Inquiry-based Science,

Inquiry-based Science, Scientific Literacy,

the importance for Citizenship

Svein Sjøberg

School science in Norway, a comparative glimpse

2

Looking back at School science – at the end of obligatory school

 Interesting, but …

 Less interesting than other subjects

 Has not opened eyes for jobs

 Has not increased appreciation for nature

 Has not taught me how to take care of my health

 Has not increased my curiosity

 Has not shown the importance of S&T for our way of living

School science is interesting

Norway: Not bad at all!

I like school science better than most other subjects

Norway: A gendered challenge!

I would like to have as much science as

possible at school

In wealthy countries, young people are not

enthusiastic about school science -- in particular not the girls

School science has opened my eyes to new and exciting jobs

School science has shown me the importance of science for our way of living.

In SUM:

We can do better!

Is inquiry-based science

the answer?

The key important concepts

 Inquiry-based science

 Scientific literacy

 Citizenship

 Problematic and elusive in English

 And even more so in translation to Norwegian

 Added in the break: Even more problematic:

 Scientific literacy is not the same as

 Science AND Literacy (reading,

writing, talking skills) ₁₀

”Inquiry-based science”:

a long tradition

 Learning by doing (Dewey 1930s)

 Discovery-learning of the 1960s

 Active learning, open learning

 Problem-based learning (PBL)

 Hand-on-science

 Nature of science (NOS)

 Constructivism

 Intellectual roots:

Dewey, Schwab, Bruner, Piaget, Vygotsky, Freire, Wagenschein

11

Inquiry-based science

 Focus on the methods and processes of science (not just contents)

 Science as a process, not just a product

 Long heritage:

e.g. SAPA (1960’s), SCIS (1960-70’s)

 Norwegian curriculum: LK06: In the general part as well as in the science curriculum (”Forskerspiren”)

12

Physics for the Inquiring Mind:

The Methods, Nature, and Philosophy of Physical Science 1960

The first post-Sputnik wave of science

curricula:

PSSC (USA) and Nuffield science projects (UK)

Norwegian science curriculum:

Forskerpiren = Budding scientist

Naturfag som et produkt og som en prosess Prosessene omfatter:

•hypotesedanning (formulation of hypothesis)

•eksperimentering (experimenation)

•systematiske observasjoner (observations)

•åpenhet (openness)

•diskusjoner (discussions)

•kritisk vurdering (critical evaluation)

•argumentasjon (argumentation)

•begrunnelser for konklusjoner (reasons..)

•formidling (communication) ¹⁴

Slide 15

”The ethos of science”:

Ideals and norms (for academic science)

CUDOS (Robert Merton, 1942):

Communalism, (Vitenskapen skal være felles, den skal være fri, publisert og tilgjengelig)

Universalism (Vitenskapen skal være universell, global uavhengig av tid, sted, rase, religion)

Disinterestedness, (Vitenskapen skal være upartisk,

uavhengighet, ikke involvert, uten egne interesser i saken eller 'sannheten’)

Originality (Vitenskapen skal være original, den skal være ny, ideene skal bringe noe nytt)

Scepticism (Vitenskapen skal ikke anerkjenne autoritet, det er rom for systematisk skepsis og tvil)

Scientific literacy

Clarification, added in the break…:

 Scientific literacy is not the same as

 Science AND Literacy (reading, writing, talking skills, or the role of text in science)

 “Scientific literacy” is used as a concept on its own (PISA), like also

 Mathematical literacy (PISA)

 Reading literacy (PISA)

 Cultural literacy

 Etc…

 Be aware of possible misunderstanding based on confusion of terms

“Scientific literacy”:

A slogan since the 1950-s

 Miller, J. D. (1983). Scientific literacy: A conceptual and empirical review. Daedalus

 Champagne, A.B., & Lovitts, B.E. (1989).

Scientific literacy: A concept in search of definition. Washington, DC: AAAS.

 Shamos, M. H. (1995). The myth of scientific literacy.

 “Scientific literacy is an ill-defined and diffuse concept” (Laugksch, 2000).

 Roth, W.-M., & Barton, A.C. (2004). Rethinking scientific literacy. Routledge Falmer.

17

What is ”Scientific literacy” in Norwegian?

 PISA2000: ”science literacy” translated to

”naturfaglig allmenndannelse” (Lie mfl.

2001).

 PISA2003 "Norske elevers prestasjoner i naturfag…" (Kjærnsli mfl. 2004)

 PISA2006: Dels kompetanse i naturfag, dels bare naturfag

 ”Begrepet scientific literacy er det ikke lett å finne en dekkende norsk oversettelse for. ….Et alternativ ville være å bruke betegnelsen

naturfaglig allmenndannelse på dette, men siden dette ikke helt er dekkende, vil vi i denne boka nøye oss med å referere til fagområdet som naturfag.” (Kjærnsli mfl. 2007)

18

Norwegian core curriculum (generell del av KL06)

19

Scientific methodology

(Norwegian Core curriculum)

 Scientific methodology consists of procedures designed to avoid being

deceived - either by oneself or by others.

 Skill in scientific thinking and working methods demands the training of three faculties:

1. The ability to wonder and to pose new questions;

2. The ability to invent possible explanations for phenomena one has observed;

3. The ability to test one’s explanations by examination of sources, experimentation,

or observation. (Norwegian Core curriculum) ₂₀

”Science education for citizenship”

Norway 1996-2001

 Funded by the Research Council of Norway

 3 PhDs:

 Erik Knain (1999) (in Norwegian) The silent voice of science education.

 Stein Dankert Kolstø (2001) Science Education for Citizenship. Thoughtful

Decision- making about Science- Related Social Issues.

 Marianne Ødegård (2001) The Drama of Science Education.

”Citizenship” – not just literacies, skills and competencies

 Norwegian: (demokratisk) medborgerskap

 Not just a cognitive dimension, but also

 A value dimension: rights and duties,

commitments and actions, human values, acting for the wellbeing of others

 Ref Howard Gardner: Doing good!

22

Howard Gardner, not only describing the different dimensions of intelligence, but also normative on how one should put these to work as citizens.

(responsibility, moral dilemmas, ideals, values)

Not only PISA; TIMSS and PIRLS:

Also comparative studies on Citizenship and Education

24

Norway comes out as one of the ”winners”

(But without much public attention…)

”Den norske gjennomsnittseleven er en elev…

 med gode kunnskaper og ferdigheter, en elev

som identifiserer seg med demokratiske normer, verdier og oppfatninger ... en forsvarer av en

omfattende velferdsstat.

 Han og hun, særlig hun, er sterkt

likestillingsorientert og støttende overfor innvandreres rettigheter i samfunnslivet.

 Eleven tenker oftest prinsipielt om politiske spørsmål.

 I skolen opplever eleven et klasseromsklima som er åpent for uenighet og diskusjon.

 Eleven synes i tillegg at samarbeid er svært viktig og at medbestemmelse er betydningsfullt

(Mikkelsen et al. 2002, s. 242).

Democratic citizenship is a key dimension in Ny formålsparagraf,

(the purpose and mandate of Norwegian schools)

 Opplæringa …skal opne dører mot verda og framtida og gi elevane historisk og kulturell innsikt.

 Ho skal byggje på respekt for menneskeverdet, på åndsfridom, nestekjærleik, likeverd og solidaritet

 Opplæringa skal fremje demokrati, likestilling og vitskapleg tenkjemåte.

 Dei skal få utfalde skaparglede, engasjement og utforskartrong.

 Elevane skal lære å tenkje kritisk, handle etisk og ta økologisk ansvar.

 Dei skal ha medansvar og høve til medverknad.

 Skolen …skal møte elevane med tillit og krav, og gi dei utfordringar som fremjar danning og lærelyst.

 Alle former for diskriminering skal

motarbeidast. Skolen skal samarbeide med heimen.

Inquiry-based teaching:

Debate, criticism, second thought…

(Example from Educational Psychologist:

 After a half century …. there appears no body of research supporting the technique.

 … evidence … almost uniformly supports direct, strong

instructional guidance rather constructivist-based minimal guidance….

 Not only is unguided instruction normally less effective;

there is also evidence that it may have negative results when student acquire misconceptions or incomplete or disorganized knowledge

 Kirschner et al (2006) An analysis of the failure of constructivist,

discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching.

Educational Psychologist 41 (2) 75-86

27

Intriguing findings from

international tests (PISA, TIMSS)

 Negative correlations between test scores and inquiry-oriented teaching methods

 Negative correlations between test scores and attitudes.

 High scores at 15, but hating the subject – and avoiding it later?

 Are we testing what we value and care about?

 Can we expect “positive results” for inquiry-based science teaching if the standard testing is the criterion for

success? ²⁸

PISA-score and experimental work in science: negative correlation?

29

Never Always

PISA science score vs. inquiry-based methods (”testing and exploring own ideas”):

negative correlation?

30

Always Never

Towards conclusions?

 Scientific literacy: still a useful term and ideal

 But be aware of its slogan-like nature…

 Inquiry-based science is ”real science”, and is as important as ever

 But if we use standard tests of science achievement as

“measures of success”, we may become very disappointed!

Include measures of values, interest, attitudes, motivation and the subject choices students make.

 Good Citizenship requires and assumes

scientific as well as other forms of literacies

 Legitimized by appeal to the fundamental and “official”

values in Norwegian schools as in ”Formålsparagrafen”

(Moral, ethical, solidarity, care for nature, responsibility etc.)

 With Marianne, these concerns will be in

good hands! ³¹

And finally:

A test of science inquiry orientation

32

Science Education NOW:

A renewed

Pedagogy for the Future of Europe

(The Rocard Report)

European Commission 2007

Stressing

”Inquiry-based science”

http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/report-rocard-on-science-education_en.pdf