Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

SOCIETAL ISSUES AND THEIR IMPORTANCE FOR CONTEMPORARY SCIENCE EDUCATION—A PEDAGOGICAL JUSTIFICATION AND THE STATE-OF-THE-ART IN ISRAEL, GERMANY, AND THE USA

  • Published:
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

One common theme underlying recent reports on science education is that the content of school science and its related pedagogical approaches are not aligned with the interests and needs of both society and the majority of the students. Most students do not find their science classes interesting and motivating. These claims are especially valid regarding those students who, in the future, will probably not embark on a career in science or engineering but will need science and technology personally and functionally as literate citizens. One key problem seems to be that few science programs around the world teach how science is linked to those issues that are relevant to students’ life, environment, and role as a citizen. As a result, many students are unable to participate in societal discussions about science and its related technological applications. This paper discusses the need to incorporate socioscientific ideas into the science curricula more thoroughly. This recommendation is supported by a theoretical rationale from various sources leading to a reflection about common practices in science education in three countries: Israel, Germany, and the USA. The state-of-the-art, potentials, and barriers of effective implementation are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Chemical Society (ACS) (1988). Chemistry in the community. Dubuque, IA: Kendall & Hunt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. O., Chui, M.-H. & Yore, L. D. (2010). Special issue “First cycle on PISA (2000–2006)—international perspectives on successes and challenges: Research and policy directions”. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8, 373–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Appleton, K. & Kindt, T. (1999). How do beginning elementary teachers cope with science: Development of pedagogical content knowledge in science. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. Boston, MA.

  • Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundation of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blonder, R., Kipnis, M., Mamlok-Naaman, R. & Hofstein, A. (2008). Increasing science teachers’ ownership through adaptation of the PARSEL modules: A “bottom-up” approach. Science Education International, 19(3), 285–301.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton, G., Holman, J., Pilling, G. & Waddington, D. (1994). Salters advanced chemistry. York, UK: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bybee, R. W. (Ed.). (1985). Science–technology–society, NSTA yearbook. Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bybee, R. W. (1997). Toward an understanding of scientific literacy. In W. Gräber & C. Bolte (Eds.), Scientific literacy—an international symposium (pp. 37–68). Kiel, Germany: IPN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bybee, R. W. & DeBoer, G. (1993). Goals for the science curriculum. In D. Gable (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 357–387). Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bybee, R., Fensham, P. J. & Laurie, R. (2009). Special issue: Scientific literacy and contexts in PISA science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(8), 861–960.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D., Ben-Zvi, R., Hofstein, A. & Rahamimoff, R. (2004). On brain, medicines and drugs: A model for the “Science for All” program. The American Biology Teacher, 66(1), 9–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Boer, G. (2000). Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(6), 582–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Vos, W., Bulte, A. M. W. & Pilot, A. (2002). Chemistry curricula for general education: Analysis and elements of a design. In J. K. Gilbert, R. Justi, O. de Jong & J. Van Driel (Eds.), Chemical education: Towards research-based practice (pp. 101–124). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eilks, I. (2000). Promoting scientific and technological literacy: Teaching biodiesel. Science Education International, 11(1), 16–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eilks, I. (2002). Teaching ‘biodiesel’: A sociocritical and problem-oriented approach to chemistry teaching, and students’ first views on it. Chemistry Education: Research Practice, 3(1), 67–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eilks, I., Marks, R. & Feierabend, T. (2008). Science education research to prepare future citizens—chemistry learning in a socio-critical and problem-oriented approach. In B. Ralle & I. Eilks (Eds.), Promoting successful science learning—the worth of science education research (pp. 75–86). Aachen, Germany: Shaker.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eilks, I., Parchmann, I., Gräsel, C. & Ralle, B. (2004). Changing teachers’ attitudes and professional skills by involving teachers into projects of curriculum innovation in Germany. In B. Ralle & I. Eilks (Eds.), Quality in practice oriented research in science education (pp. 29–40). Aachen, Germany: Shaker.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eilks, I. & Ralle, B. (2002). Participatory action research in chemical education. In B. Ralle & I. Eilks (Eds.), Research in chemical education—what does this mean? (pp. 87–98). Aachen, Germany: Shaker.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elmose, S. & Roth, W.-M. (2005). Allgemeinbildung: Readiness for living in a risk society. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(1), 11–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feierabend, T. & Eilks, I. (2010). Raising students’ perception of the relevance of science teaching and promoting communication and evaluation capabilities using authentic and controversial socio-scientific issues in the framework of climate change. Science Education International, 21(3), 176–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fensham, P. J. (1988). Familiar but different: Some dilemmas and new direction in science education. In P. J. Fensham (Ed.), Development and dilemmas in science education (pp. 1–26). London: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fensham, P. J. (1993). Academic influence on school sciences. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 25(1), 53–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fensham, P. J. (2009). Real world contexts in PISA science: Implications for context-based science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(8), 884–896.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, H. E., Klemm, K., Leutner, D., Sumfleth, E., Tiemann, R. & Wirth, J. (2005). Framework for empirical research on science teaching and learning. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 16(4), 309–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freise, G. (1994). Für einen politischen Unterricht von der Natur. Marburg, Germany: Soznat.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geddis, A. N. & Roberts, D. A. (1998). As science students become science teachers: A perspective on learning orientation. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 9(4), 271–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. K. (2006). On the nature of context in chemical education. International Journal of Science. Education, 28(9), 957–976.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glenn, J. (2000). Before it’s too late: A report to the nation from the national commission on mathematics and science teaching for the 21st century. Washington, DC: NCMST.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, J. (1988). Constructing a practical philosophy of teaching: A study of pre-service teachers’ professional perspectives. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4(2), 121–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gräber, W. (2002). Chemistry education’s contribution to scientific literacy—an example. In B. Ralle & I. Eilks (Eds.), Research in chemical education—what does this mean? (pp. 119–128). Aachen, Germany: Shaker.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gräber, W. & Bolte, C. (Eds.). (1997). Scientific literacy—an international symposium. Kiel, Germany: IPN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gräber, W. & Lindner, M. (2008). The impact of the PARSEL way to teach science in Germany on interest, scientific literacy, and German national standards. Science Education International, 19(4), 267–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, C., Hofstein, A., Eylon, B.-S. & Simon, S. (2008). Evidence-based professional development of science teachers in two countries. International Journal of Science Education, 30(5), 577–591.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstein, A. & Dori, J. Y. (2000). The development implementation and initial research findings of ‘Science and Technology for All’ in Israel. Paper presented at the international symposium on connecting communities through research in science and technology education for all: An international perspective. New Orleans, LA: NARST.

  • Hofstein, A. & Kempa, R. F. (1985). Motivating aspects in science education: An attempt at an analysis. European Journal of Science Education, 7(3), 221–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstein, A. & Kesner, M. (2006). Industrial chemistry and school chemistry: Making chemistry studies more relevant. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 1017–1039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstein, A., Mamlok, R. & Carmeli, M. (1997). Science teachers as curriculum developers of science for all. Science Education International, 8(1), 26–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstein, A. & Yager, R. E. (1982). Social issues as organizers for science education in the 80’s. School Science and Mathematics, 82(7), 539–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holbrook, J. (1998). Operationalising scientific and technological literacy—a new approach to science teaching. Science Education International, 9(2), 13–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holbrook, J. (2005). Making chemistry teaching relevant. Chemical Education International, 6 (1). Retrieved August 01, 2009, from the World Wide Web at http://old.iupac.org/publications/cei/vol6/06_Holbrook.pdf.

  • Holbrook, J. (2008). Introduction to the special issue of science education international devoted to PARSEL. Science Education International, 19(3), 257–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holbrook, J. & Rannikmäe, M. (2007). The nature of science education for enhancing scientific literacy. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1347–1362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holbrook, J., Rannikmäe, M. & Kask, K. (2008). Teaching the PARSEL way: Students’ reactions to selected PARSEL modules. Science Education International, 19(3), 303–313.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holman, J. (1986). Science and technology in society. General guide for teachers. Hatfield, UK: The Association for Science Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, G. (2000). Marginalization of socioscientific material in science–technology–society science curricula: Some implications for gender inclusivity and curriculum reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 426–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Humboldt, W. v. (1793/2000). Theorie der Bildung des Menschen. English translation in I. Westbury, S. Hopmann & K. Riquarts (Eds.). Teaching as a reflective practice: The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 57–62). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

  • Jenkins, E. W. (2005). Important but not for me: Students’ attitudes towards secondary school science in England. Research in Science & Technological Education, 23(1), 41–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kagan, S. M. (1992). Professional growth among preservice and beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 62(2), 129–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, J. M. (1987). Development and use of the ARCS model of instructional design. Journal of Instructional Development, 10(3), 2–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kempa, R. F. (1983). Developing new perspectives in chemical education. Proceedings of the 7th international conference in chemistry, education, and society. Montpellier, France (pp. 34–42).

  • Kesner, M., Hofstein, A. & Ben-Zvi, R. (1997). Student and teacher perceptions of industrial chemistry case studies. International Journal of Science Education, 19(6), 725–738.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klafki, W. (1958/2000b). Didaktik Analysis as the core for preparation of instruction. In I. Westbury, S. Hopmann & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice: The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 85–108). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klafki, W. (2000). The significance of classical theories of Bildung for a contemporary concept of Allgemeinbildung. In I. Westbury, S. Hopmann & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice: The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 85–108). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • KMK (2004). Bildungsstandards im Fach Chemie für den Mittleren Bildungsabschluss. München, Germany: Luchterhand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luft, J., Ortegaz, I. & Wong-Kavas, S. (2009). NSTA’s state of science education survey. Washington, DC: NSTA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marks, R., Bertram, S. & Eilks, I. (2008). Learning chemistry and beyond with a lesson plan on potato crisps, which follows a socio-critical and problem-oriented approach to chemistry lessons—a case study. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice, 9(3), 267–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marks, R. & Eilks, I. (2009). Promoting scientific literacy using a socio-critical and problem-oriented approach to chemistry teaching: Concept, examples, experiences. International Journal of Science and Environmental Education, 4(3), 231–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marks, R. & Eilks, I. (2010). The development of a chemistry lesson plan on shower gels and musk fragrances following a socio-critical and problem-oriented approach—a project of participatory action research. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice, 11(2), 129–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCann-Sherman, W. (1999). Teaching about societal issues in science classrooms. SE 99-6. Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics and Environmental Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millar, R. (2009). On scientific literacy and curriculum reform. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4(3), 201–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millar, R. & Osborne, J. F. (Eds.). (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. London: King’s College London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morell, P. D. & Lederman, N. G. (1998). Students’ attitudes toward school and classroom science: Are they independent phenomena? School Science and Mathematics, 98(2), 76–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC) (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC) (2005). Systems for state science assessment. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nentwig, P., Parchmann, I., Gräsel, C., Ralle, B. & Demuth, R. (2007). Chemie im Kontext—a new approach to teaching chemistry; its principles and first evaluation data. Journal of Chemical Education, 84(9), 1439–1444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norris, S. P. & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in its original sense is central to scientific literacy. Science & Education, 87(2), 224–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2006). Assessing scientific, reading and mathematical literacy. Paris, France: OECD.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J. F. (2003). Attitude towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049–1079.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J. F. (2007). Science education for the twenty first century. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 3(3), 173–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J. & Collins, J. (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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J. & Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: Critical reflections. London: The Nuffield Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J., Driver, R. & Simon, S. (1998). Attitudes to science: Issues and concerns. School Science Review, 79(288), 27–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostermeier, C. & Prenzel, M. (2005). What can we learn from different forms of evaluation? Experiences from a quality-development program in science and mathematics instruction. In J. Benett, J. Holman, R. Millar & D. Waddington (Eds.), Evaluation as a tool for improving science education (pp. 145–158). Münster, Germany: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pederson, J. E. & Totten, S. (2001). Beliefs of science teachers towards teaching of science/technological/societal issues: Are we addressing national standards. Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society, 21(5), 376–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedretti, E. G., Bencze, L., Hewitt, J., Romkey, L. & Jivraj, A. (2008). Promoting issues-based STSE perspectives in science teacher education: Problems of identity and ideology. Science & Education, 17(8–9), 941–960.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pilot, A. & Bulte, A. M. W. (2006). Special issue: Context based chemistry education. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 953–1112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, D. A. (1988). What counts as science education. In P. Fensham (Ed.), Development and dilemma in science education. Barcecome, Lews, East Sussex, UK: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research in science education (pp. 729–780). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W.-M. & Lee, S. (2004). Science education as/for participation in the community. Science & Education, 88(2), 263–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rutherford, F. J. & Ahlgren, A. (1991). Science for all Americans: The project 2061. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research Science Teaching, 41(5), 513–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T. D. (2008). Socioscientific issues in science education: Labels, reasoning, and transfer. Cultural Studies in Science Education, 04, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T. D. & Zeidler, D. (2009). Scientific literacy, PISA, and socioscientific discourse: Assessment for progressive aims of science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(8), 909–921.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shwartz, Y., Ben-Zvi, R. & Hofstein, A. (2005). The importance of involving high school teachers in the process of identifying and defining the operational meaning of chemical literacy. International Journal of Science Education., 27(3), 323–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shwartz, Y., Ben-Zvi-R & Hofstein, A. (2006). Chemical literacy: What does it mean to scientists and school teachers? Journal of Chemical Education, 83(10), 1557–1561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sjøberg, S. & Schreiner, C. (2006). How do learners in different cultures relate to science and technology? Results and perspectives from the project ROSE (the Relevance of Science Education). APFSLT: Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 7(1).

  • Solomon, J. & Aikenhead, G. (Eds.). (1994). STS education: International perspectives on reform. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomorrow 98 (1992). The report on reform in science education. Jerusalem, Israel: The Ministry of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsaparlis, G. & Papapihotis, G. (2002). Classroom activity # 47: Brushing up on chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 79, 1168A–1168B.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Aalsvoort, J. (2004a). Logical positivism as a tool to analyse problem of chemistry’s lack of relevance in secondary school chemistry education. International Journal of Science Education, 26(9), 1151–1168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Aalsvoort, J. (2004b). Activity theory as a tool to address the problem of chemistry’s lack of relevance in secondary school chemistry education. International Journal of Science Education, 26(13), 1635–1651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veal, W. R. & Hill, C. (2004). Beliefs and knowledge in chemistry teacher development. International Journal of Science Education, 26(3), 329–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westbury, I., Hopmann, S. & Riquarts, K. (Eds.). (2000). Teaching as a reflective practice. The German Didaktik tradition. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yager, R. E. & Lutz, M. V. (1995). STS to enhance total curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 95(1), 28–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L. & Howes, E. V. (2005). A research based framework for socio-scientific issues education. Science & Education, 89(3), 357–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel

    Avi Hofstein

  2. University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany

    Ingo Eilks

  3. BSCS, Colorado Springs, CO, USA

    Rodger Bybee

Authors
  1. Avi Hofstein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ingo Eilks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rodger Bybee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Avi Hofstein.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hofstein, A., Eilks, I. & Bybee, R. SOCIETAL ISSUES AND THEIR IMPORTANCE FOR CONTEMPORARY SCIENCE EDUCATION—A PEDAGOGICAL JUSTIFICATION AND THE STATE-OF-THE-ART IN ISRAEL, GERMANY, AND THE USA. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 9, 1459–1483 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9273-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9273-9

KEY WORDS

Search

Navigation