Science & Education

, Volume 18, Issue 3–4, pp 401–423 | Cite as

The Construction and Analysis of a Science Story: A Proposed Methodology

  • Stephen Klassen


Science educators are beginning to establish a theoretical and methodological foundation for constructing and using stories in science teaching. At the same time, it is not clear to what degree science stories that have recently been written adhere to the guidelines that are being proposed. The author has written a story about Louis Slotin, which deals with the beginnings of radiation protection, to serve as a case study. In this paper, the story is dissected and evaluated with the view to begin to establish a method of literary criticism for science stories. In addition, student responses to the story are investigated and interpreted.


Radiation Protection Student Response Atom Bomb Good Question Manhattan Project 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This research was supported by a five-year grant from NSERC’s CRYSTAL program at the University of Manitoba and funding from the Maurice Price Foundation. Thanks are due to Sarah Dietrich for transcribing the data and to Vince Bagnulo for participating in the data analysis.


  1. Bachelard G (1938) La Formation de l’Esprit Scientifique. Vrin, ParisGoogle Scholar
  2. Bruner J (1986) Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  3. Bruner J (1996) The culture of education. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  4. Butterfield H (1959) The whig interpretation of history. Bell & Sons, London. (Original work published 1931)Google Scholar
  5. Calloway L (1995) Nuclear Naiveté. Albuq J Special Reprint, July, 1995:2Google Scholar
  6. Carey S, Evans R, Honda M, Jay E, Ungar C (1990) An experiment is when you try and see if it works. Int J Sci Edu 11:514–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Coffin C (2004) Learning to write history: the role of causality. Written Commun 21(3):261–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cox MT, Ram A (1999) On the Intersection of Story Understanding and Learning. In: Ram A, Moorman K (eds) Understanding language understanding: computational models of reading. MIT Press/Bradford Books, Cambridge, pp 391–434Google Scholar
  9. Frisch OR (1969) The Dragon experiment, Keynote address at the Fast Burst Reactors Conference held at the University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, January 28–30, 1969 in Malenfant RE (2005) Experiments with the Dragon Machine, Report LA-14241-H, Los Alamos National LaboratoryGoogle Scholar
  10. Frisch OR (1979) What little I remember, Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  11. Froman DK, Schreiber RE (1946) May 28, Report on May 21 accident at Pajarito laboratory. In: Malenfant RE (ed) (1996) Lessons learned from early criticality accidents. Report submitted to the Nuclear Criticality Technology Safety Project Workshop, Gaithersburg, Maryland, May 14–15, 1996Google Scholar
  12. Gil-Pérez D (2002) Defending constructivism in science education. Sci & Edu 11:557–571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hacker BC (1987) The Dragon’s tail: radiation safety in the Manhattan Project, 1942–1946. University of California Press, Berkeley, CAGoogle Scholar
  14. Hayes DF (1956) A summary of accidents and incidents involving radiation in atomic energy activities, June 1945 through December 1955. Unclassified Report TID-5360, United States Atomic Energy CommissionGoogle Scholar
  15. Helstrand A, Ott A (1995) The utilization of fiction when teaching the theory of relativity. Phys Edu 30(5):284–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Henning B (Producer), Phillips P (Director) (1998) Tickling the Dragon’s tail [documentary]. Great North ProductionsGoogle Scholar
  17. Kenealy P (1989) Telling a coherent “Story”: a role for the history and philosophy of science in a physical science course. In: Herget DE (ed) HPSST, Proc. First Int Conf, pp 209–220Google Scholar
  18. Kragh H (1987) An introduction to the historiography of science. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  19. Klassen S (2006a) A theoretical framework for contextual science teaching. Interchange 37(1–2):31–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Klassen S (2006b) Does a science story have heuristic power to promote learning? In: Paper presented at the first international conference on story in science teaching, Munich, July, 2006Google Scholar
  21. Klassen S (2007) The application of historical narrative in science learning: the atlantic cable story. Sci & Edu 16(3–5):335–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kubli F (1999) Historical aspects in physics teaching: using Galileo’s work in a New Swiss Project. Sci & Edu 8:137–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kubli F (2001) Can the theory of narratives help science teachers be better storytellers? Sci & Edu 10:595–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kubli F (2005) Science teaching as a dialogue—Bakhtin, Vygotsky and some applications in the classroom. Sci & Edu 14(6) 501–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lin H (1998) The effectiveness of teaching chemistry through the history of science. J Chem Edu 75(10) 1326–1330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Loaiza D, Gehman D (2006) End of an era for the Los Alamos critical experiments facility: history of critical assemblies and experiments (1946–2004). Ann Nucl Energy 33:1339–1359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Malenfant RE (1996) Lessons learned from early criticality accidents. In: Report submitted to the Nuclear Criticality Technology Safety Project Workshop, Gaithersburg, Maryland, May 14–15, 1996Google Scholar
  28. Martin BE, Brouwer W (1991) The sharing of personal science and the narrative element in science education. Sci Edu 75(6):707–722CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mayr E (1990) When is historiography whiggish? J Hist Ideas 5(2):301–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Metz D, Klassen S, McMillan B, Clough M, Olson J (2007) Building a foundation for the use of historical narratives. Sci & Edu 16(3–5):313–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Moon B (1961) The nuclear death of a nuclear scientist. MacLean’s Mag 74(2):17Google Scholar
  32. Norris S, Guilbert M, Smith M, Shahram H, Phillips L (2005) A theoretical framework for narrative explanation in science. Sci Edu 89(4):535–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schwitzgebel E (1999) Children’s theories and the drive to explain. Sci & Edu 8:457–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shrigley RL, Koballa TR (1989) Anecdotes: what research suggests about their use in the science classroom. Sch Sci Math 89(4):293–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Solomon J, Duveen J, Scot L, McCarthy S (1992) Teaching about the nature of science through history: action research in the classroom. J Res Sci Teach 29(4):409–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Stinner A (1995) Contextual settings, science stories, and large context problems: toward a more humanistic science education. Sci Edu 79(5):555–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Stinner A, McMillan BA, Metz D, Jilek JM, Klassen S (2003) The renewal of case studies in science education. Sci & Edu 12(7):617–643CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Toolan MJ (1988) Narative: a critical linguistic introduction. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  39. Vipond D, Hunt RA (1984) Point-driven understanding: pragmatic and cognitive dimensions of literary reading. Poetics 13:261–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wandersee JH (1990) On the value and use of the history of science in teaching today’s science: constructing historical vignettes. In: Herget DE (ed) More history and philosophy of science in science teaching. Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, pp 278–283Google Scholar
  41. Winchester I (1989) Editorial–history, science, and science teaching. Interchange 20(2):i–viCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Zeilig M (1995) Dr. Louis Slotin and “The invisible killer”. Beaver: Explor Canada’s Hist 75(4):20–26Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.PhysicsUniversity of WinnipegWinnipegCanada

Personalised recommendations