This paper allows me the opportunity to explore an issue that has been on my mind for some time: establishing a personal philosophy of science education. I feel it would be foolish to enter the profession without such a philosophy, and yet it appears that many educational students do not formulate one until they begin teaching -- if even then. While I believe we should be flexible enough to modify our philosophy as we gain more experience and insight, a clear system of educational strategies and beliefs is imperative to define our direction.
I will first take a look at what I consider to be the primary challenges that face science educators today. I will then organize the many questions dealt with in a scientific educational philosophy into three domains. Finally, I will offer examples of how, in my view, science teaching can be improved. It should be noted that, in many ways, what I say about science education may be applied to education in general. We are in an age of an information explosion. In my field of biology, for instance, it is impossible to keep up with even the daily discoveries. I receive several science periodicals every week, and while I pick a few items to actually read through, time dictates I take most of the information in summary. This is the minimal reading required for anyone to be even remotely competent in understanding the field. The field is changing so fast, in fact, that much of the material taught to Jr. High or High School students, as well as the emphasis on what is important to learn, will be changed or modified significantly, even by the time they graduate. 25 years ago my high school biology class consisted mostly of taxonomic information, organismly centered. We were taught there were two kingdoms, plant and animal (it was not stressed that such categorical decisions are arbitrary). DNA was an exotic word. Three years ago I was surprised to learn that all organisms were divided into five kingdoms, and that organismal biology was passé -- molecular biology was the only topic worth studying. Today, thanks to recent DNA/DNA hybridization techniques it is now recognized that three kingdoms make more sense (two of them are bacterial!), and there are murmurings that the heavy emphasis on biochemistry will not last forever -- molecular ecology is an issue that must be explored and that will eventually bring us back to an organismally-based view of life. Biochemists will be left to grind away at their glorified lab-tech jobs.
This is all to illustrate the rapid changes that are occurring in the sciences, and the amount of material one has to absorb to keep up with it all. The teacher, then, feels obligated to present an accurate picture to the student as to just what is worth knowing. Indeed, there are significant issues that affect the welfare of all of us. Even for those students who are not interested in science-based careers, it is important for them to understand the significance of ozone depletion, global warming, acid-rain, etc., and to do this the teacher must be informed almost up to the minute. It was just within the last month, for instance, that it was discovered that we are due for twice the usual amount of UV radiation at our latitude this spring, and yet a computer cleaner product loaded with CFC's is being sold at this moment in a local store with a label that proclaims it as "environmentally safe."
Teachers, then, are looking for more efficient ways at supplying information to the students. But there is another problem that has to do with a phenomenon of our time. Along with information, this also seems to be the age of entertainment. Today's students are used to having all the creative work done for them in all parts or their life, and, as a result disdain having to become part of the process. Therefore, while the educator has to grapple with the selective process of what information should be given the student, the student in turn often has no interest in the material if it has no glamour, and have great difficulty employing skills to successfully exploit information resources. One result of this problem is that students are unable to distinguish the scientific process from pseudo science. I just returned from the grocery store where I love standing in the express line so that I can be entertained by the front page news of one of the displayed tabloids. "Dolphin found with human arms," it says, "Scientists say it loves humans and can use sign language."
Thus, used to being on the pay-off end of the entertainment game, students complain when they are asked to do anything more than consume the information and spit it back via packaged instructions as to where and how to spit it. Concepts are okay as long as they know what's going to be on the test so they can ignore anything else before the test and forget everything else after. Labs are fine as long as they are predictable and the students are told exactly what to do. Ideas are acceptable as long as it is the teacher who is responsible for dealing with their relevancy. It is thus in three areas that a viable science educational philosophy must address: conceptual, methodological, and philosophical.
Textbooks reflect this problem. They embody conceptual knowledge as encyclopedias of facts. The methodology of science is dealt with in cookbook labs and worksheets and the philosophy of science is spare and handled timidly at best, with such "controversial" issues as evolutionary theory and the ethical issues of animal experimentation and genetic research only pointed to at arm's length. Thus what appears to be several hundred pages of substance is really no substance at all. It is no wonder that in an age of daily breakthroughs the average student of science can barely muster a yawn.
Teachers are in an uncomfortable position. They are led to worry if they are not presenting the daily quota of information the curriculum guidelines are calling for. In addition, they feel inadequate if they don't present the material in an interesting fashion, like entertainment czars. In contrast, I propose that successful science education become more student-centered, in that students are led to view scientific processes as skills they need and can use to deal with relevant problems, and that they seek out the information resources they need and learn how to use them. On page 7 I have constructed a table listing questions I believe the students and teachers should be addressing. These are grouped into the three domains I have previously mentioned. The overall result is to place the student into the center or his or her learning experience so that the subject at any particular moment is seen as highly relevant to the student, and the student becomes responsible for utilizing the appropriate information resources to solve a problem. The teacher leads the students to ask the kinds of questions listed in the first column, while providing direction of the type suggested in the second column.
In order to deal with this successfully the classroom has to be set up in a radically different manner than the traditional one. Let us see how this translates into actual practice.
Instruction Usually the students are the recipients of what the teacher has to
give, placing the teacher in the position of Master of Ceremonies, and success is gauged
by level of interest on the student's part. Here the students are at the center of the
classroom; whereas in the past the teacher has usually been the center of activity, here
the student takes on this role, instead. Subject matter becomes personal, addressing
problems students face and are led to recognize they will face in the future. The teacher
plays the classic role of the scientist as problem-solver but recruits help from the
students as partners. Instruction is extended beyond the classroom and school setting to
problems encountered in everyday living. Students are led to understand they control the
future -- that it is their own inquiry and discovery process that will provide the
solutions of the future. How this comes about can be illustrated by many historical
examples of science inquiry. Thus, the teacher can be seen as a resource and
facilitator/guide.
Curriculum Curriculum is problem-centered. Anthropocentric relevancy is the key
theme: It is taught there are societal issues around which the study of science and its
interaction with technology and society are built. To be sure, all life on this planet is
affected by our actions -- mostly adversely -- but it is our responsibility alone to
address these problems. Besides stressing our personal responsibility and the urgency of
the situation to all life, science is presented in a historical context with its attendant
cultural and social connotations; the role of ethnic minorities and women should be
included.
Writing is an important element in the process. Students are led to understand the importance of communicating their discoveries with others since the effort to preserve the planet and our species must be a collaborative one to be successful. It is effective to have students write lab reports after designing and conducting their own experiments, and students are given the opportunity to present their research to their peers, thereby further demonstrating the importance of communication skills. Textbooks are used for what they are: reference resources. However, many additional resources are pointed out and utilized: the natural environment, results from past experiments (both published, as well as the students' own), human experts (including the teacher), and the immense wealth of data available from many sources, including historical data. It is recognized, then, that effective research may also include data-based analysis rather than being restricted to lab experiments.
Evaluation It should be stressed often that science is a process and, therefore,
does not "solve" questions asked with specific definite conclusions; often more
questions are raised than answered, and this often is a sign of successful research and
inquiry. Emphasis is thus placed not so much on right and wrong answers but on
productivity of investigation.
Hard information is used as a tool for further self-initiated inquiry, not just a compendium of facts useful only for administration of tests for teachers to evaluate students' understanding. What the student creates with this information is of key importance.
Ultimately, then, evaluation is based on the evolution of philosophical understanding and decision-making on the part of the student. This translates into the student's attitude as well as creative skills. Tests employ the use of concepts only as tools to deal with personal, local and global issues. In other words, a good portion of tests may simply give a discrete amount of information and then ask the students questions that require interpretation and analysis of that information.
Environment/Behavior The teacher presents a model of enthusiasm for the subject and
scientific process, as well as the type of discipline required to carry through that
process. Motivation on the part of the student is of key importance here. It is not the
job of the teacher to rally the students, however, but rather to demonstrate his or her
own enthusiasm, while at the same time it is made clear why the material is relevant and
important to our lives. A lot of activity in the classroom should not be seen as a
problem, but rather as an indication of work in progress unless certain students are being
hampered by others. The number one rule should be that students have the right to pursue
their research without obstruction from others.
What is expected of the students should be clearly spelled out from the beginning. For instance, the teacher should make clear that, while noise and activity are accepted during periods of inquiry, particularly if it is a cooperative effort, disruption of students' rights to pursue their research or learning experience will not be tolerated. On this last point, frequent group meetings should be held to allow students to evaluate how things are going, and to air grievances against those that are causing problems, allowing everyone to see the relatedness of their behavior to the process of their own education. The students are thus given a greater role in determining their own disciplinary philosophy as a group, just as they are encouraged to collaborate with each other for their inquiry processes.
The classroom itself should be physically organized to reinforce the inquiry process, as well as to de-emphasize the student-as-recipient situation. This can be handled in many ways, but probably excludes seats positioned in rows oriented toward the lecture area. It would be best to create an atmosphere of resource-centers around the room (computer and/or data-based area, lab material area, group discussion centers, blackboard as teacher-resource center, resource files and library section, etc.). This emphasizes the fact that the responsibility for learning is placed into the hands of the students.
Collectively, then, these aspects of the science education experience should address the philosophical, methodological and conceptual questions as follows: What is the problem, what can we do, and what are our resources? All that is then needed is the personal philosophy/touch of the teacher. I believe my own teaching style, for instance, would emphasize the urgency of our present situation. We as humans have been largely responsible for creating many of the critical situations for all life on this planet. I believe we are capable of instituting solutions, but it will require a deliberate approach. This approach, if learned, should aid the students to at least make intelligent decisions in their future, no matter what future they pursue.
S. Brown