers Association has created a position statement[41] on Informal Science Education to define and encourage science learning in many contexts and throughout the lifespan. Research in informal science education is funded in the United States by the National Science Foundation.[42] The Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE)[43] provides resources for the informal science education community.

Examples of informal science education include science centers, science museums, and new digital learning environments (e.g.Global Challenge Award), many of which are members of the Association of Science and Technology Centers (ASTC).[44] The Exploratorium in San Francisco and The Franklin Institute in Philadelphia are the oldest of this type of museum in the United States. Media include TV programs such as NOVA, Newton's Apple, "Bill Nye the Science Guy","Beakman's World", The Magic School Bus, and Dragonfly TV. Examples of community-based programs are 4-H Youth Development programs, Hands On Science Outreach, NASA and After school Programs[45] and Girls at the Center. Home education is encouraged through educational products such as the former (1940-1989) Things of Science subscription service.[46]

In 2010, the National Academies released Surrounded by Science: Learning Science in Informal Environments,[47] based on the National Research Council study, Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits.[48]Surrounded by Science is a resource book that shows how current research on learning science across informal science settings can guide the thinking, the work, and the discussions among informal science practitioners. This book makes valuable research accessible to those working in informal science: educators, museum professionals, university faculty, youth leaders, media specialists, publishers, broadcast journalists, and many others.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^Bernard Leary, ‘Sharp, William (1805–1896)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford University Press, Sept 2004; online edn, Oct 2005 Retrieved 22 May 2010
  2. ^Layton, D. (1981). "The schooling of science in England, 1854–1939". In MacLeod, R.M.; Collins, P.D.B. The parliament of science. Northwood, England: Science Reviews. pp. 188–210. ISBN 0905927664. OCLC 8172024. 
  3. ^Bibby, Cyril (1959). T.H. Huxley: scientist, humanist and educator. London: Watts. OCLC 747400567. 
  4. ^Del Giorno, B.J. (April 1969). "The impact of changing scientific knowledge on science education in the United States since 1850". Science Education. 53 (3): 191–5. doi:10.1002/sce.3730530304. 
  5. ^ abcNational Education Association (1894). Report of the Committee of Ten on Secondary School Studies With The Reports of the Conferences Arranged by The Committee. New York: The American Book Company Read the Book Online
  6. ^Weidner, L. "The N.E.A. Committee of Ten". 
  7. ^Hurd, P.D. (1991). "Closing the educational gaps between science, technology, and society". Theory into Practice. 30 (4): 251–9. doi:10.1080/00405849109543509. 
  8. ^Jenkins, E. (1985). "History of science education". In Husén, T.; Postlethwaite, T.N. International encyclopedia of education. Oxford: Pergamon Press. pp. 4453–6. ISBN 0080281192. 
  9. ^Jegstad, Kirsti Marie; Sinnes, Astrid Tonette (2015-03-04). "Chemistry Teaching for the Future: A model for secondary chemistry education for sustainable development". International Journal of Science Education. 37 (4): 655–683. doi:10.1080/09500693.2014.1003988. ISSN 0950-0693. 
  10. ^Azmat, R. "Manufacturing of High Quality Teachers for Chemistry Education at Higher Secondary Level in Current Era"(PDF). Pakistan Journal of Chemistry. 3 (3): 140–141. doi:10.15228/2013.v03.i03.p08. 
  11. ^Taber, Keith S. (2009). Progressing Science Education: Constructing the Scientific Research Programme Into the Contingent Nature of Learning Science. Springer. ISBN 978-90-481-2431-2. 
  12. ^Taber, K.S. (2011). "Constructivism as educational theory: Contingency in learning, and optimally guided instruction". In J. Hassaskhah. Educational Theory. Nova. ISBN 9781613245804. 
  13. ^Koestler, Arthur (1964). Act of Creation. London: Hutchinson. pp. 265–266. 
  14. ^Carleton University. "Guided discovery problems: Examples (in: Teaching Methods: A Collection of Pedagogic Techniques and Example Activities)". 
  15. ^"Science exercises and instructional materials: Teaching science as if minds mattered!". 
  16. ^Tremblay, Eric (2010). "Educating the Mobile Generation – using personal cell phones as audience response systems in post-secondary science teaching". Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching. 29 (2): 217–227. 
  17. ^Duit, R. (2006). "Bibliography—STCSE (Students' and Teachers' Conceptions and Science Education)". Kiel:IPN—Leibniz Institute for Science Education. 
  18. ^Duit, R.; Niedderer, H.; Schecker, H. (2007). "Teaching Physics". In Abell, Sandra K.; Lederman, Norman G. Handbook of Research on Science Education. Lawrence Erlbaum. p. 599. ISBN 978-0-8058-4713-0. 
  19. ^Wandersee, J.H.; Mintzes, J.J.; Novak, J.D. (1994). "Research on alternative conceptions in science". In Gabel, D. Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning. New York: Macmillan. ISBN 0028970055. 
  20. ^Arons, A. (1984). "Students' patterns of thinking and reasoning". Physics Teacher. 22 (1): 21–26. doi:10.1119/1.2341444.  pp. 89–93 doi:10.1119/1.2341474; 576–581.
  21. ^National Curriculum Board (2009). "Shape of the Australian Curriculum: Science"(PDF). ACARA. 
  22. ^Hassan, Ghali (2011). "Students' views of science: A comparison between tertiary and secondary school students". Science Educator. 
  23. ^ abPrice, Ronald F. "Science Curriculum- A Global Perspective: China". 
  24. ^Kim Catcheside (15 February 2008). "'Poor lacking' choice of sciences". BBC News website. British Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved 22 February 2008. 
  25. ^Welcome to Twenty First Century Science
  26. ^"Maintaining curiosity: a survey into science education in schools". Ofsted. 21 November 2013. Retrieved 25 November 2013. 
  27. ^Holman, John (22 November 2013). "We cannot afford to get science education wrong". The Conversation. Retrieved 25 November 2013. 
  28. ^ abGlavin, Chris (2014-02-06). "United States | K12 Academics". www.k12academics.com. Retrieved 2016-05-17. 
  29. ^National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences (December 1995). "National Science Education Standards". Science Teaching Standards. National Academy Press. 
  30. ^Mullis, I.V.S.; Martin, M.O.; Gonzalez, E.J.; Chrostowski, S.J. (2004). TIMSS 2003 International Mathematics Report: Findings from IEA's Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study at the Fourth and Eighth Grades. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center. ISBN 1-8899-3834-3. 
  31. ^Rutherford, F.J. (1997). "Sputnik and Science Education". Reflecting on Sputnik: Linking the Past, Present, and Future of Educational Reform. National Academy of Sciences. 
  32. ^"Citing "Critical Situation" in Science and Math, Business Groups Urge Approval of New National Agenda for Innovation" (Press release). Business Roundtable. 27 July 2005. Archived from the original on 2007-12-08. 
    Borland, J. (2 May 2005). "Gates: Get U.S. schools in order". CNET News. 
  33. ^"Tapping America's Potential". 
  34. ^[1]Archived 14 June 2006 at the Wayback Machine.
  35. ^Sreyashi Jhumki Basu
  36. ^"National Research Leader in College and Workforce Readiness"(PDF). ACT. 2009. Retrieved 2017-05-19. 
  37. ^A Framework For K-12 Science Education
  38. ^A Framework For K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas
  39. ^Gillis, Justin (9 April 2013). "New Guidelines Call for Broad Changes in Science Education". New York Times. Retrieved 22 April 2013. 
  40. ^"Next Generation Science Standards". Retrieved 23 April 2013. 
  41. ^"NSTA Position Statement: Informal Science Education". National Science Teachers Association. Retrieved 28 October 2011. 
  42. ^National Science Foundation funding for informal science education
  43. ^"Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE)". 
  44. ^"Association of Science-Technology Centers". 
  45. ^"NASA and Afterschool Programs: Connecting to the Future". NASA. 3 April 2006. Retrieved 28 October 2011. 
  46. ^Othman, Frederick C. (7 October 1947). "Thing-of-the-Month Club will provide remarkable objects". San Jose Evening News. Retrieved 1 November 2013. 
  47. ^Fenichel, M.; Schweingruber, H.A.; National Research Council (2010). Surrounded by Science in Informal Environments. Washington DC: The National Academies Press. ISBN 978-0-309-13674-7. 
  48. ^Committee on Learning Science in Informal Environments, National Research Council (2009). Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits. Washington DC: The National Academies Press. ISBN 978-0-309-11955-9. 

Further reading[edit]

Children mix different chemicals in test tubes as part of a science education program.
Young students use a microscope for the first time, as they examine bacteria a "Discovery Day" organized by Big Brother Mouse, a literacy and education project in Laos.
Categories: 1

0 Replies to “Science And Education Essay Topics”

Leave a comment

L'indirizzo email non verrà pubblicato. I campi obbligatori sono contrassegnati *