Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Email
Answers.com

Science education

 
US History Encyclopedia: Science Education

Although advanced science education did not begin to thrive in the United States until the last third of the nineteenth century, scientific learning has long been a part of American intellectual and cultural life. In colonial America, mathematics and natural philosophy formed a standard part of a college education. As a Harvard student in the 1750s, John Adams studied both subjects, as did Thomas Jefferson and James Madison at William and Mary and the College of New Jersey (later Princeton), respectively. Natural history entered the university curriculum toward the end of the eighteenth century, and in 1802, the establishment of the United States Military Academy at West Point provided a center for engineering education to meet the new nation's military engineering needs.

Social settings outside the colleges and universities also provided important forums for learning and discussing the truths of the natural world. In Europe, the rise of print culture and an active literary public sphere, and the creation of new institutions such as London's Royal Society, with its gentlemanly forms of discourse, or the Parisian salon where men and women pursued science as a form of entertainment, all played a central role in disseminating the natural philosophy of the Enlightenment during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Similar developments characterized scientific learning in America during the colonial and early national periods, through learned societies such as Philadelphia's American Philosophical Society, public lecture-demonstrations by men of science, and newly established museums with natural history collections.

Nevertheless, by the middle of the nineteenth century the boosters of American science remained acutely aware that scientific learning in the United States was still distinctly second-rate. Books were scarce, and standard sources in European libraries were absent from American shelves. In universities, the prohibitively high cost of scientific apparatus meant that laboratory instruction was almost nonexistent. Natural history flourished thanks to the wealth of living organisms and fossils that required identification and classification, but American science had little to celebrate in fields such as chemistry, physics, and mathematics. Opportunities for advanced science education were few, and Europe remained the preferred option for those who wanted high-quality training.

With the nationwide trend toward professionalization in the 1840s, opportunities for higher education in science and engineering gradually increased. West Point's engineering program had declined by the 1830s, but in 1835, the Rensselaer Institute (renamed Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in 1851) helped fill the gap by awarding the nation's first civil engineering degrees. Engineering education expanded further in the 1850s and 1860s with the founding of new engineering schools such as Brooklyn Polytechnic Institute and Massachusetts Institute of Technology. By the 1870s, there were eighty-five engineering schools in the United States. Scientific schools proliferated as well. Yale founded its School of Applied Chemistry in 1847, which evolved into the Sheffield Scientific School in 1861 (the same year that Yale awarded the nation's first Ph.D.s, one in physics and two outside the sciences), and other universities followed suit. The United States could boast seventy such schools by 1873. The passage of the Morrill Act in 1862 provided an additional boost to science and engineering by providing states with land grants to endow colleges and universities "for the benefit of agriculture and the mechanic arts." More than seventy institutions were either established or assisted under the Morrill Act, including Cornell University, University of Minnesota, and University of Wisconsin.

This expansion of science and engineering education represented a change in scale, but less a change in kind. The opening of Johns Hopkins University in 1876, however, signaled the creation of a new kind of institution: the American research university, dedicated primarily to graduate education and the generation of new knowledge, particularly in the sciences. By the turn of the century, research had become a central criterion for all universities that aspired to academic excellence. In the early twentieth century, other institutions, particularly philanthropic foundations, began to combine forces with the universities to promote advanced scientific education and research. The Rockefeller Foundation, launched in 1913, played a major role in building American leadership in science. During the 1920s, for example, a generation of brilliant young American physicists studied in Europe, most with support from the Rockefeller-funded National Research Council fellowship program, and their return to American academic positions turned the United States into a major center of physics where aspiring physicists could find high-quality training. A few years later, the rise of fascism forced many of Europe's best physicists to seek refuge in the United States, and American physics reached even greater heights.

Ultimately, however, World War II and the Cold War played the most important role in transforming American science education into its currently recognizable form. Leading research universities in science and engineering fields built their reputations upon the foundations of wartime and postwar funding for research. Wartime defense spending, for example, helped transform MIT into a truly distinguished research center. MIT led universities with $117 million in defense contracts during the war, and with the rise of the Cold War and the permanent mobilization of science by the federal government, the institute continued to be a center of military-sponsored research. Stanford University also benefited immensely from the new relationship between science and the federal government. Although Stanford University held few wartime defense contracts, after the war its administrators aggressively pursued Cold War defense dollars in order to turn their university into a first-rate research institution. Within a few years Stanford rivaled MIT for preeminence in electrical engineering and other fields that commanded generous defense contracts.

Cold War funding and the massive expansion of university-based research transformed science education in a variety of ways. The physical sciences received well over 90 percent of their research funds from military sources in the 1950s and 1960s. As military needs shifted disciplinary priorities, science and engineering students gained a new sense of the kinds of research problems that earned professional acclaim. For example, the entire discipline of electrical engineering redefined itself around military problems. At MIT, a significant number of students wrote dissertations on classified projects, and even the textbooks reflected military topics. Its aeronautical engineering program turned away from questions of safety to an almost exclusive concern with high-performance aircraft. Such Cold War trends reproduced themselves, to varying degrees, at the major research universities across the country.

As a result of federal support for university research, postwar America could boast the best advanced scientific education in the world. There did not always seem to be enough students to take advantage of that education, however, and throughout the Cold War, policymakers continually worried about shortages in scientific manpower. They responded with educational initiatives designed to ensure a steady supply of scientists. In 1948 the Atomic Energy Commission established the largest program for advanced science education in the nation's history by providing generous fellowship support to hundreds of students each year for graduate and postdoctoral work in physics, mathematics, biology, and medicine. Federal educational support increased further after the Soviet launch of Sputnik prompted a nervous Congress to pass the National Defense Education Act of 1958. The act appropriated more than $370 million to promote education in science, engineering, and other areas, such as foreign language study, deemed necessary to provide expertise for waging the Cold War.

After the 1960s, government efforts increasingly focused on creating educational opportunities for women and minorities in order to augment the scientific talent pool. Government policies helped growing numbers of women and racial minorities to pursue scientific careers, but African Americans, Latinos, and Native Americans still report the persistence of systemic barriers and subtle forms of discrimination. By 1999, members of under-represented minority groups—African Americans, Latinos, and Native Americans—still earned less than 10 percent of science and engineering doctorates. In physics these minorities accounted for only 3.6 percent of doctorates, or just twenty-six physics degrees across the entire nation. Women have become increasingly visible in the life sciences, where in 1999 they earned over 40 percent of doctoral degrees, but only 23 percent of Ph.D.s in the physical sciences (and less than 13 percent in physics) went to women. In the meantime, a heavy influx of science and engineering students from abroad played a key role in providing the United States with scientific talent. By the 1990s, foreigners constituted nearly 40 percent of science and engineering doctoral students in the United States, and two-thirds accepted American employment after earning their degrees. Among Chinese and Indians, nearly 80 percent chose to remain in the United States. Immigration also contributed to the relatively large percentage of Asian Americans who have earned science and engineering doctorates, since the highly educated Asian immigrants who came to the United States in large numbers beginning in the 1960s viewed science and engineering as means of upward mobility, and they encouraged their children to follow similar career paths. In 1999, Asian Americans earned over 11 percent of science and engineering doctorates, even though their percentage of the total U.S. population stood in the low single digits.

The evolution of science education has thus moved in tandem with larger social and political currents—transformed not only by institutional change but by domestic social change, which has led radically different groups of people to pursue science and engineering degrees in twenty-first-century America.

Bibliography

Bruce, Robert V. The Launching of Modern American Science, 1846–1876. New York: Knopf, 1987.

Cohen, I. Bernard. Science and the Founding Fathers: Science in the Political Thought of Jefferson, Franklin, Adams, and Madison. New York and London: Norton, 1995.

Greene, John C. American Science in the Age of Jefferson. Ames: Iowa State University Press, 1984.

Kevles, Daniel J. The Physicists: The History of a Scientific Community in Modern America. New York: Knopf, 1978. Reprint with new preface, Cambridge, Mass., and London: Harvard University Press, 1995.

Kohler, Robert E. Partners in Science: Foundations and Natural Scientists, 1900–1945. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1991.

Leslie, Stuart W. The Cold War and American Science: The Military-Industrial-Academic Complex at MIT and Stanford. New York: Columbia University Press, 1993.

Lowen, Rebecca S. Creating the Cold War University: The Transformation of Stanford. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1997.

Search unanswered questions...
Enter a question here...
Search: All sources Community Q&A Reference topics
 
Blogs: Related blogs on: science education
Top

Wikipedia: Science education
Top

Science education is the field concerned with sharing science content and process with individuals not traditionally considered part of the scientific community. The target individuals may be children, college students, or adults within the general public. The field of science education comprises science content, 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. The traditional subjects included in the standards are physical, life, earth, and space sciences.

Contents

Historical background

Science education in secondary schools began in the UK around 1870, but it was not widespread until much later. The first step came when the British Academy for the Advancement of Science (BAAS) published a report in 1867 (Layton, 1981). 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.[1]

In the US, science education was a scatter of subjects prior to its standardization in the 1890’s (Del Giorno, 1969). 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 (NEA, 1894). In 1894, the NEA published the results of work of these conference committees (NEA, 1894).

Of particular interest here is the Committee of Ten recommendations for the science curriculum. It recommended four possible courses of study: Three of the courses of study had the following science recommendations

  • High School Science (9-12)
      Grade  9: Physical Geography (3p)
      Grade 10: Physics(3p), 
                         Botany or Zoology (3p); 
      Grade 11: Astronomy 1/2 year & Meteorology, 1/2 year (3p)
      Grade 12: Chemistry (3p)
                         Geology or physiography,  1/2 year 
                                                      &                                                    (3p)
                          Anatomy, physiology, and hygiene, 1/2 year

For the classical course of studies Greek replaced many of the sciences

      Grade  9: Physical  geography (3p)
      Grade 10: Physics (3p), 
                         
      Grade 11: 
      Grade 12: Chemistry (3p)
   

See Sheppard & Robbins (2007) For a more full discussion of the recommendations of the Committee of Ten.

The curriculum shown above has been largely replaced by the physical/earth science or biology, chemistry, and physics sequence in most high schools.

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. [2]

This committee supported the citizen science approach focused on mental training and withheld performance in science studies from consideration for college entrance (Hurd, 1991). The BAAS encouraged their longer standing model in the UK (Jenkins, 1985). The US adopted a curriculum was characterized as follows (NEA, 1894):

  • 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 committees 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 is 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.

Pedagogy

Whilst 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 the addressing misconceptions that learners may hold regarding science concepts or other content. Research shows that students will retain knowledge for a longer period of time if they are involved in more hands on activities[citation needed].

United States

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. Unfortunately, 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.

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[citation needed] rather than on direct instruction of facts and methods, remains controversial.[citation needed] Some research suggests that it is more effective as a model for teaching science. Other approaches include standards-based assessments such as Washington Assessment of Student Learning, which emphasize devising experiments at early grades at a level traditionally not covered until college (traditionally, students conducted rather than designed experiments), based on mock data with very little testing of factual knowledge.[clarification needed] Their eight categories of national science education standards reflect a new emphasis on the themes of constructivist approaches, diversity, and social justice common throughout the education reform movement. These categories are unifying concepts and processes, science as inquiry, physical science, life science, earth and space science, science and technology, science in personal and social perspectives, and history and nature of science.[3][dead link]

Concern about science education and science standards has often been driven by worries that American students lag behind their peers in international rankings.[4] One notable example was the wave of education reforms implemented after the Soviet Union launched its Sputnik satellite in 1957.[5] The first and most prominent of these reforms was lead by the Physical Sciences 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.[6] 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.[7]

Physics education

Physics is taught in high schools, colleges, and graduate schools. Physics First is a popular movement in American high schools. In schools with this curriculum 9th grade students take a course with introductory physics education. This is meant 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 electives in American high schools.

Physics education in the high schools has suffered the last twenty years because of the fact that many states now only require 3 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 [8]. This is a potential opportunity to forge the connection between physics and social benfit.

Informal science education

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[9] 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[10]. The Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE)[11] 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).[12] 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, The Magic School Bus, Dragonfly TV and Dora the Explorer. Examples of community-based programs are 4-H Youth Development programs, Hands On Science Outreach, NASA and Afterschool Programs[13] and Girls at the Center.

United Kingdom

In England and Wales schools science is generally taught as a single subject science until age 14-16 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.[14] In Scotland the subjects split into chemistry, physics and biology at the age of 13-15 for Standard Grades in these subjects.

In September 2006 a new Science programme of study known as 21st Century Science was introduced as a GCSE option in UK schools, designed to "give all 14 to 16 year olds a worthwhile and inspiring experience of science"[15].

Research in Science Education

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 such as cognitive psychology and anthropology. Science education research aims to define or characterize what constitutes learning in science and how it is brought about.

In John D. Bransford, et al, the fruit of massive research into student thinking is presented 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 abandon 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.
Factual Knowledge 
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."[10]
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.

See also

References

  1. ^ Bibby, Cyril 1959. T.H. Huxley: scientist, humanist and educator. Watts, London.
  2. ^ www.nd.edu/rbarger/www7/neacom10.html
  3. ^ www.nap.edu/readingroo/books/nses/6a.html
  4. ^ [1]
  5. ^ [2]
  6. ^ [3][4]
  7. ^ [5]
  8. ^ Joshua M. Pearce, "Physics Using Appropriate Technology Projects", The Physics Teacher, 45, pp. 164-167, 2007. pdf
  9. ^ [6]
  10. ^ National Science Foundation funding for informal science education
  11. ^ [7]
  12. ^ [8]
  13. ^ [9]
  14. ^ Kim Catcheside (2008). "'Poor lacking' choice of sciences". BBC News website. British Broadcasting Corporation. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7245529.stm. Retrieved 2008-02-22. 
  15. ^ Welcome to Twenty First Century Science
  • Layton, D. (1981). The schooling of science in England, 1854-1939. In R. MacLeod & P.Collins (Eds.), The parliament of science (pp.188–210). Northwood, England: Science Reviews.
  • Del Giorno, B.J. (1969). The impact of changing scientific knowledge on science education in th United States since 1850. Science Education, 53, 191-195.
  • Hurd, P.D. (1991). Closing the educational gaps between science, technology, and society. Theory into Practice, 30, 251-259.
  • Teaching Inquiry Science Downloadable book about teaching science through inquiry.
  • Jenkins, E. (1985). History of science education. In T. Husen & T.N. Postlethwaite (Eds.) International encyclopedia of education (pp. 4453–4456). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
  • National 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
  • Sheppard, K. & Robbins D. M. (2007). High School Biology Today: What the Committee of Ten Actually Said. CBE-Life Sciences Education. 6 (3) 198-202.
  • Aikenhead, G.S. (1994). What is STS teaching? In J. Solomon & G. Aikenhead (Eds.), STS education: International perspectives on reform (pp.74–59). New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Dumitru, P. & Joyce, A. (2007) Public-private partnerships for maths, science and technology education. Proceedings of Discovery Days conference.
  • European Schoolnet (2007) National and European Initiatives to promote science education in Europe. Insight portal.

Further reading

External links



 
 

 

Copyrights:

US History Encyclopedia. © 2006 through a partnership of Answers Corporation. All rights reserved.  Read more
Education Encyclopedia. Encyclopedia of Education. Copyright © 2002 by The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.  Read more
Answers Corporation Blogs. © 1999-2009 by Answers Corporation. All rights reserved.  Read more
Wikipedia. This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Science education" Read more