SE DE UN USO DISTINTO AL CONTRATADO

The proposed PoS for 11-14-year-olds is the first place where the NoS appears as a specific learning goal. It is contained within a section called ‘Science in Action’ (DES,

1988b, pp.132-133). The NoS is introduced to children through key ideas. Table 6.2 lists the key Ideas and relates them to the NC NoS themes listed in table 6.1.

Table 6.1 Emergent themes from an analysis of the NoS curriculum statement compared to Lederman’s (2007) views.

Nature of Science theme description derived from the

National Curriculum statement National Curriculum Nature of Science Theme Identifier

Characteristics of the NoS Lederman (2007)

Science is a human endeavour

A

Human Endeavour

That science involves creativity and imagination.

That science as a human enterprise is practised in the context of a larger culture.

Science is a continuous process (from past to present leading to

the future)

B Continuous

Process

That scientific knowledge is never absolute or certain.

Science is about the understanding of natural phenomena (physical and

biological)

C Understanding

Nature

There is a distinction between observation and inference.

Science requires reliability D

Reliability

That there is a distinction between laws and theories.

Science is the testing of ideas and theories

E

Testing theories Scientific knowledge use is

affected by social and cultural

contexts F

Social Contexts

That scientific knowledge is

subjective and/or theory laden. That science as a human enterprise is practised in the context of a larger culture.

Within the consultation document (DES, 1988b) the NoS was a full Attainment Target (AT22). The PoS, as well as being the statutory part of the curriculum, had the function of pulling the ATs together. This was the case with the ‘Science in Action’ section of the curriculum, where AT21 also featured as the ‘technological and social aspects of science’ (DES, 1988b). There was a potential issue in linking these two attainment targets. The NoS has a social aspect (F) so the development of a separate AT for the technological and social aspects is potentially confusing or could undermine the NoS AT by implying that the social aspects of the NoS are only linked to the appliance of science as in technology. This would fit with Wolpert’s (2004) view that science should be free from moral and ethical constraints. It also illustrates another problem when considering the NoS as an integrated entity within a curriculum: boundaries may be blurred. This can lead to a lack of coherence within the curriculum, one of the problems emerging from this case study.

Table 6.2. Key ideas on the nature of science derived from an analysis of the 1988 programme of study

Programme of Study 11-14 NC NoS theme Programme of Study 14 – 16

i. The role and importance of science in everyday life

A

Human Endeavour N/A

ii. How science is applied and used in domestic, industrial and

environmental contexts

A

Human Endeavour N/A

iii. The benefits and drawbacks of applying scientific concepts to themselves, the environment and the community

A

Human Endeavour N/A

iv. Make personal decisions and judgements based on scientific knowledge on matters of health, well- being, safety and care for the environment A Human Endeavour C Understanding Nature N/A

v. The study of ideas and theories (in history) to explain natural phenomena

B

Continuous Process

C

Understanding Nature

VIII. Study the ideas and theories used in other times to explain natural phenomena

vi. Relate ideas and theories to present day scientific and technological understanding and knowledge C Understanding Nature D Reliability

IX. Relate such ideas and theories to present scientific and technological

understanding and knowledge vii. Compare ideas and

theories with their own emerging understandings and relate them to available evidence C Understanding Nature D Reliability E Testing Theories

X. Compare such ideas and

theories with their own emerging understanding and relate them to available evidence

N/A D

Reliability

XI. Distinguish between claims and arguments based on scientific considerations and those which are not

N/A

B

Continuous Process

F Social Contexts

XII. Consider how the

development of a particular scientific idea or theory relates to its historical and cultural context N/A B Continuous Process D Reliability E Testing Theories

XIII. Study examples of

scientific controversies and the ways in which scientific ideas have changed

A footnote in the proposal document states that the NoS should be delivered as a part of ‘normal science studies’ (DES, 1988b, p.133). This implies that the concept of the NoS should not be taught explicitly but woven into everyday teaching.

In common with the PoS for 11-14, the NoS is incorporated into the PoS for 14-16 (table 6.2) within the curriculum section ‘Science in Action’ which, as noted earlier, includes AT21 and 22. The key ideas are similar to those found for ages 11-14, and include some overlapping statements, but as would be expected they are developed further with new statements that are conceptually more difficult.

There is a crossover with the key ideas in the PoS for 11-14 and a rewording of one statement. Instead of the study of ideas and theories ‘in history’ (PoS 11-14) the phrase ‘in other times’ is used (PoS for 14-16) – (see table 6.2 row 4). These may be considered as synonymous.

The SWG is looking for a progression in knowledge and understanding of the NoS at the ages of 14-16, with statements which contain words such as ‘distinguish’ and ‘compare’, asking children to relate scientific ideas/theories to historical and cultural contexts. What is less clear is how the attainment target statements directly relate to the concepts outlined in the narrative of the PoS. While statements can be allocated to cover the various concepts (as has been illustrated in table 6.2), a natural and direct fit is not evident. For example, while the testing of ideas and theories is an explicit part of the PoS statement (E), the attainment target statements do not consider this aspect of the NoS explicitly, though it could be inferred from the statement ‘Compare such ideas and

theories with their own emerging understanding and relate them to available evidence’

(DES, 1988b, p.70).

The issue here is how the NoS has been separated and listed as a component part of the attainment targets, while some aspects of the NoS, e.g. the testing of ideas/theories are contained in other ‘experimental’ attainment targets. It is worth comparing and exploring what the key themes in the SNC are with respect to the proposed Programme of Study for Key stages 3 and 4.