Fostering Scientific Literacy and Critical Thinking in Elementary Science Education

  • Rui Marques Vieira
  • Celina Tenreiro-Vieira


Scientific literacy (SL) and critical thinking (CT) are key components of science education aiming to prepare students to think and to function as responsible citizens in a world increasingly affected by science and technology (S&T). Therefore, students should be given opportunities in their science classes to be engaged in learning experiences that promote SL and CT, which may trigger the need to build and develop knowledge, attitudes/values, thinking abilities, and standards/criteria in an integrated way, resulting in their ability to know how to take responsible action in contexts and situations of personal and social relevance. This paper reports on a study to design, implement, and assess science learning experiences focused on CT toward SL goal. Results support the conclusion that the learning experiences developed and implemented in a grade 6 science classroom had a significant influence on the students’ CT and SL. Within this elementary school context, the theoretical framework used appears to be a relevant and practical aid for developing learning experiences that promote CT/SL and in supporting teaching practices that are more in line with the goals of critical scientific literacy.


Critical thinking Elementary science education Scientific literacy 



The authors thank Dr. Larry Yore and Mrs. Sharyl Yore for their mentoring assistance.


  1. Aikenhead, G. (1992). Logical reasoning in science and technology: An academic STS science textbook. Bulletin of Science Technology and Society, 12(3), 149–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aikenhead, G. (2007, May). Expanding the research agenda for scientific literacy. Paper presented at the Linnaeus Tercentenary Symposium on Promoting Scientific Literacy: Science Education Research in Transaction. Uppsala University, Sweden. Available from
  3. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1990). Science for all Americans: Project 2061. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy: Project 2061. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. BSCS. (2008). Scientists and science education. Retrieved from Scholar
  6. Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (1997). Common framework of science learning outcomes, K to 12: Pan-Canadian protocol for collaboration on school curriculum. Retrieved from
  7. Coutinho, C. (2011). Metodologia de investigação em ciências sociais e humanas [Methodology of research in social sciences and humanities]. Coimbra, Portugal: Almedina.Google Scholar
  8. Department for Education (2011). Review of the National Curriculum in England. What can we learn from English, mathematics and science curricula of high-performing jurisdictions. Retrieved from
  9. Department for Education (2013). National Curriculum to England (framework document). Retrieved from
  10. Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (2006). National assessment program—Science literacy year 6. School release materials. Author. Retrieved from
  11. Ennis, R. H. (1987). A taxonomy of critical thinking dispositions and abilities. In J. B. Baron & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Teaching thinking skills: Theory and practice. New York, NY: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
  12. Ennis, R. H. & Millman, J. (1985). Cornell critical thinking test, level X. Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest.Google Scholar
  13. Finnish National Board of Education (2004). National core curriculum for basic education. Retrieved from
  14. Ford, C. L. & Yore, L. D. (2012). Toward convergence of metacognition, reflection, and critical thinking: Illustrations from natural and social sciences teacher education and classroom practice. In A. Zohar & J. Dori (Eds.), Metacognition in science education: Trends in current research (pp. 251–271). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hackling, M. W., Goodrum, D. & Rennie, L. (2001). The status and quality of teaching and learning of science in Australian schools. Canberra, Australia: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.Google Scholar
  16. Harlen, W. (2006). ASE guide to primary science education. Hatfield, England: Association for Science Education.Google Scholar
  17. Harlen, W. (Ed.). (2010). Principles and big ideas of science education. Hatfield, England: Association for Science Education.Google Scholar
  18. Hatcher, D. & Spencer, L. A. (2000). Reasoning and writing: From critical thinking to composition. Boston, MA: American Press.Google Scholar
  19. Hofstein, A., Eilks, I. & Bybee, R. (2011). Societal issues and their importance for contemporary science education—A pedagogical justification and the state-of-the-art in Israel, Germany, and the USA. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9, 1459–1483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. International Council for Science (2011). Report of the ICSU ad-hoc review panel on science. Paris, France: Author. Retrieved from
  21. Lin, S.-S. (2014). Science and non-science undergraduate students’ critical thinking and argumentation performance in reading a science news report. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12, 1023–1046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Millar, R. & Osborne, J. (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. London, England: King’s College School of Education.Google Scholar
  23. Ministério da Educação e Ciência (2013). Metas curriculares [Curricular goals]. Lisbon, Portugal: Author.Google Scholar
  24. National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  25. National Research Council (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  26. NGSS Lead States (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Available from
  27. Norris, S. & Ennis, R. H. (1989). Evaluating critical thinking. Pacific Grove, CA: Critical Thinking Press & Software.Google Scholar
  28. Oates, T. (2010). Could do better: Using international comparisons to refine the national curriculum in England. Retrieved from Scholar
  29. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2006a). Assessing scientific, reading and mathematical literacy—A framework for PISA 2006. Paris, France: Author.Google Scholar
  30. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2006b). Evolution of student interest in science and technology. Policy report. Paris, France: Retrieved from
  31. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2009). PISA 2009 assessment framework—Key competencies in reading, mathematics, and science. Paris, France: Author.Google Scholar
  32. Osborne, J. & Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: Critical reflections. London, England: Nuffield Foundation. Retrieved from
  33. Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 729–780). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  34. Rocard, M., Csermely, P., Jorde, D., Lenzen, D., Walberg-Henriksson, H. & Hemmo, V. (2007). Science education now: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe. Luxembourg, Belgium: European Commission. Retrieved from Scholar
  35. Scriven, M. & Paul, R. (2007). Defining critical thinking. Retrieved from Scholar
  36. Tenreiro-Vieira, C. & Vieira, R. M. (2011). Educação em ciências e em matemática numa perspectiva de literacia: desenvolvimento de materiais didácticos CTS / Pensamento Crítico (PC) [Mathematics and science education for literacy]. In W. dos Santos & D. Auler (Eds.), CTS e educação científica: desafios, tendências e resultados de pesquisas (pp. 417–437). Brasília, Brazil: Editora Universidade de Brasília.Google Scholar
  37. Vieira, R. M. (1995). O desenvolvimento de courseware promotor de capacidades de pensamento crítico [The development of a courseware to promote critical thinking abilities] (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Lisbon, Portugal. Google Scholar
  38. Vieira, R. M., Tenreiro-Vieira, C. & Martins, I. (2011). Educação em ciências com orientação CTS [Science education with STS orientation]. Porto, Portugal: Areal Editores.Google Scholar
  39. Yore, L. D. (2012). Science literacy for all—More than a slogan, logo, or rally flag! In K. C. D. Tan & M. Kim (Eds.), Issues and challenges in science education research: Moving forward (pp. 5–23). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Yore, L. D., Pimm, D. & Tuan, H.-L. (2007). The literacy component of mathematical and scientific literacy. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5, 559–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EducationUniversity of AveiroAveiroPortugal
  2. 2.Research Centre for Didactics and Technology in Teacher EducationUniversity of AveiroAveiroPortugal

Personalised recommendations