Abstract
There is growing concern about falling levels of student engagement with school science, as evidenced by studies of student attitudes, and decreasing participation at the post compulsory level. One major response to this, the Australian School Innovation in Science, Technology and Mathematics (ASISTM) initiative, involves partnerships between schools and community and industry organisations in developing curriculum projects at the local level. This project fulfils many of the conditions advocated to engage students in learning in the sciences. ASISTM is underpinned by the notion of innovation. This paper describes the findings of case study research in which 16 ASISTM projects were selected as innovation exemplars. A definition of innovation and an innovation framework were developed, through which the case studies were analysed to make sense of the significance of the ideas and practices, participating actors, and outcomes of the projects. Through this analysis we argue that innovation is a powerful idea for framing curriculum development in the sciences at the local level that is generative for students and teachers, and that these ASISTM projects provide valuable models for engaging students, and for teacher professional learning.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Angus, M., Chadbourne, R., & Olney, H. (2001). ‘Managing Innovation’ in P. Cuttance and the Innovation and Best Practice Consortium. School Innovation: Pathway to the Knowledge Society. Canberra: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs. Accessed Jan 2009 at: http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/school_education/publications_resources/school_innovation/default.htm.
Australian Academy of Sciences (2005). Primary Connections: Linking science with literacy. Retrieved May, 2008, from http://www.science.org.au/primaryconnections/index.htm.
Australian Academy of Technological Sciences Engineering (2008). STELR project. Retrieved July, 2009 from http://www.stelr.org.au/.
COSEPUP. (2005). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. Washington, DC: National Academies Committee on Science Engineering and Public Policy.
Cuttance, P., & Stokes, S. (2001). Innovation and Best Practice. In P. Cuttance and the Innovation and Best Practice Consortium. School Innovation: Pathway to the Knowledge Society. Canberra: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs. Accessed Jan 2009 at: http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/school_education/publications_resources/school_innovation/preface.htm.
Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST). (2005). Boosting Innovation in Science, Technology and Mathematics Teaching (BISTMT). Canberra: Department of Education, Science and Training.
Duggan, S., & Gott, R. (2002). What sort of science education do we really need? International Journal of Science Education, 24(7), 661–679.
Engineering Working Group (2008). Skills shortages in engineering. Retrieved 24 January, 2008, from http://www.skillsinitiative.gov.au/skills_shortages/engineering.htm.
European Commission. (2004). Europe needs more scientists: report by the high level group on increasing human resources for science and technology in Europe. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
Fensham, P. (2002). Time to change drivers for scientific literacy. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 2, 9–24.
Goodrum, D., Hackling, M., & Rennie, L. (2001). Research Report: The status and quality of teaching and learning of science in Australian schools. Canberra; Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs. Retrieved July, 2009 from http://www.detya.gov.au/schools/publications/index.htm.
Hargreaves, D. (1999). Schools and the future: the key role of innovation in innovating schools. Paris: OECD.
Latour, B. (1996). Aramis. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Laugksch, R. C. (2000). Scientific literacy: a conceptual overview. Science Education, 84, 71–94.
Lindahl, B. (2007). A longitudinal study of students' attitudes towards science and choice of career. Paper presented at the 80th NARST International Conference New Orleans, Louisiana.
Lyons, T. (2005). Different countries, same science classes: students’ experiences of school science in their own words. International Journal of Science Education, 28(6), 591–614.
Lyons, T. (2006). The puzzle of falling enrolments in physics and chemistry courses: Putting some pieces together. Research in Science Education, 36(3), 285–311.
Osborne, J., & Collins, S. (2001). Pupils’ views of the role and value of the science curriculum: A focus group study. International Journal of Science Education, 23(5), 441–467.
Rennie, L. (2006). The community’s contribution to science learning: Making it count. Proceedings of the ACER Research Conference: Boosting Science Learning—what will it take? (pp. 6–11). Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: The Free.
Smith, C. (2005). ‘What Sustains Innovation in Education? A Comparative Study in Victorian Government Schools’. Beyond the Pilot: Sustaining Innovation, unpublished report, Melbourne: DE&T.
Smith, S., Smith, C., & Ryan, M. (2004). Survey report of innovative projects. Melbourne: Victorian Schools Innovation Commission.
Symington, D., & Tytler, R. (2004). Community leaders’ views of the purposes of science in the compulsory years of schooling. International Journal of Science Education, 26(11), 1403–1418.
Tytler, R (2007). Re-imagining science education: Engaging students in science for Australia’s future. Australian Education Review No. 51. Australian Council for Education Research, ACER press.
Tytler, R., & Symington, D. (2006). Science in school and society. Teaching Science, the Journal of the Australian Science Teachers Association, 52(3), 10–15.
Tytler, R., Duggan, S., & Gott, R. (2001a). Dimensions of evidence, the public understanding of science and science education. International Journal of Science Education, 23(8), 815–832.
Tytler, R., Duggan, S., & Gott, R. (2001b). Public participation in an environmental dispute: implications for science education. Public Understanding of Science, 10, 343–364.
Tytler, R., Osborne, J., Williams, G., Tytler, K., & Cripps Clark, J. (2008). Opening up pathways: Engagement in STEM across the Primary-Secondary school transition. Canberra: Australian Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. Report accessed July 2009 at: http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/career_development/publications_resources/profiles/Opening_Up_Pathways.htm#authors.
Tytler, R., Symington, D., Smith, C., & Rodrigues, S. (2008). An Innovation Framework based on best practice exemplars from the Australian School Innovation in Science, Technology and Mathematics (ASISTM) Project. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. Report accessed July 2009 at: http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/school_education/programmes_funding/programme_categories/key_priorities/asistm/.
Victorian Department of Education and Training (2003). The Middle Years. Accessed March 2009 at: http://www.sofweb.vic.edu.au/mys/docs/InnovationExcellence/SIEInnovationDiscussionPaper.doc.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge with thanks the funding support of the Australian Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Development to carry out this study. Funding from the Science, ICT and Mathematics Education in Rural and Regional Australia (SiMERR) project, funded by the Australian Department of Transport and Regional Services, was also important in preparing the ground for this study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tytler, R., Symington, D. & Smith, C. A Curriculum Innovation Framework for Science, Technology and Mathematics Education. Res Sci Educ 41, 19–38 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-009-9144-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-009-9144-y