Abstract
This paper presents an action research study on student scientific literacy, which is analysed by two metaphors of learning, introduced by Sfard (1998), and adapted to fit the context. These metaphors are students working in science as if they follow recipes and students working in science as if they devise recipes. By looking at the relationship between the metaphors in each of four vignettes that represent the research, possibilities are considered for the usefulness of the metaphors as a framework that provides common ground for otherwise divergent views about scientific literacy. Issues of how to represent and legitimate some action research, and considerations for the need to tightly integrate reading, writing, conversing and experimenting tasks to facilitate scientific literacy are also prominent.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Agin, M. (1974). Education for scientific literacy: A conceptual frame of reference and some applications.Science Education, 58(3), 403–415.
Atwater, M. (1996). Social constructivism: Infusion into the multicultural science education research agenda.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(8), 821–837.
Bingle, W., & Gaskell, P. (1994). Scientific literacy for decision making and the social construction of scientific knowledge.Science Education, 78(2), 185–201.
Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (1994). Entering the field of qualitative research. In N. Denzin, & Y. Lincoln (Eds.),Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 1–17). London: Sage.
Devlin, K. (1998). Rather than scientific literacy, colleges should teach scientific awareness.American Association of Physics Teachers, 66(7), 559–60.
Eisenhart, M., Finkel, E., & Mariom, S. (1996). Creating the conditions for scientific literacy: A re-examination.American Educational Research Journal, 33(2), 261–95.
Fosnot, C. (1989).Inquiring teachers, inquiring learners. New York: Teachers' College Press.
Garrison, J. (1995). Deweyan pragmatism and the epistemology of contemporary social constructivism.American Education Research Journal, 32(4), 716–40.
Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (1989).Fourth generation evaluation. London: Sage.
Hanrahan, M., Cooper, T. J., & Russell, A. L. (1997, June, 1997).Science for all: Action researching literacy difficulties in a year 8 science class. Paper presented at Convergence in Knowledge, Space and Time World Congress, Cartagena, Colombia.
Hawking, S. (1989).A brief history of time. Toronto: Bantom.
Holliday, W. G., Yore, I. D., & Alverman, D. E. (1994). The reading-science learning-writing connection: Breakthroughs, barriers and promises.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 887–893.
Kember, D., Jones, A., Loke, A., McKay, J., Sinclair, K., Tse, H., Webb, C., Wong, F., Wong, M., Yan, P., & Yeung, E. (1996). Developing curricula to encourage students to write reflective journals.Educative Action Research, 3(3), 73–92.
McNiff, J. (1993).Teaching as learning. London: Routledge.
McRobbie, C., & Tobin, K. (1995). Restraints to reform: The congruence of teacher and student actions in a chemistry classroom.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(4), 373–385.
Olorundare, S. (1988). Scientific literacy in Nigeria: The role of science education programmes.International Journal of Science Education, 10(2), 151–58.
Pedretti, E. (1996). Facilitating action research in science, technology and society (STS) education: An experience in reflective practice.Educational Action Research, 4(3), 463–485.
Ratmo, C. (1998). Scientific literacy or scientific awareness?American Journal of Physics, 66(9), 752.
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one.Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4–13.
Shamos, M., (1984). Exposure to science vs. scientific literacy.Journal of College Science Teaching, 13(5), 333, 393.
Sumara, D. J., & Davis, B., (1997). Enactivist theory and community learning: Toward a complexified understanding of action research.Educational Action Research, 5(3), 403–419.
Taylor, P. (1997, March).Telling tales that show the brushstrokes. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Chicago, IL.
Tobin, K., & Tippins, D. (1993). Constructivism as a referent for teaching and learning. In K. Tobin (Ed.),The Practice of Constructivism in Science Education (pp. 3–21). Washington: AAAS Press.
Toomey, R. (1997). Transformative action research.Educational Action Research, 5(5), 105–121.
Van Maanen, J. (1988).Tales of the field. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
von Glasersfeld, E. (1993). Questions and answers about radical constructivism. In K. Tobin (Ed.),The practice of constructivism in science education, (pp. 23–38). Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Waldrip, B., & Giddings, G. (1993).Students motivational patterns at Righschool. Technical report to staff at Righschool by the Science and Mathematics Education Centre, Curtin University, Perth.
White, R. (1998). Research, theories of learning, principles of teaching and classroom practice: Examples and issues.Studies in Science Education, 31, 55–70.
Willison, J. (1996). HoWRU: Integrating hands-on, writing and reading for understanding into your students' science learning?Australian Science Teachers Journal, 42(4), 8–14.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Willison, J. Who writes the recipes in science? Possibilities from four years of action research with students and their scientific literacy. Research in Science Education 29, 111–126 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461183
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461183