ED478718 2002-11-00 Open Questions in

Science Education. ERIC Digest.

ERIC Development Team

www.eric.ed.gov

Table of Contents

If you're viewing this document online, you can click any of the topics below to link directly to that section.

Open Questions in Science Education. ERIC Digest........................ 1

WHAT WE KNOW.............................................................. 2

WHAT WE DO NOT KNOW.................................................. 3

CHARACTERISTICS OF NEEDED RESEARCH......................... 5

REFERENCES.................................................................. 6

ERIC Identifier: ED478718

Publication Date: 2002-11-00

Author: Anderson, Ronald D. - Helms, Jenifer V.

Source: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science Mathematics and Environmental Education

Columbus OH.

Open Questions in Science Education. ERIC

Digest.

THIS DIGEST WAS CREATED BY ERIC, THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES

INFORMATION CENTER. FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT ERIC, CONTACT

ACCESS ERIC 1-800-LET-ERIC

The "No Child Left Behind Act" signed into law on January 8, 2002 places strong

emphasis on state accountability for educational results and use of teaching methods

that have been shown to work [see http://nclb.gov/next/overview/]. For science

educators, these expectations underscore the need to fully implement the National

Science Education Standards (National Research Council (NRC), 1996) by attending to

ED478718 2002-11-00 Open Questions in Science Education. ERIC Digest. Page 1 of 7
the multifaceted conditions in schools in a holistic and systemic manner. The challenge

for the research community is to identify the most critical aspects of the needed

research, conduct the research, and provide the educational community with the

research-based information needed to move forward with science education reform.

There are significant gaps in our knowledge of the science education reform process,

and the existing body of research highlights specific areas where additional

understanding is of central importance to successful reform.

WHAT WE KNOW

A review of extant research (Anderson & Helms, 2001) provides the basis for the

following generalizations about efforts to promote broad reform congruent with the

vision of the "National Science Education Standards" (NRC, 1996):

* The dramatic changes called for in the Standards are very difficult to put into full

practice and where attempted generally fall short of the mark.

* The difficulties of making the desired changes are highlighted by the many dilemmas

teachers face in the process. Some of the dilemmas teachers experience (Anderson,

1995, 1996) relate to time constraints, tensions between the ideal and classroom

realities, changing roles for students and teachers, overcoming traditional views of

preparing students for the next level of schooling, and issues related to equity, such as

tracking and ability grouping.

* Fundamental reform requires significant changes in teachers' values and beliefs about

science education practices. Though the relationship between teachers' beliefs about

the nature of science and their views of schools and pedagogy is unclear, teachers'

views of students in terms of ability, gender, and ethnic identity do seem related to their

pedagogical decision making (Bianchini, Cavazos, & Helms, 1999).

* Departments within schools are the most important setting for change, although most

research addresses whole school change.

* Substantial teacher collaboration in the work context--not just in inservice

www.eric.ed.gov ERIC Custom Transformations Team

Page 2 of 7 ED478718 2002-11-00 Open Questions in Science Education. ERIC Digest.
education--can be a powerful changing influence on teachers' values and beliefs. A

significant barrier to substantive change comes from a lack of attention to the ways in

which teachers come to hold certain beliefs, values, and assumptions with respect to

students' roles, pedagogy, and the science curriculum.

* Parents often resist reforms and they have a strong influence on science education

reform efforts; without local parental support of the reform ideas and practices, their

implementation fallsshort.

* The recommended reforms demand new student roles and different student work. It is

the "bottom line" of science education reform, and it is the area in which almost all

reforms fall short, even when teachers have made substantial changes in their own

roles and practice.

WHAT WE DO NOT KNOW

Following are topics important both to practitioners and policy makers, but we do not

have a good understanding of these matters. Thorough investigations are needed.

* The most productive roles for students when addressing science content in ordinary

classroom settings are not known in any practical detail.

The modes of learning called for in the Standards imply markedly different roles for

students in terms of designing laboratory investigations, processing information, and

engaging in such mental processes as interpreting, explaining, and hypothesizing.

Given the knowledge we have, it is clear that these roles cannot be studied very

effectively in isolation because their implementation interacts so deeply with changes in

teachers' roles and various teacher values and beliefs.

* In addition to student roles, the nature of the desired student work and the means of

engaging students in it within ordinary classroom contexts, are not known in any

practical detail.

ERIC Resource Center www.eric.ed.gov

ED478718 2002-11-00 Open Questions in Science Education. ERIC Digest. Page 3 of 7
The new student roles imply that students will direct much of their own learning, that

learning tasks will vary among students, and that these tasks will emphasize reasoning,

reading and writing for meaning, solving problems, building from existing cognitive

structures, and explaining complex problems. The range and nature of these tasks in

various specific science contexts are not well understood; in fact, there is a dearth of

studies on desired student work.

* How teachers can best be engaged (over a period of years) in reassessing their

personal values and beliefs and taking major personal responsibility for acquiring

needed new professional competencies is not well understood.

The research tells us that teacher collaboration is powerful, but it has not been studied

as a specific means of addressing these particular aspects of science education reform.

To be fully understood, this situation must be studied from multiple perspectives, in

particular from psychological and socio-cultural perspectives.

* It is not clear how to involve parents most effectively in the science education reform

process so that they are educated about the issues involved and can influence their

children's education most positively.

It is clear that parents can have a strong influence on efforts to change science

education practice, and research indicates that teachers provide a key interface

between parents and schools. There is, however, an insufficient research base for

deciding the best course of action for schools to take to inform parents and productively

engage them in the reform process.

* How to address the increasingly acute equity and diversity issues in a climate of

science education reform is not well understood.

"Research efforts," Lee (2000) claims, "generally involve identifying educational

problems or describing instructional practices rather than implementing intervention

strategies to promote teacher effectiveness or student achievement. Research is still at

www.eric.ed.gov ERIC Custom Transformations Team

Page 4 of 7 ED478718 2002-11-00 Open Questions in Science Education. ERIC Digest.
the stage of conceptualizing issues that need empirical testing." A recent forum on

"Diversity and Equity Issues in Mathematics and Science Education-What do We

Know? What Do We Need to Know?" (Britton, Raizen, Kaser, & Porter, 2000) offers

specific recommendations regarding the research needed in this important area.

CHARACTERISTICS OF NEEDED RESEARCH

The multidimensional challenges listed above call for a variety of holistic and systemic

approaches to research. Scholarship must be "holistic" in the sense of giving

simultaneous attention to all of the many elements and perspectives that are part of the

picture. They must be "systemic" in that attention is given to the many "interactions"

among the various elements and the influences they have on each other.

Multiple Perspectives

Broad, comprehensive studies from a multiplicity of perspectives--psychological,

sociological, cultural, organizational, political, economic, philosophical, and subject

matter--are needed. Then, scholarly syntheses of studies conducted from various

perspectives will need to follow. Our poor understanding of "science for all" underscores

our need to study science classrooms as communities of practice, and teachers as

communities of professionals.

Conduct Research in the "Real World"

Studies are needed in ordinary school contexts, with ordinary levels of resources, and

ordinary outside help.

Study Interventions

Researchers need to study a variety of specific interventions having certain intended

outcomes. Interventions chosen and initiated by teachers must be central, and they

should include those influencing parents, teachers, and students.

Not Based on Assumptions that Change Comes from the Top Down

The inadequacies of interventions that are solely top-down are well established in the

research literature (Sarason, 1996).

ERIC Resource Center www.eric.ed.gov

ED478718 2002-11-00 Open Questions in Science Education. ERIC Digest. Page 5 of 7
Interpretive Research

The multiplicity of interacting variables in the matters under study is such that controlled

experiments with full prior delineation of all variables are largely impossible. The goal is

to make interpretations of this complex situation that will make it possible to assist

practitioners in changing practice and aid policy makers in setting better policy. This

need places a premium on research that attends to the many relevant variables, their

interactions, and various interpretations of the complex situations.

Focus on Students Roles and Student Work

The roles played by students and the nature of the work they do constitute the "bottom

line" of educational reform, yet the specifics of desired roles and the most beneficial

student work are not clear. These matters must be at the center of research in this area.

Give Major Attention to Teacher Learning

Past research points to teacher learning as being central to reform, and that the most

important dimension of learning has to do with values and beliefs. What is not fully

understood are the nature of needed changes and the circumstances under which

teachers personally can best reassess relevant values and beliefs.

REFERENCES

Anderson, R. D. (1995). Curriculum reform: Dilemmas and promise. "Phi Delta Kappan",

77, 33-36.

Anderson, R. D. (1996). "Study of curriculum reform" (Volume I of the final report of

research conducted under contract number RR91182001 with OERI, U. S. Department

of Education). Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office (ISBN

0-16-048865-6).

Anderson, R. D., & Helms, J. V. (2001, January). The ideal of standards and the reality

of schools: Needed research. "Journal of Research in Science Teaching", 38 (1), 3-16.

[EJ 622 074]

Bianchini, J. A., Cavazos, L. M., & Helms, J. V. (1999). "From professional lives to

inclusive practice: Science educators' views of gender, ethnicity, and science". Paper

presented at the American Educational Research Association conference in Montreal,

www.eric.ed.gov ERIC Custom Transformations Team

Page 6 of 7 ED478718 2002-11-00 Open Questions in Science Education. ERIC Digest.
Canada.

Britton, E., Raizen, S., Kaser, J., & Porter, A. (2000). "Beyond description of the

problems: Directions for research on diversity and equity issues in K-12 mathematics

and science education". Available online at:

http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/nise/News_Activities/Forums/

5th_Annual_Forum_Report/Beyond_Descriptions_of_the_Problems_Front.ht m.

Lee, O. 2000. "Equity for Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Students in Science

Education: Recommendations for a Research Agenda." Paper presented at the National

Institute for Science Education Forum, Detroit, May 2000.

National Research Council. (1996). "National Science Education Standards".

Washington, DC:

Sarasan, S. B. (1996). "Revisiting 'The culture of the school and the problem of

change'". New York: Teachers College Press.

-----

This digest was funded by the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S.

Department of Education, under contract no. ED-99-CO-0024. Opinions expressed in

this digest do not necessarily reflect the positions or policies of OERI or the U.S.

Department of Education.

Title: Open Questions in Science Education. ERIC Digest.

Document Type: Information Analyses---ERIC Information Analysis Products (IAPs)

(071); Information Analyses---ERIC Digests (Selected) in Full Text (073);

Available From: ERIC/CSMEE, 1929 Kenny Road, Columbus, OH 43210-1080. Tel:

800-276-0462 (Toll Free); Fax: 614-292-0263; e-mail: ericse@osu.edu; Web site:

www.ericse.org.

Descriptors: Educational Change, Educational Research, Elementary Secondary

Education, Science Education, Standards

Identifiers: ERIC Digests, National Science Education Standards

###

[Return to ERIC Digest Search Page]

ERIC Resource Center www.eric.ed.gov

ED478718 2002-11-00 Open Questions in Science Education. ERIC Digest. Page 7 of 7